Nikon D750 & D780
- Thread starter Joeturner11
- Start date
- Messages
- 5,813
- Edit My Images
- No
Not many!
Wife has taken the 24-70 for now so I have bene using the 24-120 and 50mm. Nothing special TBH.
This is the dilemma though... my Wifes Nan recently passed away and her Mum and Dad want to buy me something special with some of the money that was left (when her Gran passed away they bought me a D7100 + lenses).
They were very interested when I was talking about a new lens so I might be in a position to get a higher grade bit of glass so it puts me in an a bit more of a dilema about FX vs DX.
All my equestrian shots of late have been with the 24-120 and been pretty good, but maybe getting a bit of an upgrade on the glass front will make me forget about the D500!
- Messages
- 23,621
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
As you know I have the 24-120mm f4, and the 70-200mm f2.8 VRII. The 70-200mm f2.8 is my go to lens for sports (running and cycling, and often motorsports if I can get close enough) and the difference in focus speed and accuracy for sports is night and day compared to the 24-120mm. This is why I've since bought the Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 for close up sports as the focus speed is probably a touch faster than the 70-200mm, and again night and day from the 24-120mm. I don't want to part with my 24-120mm though as I find it a better walkabout length, but doubt I'll use it for sports again.
- Messages
- 5,813
- Edit My Images
- No
I think the 70-200 would certainly help... i'm not sure how much I would have to spend on a lens, but this would be high up on the list! But if buget is lower, then are there other options? The F4 version is probably going to be too slow I guess.
I'm not blown away with the 24-120 but its a great focal length for everything!
- Messages
- 23,621
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Many users report the Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 is very good. Not sure how fast the AF is compared to the VRII, but users seem to report it's fast. I tried the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 OS and whilst fast is not in the same league as the VRII.
The 24-120mm is what it is. It's not a pro lens and is 'just' a higher end kit lens. It's good for what it is though imo, sharpness is up there with the 24-70mm.
- Messages
- 3,194
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
I have the F4 70-200, the af is as fast as the f2.8 to all intents and purposes. I cannot see any difference between the af speed of the 70-200 F4 and the 24-70 f2.8 which I also have. This is on a D810 though, but wouldn't expect any difference on a D750. The VR is excellent too when I use it. Only thing to be aware of is it is not rated as weather sealed like the f2.8
- Messages
- 1,468
- Name
- Anirban
- Edit My Images
- No
I was in that situation a few years ago, may be not as much as you lol , but not anymore. I am tempted by many lenses, but I know that I have to first try to get out and shoot and truly understand the limitations of the lenses I own. Reading about lenses on the internet is actually a not so good idea.
If you pick the D500, at least you can tell yourself you tried to see what it offers and you can always use the D750 your wife has.
I am not very clear though why you want a DX body, seems you are not convinced yourself. But in your case, you have the luxury of having both the D500 and D750 at home with a choice of lenses.
Good luck with your next purchase
- Messages
- 1,468
- Name
- Anirban
- Edit My Images
- No
The Nikon is slightly better in AF speed from reports and I tend to believe that, but only someone who handled both can offer a better opinion. I also think for VC/VR enabled shots in succession or speed to single shot, the Nikon might have an edge,
- Messages
- 4,562
- Name
- Mark Gameson
- Edit My Images
- Yes
A couple from over the weekend from me
BLACK & WHITE by Mark Gameson, on Flickr
ANCIENT by Mark Gameson, on Flickr
BLACK & WHITE by Mark Gameson, on FlickrANCIENT by Mark Gameson, on Flickr
- Messages
- 817
- Name
- Scott
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've got the Tamron 70-200 VC and it is brilliant, almost as fast to focus as my Canon 70-200II was, I can't remember my VRII when I had it but I did have a little play with one and it didn't feel any different than the Tamron. The Tamron doesn't have a limiter switch though and that does make a difference sometimes, although I have yet to come away from a circuit feeling let down by it. It is also an incredibly sharp lens and mine seems to be sharpest wide open.
- Messages
- 5,813
- Edit My Images
- No
This is very true - I think its probably more sensible to not change anything until I am convinced on what to do as it could be a costly move.
