What (cheaper) Full Frame Nikon camera should I upgrade to?

I will be selling my Nikon APS-C cameras except for my D90 and I would like to upgrade to an older, but still great Nikon Full-Frame camera.

 

I have been looking at the Nikon D3, D700 or D800 because they seem to be in my price range. I have been leaning toward the D3 because of its weather sealing, professional viewfinder and quality and full manual control however, D800 seems to have a better sensor. Video is not necessary as I have a Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera.

 

I have plenty of good Nikon lenses such as a 70-200mm f/2.8, Nikon 50mm f/1.2 and more.

 

My favorite style of photography is portrait.

 

PS. I would love a Nikon DF, but those are still too expensive for me :)

The D800 is a generation newer than the D3/D700 and better in almost every way.

 

If you were considering the D3s, there would be an argument for its roughly 1 stop better high ISO performance vs. the other cameras. In my experience, the D700/D3 and the D800 have roughly the same high ISO performance.

 

The other compelling argument for the D3 is its higher frame rate, but you don't necessarily seem to need that for your uses.

 

One other big downside the D3 and D700 have is they use the now-obsolete EN-EL4a and EN-EL3e batteries. There are a lot of good used ones out there, but you can still buy new batteries for the D800.

Most Americans will be receiving a $1200 check soon so factor that in.

My favorite style of photography is portrait.

Used D750?

 

I'm not sure what type of portraiture you do, but full weather sealing and high frame rate are not normally needed....;)

 

Most Americans will be receiving a $1200 check soon so factor that in.

Err, a non-American might need a why here!

Part of the economic stimulus package being cooked up right now in congress.

Check out this deal:

 

Nikon D610 DSLR Camera with 50mm f/1.8 Lens Kit

 

I just bought this one, and it's a lot of camera for the money. I really didn't need the 50mm f/1.8, but with the power grip and WI-FI adapter, it was too good to pass up.

From those I’d probably take a D800. I got one when it was new to replace a D700 and it was better in almost every way. (The D700 does have a certain simplicity that I missed.) I sold it when I went mirrorless, missed it and got another one. Yeah, my XH1 is better in almost every way, but there’s something satisfying about a big DSLR. Also, I was able to do some wheeling and dealing and ended up with a very good deal on the kit.

I have been looking at the Nikon D3, D700 or D800 because they seem to be in my price range.

 

Used D810s of moderate shutter count are at most $200 more than D800s. The D810 comes with several goodies over the D800: electronic front-curtain shutter, highlight-weighted metering, group-area AF, continuous quiet drive mode, and no low-pass filter over the sensor. Perhaps most significant for portraiture, the shutter is much quieter.

Among those three (D3, D700, D800), I would get the D800, which is the newest among the three. The D3 is very heavy and was a pro workhouse. Most likely the used ones have gone thru a lot of professional abuses. The D800 uses the current EN-EL15 (including the A and B variations) battery and has an SD slot.With the others, you have to use the now out-of-favor CF memory cards.

 

The D750 is worth considering also. During Black Friday in November 2019, Nikon was selling new D750 for a few days at $999. You should be able to get a used one at a very reasonable cost. The D750 has dual SD card slots and uses the EN-EL15 also.

I have the D4, the 800 and 810. All three with low shutter counts. The D4, like all of their flagship cameras, is bigger but it simply works fast and can shoot I think 11 FPS. Cost more too. For weddings and a lot of other things the 800&810 are the workhorses. If it’s in your budget I would go with one of those followed by a 700 or 750. D3 should be very goo also.

 

Rick H.

Of the cameras on the OP's list, I would vote for the D800 as being the most versatile and having the best image quality.

 

The OP should consider a D810 if possible vs D800, the price difference does not seem very high as others have pointed out for the improvements gained. Also close in price, a D750 (or D6x0) would have similar control layout to the D90 the OP is keeping.

 

Thinking back, I had a D600 and was part owner of a D3s at the same time. I thought the D600 auto white balance and resulting JPGs were often better than those from a D3s in lousy artificial lighting. I like taking photos, but don't much like messing around with NEF's and software to get the final image I want.

The D810 looks like a good bet, but at that level you're within savings distance of a Z6. IMO, if there's any possible way to save a bit more, that would get the OP current with the times and for quite a while to come. You get the in-body vibration reduction, which will work with all the old lenses. The only downside is once you try an S series lens, you'll want 'em and if the OPs finances are like mine, they'll come slowly. Very slowly!

I still have the D3, the 800 and D4s (and sold D700, D810 , D4 and D750). All three with low shutter counts probably because I own almost all FF body Nikon produce and many other brands. For portraits I will choose the D3(D700) paired with 70-200/2,8. In my opinion the 12Mp sensor deliver the most beautiful and natural colors in every situation, even with flash or studio light. It's hard to explain...every sensor have it's own personality. Forget the sensors produced after D800 except maybe D4s. They are not suited for portraits.

