Prime lens and crop or telephoto?

I am trying to make up my mind about which direction to go. I hate carrying a large heavy camera on a hike but I love shooting scenery and wildlife. I have a super zoom (60X) lumix but I have had a hard time getting the focus right, especially on moving subjects (birds in flight? forgetttaboutit). I am wondering if I'd be better off shooting a full frame camera with say a 50 mm lens and cropping to catch the bird that otherwise I'd need a 600mm lens to match. If I tried that vs a Nikon 1v3 which would give me a better view of a bird say, 50 yards? If I wanted to blow it up to my computer monitor size (I use my shots as background on my computer) which would give me better results?

I have thought about the Nikon D750 for a full frame sensor.

Is the full size sensor able to capture enough detail to be blown up and match a telephoto on a mickey mouse sized sensor? Perhaps a compromise of a full size sensor with an 85 prime lens?

Just trying to get a feel for what could work. My ideal camera would be weatherized, light, and easy to use. I don't worry about video capabilities or sound. Just like to make pretty pictures. Landscapes, Northern lights, wildlife, grandkids. Those are what I enjoy. I have another camera dedicated to underwater photography (I love sharks) but it has the smaller sensor and only has the 5X zoom.

Keep in mind that if you go FX for birding or anything else that requires reach, you'll have a harder time filling the frame than when using DX. The crop factor is a serious advantage when it comes to reach.

The amount you can crop depends on more than just the pixels. The sharper or more detailed the shot, the easier to crop. More pixels evidently helps but a good lens helps more. I can crop the D750 up to 100% if my shot is good. The crop isn't as much the problem as filling the frame is. You need to get pretty close to have a little bird fill the sensor even with longer lenses.

For birding on the D750 you would need at the very minimum a 300mm prime. Shorter than that makes it hard. Unless you got really big birds there. I'll check my files; I got some birds I shot with a 200mm so you get an idea how it looks in a full shot.

Here's a shot using my 70-200mm on the D750. Focus distance according my EXIF was 17.78m. A swan is a BIG bird.



It gives you an idea how close you need to get to little birds for a 200mm on a D750.

farsidefan1 said:

Is the full size sensor able to capture enough detail to be blown up and match a telephoto on a mickey mouse sized sensor? Perhaps a compromise of a full size sensor with an 85 prime lens?

Click to expand...

Yes, in many cases, but it depends, and there are limits.

24 megapixel is about 6000x4000 pixels. If you crop it to 1/4 size (simulating a 4x longer lens), you have fewer pixels, but you still have 1500x1000 pixels. If that's enough pixels, yes (and it probably is for a video monitor image). If not, then no, there can be bigger better ways than cropping.

Here is a D800 crop from 36 megapixels, but the final image is not a large image (click it).

Here's two parts of that swan shot cropped to the max.

This one is only average after such massive cropping.






Oops; I forgot to disable resizing for those two so you're looking at a 200% version.

This is 100% cropped:



Your shot needs to be good to allow such cropping. Unlike this one. Low light or not perfect focus really starts to show when cropping.

Your words

Landscapes, Northern lights, wildlife, grandkids.

In my mind you have 3 subjects that could be best using FX and one using DX,to me the wildlife would be the most important so if it was one format only it would be DX.

mikew said:

Your words

Landscapes, Northern lights, wildlife, grandkids.

In my mind you have 3 subjects that could be best using FX and one using DX,to me the wildlife would be the most important so if it was one format only it would be DX.

Click to expand...

For landscape and night-skies nothing beats FX in terms of wideness. Wildlife DX has the advantage in terms of reach. Grandkids both will do fine.

FX also costs a considerable amount more. A D750 body would be about the same price as a D7200 + spiffy lens.

I agree that wildlife shots are going to be the most challenging. I have no problem - well, I can handle the expense of the FX lens. Would the FX in, say a 50 mm (or perhaps an 85mm prime) be able to be cropped to match the quality of a smaller sensor equipped zoom lens camera? I use my pics as screen savers on my computer so I see them all the time, as do my clients.

farsidefan1 said:

I agree that wildlife shots are going to be the most challenging. I have no problem - well, I can handle the expense of the FX lens. Would the FX in, say a 50 mm (or perhaps an 85mm prime) be able to be cropped to match the quality of a smaller sensor equipped zoom lens camera? I use my pics as screen savers on my computer so I see them all the time, as do my clients.

Click to expand...

It depends what wildlife you have in mind when using a 50mm or 85mm. An elephant would work, a mouse not so much.

Such short lenses would require you to do stalking and be almost right on top of your target. If I have time I'll use a 50mm tomorrow and try to get as close as possible to a duck.

