DSLR's Dead?

[greybeard45 17]

Your 150-600 may or may not work with the FTZ adapter on a mirrorless nikon body. It all depends on how new it is. I had a Tamron 150-600 gen 1 that would not and there was no way to update the firmware in the lens. Also, are your AF-S lenses for DX or full frame? If they are DX then they are designed for APS-C crop frame and not full frame like a D850/Z5. They will work but will not use more than 1/2 the available pixels.

It really depends on how much money you are willing to spend before I could make any kind of a recommendation. For around $1300 you can get a new Z50 ii with a 16-50 and 50-250mm lens kit that will satisfy most if not all your needs. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1862841-REG/nikon_z50_ii_mirrorless_camera.html. You could add a FTZ adapter to this rig. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1862841-REG/nikon_z50_ii_mirrorless_camera.html that will let you use your current lenses (maybe as the jury is still out on the 150-600) I own a Z50, a Z5, and a D850. I can honestly say that I could make due with the Z50 and not miss a shot.

 

[DanOstergren34 4]

The D850 is an incredible camera, despite the advantages of mirrorless. You can still use your lenses, and buying more will be much less expensive compared to buying more lenses with the mirrorless mount. This is why I am sticking with my 5D MKIII for now; it's an amazing camera and I love using it, I love the images I can create with it, and I got my dream lens (a Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II) for a steal of a price because the EF mount is considered out of date now, despite many of the EF lenses still being magnificent tools. If you aren't concerned with the advantages of the new tech in mirrorless and don't see them as necessary to you taking photos, I would recommend getting the D850. I don't think you will regret it.

 

[Rickbb76 15]

The D850 is an incredible camera, despite the advantages of mirrorless. You can still use your lenses, and buying more will be much less expensive compared to buying more lenses with the mirrorless mount. This is why I am sticking with my 5D MKIII for now; it's an amazing camera and I love using it, I love the images I can create with it, and I got my dream lens (a Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II) for a steal of a price because the EF mount is considered out of date now, despite many of the EF lenses still being magnificent tools. If you aren't concerned with the advantages of the new tech in mirrorless and don't see them as necessary to you taking photos, I would recommend getting the D850. I don't think you will regret it.

This was my reasoning for going with the 850 instead of the Z7 at the time. The only new lens I would want is a really long one, but I can't justify the cost no more than I shoot.

 

[smoke665]

I've seen plenty of the a) tech-obsessed, but they're the smallest group by a long shot. The group b) who fail to learn the tech adequately so as to be able to take the photos they want are a larger group and the group c) that manages both so that their use of the tech well supports their expression is also a larger group than a), not sure how much larger they are than group b) though.

Thank you for finally confirming what I've been saying all along. Group C, Tech is great for those that want it, and commit to learning how to use it. Doing so CAN increase their creative options, provided they don't become obsessed with the technology, like your Group A. Group B is the group most often led astray by the marketing schmooze. They erroneously assume that a $$$$ high tech camera will automatically let them produce fantastic images.

I suspect that Group B is much larger than you think. I can't count the number of wannabe professionals in our area who buy a camera, start booking sessions on FB, only to rapidly fail. They have no clue how to use their camera, or even basic knowledge of photography. I've encountered no less than 3 in our small group of 18.

 

[smoke665]

Some don't agree with my decision buying an older DSLR, I've already been called stupid for it

Hanging on the wall is a 16x20 that I took in 2016 with a K30, 16.3mp camera released in 2012. I would put that image up against any I've shot today with the K1MII. I think you've found your stride, being comfortable with your tools, makes a difference.

 

[Ysarex97 91]

I tend to agree with that that statement. As a tech enthusiast, I really appreciate the tech that are in cameras and it definitely interests me and sometimes has influence my camera decision but I also know that the latest, greatest and most high tech cameras doesn't enable you to take better photos.

