Full frame camera (primarily for bird photography)

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by pamela_wood|1, Apr 26, 2014.

  1. I have a Nikon 7000. I am wanting to buy a full frame body but I find all of the information confusing. I would like opinions please. I enjoy
    travel, wildlife, and nature photography. This year I have been photographing a pair of eagles and I went to Costa Rica. With the eagles
    and most of the photographs from Costa Rica I pushed my Nikon DX 55-300 1:4.5-5.6 lens to the limit. I am disappointed with my
    photographs from Costa Rica. I do not know if it was the humidity or me, but I could not get a fast shutter speed. The hummingbirds look like a gaugan nightmare. If I did get the shutter speed up to 1000, the photographs were black if I did not raise the ISO to at least 800. I have never had that problem. Needless to say, the photos on the night tour are fine, but I see photographs with full frame that are much sharper than mine. I have the Tamron 60mm f/2 macro 1:1, AF-S Nikkor 18-105mm 1:3.5-5.6, the Tamron SP 10-24mm 1:3.5-4.5. I think a full frame would give me the quality I want more than another lens. I photograph birds mainly, in all light conditions.
     
  2. SCL

    SCL

    I found that for most of my bird photography I really needed to go out 400mm or longer. Also, it was critical to have lots of light. I'm not sure a full frame body will begin to answer your concerns. Remember that the cropped bodies will produce shots (in the Nikon world) where the subject appears to be about 50% larger than on a full framed body shot. Most people don't realize that in the bird photography world, stalking skills and getting close to a subject, in good light, generally outweighs the sensor on one's body. Also, firm support for one's gear is critical for sharp shots...at least for me, hand held shots just don't cut it.
     
  3. You couldn't get a fast enough shutter speed because there wasn't enough light. Black images mean severe underexposure. It has nothing to do with DX vs FX. You would have had to increase the ISO higher than 800. A full frame camera may allow higher ISO with less noise, but you also will need longer, faster telephoto lenses than your 55-300mm.
     
  4. You need to understand light and how it affects your bird images. The camera meter often reads the light in the sky, giving odd results when you are doing your best to get a great bird image. If you set your D7000 to Manual mode, and take a test shot (or several) you should be able to see what setting work best. There is no *one* answer for your questions.
    (A digital full frame camera will likely give you the same results.)
    Please check
    http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=1016994
    for some bird photos taken with a variety of Nikon camera bodies.
     
  5. Whether you have D7000 or D4s the same principals apply. So no, the ff doesn't have the magic to override the combo of aperture, shutter speed and/or the ISO's. You need to analyze the action and lighting, and adjust your camera appropriately. Here is for instance, if you are doing a portrait of someone with 105mm lens and the shade is quite dark would you still use 1/60sec shutter...because the camera tells you to do this ? OK, it's similar with birds, sport action or similar. Unless you determine the appropriate shutter-aperture and then follow up with ISO's to match it (or whichever sequence you choose), the camera is not build to make that decision for you.
    Hummingbirds tend to flutter quite fast and I wouldn't hesitate to crank the shutter to 1/1500-1/2000 or even faster...that becomes a judgement call + experience. Yes, flukes do exist, but if I were you I wouldn't count on it (below). The other issue is the optics. If I were you, I'd get something longer like 300/4 + 1.4 extender....and you'd get some decent reach and the results would be quite sharp too. Nonetheless, you may still have to crank up the ISO's if the conditions require such. Many folks here will tell you that they'd not even start taking photos of the birds unless the shutter is 1/1250sec or higher.....to obtain something usable.
    The D7000 is a very capable camera. It's more about the technique and less about equipment. You need to brush up on basics. Sometimes the conditions are simply too dark to shoot (and you should recognize those limits) and the high ISO's and floating golf-balls of noise will not rescue your photo. Hmmm, denoiser might.
    Good luck to you.
    Les
    00cY1B-547583684.jpg
     
  6. Cameras are not magic. Consider that if you use your 70-300mm lens on a full frame camera, it will be equivalent to using a 200mm on your current camera. You will lose a lot more than you gain here. I agree with above that your problem seems to mostly be understanding exposure. You should be able to use ISO 1600 with your D7000 with no problem. Lenses are almost always more important than cameras, and that's especially true for bird photography. If I were wanting to do what you wanted, I'd spend the money on a better lens before even thinking "camera." If I was mostly photo'ing birds on a "casual" basis, I'd go for a Nikon D7100 and either Nikon 80-400mm VR-G or Tamron 150-600mm OS. I have that D7100 & 80-400mm VR-G combo and it is fantastic! You would have to buy a Nikon D800 and a lens costing well over $3,000 to beat it for birds.
    Kent in SD
     
