I use it on a D200 but am looking to upgrade my body but was wondering how it holds up with the extra resolution.
The other option is the D600 with the new 18-35G lens. My other lens at the moment is a 50mm 1.8G so that would fit right in.
I tend to shoot street, architecture and some landscape and reckon I would be happy with the higher ISO performance of either compared to the D200.
The 12-24 is fine on the D7100. Just don't expect the same per pixel as with lower-res sensors. However, I'd move towards FX for the type of subjects you describe.
In your place....shopping for a new basic kit to do that kind of photography, I would go ahead and get the D600 and the 18-35 lens. That way your 50 is still a 50 instead of becoming a 75.
I think in the long term you will be happier with the slightly better IQ of the FX platform.
One thing to consider is that as technology moves along, unless DX gets better support from Nikon in future years (?), the DX lens line starts to look more and more like an orphan. It has no real functionality on the FX camera line, doesn't work on the new mirrorless camera line, and hasn't seen any new releases in a LOOOOONG time. There may be a message there.
In your place....shopping for a new basic kit to do that kind of photography, I would go ahead and get the D600 and the 18-35 lens. That way your 50 is still a 50 instead of becoming a 75.
I think in the long term you will be happier with the slightly better IQ of the FX platform.
One thing to consider is that as technology moves along, unless DX gets better support from Nikon in future years (?), the DX lens line starts to look more and more like an orphan. It has no real functionality on the FX camera line, doesn't work on the new mirrorless camera line, and hasn't seen any new releases in a LOOOOONG time. There may be a message there.