Skip to content

SANParks.org Forums

View unanswered posts | View active topics






Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
 [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: To upgrade or not? dx or fx
Unread postPosted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 11:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 9:51 am
Posts: 37
I have a nikon D90 with the 18 to 200mm VR lens. I am thinking of upgrading to either the D7100 or the D610. Thinking of the D 7100 because of the 1.3 crop which translates to a longer telephoto. Just heard that Nikon has announced the D750 FX. Confusion, confusion. Any advice out there?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: To upgrade or not? dx or fx
Unread postPosted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 8:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 1:26 pm
Posts: 216
Location: Fourways, Johannesburg
Yusuf, as usual, a valid answer to your question is... it depends. depends on your budget and depends on your main focus of photography. If your prime use is for wildlife, then it is a no-brainer to go for the D7100, but if it simply general photography, with some wildlife thrown in for good measure, then the D750 is a better option. Either way, you are going to have to upgrade your equipment in the lens department in order to get the best out of any body you decide on. Your 18-200 will simply not do justice to either body. Both have 24MP sensors, but given that the D7100 is a crop-body, any bad technique and/or camera movement will be compounded on this body, and low-light photography will simply not be as good. All indications are that the D750 will have a better low-light capability, given the size of its pixels compared to the pixel size on the D7100. Insofar as reach is concerned, the lenses you will require for the D750 will have to be longer than the lenses required for the D7100 if you wanted to get the same field of view, but you do have the benefit of a 24MP sensor, which should allow for a reasonable amount of cropping to take place on images from either camera.

Personally, I use a D7000 and a host of different lenses, but few are at professional level. If I were in your position, I would first upgrade my lenses to a professional-level quality, and use the benefits of the D90 - you will see a major difference to the quality of your images - and I would do this BEFORE you spend money on a new camera body that simply cannot be exploited to its full benefit with the lens you currently have. I would suggest that you DO NOT throw good money after bad, by upgrading your camera, without upgrading your lenses.... and clearly, the lenses you purchase will depend on its intended uses....

_________________
"Take nothing but memories, leave nothing but footprints"

Photographs help to crystallize memories, but cannot be seen to be a replacement of them!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: To upgrade or not? dx or fx
Unread postPosted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 9:51 am
Posts: 37
Thank you Scottm. Should I preferably invest in a nikon 70 to 200 f2.8 and use with the D90 until such time I can upgrade to a FX body or the D7100?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: To upgrade or not? dx or fx
Unread postPosted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 1:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 1:26 pm
Posts: 216
Location: Fourways, Johannesburg
Take your camera into a good camera store to test any lens before you buy. If they do not let you test a lens before you buy, find a different store.

The 70-200mm f/2.8 is a beast of a lens and probably one of the best zooms that Nikon makes. It is the pinnacle of lenses in this range, and will probably last you a lifetime if you look after it, but it is very expensive. (Did I mention that it was expensive for what you get?).... If I could afford it, without forgoing other stuff I require, I would. BUT, and this is a BIG BUT, rather take a step back and go through the focal lengths you require to achieve your photographic objectives, AND the quality/depth-of-field requirements to achieve that objective. Such an exercise will also help you determine whether to remain with DX or upgrade to FX.

Each to his own, but I would want to cover the full range in the fastest zooms possible, but simply cannot justify the required cost outlay for my hobby. My preferences (and budget) may be very different to yours. For example, given the improved ISO capabilities of the new cameras, instead of the f/2.8 model, I would consider the relatively new 70-200 f/4 VR, which is smaller and lighter (and less outlay) than the f/2.8 model. What about rather adding a 300mm f/4 for bird and distant wildlife and continue to use the 18-200 until you do upgrade? Note that your 18-200 will not be suitable for any FX camera, so you would have to update that focal range when and if you move to FX. What about starting with a 50mm f/1.4 or f/1.8 prime and see what difference a good quality (and fast) lens could make to your D90 images? Just because there are new camera models available does not make your D90 any less capable.

Yusuf, I could help you spend thousands of $$$$, but you need to take an objective look at your specific needs and build up your equipment as required to cover those needs. GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome) is a problem that some of us suffer from, and this can (and in my case, has) become a serious wallet-depleting disease.

_________________
"Take nothing but memories, leave nothing but footprints"

Photographs help to crystallize memories, but cannot be seen to be a replacement of them!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: To upgrade or not? dx or fx
Unread postPosted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 1:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 9:51 am
Posts: 37
GOD bless you for your advice. I have a limited budget and the f2.8 is very expensive. I take family photos and an average of 12000 to 15000 shots in the KNP every year. So wildlife and family photos is my primary use for the camera. I am going to look into the f4 300mm. Hope you don't mind that I pester you every now and then for your valuable advice.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: To upgrade or not? dx or fx
Unread postPosted: Sat Oct 25, 2014 9:43 pm 
Offline
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger

Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 8:24 pm
Posts: 521
Location: Somerset West
Hi Yusuf,
You have received excellent advice. Lenses are more NB than camera bodies...
Camera:
1. My wife and I each have a D7000, which really is a very good camera, and very cheap today. If you upgrade from D90, rather take 2 steps and go for the D71000 for the 1.5x DX factor and bigger sensor...
2. I lusted for the FX format and got one of the first D600 cameras. Seriously, very good quality, but disappointing for wildlife, cause your lenses feel insufficient with not enough reach for wildlife...

Lenses:
1. I had 2x 70-200mm f2.8 VR1 models -- the first was brilliant, the second not so good.
2. I now have the amazing little Nikon 70-200mm f4. It is seriously sharp, lightweight but solid, and works brilliantly with 1.4x tc, even wide open. Price = half of the 2.8 model.
3. Had a 300mm f4 -- brilliant lens, but AF packed up 11 months after buying it. Amazing close focusing ability too. Struggled to get sharp pictures on tripod -- not very good tripod mount. I also missed the versatility of a zoom lens.
4. Got a used Nikon 70-300mm VR for gorillas in DRC, but big mistiake -- NOT very sharp wide open @ 300mm! Need to stop down at least 1 f-stop for better results.
5. I do use a 200-400mm f4 VR1 -- get amazing results with it, but price!!! (got it cheap used from a friend). If you are serious about good quality, then try to get a NEW model 80-400mm -- seems to be highly rated by guys like Tom Hogan etc.

I don't use the 18-200mm any more, not good enough for newer sensors. Only use 24-85 for the D600 landscapes, it is OK.
The surprise for me was D600 plus 70-200mm f4!! It works as a "landscape" wildlife type of lens, with stunning results.
I mostly use the bigger lens, even with 1.4x tc on the D7000 for more reach.

Last point: with something like the D90 I suspect you shoot no higher than about 400 ISO??? With the D7000 you can get amazing results in LOW light (before sunrise, after sunset) up to 3200 ISO (over expose by +1/3 f-stop to limit digital noise)....
With the D600 you can go up to 6400 ISO when desperate, so really, you don't need a f2.8 so much any more...

Hope you get what you need.

God bless,

Friedrich von Hörsten

PS. Don't be afraid to go for used equipment, as in Outdoor Photography etc. You can get very good equipment with very low mileage for decent prices.

Check some of my pictures on Facebook: Friedrich von Horsten Photography for the D600 + 70-200mm f4 combination.

_________________
``God, I can push the grass apart and lay my finger on your heart'' -- E. St V Millay


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group

Webcams Highlights

Addo Nossob Orpen Satara
Addo Nossob Orpen Satara
Submitted by Shiba at 20:51:00 Submitted by Stampajane at 05:03:22 Submitted by Shiba at 02:42:03 Submitted by frisian at 20:18:50