The primary reason I bought my D500 while keeping the D7100 was wildlife, which I also like to shoot quite a bit. With that subject, the two cameras aren't even in the same league. I still love my D7100 for landscapes, architecture, etc., but I would not want to be out in the woods without the D500. Your long Sigma lens gives you a bit more speed at the long end than my 300mm f/4 plus 2x teleconverter, but I'm pretty sure you still experience the same thing I used to, namely that "getting the shot" with the D7100 was always iffy.
NIkon D850: Best Wildlife Camera EVER?
- Thread starter mikew_RIP
- Start date
The primary reason I bought my D500 while keeping the D7100 was wildlife, which I also like to shoot quite a bit. With that subject, the two cameras aren't even in the same league. I still love my D7100 for landscapes, architecture, etc., but I would not want to be out in the woods without the D500. Your long Sigma lens gives you a bit more speed at the long end than my 300mm f/4 plus 2x teleconverter, but I'm pretty sure you still experience the same thing I used to, namely that "getting the shot" with the D7100 was always iffy.
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
Hmmmm. I've been using mine for almost 3 years and I don't know what I would want replaced.
As always, it depends on what you're shooting. The D750 is sort of the full-frame equivalent of the D7100. Both are great cameras, but neither performs particularly well with fast moving subjects or in very low light, though the D750 is a mite better than the D7100 in that department. If your preferences require neither - great.
Nikon released some ho-hum camera upgrades with the D3400, D5600, D7500 lately, so the D850 is the first major step forward in a few years. Technology has advanced quite a bit since the D7100/D750 were released, so that's why I see a D750 replacement as due if not overdue if Nikon wants to keep the momentum. As we say in German: "The better is the enemy of the good."
Well I use the D7100 + 150-600mm at bird reserves from a hide so there is more light than in woods, but to keep the shutter speed up for action shots the ISO is still up at least at 800+ which is ok on the D7100.
I have started venturing into macro recently, and I will hopefully be starting some voluntary work for a museum soon in their photography team, so that is why I have one eye on full frame.
The D750 looks like a great fit, at the same time I'm watching the D810 to see if there is price drop now the 850 is out.
I would beg to differ. Speaking from experience having shot with the D750 for over 2 years, it is still my go to camera for low light fun. (I would say "low light work, but some people might be offended by that word
) I would not be caught in a dark alley without it.
Horoscope Fish
Senior Member
I can only assume you've not spent much time actually shooting with the D750 in low light.
In my experience the D750 snaps to focus-lock with almost uncanny accuracy, and speed, in low-light situations.
I think at some point we need to find a way to take owner's pride out of these discussions. "Uncanny accuracy"? Give me a break.
The D750 is, as I said repeatedly, a very good camera and you should be as proud to own it as you obviously are, but it can't hold a candle to the D5 nor D850 when it comes to low-light performance, which is the exact point I was making. The D500 has the better AF system but smaller pixels, so that comparison is admittedly less clear-cut.
Horoscope Fish
Senior Member
Sorry, no breaks being given on this. You said the D750, "doesn't perform particularly well in very low light." I could not disagree more and I stand by my previous statements. The word "uncanny" was being used, hyperbolically, to assert my point.
Further, the last thing I am is "proud" of my camera; *insert confused look*... In fact I'm having difficulty wrapping my brain around that concept.
.....
TL Robinson
Senior Member
Owning a D500, a D810, a D750, and gauging DR at differnt ISO's the D750 is slightly better than the D850 in comparison at higher ISO's - from experience I can say of my D810 and D750, while I use both, the images at equal ISO in same settings are better off the D750.
I note in your sig you do not own a D750? Have you ever shot with one in low light situations?
The only camera out there right now (Nikon) that surpasses the D750 for low light/high iso performance is the D5 - jury is still out on the D850 (mine is anyway), as I don't base everything off charts, but some of what I'm seeing out there holds up to what we see here.
To say the D750 "doesn't perform well" in low light is ludicrous. My experience with it in concert settings says something vastly different.
Attachments
Last edited:
I'd appreciate you quoting me correctly before throwing around insults. Let us also keep the context of this post in mind. We're talking about *wildlife* here, not concerts. My point, if you re-read all of the posts, was that with fast-moving subjects or in VERY low light conditions (meaning hi-ISO), the D750 is not in the same class when shooting wildlife as the D500/D5/D850, and that the latter are the only three I would consider.
Even though the D750 has a more sensitive sensor, the D500 with its faster AF and DX format IMO is a better performer in this category. You confirmed yourself that the D5 is superior. As far as the D850 goes, yes, the jury is still out, but the test shots others on this forum shared convinced me that its hi-ISO performance is stellar and possibly exceeds that of the D5. So I conclude again: the D750 is not as good a choice for wildlife as the other three are and I would not recommend it if that was the primary intended use.
