Best Digital Body in the 1K-1.5K Range

<p>I'm looking to upgrade from my D80 to something better and newer for all around photography. My budget is in the $1,000 to $1,500 range for a body only. I'm looking to drop the D80 mostly due to the weak high ISO performance and poor resolution. I'm not sure that I need a ton more resolution but I do frequently find myself wishing I had more once I've cropped an image to 4:5 or tighter. I've mostly been looking at used in order to get a body with the better ergonomics and faster control that I would find on top of the line cameras that are out of that price range new. I have a preference for FX as all my lenses are already FX. Weight and complexity don't worry me as my favorite body right now is a F5 and the new digital body will likely share space in the bag with it on trips out.</p>

<p>I'm going to have to ask the body to cover a pretty wide range of tasks. Day to day family shots, landscape, planned portraits, and light action (animals at the zoo, festivals). I'm not planning to do any sports shots with it.</p>

<p>My biggest challenge in comparing bodies is that there are no good comparisons between different generations of camera, the D3 vs D800 for example, just those automated sites that only care about resolution.</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

<p>For a Nikon and budget of $1500 max it would be the D610 or the D7200. There are pros and cons on each.</p>

<p>You might just find a D800 for that if you look around - they're about $1600 at KEH right now. It should do all you ask - the 4fps maximum framerate shouldn't be a limitation for the type of shots you mention. Everything else is fast, ergonomics are excellent, and the sensor is great for cropping (though you need a decent computer to keep up with the large files).</p>

<p>i think it really depends on the lenses you're using. if you're not shooting sports/action, you may not need the better AF or the extra reach of the D7200. the 610 should work for all the listed criteria, but you'd also get better high-ISO performance vs. DX. both have 24mp sensors, so cropping should be no problem. </p>

<p>buying a high-performance model used is always sketchy unless you get a refurb or extremely lightly-used model. most of the D3's, D3s's and D700s out there have been put through the wringer, and all of those bodies only offer 2mp more resolution than your current D80. A used D800 from KEH looks like its just outside of your budget cap, and with that body you want a warranty to make sure you dont get one with QC issues. I doubt you could get a D4 or D4s in good working condition for that price; a BGN-grade D3s is about $1700 at KEH.</p>

<p>if i was in your shoes, based on your criteria, i would get a D610. if you look at PN moderator Shun's recent D750 review, he describes his experiences with the 800, the upshot being that 36mp is sometimes overkill for a jack-of-all-trades usage pattern. also, for casual, all-purpose use, you might find having a built-in flash--which the 610 has but the 800 doesnt--handy for fill or grab shots. the 800 is a more full-featured camera in terms of ergonomics and build, but there's nothing in your post which says to me that a d610 wouldnt fit the bill, especially since you're coming from a d80. </p>

 

Thanks.

<p>You can compare cameras (and lenses) on dxomark.com</p>

<p>They will show the actual resolution you end up with (not the same as the pixel count) as well how much difference there is between different cameras when it comes to dynamic range, noise at all ISO settings etc.</p>

<p>The site will not show anything how a camera feels or handles, af performance or anything like that.</p>

<p>I would say take a good look at the 7200. I hear that "Refurb" 7100's are pretty good as well.</p>

<p>I went from a D80 to the D7100 when they first came out. I wanted to stick with DX format and my favorite kit lenses. I have been very pleased! I shoot indoors at iso 3200 all the time. 24mp translates into very large prints at 300 ppi (13.33x20 inches), and I usually scale down to a 10x15 print, which even sharpens and reduces grain. My portfolio is full of examples.</p>

<p>Since the OP stated a preference for FX, I'd second Eric's post. for price and features the 610 will be a big improvement over the D80. If you could afford the D750, even better but its a bit more.</p>

<p>Since you have a working camera and do not have to make the purchase right now, wait a few months until the Holiday Season sales begin - about 2 months or so.</p>

<p>I vote with Richard, a D800 is a body on F5 level, D 7xxx and their FX derivates are not.</p>

<p>Eric, D800 does have a built-in flash. I agree that for most of my applications it was an overkill, so I downgraded to a D750 which fit perfectly my needs. I really consider that OP's best options are D750 and D610. I used to have a D600 and is not bad at all, but D750 is definitely better.<br>

<br>

Frank, one thing is for shure. Whatever you will pick from D7100, D7200, D610, D750 or D800 will be a major upgrade over D80.</p>

<p>Note also that the D800 <strong>does</strong> have a built-in flash. I don't find 36MP a burden with a reasonably fast, fairly recent computer, and I do much prefer the ergonomics of the D800 to the D610, etc. The only downside of its build quality is that the D800 is not a lightweight camera!</p>

 

<p>The D3/D4 are on the F5 level. The D800/D810 are not. <br>

Any way refurbished D810 right now from Nikon store is around $2000. I don't think you want the D3/D4 as they don't offer much in term of resolution although they have excellent high ISO performance. For you budget it's difficult to get a D3/D4 level cameras even well used. </p>