I much preferred the colour from the D800 when I upgraded from a D700 - each to their own.

 

The high ISO performance of the D800 is also much superior to the D700. My D700 had a blue shadow and banding issue at ISO speeds above 1600.

 

That said, if you don't pixel peep or print bigger than A3, then the lower resolution of a D700 isn't much of an issue, especially with older lenses. For example: The 50mm f/1.2 used wide open won't give much different results whether you give it 12 or 36 megapixels to project on to.

If portraiture needs 'softness', nothing beats a good AA filter....;)

The D700 does produce lovely color for portraits, but with some basic massaging so do the rest of them...

Given your lenses and portrait interests, at current give-away prices I would suggest starting with a clean D700, and if it doesn't meet your expectations work your way up to something else. The D700 handles well with the 70-200, is nearly as rugged as a D3 but much smaller, has killer AF, can be powered off ordinary AA batteries if you add the optional battery pack (which almost converts it into a D3 anyway). The 12MP full-frame sensor (and specific AA filter over it) are ideal for portraits, and the smaller files are easier to work with if you aren't the type who geeks out with their computers. The slightly cropped viewfinder is not the huge deal people make out of it: an issue for precise macro work, yes, but has very little impact on portraits. Performance in low light beats the D90 and isn't terrible by any means: if you aren't shooting portraits in "available murk" in dark corners of restaurants, there's nothing to worry about with D700.

 

An interesting feature that Nikon eliminated after the D700 is ability to import the color response algorithms of other earlier Nikon bodies. It is possible to import the color response of the D2x into the D700 using the firmware update procedure, which then gives you a menu option to save files with the D2x "look" pre-applied. The D2x was very popular with portrait/wedding photographers, to the point they clamored for Nikon to port its color to succeeding bodies, but this ended after the D700. This optional color curve (if you like it) can save a lot of post-processing time and effort: the OOC pics tend to have good skin tone. But fully exploiting this does require using Nikon post-process software.

 

The D600/D610 is a bargain today, but doesn't handle as nicely as the D700/D800 and had some production issues with shutter spitting smudges on the sensor. Nikon made multiple attempts to fix this, with widely variable degrees of success from sample to sample. If you want something newer than the D700, skip the 600/610 and go straight to the D750, which is a better camera overall anyway for not much more money.

 

The D800 had a problematic debut, and again Nikon was hopelessly sloppy in resolving it. A great camera when it works 100%, but quite a few resisted servicing and were promptly dumped on the used market the minute the D810 hit. If you want a D800, save a bit more for the D810 instead because its much less likely to have unforeseen problems. Personally, I think 36mp is total overkill for portraits, and the file size a burden to handle unless you can exploit the hell out of it for landscapes. If the D700 strikes you as too old to take a chance on, go with the D750: its 24mp sensor is modern enough with enough resolution/dynamic range/low light performance that it has been (and will remain) the midrange enthusiast standard for a couple more years.

Edited March 23, 2020 by orsetto

Orsetto, thanks, had forgotten about the D2x modes that I did use on occasion when I had a D700 a while back. I picked up a D3x last year and do like it for portraits, will be fun to try out the D2x modes in the D3x.

If you 'really' want a cheap full frame, I'd suggest the D610.

IKokomo,

If your shooting portraits you maybe able to get by with 12 MP .

The D3s is a great camera. That said the D610 and D750 cameras are very good.

I still use my D800e. It’s very sharp.

Good luck.

Looking at the question from another angle i think i would choose a camera which uses SD / SDHC cards, CF cards are running out quickly, XQD cards need replacing by CFexpress cards and the SD card format is the only format that seems to be a standard forever and available in any price range.

 

Doing portrait on small SD cards keeps prices for memory affordable if high dpeed is not a requirement, all other formats are expensive no matter what speed, and in some area's SD cards are the only fotmat thet i always available

 

Adding this to all other facts mentioned in other posts in this thread, i woud go for a D750 ( used or new , current new prices are around 50% of original the introduction price ......)

Used Z6 w/ FTZ adapter and never look back. Or a D750.

Buy what you can afford. When the D700 was released, I gazed at the magazines, wondering if I could ever raise the funds, or justify, owning such a beast, the one that the reviewers said was ‘ the only camera they’ll ever need’. 10 years later, I sold my D7000, and bought the infamous D700 for £350, with a 1700 shutter count, just because I wanted to feel and smell it . As a Nikon film user, I had lenses to suit in any case. The pictures are the same. I haven’t become Cartier- Bresson overnight. If I was a Pro, sure, I’d spend the money, as clients like to pixel peep the adverts that their clients will be looking at 6 x 4 inches on their iPads at 72 dpi, but for the average amateur, to my mind, it makes no real difference to have the latest model. Same with washing machines.

10 years later, I sold my D7000, and bought the infamous D700 for £350, with a 1700 shutter count, just because I wanted to feel and smell it

 

Surely take pictures should be there too??

Surely take pictures should be there too??

They take Pictures??