I recently acquired 2/3rds of the holy trinity at a price that allows me to think about a new body to keep up with them. The lenses I got are the 24-70 2.8 and the 70-200 2.8 vr1. They instantly produced more contrast, less flare, and better subject isolation (in the case of the 70-200) while allowing better images in low light. I've moved my 18-140 g and 70-300 g to travel/day trip status. While I am satisfied with having 2 gripped 7000s I was wondering if stepping up to a 610 would produce better IQ, allow lower ISOs, and a better overall experience with the pro glass? Will the higher MP count really show any sloppy handling skills? Will it even give me any real world benefits? Should I just save up for a better body? Right now there's a 610 for $1000 on CL and a 800 at a local shop for $1500. At $1500 I could probably snag a 750 at rebate time or even a used d3s a friend in selling. Just some random thoughts running through my mind. I also got a question about the 14-24 but I'll ask in that forum.
To FX or not to FX
- Thread starter Deuce808
- Start date
singlerosa_RIP
Senior Member
Got my D7000 about 5 years ago and added a D600 2 years later. The trinity followed as I got rid of all my DX glass. Added a 750 early this year to get even better ISO performance and low light focusing capabilities. I noticed an IQ difference with the 600 and a big ISO diff with the 750. Plus the 750 has wifi and the tilty LCD. If you shoot nothing but outdoors in bright sunlight, high ISO means nothing to you. But, if you get a 14-24 you will have to have full frame or you're wasting your money (IMHO) on a great UWA lens.
Horoscope Fish
Senior Member
Quoted for great truth.Eduard said:
- ...
But again, this is all premised on knowing what I shoot and where I want to go with my photography.
....
I shoot basically everything except sports. Landscape, night city scape,astrophotography, street, people, pets, travel. I guess 80% of what I shoot is at night using ambient light. Probably 90% is handheld. Most times when I head out I pack 2 bodies, 3 lenses (10-24,18-140, 70-300 during the day or 10-24, 24-70, 70-200 at night or rarely just 1 body and 35, 85) I also shoot large/jpeg, don't use Lightroom or Photoshop (well PS mobile to get rid of dust spots) and while I do print occasionally it never goes above 12x24. Most of what I shoot gets posted to social media and for that, I guess the IQ wouldn't be too important, except for my own price of mind I want to take the best photos I can with what I have.
I just curious about moving to a 610, I believe what I've read says that I won't see too much difference, moving to a 750/800 will give a lot more, although the 800/810 might show off any crappy technique. I like the similarity of controls on the 610/750 in relation to my 7000. I also love the look of the DF and if that had the el-en15 battery I would be all over it. I like that all my batteries use the same charger. But If I could get that for a good price I would surely be tempted. What I'm looking to improve is low light focusing and lower my ISO.
I just curious about moving to a 610, I believe what I've read says that I won't see too much difference, moving to a 750/800 will give a lot more, although the 800/810 might show off any crappy technique. I like the similarity of controls on the 610/750 in relation to my 7000. I also love the look of the DF and if that had the el-en15 battery I would be all over it. I like that all my batteries use the same charger. But If I could get that for a good price I would surely be tempted. What I'm looking to improve is low light focusing and lower my ISO.
Last edited:
Where have you heard the D610 would not make much of a difference?
It is a perfect match for your D7000 everything pretty much in the same place and it performs great.
As you are an owner of those fabulous lenses I would consider the jump mandatory! D750 a bit better of course but if it's not in the budget it makes no sense to me to wait
It is a perfect match for your D7000 everything pretty much in the same place and it performs great.
As you are an owner of those fabulous lenses I would consider the jump mandatory! D750 a bit better of course but if it's not in the budget it makes no sense to me to wait
Start with shooting in raw and using post-processing. A fx camera will not solve your desire to have the best photos..
This, this and this!
Please excuse my honesty, but you should just stick to what you have. A battery charger and looks should be the last thing considered when deciding on a camera body.
