jorish

This forum never disappoints; a lot of input and suggestions, reasonings, etc. make me evaluate and question my own line of thinking, which is good.

For those of you who are interested, a little more background and (un)reasoning behind my question and my probable solution...

I've had a couple of Nikon DSLR's so far; started out with a D50 (which was also my starting into photography), after that a secondhand D200 (disappointed me in IQ, which was probably just my sample), then a D80 (which despite the bad rep worked for me), then a D300. That camera really clicked with me and I might still be using it today. However, my wife wanted to change to digital, so we decided she would take over the D300, and I would buy the successor. That successor kept not arriving however, so I bought the D750. Just a couple of months before the D500 was announced...

Now the D750 is a very capable camera, and on paper more than adequate for me. Reality however proved otherwise; I never managed to find my way around the different style of controls and menus. I even lost some of the pleasure in shooting. So I decided I wanted to trade it in on either a D500, or a D8xx. And having gotten used to FX, I wanted to see what the secondhand market here in the Netherlands was like for the D800 or D810.

Started to read up on the differences between the D800, D810 and the D850. Now, I'm also prone to GAS/NAS, so a D850 looked mightily interesting but just out of my wallet's reach. What I liked about the D850 was the flip-up lcd (one of the few things I really liked and often used on my D750), the fact that it is more recent (I plan to use this camera for the next 6 years at least), and the better AF. And yes, NAS also chipped in.

Now, I had more or less decided to wait for a good secondhand D810, when I noticed a demo D850 at 'my' shop. I can get no VAT (or whatever you call sales tax) back on secondhand models, but that's not true for a demo model. So... 15% off new price because it was a demo and 21% sales tax back brought it just within reach. And this demo model had only 91 clicks...

So, less than a fortnight ago, I bought the D850.

Now. The question of a walk-around lens.

I understand and have tried some of the suggestions made here;

* Get a compact.

> I had a Sony RX100III for a while. Easy to carry around, good quality images. I just found it too small, did not like the menus and buttons, and it ended up in a drawer. Gave it to a friend who is reallly happy with it.

* With all my Nikons I have tried several solutions for city trips, day trips into nature (hills, woods, etc.), etc. I don't mind the weight so much of different primes, or even 2 or 3 zooms. Though weight does take its toll after a while of course.

The reason I asked for 1 lens, is that photography is not the main goal of those trips, and my changing lenses leads to people waiting for me, getting annoyed, etc. I want to be able to take my camera out of the bag, aim, focus and click within a couple fo seconds (ok, maybe more like a minute, but you get the drift I'm sure).

My experience with the D850 so far...

Last week I was working (I work as a techie for theatres and companies). I traveled with acrobats, and tried my D850 in my spare moments. I had brought the 35/1.8 and the 70-200/2.8 VR mk1 with me. Shot out of hand and I really, reallly liked using the D850, though I'm still learning (will be for a long while) what it's really capable of. But the controls made sense, I was able to quickly change settings and try out different things. Tracking movement worked pretty good right from the start.

...

In short; anyone who read the original question and my first reply really carefully, will have noticed I did not so much ask for a *light* camera/lens combo, as for a "1-unit, quick-to-grab" comb. I don't need it to be F2.8, and since I have so far never liked variable aperture, it will probably be a F4 lens. Nikon or Sigma, whichever works. And if neither of them please me, a F2.8 is more probable than a variable aperture.

I'll keep you posted, though it may very well be a couple of months before I buy.

@ c.p.m._van_het_kaar: I'm not getting the D850 for these hikes. I'm getting the D850. I don't (at this moment at least) want a second camera, so for hikes, day trips, etc. I'm looking for a general purpose lens that will prevent me having to change lenses, yet will still be good enough to print enlarged images now and then.

@ everyone else: Thanks very much for your input. It confirms some of the things I thought and read, and clarified some other points. The 24-70 F2/8 models were taken off the short list because of price and (less so) weight. The 28-300 was taken off because I really want the wider 24 mm.

