Need Advice - Upgrading to Full Frame

[theraven871]

I'm going to be purchasing a new full frame camera. With the camera, I plan to purchase the 70-200 f2.8, and 24-70 f2.8 (along with various other lenses depending upon which brand I choose). Its a major investment that I've been researching for the past several months.

At this time, I have narrowed it down to either the Canon 6d, Nikon D750 or Nikon D610. (I'd be interested in a Canon 5d Mark III; but they may be a bit more than I want to spend)
I shoot mostly landscape/nature and portraits. Off camera flash control is also important to me.
I also want independent controls of the settings I need.

In my opinion, I believe Canon makes higher quality glass/lenses. But I much prefer Nikon bodys and sensors.
When all is said and done, I don't have any brand loyalty. I also don't want this to be a "war" to argue which is better. Both Nikon and Canon are top notch, the differences in them are almost too small to measure. I'm looking for information on the intangibles. The things you don't think about until after you buy a camera.

What system will get me better photos with the least amount of stress?
Which has a better/easier workflow?
Which Company is better to work with if issues arise? Canon or Nikon?

Any other advice is appreciated!!

 

[runnah]

I'd skip the 24-70 personally. For landscapes you can go with the 17-40 f/4 L and save a boat load of cash. The 70-200 is a must have.

I'd go with the 5d personally.

 

[theraven871]

I'd probably get a 16-35 for landscapes.

But what I was wondering was NOT what lenses to get.
I'm curious about all the little tiny things that you only learn after you buy the camera.
I see pros using both, and both will get excellent results.
I don't shoot much (if any) sports photography, so the "best" autofocus system isn't as important. Although I don't think I could tolerate the 5d Mark II's autofocus system.
I do shoot weddings, so autofocus in low light or "less than optimal light" is important.
But, all the camera's I've listed above should get the job done. If I'm wrong, please let me know

 

[jaomul]

Nikon (it's generally accepted) do better low iso (most landscape shots taken at iso 100) photos with up to 2 stops more dynamic range, which can result in more detail if your scene is high contrast (think sunny with dark shaded areas).

Some say Canon are better with skin tones.

Canon supply a very good software suite that has a very good raw converter and allows tethering from your computer.

Nikon also has a software based on silkypics that's supposedly not quite as good.

Canon has specialised macro lenses that give a 5:1 magnification and their tilt/shift lenses are supposedly unbeatable.

From your post and being new I think the Canon 6d or Nikon d610 are both great options. Both are plenty camera for most. If pushed in a corner I'd get the d610 for its better dynamic range and faster high speed shooting, but both are great, neither is a bad choice

 

[D-B-J]

I'd probably get a 16-35 for landscapes.

But what I was wondering was NOT what lenses to get.
I'm curious about all the little tiny things that you only learn after you buy the camera.
I see pros using both, and both will get excellent results.
I don't shoot much (if any) sports photography, so the "best" autofocus system isn't as important. Although I don't think I could tolerate the 5d Mark II's autofocus system.
I do shoot weddings, so autofocus in low light or "less than optimal light" is important.
But, all the camera's I've listed above should get the job done. If I'm wrong, please let me know

The D750 is supposed to be a really good "across-the-board" performer. Have you thought of a used D800? I absolutely love mine.

 

[theraven871]

I have a subscription to Adobe for both Lightroom and Photoshop CC.
I also have the entire NIK plugin collection. (Various other pieces of software).
Long story short, Canon vs Nikon software doesn't interest me as they both seem inferior to the Adobe products I have.

The extra dynamic range on the Nikon sensor is noticeable to me. Even post processing the Canon RAW files, I cannot get the same range as I can with the Nikon.
I'm sure you could do some software magic on the Canon to level the playing field, but I have zero interest in spending 3 hours post processing a single image.
That said, Canon's DO have better skin tones. Or, at least, its a visible difference to my eyes. Their skin tones have a bit more "pop" to them than what I see from Nikon sensors.
But, neither of these are large enough differences to justify one over the other.