  7. I shoot birds a lot under varying conditions. While I have sometimes wished for a full-frame camera because I am not entirely satisfied with the high-ISO performance of my D7100, I can't imaging sacrificing the beneficial crop factor to gain it. I photographed birds in Costa Rica (and elsewhere in Latin America) using a D300 (and 70-300 VR) and did quite well. Jungle or overcast conditions can be a challenge, I do admit; I haven't been back there since obtaining my D7100 but know that it would do better.
    The others have given you good advice about adjusting all your settings--and expectations--to match the shooting conditions. (I don't have a hummingbird-in-shade shot readily at hand; I hope this will do. The mosquito is almost frozen! They were almost as big as hummers...)
    [​IMG]
    Gray-necked Wood-Rail in the jungle at El Peru (Waka), Guatemala: D300; Nikon 70.0-300.0 mm f/4.5-5.6; 230.0 mm (in 35mm: 345.0 mm); 1/160 sec; f/5.6;ISO 400
     
  8. I cross posted with Kent and agree. If you are serious about photographing birds, you really need to invest in different gear. (While I used to shoot with a D300 and 70-300 VR, my kit these days is a D7100 and the new 80-400.)
     
  9. Me too. Kent and Noreen have it right. The D7100 is a lovely camera. (So is your D7000 for that matter.) The 80-400 is a great lens to go with it. If I were you, before I bought anything I would grab my 55-300 and go stalking birds. Once you have the exposure business down pat then you can see about another camera. My suspicion is though, that once you get better at nailing your exposures you will be happy with your D7000.
     
  10. Pamela, could you post some of those underexposed immages just to see where things do not work out well ?
     
  11. Depending on the final usage of your images and how you process them, the D7000 can be used effectively at ISO 800 and higher. You get good results at ISO 3200 and even 6400 with some care and good post processing software (shooting RAW). This article may help you better understand ISO:
    http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Learn-And-Explore/Article/g9mqnyb1/understanding-iso-sensitivity.html
     
  12. The D4s is the camera you want. BUT I ALSO RECOMMEND THE Nikon 200-400mm f/4. Neither are cheap. For general
    photography The D4s does a great job with suppressing noise all the way up to ISO 12,800 and even 25,600. With birds
    you might find the signal to noise above 6400 objectionable for fine detail.

    Your existing camera does a really job as well, but not knowing how you used it I suspect the limiting factors here are your
    choice of lenses and technique.
     
  13. What others said; frankly when you say:
    If I did get the shutter speed up to 1000, the photographs were black if I did not raise the ISO to at least 800.​
    My first reaction is that you do not understand how exposure works; rather than spending money on any gear at this moment, I would spend a few dollars on Bryan Peterson's Understanding Exposure and get the basics of exposing images into your system. Before you blame your gear, make sure it's not your technique that's coming short, as spending another few thousand dollars on gear only to find that you still have the same problem with the exposure is going to be a bigger disappointment.
    If there is one area where DX has a distinct advantage, it's wildlife and birds. Your D7000 is a very capable camera for this kind of work, the 55-300 a little less so. So as many other said, if you really want to upgrade the gear, you're better served looking at lenses at this point.
    But refining your technique is really the best investment of them all.
     
  14. "If there is one area where DX has a distinct advantage, it's wildlife and birds."

    Statements like this are often made, but it simply isn't true. When it comes to image quality, a DX sized crop from a D800 gives pretty much the same everything as the DX image from the D7000.
     
  15. I have two FX bodies and one DX body, all Nikon. For birds, I use my D 300s, a DX body because its 1.5 crop sensor "boosts" the apparent focal length of any lens used on it. For birds, you almost always need more focal length ! The D 300s also has the ability to shoot at a high frame rate or frames per second, something lacking on my more expensive D 800 E, a FX body which is why I do not use it for birds very often.
    I have improved my keeper rate by making sure that my shutter speed is between 1/1250 and 1/3000 of a second. To accomplish this I just increase the ISO even as high as 3200 to get the needed shutter speed. To make sure exposure is correct in the camera, you need to master it by reading books and articles on it, learn how to set Exposure compensation and know when to use it. One place to start on photo education is to go to the Internet and search on Cambridge Photo Tutorials. That will get you started.
    Joe Smith
     
