thenameislui
Senior Member
any opinions on this?
D800 or D7100?
- Thread starter thenameislui
- Start date
pistnbroke
Banned
Wow that is a big question ..if you look at DXO you will see that the DX cameras are well behind the FX in terms of picture noise ...BUT if you dont shoot in the dark does that matter......??? Big difference in price and where do you factor the D600 in this .....is it for business or pleasure or do you like owning the best???
Seems to me that unless you want to use primes you wont get full use from the D800...
Seems to me that unless you want to use primes you wont get full use from the D800...
thenameislui
Senior Member
Currently I have the D3200 but I am looking to upgrade to one of these bodies.
my goals are to shoot self portraits, landscape/nature photography, and sports photography.
Photography is a knack of mine ive had since highschool but was never able to afford it.
I've began to do a few photo shoots here and there for friends and my place of work.
so i guess its a combination of all 3 business, pleasure, and owning the best.
yeah definately the price difference is alot, which has led me more towards the D7100 and use the remainder of the money to get multiple lenses.
if you have any other options besides the D7100 and D800 i'd love to hear about them
my goals are to shoot self portraits, landscape/nature photography, and sports photography.
Photography is a knack of mine ive had since highschool but was never able to afford it.
I've began to do a few photo shoots here and there for friends and my place of work.
so i guess its a combination of all 3 business, pleasure, and owning the best.
yeah definately the price difference is alot, which has led me more towards the D7100 and use the remainder of the money to get multiple lenses.
if you have any other options besides the D7100 and D800 i'd love to hear about them
The first question you have to ask yourself is do you want to stay with DX or move to FX. Until you answer that question you cannot answer any other. If you already have DX lenses, they are not going to be of any use on a D800.
You also have to ask yourself do you NEED 36MP? What are you going to be taking photos of? Unless you plan to print mural size, most of that will be totally wasted
You also have to ask yourself do you NEED 36MP? What are you going to be taking photos of? Unless you plan to print mural size, most of that will be totally wasted
Others will probably disagree but I'll give you my opinion.
For sports, I don't think that either 800 or 7100 will be great. 7100 for low buffer and 800 for the size of files you'll have to store and treat.
If you want to have quality and not spend all your money on bodies that will depreciate the minute you walk out of the photo store, why not get pre-owned D300 and/or D700. These are very capable cameras that can produce fantastic images.
For sports, I don't think that either 800 or 7100 will be great. 7100 for low buffer and 800 for the size of files you'll have to store and treat.
If you want to have quality and not spend all your money on bodies that will depreciate the minute you walk out of the photo store, why not get pre-owned D300 and/or D700. These are very capable cameras that can produce fantastic images.
thenameislui
Senior Member
very true, you bring a good point.
i think i intend on staying with DX and you're right 36 mp is alot. i do not plan on printing anything that big.
i think i intend on staying with DX and you're right 36 mp is alot. i do not plan on printing anything that big.
You hit the nail on the head. Everyone is wowed by the prospect of 36MP resolution. But if you are going to print at most 11 x 14 or to the web, 80% of that resolution will be wasted, along with a pretty substantial amount of money. I use a D700 with a paltry 12MP. But it prints quite well out to 16 x 20. From the normal distance you would view a 20 x 30, it does quite well even there. If you want your camera to also be a video camera, well then forget the D700 because it does not have video. DX cameras are still very popular, but with Canon and Nikon coming out with more FX cameras, I see DX starting to go away over the next several years with the exception of perhaps a base consumer level model.
If you want to do sports, then having a camera which is capable of higher frame rates is definitely something you should look into. If you are looking for something to shoot people, landscape, nature and family stuff, who needs 8 fps?
I'm sure there is Dave. But, what I see is someone starting to get interested in photography that are made to think that a better camera will take better pictures. Of course it will, but sometimes a class or training in post processing could be a lot more beneficial to those than the better camera. If the light is not nice and the subject is not nice, no better camera can make a better picture. A better trained photographer could get a different angle though and get a better picture with an inferior camera.
But it's all been said before.
Yes, I agree. But my post was more to the mistaken notion that the D800 is firstly a 36 mp camera. It's unfortunate that such high resolution seems to be the headliner for this camera when in fact it's the dynamic range and IQ that makes this camera special. And at no point was I trying to insinuate that only expensive cameras produce nice images.
AC016
Senior Member
These days, any DSLR can shoot sports. However, it is the FPS that is a crucial part of the equation. I found this article and if you go down to the section talking about FPS, the reason for higher FPS will become clear.
Sports not for D800?
Again, any DSLR can do "sports". Heck, even my D3000 was able to do it. However, some do it better and in this case, the D800 just lacks the FPS.
Sports not for D800?
Again, any DSLR can do "sports". Heck, even my D3000 was able to do it. However, some do it better and in this case, the D800 just lacks the FPS.
AC016
Senior Member
But does not the D800 get it's IQ and DR from it's 36mp? Though, i do understand that its not fair to equate a camera to one part of it's long list of specifications.
Not directly. It's the EXPEED processor along with the large sensor that produces the IQ and dynamic range. The resolution is a sensor quality only and isn't a product of the EXPEED processor.
Of course, but for the price of it, does it have enough to warrant the price when you may not need a lot of what it can offer over a cheaper DX machine? When I get a second body, it will be a D3X. I really have no use for 36MP or video, so honestly, the D800 really does not look all that attractive to me.
It really all boils down to determining what you really need (versus what you want) and what you can afford and then finding a camera which suits those needs
Frankly, I think the D800 is well underpriced compared to the D4. If Nikon fully understood what they had and the type of response the D800 was going to get I'm certain they would have bumped the price of 50% or more and people would still have still been happy with it. It's an amazing instrument and statics on paper do not do it justice at all.
This statement is not accurate at all unless you are talking about consumer lenses. There are prime lenses that received lower scores based on what lensrental have posted before and it also depends on the manufacturer. But then again, if an owner of a D800 prefers using his AIS lenses, surely there is nothing wrong with that.
LensRentals.com - D800 Lens Selection
To the OP (thenameislui), I understand that you are new to the forum, but people here can better provide you a recommendation if you fill out your profile, list down what equipment you have and your budget. This will eliminate a lot of wasted discussion although most are eager to tell you what you should go for.
I can easily tell you which camera to buy but if it doesn't fit your "budget", then we are just wasting our time on useless discussions.