Shooting in raw and post processing to get the correct shot is not the way I want to shoot. I try to get the correct shot in camera. I can't help the dust once in a while so I use the blemish removal in PS mobile when I can. If you like to process then that's cool, I don't, if I was forced to I would sell all my gear and just use my phone. As it is now, it goes straight from my camera to social media or printing, If it doesn't look good it gets thrown out. I will not bend on that.
Moving to FX only makes sense to me if the bodies will help me lower the ISO and focus better in low light. If it will I will get the one I can afford, which looks more and more like the 750 as it has the better auto focus. The lenses I own, regardless of FX, pro glass, or not, all work with my bodies. I am just looking to kick it up a notch. The pro glass already helped with contrast, flare, and isolation.
As as far as the DF, somethings may matter to someone and not to others. Whatever gets you out shooting. I personally hated having 2 different chargers, the main reason I sold my 3200. It irks me to the point that one camera sat unused. Now that I have one type of battery, one wall charger, one car charger, I can constantly rotate through the bodies. Its a personal preference. As far as the looks, that's a preference and if it did have the battery I would have bought it already, even at retail. I just mentioned it as a afterthought, if you took offense to my opinions then maybe you're the one with a issue.
Maybe I don't belong in this forum as I see a lot of hate going around. I throw out a question from time to time, sometimes I get real answers to the question I asked but most times it's a question that questions why I'm questioning. It doesn't matter why, what matters is the info I was trying to gleen from the collective. I think I'll go back to doing own research, at least I don't berate myself.
Moving to FX only makes sense to me if the bodies will help me lower the ISO and focus better in low light. If it will I will get the one I can afford, which looks more and more like the 750 as it has the better auto focus. The lenses I own, regardless of FX, pro glass, or not, all work with my bodies. I am just looking to kick it up a notch. The pro glass already helped with contrast, flare, and isolation.
As as far as the DF, somethings may matter to someone and not to others. Whatever gets you out shooting. I personally hated having 2 different chargers, the main reason I sold my 3200. It irks me to the point that one camera sat unused. Now that I have one type of battery, one wall charger, one car charger, I can constantly rotate through the bodies. Its a personal preference. As far as the looks, that's a preference and if it did have the battery I would have bought it already, even at retail. I just mentioned it as a afterthought, if you took offense to my opinions then maybe you're the one with a issue.
Maybe I don't belong in this forum as I see a lot of hate going around. I throw out a question from time to time, sometimes I get real answers to the question I asked but most times it's a question that questions why I'm questioning. It doesn't matter why, what matters is the info I was trying to gleen from the collective. I think I'll go back to doing own research, at least I don't berate myself.
IMO sometimes a response without questions would be a very poor response,in any walk of life you should try not to assume things,therefore we often check to ensure the OP has the full knowledge about the possible answers to his question,this in turn will bring out conversation the OP may not be interested in but hey thats conversation.
Some people can not grasp the idea that there opinions are perhaps not the only ones that matter and there reasons for doing something are not the only reasons,when in a forum situation you need to ignore these answers rather than take them personally,sorry you feel the way you do.
Some people can not grasp the idea that there opinions are perhaps not the only ones that matter and there reasons for doing something are not the only reasons,when in a forum situation you need to ignore these answers rather than take them personally,sorry you feel the way you do.
In low light a prime F1.8 or even better F1.4 will be ideal. I use my 35mm F1.8 DX with D3300 almost exclusively for indoor and night shots. With an FX body, like D750, you can shoot at higher ISO while maintaining similar noise or shoot at lower ISO for practically noise free images.
