Could use some help selecting a body

[astroNikon]

Wow, thanks all for your great help, much appreciated. (As i expected this made it even harder but also more clear to me. )

As adviced i have already set a date to try out a Nikon.

Currently on my todo list:
#1: Canon 70D vs Nikon D610
#2: Canon 6D vs Nikon D750

Winner #1 vs winner #2 results in my new camera

If anyone has more tips about 1 of these 4 camera's (or other tips), feel free to share them with me!

Cheers!!! Tim

I think # 1 winner will be the D610
#2 will be the D750
and then it all depends upon if you like all the additional features the d750 brings.
Myself I've gone from a d7000 to a d600 and sooner or later I'l get a d750.

The 2 main advantages for me of the d750 is the fps (handy for the sports I shoot - though i'm not a shoot & pray, when I take my shots I just wish it was a bit faster to catch certain motion ranges better) & tilting screen (very convenient when attached to my telescopes).

As mentioned above the d750 offers even more advantages over the d610. They're both great cameras.

I'm surprised for your budget you haven't selected better comparison cameras such as used Canon 7dm2 or 5dm3.

 

[B100]

Thanks again for the detailed replies!! Or the Nikons are overall better than the Canons atm or we are missing out on Canon fanboys here.
Anyway i will keep everything in mind when i go through the choosing proces.

To come back to the D610 vs 70D or D750 for a minute, a common complaint like oil spots on the sensor of the D610 will also weigh in heavy in my decision.

I can't say it enough but once more: thank you all very much for helping me out!

 

[astroNikon]

Thanks again for the detailed replies!! Or the Nikons are overall better than the Canons atm or we are missing out on Canon fanboys here.
Anyway i will keep everything in mind when i go through the choosing proces.

To come back to the D610 vs 70D or D750 for a minute, a common complaint like oil spots on the sensor of the D610 will also weigh in heavy in my decision.

I can't say it enough but once more: thank you all very much for helping me out!

The d600 had the oil spot issue. I guess the d610 could have the issue too as I haven't looked into that. My d600 had the issue and I got a free shutter replacement ... I'm hoping it splatters more as then I'll get a new camera, but no such luck 5,000 shots later.

 

[jaomul]

The d610 replaced the d600 to sort the oil problem. All dslrs have potential to throw some oil but the d610 is not a camera that does this any more frequently than any other, the d600 had a known issue.

The Nikon Canon thing is a can of worms. It seems at the moment Nikon seem to give slightly better value as a 5d3 and a d750 have very close specs, but the Nikon is noticeably less expensive

 

[Jim Walczak]

Thanks again for the detailed replies!! Or the Nikons are overall better than the Canons atm or we are missing out on Canon fanboys here.
Anyway i will keep everything in mind when i go through the choosing proces.

To come back to the D610 vs 70D or D750 for a minute, a common complaint like oil spots on the sensor of the D610 will also weigh in heavy in my decision.

I can't say it enough but once more: thank you all very much for helping me out!

First and foremost, for my part at least, I'm glad you're finding the comments helpful, if not educational .

As far as the Nikon vs. Canon debate, my own personal bad experiences aside for the moment, in essence it really is quite like the "Chevy vs. Ford" debate (personally I prefer Dodge/Plymouth). It's much like saying "Friends don't let friends drive Fords"...same thing, "Friends don't let friends shoot Canon", LOL!!! In the broadest general sense, it's really more about personal preference than anything else...both brands have their advantages, both have their weaknesses.

Now at the risk of bringing my own personal bias back into this, one thing I will say is that I think one of the problems with Canon (perhaps explaining my own customer service issues) is that they're not just a "camera company", they're an electronics company. Yea...they make some decent cameras...but they also make everything from inkjet printers to office copiers to calculators. It really wouldn't surprise me if we started seeing microwaves, TV's, smart phones and refrigerators with the Canon brand name, much like Goldstar or LG. Honestly, Canon has always dabbled in fields other than just cameras, however in recent years, to me at least, it seems as though their camera customers often suffer because of their broad range of corporate interests.

Nikon on the other hand, while they have also dabbled a little over the years, their company focus always seems to have been on precision optics, be it cameras, binoculars, microscopes and in the early days, even telescopes. Today, they seem to be primarily interested in cameras...in fact, if you look at Nikon's website, wow...yea....that's what they do. I see cameras, lenses and speedlights! Not a single inkjet printer or calculator listed, LOL!

People can certainly draw their own conclusions from all of that, however it could be argued that with something like cameras, it's easier to be really good at something if that's the only thing your company really does...and Nikon's been doing it since 1917. With modern DSLR's, no...that's not really a selling point, but it is something to consider.

Again, it's really more about what get's you where you need to go. For myself, again I was a Canon shooter for a very long time with 35mm, however once I got into digital, from lens selection to customer service, I had problems with Canon pretty much right from the start...which is why I finally switched to Nikon. I got many great images over the years with my Canons (35mm and digital alike) and I get great images with my Nikons. So far however, Nikon hasn't let me down the way Canon did repeatedly. As I've said so often, ultimately it's not about the camera, it's about the person using it and there are plenty of folks who've done quite well with either brand (not to mention other brands like Olympus, Pentax, Sony, etc).

Whatever gets the job done.