Enabling you to take better photos is exactly what tools do. The Arts have a physical component and require tools to manipulate that physical component and as such tools matter. Good tools enable the artist to do good work and poor tools inhibit the artist. You won't find painters at the dollar store buying brushes. I'm always listening to music at my desk and right now I'm listening to Angel Romero play the guitar. Angel Romero didn't buy his guitar at Walmart. I'll bet his guitar cost thousands and thousands of $$$$ and was probably hand made just for him. Why? Because tools matter. The art isn't about the tools and in that sense the tools aren't a concern unless they're poor tools that have interfered with or inhibited the artist's expression. Even with Angel Romero playing I doubt that Mauro Giuliani's Overture that I'm listening to right now would sound as good on an $149.00 Walmart guitar. In all the Arts serious practitioners pay attention to their tools, take care of their tools, and use high quality tools to enable them to do good work.

I seen incredible artists using a 6mp DSLR from 2005 taking better photos than photographers today spending $7k on a high end mirrorless camera. But..but they need 8k video for their YouTube content

Idk what to think anymore. Some don't agree with my decision buying an older DSLR,

The D750 is an excellent camera capable of producing excellent photographs. If it serves your needs and doesn't inhibit your ability to take the photos you want there's no reason not to use it and be happy with it. Your D750 is a 2014 vintage camera. My Fuji X-T2 is two years newer and my Olympus is two years older. I'm using older gear just like you and it's adequate for me and I'm happy with it.

I've already been called stupid for it but I looked at my previous work at a time I really enjoyed photography and it was when I had a DSLR. I started asking why? Ever since I switched to mirrorless, it was always about the tech and how exciting it was and how everyone on social media really hyped it up. It made you feel like you being left behind. But the truth is, it doesn't matter. Your work will speak for itself regardless of what camera how old or how new it is.

Early digital cameras just had a certain feel to them because social media wasn't still in its infancy, the influencer realm was in its infancy and these cameras were simply just cameras that you could go out and create with. They weren't advertised to content creators as heavily as they are now. Now most modern mirrorless cameras are basically high end video production cameras too.

I'll probably switch back to mirrorless again when my budget allows but for now the D750 is more than enough for me and oddly enough it's been the most comfortable camera I ever held.

 

[Ysarex97 91]

I disagree. I seen amazing guitarists play on cheap guitars and made them sound good.

Then why don't they? The 100 Most Iconic Guitars of All Time: Complete List Revealed

Its skill. You don't go buy a high end hammer and start building million dollar homes.

Doesn't matter what I say anyways, you're always right and I'm always wrong.

I'm not an artist anyways. I used to take art serious, but I don't anymore. I just like taking photos for fun and I'm going to do it on any camera I want and I could care less what you think.

 

[smoke665]

Good tools enable the artist to do good work and poor tools inhibit the artist.

Don't think anyone doubts the value of good tools, but this fails to consider the point of diminishing returns. Obviously it wouldn't make much difference if I was strumming a cheap guitar, or Martin Acoustic Limited Edition D-200, because I don't have the ability to utilize all the more expensive guitar has to offer. Same with camera gear to a point, a newbie isn't going to see much difference in image IQ capability between an entry level camera and a Hasselblad X2d 100C. However the difference between your guitar analogy and a camera, is the musician produces the art "on the guitar" whereas a camera "records" what the photographer points it at. Much of the creation of art is going on in front of the camera, behind the camera, and by the lens, so while the "camera tools" may provide the photographer some more opportunities to create, it doesn't prevent an artist from creating with what he has. Check out some of the work by TPF member Bullduram in the Alternative Techniques Gallery, or DanOstergren in People, or Nerwin in Nature and Wildlife, can you say they were somehow inhibited and not art worthy because they didn't have the latest, greatest camera tool set?

 

[cgw128 153]

Don't think anyone doubts the value of good tools, but this fails to consider the point of diminishing returns. Obviously it wouldn't make much difference if I was strumming a cheap guitar, or Martin Acoustic Limited Edition D-200, because I don't have the ability to utilize all the more expensive guitar has to offer. Same with camera gear to a point, a newbie isn't going to see much difference in image IQ capability between an entry level camera and a Hasselblad X2d 100C. However the difference between your guitar analogy and a camera, is the musician produces the art "on the guitar" whereas a camera "records" what the photographer points it at. Much of the creation of art is going on in front of the camera, behind the camera, and by the lens, so while the "camera tools" may provide the photographer some more opportunities to create, it doesn't prevent an artist from creating with what he has. Check out some of the work by TPF member Bullduram in the Alternative Techniques Gallery, or DanOstergren in People, or Nerwin in Nature and Wildlife, can you say they were somehow inhibited and not art worthy because they didn't have the latest, greatest camera tool set?

