Canon 5D Mark iii or Nikon D750?

[jsecordphoto]

750. Every time I shoot with this thing, I fall in love all over again. I switched from Canon btw

 

[astroNikon]

So I just happened upon some more info in my research... Perhaps you could clarify for me, as i'm new to RAW. It appears the Nikon D750 shoots in compressed RAW. Wouldn't that give the Canon D M3 an advantage?

I think it's optional
You can use 14 bit lossless RAW
or 12-bit compressed RAW
Nikon D750 Buffer Capacity

 

[JohnnyWrench]

Does anyone have a good guess at when we can expect a price drop on the 750? I'm very seriously considering one also.

 

[Vtec44]

So I just happened upon some more info in my research... Perhaps you could clarify for me, as i'm new to RAW. It appears the Nikon D750 shoots in compressed RAW. Wouldn't that give the Canon D M3 an advantage?

It's optional on most Nikon professional DSLR's. You can turn it on or off. I have it on for all of my DSLR. I can barely tell the difference in quality, but the reduction in file size is HUGE. For my D800, it went from 80mb to about 40mb with unnoticeable quality loss.

 

[kiwi314]

Okay, thank you. Another question... Will the ISO range be limiting/not high enough? What about the shutter speed - is it going to be fast enough?

 

[Vtec44]

Okay, thank you. Another question... Will the ISO range be limiting/not high enough? What about the shutter speed - is it going to be fast enough?

That's more or less depend on the lighting condition at the time and your style of photography. I rarely use anything above 6400ISO or 1/8000 shutter speed. It doesn't mean that the next photographer shoots the same way that I do.

 

[robbins.photo]

Okay, thank you. Another question... Will the ISO range be limiting/not high enough? What about the shutter speed - is it going to be fast enough?

You don't run into too many situations where you need 1/8000 shutter speed.

In fact, I've never been in one myself.

Low light performance will be a bit better on the Nikon but again skill and experience in choosing your Iso, shutter speed and aperture will ultimately influence the final results far more than the hardware differences

Sent from my 306SH using Tapatalk

 

[kiwi314]

You guys are the greatest. I won't worry about that either, then.
I am looking in to lenses and it seems like a 50mm lense f/1.8 is a nice lens, and I love that it has a shallow depth of field. It is also affordable. I am thinking about going that route, but I would also like another lens that has a bit more depth so you could take group photos and landscape. Which is better for that? I assume they might be more expensive, so maybe I should just get the kit?
The lens: Nikon 50mm f 1.8 D Review

 

[Vtec44]

Go for the 50 f1.4G and never look back. I have the 50 f1.8D, 50 f1.4D, and 50 f1.4G

 

[robbins.photo]

You guys are the greatest. I won't worry about that either, then.
I am looking in to lenses and it seems like a 50mm lense f/1.8 is a nice lens, and I love that it has a shallow depth of field. It is also affordable. I am thinking about going that route, but I would also like another lens that has a bit more depth so you could take group photos and landscape. Which is better for that? I assume they might be more expensive, so maybe I should just get the kit?
The lens: Nikon 50mm f 1.8 D Review

The 50 mm 1.8 G is a fantastic lens, I love mine. It's incredibly sharp, lightweight, just a fantastic little lens to have in the bag. I haven't tried the 1.4 myself, so not sure how big of an advantage it might have over the 1.8.

There are tons and tons of lenses available that go from 18mm - whatever or 24mm to whatever that would all be fine for landscapes or group shots, really just depends on what you think you might need. Normally I advise people to just get an 18-55mm kit lens and start with that, and figure out what more you might need from there. After shooting with it for a while then you'll have a better idea, do I need something wider, something faster, etc.

 

[astroNikon]

Normally I advise people to just get an 18-55mm kit lens and start with that, and figure out what more you might need from there. After shooting with it for a while then you'll have a better idea, do I need something wider, something faster, etc.

18-55 is a DX lens .. not for a d750
you'll have to look for a 18-35 FX lens, or the 24-85 VR lens is considered a WideAngle on FF and is a good starting point. Or I think they sell the 24-120/4 kit lens which would be a great starting lens on FullFrame like the d750.

 

[robbins.photo]

Normally I advise people to just get an 18-55mm kit lens and start with that, and figure out what more you might need from there. After shooting with it for a while then you'll have a better idea, do I need something wider, something faster, etc.

18-55 is a DX lens .. not for a d750
you'll have to look for a 18-35 FX lens, or the 24-85 VR lens is considered a WideAngle on FF and is a good starting point. Or I think they sell the 24-120/4 kit lens which would be a great starting lens on FullFrame.

Whoops. Yup.. right. Forgot we were in the nosebleed section here.

 

[kiwi314]

Okay, so i'm kind of deciding now between the kit lens 24-120mm f/4 VR and the 28-300 VR. Ken Rockwell says on his website that he likes the latter better and that it is cheaper. But I might be able to find the former cheaper if it is in a kit. Which is better?

 

[robbins.photo]

Okay, so i'm kind of deciding now between the kit lens 24-120mm f/4 VR and the 28-300 VR. Ken Rockwell says on his website that he likes the latter better and that it is cheaper. But I might be able to find the former cheaper if it is in a kit. Which is better?

Best thing you can do is remove Ken Rockwell's website from your bookmarks. It isn't really the best source of information out there.

Nikon 24-120mm AF-S VR Nikkor review by Thom Hogan

Short Nikon Lens Reviews

 

[kiwi314]

Good to know. Based on Thom Hogan's review it would appear that the kit lense is actually better quality...