Canon 70D to Nikon D610 - Thoughts?

Janesy B

Janesy B

Messages
353
Name
Bryan
Edit My Images
No
Currently I have a Canon 70D which I am sort of happy with, but I feel I am making a compromise on things I am bothered about with things I don't really care about. I've got dual pixel AF for constant AF during video recording (I've recorded 2 videos with it), it's got Wifi remote shooting (I used it once when I first got the camera), I can pull images off the camera using wifi (it's slow and battery consuming in practise) and I would rather sacrifice some of these features for better image quality and low light handling.

I initially switched to the 70D from a 550D as the AF was hopeless, I still want to do some motorsport photography so I still want something that can track objects accurately, and I don't feel the 6D will be up to this task (although I will happily be convinced otherwise). I have been tempted away from Canon by the fact I can get a D610 with the Nikkor 24-70 f2.8 lens for £2100 whereas a 6D and Canon 24-70 f2.8 would be £500 more.

I currently have a 70D, EF-S 17-55 f2.8 and Sigma 35 f1.4 that can be sold to fund this, so the 'upgrade' will cost me a few hundred. I will of course try one to make sure I am happy with the handling of the camera, I'm just not sure what direction to go.

Is it worth it or would I be on a hiding to nothing?
 
Is the D610 AF up to this kind of thing ? - you might be better off with a second user D3 (or a 1 series canon)
 
Given the right technique, a 70D should be able to follow a car/bike on circuit perfectly adequately. Of course you'll want a longer lens if you want the vehicle to fill a significant proportion of the frame.
 
ST4 said:
D610 and 24-70 f2.8 is a great set up and D610 af is better than 6d's, which will be important for motorsport photography
Click to expand...

but is it better than the 7D or the 1D ? - personally i'd have bought a 7D in the first place (they are about the same price as a 70D) - and i'd now be putting the money into a longer lens
 
big soft moose said:
but is it better than the 7D or the 1D ? - personally i'd have bought a 7D in the first place (they are about the same price as a 70D) - and i'd now be putting the money into a longer lens
Click to expand...

Don't know, I know 1st hand the 610 isn't as good as the D800 AF wise. 7d (I may be wrong) is probably quite an old body with poor AF, but a longer lens and crop body is probably ideal for motorsports. 1d would be ideal I would imagine.
 
When you go to motorsport events I found that the majority of cameras are Canons... usually the 7d but a few people here have changed the 7d for the 70d. Read into that what you want but it should be and will be perfectly good enough for what you want. Maybe it is poor technique and you should work on that before getting shut? I use a Nikon d7000 and it is perfect for motorsport and wildlife photography.

No doubt the d610 will offer better IQ though.
 
andrewc said:
Given the right technique, a 70D should be able to follow a car/bike on circuit perfectly adequately. Of course you'll want a longer lens if you want the vehicle to fill a significant proportion of the frame.
Click to expand...

That's not the problem I am having, 70D AF is not an issue. I am trying to get better IQ and low light performance.
 
Last edited:
I've shot motorsports starting with a 350D and going through 30D, 40D, 50D, 7D, 1D3 and 1D4. The 7D AF is very good, better than anything below it and approaching 1D3 accuracy.

Yes its now 5 years old and a high megapixel count on a crop sensor, so there is noise at higher ISO and it doesn't have some of the refinements of the newer bodies, but as you can get low mileage 7D's for under £ 450 these days if my 7D dies I'll probably just replace it with another unless there is a blinding deal on a newer body elsewhere. Reason is - 7D is a very good camera for sports.
 
If you want low light performance, then I'd say a 5D of some version or a 6D would be better than a crop sensor, but then you'll need to replace the EF-S lens, but then again you'll need a longer lens for a frame filling shot for motorsport as the pixel density of the crop sensor cameras is double that of the full frames.
 
I want a 5DIII but this is just a hobby and I can't justify spending that money on a body hence looking for a cheap way into FX - A D610 seems to be a better prospect than a 6D helped along by the fact out of the two 24-70 f2.8s, the Nikon is cheaper by some margin. I will address the lack of telephoto once I'm happy I've got the body I want. Currently I have 70-300 f4-5.6 VC Tamron and I'm holding off replacing that until I make my mind up on which way to go on a body.
 
Trouble is once you factor in the cost of replacing all your lenses the system change is rarely worthwhile (and this applies equally to those nikonians thinking of coming over to the light side). The other thing is the 610 is a cut down version of the 800 just like the 6D is a cut down of the 5d3 - so you may well find that the features you want are still missing
 
Have you considered going for a grey import? Pretty sure you'd get a 5d3 for less than your quoted price of the d610 and lens. Factor in the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 vc instead of the Canon and you would be around the price of what you thought you would be paying. (Well, maybe a couple hundred more) but you'd be getting on the next level up the ladder.

Just a thought.
 
I think the problem I would have is even with the D610 I would probably find myself wanted a 5DIII. In reality I think I'm better off waiting until I can afford what I want rather than trying to switch systems.
 
Don't get why your looking at moving from Canon if ultimately you want to move back to a 5d3 that means 2 sets of lens swaps. Or am I missing something
 
Theres a 1DmkiV in the classifieds for £1450 (I have no connection btw - just pointing it out)
 
Janesy B said:
I have been tempted away from Canon by the fact I can get a D610 with the Nikkor 24-70 f2.8 lens for £2100 whereas a 6D and Canon 24-70 f2.8 would be £500 more.
Click to expand...
Janesy B said:
A D610 seems to be a better prospect than a 6D helped along by the fact out of the two 24-70 f2.8s, the Nikon is cheaper by some margin.
Click to expand...
Be careful. You're not comparing like with like lens-wise. The Mk II Canon (the expensive one) is a much better lens than the Nikon, basically because it's a newer design. The Mk I Canon is more comparable, but it's no longer in production. Pick up a mint second hand one and you have a significant price advantage to Canon.
 
theres also a minty 5d3 in the classifieds for 1500 now
 
StewartR said:
Be careful. You're not comparing like with like lens-wise. The Mk II Canon (the expensive one) is a much better lens than the Nikon, basically because it's a newer design. The Mk I Canon is more comparable, but it's no longer in production. Pick up a mint second hand one and you have a significant price advantage to Canon.
Click to expand...

I didn't realise this, thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top