- Messages
- 550
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Looks a bit too pricey for me [emoji23][emoji23]
Cheaper lenses though!
Looks a bit too pricey for me [emoji23][emoji23]
I have two main lenses for my landscape work, I use a Tokina 11-16 2.8 and a Nikon 17-55 2.8
First you need to get away from the idea that a full frame is an upgrade. FX and DX bodies are just different tools which are suited to different jobs. If you look at what you get if you spend similar amounts of money on DX and DX bodies, FX is likely to give you better noise handling and better dynamic range, whereas DX is likely to give you a better spread of autofocus points and a faster frame rate. Which is better for you depends on what you're trying to do with it.First you need to identify exactly what it is that buying a FF body will do....
I shoot portraits primarily.
I've got the d300s and d810. I'd happily use either in most situations. I moved from canons X0D range of crop cameras and L glass. I personally find the AF better and skin tones more to my liking, or easier to attain in photoshop. The dynamic range is better in my Nikons. The dynamic range and amount you can get out of the shadows in the D810 is constantly amazing.
I look back at my work in the form of A3 prints on my first digital camera - the canon 20D with 24-70 f2.8 and was/am happy with that.
If you like, I could take a random shot in the park with both cameras and let you see the raw files. Or if you are popping over to Edinburgh at some point, bring your camera and spare SD card and we could try the same scene with different gear. PM me if you are interested.
There's no camera that sits between the D7200 and the D500 in the current line up.Ok so after much thought i think I'm going to stick with DX but try and upgrade from my D7000 to something a bit more pro, I have some decent lenses for my DX body but the equivalent for FF is just way out of my budget, If I trade in my body and a decent lens I could probably just about do a swap for a new D7200 or do I add some cash on to that and go for something with a bit more oomph? obviously not the top DX but probably something in between the D7200 and the D500?
There's no camera that sits between the D7200 and the D500 in the current line up.
Nope the D7200 is. The D7000 was replaced by the D7100 which was replaced by the D7200. These are all classed a 'consumer/enthusiast' APS-C cameras. The D500 is classed as a pro level APS-C camera, the long awaited replacement for the D300s.So is the D7000 the last in the range before the D500 with regards to spec?
Nope the D7200 is. The D7000 was replaced by the D7100 which was replaced by the D7200. These are all classed a 'consumer/enthusiast' APS-C cameras. The D500 is classed as a pro level APS-C camera, the long awaited replacement for the D300s.
2 reasons for the price difference. One is that the D500 is newer than the D7200, but as I said the D500 is a 'pro spec' which means that it will be built like a tank. Also, you've got all the new tech like crazy frame rate, new super duper AF system, and a few other bits and bobs. It's the same with full frame cameras, if you look at the D7200 FF equivalent, the D750 it's around £1400, yet the pro body (D5) is over £5k. In FF you do have something in between, the D810, but it's still £3k cheaper than the D5.Ok thanks, bit of a price difference between the two, pretty much the difference of buying one new and one 2nd/3rd hand
2 reasons for the price difference. One is that the D500 is newer than the D7200, but as I said the D500 is a 'pro spec' which means that it will be built like a tank. Also, you've got all the new tech like crazy frame rate, new super duper AF system, and a few other bits and bobs. It's the same with full frame cameras, if you look at the D7200 FF equivalent, the D750 it's around £1400, yet the pro body (D5) is over £5k. In FF you do have something in between, the D810, but it's still £3k cheaper than the D5.
Why would a D810 or D750 improve his shots?Some really good shots on your Flickr
To change and get better you'll need to go D810 and the 14-24 f2.8, or at least the D750 - so unless you have £3,000+ you don't need then the £600 D7200 is the way to go (I use the Tokina 11-16 on this too)
I use this 'consumer' camera professionally (its hugely better than some of my previous 'Pro' cameras and a fraction of their cost !!!), and I have no plans anytime soon to change to FX either for my Landscapes or Weddings, but if I did it'd purely be for cleaner high ISO
Dave
Maybe, but I'm not sure. I think the D810 and D750 will get updates first as they're just over 2yrs and just under 2 yrs respectively compared to the D7200 which is just under 1.5 years old. There's no sign of a D810 or D750 replacement as yet, although photokina is only a month away.The followup to the D7200 will probably be out in the next 6 months.
Why would a D810 or D750 improve his shots?
The D7200 actually has more DR than the D750,... by a whopping 0.1ev if you believe DXO But how this translates into shadow recovery I don't know. The D750 is insane in this area for sureLargely they won't, but these cameras do have a (slightly) higher DR, certainly my pal with the D750 can pull more out of the shadows than I can - but then he needs to as he's crap at getting his exposures right
More specifically, the 14-24 is better, so the bench-testers say, than the Tokina 11-16
Would he, anyone, notice a difference in quality if both set-ups shot a similar field of view at the same time with the same exposure? Maybe, but no-one ever does that so no-one really knows
Dave
Ok that's all my gear packed up and awaiting collection on Tuesday from MPB......in exchange for a brand new D7200, my first new body (always bought second hand). Hope I've done the right thing [emoji52]
Just seen this! Sure the D7200 will be a nice upgrade. Which lenses will you be using with it?