So frustrating

Netskimmer · Apr 10, 2013

This is mostly just a rant so bare with me.

My problem is that I want a D800 but I do not need a D800. The vast majority of my pictures are nature, wildlife, candids, and macro. The D800 would either be better or at least no worse than my D7000 for these things.

The only issue I have is the low FPS but the only action photography I tend to do are birds in flight and equestrian stuff, barrels, jumps, ect. I don't think I need much in the way of FPS for the equestrian photography so the only real issue would be birds in flight and I think the superior AF system on the D800 would make up for that in most cases.

The only other potential problem I might come up against is dealing with the high resolution. Storage space isn't really an issue because external HDDs and DVDs are cheap these days but processing RAW files of those sizes may slow me down a bit. I don't have to much trouble editing 100+ RAW files at a time from the D7000 so I don't know if it would even be an issue.

The problem is that as I said at the beginning, I don't need a D800. I don't run into many limitations with my D7000 and I enjoy using it. I would be better off spending the money on glass, yet I still want A D800 dang it! :banghead:

Ok, rant over, thanks for listening. :sillysmi:

Majeed Badizadegan · Apr 10, 2013

A lot of people want a D800.

Mainly because it's awesome.

Netskimmer · Apr 10, 2013

Yeah, I almost wish the D7000 wasn't such a great camera, then I'd have an excuse to upgrade.

Derrel · Apr 10, 2013

The D7100 is supposed to be an even better camera!!!! Ya know what??? Nikon often announces a new camera in April. Four out of the last nine years, they've announced a new body in April. Maybe a high-MP count D400 will be announced soon!

I was looking at DxO Mark's newest big-big test, the Canon 5D-III and lenses for that camera, which is like a 22 MP sensor...and ya know what? It performed almost as well as the D800 did. VERY,very close. Point being...that's fewer MP than either the Nikon D600, D3x, or D7100 or D3200...maybe, just maybe, you'd really be haoppy with a 24 megapixel camera. Ken Rockwell just yesterday published a D600-D7100-D7000 three-camera comparison; the files from the D7100 and D600 look, basically IDENTICAL, and he said they appears so, while the D7000 files showed lower resolution.

The D800,D600, and D7100 ALL share the same-generation of sensor technology. The D7000 is one generation back, and lower in MP count. Maybe you'd be happy with a new $1,199 D7100 body?????

Benco · Apr 10, 2013

Resolution too high and FPS too low eh? you don't need a D800.....you need a D4.

runnah · Apr 10, 2013

Don't worry about what you don't have and enjoy what you do have.

gsgary · Apr 10, 2013

Forget the D800 you may have to upgrade your computer, get a 300f2.8 or a 200-400f4 glass is more important

Overread · Apr 10, 2013

gsgary said:
Forget the D800 you may have to upgrade your computer, get a 300f2.8 or a 200-400f4 glass is more important

+1

Good cameras are important, but heck even an entry level DSLR can do action photography - fast FPS is helpful, but a lot of action isn't about gunning it, but about timing the shot to the moment (or typically just before so you've a split second to hit the shutter). Experience and practice helps improve this a lot, esp with specific subjects. First time you shoot horses doing a barrel race you'll miss shots - lots of shots. Do it 20 times and soon you'll start to know what is going to happen before it happens; you'll be able to read the scene, the horse and the rider and know where to aim, what to look for and when the moment will (most likely) happen.

For areas that want long lenses and high quality go for the glass early on - its the biggest investment cost wise and seriously makes the most difference to the results you'll get (after photographer skill of course).

Netskimmer · Apr 10, 2013

Yeah, like I said, mostly just a rant. I really enjoy my D7000 and have not real need to blow $3,000 on a new body. As for the D4 and the lenses listed, I don't have THAT much saved up...yet. I'd love for Nikon to release a lower MP higher FPS body in the D000 range. Something like 16-24MP 6-8 FPS on an FX sensor.

Edit -

I've been shooting the equestrian stuff for a while now. The 6 FPS my D7000 offers seems adequate for that. I am struggling with birds in flight but I haven't taken the time to really stalk them or set up blinds or anything.