Not disappointed.. Not satisfied.

MVPernula

TPF Supporters
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2017
Messages
82
Reaction score
25
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
Hello guys!

Back again after a few months after asking for help over a potential upgrade from a Nikon D5100 to something more rigid. After some discussion going on with people here on the forums I ended up going for a D7100 and man it's a splendid camera, I like the display by the power button, size and most things with it.

But I stil had a feeling of "But what is the upgrade here"?
Sure I get more megapixels, I get a bigger camera like I wanted, but aside from that it's basically the same (Yeah more focus points and many other improved specs but you get the general idea). Lenses I put on from my D5100 gives pretty much the same result on this camera.

During my post I was thinking "Well.. I want an FX most of all, but I'll never be able to afford that."
That was apparently just naive thinking since you can get some really nice fx cameras for not too much, I realized this AFTER I bought the D7100 and now I'm looking to sell it so I can get something FX.

My eyes are set on the D800 since they're getting more affordable in the used market, has a whopping 36 megapixel, is FX and seems the be a powerhouse for a hobbyist like me. But cheaper options are also D600, D610 if I want to add a little extra, d700 if I want to get something on the cheapest side in cost of age (not worth it imo since it's getting dated compared to alot of other FX variants). And so on.

What are your thoughts? The used D800 prices are basically as far as I'm willing to go, since I'm selling my D7100 with it's 2 batteries and battery grip for 4500 sek (swedish krona) I'll just add the in-between for the new camera, but I don't want to put a fortune in that.
Is the D600 worth going for since it's significantly cheaper? Heard about some "oil stain problems"? Something with the sensor getting dirty and long service times? Dunno, might've been rumors.

Hit me!
Thanks :)
 
Have you thought about the D800e ? it has no AA filter, and so it should be sharper, better for landscapes, nature....
the D800 has the AA filter, so it helps to remove moiré in repeating patterns, but it makes the image a bit less sharp.
in the end it comes down to pixel peeping tough.

Remember that going to FX, also requires buying FX glass, and there is where the money goes up!
I was thinking the same, going to a used D800e, but in the end, it depends on what you shoot.
there as some VERY good DX lens options, mostly upgrading to a better lens is better then a new body. (think about a sigma 18-35 1.8,...)
 
You could look at d610, better image quality but less autofocus ability. You could try snag a d800/810 second hand and get improvement all over, better image quality, great autofocus but less FPS if that is important.

If I was buying a Nikon FX right now second hand I'd go d800/810, if I was buying new I'd get a d750 which is basically a d7100 with a fullframe sensor and flippy screen
 
Have you thought about the D800e ? it has no AA filter, and so it should be sharper, better for landscapes, nature....
the D800 has the AA filter, so it helps to remove moiré in repeating patterns, but it makes the image a bit less sharp.
in the end it comes down to pixel peeping tough.

Remember that going to FX, also requires buying FX glass, and there is where the money goes up!
I was thinking the same, going to a used D800e, but in the end, it depends on what you shoot.
there as some VERY good DX lens options, mostly upgrading to a better lens is better then a new body. (think about a sigma 18-35 1.8,...)
I've looked up the D800e, but it seems to come in short supply in the used marked here in Sweden. It's definetly an option if I can find one, if the price is right of course. +

I'm already buying FX glass since I want all my lenses to be compatible to a possible future FX upgrade, so that's fine.
And I've gotten pretty.. Sick of DX. I guess that's a pretty rough way of saying it but I felt (in my early photography days) that I got robbed of my choices since they weren't completely right.

"50mm isn't 50mm on DX because DX, it's basically 75mm!"

And I ended up realizing that after I broke the seal on the box, put it on my D5100, and realized it was way more zoomed in than on the cameras I studied with (FX). If I would've known that I would have taken a 35mm and called it a day but that STILL bothers me. Even DX version lenses have this. I know its because of the sensor, but I don't get why they would bother making a DX lens that has the same crop as an FX variant, it's just cheaper.

Ohwell
/rant
 
You could look at d610, better image quality but less autofocus ability. You could try snag a d800/810 second hand and get improvement all over, better image quality, great autofocus but less FPS if that is important.

