FX Experiment

I am considering purchasing my first FX body, mostly as

an experiment. I have been very happy with my two DX

bodies (D5100 & D7100), but I wonder if I just don't know

what I'm missing. I expect my experiment to take some

time, so rental is not an option. I want a serious

comparison to my D7100, so 24Mp is essential.

Assuming I buy used/refurbished, will the D610 be a

useful investment, or should I spring for the D750? My

primary subjects are landscapes, architecture, and some

wildlife. I'm hoping to expand my portfolio into sports,

street, and events, as well as some informal portraiture. I

own a limited selection of FX/film-compatible lenses,

including 70- 300 afs vr, Micro Nikkor 55/2.8 AI, and a

few other legacy lenses. Your feedback and suggestion

on my experiment will be sincerely appreciated.

<p>Autofocus on the D610 is not nearly as good that of the D7100. If you really want a serious comparison, spring for the D750.</p>

<p>But I wonder if you really need to make the comparison--so many photographers have done it already. I have both the D7100 and the D750, which I purchased for better performance in low light. All the reports were correct--the D750 is about a stop and a half better in low light. Whereas I stayed at or below 3200 ISO with the D7100, I've been very comfortable shooting the D750 at 6400. Your tolerance for how much noise you accept may be different from mine, but the D750 reach your limit at a higher ISO.</p>

<p>If you were to buy either of these cameras new, the difference is $300 and only you can determine whether one is significantly over the other. The main differences are: tilt screen, the AF is 51 vs 39 points, 0.5FPS faster, ISO improvement and some video enhancements. Not sure if this is accurate, but the comparison that I was looking at showed 610 having time-lapse capability, while 750 had a blank next to it (?).<br>

Although I enjoy legacy glass (especially 105/2.5, etc) I've noticed that Tammy 90/2.8 macro easily outperforms it in sharpness. What I'm hinting at is, that updated glass tends to do better with more current DSLR's.</p>

<p>Les</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Leszek Vogt - I do not have a D750, but my friend mentioned: see under Movie Shooting Menu then it can do the time-lapse.</p>

If you really want to see a difference buy a used D800...it will rock your world...period

 

John

<p>A used D600 would be your most economical choice. You should be able to sell it for about what you paid for it. I'll point out that your 300mm lens won't be anywhere near long enough for wildlife. In the end, no one is going to see the difference in shots made from a D600 and a D7100, especially when we're talking about daytime landscapes. For sports and wildlife, I'd want a D500 or at least a D7200, with appropriate lenses of course.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>David - Haven't got or used the 610, but followed my DF with a used 750 which I like nearly as well. It is a very capable camera with all the bells and whistles. I've found it good under all conditions. Lots of shots with it posted in my gallery. Several reputable sources this morning have it for around $1399. It you have Pay Pal with their guarantee, you might be able to do better taking a chance. RE: FX lenses, the 50 / 1.8 G is available quite inexpensively all over the place, and though many would Ho Hum it, I've found it quite useful -- compact and good in low light. I usually don't see much difference between the 16.6 DF and 24.3 of the D 750, but I don't print larger than 13x19. Haven't had a DX Nikon since my old D60 in 2014, but it is still going strong with one of my kids, and short of pixel peeping, the images I still have from it aren't bad at all. Wish you luck and fun with your decision!</p>

I keep plugging the "camera comparometer" on the

imaging-resource website, but it really is a very

good way to see cameras compared side-by-side,

and where possible using the exact same lens, or at

least the same high standard of lens.

 

It could save you a lot of tedious testing. There's

nothing like seeing the evidence of your own eyes.

 

The comparometer can be found here:

https://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

<blockquote>

<p>"camera comparometer"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>There's enough inconsistency in the exposure and particularly the white balance to make it hard for me to draw conclusions from the comparisons.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I want a serious comparison to my D7100, so 24Mp is essential.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't understand that reasoning at all: different pixel sizes and all follows from that. I second what Hector pointed out: there are ample reports already available. Of course, nothing beats personal experience and those with too high expectations will likely end up disappointed. Not many can pick the 85/1.4 image out of a batch shot with the f/1.8; and similarly, not many will be able to pick the FX image out of a sea of DX ones.</p>

<p>Thank you to all who have provided such thoughtful responses. Your input is sincerely appreciated. I continue conflicted as to whether or not the investment in an FX body is warranted. I remain convinced that on-line examples are insufficient evidence on their own, based on the limits of monitor resolution, on which to make a decision, as my larger intent is to make high-quality prints for display in my home and as gifts to family and friends. After all is said and done, if I choose to purchase an FX body in the near term, it will likely be the D750, or perhaps its successor if my decision is greatly delayed. Also, I have heard the sirens' song of the D810, and have been tempted to start saving for it as a long term goal, since I hear raves about it for landscapes, and that is my great love. In the mean time, I'll keep working to ring every last ounce of performance out of the cameras and lenses I now own. Thanks again, David.</p>

<p>Unless you are shooting often at high ISOs and/or want a larger, brighter viewfinder, and/or make poster sized prints often you likely will not notice much of any difference in your photos from your current bodies to a FX body.</p>