Also, I get really nervous shooting at high ISOs. A professional photographer can talk to me about how a certain camera has less noise at 3200 ISO. But how often does a professional shoot at 3200 ISO? I'd rather spend $3,000 on studio lighting so I can shoot at 100 iso. As impressive as clean images at high ISO are, I doubt I would ever need it for a paid job. I RARELY shoot higher than 800, and get really nervous when I go up as high as 1600.
I'm not saying I want a camera that is noisy at high ISO. I'm just saying that I will NEVER shoot at some of the ridiculously high ISOs these cameras have. 51,000 iso? No way.

 

[theraven871]

I'd probably get a 16-35 for landscapes.

But what I was wondering was NOT what lenses to get.
I'm curious about all the little tiny things that you only learn after you buy the camera.
I see pros using both, and both will get excellent results.
I don't shoot much (if any) sports photography, so the "best" autofocus system isn't as important. Although I don't think I could tolerate the 5d Mark II's autofocus system.
I do shoot weddings, so autofocus in low light or "less than optimal light" is important.
But, all the camera's I've listed above should get the job done. If I'm wrong, please let me know

The D750 is supposed to be a really good "across-the-board" performer. Have you thought of a used D800? I absolutely love mine.

A used D800 would be a good idea. But how inferior is it to the new D800?
I know the D600 had a notorious camera shutter issue that was resolved in the D610. Was there a similar issue with the D810?
Because I'm having troubles seeing the difference between a D800 and a D810.
Also, many people report that the file size on the D800 is ridiculously large. I'm not opposed to buying extra (external) HDDs.
But are the files really 100Mb a piece (on the D800/D810)? If so, that is 1 GB per 10 photos.

 

[JacaRanda]

Based on your replies, seems like you have your answers already.

You determine the amount of stress, you determine your workflow and you will probably get good customer service from either company. Some will always have their nightmare stories.

 

[Derrel]

I'd get the Nikon D750; the 6D is a pretty stripped-down, low-end body, whereas the D750 has the high-end AF system of the Nikon D4s and Nikon D810. Flash control on the Nikon is good, with the on-board pop-up able to serve as a trigger for off-camera flashes. I do not think the idea that Canon lenses are better than Nikon lenses holds much water. I think they are pretty close across the range. The Nikon sensor is remarkably better at recovering under-exposed areas without a ton of noise in the shadows. For its price, the D750 is close to a pro-level camera body in terms of features, and is light and small and not ostentatious, which I think makes it a better camera for people work. I see the 6D as a really stripped down body with a decent sensor, where the D750 is a highly-featured body at a somewhat similar price point. The D610 is attractive in terms of its low price and good features, but I would really rather have the high-end features the D750 offers.

Nikon has the more-direct body control system in my experience, with more SINGLE-purpose buttons. I bought a Canon system wit the 20D and 5D and used it side by side with Nikon for six years or so. In my opinion, the dual-function buttons on the top right deck of Canon's is kind of a bad ergonomic/design ethos issue that dates allllll the way back to their 1987 decision to jump into the EOS era without any real testing of alternate control concepts.

Lens-wise a 24-70 and 70-200 and 85/1.8 and so on are basically almost identical between the two companies. I dunno....most Canon users have never owned a Nikon and never really compared the two side-by-side over six years like I have. I prefer Nikon's controls and input systems over what Canon invented in the mid-1980's; the four button idea, and the alternating shutter/f/stop input on two different dials depending on which metering mode the camera is in means the Canon camera forces you to guess, or remember, which button will do what thing, constantly. To me, that is lousy ergonomic design, but again, they came up with this buttons-on-top-deck concept a quarter century ago, and have been forced to stick with it. But, people can adapt, and you can get used to a crappy design and learn to accept it, and Canon users do that all the time. Many of them have no idea that there are better design ideas out there.

