Yet another "Should I go FX" question.

C

Craig Rogers

Senior Member
Hi all, first post (apart from an Hello),

I have been shooting away for quite a few years, started on a D70 then moved to a D7000 (which I still have) and now a D7100.

My main interests are animals/wildlife and own an AF-S 80-400 which on the D7100 is great. I also do some landscapes mainly sun and moon sets and rises.

I have the urge to step up to FX for better low light/high ISO shots (for dusk and dawn photography) and far better subject tracking.

Currently with the deal (in the UK) of a £400 bonus on a trade-in against a D810, I can pretty much trade in my D7000 and pickup the D810 (with 24-70 f/2.8) for the same price as a D750 (with same lens). To fund this, I will also sell the 3 DX lenses I currently own and probably also sell the D7100 (although I will try to hold on to this).

So, the question is, should I or should I wait for the d7200 which will get me closer to the performance of the D810. The main concern I have is image quality over performance of camera. If I crop (or indeed shoot in crop mode) photos from the D810, the pixel count is going to be lower than that of the D7100/D7200. However, I would like to think that the overall quality of the lower pixel count is still better.

So, the thing I'm struggling with pressing the "Go" button on the sale is weighing up the pros/cons of the performance of the D810 but with the lower pixel count when similar sized photos from the D7100 (or indeed the D7200).

It's a long way off before I could afford/justify getting glass longer than 400mm. I know in extreme cases, I could get away with a TC1.4 on the 80-400. I have also the option of renting a big lens in situations where I need longer reach.

Thanks for any help!
 
Last edited:
J

jay_dean

Senior Member
Think it might be time to wheel this one out again!?
can-of-worms.jpg
 
Scott Murray

Scott Murray

Senior Member
I love my D800E so I may be bias but I say go for the D810 and you wont regret it so long as your computer and HDD space is adequate for the larger file sizes.
 
Marcel

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
I say wait for the 7200 but you'll get as many different opinions as there are members on this forum. It's always easy to advise when you don't have to pay.
 
M

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
I will ask the question i always ask,can you fill an FX sensor with most of your subjects,if not the D7100 or D7200 could be a better bet,or you could need both.:D
 
AC016

AC016

Senior Member
Get a D4s.... see, i like spending other peoples money. As Marcel said, you will get as many different opinions, as there are members here. A camera is a personal choice. Don't let someone else "tell" you what to get. My only question is this: how are you deploying your photos? If all you are doing is posting photos up on the interweb, an FX camera is a waste of money.
 
J

J-see

Senior Member
For low light FX without a doubt. Even the D7200 won't be able to compete at that level. There the D750 will do slightly better than the D810.

For cropping the D810 has plenty a pixel so it won't be as much a different as when using a 24Mpix FX.
 
M

Moab Man

Senior Member
and far better subject tracking
Click to expand...

FX does not mean you will have better focus tracking. The D7100 is far superior to my D600 in this regard.

If you are seeing unacceptable noise from ISO then it's a no brainer to go FX.

As for waiting for the 7200, it will not make the difference in regards to noise.

So if this isn't just a want, and iso noise is the issue, then upgrade. Otherwise stay where you are IMO.
 
Last edited:
M

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
J-see said:
For low light FX without a doubt. Even the D7200 won't be able to compete at that level. There the D750 will do slightly better than the D810.

For cropping the D810 has plenty a pixel so it won't be as much a different as when using a 24Mpix FX.
Click to expand...


Depends what you call much D810 in DX mode is 15.4mp if you crop again as is often the case with wildlife then you start to get low on MP, thats why i always ask can you fill the sensor


 
J

J-see

Senior Member
Focus tracking has a lot to do with the lens you attach. On average; the wider the lens, the faster/better the focus. Not to say that new technology in the cam helps too.
 
J

J-see

Senior Member
mikew said:
[/COLOR]Depends what you call much D810 in DX mode is 15.4mp if you crop again as is often the case with wildlife then you start to get low on MP, thats why i always ask can you fill the sensor
Click to expand...


Yeah but if you shoot the D810 full you'll have a 36Mpix on the same area the D750 has 24. That makes some difference when cropping even when the sensor isn't filled. Combine that with better detail and I can't compete against that regardless what I do.
 
M

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
J-see said:
Yeah but if you shoot the D810 full you'll have a 36Mpix on the same area the D750 has 24. That makes some difference when cropping even when the sensor isn't filled. Combine that with better detail and I can't compete against that regardless what I do.
Click to expand...

That makes the D810 better than the D750 then:D,dont think it changes my statement,but as i have the habit of saying in these situations time to bow out of this one.
 
J

J-see

Senior Member
mikew said:
That makes the D810 better than the D750 then:D,dont think it changes my statement,but as i have the habit of saying in these situations time to bow out of this one.
Click to expand...

At the level of detail and resolution yes. No doubt the D810 beats the D750 there. In low light I have a slight edge. They pay that 1k more for some reason. ;)
 
C

Craig Rogers

Senior Member
Thanks for all the info guys and sorry to dig up another old debate.

For now, I think I'll see what the verdict on the D7200 comes in as and who knows, maybe the D9300/D400 mystical camera might make an appearance.
 
C

cbay

Senior Member
If i could find the quality glass for my landscape needs that i want in crop i wouldn't worry about it. In a perfect world it would be the D750 with fixed primes for landscape and the D7200 for wildlife. No way i can afford that so crop it is.
 
Marcel

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
What just came to my mind is the hope some people have that they can reproduce results that are made with very expensive lenses (400 or 600mm prime Nikons) by buying a better body and using their, well let's just say with "tongue in cheek" sub-par zoom lenses is just so un-realistic. There is always a compromise one faces when it comes to upgrading quality, it's the same in every field. Better equipment that will give you a maybe 10% raise in IQ can cost from 4 to 10 times your actual equipment. So one really has to consider the costs of real upgrade vs the cost of placebo upgrade. Of course Nikon and all other marketing teams will try to make you believe that you need the latest body to improve your shots where very often what you need is better lenses. But they do come with cost.
 
Scott Murray

Scott Murray

Senior Member
Marcel said:
What just came to my mind is the hope some people have that they can reproduce results that are made with very expensive lenses (400 or 600mm prime Nikons) by buying a better body and using their, well let's just say with "tongue in cheek" sub-par zoom lenses is just so un-realistic. There is always a compromise one faces when it comes to upgrading quality, it's the same in every field. Better equipment that will give you a maybe 10% raise in IQ can cost from 4 to 10 times your actual equipment. So one really has to consider the costs of real upgrade vs the cost of placebo upgrade. Of course Nikon and all other marketing teams will try to make you believe that you need the latest body to improve your shots where very often what you need is better lenses. But they do come with cost.
Click to expand...
Yes they do, my next real lens purchase will probably hurt alot ;) or maybe the camera combo will hurt even more. It is never ending.
 
Top