D600 or D7100 ????

[coastalconn]

What exactly do you feel is holding you back with the D5100? Just curious. What are you hoping to improve with a new camera vs better glass?

 

[keirem]

Don't get me wrong, the D5100 is a great camera. I want something a little bigger and beefier as well as better glass.
Since I will have the funds for a FF I might as well get one. I don't expect better pictures because of FF but I think
thats where I want to go and just wanted a few opinions from fellow photographers to see if there was a reason to
stick with DX or make the jump to FX now.

Thanks for your answers

 

[NapoPhoto]

This is an interesting debate, I have a D7000 & recently been building up FX lenses 70-200 Vr & 24-70 2.8. I am inclined towards buying a FF due to the results these lenses perform on FF. but the cost!! D800 or D600 is the question !!

 

[goodguy]

D600 with the 50mm f/1.8.... GO!!! That's what I did and I love it.

Arrrrggg you are such a tease LOL

 

[DCerezo]

This is an interesting debate, I have a D7000 & recently been building up FX lenses 70-200 Vr & 24-70 2.8. I am inclined towards buying a FF due to the results these lenses perform on FF. but the cost!! D800 or D600 is the question !!

In hindsight... If I had the brains at the time I would have gone for the D800. I didn't because I didn't think the price difference was justified... But it is so if you can get the D800, do so!

 

[gregtallica]

What about a D700 used or something? Are you printing wall-sized posters and need the mp?

 

[sashbar]

Don't get me wrong, the D5100 is a great camera. I want something a little bigger and beefier as well as better glass.
Since I will have the funds for a FF I might as well get one. I don't expect better pictures because of FF but I think
thats where I want to go and just wanted a few opinions from fellow photographers to see if there was a reason to stick with DX or make the jump to FX now.
Thanks for your answers

I really can not see the logic here.
Why do you want something beefier? Do you shoot every day so you need something more reliable and long lasting? Do you shoot in bad weather conditions and need it weatherproof? Do you like carrying heavy bags?
Why do you need a better glass if you do not expect better pictures ??

 

[DCerezo]

Only reason to upgrade any body is for more convenient dial and button placement and image quality. Also if you shoot in low light like I do.

 

[keirem]

Don't get me wrong, the D5100 is a great camera. I want something a little bigger and beefier as well as better glass.
Since I will have the funds for a FF I might as well get one. I don't expect better pictures because of FF but I think
thats where I want to go and just wanted a few opinions from fellow photographers to see if there was a reason to stick with DX or make the jump to FX now.
Thanks for your answers

I really can not see the logic here.
Why do you want something beefier? Do you shoot every day so you need something more reliable and long lasting? Do you shoot in bad weather conditions and need it weatherproof? Do you like carrying heavy bags?
Why do you need a better glass if you do not expect better pictures ??
Or does it just feel better to hold a solid piece of magnesium alloy and loook like a pro?
Do not get me wrong, I do not want to offend you or anything, but Coastalconn has asked the right question. I own D5100 as well and sometimes have an understandable urge to invest into something more "solid" . But then i ask myself the same question - what is holding me back? And the answer is - apart from the lack of a couple of direct buttons and probably a couple of PRE white balance settings ( 5100 has only one) - nothing. And even that is not such a big deal. And that's where my upgrade bug dies. I said to myself - when some day I tell myself: I could have made THAT, THAT and THAT pic the way I want IF I had a better camera, which has this and this option, I will go and buy it. Probably.
I have made a similar journey with Hi-fi. You start with a modest set and then start upgrading, throwing literally thousands of dollars on interconnects, converters, mains cleaning, vibration damping etc. You think about microdynamics, lateral reflections, cues, note decay, tembral consistency and forget about the music. Then you look at your grand hi-end system fine tuned to the extreme and ask yourself - do you enjoy your music more now? Same thing with photography.

Not offended at all, it does rain here a lot so the weatherproof will be nice and I want something that I will be using for a long time to come.

 

[tevo]

Not offended at all, it does rain here a lot so the weatherproof will be nice and I want something that I will be using for a long time to come.

People get into photography and they become thirsty for better quality gear. Will a D5100 meet OP's present needs? Yes. Would a D600? Yes. The question then becomes will a D5100 meet OPs needs down the speculative road of photography considering he gets into it? Probably not. Here comes the discussion on glass vs body but for all intent and purpose I make the point that a better body now will retain its value as a tool and a medium for a longer time. The glass will come along.

