Second body or more glass???

Scott Murray

Scott Murray

Senior Member
Ok I am thinking of either getting another body or more glass aka lenses. And if I got a second body what would compliment the D800 that I already have??? As for budget goes I do not want to spend more than $5000AUD. Any thoughts?

As most know I do a lot of landscape and wildlife photography and would like to get more into the wildlife side of it. I have the 80-400mm Vr but will be upgrading that to either the new 80-400 or something else.
 
BackdoorArts

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
Assuming you are happy with your current body (which I know you are) then my take is always based on this question, "Are you the type of photographer who would benefit from, and would frequently carry, two cameras together?" If the answer is no, then go with the glass. If the answer is yes, then the next question is, "Am I looking to compliment my current camera or move in the direction of an upgrade?"

I love the idea of the D600 and D800 together. I'm waiting for my D600 to get back from service as I get used to my D800, but I like the idea of the less dense sensor on the D600 and it's (potential) ability to provide higher IQ due to the lower pixel density. You and I seem to have very similar interests, and for me the idea of a long lens on the D800 and a normal/wide on the D600 seem just right if I'm going to be out and about shooting.

We've been thru the "D800 as DX" elsewhere, and it makes sense that since it can do that then you don't need to look at the D7100 or D300 unless cost is a prime motivator. Given the difference in form factors and function the D600 could lead to minor frustrations while shooting (they are very different), in which case you may want to decide whether you really want a second D800 or make the move to a D4? You'd need to go used to make your budget, but if it's the one that makes sense then it makes sense.

Ultimately, it comes down to whether you want to walk around with a pair of cameras. Only you can answer that. I suspect Africa will give you your answer - unless you're trying to figure it out before you go. Maybe rent a D600 for the trip and see what's what?
 
Scott Murray

Scott Murray

Senior Member
BackdoorHippie said:
Assuming you are happy with your current body (which I know you are) then my take is always based on this question, "Are you the type of photographer who would benefit from, and would frequently carry, two cameras together?" If the answer is no, then go with the glass. If the answer is yes, then the next question is, "Am I looking to compliment my current camera or move in the direction of an upgrade?"

I love the idea of the D600 and D800 together. I'm waiting for my D600 to get back from service as I get used to my D800, but I like the idea of the less dense sensor on the D600 and it's (potential) ability to provide higher IQ due to the lower pixel density. You and I seem to have very similar interests, and for me the idea of a long lens on the D800 and a normal/wide on the D600 seem just right if I'm going to be out and about shooting.

We've been thru the "D800 as DX" elsewhere, and it makes sense that since it can do that then you don't need to look at the D7100 or D300 unless cost is a prime motivator. Given the difference in form factors and function the D600 could lead to minor frustrations while shooting (they are very different), in which case you may want to decide whether you really want a second D800 or make the move to a D4? You'd need to go used to make your budget, but if it's the one that makes sense then it makes sense.

Ultimately, it comes down to whether you want to walk around with a pair of cameras. Only you can answer that. I suspect Africa will give you your answer - unless you're trying to figure it out before you go. Maybe rent a D600 for the trip and see what's what?
Click to expand...
Jake thanks for your reply.

You are right in saying that I am happy with my D800. It would make sense to have a second camera body only for the fact of changing lenses in Africa can be risky due to the high dust content in the air at times, but in saying that I wont be getting it before I leave (I dont think lol).

A better super telephoto lens with better low light abilities and the ability to add a TC on to it is on the cards, as with my wildlife and some of the shy animals I am trying to photograph this would be a god send. Africa will give me an understanding of my current set up. I am keen to hear about the new 80-400mmVR AFS and would have bought that if it was released in time. Maybe I can buy it duty free somewhere :).

I am unsure if I would honestly like to walk around with 2 bodies but seeing as I have never tried this I cannot discount the idea.

I guess I have 2 months to decide, the lenses I am looking at are above my budget but honestly if I go the lens direction then I am willing to spend a bit more to get a quality lens.

Hmmm decisions. Maybe I should re-visit this idea when I get back!!!
 
