Driving myself crazy between two DSLR’s

[Tatback]

First off, my total budget for just a body and lens is around 2500.

I plan on doing mostly Real Estate photography with this choice and will be getting a tripod (narrowed it down to a couple choices) and a couple flashes.

I’m stuck trying to walk the fine line between over all picture quality and maximizing my work flow. The competition in my area does a mixture of aerial, stills, and video compilations.

The lense will be a 15-30 Tamron

The two bodies I’m torn between are the

Nikon D750
- Better overall picture quality
- unsure about video
-lacking on the app and wireless control
- Dual card slots

Canon 6D Mark II
- Slightly less quality (I read)
- I like the stabilization for video
- Touch screen and wireless app control


I’m sure there are more pros and cons I’ve discovered but it’s 1am where I’m at and my brain has been fried trying to weigh out the two systems. I’ve used both brands in the past as well as some old Sony systems (F828)
I do not have any gear for either at this point as I’m starting fresh.

 

[Derrel]

I would purchase a USED full-frame camera, and save a ton of money. Both the D750 and the 6D-Mark II are good shooters.

 

[Overread]

Either camera will do for realestate. It's a situation that is slow moving, controlled and where the biggest elements are going to be the situation and the lighting as opposed to the camera. It's basically very low demand on the camera to perform well so any solid good camera will work well. I agree that fullframe is beneficial as it gives you a wider angle of view with standard lenses and the increased overall noise performance will be good as well.


Either one will do, at present Nikon has the edge in terms of ISO performance, but at the same time I can't imagine that typical work for you will push the limits of the ISO too far as you've already expressed a knowledge that flashes will be important. Plus with editing software and a good tripod you can easily take a few stills to combine into a single photo for HDR if required.
A second hand body would also leave you money to spend further on lighting modifiers and a good tripod and other support gear.


As for drones in the air that is a whole separate area to consider; as is video. From what very little I know Canon has the edge in video overall; however DSLRs for video (esp clear and steady video) often require quite a bit of support gear to get the professional smooth moving video captures. So, again, a second body would leave you more money for the support equipment (I can't suggest any as I've not done video).

 

[Designer]

First off, my total budget for just a body and lens is around 2500.

Spend about $1,000 on a used FX Nikon body, which leaves you with $1,500 for additional lenses and a Wi-Fi dongle. I'm also thinking of a wider lens for interior shots, and a few extra flashes.

 

[Tatback]

Either camera will do for realestate. It's a situation that is slow moving, controlled and where the biggest elements are going to be the situation and the lighting as opposed to the camera. It's basically very low demand on the camera to perform well so any solid good camera will work well. I agree that fullframe is beneficial as it gives you a wider angle of view with standard lenses and the increased overall noise performance will be good as well.


Either one will do, at present Nikon has the edge in terms of ISO performance, but at the same time I can't imagine that typical work for you will push the limits of the ISO too far as you've already expressed a knowledge that flashes will be important. Plus with editing software and a good tripod you can easily take a few stills to combine into a single photo for HDR if required.
A second hand body would also leave you money to spend further on lighting modifiers and a good tripod and other support gear.


As for drones in the air that is a whole separate area to consider; as is video. From what very little I know Canon has the edge in video overall; however DSLRs for video (esp clear and steady video) often require quite a bit of support gear to get the professional smooth moving video captures. So, again, a second body would leave you more money for the support equipment (I can't suggest any as I've not done video).

Thank you for that, I know the subject will not be very demanding of the camera especially since I could bracket if needed and retake.

I already have a drone and do video/photography with that as well as my 107. That’s what has pushed me into this field.

I do like the image quality of the Nikon and sample images I’ve seen. I also like that all the controls are easily accessible BUT that’s slightly a mute point as I won’t be running and gunning.

I’ll be pairing the camera with a tripod and eventually adding a geared head.

I guess I’m trying to see if the 6DmII is close enough to the D750. I can give up a little quality for the improved work flow that the touch screen will provide in the given situations. Most of the pictures will just be on a computer monitor anyways. I will have a gimble making its way to me as well for steady shots for the quick videos.

I don’t like the single card as I love redundancy but I know it’s not as important with this style as I could offload the pictures between houses. I do like the GPS and the wireless connectivity with the Cannon as I could adjust settings if needed. I’m just a stickler for image quality and can’t find a straight answer if the Canon is close enough to the D750.

 

[Overread]

One thing to bare in mind is that image quality when it comes to comparing cameras basically mostly means comparing high ISO noise performance as that is the main thing that camera bodies control in terms of quality. Most of the other properties are often a duel result of camera body and lens and for most general uses these days most combinations are more than suitable for real estate where you are likely to be using apertures like f8 where the camera and lens are already going to be performing at their best.
In high ISO the Nikon is likely the best performer, but if you are never going to push the camera that far (since if you are indoors chances are you will use the flash lighting; and most times you'll be able to just use a longer exposure on a tripod as a building won't run away on you) its a lesser concern.

Dynamic range would be the most important in terms of sensor performance for your situation. It's important for all areas, but it helps when you've got a bit more as you get that increased latitude on exposures before things over/under expose. Of course for static scenes and tripod use you can bracket shots in difficult lighting and the fullframe cameras you have listed are already pretty good with their dynamic ranges.


Touch screen is nice, but eh, I'd not consider it a major selling point for me. Personally I like touch screens in the right place, but for a camera I prefer buttons that I can press and know I've pressed them. Especially because the camera back screen is small and the camera weight fairly significant. Plus, unlike texting, there isn't auto-correct (though many might consider that a bonus).
Wireless would be a boon, though in reality might not be as big a selling point as you realise since, again, you're not in a fast shooting environment so the time it takes to pop a memory card out of the camera and into the computer for a fast download might even be less than waiting for the wireless to hook up and transfer (esp if you shoot in RAW as opposed to JPEG). Wiresless is often great for people covering events or other fast shooting environments where they need the camera in the computer and off to printers/editors/websites etc.... almost as soon as they are taken (which often means one person manning the camera and another the computer).

GPS is probably the most valuable as it would neatly tie into your archiving of photos, keeping the right house with the right photos as a second layer of help there. Plus useful info for your website or other advertising resources so that you can put the GPS up and show a clear map of the houses location effortlessly.

That said I would be surprised if Nikon doesn't have a bolt-on extra that provides at least GPS functionality, though that is an additional cost