Thinking about moving up to full frame--Open to advice

[Derrel]

There actually is a difference between shooting crop frame and shooting full frame. I started in 2001 with a 1.5 X Nikon D1 and around 2006 I bought a Canon 5D full frame. The biggest difference is in what it does for your lenses. The D610 uses the vast back catalog of Nikon lenses designed for full frame and it uses the lens in the manner in which they were designed for. The depth of field skills for example are correct. The lenses work well in the types of situations which they were designed for. For example there is very little need for radical aspherical lens designs at the bottom end of the wide-angle tree ... On the D610 a 50mm functions as a normal and not as a moderate telephoto. On the D610 a 24 mm is quite a wide angle lens, but on the D3200 a 24 mm is like a semi-wide. The D610 older legacy auto focus in manual focusNikon lenses pretty well, and it can auto focus with a wide variety of older and fairly inexpensive F and AF and AF – D lenses, with your current D 3200 cannot order focus,and The D610 is a "two button camera". meaning it offers a front and a rear command dial, and it also allows you to use flash units that are capable of high-speed synchronization, something that the D 3200 cannot do. The D601 is a quite capable camera, and the imaging sensor is a little bit better than that found in the D3200, especially at elevated ISOnlevels. I bought myself a D610 in the summer of 2017, and I'm pretty familiar with the camera. It is a good imager, a little better than the D 3200, and the body features are a step up. as to the two flower close-ups that were posted earlier. I looked at both come and on my iPhone come seen fairly small I would say that the second photo we shot with the full frame camera

it is difficult to describe, but the full frame camera offers in nice compromise between shallow depth of field in deep depth field, per picture angle, with commonly made lenses that have been made since the 1980s. I think that the 20 mm, 24mm, 35 mm, 50 mm, 85 mm, 105 mm, 135 motor, 180 mm, 200 mm, and 300 mm prime lenses and the 24 to 70 millimeter F/2.8 and 70- 200 mm F/2.8 lenses… All of those reasonably common lenses that Nikon has made millions of work extremely well when shot on a 24 x 36 mm piece of film or digital sensor. The above lenses give us easy shooting in common locations, and at common distances. when you halve the size of the capture sensor you make and 85 mm lens nearly useless in the typical family living room, and you make a 24 mm into the equivalent of some oddball 42 mm. Olympus tried using the half frame format and it never really made it past the 1960s, and for good reason.

smaller sensors have become extremely good. larger "full frame "sensors have become extraordinarily good. With all things being equal, and they sell them are equal, a good bigger sensor will beat a good smaller sensor, Especially at elevated ISO settings.

but this is not strictly about the imaging sensor...you would be moving from Nikons least expensive, and most primitive digital single lens reflex to a mid-level camera come with several better features and better controls.

 

[jcdeboever]

It's not the gear in my experience. Sure, gear can make a difference in certain situations but most have a path to circumvent the limitation. For example, if you shoot indoor sports, having a full frame camera and a fast lens is going to make things easier but understanding your current setup, boosting the ISO, and being selective on where your standing (using a short, fast, normal to wide lens) can cicumvent the limitation. Another example, shooting outdoor sports with a manual focus film camera...they did it back in the day, so can I. Just practice zone focus techniques and wait for the action to come into that zone.

 

[JoeW]

I think this thread has partially gotten away from the OP's question about a possible upgrade to the D610 or other options with some people getting hung up on the "what pictures can only a full frame camera shoot?

I've got 3 Nikon bodies: D4, D600 (so just prior to the D610), and D800. I find the D800 isn't a good camera for my purposes if I'm shooting in low light (you end up with a lot of grain). And when you shoot RAW files it's very slow developing. But for landscapes, for architectural or interiors work, or anything I know I'm going to be cropping extensively (but it's in good light) the D800 is excellent.

I'm very happy with the D600. Yes, its' (your D610) very dated but it will be 10x better than your D3000 series. Not big for a body with an autofocus motor in it (though it will feel big compared to your D3000 body). Versatile, reliable, good solid FF body.

I'd look at what you intend to shoot primarily and base your decision on that. Like I said, I think the D800 is great for anything that is in good light, lots of cropping, things like interiors. For low light, for sports, a lot of wildlife, other bodies would probably serve you better.

 

[Strodav]

Not a whole lot of difference in SNR between the flagship D850, the D800 and D600 where they overlap. If I stay better than ISO 1600 the noise (grain) is acceptable to me on my 2 Nikon DX and 2 Nikon FX bodies.

 

[Derrel]

I feel that the D610 and the D800 are almost exactly equal at high ISO. The D800 has a slightly newer and more technologically-advanced sensor than is found in the D610, and despite the disparity in megapixel count with the D 800 at 36 million pixels and The D610 at 24 million pixels,in my experience the higher megapixel count sensor does just about as well, or better than the D610.

I think that for the money,for $650 with a 50 mm Nikon lens,that the D610 is a big value. 24 megapixels is quite enough and the camera does very well across almost all iso levels.

 

[DanOstergren]

Personally when I upgraded to a full frame camera I was immediately impressed with the jump in image quality, which to me was quite noticeable (but I imagine that the average viewer likely wouldn't be able to tell the difference that we would). What satisfies us as image makers is important though, and I think you will like the upgrade a lot. When I upgraded, I too decided to get an older camera model, the Canon 5D. I shoot portraits, so I generally don't need to go above ISO 1000, meaning that I have no demand for low light capabilities. The D610 has much better low light capabilities than the original 5D, so if you need certain low light abilities on a camera, the D610 could still work for you. I personally have no issues with the 5D, and to be honest I don't think it really matters if a camera has a new generation censor or not, especially when it comes to a camera like the D610. Personally I think you should get it; don't let yourself get dooped into being convinced that new tech is the only way to go.

 

[Derrel]

take a look at the quality of work that Dan does with the now 13 or 14-year-old sensor technology in the original Canon 5D… The 610 from Nikon has a substantially better sensor than that camera…

I bought a Canon 5D when it was a current model, and even back then its 12.8 MP sensor was fantastic. It has a certain look to it, and the sensor does pretty well from base ISO all the way to around 1250, with almost no objectionable noise. Even at 1600 it is still pretty good. Today's sensors are better yes, but the original 5D has good image quality even by today's standards. however the Nikon D 610 is even better; it is a surprisingly good sensor, and it offers you a tremendous amount of image correctability from in the field under-exposure. This has been the biggest area of improvement in the last five years ... The sensors used in a wide variety of Nikon cameras now offer what is called ISO invariability,which allows you to correct severely under exposed raw files to a tremendous degree in software after the capture has been made.

 

[SoulfulRecover]

I moved from a D300 to a D600 a few years ago and the quality was more than worth it. The D600 has more than enough resolution for anything I could need in the digital realm and coupled with a modern lens, its wonderfully sharp. I wouldn't hesitate to buy another one with how inexpensive they are now. I honestly don't think I will ever upgrade from it

 

[greybeard]

When I added full frame, I went from a Nikon D7000 to a D750. This was a very smooth transition because the D750 shares a lot of the same control layout as the D7000. There is not however, a full frame that has the same layout as the D3200. The D610 and D750 are closer than any of the D800 series. If you can swing a D750-D780 either one will give you of all the camera you will need for years to come. To get the most of out the D800 series of cameras you will need the best of the best glass where as the D610-D750-D780 are much more forgiving. (jmho)

 

[Space Face]

FF for me nowadys.