Sorry if you read more into my post than I meant to say, but I stand by everything I meant to say.
RocketCowboy
Senior Member
Not just you. I'm a bit burned out on gear lust, so don't see a reason to upgrade either the D810 or D500 to this just yet. Its a great camera, and I think at a great price for full frame and D5-like performance, but I just don't see that I need it.
RocketCowboy
Senior Member
For the same price as my refurbished D500, deal!
RocketCowboy
Senior Member
The D750 has stolen many wedding photographers from Canon specifically because of it's low light performance. It arguably performs better in low light than the D810, which caused me a lot of concern before I finally decided on the D810 for my needs. While I agree that the D7100 wasn't a low light beast (and that's why I ended up in full frame anyway), the D750 definitely holds it's own in that department.
Beat it up on build quality of shutter reliability, sure. But low light performance???
TL Robinson
Senior Member
Per his response to my post - he says he's talking about low light in specific terms with regards to shooting wildlife. I still disagree - speed wise, sure, no it's not the greatest in terms of FPS nor does it surpass the D5 in anyway. That being said - focus acquisition in low light situations (not just concert photography but if I can lock in at venue I can do it on an animal) is spot on and high iso image quality is, as is well documented, better than almost every Nikon camera out there except the D5.
I don't shoot a lot of wildlife and would never use my D750 for that (except that one time in Africa when I was surprised with an unexpected safari) - that's why I have a D500. But I won't use my D500 in venues anymore because IQ at 3200 and above compared to the D750 is good, but not better than. Even the D750 in crop mode is better than the D500 wrt low light shooting...
Low light is low light regardless of wildlife or concert settings....he stated "...neither performs well with fast moving subjects OR low light..." not and.
Had he said "and" I would marginally agree with that statement, and that's where the D850 will beat it out...speed, but I'm still not seeing, either in real world samples, or in lab testing, anything that says image quality at high iso's is better than the D750 (and only marginally better than the D810).
Not saying it's not a great camera, it most certainly is, but I'm far less excited about it than I was when it was announced...
Last edited:
Horoscope Fish
Senior Member
Spot. On.
It has been fun to see people's reaction to the D850. Nikon seems to have done quite well here. I understand the excitement about the D850, it has a lot of great features and is a real upgrade in multiple respects.
I think there is one big drawback, to me anyway, with using the D850 for wildlife over the D500. The bigger the subject is in the viewfinder, the easier it is to get in focus. That's a big advantage to the D500 with its DX sensor. It looks like you can now crop a D850 file and get about the same quality as a D500 at full size. That wouldn't matter to me if It is harder to get the focus spot in the right place.
I feel just fine shooting my D500. Great, in fact. It is certainly the best camera I have ever owned. If I won the lottery? Sure, I'd grab a D850 in an instant. But I feel far from handicapped when using either my D500 or D7200/7100 for people, macro, landscapes, or anything else.
I think there is one big drawback, to me anyway, with using the D850 for wildlife over the D500. The bigger the subject is in the viewfinder, the easier it is to get in focus. That's a big advantage to the D500 with its DX sensor. It looks like you can now crop a D850 file and get about the same quality as a D500 at full size. That wouldn't matter to me if It is harder to get the focus spot in the right place.
I feel just fine shooting my D500. Great, in fact. It is certainly the best camera I have ever owned. If I won the lottery? Sure, I'd grab a D850 in an instant. But I feel far from handicapped when using either my D500 or D7200/7100 for people, macro, landscapes, or anything else.
Good luck with that :encouragement:
Cheers Woody, I hope so, I've given myself a substantial time period to decideYeah, we've all been there. A little time off and I'd bet you'll be loving it again.
Danno
Senior Member
@Woodyg3 I agree with you on the 850. It looks like a good camera, but ultimately I am really happy with what I have now as well.
My budget keeps me out of the D500 or the 850 but I am very happy with the 700 and the 7200. I enjoy shooting both cameras, and actually, the cameras are not my limitation. It is my ability to find and keep up with moving targets and pack the big lens very far.
If I won the Lottery I think I know what I would buy. Until I start buying tickets I will be happy with what I have and plug along as I am able loving every minute of it.
My budget keeps me out of the D500 or the 850 but I am very happy with the 700 and the 7200. I enjoy shooting both cameras, and actually, the cameras are not my limitation. It is my ability to find and keep up with moving targets and pack the big lens very far.
If I won the Lottery I think I know what I would buy. Until I start buying tickets I will be happy with what I have and plug along as I am able loving every minute of it.
Well I only won $25 on last nights Powerball, so now I have to wait until next week to win big Oz