  16. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Statements like this are often made, but it simply isn't true. When it comes to image quality, a DX sized crop from a D800 gives pretty much the same everything as the DX image from the D7000.​
    People make that kind of statement often because a lot of the world's leading wildlife photographers prefer DX bodies. While you could crop an image from the D800, you are still burdened with capturing all 36MP so that your frame rate is slower and your storage requirement is higher. Even in its DX crop mode, the D800 still has a slower frame rate than the D7000 and D7100, and a viewfinder that shows a lot more than the capture area is confusing and difficult to se.
    And incidentally, the D7000 is no longer state of the art. The top DX body is now the D7100 with 24MP.
    While there are now better cameras, such as the newer D7100, the OP's D7000 is fine. Her main equipmet problem is lens. If I were restriced to a slow 55-300mm DX lens, I would be very frustrated as well.
    Since the OP mentioned Costa Rica, I captured the image below with a D300 and 200-400mm/f4 lens at f4, 280mm. It was dim at that location but I was allowed to use flash, which solved the issue with dim lighting.
    00cY5O-547610084.jpg
     
  17. Statements like this are often made, but it simply isn't true. When it comes to image quality, a DX sized crop from a D800 gives pretty much the same everything as the DX image from the D7000.​
    But, you are then buying a $2,500 camera (used price) to get basically the same performance you are getting from a $600 camera (used price.) That makes little sense to me. Meanwhile, you're still stuck using the 55-300mm lens. The $2,500 would be better spent on a lens.
    Kent in SD
     
  18. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Hummingbirds are an extreme case since they are tiny. Here is another example I captured about two weeks ago, on April 13, with the D4S + 600mm/f4 AF-S VR lens. This is one of my favorites from this spring. Unfortunately, the useful part of the image occupies about 1/9 of the frame, give or take. When you start with a 16MP D4S, you are down to below 2MP, which is not very useful beyond posting a small JPEG to the web. Had I used a D7100, I may have a 6MP image to work with. The problem is that the D7100 does not have the D4S' frame rate and deep buffer for action photography.
    Fortunately, most birds are larger. My suggestion to the OP is to stay with the D7000 and improve her lens. Keep in mind that once you are talking about a 200-400mm/f4, 500mm/f4, and 600mm/f4, they become very expensive and also very heavy, plus you need a sturdy tripod. In other words, bird photography is demanding and there are no easy answers.
    I am very much into bird photography, among other types of photography, myself. Switching to FX is exactly the wrong move for the OP.
    00cY5g-547611884.jpg
     
  19. You've gotten a lot of help here. But as a bird photographer - along with occasional other wildlife, attempts at landscapes etc... The answer is simple...
    1, you want a crop camera body - I'm still shooting most of my bird photography with the old D300 which I love.
    2, you need a far better lens than what you have. With birds especially, you need reach - 500 mm +
    I have a D800, but it rarely does bird photography - yes I can crop, but the extra reach of the D300 makes me still reach for it in most situations.
    If bird photography is your interests - stay with a good crop camera & invest in better lenses. Then learn how to correctly expose the birds.
     
  20. Look like the OP need the 600 f/4 lens and may be upgrade to the D7100.
     
  21. Look like the OP need the 600 f/4 lens​
    surely there are other options for an amateur photographer than a $9500 lens.
    a d7100 isn't a terrible idea, for the extra hi-ISO performance, crop ability, and better AF module. one might also consider a Nikon 1 + FT-1 adapter+ used 70-200 (which gives you a 189- 540mm @ 2.8). of course, you're limited to center focus point there, but you will at least have fast AF tracking, plenty of reach, and a much faster max aperture.
    but let's be realistic here. a new 80-400 VR AF-S is $2700. a used older model is a lot less, but even then, you still have a max aperture of 5.6 at the long end -- the same as the 55-300. shooting at ISO 800 and 5.6 isnt enough to maintain a 1/1000 shutter, so... simply raising the ISO to 1600 or 3200 will have the biggest effect on this situation.
     
  22. For once I am in nearly 100% agreement with Shun (it's not quite in the league with a freeze warning for Hell).;)
    When you get a DX body with the same generation sensor as the FX body, you are likely to be ahead with the DX 1.5X factor, rather than cropping the image from the FX. The pixies are really crowded in there on the DX sensor.
     
  23. There's always the 300 mm f/4 with a TC as a lens
    Shun has it right.
     
  24. Pamela must be out shooting somewhere deep on the woods of Costa Rica. Just as a comparison, the recently discontinued but still available Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 OS HSM with a 1.4 teleconverter is about $2850. Between the two, that's an equivalent range of 180-450mm f2.8 and 252-630mm f/4. The Nikon AF-S 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR for $2700 would be 120mm f4.5 to 600mm f5.6. I opted for the Sigma with my D300s.
     