Here are few indoor and night images taken in the last few days
Here are few indoor and night images taken in the last few days
appreciate you dont want to post process, you want low light capabilities then a 1.8 or 1.4 lens using fx camera and raw is the way to go , you can bring more detail out of your shots , you dont have to do much post just open up the shadows and drop the highlites , problem is all raw photos need processing so its a trade , you want more low light capabilities then fx and raw in my opinion
i do set up my import into lightroom with presets that are about the same as what i see in my jpeg sooc so really most can be done auto on import and then i just tweak if there is blown or clipped highlites , there is so much more info in a raw its hard to ignore
if you want to shoot jpeg then i cant see the need to go fx imo
i do set up my import into lightroom with presets that are about the same as what i see in my jpeg sooc so really most can be done auto on import and then i just tweak if there is blown or clipped highlites , there is so much more info in a raw its hard to ignore
if you want to shoot jpeg then i cant see the need to go fx imo
Last edited:
Horoscope Fish
Senior Member
Okay, so you're what I call a "generalist" (you shoot a little of everything), you don't mind lugging some gear around (multiple bodies, lenses, etc.) and you want to keep this simple (you shoot JPG and have no interest in doing any significant post-processing). You want to be able to use AF in low, or at least low-ER, light than what your current kit allows and lastly you want to be able to shoot at higher ISO with less noise in your images.
Are we on the same page so far?
If so, then I think you would be very happy with a D600/610 and you'd probably about crap your pants over the D750.
....
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
Here's the thing with low light and high ISO that probably mean very little to you when choosing between the D610 and D750 ... you're shooting JPEG. That is important. Yes, you're going to have about one stop less noise with the D750, but the in-camera High ISO NR is pretty darn good in both cameras. What you'll never benefit from with the D750 is the ability to dip into the amazing dynamic range of the RAW file, pulling details buried in 5 stops worth of darkness because you only have what your meter reading allowed you to capture.
As an owner of both cameras (and a D800), what I'm telling you is that you're over-buying if you get anything beyond the D610 and shoot only JPEG alone. The only thing that the other cameras will buy you is more focus points. Were I in your shoes, I'd get a D7200. You lose nothing in terms of reach that you're already used to, and the improvements in the sensor on that camera will certainly be eye opening over the D7000, particularly with the removal of the OLPF. You also get the 51-pt focus system that the D610 lacks.
I own the D7000 and the D600 and enjoy the versatility it gives me. If I could afford new cameras I would have the D7200 and the D750. With all the medical bills I have had lately there is no budget for photography equipment. Fortnightly I am very happy with what I own and think they both do a great job!
Horoscope Fish
Senior Member
I'm not sure why you're quoting me, specifically here, but since you are I'll respond with my thinking behind my post.
Group-Area AF auto-focus area mode, Highlight-Weighted Metering and Face Detection for Matrix Metering and the articulating LCD are all features of the D750 and all of those, I think, sound potentially relevant for a "generalist" type shooter like the OP appears to be. None of those things are specific to low light/high ISO performance but that's a fantastic features-set right there; hence my pants-crapping reference. I agree he may be "over buying" since he intends to shoot JPG only but he appears to understand that.
,,,,
The best choice for a DX body, I agree. It's high-ISO performance is impressive but I don't think it can really compete against the D750 in this area and this appears to be a crucial factor in the OP's decision making. It also lacks the previously mentioned awesome features of the D750.
Just my take.
....
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
My reason for quoting you was that while I believe that your, "I think you would be very happy with a D600/610 and you'd probably about crap your pants over the D750.", assertion is likely an overstatement for a JPEG-only shooter. Shooting with both of them I don't see the difference as being that extreme until I dive into the DR I get in RAW from the D750. Given the difference in price my point is that if he's paying almost twice as much (D610's can be had for under a grand) he should expect twice the camera. He might have it, but I don't know that he'll ever experience it. MHO, and as always, YMMV.
Horoscope Fish
Senior Member
Fair enough.
I agree by shooting JPG much of the raw horsepower is wasted but again, OP seems to value the simplicity of shooting JPG. I was responding in a more general, overall photographic experience with the "pants crapping" comment, which I stand by. The D750 has a feature set that, taken its totality is, IMO, is Just That Good.
....