As for the 24-85; I have only ever owned 2 variable aperture lenses; the 18-55 and 55-200 kit lenses that came with my first ever camera, the D50. I could never get used to the variable aperture (though admittedly I was also overwhelmed with everything I was learning). Still, I've mentally blocked considering the 24-85. I'll read up on it.

I'm hoping to find the time tomorrow to go to the store and try out the Nikon 24-120, the Sigma 24-150 and maybe the Nikon 24-85.

Up till now I was very much undecided between the Nikon and the Sigma, but I just read somewhere that the Sigma turns the 'wrong' (Canon) way. That, and the constant power requirement mentioned by Dieter, may very well be the deciding factors.

Hi,

I'm planning on getting a D850. I have a couple of primes for my theatre work, but I'm looking for a one-lens solution for holidays and hikes. I don't want to take 4~5 lenses with me when I'm going for day-trips, and maybe more importantly, don't want to change lenses so much anymore 'in the open'.

So, I'm reading up on the Nikon 24-120 F/4, and the Sigma 24-105 F/4.I don't need larger apertures.

The verdict on those two lenses seems to be "ok to good, but not great".

Any thoughts or experiences? From D850 users even? Or tips for a secret gem lens that I overlooked?

A bit late, but better than never, right?

"Dead in the water"

Handheld, Sigma 150mm Macro on D750.

Taking a walk, just shooting what looks interesting, I came home with this one...

I was trying to look at the city where I live with a tourist's eye... Now, like most cities in the Netherlands we have a historical center, monumental buildings (some of which are hundreds of years old), and other 'typical touristy things'. But as a foreign visitor, I guess one of the most Dutch things is the everyday use of bicycles. And especially all the folding bikes that people use in combination with cars or public transport.

And alas; even the most humble bikes need motorcylce-strength locks on them. This one is even slightly underprotected IMO...

Nikon D750, Nikkor 24/2.8 AF-D. ISO250, f/6.3, 1/125sec.

At the island of Terschelling, last december.

A colleague of mine adjusting theatre lights. We had red, green and blue colour gels, and red looked most dramatic :)

I do not have a lot of wisdom to offer regarding the different lenses. However, for manual focusing, I sometimes use a trick when I shoot theatre/dance performances; During a moment just before 'the action' (and I assume you have a second or two here when the game moves toward a goal for instance) you let the camera AF on something/someone close to where you expect the action, then switch to manual and you don't have to worry about being able to see the correct focus in the 'bad' viewfinder.

With f/4 together with the distance, you will very often have enough of the action in focus.

I admit it's more of a workaround than a proper solution, but it worked for me until I had the budget for a better lens.

If the card really doesn't matter, it might be possible to drill/force a small hole in the card, thread a piece of metal wire through and fashion a grip?

- off-topic: as a non-native English speaker I was thrilled to see that the actress/bishop jokes/replies are not limited to Dutch... Every once in a while my colleagues and I will have an afternoon in which every sentence gets replied to with a 'said the actress to the bishop" or "said the bishop to the actress". A dirty mind is a joy forever, albeit very exhausting sometimes for the people around us :))

Infrequent poster, just as I am an infrequent shooter...

This was taken earlier this month, at the beach of West Terschelling, the Netherlands.

In the hope I can upload an image...

[...] never use the bathroom at night, etc... that kind of revolving guy, I`m afraid. :D

What's up with using the bathroom at night? I'm getting scared :eek::D

I've always assumed the warning is there for a reason, so I try to heed it. I've often found myself clicking in the new lens and realising I'd forgotten to turn the camera off though, and they still keep functioning fine. I've only ever reaaly used DSLR's, so I don't know if the possible adverse effects could be greater for a SLR?

And you're not the only one preferring primes ;)

I think DNG is more 'future proof' because it's not a specific Nikon format, and more widely 'accepted' by different brands of software. Having said that I (partly out of laziness, partly out of not wanting too many large files) just keep the NEFs and the jpg's I create from them. If it ever should happen I cannot open the NEFs anymore, I'll still have good quality jpg's.

