Do i need an upgrade?

Wakefieldowl

Senior Member
Hi everyone.
Im an amateur that takes mostly portrait/ classy boudoir and some landscape.
Ive had a d3100 for a few years that came with a standard lens. I also have a nikon lense that goes to a 1.4f, to help with low light shots.

Ive been happy with my kit but just feel that the quality could be better.
Ive worked hard understanding to get the best out of it, but feel the image quality (pixels?) Isnt high enough.
I dont want to spend thousands but feel like i need better kit. Even in reasonable interior light i tend to get some "grain", despite changing settings often. Im not after professional quality, but just wonder if an upgrade would give me that improvement in image quality.. Is it about as many pixels as possible?

Its a vague question i know, but can anyone make recommendations? Do i need new camera body? New lenses? Or both?
i greatly appreciate any comments
Thanks
 

Fred Kingston

Senior Member
There are two issues with that camera body without discussing which lenses you have. 1. It's a 14M sensor. And 2. It's ISO range is low, at 100-3200 making it relatively noisy by comparison to NEWer cameras... Those issues don't make it a bad camera, just very limited in its capabilities, as there are solutions for each of those limitations. The low resolution and noise may also be exacerbated by the lenses you have. That camera doesn't have a focus motor in the body, which isn't a problem, but does limit your access to older, less expensive, better lenses.

You're at the cusp many photographers reach whereby their skills have outgrown the limitations of a entry level system, and it's time to spend money to get to the next level. I wish you luck in your journey.
 
Last edited:

Bikerbrent

Senior Member
Your D3100 was released 21 years ago, so is quite old. We also really need more information on which lens you are actually using to help you out. Also knowledge of accessories you may have (flash units, lighting equipment, etc) would also help us help you. Without a doubt you could use a newer more modern camera but without more information and a budget, we would just be guessing in the dark.
 

BF Hammer

Senior Member
With respect Bikerbrent, but the d3100 model is only 11 years old.

Let's take an inventory of what you have and where you may consider making changes. Is your kit lens an 18-105mm or 18-55mm? Those appear to be the common kit lenses for the d3100. Would like to know what the other lens is also. 50mm f1.4? Knowing helps to know if you might need to trade in lenses with the body for something different.

You have an entry-level DSLR that is a couple of generations old now. Your interests do favor having higher pixel count sensors. I expect you are using low lighting for mood with the boudoir portraits which precludes most uses of a flash. But there are light modifiers that can help with that situation. But better ISO performance would help a great deal there. Not as much with standard portraits and landscapes. There more megapixels help.

Personally for me, I went from a 10MP D80 as my entry to a 16MP D7000 and I only noticed that my photos had more detail and less noise. I also could use higher ISO settings without much penalty. But I did have to upgrade the lenses over time to exploit that higher-res sensor. My vintage lenses especially showed limitations. Then I bought a full-frame D750 (24MP) and there was another leap in photo detail. And I find the noise levels to be low enough that the de-noise filters in my post processing fixes easily because I have enough detail to spare in the resolution. However I also had to buy FX format lenses as I had nothing but DX lenses in the wide to normal range. I was ready on a personal level to make that change at the time and have not regretted.

So to keep things on a budget-friendly basis, have you considered selling or trading in your current gear? If you have a local brick-n-mortar camera shop that can be a possibility. I would consider a used body such as a D7200. That is still an APS-C DX sensor so your current lenses would fit and work, even if they don't deliver on quality of resolution. There is a significant amount of people moving to mirrorless systems that are trading in good equipment now to upgrade. If you look to full frame FX, a D610 used should be purchased for under $700 and I think you would flip cartwheels over the images compared to an entry camera. But the glass would need upgrading also to FX lenses.

The more forward-thinking approach would be to go mirroless yourself. As in Nikon Z50 kit at about $1100 to $1200. I would not talk anybody down from a Canon R series right now either. They are doing good things in mirrorless and maybe a bit better than anybody currently.
 
Last edited:

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
....but just wonder if an upgrade would give me that improvement in image quality.. Is it about as many pixels as possible?

No, it isn't just about the number of pixels although more pixels definitely helps. I'll explain below.

Personally for me, I went from a 10MP D80 as my entry to a 16MP D7000 and I only noticed that my photos had more detail and less noise. I also could use higher ISO settings without much penalty. But I did have to upgrade the lenses over time to exploit that higher-res sensor. My vintage lenses especially showed limitations. Then I bought a full-frame D750 (24MP) and there was another leap in photo detail. And I find the noise levels to be low enough that the de-noise filters in my post processing fixes easily because I have enough detail to spare in the resolution. However I also had to buy FX format lenses as I had nothing but DX lenses in the wide to normal range. I was ready on a personal level to make that change at the time and have not regretted.

My experience was very similar to BF Hammer's. My first DSLR was a D90. It was a great starting point, but I found it had limitations. In the past, I volunteered for my local high school's drama department, and I used it to make 20"x30" posters. Its low light performance (shooting at ISO 1600 or higher) brought noise - and with the smaller size sensor (less pixels), enlargements showed the limitations of what the body could do.

As several other Nikonites did at that time, I jumped on the bandwagon and purchased a refurbished D7100. The larger sensor with a higher pixel count definitely helped for enlargements, but the sensor still had its limitations when using an ISO above 1600 (although it was definitely better than the D90 sensor). I used to shoot 35mm film with an N90s and really wanted an FX body. So I purchased a D600 - and WHOA! What a HUGE difference in quality for its images! The D600 had the oil spot issue, but I was able to move to a D610 because of it.