My thoughts were:
D500 pro's for me:
Longer reach for sports, better AF for sports (on paper anyway), some nice new body features and buttons
D500 con's for me:
High ISO performance not as strong, slightly bigger, new cards are expensive compared to SD, IQ and DOF not a match for FX
D750 pro's for me:
FX sensor produces great images, can focus in what seems like dakness, smaller (not by much but it is), great high ISO performance
D750 con's for me:
The close group of focus points for sports (not that I have had issues as nearly always framing in the centre so maybe this isnt a con after all), being FX you need some big lenses or TC to get decent reach
My thoughts were as I was doing more action next year, the D500 would be better (on paper) but then I look at my equestrian shots and think, what would the D500 actually have done any better!
- Messages
- 1,468
- Name
- Anirban
- Edit My Images
- No
The Tammy is super sharp and I love mine. DXO rates it a point sharper than the Nikon VRII on a D810.
- Messages
- 5,327
- Name
- Peter
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think you have to analyse your shots.
If,at the equestrian events, you are missing a lot of shots because either you are too far away and/or the action is too fast (jumping over fences?) and the AF is inadequate, then a D500 would help. But if the 750 already copes with these then it will also be as good or better for all you other photography needs.
Which lens are you using for portraits?
If,at the equestrian events, you are missing a lot of shots because either you are too far away and/or the action is too fast (jumping over fences?) and the AF is inadequate, then a D500 would help. But if the 750 already copes with these then it will also be as good or better for all you other photography needs.
Which lens are you using for portraits?
- Messages
- 1,468
- Name
- Anirban
- Edit My Images
- No
@JJ! , I'd ideally suggest you keep your D750 and shoot more, New cameras always sound exciting, but I think these days even a basic budget camera is fantastic with some good glass.
From what you described iun terms of your shooting needs, D750 is more than enough, even a old D700 will be also fine. The same logic applies to me also. I have hardly scratched the surface of what the D750 is capable of.
I have two fast glass - 85 1.8G and the Tamron 70-200 F2.8 and a slow kit lens the 24-85 VR. I have almost the whole focal length covered for what I usually shoot (no BIF, wildlife and Sports). The only lens I may actually need is a 20 F1.8 or a 35 F1.8, but I am going to give myself some time before I buy.
I think the D500 can also go down to -3 ev isn't that true?
- Messages
- 3,194
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
Not quite, it can focus down to -4EV
- Messages
- 5,813
- Edit My Images
- No
Hang, on let me find some images, and post them to see what you think.
- Messages
- 1,468
- Name
- Anirban
- Edit My Images
- No
Here's a site that seems like your area of interest and the guy shoots with a D750.
https://itsnotthecamera.wordpress.com/2016/03/20/shooting-a-working-equitation-workshop-march-1816/
- Messages
- 5,813
- Edit My Images
- No
Shared before, but these were with 24-120 F4 and in single shot:
https://m.facebook.com/justinakehurstphotography/albums/1210890985637061/
https://m.facebook.com/justinakehurstphotography/albums/1210890985637061/
- Messages
- 1,468
- Name
- Anirban
- Edit My Images
- No
I am no expert in shooting this kind of events, but from personal preference, the images look ok but some of them do not stand out much.
I think you may have to work on composition (finding the right spot, angle, distance and focal length) and perhaps get a 70-200 2.8 lens so that the background can be blurred a bit more to isolate the subject. What shutter speed were you using mostly?
- Messages
- 410
- Name
- Ian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have an early Sigma 70-200 f2.8 bought second hand on here and it is almost always on the front of my D7000, had DX 70-300 before and now never use it just does not give the results, I think I paid around £300.00? I could not see the benefit "to me" of spending over double on the Nikon version?
Last edited:
- Messages
- 5,813
- Edit My Images
- No
Was all in one spot from the side sadly, access to the ring and the decent spots were for the on site photographer only so was rather limited to where I could get pics from.
Looking at side by side pics the D500 looks quite a bit more chunky even though measurements don't seem that much different?
Last edited:
- Messages
- 451
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 5,813
- Edit My Images
- No
Cant actually remember shutter speed, will have a check, 1/1500ish maybe.
I do not more subject isolation though - it just wasnt happening with the 24-120 from where I was standing!
- Messages
- 2,835
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 5,813
- Edit My Images
- No
See I dont 100% agree as I am a horse rider myself I get to talk to a lot of the riders and the single most important thing they all seem to like is the look of the front legs and the hate the photos of jumps from behind!
Most limiting factor at that particular show was probably my position and reach of the 24-120.