 

[Ido]

Here's a pretty good comparison of both systems - by far the best, most comprehensive one I've seen to date:

 

[theraven871]

I'd get the Nikon D750; the 6D is a pretty stripped-down, low-end body, whereas the D750 has the high-end AF system of the Nikon D4s and Nikon D810. Flash control on the Nikon is good, with the on-board pop-up able to serve as a trigger for off-camera flashes. I do not think the idea that Canon lenses are better than Nikon lenses holds much water. I think they are pretty close across the range. The Nikon sensor is remarkably better at recovering under-exposed areas without a ton of noise in the shadows. For its price, the D750 is close to a pro-level camera body in terms of features, and is light and small and not ostentatious, which I think makes it a better camera for people work. I see the 6D as a really stripped down body with a decent sensor, where the D750 is a highly-featured body at a somewhat similar price point. The D610 is attractive in terms of its low price and good features, but I would really rather have the high-end features the D750 offers.

Nikon has the more-direct body control system in my experience, with more SINGLE-purpose buttons. I bought a Canon system wit the 20D and 5D and used it side by side with Nikon for six years or so. In my opinion, the dual-function buttons on the top right deck of Canon's is kind of a bad ergonomic/design ethos issue that dates allllll the way back to their 1987 decision to jump into the EOS era without any real testing of alternate control concepts.

Lens-wise a 24-70 and 70-200 and 85/1.8 and so on are basically almost identical between the two companies. I dunno....most Canon users have never owned a Nikon and never really compared the two side-by-side over six years like I have. I prefer Nikon's controls and input systems over what Canon invented in the mid-1980's; the four button idea, and the alternating shutter/f/stop input on two different dials depending on which metering mode the camera is in means the Canon camera forces you to guess, or remember, which button will do what thing, constantly. To me, that is lousy ergonomic design, but again, they came up with this buttons-on-top-deck concept a quarter century ago, and have been forced to stick with it. But, people can adapt, and you can get used to a crappy design and learn to accept it, and Canon users do that all the time. Many of them have no idea that there are better design ideas out there.

I completely agree. I find the Canon system something that isn't as intuitive.
Maybe that is personal preference. If so, perhaps the Nikon would be better fit for me.

How much of a difference is there between a D610 and a D750?
I ask because the cost of used D610s is getting very reasonable and buying a used one would enable me to save money for more glass.
Does the D610 give you direct control over ISO, Aperture, Shutter speed (etc) without having to do any hocus pocus with the camera body?
How is the focus system in the D610? Obviously inferior to the D750; But does it get the job done? Or is it problematic?
Is the D610 missing any important features found in the D750?

 

[runnah]

my number one pet peeve is that spot metering on the canon sucks. It's only located in the center rather than where you AF point is. Not a deal breaker because everything else is great, but I hope they fix it in the future/

 

[Ido]

my number one pet peeve is that spot metering on the canon sucks. It's only located in the center rather than where you AF point is. Not a deal breaker because everything else is great, but I hope they fix it in the future/

Heard the new 7D Mark II might have it, and also the top-of-the-line 1D X. All others don't, as far as I know.

 

[ruifo]

My recommendations:

- Body: D800, D800E or D810
Any of them will give you the image and body quality you are looking for. The D800 and D800E have very interesting prices now, with the launch of the newer D810.

- Lenses: Nikkor 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5G ED + Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 + Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 VC USD
This combination will cover a great range from super-wide to telephoto, covering all your needs, with sharp and fast images, at a fair price (USD $2,500 - altogether).

If you visit my Flickr albums/sets (the link is below in my forum signature), you can see several sample shots with my D810 and these three lenses. This is a very solid kit for your needs.

 

[JacaRanda]

my number one pet peeve is that spot metering on the canon sucks. It's only located in the center rather than where you AF point is. Not a deal breaker because everything else is great, but I hope they fix it in the future/

Heard the new 7D Mark II might have it, and also the top-of-the-line 1D X. All others don't, as far as I know.

I don't think it is.