 

[DB_Cro]

Currently on my todo list:
#1: Canon 70D vs Nikon D610
#2: Canon 6D vs Nikon D750

Winner #1 vs winner #2 results in my new camera

If anyone has more tips about 1 of these 4 camera's (or other tips), feel free to share them with me!

Image quality on the 70D is far below the others and sensors on 610 and 750 are also considerably
better then on the 6D especially in low light/high ISO.

 

[Ido]

Nikons are overall better than the Canons atm

As far as sensor technology is concerned, then yes, at the moment that is absolutely true. However, at the moment is the key term here. As Thom Hogan wisely points out in one of his recent articles, “What happens in the current state of the market is a giant game of leapfrog.… For short periods of time one system or another will appear to have a technological advantage, usually due to something at the sensor, sometimes due to lens availability. Over time, that advantage disappears, and more often than not, the one with the temporary advantage gets leapfrogged by another.”

Both the D750 and the D610 are incredible cameras. The D750 has some advantages, most notable is the autofocus system, but the D610 is still a superb option.

 

[DB_Cro]

That "short period of time" has been for about 3-4 years now.
Canon needs to update literally ALL of their bodies right yesterday.

 

[Ido]

That "short period of time" has been for about 3-4 years now.
Canon needs to update literally ALL of their bodies right yesterday.

Sorry for hijacking this thread, but I’ll continue the discussion I started. If it bothers anyone, we’ll move it to some place else.

In the grand scheme of things, 3–4 years is a relatively short period of time. Canon was considered ahead since the first digital SLRs, if I’m not mistaken, until Nikon leapfrogged them about 3–4 years ago. I actually think it might have been a bit longer than that already—more like 5–6 years—but still goes with my (and Thom’s) point.

 

[JacaRanda]

As I've said so often, ultimately it's not about the camera, it's about the person using it and there are plenty of folks who've done quite well with either brand (not to mention other brands like Olympus, Pentax, Sony, etc).

This ^^ Because if you surf the web long enough, you will eventually see quality images made by photographers that know what they are doing with the equipment they have. Here on TPF imo, there are plenty examples of what can be done with older equipment.

Just think of all the images ever made with all kinds of different cameras prior to today or last year. Are they crappy now because they were not made with new/better technology?
At some point we have to manage our expectations and as mentioned, go with what works for me/you. JMHO

 

[JacaRanda]

That "short period of time" has been for about 3-4 years now.
Canon needs to update literally ALL of their bodies right yesterday.

I disagree . There are plenty of options out there and instead of "Canon needs to update literally All of their bodies right yesterday.", all you need to do is purchase Nikon.

 

[DB_Cro]

That "short period of time" has been for about 3-4 years now.
Canon needs to update literally ALL of their bodies right yesterday.

I disagree . There are plenty of options out there and instead of "Canon needs to update literally All of their bodies right yesterday.", all you need to do is purchase Nikon.

Me buying a Nikon will not fix the Canon bodies.
Besides, I can't afford the switch, not even remotely.

3rd world country, making a few hundred $ a month if lucky.

 

[JacaRanda]

That "short period of time" has been for about 3-4 years now.
Canon needs to update literally ALL of their bodies right yesterday.

I disagree . There are plenty of options out there and instead of "Canon needs to update literally All of their bodies right yesterday.", all you need to do is purchase Nikon.

Me buying a Nikon will not fix the Canon bodies.
Besides, I can't afford the switch, not even remotely.

3rd world country, making a few hundred $ a month if lucky.

Sorry, there was a bit of sarcasm in my response and I probably could have chosen a better emote to show it. BTW, I think you do very nice work with the equipment you have (which is also related to the point I was making).

 

[DB_Cro]

Yeah, thanks, I actually get that a lot (not to sound uptight or something but..).. and I know the limits of my camera body and it pisses me off
when all I need is 1 stop more of clean, usable high ISO and they went from 550 (t2i) to 600, 650 and 700 using the EXACT SAME sensor,
then 70D and 7D markII which do a bit better, but it's such a small difference that most will never notice it.. and the 750/760D (T6..) with
24mpix senors which again, do worse then 70D/7D.

Progress? Yeah, sure, better bodies all around, every upgrade, but throw in the now discontinued, Nikon D3200 and every single one of the
crop sensor Canons I mentioned in the DXO mark (yeah, I'm not a fan but they have a point re ISO) and you'll see that the cheapest Nikon
beats the most expensive (almost a $2k body here re: 7d) Canon at the moment, and the D3300 and 5500 are even better still. ISO, DR, the works.

I'd agree 4 years is not a long time but Canon hasn't done crap with their sensors while other brands are running away from them.
I love Canon and especially their lenses and I really don't want to switch, but if I was buying my stuff new right now, I'd have to
be stupid or ignorant to buy a Canon rebel instead of the Nikon D3300.

I'd still love a 70D or 7D with that sweet focusing setup and killer shutter BUT... ISO.
Anyways.

Excuse the rant. :-/

 

[JacaRanda]

but if I was buying my stuff new right now, I'd have to
be stupid or ignorant to buy a Canon rebel instead of the Nikon D3300.

I've said something similar to this ^ also. In fact, if the first DSLR was for me instead of my wife, I likely would have gone the Nikon route also. However, at that time I had no idea that birdography would end up being my passion. In the end, happy with the choice of lenses (even though most are out of my price range league).