Hey, you forgot me! Hah!

 

[cgw128 153]

So weary of some elements of these discussions. Thankfully there's way less of the "big swinging cameras" crew in evidence. If anything, I'm guilty of a bit of reverse snobbery in my fondness for trailing edge gear that does the trick for me. Friends differ but some do admit to blowing way too much scratch for the barely perceptible IQ boost. YMMV, as always.

 

[cgw128 153]

Hey, you forgot me! Hah!

In jest, gee...

 

[Ysarex97 91]

Don't think anyone doubts the value of good tools, but this fails to consider the point of diminishing returns. Obviously it wouldn't make much difference if I was strumming a cheap guitar, or Martin Acoustic Limited Edition D-200, because I don't have the ability to utilize all the more expensive guitar has to offer. Same with camera gear to a point, a newbie isn't going to see much difference in image IQ capability between an entry level camera and a Hasselblad X2d 100C. However the difference between your guitar analogy and a camera, is the musician produces the art "on the guitar" whereas a camera "records" what the photographer points it at. Much of the creation of art is going on in front of the camera, behind the camera, and by the lens, so while the "camera tools" may provide the photographer some more opportunities to create, it doesn't prevent an artist from creating with what he has. Check out some of the work by TPF member Bullduram in the Alternative Techniques Gallery, or DanOstergren in People, or Nerwin in Nature and Wildlife, can you say they were somehow inhibited and not art worthy because they didn't have the latest, greatest camera tool set?

They all have good tools.
I never once even hinted that the need for good tools should translate into the "latest, greatest camera tool set." I chose my words carefully and said serious practitioners pay attention to their tools and use high quality tools to enable them to do good work. I get so tired of the cliche response that in someway tries to suggest that tools aren't important. The behavior of artists the world over resoundly contradicts that.

 

[Hammy56]

I have a Z6iii and a D850.
The mirrorless has some inherent features that can't be denied. Smaller and lighter, subject detection, IBIS, etc...
One of the things I like the most about it is being able to review images in the viewfinder, especially when outside in the light.
I have the FTZii adapter and use all F mount glass. I'll slowly accumulate some Z glass over the years. But I have nice F glass and likely won't sell it any time soon.

But damn I love shooting with that 850.

Im an amateur hobbyist and for me it's all about the fun and experience.

 

[10acres]

Just remember that the D850 is going to be a lot bigger than your D5500. As far as carrying 2 cameras, I would not recommend that. Although I’ve toyed with the idea of carrying a small point and shoot as a backup, but I still haven’t convinced myself to do it.

I spent 2 weeks in Italy last fall with my Canon T7i, 10-18mm, 18-135mm and 55-250mm. My 55-250mm never left the bag while the 18-135mm was used 80% of the time. As of now, when I head back to Europe this fall, my Nikon D7100, Sigma 10-20mm, 35mm and 18-140mm will make the trip with me.

 

[Don Fischer]

I've got a Nikon D5500, which I bought in 2015, and upgrade from my old Minolta X700. It took a long time for me to upgrade from film to digital. Now I see that the trend is toward mirrorless. One of the things I regretted when I did the last upgrade was having to give up my lenses. I'd had some of those lenses since 1974, when I bought my first SLR, a Minolta SRT101.

I am still not extremely knowledgeable about working with the D5500, but get by. During our vacation this year, I decided there might be an advantage to carrying two cameras with different lenses (please disadvise me of this notion if it is wrong).

So, I've started investigating my next purchase. I've been looking at the Nikon Z6 III. I've also been looking at the price, and wondering how many new lenses I'd have to buy. I currently have four lenses for the D5500, 3 are Nikon AF-S's and one is the huge Sigma 150 - 600.

Last night, it occurred to me that I could probably get the D850 for less money, and not have the lens dilemma.

I'd like to hear your predictions about the future of photography and any advice.

For what its worth, I'm now in my 70's, so probably won't need a camera to take me much beyond 15 to 20 years.

Wlii a lens on a d5500 even work on a d750? Whole thing with camera's is going straight to hell. Wish I were sure film would last. Then I could go back to my Nikon FM and the company]s could stick their latest and greatest where the sun don't shine!