As for backing up... it's mostly a matter of preference I think. Both your suggestions should work equally well.

In my case I have my ISP's modem/router which creates a (wired and wireless/wifi) network, and have added network hard drive to it; all my computers automatically back up to that. But that's just a matter of it being slightly more convenient (for me anyway) than copying twice by hand, not more reliable.

It won't help you with the past shoot, but I always learned a lot about new Nikon cameras (D50, D80, D300 and now D750 respectively) from Thom Hogan's guides (I'm not affiliated with him in any way, it's just a happy user's opinion). He carefully explains settings, and why you might want to use a particular setting (or not). For beginners, advanced and pro users.

His general site is here: New Camera and Photography Articles, Nikon DSLR camera and lens, the page with the guide to the D810 is here: Nikon D810 & D810A Guide | DSLRBodies | Thom Hogan

About failing cards; I always keep to this regimen: I format the card in camera (never in a computer), after shooting and downloading the images to my computer I make backups to a hard drive on my home network and to an online storage, then put the card back in my camera and format it before ausing it again.

Things I avoid:

* using a usb cable to transfer the image from camera to computer (the camera might run out of power and images could get damaged)

* formatting a card in the computer, as there seem to be differences in formatting

Good luck and have fun with the D810!

Congrats on the 20!

I did not start photographing until 2006, and it took me a while to get to English language-forums (it's my second language after Dutch), but I think photo.net was the first in 2007? 2008? A bit of a shame I can't get it back from my account details...

I mostly check forums (or actually sites in general) without logging in, so my account activity is a bit slower than my actual presence ;)

20 years ago... my first internet connection had been established, but anything with pictures would have bogged it down too much anyway :))

<p>There's a test here from a German site that has a good reputation as far as I know:<br>

<a href="http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/989-tamron153028vcff">http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/989-tamron153028vcff</a></p>

<p>Tidal flats, submerged. The horizon almost disappears...</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>I bought the D750 as an upgrade to my D300 just 2 weeks before the D500 got announced.</p>

<p>Had I known, I would have waited for the following reasons:<br>

* I like the heftier body of the D300/500 as opposed to the D750<br>

* I like the more direct, pro-like controls of the D300/D500<br>

* Lenses for the APS-C camera's are cheaper and there's more choice than for the full-frame ones</p>

<p>The reason I'm happy anyway that I bought the D750<br>

* The amazing jump in low-light performance (I shoot theatre and dance, and it makes a world of difference to me)<br>

* the articulating screen, which makes it easier to shoot from a low of high point of view<br>

* It was available now, instead of in a couple of months (the D500)<br>

* the larger sensor and files give me more cropping options</p>

<p>Good luck deciding :)</p>

<p>Just an update for anyone who is interested in the outcome...</p>

<p>I went and tried both the D7200 and the D750 in a shop. Funnily enough, they were both a bit larger than I'd anticipated, and not (at first sight) noticably smaller than my D300. Once in my hand however, the difference was there, and the D300 still felt best. The D750 was a close second, and the D7200 caused my hand to pinch more than I like (there was some space between my hand and the body when I put my hand around the grip, so my fingers had to exert more power to hold the camera).<br>

So, I chose the D750...<br>

Right after that, we went to Paris, where my girlfriend used the trusty D300 and I used the D750. And it turns out I'm happy with my choice \o/</p>

<p>I still takes getting used to the controls, and changing the mode between A, S, P & M is an absolute nightmare for me. Shame on Nikon for such laborious controls that make you take away your eye from the viewfinder and potentially miss a shot (I could do it blindly with the 'push a button and turn a wheel'-way on the D300).<br>

Changing the ISO was a problem until I put it under the videobutton (I never use video anyway).</p>

