My teenage daughter shoots a D7000 and has come a long way. It's time to make the jump to FF. She shoots people/landscape/art stuff, no sports. So one shot at a time. No need for speed and not much need for very low light/high ISO shooting - she uses a tripod and rarely shoots people in low light.
I am looking at the D750 because it's the newer model, but can't decide that it does anything better for her than a D610. My progression into FF was D600/D610/D810, so I never shot the D750.
Other than the articulating screen, what does the D750 offer her? Is the high ISO that much better?
My D750 performs quite a bit better than my D800 at high ISO.
The AF of the D750 is also better than the D600/610.
Other than that, they are very similar. If those things don’t matter to you, and you can get one quite a bit cheaper than the other, I’d go with the cheaper one and invest in better glass.
She uses my glass, so its not really a "this or that" issue, I just don't know if the extra $300 for a D750 is worth the benefit, whatever that may be.
cbbr wrote:
She uses my glass, so its not really a "this or that" issue, I just don't know if the extra $300 for a D750 is worth the benefit, whatever that may be.
Most of the D750 improvement over the D610 is in the focus system, and especially in low light. What what you have said, I would think the D610 would be the choice based on price, unless she needs to shoot in low light, high iso.
I had the D600 before. There is no way I would go back.
THe D750 "falls" into my hands. Extremely good grip. Never experienced that with any other Nikon DSLR, except the D5500.
The AF is of course better. Most importantly a larger AF field. Better metering, too.
The flippy screen has its uses for over the head overview shots. Also macro shots in landscape orientation, which is the norm for macro shots. Other than that, its very limited compared to for example what you can do on a D5x00 (x >= 1).
But that one detail that I really wouldnt want to miss and why I wouldnt ever go back to the D600 was and is that you can get 100% on a single press of a button. Frankly its just unforgiveable that the D600/D610 dont have that, and that Nikon never gave it to the D600 and D610 in a firmware upgrade.
The sensor is the same, though the firmware improved and low ISO is somewhat better. Namely the natural range of amplification goes now to 12k instead of just 6k, which raises the digital amplified range to 50k, from 25k.
My money would be on the D610. Stellar IQ and low light performance (basically same sensor as D750) and the price is right (if you find a D600 that was repaired under the recall, you can get the body super cheap). Focus points are jammed into the middle just like the D750, so the extra focus points don't add much. And of course we will all be using Zed Nikons soon, so silly to put money into the old system
Sauseschritt wrote:
I had the D600 before. There is no way I would go back.
THe D750 "falls" into my hands. Extremely good grip. Never experienced that with any other Nikon DSLR, except the D5500.
The AF is of course better. Most importantly a larger AF field. Better metering, too.
The flippy screen has its uses for over the head overview shots. Also macro shots in landscape orientation, which is the norm for macro shots. Other than that, its very limited compared to for example what you can do on a D5x00 (x >= 1).
But that one detail that I really wouldnt want to miss and why I wouldnt ever go back to the D600 was and is that you can get 100% on a single press of a button. Frankly its just unforgiveable that the D600/D610 dont have that, and that Nikon never gave it to the D600 and D610 in a firmware upgrade.
The sensor is the same, though the firmware improved and low ISO is somewhat better. Namely the natural range of amplification goes now to 12k instead of just 6k, which raises the digital amplified range to 50k, from 25k. ...Show more →
To your last point, does that make a difference to the RAW files? I presume it does, but I am interested in first-hand accounts. Have you got any pics to compare, that you could post, by any chance?
Are there specific reasons for transitioning to full frame, such as shallower depth of field? Which lenses do you have available, and do you have plans to add any lenses for a full frame camera?
I don't know why people think that FX is higher quality than DX. FX is just a different tool. It offers different shooting looks, not necessarily better.
The D7000 is an older tech camera so there are newer choices for AF, speed, ISO, etc.
I have not used a 610, but I can tell you that I and the person I was the second shooter for at weddings both sold our D3s's and got D750's to replace them. The high ISO was that much better. And the AF was just as good.
I know you said she doesn't need high iso, but it's nice to have it just in case. What she wants to shoot may change.
AcuteShadows wrote:
Are there specific reasons for transitioning to full frame, such as shallower depth of field? Which lenses do you have available, and do you have plans to add any lenses for a full frame camera?
She shoots film, and likes the FOV far better (she shoots mostly wide shots). Better low light and shallow DOF would defiantly be a bonus. And, maybe most importantly, she could really take advantage of my lenses.