LOL, good point. Birds are what I expect to be most difficult. They don't seem to like me sneaking up on them. Usually I can get within 30 yards. But most of them are a lot smaller than a swan. Sometimes I see wolves in Yellowstone, usually at longer range (200 yards, bison, well they pose no problem).

farsidefan1 said:

LOL, good point. Birds are what I expect to be most difficult. They don't seem to like me sneaking up on them. Usually I can get within 30 yards. But most of them are a lot smaller than a swan. Sometimes I see wolves in Yellowstone, usually at longer range (200 yards, bison, well they pose no problem).

Click to expand...

I shot that swan at about 20 yards and that's with a 200mm. With a 50mm you'd need a magnifying glass to see it in your shot when shooting it at 30 yards.

A lot of going to come down the the specific lens, since even when looking at 50mm primes, there will be different levels of sharpness across different makes/models.

That said, my expectation is that trying to crop in on a 50mm for a picture that should have been taken with a 600mm, is a losing battle. Shoot it with a 300mm prime instead of a 600mm zoom, you might have a better chance depending on skills and camera settings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But what about the quality of the pic after cropping? Am I better off with a 1V3 with a 70-200 telephoto or a full frame with a prime 85? That is my debate.

Ah thanks Rocket, I did not see your post before I printed the above sentence. I hate carrying a big heavy camera so it sounds like I might be better off with the zoom on a mirrorless vs full frame and prime lens. Full frame camera and a 300 plus just "ain't gonna happen".

farsidefan1 said:

But what about the quality of the pic after cropping? Am I better off with a 1V3 with a 70-200 telephoto or a full frame with a prime 85? That is my debate.

Click to expand...

You're better off with a full frame and a 70-200mm.

What you're asking is a bit like asking advice which is best to win the races; putting the crappy jockey on the fast horse or the good jockey on the slow horse. Best is putting the good jockey on the fast horse.

Not that I want to imply that cam is crap.

farsidefan1 said:

I hate carrying a big heavy camera .

Click to expand...

Do you use the bog standard camera strap?

The D750 isn't that heavy and when I attach my 150-600mm, it's actually a comfortable thing to hold since I use the tripod collar to carry.

I bought an upgraded strap. I'm at the office now so I can't check the brand. I will go to the camera shop tonight and attach a couple different cameras to the strap and see how they feel.

Good suggestion. I'll try the d750 with a 70-200 with my strap and compare it to a couple of others.

Right now my list to decide from includes the Nikon 1v3 (but it is bottom of the list due to small sensor), Nikon D 750 (I'll get the 70-200 and a prime 55), Sony Alpha a7 II, and the Olympus OM-D E-M5II. If the weight doesn't bother me too much I will jump on the D750, but if it bothers me too much then it's more research.

Thanks so much for sharing your insights. This group has been very helpful. I shot a Canon FTB with a 1.2 lens but when film died I just couldn't see continuing with it. I got the Canon g12 for my scuba stuff but have not been pleased with what it does topside. Hence I've landed in here. Your experience in this medium is invaluable. I appreciate it.

I know everyone here is recommending a DSLR and I understand that, but since you said you wanted something light and easy to carry, have you tried looking into the Nikon 1 Mirrorless cameras? The 70-300mm CX lens is an amazing lens for shooting birds and wildlife. It has the equivalent field of view of 189-810 on a full frame. I suggest using a Nikon V3 with it. Here is a link to a review of the 70-300mm., I have not read anything but good stuff about this lens. Even at $1000 Nikon has not been able to keep up with the demand.

I just got a phone call saying mine came in. Woot!

Anyway, here is a link to a good review of it. Also, shows how small it is compared to DSLR lenses and some samples of excellent photos.

https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-1-70-300mm-f4-5-5-6-vr

I was watching some youtube videos and a guy called "the angry photographer" keeps banging on about the D700 being a really great camera that you can get mint for around $700-$750. He also rates the D7100 as Nikons best current production camera for the money.
Now I have no experience of the D700 but know it is a highly rated camera but clearly older tech. But it would offer good low light capabilities and with the $ you save you could buy something like a 300mm f4 lens and 1.4x teleconvertor for birding. Like I say I haven't used this camera but it might be an option rather than forking out for something like a D750.

For me my D7100 and 70-300mm is decent combo for birds etc. until I can buy a 300mm prime.

Could be too late but try the Black Rapid strap attached to the lens tripod mount if you try a big lens,although i like my V2 the crop factor is just that and i dont feel the sensor is a patch on my D7100 so i cant see it being close to a D750.