<p>Getting used to the 'new focal lengths' of my lenses will take time, but also opens up new perspectives (pun intended), so that's mostly fun.</p>

<p>On the plus side, I'm very happy so far with the new metering mode that's based on the highlights in the scene and with the amazing quality of formerly too-high ISO values.</p>

<p>I'm still below the 500 shutter count, so it's still early days, but I think I'm going to be very happy with the D750. In the end the way the camera feels in my hand was the most important consideration, but that was also due to the fact that other questions were already answered by you guys. Oh, the joys of active and helpful forums! So, thanks again, mille fois merci and hartelijk dank from the Netherlands :)</p>

<p>Like Shun I also think the 85 is on the long side. I have it, and I took some nice portraits with it now and then, but I usually like the 50/1.8 better. And lately I've started to use the 60/2.8 micro as well. And I like that too. So, what to recommend... the 50/1.8 if you want to save money and still get a very very good lens. The 60/2.8 micro if you want a lens that can also do macro every now and then. And the 85/1.8 if you're sure you can/want to be farther away from your subject.</p>

<p>As for landscape work, and also very versatile; maybe the 17-50/2.8 by Tamron? The non-stabilised version. They've had a v1, a v2, and now a v3 with stabilisation. The v2 is still readily available and seems to be slightly better than the v3 IQ-wise. Cheap (for a 17-50/2.8), light, and pretty good.</p>

<p>You could check out some tests at photozone.de if you want some more info on the various possibilities.</p>

<p>@Michael Darnton: as far as I know the D7200 is not inferior in any way to a possible D400, and is in every technical aspect probably superior to my D300. For my taste however, I think (but am not sure until I've tried one in the shop) it's too small for my hands. I'm basing this on the D50, D70 and D80's that I used in the past. I *can* use those smaller cameras, but I like the heftier bulk of the D300 and D8**'s.</p>

<p>@almost everyone else: my main topic was (and probably will be in the next year at least) theatre performances. Both inside regular theatres and outside (in the street or in special locations like an old factory for instance). So low light capabilities are important; the less light the camera needs, the better. And since I always try to be inconspicuous; if a shutter should be (a lot) more silent, that may be a point in favour as well.<br>

Reach is not that important; I have a 70-200/2.8 (first generation) but I hardly ever use it; my 85/1.8 is usually long enough on the D300 and has a larger aperture of course. This may of course be different with a FX camera.<br>

Besides performances I'm also slowly starting to expand into landscape (both nature and city) photography, and I'm expecting all options to be perfectly capable of that.</p>

<p>I've been checking prices further, and a.t.m. the D750 and the D7200 here in the Netherlands have cash-back deals going. €150 for the D750, and €75 for the D7200. This puts the demo 800E about 15% above the D750, so the choice will probably be between the D750 and the D7200. The D7100 is close enough to the D7200 that I'll take the newer model if only for the minimal gain in low light situations.</p>

<p>I understand that in almost every way the D7200 is the most logical path from the D300. Transition will probably be easier because by now I usually know which focal length I want to use, whereas this will probably take me some time to learn with an FX camera. I was already considering it, but now I will definitely take my lenses with me to the shop to try them out, and see if they measure up to the new sensors. I'm hoping that *if* I go for a FX, at least my primes and the 70-200 will be up to the challenge...<br>

<br />My current lenses are:<br>

DX: Nikon 10.5/2.8, 35/1.8 and Tokina 11-16/2.8<br>

FX: 24/2.8, 50/1.8, 60/2.8 micro, 85/1.8, 28-70/2.8 & 70-200/2.8<br>

My computer(s) are a MacBook Pro 15" late 2013, with 16GB RAM and an SSD drive, and a MacMini late 2012 also with 16GB and an SSD. I'm expectiing them to be up to handling anything Nikon can throw at them ;)</p>

<p>I really appreciate the time everyone takes to share their thoughts. Some of them are in line with what I've been thinking myself, but new considerations came up as well, so your time is not wasted as far as I'm concerned.</p>