If I was buying a Nikon FX right now second hand I'd go d800/810, if I was buying new I'd get a d750 which is basically a d7100 with a fullframe sensor and flippy screen
From what I can see the D800's don't go for sooo much more than the D610's.. But it's still enough to make me consider the D610. Hard decision really.

FPS don't matter to me that much, but snappy autofocus does.
 
I really think you are overthinking the fx dx thing. You get the lenses you need for whichever format.

There should be nothing stopping you getting super shots with a d7100. But the fx allows for lower light possibilities, and possibly depth of field benefits depending on the lenses you use.
 
I really think you are overthinking the fx dx thing. You get the lenses you need for whichever format.

There should be nothing stopping you getting super shots with a d7100. But the fx allows for lower light possibilities, and possibly depth of field benefits depending on the lenses you use.
I might yeah. The D7100 is a really good camera, I won't say anything about that. I'm by no means limited by the camera itself.

I'm actually fiddling alot with low-light, photography. Specifically long exposure!
 
Long exposure, iso 100, correct lens, you should manage great photos. I'm not saying don't get a full frame, or don't upgrade, but make sure you know what you need and what your upgrade will do for you.

It's very easy to spend loads of money and get very little improvement
 
Long exposure, iso 100, correct lens, you should manage great photos. I'm not saying don't get a full frame, or don't upgrade, but make sure you know what you need and what your upgrade will do for you.

It's very easy to spend loads of money and get very little improvement
Yeah.. Alright I hear you.

You're telling me "D7100 is good, you can do what you want with the right stuff, you don't really need an upgrade". - And that's good.

I'm one of those guys whose upgrade itch doesn't scratch off easily. The D7100 is actually plenty for an amature like me, I know that, but man.. That D800 though.
Although going from a 7100 to an 800 would be a pretty clear improvement.
 
What lenses do you have? What do you feel you need with a new setup?
 
What lenses do you have? What do you feel you need with a new setup?
D800 would give me this:
  • More pixels, cropping alot.
  • Full frame, which suits all my current lenses except the 18-55mm I got with the D5100
And right now I'm looking for a 35mm lens since I wanted that 50mm specific lens.
To get that I have to about 2000-2500 sek, which is basically as much as I have to pay to get the D800 anyways (after selling my D7100). So either way I'll get my sought after 50mm portrait lens, favorite! And since I have a 10-20mm I would looove to actually get those wider shots.

I currently have:
50mm, f/1.8
70-300mm f/4-5.6
35-70mm ais f/3.5
18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 (DX)
10-20mm f/3.5

So either way I will spend money to get what I'm looking for, so the question then is;
Do I upgrade or do I get a new lens?

I'll spend as much.
 
I dunno, that 10-20 is also a dx lens that won't give you a full fov on a d800.

I think unless your set on spending money buy a 35mm f1.8 dx and go take some photos. 24mp was twice what anyone had only a few years back
 
I dunno, that 10-20 is also a dx lens that won't give you a full fov on a d800.

I think unless your set on spending money buy a 35mm f1.8 dx and go take some photos. 24mp was twice what anyone had only a few years back
Oh.. Man I didn't know it was DX.
Lack of research again, rip.

Yeah. Hm, you've made me think twice.
I'll take a step back and collect my thougts.
 
Used D800 is what I did after having bought a used D610 eight months ago or so. I prefer the D800 is every category. The 800e minus AA filter does not seem to be that big of a deal, to me at least, I'm plenty happy with the 800's detail level even on landscapes.
 
I dunno, that 10-20 is also a dx lens that won't give you a full fov on a d800.

I think unless your set on spending money buy a 35mm f1.8 dx and go take some photos. 24mp was twice what anyone had only a few years back
Oh.. Man I didn't know it was DX.
Lack of research again, rip.

Yeah. Hm, you've made me think twice.
I'll take a step back and collect my thougts.

Look at it this way, 10-20f3.5 excellent wideangle, 50mm on dx very nice portait lens, 70-300, good Tele on dx, nothing wrong with kit lenses either in good light. You add that 35, you have there or thereabouts the same field of view that a 50mm gives on fullframe, if it don't work out you are only a little money down (cost of 35mm dx) from where you are now.

Make sure you've good tripod, cable release or infrared remote. It's the small things make the bigger difference, shoot (raw)in 14 bit lossless if you are gonna be at iso 100 and learn a little editing
 

Most reactions

Back
Top