<p>I would vote for a 'low-mileage' D3 based on your comments.</p>

<p>My first DSLR was the D80. I now have a D7100 and a D800E. Really, I suspect you'd be better off with a used D7100 and upgrading your lenses. Just as cameras have improved, lenses have improved every bit as much. D7100 plus Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 OS and Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VR, throw in a Sigma 35mm f1.4 ART (astonishing lens!) and you will have a first class system. I often shoot the D7100 at ISO 2000 and got results better than the D80 at ISO 800. To give you an idea, when I added D800E I spent $1,500 for the camera and another ~$6,000 on the very best lenses made. Biggest, most noticeable improvement came from the lenses.<br>

Note that cameras like D3, D800 are huge and heavy compared to what you now have. Speaking from my own experience, they are a pain to travel with. Best results come when you always use a tripod.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>If you shared some info on the lenses you have that might help flesh out some responses. Your interests seem to suggest that the D610 might be a better all around choice if you aren't looking too much towards dynamic or small/distant subjects like sports and nature. The D7200 crop and focus system are advantages on that side of things. It's a difficult choice as personal subject preferences would tend to drive the choice. Also, if necessary, modernizing the lens kit can be more expensive with ff. Interestingly, to me at least, is the way I look at it, if your interests lean more towards those subjects that aren't as dynamic, then the D610 might be a better choice than the D750 (out of price range) but the difference could well be used on lens upgrades.<br>

FWIW, for me, as much as I'd like to go FF, the pricing based on my current set of lenses and my interest in dynamic subjects and nature at times, pushes me towards the D7200.</p>

<p>i dont see anything wrong with a d610, although a d750 would be better. unless you have specific reasons to get a d7100/d7200, which doesnt seem to be the case. but how does 'i want better image quality' translate into get an FX body (D3) with only 2mp more resolution????</p>

<p>also kent is right about lenses. the sigma 35 ART is a terrific lens, and adding a good 50 and a good 85 to an FX kit can go far.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I have a preference for FX as all my lenses are already FX.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Within your budget, there are 5 choices, D700 (and possibly D3 but given what you shoot there's little reason to go there), D600, D610, D750, D800/D800E. For the latter two, you are at the lower end of what they are currently going for - so you might have to stretch that budget a bit. The D700 is "only" 12MP - so not much gained over your D80 MP count. D600/D610 are essentially the same (but I wouldn't take the gamble on a D600) - and like Eric pointed out, it's the one that fits your profile quite well. D750 is an upgraded D610 - you need to decide whether or not the better AF and the tilt screen are worth the price. D800/D800E are the MP champs in the Nikon camp - even in DX mode, they give you about 6MP more to work with than your D80 (the D600/D610/D750 crop down to about the same as your D80).</p>

<p>Within your budget are the two DX alternatives already mentioned - D7100 and D7200. AFAIK, not all that much difference between them - only you can decide if the performance gain with the latter is worth the about $400 price difference. And, of course, whether you are happy to stick to DX.</p>

<p>The fact that you have been using FX lenses on your DX camera makes me wonder if once you move to FX you won't miss the "reach" and would be looking for something "longer" (and that what you currently have in lenses would feel too "wide").</p>

 

If you have FX lenses and want FX, a D700 is a big improvement over a D80. Pixel count is just one of many variables. If

you want FX on a budget, a decent used D700 would be at or near the top of my short list.

<blockquote>

<p>I'm looking to drop the D80 mostly due to the weak high ISO performance and poor resolution. I'm not sure that I need a ton more resolution but I do frequently find myself wishing I had more once I've cropped an image to 4:5 or tighter.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>this is why i don't think a D3 or D700 is a good match for the OP. 12mp doesnt give you much more cropping room than 10mp. also, it's difficult these days to find a little-used D700. KEH has one in EX condition for under $1000, but they don't list shutter actuations. so while everything might be working mechanically, it's not inconceivable that you could be buying a camera with 3/4ths of its shutter life gone. not a great long-term purchase. i would also think that while a D800/e might offer better ergonomics and that big body feel, that would be absolute overkill for "day to day family photos". So, understanding that we're looking for all-around versatility and compromise, we find ourselves back at the D610/D750. basically they have the same resolution and body size, 750 is a bit better at high ISO and has better AF, but... if you dont shoot sports and/or don't shoot video, the 610 would likely do just fine and wouldn't break your budget.</p>

And this is why I love photo.net I always get the best advice here. I'm gonna head to the local store that carries used and

start trying those out. All the mp of the D800 are calling but I definitely need to try the 610 and 750.

 

For those wondering about lens. I've got a 35 f2, 50 1.4D, and the 70-300 VR. All Nikon. I'm probably going to pick up

something fast on the wide or short end soon as well.