BackdoorArts

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
I keep looking at the new 80-400mm and then at the new Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 and wonder if that's not the better way to go. About $900 more in the US, but with a 2X I'm at a 240-600mm f5.6, which is what the Nikon is at 400mm without the TC. I'm thinking this will be a killer wildlife lens. Albeit at twice the weight (at least for the last generation) it may not be practical as a handheld. If they figured out a way to shave a pound or two off of it, that'll be awesome.
 
nikonpup

nikonpup

Senior Member
i vote for a second 800 body. A great shot waits for no one and i suck at trying to change lens in a hurry.
look at a cotton carrier system for 2 cameras i love mine.
 
Last edited:
C

crycocyon

Senior Member
This is what I would do in your shoes.

Sell the 80-400 and that money put it toward a new or next to new Nikon D800E. You are shooting wildlife so moire doesn't matter.

Then, with the other cash you can get two fast prime telephoto lenses (or one more expensive longer fast lens). For versatility add a 1.4x or 2x Nikon doubler (although I shy away from doublers). I would get a 180-200 and then a long lens like 400/500. You, your wildlife, and your D800 deserves the best glass.
 
D

Dave_W

The Dude
In a perfect world (or one where I have unlimited funds) I would want a second D800, maybe even a D800E, and would then pine for glass in the form of the new 80-400mm.
 
F

fotojack

Senior Member
Here's something I don't understand; with a lens that long and heavy, you'd want to mount it on a tripod, right? So why does it come with VR? :) hehehe......just wondering. :)
 
D

Dave_W

The Dude
fotojack said:
Here's something I don't understand; with a lens that long and heavy, you'd want to mount it on a tripod, right? So why does it come with VR? :) hehehe......just wondering. :)
Click to expand...

Good point. I guess it's like vitamins. Iron and vitamin C essentially cancel each other out if taken together but if you make a vitamin without one or the other no one will buy them. I'm thinking Nikon has calculated that if they add VR to the lens they'll sell more units than if they kept it off. Then again, I could see a reason to hand hold the lens if shooting action shots.
 
P

pedroj

Senior Member
I wouldn't think of hand holding something like it 10.7 pounds..Shooting surfing for 3 to 4 hours...

I have trouble hand holding my D300 & 300mm F4 for half an hour..
 
BackdoorArts

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
pedroj said:
I wouldn't think of hand holding something like it 10.7 pounds..Shooting surfing for 3 to 4 hours...

I have trouble hand holding my D300 & 300mm F4 for half an hour..
Click to expand...

The 80-400mm is about 3.5lbs, so a 10.7lb estimate isn't exactly accurate. That said, with the Sigma 120-300mm I mentioned, it would get close to that, and yeah, you don't want to handhold that for hours. I did use one for about 15 minutes mounted to a Canon pro rig (I refuse to memorize their names when I don't need to) and was glad that I do enough push-ups daily that I was able to handle it. That said, for anything over a couple minutes a monopod would work wonders and, yes, you want VR with a monopod.
 
S

Sambr

Senior Member
I have never mounted my 300mmF4 on a tripod - I would love to, except my style of shooting just doesn't accommodate that luxury. Mono pod yes lots, however 90% 0f the time it's D4 or D800 with the 300mmF4 handheld. I am looking to get a "Bushhawk" shoulder stock. I have read & seen some great results with this support system.
 
P

pedroj

Senior Member
BackdoorHippie said:
The 80-400mm is about 3.5lbs, so a 10.7lb estimate isn't exactly accurate. That said, with the Sigma 120-300mm I mentioned, it would get close to that, and yeah, you don't want to handhold that for hours. I did use one for about 15 minutes mounted to a Canon pro rig (I refuse to memorize their names when I don't need to) and was glad that I do enough push-ups daily that I was able to handle it. That said, for anything over a couple minutes a monopod would work wonders and, yes, you want VR with a monopod.
Click to expand...

I was commenting on Jacks post re 600mm F4 which is 10.7 pounds..
 
Scott Murray

Scott Murray

Senior Member
fotojack said:
Here's something I don't understand; with a lens that long and heavy, you'd want to mount it on a tripod, right? So why does it come with VR? :) hehehe......just wondering. :)
Click to expand...
From what I have read the VR still comes into play especially if using a Gimbal head, in grandstands when there is vibration maybe even in a car with engine still running and I think that even a slight press of the button wold register some movement on a tripod.
 
K

Konbini87

Senior Member
Maybe just that extra assurance in case anyone wants to chase a subject on foot, or with a monopod. In that case I would probably prefer to have VR when I need it.
 
Top