Should I trade in my sensational D7000 + 17-55mm 2.8 combo and get D600 + 50mm 1.4?

Janmc · Jan 6, 2013

I own the D7000 with a 17-55mm lens and this is an amazing combo in just about any every day situation.
I recently tried out the new D600 with a 50 1.4 prime and was in love with the incredible portrait/candid/depth-of-field capabilities.

I am severely on the fence now wondering if I should sell of my aging D7K and lens and buy the D600+50mm combo for a little more.

I do child photography and need to capture beautiful portraits both outdoors and in (I use mainly natural light).
Of course kids don't always sit still and nailing focus is extremely important even if my subject is not entirely stationary. Surprisingly I have found that using the D7K with the zoom is like butter, focus is nailed perfectly 99.9% of the time. Even if the shots are not as amazing overall - comparatively there is more noise than with the other combo, and of course as far as bokeh capabilities are concerned, the full frame combo is in a different league. But a blurry shot is useless, which I get more often with the D600 and I don't know if its due to my inexperience in handling the D600 (I only had it a few days)

Of course, with the new combo I will also lose the range, and quite a lot of it at that. I would be saving up to eventually buy the wonderful 24-70mm but that won't happen ridiculously soon.

For anyone who has 2 cents to spare on my dilemma, what would you advise?
If you were shooting child portraits, or events (weddings or other), and also wanted to have a great combo for just shooting everyday things, what would be your preferrence?
Any insight?

pixmedic · Jan 6, 2013

what does the D7000 not do that you think you will get with the D600? a lot of money to spend to get the same results.

Derrel · Jan 6, 2013

I dunno...the D7000 + high-grade DX utility zoom lens is a potent image-maker...a very decent crop-body camera with Nikon's best DX utility zoom lens...hmmmm....very,very good rig...the 17-55 f/2.8 was designed to be the go-to event/utility zoom for APS-C bodies. I dunno...not sure I would trade for the D600 + 50, although the PRICE of both outfits seems roughly equal...so it'd be a fair trade for both parties, in my estimation.

480sparky · Jan 6, 2013

Seeing as you now have both..... why not keep them?

pixmedic · Jan 6, 2013

Keep what you have now and invest in some flashes. And learn how to use them. You will see a bigger difference in quality than by switching bodies.

Janmc · Jan 6, 2013

No, I don't have both.. I "tried" out the D600+50mm combo and did love how it unlocked the ability to take certain photographs that my other combo cant do (namely the shallow DOF on a full frame, and the cleaner images in low light). on the other end, the other combo obviously has range and is arguably easier/faster to nail focus with (unless I don't know how to use the D600 well enough)
I can't keep both. If I want to buy the D600, I will need to sell off my other combo to offset cost.

tirediron · Jan 6, 2013

There is always better gear out there. I would LOVE a Hassy H4D, but do I need it? No. Can I afford it? Well... not easily. Can I justify it? NO! If the gear you've got is doing what you want, stick with it. Upgrade when it wears out/becomes obsolete/breaks. The D7000 has not been on the market long enough to call it an 'aging' camera. More money has been wasted in photography on "I want it, I want it, I want it" upgrades...

Save your sheckles, shoot the s**t outta that D7000 and work towards a D800 & 24-70 (or whatever it happens to be when that time comes). The D600 is still a consumer body. Your only real gain is the sensor-size, and IMO, that's NOT enough to justify the cost, sexy as it may seem.

480sparky · Jan 6, 2013

If it's a matter of money, you gotta ask yourself: "What will I gain with a D600 and 50/1.4 that I'm not getting from my D7000 and 17-55?"

Could you gain what you need by just getting the 50/1.4? Or is there something the D7000 can't do that the D600 can (larger buffer, for instance)?

Janmc · Jan 6, 2013

I have found shots like this impossible to achieve with a crop, with any lens I have tried.
Even with really fast primes, one needs to be way to zoomed in on a crop to get the effect of the blurred background on a LARGE area. I have tried primes in the 30mm range (like Sigma 1.4) and while the background can be a little blurred, it is nowhere close to something like this which I have only been able to do with a full frame camera.

this is the primary reason I want a full frame.
However, if someone can show me how to achieve this on a crop (this is just a random example I found), then I would be glad to try that combo this instant and not even look into the direction of a full frame.

editing to include a link to some examples of photographs with a full person (and background very out of focus effect). not the original image I had used as example (can't find it now) but same concept.
See link here.

480sparky · Jan 6, 2013

Janmc said:
.........Even with really fast primes, one needs to be way to zoomed in .......