  25. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    To get back to Pamela's question, she needs to decide:
    1. What type of birds under what conditions she would like to photograph.
    2. What her overall budget is.
    3. How much weight she is willing to carry.
    For #1, very generally speaking:
    • Larger birds are easier to photograph than smaller one
    • Birds on the ground or water, are easier to photograph than ones on trees. Birds in flight tends to be most challenging, and even that varies depending on which types of birds.
    • Conditions with more light are easier than dimmer conditions.
    One day in Costa Rica, I went to a location not prepared to photograph hummingbirds, and all of a sudden I saw many of them under overcast light. My longest lens with me was a slow 28-300mm/f3.5-5.6 AF-S VR and that location does not allow flashes. Needless to say, I got a bunch of rather poor images with lot of motion blur and high-ISO noise issues.
    For example, the new Tamron 150-600 should be available in Nikon F mount in the near future: http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00cY4F
    A slow, 600mm/f6.3 zoom is going to post a lot of limitations, but if one can work within those limitations, it can be a very good lens for certain bird photography at a bit over $1000.
     
  26. The upcoming telezoom for the V3/V2/V1 Nikon1 cameras seems to create some buzz among birders and safari people, maybe bear aficionados as well, combined with the fast AF of the 1 system.
     
  27. Travelling AND birds...
    What are the options? Many have been mentioned above.
    Let me sum up four of them here..
    1) State of the art bird photography gear: DX or FX (semi)professional camera, 200-400/500/600 4.0 heavyweight telelens, heavy tripod with heavy ballhead or swing-head.. or fluid?? The quality of the gear is not restrictive. The weight and hassle might well be!! And the price.
    2) Yesterdays super-gear. Manual focus classic long lenses (for example: 500/4.0P, 400/3.5, maybe abovementioned 300/4.0 with TC's) and D3/D700/D300, and tripod obviously.. On the up-side: with some hard work you get the same quality for an accessible price. The hassle is in fact even bigger: now you even have to focus by yourself.. :-s
    3) Modern comfort gear. A DSLR like D7000/D7100, D600/610/800, with a modern long zoom, like Nikon's 80-400 and the new Tamron going up to 600mm. No cheap combinations, and Nr2 might well be more affordable. Much more comfortable while travelling and the quality should be excellent - if you know the restrictions posed by long lenses, and exposure. ..Maybe leave the tripod at home? More "restrictions", more slightly blurred images, much more fun.
    4) Zoom-compact. The 'bridge' model compact camera's, built around a long-range zoomlens, up to 1000mm 'FX equivalent'. Modern sensors and lenses allow for more than acceptable image quality. Obviously, there is no (such thing as a) free lunch. The joy of travelling light might well compensate for that!!
    I have been a follower of option Nr2 for a long time. The image below was taken in SA's Kruger NP in 2011 with D300 and 400/3.5. Options Nr3 and Nr4 seem tempting though!
    [​IMG]
     
  28. If you want to “reach longer”, you can have a DX camera with the new Nikon 80-400 which at the long end will be 600 mm due to the sensor crop factor, however, this lens price is $3k; if you go FX, you could use the same lens but it will not “reach further” than 400 mm. If you want a better crystal, perhaps the Nikon 200-400 f/4 is the answer but the price is $6,750 ... + the price of the FX camera, which the cheapest out there is the D610 ( 3k ).
    I don’t think you need to go FX just to shoot birds. Matter of fact, DX cameras are better to reach further.
    Shooting manual, increase ISO ( the D7000 and the D7100 are pretty good in that regard ) and use a long telephoto lens and probably tripod, are your best options. Happy shooting and good luck.
     
  29. Beautiful shot Shun, the one you shot with the D300 !! Congrats ! Well done !
     
  30. mmm Just a thought : Nikon 1 V1,2 or 43 + Nikon1 FT1 adapter + Nikon 300mm F4 AF-S ....
     