The thing is I really wanted the reach of a DX body for wildlife and eventually upgraded to the D7200. The size of the sensor between the D7100 and D7200 is the same (pretty sure they have the same number of pixels), but from what I read, those sensors weren't made by the same manufacturer. I believe one was Sony, the other Toshiba. And BOOM!!! What a noticeable difference in quality when it came to using high ISO's on the D7200! :)

But my journey still continued. Eventually I went with a D750 for FX which brought in a slight improvement of its sensor over the D610 as well as a big improvement with focusing in low light situations. I was taking photos during Worship (no flash), and there was a noticeable difference in speed with auto-focusing.

Then not knowing if Nikon is going to continue making the D500, once again I upgraded my DX body while keeping one of my two D7200's as a backup. The D500 sensor is slightly smaller than the sensor of the D7200, but there is a noticeable improvement with its high ISO quality. The thing is the D7500 uses the same sensor as the D500 - so for now both of these bodies have the best DSLR DX sensor.

BUT...here is a question for you. Have you considered using a flash in low light situations instead of upgrading to another body? Flash will allow you to work with a much lower ISO and could be an alternative option...unless you feel you've reached the limits of what your D3100 has to offer. And that is definitely a possibility for you.
 
Last edited:

BeegRhob

Senior Member
Hi everyone.
Im an amateur that takes mostly portrait/ classy boudoir and some landscape.
Ive had a d3100 for a few years that came with a standard lens. I also have a nikon lense that goes to a 1.4f, to help with low light shots.

Ive been happy with my kit but just feel that the quality could be better.
Ive worked hard understanding to get the best out of it, but feel the image quality (pixels?) Isnt high enough.
I dont want to spend thousands but feel like i need better kit. Even in reasonable interior light i tend to get some "grain", despite changing settings often. Im not after professional quality, but just wonder if an upgrade would give me that improvement in image quality.. Is it about as many pixels as possible?

Its a vague question i know, but can anyone make recommendations? Do i need new camera body? New lenses? Or both?
i greatly appreciate any comments
Thanks

Are you shooting in jpeg, or RAW? Especially if the quality is lower, the detail gets lost. If you shoot in jpeg and then process and then save it, you lose detail. If you take that file and process it and then save it, you will lose more data. Take a fresh jpeg and make a copy (no data loss) and try it. Open and hit sharpen and save. See the file size difference? Now take that file and adjust the contrast. Now see the file size? When you adjust RAW and save, it doesn't change the file size, except when you save to jpeg. I used to shoot jpeg when I started out, and post process quite a bit. Something else I did, was shoot on "AUTO", or one of the scene modes. Now I use "A", aperture priority mostly, and venturing into "manual" (YIKES! SCARY for me! lol). That could possibly make a difference. I started my journey into DSLRs with a D3000, which I still have but haven't used in quite a while, so I get where you are coming from at least a little. I had a D610, which I was just ecstatic with when I got it. It was a great camera, I just think it was too much for me, with all the much more technical "stuff" with it. With DX lenses, I couldn't get use out of the whole sensor and only had, I think, one FX lens. I guess what I am saying is if you can, rent something like that before you buy it, so you can get a feel for it. I have rambled enough for now. By the way, my main body is a D5300, I really like it. The only thing wrong with it is that it doesn't help me to get off my hind end to get out and take pics! ;)

Rob
 

Wakefieldowl

Senior Member
Thanks again everyone for your replies. They really are most appreciated.
The two lenses I use are NIKKOR AF-S 35mm 1:1.8G and the standard lense is a NIKKOR AF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5 - 5.6G

As I think i will commit to upgrading to something like a D7200, i guess the question now is, will these two lenses provide satisfactory results to the body upgrade, or will they need improving too?

I shoot RAW all the time

Thanks again everyone
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
....The two lenses I use are NIKKOR AF-S 35mm 1:1.8G and the standard lense is a NIKKOR AF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5 - 5.6G

As I think i will commit to upgrading to something like a D7200, i guess the question now is, will these two lenses provide satisfactory results to the body upgrade, or will they need improving too?

That's a good question, and I hope someone here can give you firsthand info. Looking at the original kits that were available, the D7200 either came with an 18-140mm kit lens or a dual kit lens with one being an 18-55mm AF-P lens - which I doubt is the lens you own. But it's definitely possible that some members who upgraded bodies kept their original 18-55mm AF-S lens from a previous body.

Here is a link showing the discontinued dual kit lens:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1366792-REG/nikon_13533_d7200_dual_zoom_lens.html

And no clue on the 35mm lens either. Sorry!
 

Wakefieldowl

Senior Member
Sorry to throw another question in......i am still looking at D7200 but also came across the D8000. With a 36mp sensor as opposed to 24mp for the D7200, would the D8000 give even better detail?
Thanks again
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
Sorry to throw another question in......i am still looking at D7200 but also came across the D8000. With a 36mp sensor as opposed to 24mp for the D7200, would the D8000 give even better detail?
Thanks again

That would be a D800, not a D8000. The D800 is an FX body. Although you can use your current DX lenses on it and have the images cropped, since the sensor has so many pixels, any imperfections of those lenses will still be noticeable.
 

BF Hammer

Senior Member
Sorry to throw another question in......i am still looking at D7200 but also came across the D8000. With a 36mp sensor as opposed to 24mp for the D7200, would the D8000 give even better detail?
Thanks again

It should give better detail, but you will not see the improvement with your lenses. Crop sensor lenses on a full-frame sensor camera means that only a portion of the sensor takes the photo so you will have significantly less resolution than the 36MP rating. It also takes a certain level of sharpness to get that extra detail. The 18-55mm lens just is not there. They are fine in the 10-16MP range (and at the fringe of ability at 16MP). 35mm f/1.8G is also a good DX format lens, but it may not have that kind of sharpness beyond 24MP.

If you step up to the D800, plan on new lenses right away to get what you are actually looking for.
 
Top