As for the D750... I have had an offer for it which would pay for the D500. However, the more and more reviews I read (like you do lol) its all about the focus system and that it is purely a sports aimed camera. I don't need 10FPS, but do I need that focus system? aaaaaarrrrggghhhhh
- Messages
- 23,621
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
These would certainly get a bit more 'wow' factor with something like the 70-200mm f2.8, isolating the subject more. I know you say that you don't want that, but I feel that they do give images more pop, more wow factor and help separate them from a generic iphone pic, or consumer compact pic(there's far more to it than just the lens of course) Also composition and timing of the jumps could be better tbh. Finally some better PP would also help. I don't think the D500 would help any with these images.
- Messages
- 5,813
- Edit My Images
- No
Agree but I think timing is a very personal thing in equestrian - but thats just my point of view lol
No - i do want more isolation!
Going to keep hold of the D750 - I think the D500 will not give me anything more and I like the D750 size and feel in the hand. I might have a few change around of lenses to keep GAS at bay and help get the images I am after.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 1,106
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
Justin, hi. Here's my two cents worth. (I'm also thinking through the D500/750 dilemma.) Currently, I use a D7000 and a D700. I shoot indoor events and indoor (basketball, volleyball) and outdoor sports (soccer, track and field) for a group of private schools. The two lenses that get the majority of the work are a Tamron 24-70VC and a two ring 80-200 2.8 af-d. The majority of the time I'm using the D700. All this by way of background. I see nothing wrong with the focus when looking at the show jumping photos you posted and I'm assuming they were shot with a D750. I tend to agree with other posters in that I think you would be better served in getting a quality 70/200 2.8 lens. It will blur your backgrounds if you're shooting at 2.8 and with a D750 you still have some crop ability if you're farther away than you'd like.
- Messages
- 1,468
- Name
- Anirban
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't think you need the focus system of D500 for what you shoot. Until D5 and D500 came out the whole world talked about how great the AF system is on the D750 and perhaps the best after D4s. I see no reason why that status would change suddenly. D500 may be slightly better, but people were able to capture astounding images with D750 in sports, wildlife and BIF.
Often these differences are either in people's mind or specific applications that most average Joe like us don't really shoot.
Get a 70-200 2.8 and I think you will keep that lens
- Messages
- 23,621
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
^^ thisI don't think you need the focus system of D500 for what you shoot. Until D5 and D500 came out the whole world talked about how great the AF system is on the D750 and perhaps the best after D4s. I see no reason why that status would change suddenly. D500 may be slightly better, but people were able to capture astounding images with D750 in sports, wildlife and BIF.
Often these differences are either in people's mind or specific applications that most average Joe like us don't really shoot.
Get a 70-200 2.8 and I think you will keep that lens
- Messages
- 23,621
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
I could say that about me with any lens or type of photographyIf I am given the D750 or even the D5/D500 and the best wildlife or BIF lens on Nikon, I will produce crap pictures as I don't even know the techniques and haven't practised enough to even post an opinion
- Messages
- 1,468
- Name
- Anirban
- Edit My Images
- No
I could say that about me with any lens or type of photography
It happened with me, Toby. A friend of mine to came to visit us. We were capturing our kids playing in the park. I couldn't get good shots of them running around with the Tamron 70-200. My friend picked up my camera and shot a whole sequence and over 90% shots were perfect. He knows what he was doing...I don't lol.
- Messages
- 23,621
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
My wife does things like that to me. I spend ages composing a shot, she comes along snaps the shot is a millisecond, walks off and comes out with a better image than mine
- Messages
- 8,178
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Strange rainbow the other morning. It hadn`t rained, and didn`t look like it was going to either ... As you do, I grabbed camera (fortunately 70-200 was on it) and popped off a couple of snaps
Fly me to the end of the Rainbow by Paulie-W, on Flickr
Fly me to the end of the Rainbow by Paulie-W, on Flickr
- Messages
- 6,949
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've been catching up with what you have been posting d750 v d500, I honestly think you have made the right decision keeping the d750. For me iso and isolation are the benefits of the d750, the d750 focusing isn't too shabby and FPS is ok as long as you use 12 bit lossless compressed RAWs.
A 70-200 would have been my recommendation. The f4 is pretty good, focus is fast enough but not as lightening as the f2.8. The f2.8 takes a 1.4 tc well taking it up to a useable 280mm f4. Is there going to be a time when you need f2.8? Shooting indoors or in overcast/dark light it's useful for keeping the shutter speed up. The decision over tamron or Nikon really depends on whether you plan to use a Teleconverter. The Nikon one takes one, the tamron doesn't.
Last edited: