Starting Again and Open to a New System

you can ignore the buffer problem with a good (read expensive) sd card. I can go at almost full speed forever with a 95Ms write card in the d600.
 
mountainpenguin said:
you can ignore the buffer problem with a good (read expensive) sd card. I can go at almost full speed forever with a 95Ms write card in the d600.
Click to expand...
The D7100 buffer is very different to the D600.
 
The23rdman said:
X100 is too restrictive. I like 35mm, but not for everything.

Yeah, considering a 7D, but what Canon 35mm is as good as the Nikon for 150 quid?
Click to expand...
The Canon 35mm f/2 mk1. Stunning little lens. Noisy AF but stunningly sharp.

Love it on both crop and FF systems, can be picked up used for £150.
 
odd jim said:
The Canon 35mm f/2 mk1. Stunning little lens. Noisy AF but stunningly sharp.

Love it on both crop and FF systems, can be picked up used for £150.
Click to expand...
The copy I had was a major let down.
 
true but a 95M/s card will do 3 and a bit Fps on a d7100 until the card is full. It will also run at full speed for a lot longer (can't work out the numbers in my head but should be at least 3 seconds
 
mountainpenguin said:
true but a 95M/s card will do 3 and a bit Fps on a d7100 until the card is full. It will also run at full speed for a lot longer (can't work out the numbers in my head but should be at least 3 seconds
Click to expand...
The RAW buffer is full after 8 shots though. It's waiting for it to clear that's the headache. It was a ball ache on the D7k and that's fast in comparison.
 
gad-westy said:
I'd stick to your original plan if you're familiar with the Nikon line up. Grab a good D200 for next to nothing. Pro body so all the controls where you need them. More than enough IQ at low ISO and sell for next to nothing now. Total bargain and an ideal tool for the job.

The Fuji S5 is a also an option. Its a D200 with different guts and is just wonderful for portraits but very slow to operate and more expensive than the D200.

A 35mm lens, and a zoom (I like the 18-70 myself) will leave you loads of changes for all the other bits you're bound to need.
Click to expand...


I'd agree with this, thoug han S5 is not slow to operate at all, an S3 is - painfully so, but is even cheaper again and even nicer for portraits.
 
Alan Clogwyn said:
I'd agree with this, thoug han S5 is not slow to operate at all, an S3 is - painfully so, but is even cheaper again and even nicer for portraits.
Click to expand...
As I've said several times, Alan, I do not want that old tech. I require more resolution. That's non-negotiable. :)
 
The23rdman said:
The RAW buffer is full after 8 shots though. It's waiting for it to clear that's the headache. It was a ball ache on the D7k and that's fast in comparison.
Click to expand...

If you want new tech then you need a bigger budget to reach your other requirements. The canon 7d has the buffer speed but it is ancient. You'll have to spend more money or compromise on something!
 
srichards said:
If you want new tech then you need a bigger budget to reach your other requirements. The canon 7d has the buffer speed but it is ancient. You'll have to spend more money or compromise on something!
Click to expand...
Yes, I know that.
 
Slimbert said:
If it was my money, I'd be looking for a Canon 7D and a Canon 17-55mm f2.8 IS. Great IQ and AF. I'd wait to get a prime.
Click to expand...
I had a 17-55 f/2.8. It was okay, nothing special. When I shoot at wide I want to shoot as wide as possible and on a crop f2.8 doesn't do that much for me, mate. I also want more reach than 55mm.
 
The23rdman said:
Yes, I know that.
Click to expand...

:)

I'd have the D7100 tossed out of a window in 5 minutes and I'm not much of a shot gunner. 5 RAWS??? Useless. 7d manages about 15-20 which is ok.

I still think you should go sony 25 RAWs on the A77ii, 79 AF points, 24 MP, wifi. 16-80 CZ. Sony flash triggers. Only a small robbery would be needed to finance it... :D
 
It's a happy medium to get started with.

You can't find what you want for your budget but you need to start somewhere. You need to decide what you can live without, not look for what you can't have.
 
srichards said:
:)

I'd have the D7100 tossed out of a window in 5 minutes and I'm not much of a shot gunner. 5 RAWS??? Useless. 7d manages about 15-20 which is ok.

I still think you should go sony 25 RAWs on the A77ii, 79 AF points, 24 MP, wifi. 16-80 CZ. Sony flash triggers. Only a small robbery would be needed to finance it... :D
Click to expand...

I don't spray and pray. It's only for certain aspects I need the faster bursts. Looking at YouTube I think that I could make it work as the buffer clears quickly - even quicker in cropped mode. Jpeg is also an option. I'm keen to make Nikon work because the lens line-up and IQ is superior.

Not interested in Sony.

Slimbert said:
It's a happy medium to get started with.

You can't find what you want for your budget but you need to start somewhere. You need to decide what you can live without, not look for what you can't have.
Click to expand...

7D and 24-105 with a nifty 50 would be better for me, but I am edging towards making do with the D7100. Damn, I might even end up with my fifth D700!
 
The23rdman said:
Not interested in Sony.
Click to expand...

Whenever I read one line almost throw away things like this I wonder... Why?

If you have an objection to Sony as a brand I'd urge you to drop the badge snobbery and look at the pros and cons of each actual product. If you've looked at the product range or have some other genuine and reasonable reason for rejecting Sony en masse then fair enough.
 
woof woof said:
Whenever I read one line almost throw away things like this I wonder... Why?

If you have an objection to Sony as a brand I'd urge you to drop the badge snobbery and look at the pros and cons of each actual product. If you've looked at the product range or have some other genuine and reasonable reason for rejecting Sony en masse then fair enough.
Click to expand...
Reading the ENTIRE thread, I think it relates to the lights/triggers Dean already has.
 
Sir SR said:
Reading the ENTIRE thread, I think it relates to the lights/triggers Dean already has.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, and if so that seems like a reasonable decision but it may be worth looking at the performance and cost of a possible new body and lens/lenses combo and the advantages offered and the cost of new compatible triggers/lighting/whatsits if they're available.
 
The A77ii is the only Sony I'd be interested in and it's almost all of my budget. not going to happen. :)
 
Used nikon d700 and 50mm 1.8 g would be my vote too, or a used tamron 28-75 if you need more focal lengths, could possibly get all 3 if you got lucky with deals.

used d600 and a 50 1.8 if you're dead set against a d700 though I don't really see there's an issue with dynamic range on the d700 it would certainly give more resolution.
 
CraigDHD said:
Used nikon d700 and 50mm 1.8 g would be my vote too, or a used tamron 28-75 if you need more focal lengths, could possibly get all 3 if you got lucky with deals.

used d600 and a 50 1.8 if you're dead set against a d700 though I don't really see there's an issue with dynamic range on the d700 it would certainly give more resolution.
Click to expand...
Craig, I've had five D700's over the years. The dynamic range has always been an issue with them - especially in light of the advances made- , but I still love the camera. The biggest reason that I don't really want another is that I want more resolution for big prints and canvases. This is not open for discussion on this thread though as it soon becomes a rabbit hole I have no desire for this thread to go down.
 
So you want to use a crop lens on a high pixel count full frame body and it must be cheap? You're not asking for much are ya! :)
 
Pentax K5iis plus the plastic fantastic DA 35 f2.4 is my suggestion, new and with change for a DA50 f1.8
 
The23rdman said:
Craig, I've had five D700's over the years. The dynamic range has always been an issue with them - especially in light of the advances made- , but I still love the camera. The biggest reason that I don't really want another is that I want more resolution for big prints and canvases. This is not open for discussion on this thread though as it soon becomes a rabbit hole I have no desire for this thread to go down.
Click to expand...

I know I read the thread, that's why I clarified my vote as it's just my opinion based on criteria given and you're probably a far more competant photographer than me so I'm not trying to tell you what to do. If you don't think the d700 had enough dynamic range I doubt a 7d would be an improvement and personal opinion, I think you'd be better with fx than dx if you're doing portraiture and like fairly wide lenses. D600 is around £720 used retail at the moment and can be had cheaper privately if you shop round so it and a 50 1.8d is within budget else 1.8g or the tamron is doable if you found a good deal on the body.
 
CraigDHD said:
I know I read the thread, that's why I clarified my vote as it's just my opinion based on criteria given and you're probably a far more competant photographer than me so I'm not trying to tell you what to do. If you don't think the d700 had enough dynamic range I doubt a 7d would be an improvement and personal opinion, I think you'd be better with fx than dx if you're doing portraiture and like fairly wide lenses. D600 is around £720 used retail at the moment and can be had cheaper privately if you shop round so it and a 50 1.8d is within budget else 1.8g or the tamron is doable if you found a good deal on the body.
Click to expand...

I've been around the block long enough to know that FF over DX is virtually meaningless. I've had many of both cameras and I could barely tell the difference at normal viewing distances - I'm damn sure non of my client ever cared. I'm not spending 85% of my budget on a body and being stuck with one lens - that's never ever going to work. I appreciate your thoughts though.
 
Bear in mind that this is a start-up solution. Down the line I'll upgrade.
 
The23rdman said:
Eh? I think you're getting your wires crossed, Alan.
Click to expand...

Not really, you say in your opening post you want to use a 35mm f1.8 lens, then you shoot down crop because you want shallow dof to be shallow, and you insist on high pixel count.
 
Alan Clogwyn said:
Not really, you say in your opening post you want to use a 35mm f1.8 lens, then you shoot down crop because you want shallow dof to be shallow, and you insist on high pixel count.
Click to expand...

You're putting 2+2 together and coming up with something other than 4, Alan. Yes, I like the 35mm f1.8 - it's a cracking little lens on a crop body. I never once shot down crop - I'm looking at crop bodies with high resolution. You do realise that there is a three page thread where ideas and conversations evolve, don't you?
 
Dean, D7100 every time. It may be a little slow re buffer speed but the images it produces are stunning and at the end of the day that's what it's all about. Doesn't matter what your buffer speed is if your images are carp and you know you really want that Nikon 35mm.
I know you are a very talented photographer and I'm sure you will soon be pulling in more than enough moolah to upgrade but for the moment the D7100 very nearly fulfills all your criteria. Do it.... you know it makes sense. (y)

Oh and I've just done a quick check and it appears that it is actually 89.8% utter drivel !!!!! :D
 
Andysnap said:
Dean, D7100 every time. It may be a little slow re buffer speed but the images it produces are stunning and at the end of the day that's what it's all about. Doesn't matter what your buffer speed is if your images are carp and you know you really want that Nikon 35mm.
I know you are a very talented photographer and I'm sure you will soon be pulling in more than enough moolah to upgrade but for the moment the D7100 very nearly fulfills all your criteria. Do it.... you know it makes sense. (y)

Oh and I've just done a quick check and it appears that it is actually 89.8% utter drivel !!!!! :D
Click to expand...
Yeah, I do think that you're right - it's the best compromise.

89.8% sounds about right. ;)
 
I'm hovering around the 93% mark, just an occasional jewel of sense hidden away in the mud of mediocrity. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top