Lenses - my basic bag is 24-70, 70-200, 50/58/85/105/200. And then there are the 55 & 200 Macros, old Russian stuff, converted and Ai lenses, etc. She shoots mainly a 50/1.4 and 24/2.8 (film), and a 11-16/2.8, 35/1.8 and 18-200 (D7000). I will likely pick up a 20 1.8 & either a 28 or 35 1.4 as she continues to get better.
BTW, I still have a D7200 that I use for macro & sports - this is not a "better" argument, its a "is the D750 worth the extra $$" question. IMO, the FF will be better for her as a daily because of the available lenses and as a personal preference regarding the FOV, she is keeping the D7000 too.
Having used both extensively, the D610 is likely the better choice for the stated needs (not much AF excellence needed) for the money. The sensors are near identical. The D610 is exceptional value for money, even more so if primarily tripod-bound.
To me, the differentiator other than AF that is notable is the grip. But the D610's grip is perfectly usable, as you know since you've used one.
All these cameras are really good, have your daughter do some research to figure out which one is best for the kind of photography she wants to do. That includes lenses too.
cbbr wrote:
She shoots film, and likes the FOV far better (she shoots mostly wide shots). Better low light and shallow DOF would defiantly be a bonus. And, maybe most importantly, she could really take advantage of my lenses.
Lenses - my basic bag is 24-70, 70-200, 50/58/85/105/200. And then there are the 55 & 200 Macros, old Russian stuff, converted and Ai lenses, etc. She shoots mainly a 50/1.4 and 24/2.8 (film), and a 11-16/2.8, 35/1.8 and 18-200 (D7000). I will likely pick up a 20 1.8 & either a 28 or 35 1.4 as she continues to get better.
With my D500 and D7200 ( and former D7000)I used/use the following optics
11-16/2.8
11-20/2.8
17-70/2.8-4*
16-80/2.8-4*
*both of these support real close up work too
From there on I used my FF optics like the 24-120/4 and the 70-200/2.8 and up
My FF bodies are Z6 and D850. For most of my work these days the Z6 is used.
All in at both ends of the frame sizes and the glass I have I am covered from very wide to pretty long.
"people/landscape/art stuff" just screams D850. I'd add a D850 to your possible upgrade list.
I bought a D610 because the $1500 price premium of the D810 at the time just didn't seem worth it. Just two years later I really wished I just got the D810.
I know it's a huge price premium but the D850 is such an incredible "future proof" camera that it just can't be beat. Maybe one day while out landscaping your daughter see's an amazing eagle and decides to give wildlife photography a try. Add a grip later and she's at 9 fps w/decent buffer. You know know. I __NEVER__ considered wildlife photography, but now I'm thinking of picking up a D500, as my D610 (as well as D750) have crappy buffers.
Think about tripods. You buy a crap one, then an OK one, then a pretty good one, then finally you buy the tripod you should have bought years ago and end up spending 2x the money anyways.
sjms wrote:
With my D500 and D7200 ( and former D7000)I used/use the following optics
11-16/2.8
11-20/2.8
17-70/2.8-4*
16-80/2.8-4*
*both of these support real close up work too
From there on I used my FF optics like the 24-120/4 and the 70-200/2.8 and up
My FF bodies are Z6 and D850. For most of my work these days the Z6 is used.
All in at both ends of the frame sizes and the glass I have I am covered from very wide to pretty long.
Right, but aside from the 11-16, I would have to buy all new glass. A good D610 is around $400 (or D750 at $750) which gives her all of my glass.
M_XG1_82 wrote:
"people/landscape/art stuff" just screams D850. I'd add a D850 to your possible upgrade list.
I bought a D610 because the $1500 price premium of the D810 at the time just didn't seem worth it. Just two years later I really wished I just got the D810.
I know it's a huge price premium but the D850 is such an incredible "future proof" camera that it just can't be beat. Maybe one day while out landscaping your daughter see's an amazing eagle and decides to give wildlife photography a try. Add a grip later and she's at 9 fps w/decent buffer. You know know. I __NEVER__ considered wildlife photography, but now I'm thinking of picking up a D500, as my D610 (as well as D750) have crappy buffers.
Think about tripods. You buy a crap one, then an OK one, then a pretty good one, then finally you buy the tripod you should have bought years ago and end up spending 2x the money anyways.
The 850 doesn't interest me for 3 reasons - 1) price (I buy 2 at a time to have a backup) 2) different batteries (I have 16 for my current cameras) 3) Storage. Its a great looking body, but it doesn't buy me a big enough jump from the D810's for the money for what I shoot. That said, prices are dropping for the D850, so she will inherit a D810 soon enough. And I bought a Gitzo right out of the gate.
