The D610 will get you down to ISO 100, but the D810 will do ISO 64 I believe. Unless you meant that you would like cleaner images at higher ISO's, but what do I know? We're just haters around here.
To FX or not to FX
- Thread starter Deuce808
- Start date
The D610 will get you down to ISO 100, but the D810 will do ISO 64 I believe. Unless you meant that you would like cleaner images at higher ISO's, but what do I know? We're just haters around here.
The VRII is merely quicker and more accurate. Plus I think the optics changed a bit too.
Agree with the OP 100% on the common battery thing! A major reason why I love my D300/D700 system is everything swops out including the MB D10! Sound like the OP and I agree onkeeping things simple.
OP I felt the same way as you about JPEG versus raw when I was shooting A mount.... The Minolta glass made everything pop I saw no reason to bother myself with processing.
upon moving to Nikon system I downloaded the free Nikon software (NX D) and was blown away. I do very little tweaking - often only exposure and saturation and the results are killer! The best part is the software emulates the JPEG settings on Nikon cameras= it is so easy to use! I spend zero more time with NX-d than I did with JPEG. It's like shooting JPEG and getting RAW results! You should give it a whirl! I can get a quality capture on IG within minutes of putting the CF in my desktop!
I also think a D610 will make you smile big!
Good luck!
OP I felt the same way as you about JPEG versus raw when I was shooting A mount.... The Minolta glass made everything pop I saw no reason to bother myself with processing.
upon moving to Nikon system I downloaded the free Nikon software (NX D) and was blown away. I do very little tweaking - often only exposure and saturation and the results are killer! The best part is the software emulates the JPEG settings on Nikon cameras= it is so easy to use! I spend zero more time with NX-d than I did with JPEG. It's like shooting JPEG and getting RAW results! You should give it a whirl! I can get a quality capture on IG within minutes of putting the CF in my desktop!
I also think a D610 will make you smile big!
Good luck!
Last edited:
I think that if you are not utilizing the high DR available in RAW, then you need good light for noise free images. A high MP, low DR body is good enough. The utility of RAW; at least for me; is that I can manipulate exposure to get it just right, open up shadows, when needed and play around with NR, before finalizing the output.
Shooting only in jpeg has its advantages, but then you are wasting a lot of information that is sitting there in the 14 bit RAW. Fine if you are under tight schedule to deliver images immediately, but not worth it if you want to get the most from the image. You will waste more time setting up the camera "just right" than correcting that in post.
In my case I use NX-D and normally adjust the exposures, brighten up the shadows where required and then crop and export to jpeg. Each image takes less than a minute and that is worth it.
Shooting only in jpeg has its advantages, but then you are wasting a lot of information that is sitting there in the 14 bit RAW. Fine if you are under tight schedule to deliver images immediately, but not worth it if you want to get the most from the image. You will waste more time setting up the camera "just right" than correcting that in post.
In my case I use NX-D and normally adjust the exposures, brighten up the shadows where required and then crop and export to jpeg. Each image takes less than a minute and that is worth it.
sonicbuffalo_RIP
Senior Member
I had the Trinity and my favorite lens was the 14-24 mm. I loved that lens. I will say if I was you and from what I've read and seen, I'd go for the D750 when possible. You'll be amazed! Good shooting!
Well, I am not sure about other models. Coming from D300, I would never be able to achieve this result at iso 2,500. I am very happy with the high ISO performance of D610. I have not even made color adjustment but just crop and adjust brightness a little on CS6. This is taken using the AFS 70-300 VR lens. In my opinion, it is not just the photographer behind that camera. That tool also counts. If you are considering if you should upgrade, I would say do it if financially you could.
Fortkentdad
Senior Member
Been there debated that - to death according to my wife who listened to my back and forth thinking out loud too many times.
In the end I chose a D610 and absolutely no regrets.
A grand for an FX camera - go Nike and just do it. Lots of lenses cost more than that.
In the end I chose a D610 and absolutely no regrets.
A grand for an FX camera - go Nike and just do it. Lots of lenses cost more than that.
Horoscope Fish
Senior Member
If the FX bug has truly bitten the only cure is going FX.
Fortkentdad
Senior Member
While technology has improved and dx sensor are getting better, so does fx sensor. Physic says it all. F4 and F1.4 lens are different right
So you are saying SIZE DOES MATTER.
Photogrphy is about lights. If optically it is bring in more lights, how could the dx out perform the fx in the same class? Why would a company spend more money to produce a product that cost more but has inferior output?
It is all about the tools given the same environment.