BTW, posting images that you don't own or have rights to is verboten here.

That said..... wide-angle lenses aren't really conducive to the bokeh/OOF you're referring to. I wager good money that shot was taken with at least an 85mm. Throw a 100 or 105 on your D7000, shoot at f/4 and you're golden.

Patrice · Jan 6, 2013

Janmc,

If by "photos like that" you mean shallow depth of field, isolated out of focus background, 'nice' bokeh, sorry, but images like that can be made, and are made, with crop body cameras. There thousands of examples on the web.

It's not magic: good lens, fast aperture, good focus, good exposure, well lit, background a good distance away from the subject. Here are but a few examples gleaned from a google search.

d7000eg.png
Awesome+Low+Light+Photos+from+Nikon+D7000+%285%29.jpg
DSC_2932.jpg

Janmc · Jan 6, 2013

sorry, didn't mean to break any rules (I did maintain their source/copyright info)
I just don't know how else to illustrate my point/question.
an image is worth a thousand words.
this is the effect I'm trying to achieve. If it is possible with a crop, I'd genuinely like to know.
as you mentioned, using a wide angle lens, even at 2.8, don't produce this effect.

Derrel · Jan 6, 2013

Janmc said:
I have found shots like this impossible to achieve with a crop, with any lens I have tried.
Even with really fast primes, one needs to be way to zoomed in on a crop to get the effect of the blurred background on a LARGE area. I have tried primes in the 30mm range (like Sigma 1.4) and while the background can be a little blurred, it is nowhere close to something like this which I have only been able to do with a full frame camera.

this is the primary reason I want a full frame.
However, if someone can show me how to achieve this on a crop (this is just a random example I found), then I would be glad to try that combo this instant and not even look into the direction of a full frame.

View attachment 31423

You have hit upon one of the main reasons that people who have experience with 120 rollfilm and/or 24x36mm "35mm film" quite often prefer shooting people pictures on full-frame format cameras. The two cameras are of different FORMATS. As the camera format grows larger and larger and larger, the depth of field grows smaller and smaller, and smaller, at each equivalent picture angle. A lot of people own only APS-C digital SLRs. A lot of people have learned their photography exclusively on APS-C cameras, and have no actual experience with ANY OTHER format, and so...you will often get advice that does not reflect familiarity with different types of capture FORMATS.

The reason you are having difficulty getting shallow DOF on as you stated, a "large area"??? That is caused by the crop-factor that APS-C has; to get a full-length shot of a 6 foot tall man on Canon APS-C (1.6x), with an 85mm lens, the camera needs to be 34 feet away. With a FF camera, 20 feet distant with the SAME, exact lens, will yield the same angle of view, namely 8.47 feet tall. What happens to the background???? Well, depth of field increases at a HUGE rate as the focus distance approaches the hyperfocal distance. Depth of field increases EXTREMELY RAPIDLY as focusing distance grows longer and approaches the hyperfocal distance. So, when working at "long distances", like 34 feet, there is a lot of depth of field, and the "large area", meaning the background, is quite far away from the camera.

What happens with crop-body cameras is that due to the reduced angle of view, they force the photographer to stand farther away than he/she would if the camera used a full-field (aka FX, aka full-frame AKA 35mm-sized) sensor. The increased distance from the camera-to-the-subject brings more depth of field. When the sensor is made smaller, the effect of increased camera-to-subject distance has an almost multiplying effect! The smaller the sensor, the GREATER the depth of field, at each angle of view!!! This is why small-format deep depth of field shots are so,so easy to create!!! The smaller capture formats are very,very useful when you want to show deep scenes, all in pretty good focus!!! However, if you want to show large areas of backgrounds that are well,well out-of-focus, then a LARGER capture area, like 24x36mm, or 120 rollfilm, is much,much better suited to that kind of "look".

Janmc · Jan 6, 2013

Patrice, I have had no problem getting beautiful bokeh with the crop, but just not with a wider shot like this (where there is more of the person in the shot and the background is still blurry to this level). I can get wonderful results when the shot is more zoomed into the face, but I cannot achieve anything like this (with the whole body of a child), no matter the lighting or lens. If there IS a way, I'd love to know of specific examples (what lens/lighting etc). Trust me, I have searched for years for something that produces these kinds of portraits.
The picture you posted, that of a bird, gotta realize, the bird is tiny and yes, I can get that with a DX camera. But I dont shoot birds, I do child photography. To get a whole child to fit in a frame and to have that kind of blurriness to the background... I have yet to learn the secret recepie to achieving that on a crop sensor. If anyone knows, please share!