Good landscape lens before upgrading to FX? D810 vs. D750 for first FX Body?

Malavok · Dec 14, 2015

jaomul said:
Is there a worthwhile advantage to spending all that money on upgrade to fullframe for landscape photography. Will a d750 than a d7200 give better image quality at iso 100 all else being equal? Would your money be better put buying the best possible dx lens?

The thing that would hold me back from simply upgrading my DX glass to better DX glass is the fact that I know I want to upgrade to FX soon, so I would rather not buy anymore DX glass. I simply can't get what I want in low-light situations from my 7200, especially when drawing out the shadows (loss of detail, noise). I've also had trouble finding any DX wide-angle glass that I've really liked. Actually, all of my favorite lenses on my 7200 are FX lenses, but I have nothing FX for wide angle.

I do a fair amount of high-ish ISO landscape photography (1600-3200 ISO) - for nighttime and for handheld shots during blue hour. I don't always have a tripod with me, depending on the situation, distance I have to hike, or ruggedness of my hike.

Example high-ISO landscape scenario: I was in the mountains 30 minutes before sunrise. It was pretty dark, and I was trying to get a landscape picture of a valley with elk running across it. For this, I needed high ISO, even on a tripod because otherwise the elk running would be blurred. D7200 didn't produce a very attractive image.

DB_Cro · Dec 14, 2015

Well damn.
Sounds like you need FX.

Guys doing holyshit landscapes are usually at ISO100 and tripods, that's the "usual" D810 customer.
Get the D750.. maybe save up for a sick landscape wide prime?
I just read the Sigma 20 F/1.4 review and I wish I haven't.

D-B-J · Dec 14, 2015

DB_Cro said:
Well damn.
Sounds like you need FX.

Guys doing holyshit landscapes are usually at ISO100 and tripods, that's the "usual" D810 customer.
Get the D750.. maybe save up for a sick landscape wide prime?
I just read the Sigma 20 F/1.4 review and I wish I haven't.

Yeah, I'm that usual D800 customer. It's a monster, BUT, I've shot landscapes at high ISO's and without tripods.... so don't always think we shoot at 100!

Jake

DB_Cro · Dec 14, 2015

Pushing to 125 doesn't count!

Vtec44 · Dec 14, 2015

I have both, D800 and D750. If I shoot landscape, I'd go for the D800/D810 because of the better body construction and weather sealing. It can handle abuses a lot better. I shoot weddings, so the D750 is better for that purpose but I still love my D800. The D750 low light capabilities are astounding (AF system and high ISO).

dannylightning · Dec 14, 2015

most land scape guys seem to love the nikon 70-300mm lense..

the older nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 is also something to consider.. not very expensive used. very sharp and excellent IQ i plan to pick one of these up soon.

the nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 is excellent. but i cant see paying that much that type of lens but that is just me.

if i were going full frame and i was not so worried about spending the money, those are probably the 3 lenses i would wan to have im my bag.

nerwin · Dec 14, 2015

Honestly I think the 18-35 f/3.5-4.5G is a really good landscape lens, it's incredibly sharp...though it isn't as wide as the 14-24 or Tamron's 15-30 but its heck of alot more affordable.

I mean the 18-35 3.5-4.5G, 14-24 2.8, 20-35 2.8D, 20 1.8G, 20 2.8D, 16-35 f/4 VR, 17-35 2.8D by Nikon and the Tamron 15-30 and Tokina's 16-28 2.8 & 17-35 f/4 are all really good ultra-wide lenses for landscapes.

TCampbell · Dec 14, 2015

Something else to consider (although you should probably "rent" before you "buy") is the Nikon 24mm f/3.5D PC-E (Perspective Control - aka "Tilt shift") lens.

A landscape photographer often needs to use a high f-stop to get the depth of field... but that runs into the challenges of diffraction so the image goes a touch soft. The perspective control helps you get around this because you can gently tilt the plane of focus to follow the landscape. Tilt-shift lenses are all manual focus only.

The reason I suggest you "rent" before you buy is I noticed Roger Cicala (LensRentals) says this lens is very sharp in the center, but gets soft on the edges even when stopped down (not a good feature in a tilt-shift lens... most do much better in the corners.) Rokinon makes a cheap alternative (in a 24mm focal length).

This isn't a general purpose lens... these things are pretty much dedicated to landscape and architecture photography (although I've seen photographers make very effective use of them as portrait lenses when using the much longer focal length (e.g. 90mm) tilt shift lenses.)

jsecordphoto · Dec 14, 2015

I know very few people other than architectural photographers using tilt shift lenses these days. Just focus stack if you don't want to sacrifice sharpness for extra DoF

Solarflare · Dec 15, 2015

While thats OK for product photography, you cant always focus stack with landscapes ... any wind and you have trees, clouds etc moving.

The PC-E 24mm f3.5 is btw even sharp enough for Ming Thein, so I'm confused as to why lensrentals thinks otherwise.

quinte · Dec 15, 2015

From everything I read the Tamron 15-30mm performs better than the Nikon. That is going to be my next wide angle. I have the Tamron 70-200mm, and it is excellent.

Malavok · Dec 15, 2015

Okay so I went a little crazy (and a little over my 'saving for camera' reserve money) and just got home with my new Tamron 15-30 AND D750.

I'll let everyone know what I think of them soon! I have 30 days to return the 750 if I'm not satisfied or decide the 810 would be better.