Before I take the plunge for a D850

[MitchP]

Is it going to get better crops than my D750 @ 24MP? I'm mostly on a 300mm Nikon prime with 1.7 TC. I get wonderful wildlife pictures with this combination, but I sometimes hit a wall with pixelated crops. Will the 45MP make a big difference? I know the TC doesn't help, but it out resolves my current sensor. Thanks!

 

[NS: Nikon Shooter]

Will the 45MP make a big difference? I know the TC doesn't help, but it out resolves my current sensor. Thanks!

GINORMOUS!

 

[Strodav]

Is it going to get better crops than my D750 @ 24MP? I'm mostly on a 300mm Nikon prime with 1.7 TC. I get wonderful wildlife pictures with this combination, but I sometimes hit a wall with pixelated crops. Will the 45MP make a big difference? I know the TC doesn't help, but it out resolves my current sensor. Thanks!

I use both a D850 and D500 for wildlife / nature / birding (especially water birds). When I can fill the frame, I use the D850, when I can't, I use the D500 with it's 1.5x crop factor advantage. [Note: The D500 has a 7% higher pixel density than the D850 in DX mode] More important than the FX / DX body discussion is the glass you have. I mostly use a Nikon 200-500mm f/5.6. I like the ability to zoom out, especially for birds in flight. For reach, I have a Nikon 600mm f/4G and a Nikon 1.4x teleconverter if needed. Of course you can go with either the Tamron 150-600mm G2, Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary, Sigma 500mm f/4, or the Nikon 500mm pf, which is a very popular lens for Nikon DSLRs and many report it works very well on Nikon mirrorless cameras.

Both the D850 and D500 share the D5s AF system, which is much more advanced than the D750's AF system. They are twins as far as control and menus are concerned, but the D850 has focus peaking and focus stacking, which the D500 doesn't have. The D850 is a great general purpose camera that works very well for wildlife / nature. The D500 is a better camera for wildlife / birding and does OK for general purpose photography. So, if you do more gp photography, especially landscapes and portraits, I believe you'll be happier with the D850. If you are into birding, especially BIF, then the D500 edges out the D850 because of it's 1.5x crop factor advantage and 10fps frame rate. Of course, the R5, A1, and Z9 just blow the dslrs out of the water with their revolutionary AF systems and 20 to 30fps frame rates along with IBS (in body stabilization). I have my pre-order in for a Z9.

You might want to consider keeping the D750 for gp photography and pick up a D500 and maybe some new glass, for wildlife / nature.

 

[MitchP]

GINORMOUS!

You, sir, are an enabler!

 

[NS: Nikon Shooter]

-

Beside the gain in resolution (and its draw back!) there are
the 14,8 stops of dynamic range… unbeaten yet!

 

[mrca]

-

Beside the gain in resolution (and its draw back!) there are
the 14,8 stops of dynamic range… unbeaten yet!

Yes, the d850 dynamic range blows me away since i know the clipping points on my d700 after using it for 10 years. . But with ilford hp5 film, I can over expose 5 stops and it looks identical to properly exposed. I tried that with the d850 and I get a pure white frame. Heck, for a pure white background in studio, I put the bg at about 4 stops over subject incident/aperture setting to get pure white.

 

[astroNikon]

I'd agree with everyone especially Strodav.
I have a D750. I used to also have a D500 (have some reviews years ago of it here for sports).
The D500 was awesome for Sports and BIF. I used them mostly with a Tamron 150-600 for reach.
I wanted to swap my D750 for a D850 but never got around to it as it's features far outstrip the D750 for Sports/BIF.

One you get into higher density sensors the glass really matters. I had a old AF Nikon 300mm lens that created mush images on my D750 vs a D7000.
I really want to go mirrorless but $$ for new lenses, etc is way above my budget right now.

 

[mrca]

My bird photography here in Florida is in my backyard and pond. Had a $6000 nikon 400 mm 2.8 plus 1.7 which on a d500 gave me a 1000mm equivalent. But the birds, wood storks, snow and regular great egrets, herons are used to my presence so I can get within 10 feet of them easily. So sold the 400 mm and recently picked up a 300 f4 manual focus for $300, and not quite as sharp as the $5000 400 but plenty sharp for amateur work. I have a 180 2.8 that is razor sharp and that works well if the birds get beyond 6 - 10 feet, the minimum focus. Mirrorless is little change for me as a portraitist. I did go SENSORLESS, including film 35mm using my fantastic digital glass, 67/645 medium format and 6x6. Now THAT is a huge change from a d850... which now scans my negatives at 46 mp.

 

[Strodav]

FWIW, a comment on dynamic range that most photographers don't think of when they are in the field. DR goes down very quickly with increasing ISO. For a D850, ISO goes from 14.8 Ev at ISO 64 down to 11 Ev at ISO 1600 and 9 Ev at ISO 6400. The D850, D500 and D750 are virtually identical in DR from ISO 600 to ISO 25600.

So the point is, for certain types of photography like landscapes and portraiture and stills the DR of the D850 at ISO 64 is magnificent, but it really isn't much of an advantage when birding.

 

[mrca]

FWIW, a comment on dynamic range that most photographers don't think of when they are in the field. DR goes down very quickly with increasing ISO. For a D850, ISO goes from 14.8 Ev at ISO 64 down to 11 Ev at ISO 1600 and 9 Ev at ISO 6400. The D850, D500 and D750 are virtually identical in DR from ISO 600 to ISO 25600.

So the point is, for certain types of photography like landscapes and portraiture and stills the DR of the D850 at ISO 64 is magnificent, but it really isn't much of an advantage when birding.

As a portrait photographer, when trying to shoot at 1.4 or 2.0 in full sun at the beach that lower iso really helps. To make things even harder, I often am blurring the waves at 1/30 so with a vari nd, I need to add very little nd and can see out the viefinder and focus without having to be on tripod. But I can crank the iso up to get a higher shutter speed to hand hold a 300 mm. But for a birder, I can see where good high iso lets them crank up iso to get a higher shutter speed. With the 400 mm I was looking for 1/800 .

 

[MitchP]

Thanks for all the replies! It's ordered, now the waiting begins. Woot!

 

[Scott Murphy]

I have both (plus a D500) and although the D750 is an excellent DSLR capable of producing outstanding 16x20 or larger prints, you will see a noticeable difference between it and the D850. Just be prepared for 95MP raw files.

 

[NS: Nikon Shooter]

Just be prepared for 95MP raw files.

That is the only expected draw back!

 

[Scott Murphy]

That is the only expected draw back!

I added an additional 2TB internal HD in my desktop devoted exclusively to my photography images, I don't think I will ever fill it up.

 

[mrca]

That's not a drawback, it's an stellar advantage. You can crop severely. For example, I ditched my 70-200 3 lb beast with 22 pieces of glass and mediocre quality for my 135 dc with 7 pieces of glass and I don't have to twist a zoom ring, I just crop in post. Anyone who has spent days with a second body with the beast attached to it over your shoulder in addition to another body around your neck loves getting rid of that burden. And that applies to any lens, 35, 85 135 is all I need for an event. Now I don't need a serpa bearer for my gear. And with 46 mp I can crop more than half and still have plenty of resolution for any product from a wedding or event. The battery will last for a week using the grip.