Which would be best for close up work

M

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
If i dont go with the D7200 it leaves me with scope for another purchase,for birding i am not moving from DX so that would meen sticking with the D7100,for close up work up to life size and flowers i am again considering FX,i have two choices within budget so no good saying some other model,its the D700 or D610,this would be with a sigma 105 macro.Should just say most of the time i will be using natural light although i do have flash for when needed,so its iso 800-1000 which ime ok with perceived drawbacks.
 
Last edited:
S

sonicbuffalo_RIP

Senior Member
mikew said:
Thanks i already have the sigma 105 macro,so its another body to use it on ime after,ime quiet happy never taking the tamron of the D7100,only a quick on and off to keep the contacts right :D
Click to expand...
Sorry....I overlooked that in your sig. I'm sure you love the lens though. Good luck Mike!
 
A

aroy

Senior Member
mikew said:
If i dont go with the D7200 it leaves me with scope for another purchase,for birding i am not moving from DX so that would meen sticking with the D7100,for close up work up to life size and flowers i am again considering FX,i have two choices within budget so no good saying some other model,its the D700 or D610,this would be with a sigma 105 macro.Should just say most of the time i will be using natural light although i do have flash for when needed,so its iso 800-1000 which ime ok with perceived drawbacks.
Click to expand...

D610 would be better option as it has more MP. If you are going to use the Macro at high F stops (F/24 to F/44) for better DOF, you will either need a powerful flash or better high ISO, in that case a D750 wil be marginally better than a D610. One thing I have experienced is that for flowers a shorter focal length works better for me, as that reduces a lot of hand shake, that is why I plan to get the Nikon 60mm some day.
 
J

J-see

Senior Member
For macro you'll lose the crop factor advantage when going FX so you want to get as many Mpix as possible since you'll be cropping a lot of the macro shots. When the subject gets larger, it is of less importance although more Mpix never harms.

I'd go for the D610. Quality wise there's close to no difference with the D750 and it even scores slightly higher at some if I remember well. I'm not sure how it will do when it comes to noise but even there I don't think there's a dramatic difference. Which makes 800 or 1000 ISO no problem at all.
 
B

Bill16

Senior Member
I would buy the D700 and a raynox 250 like Scott uses and skip cropping if possible! :)
But I firmly believe you should do what feels right to you my friend! :)
 
Michael J.

Michael J.

Senior Member
I think one time you tested the D700? How did you feel about it?

If I go FX I think buying of a D610 or a D750. I know it doesn't help you.
 
T

traceyjj

Senior Member
Have you got a local camera shop you can go to try the D610? I know nothing of the D700 so I cannot offer any opinions of it... but I would always want to try a camera out in my hand to see if it is balanced in my hand.

Good luck with whichever way you decide to go :)
 
M

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
aroy said:
D610 would be better option as it has more MP. If you are going to use the Macro at high F stops (F/24 to F/44) for better DOF, you will either need a powerful flash or better high ISO, in that case a D750 wil be marginally better than a D610. One thing I have experienced is that for flowers a shorter focal length works better for me, as that reduces a lot of hand shake, that is why I plan to get the Nikon 60mm some day.
Click to expand...

Thanks,i can get highish ISO close up shots now that ime fairly happy with,i just felt i could improve it with FX so long as i fill the frame,i already have the Sigma so a different lens would not be on the cards,this is what i can get with DX, i would be aiming for the same sort of thing.

DSC_0057.jpg
 
Last edited:
B

Bill16

Senior Member
The raynox 250 lens is $70-75 and goes onto your existing lens buddy! So this will help no matter what FX Nikon you buy! :)

mikew said:
Thanks,i can get highish ISO close up shots now that ime fairly happy with,i just felt i could improve it with FX so long as i fill the frame,i already have the Sigma so a different lens would not be on the cards,this is what i can get with DX, i would be aiming for the same sort of thing.

View attachment 147384
Click to expand...
 
M

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
Bill16 said:
The raynox 250 lens is $70-75 and goes onto your existing lens buddy! So this will help no matter what FX Nikon you buy! :)
Click to expand...

Thanks Bill,one of my aims will be to keep a decent working distance if ime using natural light as its so easy to cast a shadow over you subject.
 
J

J-see

Senior Member
It took me a bit to get used to the magnification loss on the D750 compared to the D3300.

It's quite the difference between 1x and 1.5x. But on average your lenses will perform better on an FX which makes cropping not that bad.
 
B

Bill16

Senior Member
If you use just the 105mm then your going to have to crop, so I'd recommend going to the D610 or something above that model. The MPs will count when cropping and the D700 is too low MPs to crop much and still have a much in print size to use if you print.
 
M

Moab Man

Senior Member
@mikew

I just picked up a Raynox 250. This weekend I will be trying it out on both my D7100 and D600. I will share with you my thoughts at the end of the weekend. If I forget, give me a shout.
 
R

rocketman122

Senior Member
mikew said:
If i dont go with the D7200 it leaves me with scope for another purchase,for birding i am not moving from DX so that would meen sticking with the D7100,for close up work up to life size and flowers i am again considering FX,i have two choices within budget so no good saying some other model,its the D700 or D610,this would be with a sigma 105 macro.Should just say most of the time i will be using natural light although i do have flash for when needed,so its iso 800-1000 which ime ok with perceived drawbacks.
Click to expand...

not understanding what the concern is here. whats wrong with the D7100/105 sigma for macro work? and whats wrong with the D7100 for birding except the bad buffer which limits your pictures.

btw that picture you posted was to show its extreme use for high iso? something looks off in with it in the editing.
 
M

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
rocketman122 said:
not understanding what the concern is here. whats wrong with the D7100/105 sigma for macro work? and whats wrong with the D7100 for birding except the bad buffer which limits your pictures.

btw that picture you posted was to show its extreme use for high iso? something looks off in with it in the editing.
Click to expand...

Perhaps nothing is wrong with the D7100 and sigma,perhaps i fancy an FX to go with it,my understanding is though a image arrived at from a similar MP sensor but not compressed into a DX area would be superior ime open to being corrected,the D7100 is a great birding camera but falls short in lower contrast fast focus situations with the 150-600 also whilst decent at handling up to 1600 iso its possible the D7200 could be better in both these areas,awaiting more reviews on this.
The D700 was only thrown in for people to get it out of my system for me,i had one on loan for a few days and loved it but at the time decided it wasn't for me,the picture wasn't to show the use of high ISO i think i stated it was to show what i was happy with to give potential advice givers an idea of what i was looking for.
 
Top