 

[gregtallica]

Don't get me wrong, the D5100 is a great camera. I want something a little bigger and beefier as well as better glass.
Since I will have the funds for a FF I might as well get one. I don't expect better pictures because of FF but I think
thats where I want to go and just wanted a few opinions from fellow photographers to see if there was a reason to stick with DX or make the jump to FX now.
Thanks for your answers

I really can not see the logic here.
Why do you want something beefier? Do you shoot every day so you need something more reliable and long lasting? Do you shoot in bad weather conditions and need it weatherproof? Do you like carrying heavy bags?
Why do you need a better glass if you do not expect better pictures ??
Or does it just feel better to hold a solid piece of magnesium alloy and loook like a pro?
Do not get me wrong, I do not want to offend you or anything, but Coastalconn has asked the right question. I own D5100 as well and sometimes have an understandable urge to invest into something more "solid" . But then i ask myself the same question - what is holding me back? And the answer is - apart from the lack of a couple of direct buttons and probably a couple of PRE white balance settings ( 5100 has only one) - nothing. And even that is not such a big deal. And that's where my upgrade bug dies. I said to myself - when some day I tell myself: I could have made THAT, THAT and THAT pic the way I want IF I had a better camera, which has this and this option, I will go and buy it. Probably.
I have made a similar journey with Hi-fi. You start with a modest set and then start upgrading, throwing literally thousands of dollars on interconnects, converters, mains cleaning, vibration damping etc. You think about microdynamics, lateral reflections, cues, note decay, tembral consistency and forget about the music. Then you look at your grand hi-end system fine tuned to the extreme and ask yourself - do you enjoy your music more now? Same thing with photography.

I think if you really looked at it, you enjoy your music way more. Like he probably would with photography. Your love for the music hasn't dropped, in fact, you hopefully have come to love it more. It's just a huge expansion on the way you get to enjoy the music. I've done the same with music gear. Some of it I needed, heavy road cases for touring and stuff, gotta have reliable, good sounding gear for gigs. I didn't need all of it, but I wanted all of it.

Whether you need it or not, that's an entirely different debate, but if you have the money and resources - there's something to be said for having nice gear. It's just nice to have.

I have a 6x12" speaker cabinet, two 4x12", and two 2x12" speaker cabinets, 6 different guitar amp heads, all for playing guitar. I play in a couple different bands, but I don't really need as much power as I have. But even though I'm not making any money off it, it's worth having pro gear. It feels better, sounds better, easier to use, looks great... I would gladly do that with photo gear if I could afford it. Not to step on the toes of the pros, but just to have my own nice things. It's all the tinkering I get to do with my gear. Trading it constantly, building my own effects, things like that. I get to enjoy playing music in a way, way more fun environment than I got to do as a broke teenager with two guitars and one amp.

 

[DBA]

In my humble opinion it'd be kind of silly to get a FF (D600) without having any good glass. Bodies have a considerable shorter life span compared to lenses, so I wouldn't upgrade until you have some decent glass.

I had a 70-200mm VR2 on my D5100 (and was able to get killer shots), moved that lens to my D7000 when I upgraded the body. Then recently I got the D600 and guess what, the 70-200 VR2 now rests on it.

A good pro quality lens will give you a much better improvement verses a body upgrade, plus it'll last you longer.

 

[MOREGONE]

I too have been pondering these cameras.

I have the D90 and would like better low light performance. I shoot a lot of bars and nightclubs and the D90 just isn't up to snuff. I am moving towards weddings and recently 2nd shot a catholic wedding where flash was not allowed, again, a strain on the ole D90.

I have a 2 lenses that are FX and 3 that are DX. I don't intend to get rid of the D90 so I think I would have a decent setup of D600 with my 70-200 and 50 1.8 and keep the 12-24, 35, and 17-50 on the D90.

I have considered the 7100 since it will be a good bit cheaper and should have some good ISO performance. If I am being completely honest with myself, I think I want the D600 for the sake of being FF

 

[TheLost]

Just to set the record straight.. Good FX glass doesn't have to be expensive:

Nikon 50mm 1.8D = $100 (1.8G = $200)
Nikon 70-300VR = $350 Refurbished
Nikon 85mm 1.8G = $397
etc...

IMHO.. even if you shoot DX these are lenses you should be looking at.

What camera should you get? You want a D4... Cant justify that? just go down the Nikon line from there until you find one you can afford

 

[keirem]

Just to set the record straight.. Good FX glass doesn't have to be expensive:

Nikon 50mm 1.8D = $100 (1.8G = $200)
Nikon 70-300VR = $350 Refurbished
Nikon 85mm 1.8G = $397
etc...

IMHO.. even if you shoot DX these are lenses you should be looking at.

What camera should you get? You want a D4... Cant justify that? just go down the Nikon line from there until you find one you can afford

With the 50mm would you go with the 1.4 or 1.8 ?
And is the G much better than the D ?

Thanks