  31. Wish I was in Costa Rica. My problem is the camera is reading the light of the sky. We had bright sunshine every day we were there. I am having the same issues with the eagles. Before I went I read about changing the white balance and EV. I have taken photos of hummingbirds at home in bright sunlight with a high shutter speed but even now I cannot keep the camera from reading the sky. Obviously I am doing something wrong. I think it is called playing with the internal settings, and I cannot fix them. Thank you for all of your help. Yes I need a new lense, more practice, and more advice.
    00cgRa-549501584.jpg
     
  32. I am trying to upload several examples, here is No. 2
    00cgRe-549501684.jpg
     
  33. Osprey taken from a boat
    00cgRj-549502084.jpg
     
  34. And last a sloth. I captioned each one with the details.
    00cgRl-549502184.jpg
     
  35. No. 1 is 1/160-F/5.6 ISO 800 P -0.3EV.
    No. 2 is 1/400.
    No. 3 is 1/1000.
    No. 4 is cropped at 50% 1/1600-F/5.6 +0.3EV M.
    No. 5 is 1/320-F/5 Focal 195-ISO 160 5560K P. I thought the info would show up with each photo.
    I always shoot in the manual mode
     
  36. Here are 3 Hummingbird photos taken last July 2013 with a fast shutter speed in sunlight
    00cgSJ-549502784.jpg
     
  37. No 2 from July 2013
    00cgSK-549502884.jpg
     
  38. I am posting 2 photos of the eagles. I would appreciate some advice, because the eaglet is trying to fly. I am pretty far away.
    00cgSP-549503084.jpg
     
  39. And the eaglet.
    00cgST-549503184.jpg
     
  40. So looking at your shots and settings, I would recommend a few things. First, all of the hummingbird shots in the tree are under exposed. You are correct in that your meter is exposing for the bright background, and therefore underexposing the subject. With experience, you will come to recognize this condition. What you need to do to correct it is overexpose depending on just how bright the background is. I can tell from your setting that you're not quite understanding this. The first shot you have close to a good exposure, but you have a -0.3 value when it should be at least a +0.3 or more. You did the opposite of what you should have. Then as you increased shutter speed, thereby increasing the under exposure, you didn't change any settings. When you went from 1/160th to 1/400th, you lost just over 1 stop of light because you more than doubled the shutter speed. So you would have to at least double your ISO to 1600. Or open up the lens by another stop. But your lens was already open all the way so you have to double the ISO. If that doesn't make sense, you need to google "exposure triangle". You really need to understand the relationship between shutter aperture and ISO. The last shot of the eaglet is the same deal. It's way under exposed. That one needs at least another stop of brightness. Again, if you're shooting up into the sky, and the sun is above, you're going to need to over expose by close to a stop. Since you're shooting manual, you just need to either lower the shutter speed, or more likely, up the ISO by a lot so you can keep a decent shutter. This assumes your lens is already at it's widest aperture.
    Now that eagle in the sky with the side light from the sun is a different story. When the sun is at the side like that, lighting up the underside of the bird, you don't need as much or any exposure compensation. Maybe just a little. That's a pretty well exposed shot, just a little dark on the shadow wing. You could probably bring out a little of that in post. It's a little fuzzy, and I'm betting that's mostly because you are shooting wide open. You need to find the sweet spot for your lens aperture for sharpness. If you want the best results, you need to stop down a bit from wide open. At least f/6.3. With this lens, probably f/8 is going to give you the best result. Unfortunately, that means you're going to have to use high ISO. But in general, noise is better than blur.
    The well lit hummers that are still a bit fuzzy is also likely from shooting wide open. Again, if you stop down the lens a bit, like to at least 6.3 I can almost guarantee you will get sharper images. That will mean raising ISO. A way you can cut the noise back a bit is to "expose to the right" which means overexpose ALL of your shots a bit when shooting with higher ISO. Noise is less in brightness than in underexposed. Google "expose to the right".
    Everyone has their own way of doing things, and I'm not saying mine is better than anyone else's, but I shoot birds in aperture priority. I have a pretty good lens, the canon 100-400L, and it's pretty good wide open, but I prefer to stop it down to 6.3 and leave it there. Then I adjust the ISO to get the shutter speed I want. And I use exposure compensation when needed, like the hummer in the tree.
     
  41. I went to Costa Rica (a destination I can fully recommend) a couple of years ago and found that much of the time even with a full frame cameras (D800,D3S) and a 200-400 (previous model) in both the rain and cloud forests the lighting conditions were difficult. I resorted to using a large flash (SB900) to provide some fill to lift the birds/reptiles clear of the background. The bigger standalone flashs can zoom their beam out to quite useful distances something a cameras internal flash will struggle with. Using the flash in daylight didn't seem to stress the animals (they carried on with what they had been doing without a pause) and none of the guides seemed to mind, there was a local ban on the use of flash at night on tree frogs which seemed fair.
    So before spending thousands on new cameras/lens I would suggest trying out one of the larger Speedlights to see if that helps.
    Any subject with a very bright background is hard to get right, you can use a fill flash or override the cameras exposure, both of which need practice and experience.
     
  42. Good answer from Brian above.

    My approach is similar. Understanding exposure is
    crucial. Your camera is good, but you have to be better..
    It will not 'know' that the little bird in front of a bright sky
    needs a different exposure than a big bird in the grass..
    It only knows a clever way of chosing aperture and shutter
    in order to compromise the image to a sort of average
    middle tone. In black and white, the image would
    represent a scala of grey tones that would reflect 18% of
    the light. Resulting in a light grey sky (too dark) and a very
    dark little bird..

    The solution? I also use setting A(perture priority control).
    I measure an average (18%) situation around me and hold
    the AEL button when taking pictures. That worked fast on
    film and just as well now on digital. Obviously you have to
    re-take a measurement the moment you let go of the
    button. Still it works faster than you think it will. And you
    avoid the kind of errors I commonly get with hard-dialling
    exposure compensation - when you forget to reset to zero
    ALL your next images might be wrongly exposed..
     
  43. Thank you so much. I read the previous posts and reread the posts in the learning section of photo.net. I took lots of
    photos today of the eaglet in bright sunlight and in late afternoon light. Upped the ISO. I went into settings and changed
    the ISO to different values, 1600-2400. Shot most of the photos in aperture but tried all. I also tried changing the active D
    lighting. All of the photos are very noisy. Some more than others. I put the ISO at 1600, the max ISO 800-1600, minimum
    shutter at 2500. Depending on which mode I was in the F stop was usually a 10-22. I think I am doing everything
    backwards. I can see more detail in him but way noisy. Should I turn the ISO setting off? And the active D lighting?
     
  44. ISO during daylight.. never needed more than 800 really!
    And I never tried D-lighting - I do that afterwards..
     
  45. Lots of good advice. At this late hour I can't really add much to it, but I will note that the first "Osprey" is a Crested Caracara.
     
  46. Practicing all advice on same equipment. Looking at old and new photos, none of my photos look clean. Not sure how to fix this, I wear tri-focal glasses due to age. Any tips would be great. Posting some close ups of hummingbirds. They were fighting, she did survive. Eagle on water. I do have trouble seeing if they are in focus too. Critique away please.
     
  47. 1/800-F6.3 ISO 1100 -1.3EV
     
  48. Hummingbird 1
     
  49. 1/800-F6.3 ISO 1600 -1.3EV Manual
    00cy9E-552688584.jpg
     
  50. 1/1000-6.3 ISO 450 -1.3EV Manual
    00cy9I-552688684.jpg
     
  51. 1/1000-6.3 ISO 360 -1.3EV Manual
    No editing except crop
    00cy9N-552688884.jpg
     
  52. Hummingbird 1
    1/800-6.3 ISO 1100 -1.3EV Manual
    00cy9T-552688984.jpg
     
  53. A friend just got the Tamron 150-600 and a used Nikon 800E. I do see the difference. She let me borrow it for some eagle shots. A DX does better, but the resolution is better on the FX.
    00d1wc-553551384.jpg
     
  54. Pamela, do an internet search for images taken with the new Tamron 150-600 and any cropped frame body. The D7000 is an excellent camera and the Tamron lens is the preeminent bird lens on the market today. It's light, sharp, and fun to use. If you want FF, then you'll have to go with the D4S for its high FPS and $6,000+ price tag. Personally, I use the Tamron on a cropped frame Sony A77 II with Tamron 150-600 at 12 FPS. However, the Tamron is so popular, may have a little difficulty finding one to buy.
     
  55. I see what everyone is talking about. With the Tamron on my 7000, it is right there. And with the FX lens, wow the
    difference is awesome. I like the resolution and the placement of the buttons better on the 800E, you cannot
    have it all, unless you could design your own. My husband did get me the Nikon 800E and the tamron for Christmas. He
    forgot me all of last year. I have 30 days to take the camera back. I am keeping the lens. I do have the option now of even
    changing to Canon, since I need FX lenses for the less noise. I even thought of that and selling my 7000, because I do
    want the FX lense regardless in Canon or Nikon. I noticed most birders use Canon. I see where crop is better. My
    question is wanting to do a large print of a bird, would I not need a full frame?
    The photo above was the first time I had used a mono pod. Thanks to all.
     

Share This Page