Upgrades: WWYD?

[bullock1692]

Hey, everybody. I'm itching to upgrade my gear, but I'm not sure how to best spend the money.

I'm currently on a crop-frame prosumer (D5100), so I'd love to upgrade to FF for the wider FOV and better noise-performance on higher ISOs. I have my eyes on a refurb'd D600 because I don't see any use in upgrading to a D7000/7100 since it's crop frame...If I'm gonna spend the money, I might as well go FF.

The most interesting caveat is the fact that my lenses are all old Nikkor AIs–circa 1970s. In other words, they're all fully-manual. I have a 35, 50, 85, and 105 (can't remember apertures off the top of my head, but they're all pretty low); I'm not really missing much in terms of focal length.

So, PhotoForumers, what would you do? Do you think I'm better off investing in a D600 and using my old lenses? Or should I get more life out of the D5100 and invest in newer lenses with autofocus? I mostly shoot nature, landscapes, and the occasional event requiring faster lenses.

 

[Braineack]

I JUST bought a refurb'd D600 on Monday to replace my D5100, but I had to think long and hard about the D7100. There's still things about it that are better than the D600.

Both can handle your old lenses, so it's really a matter of if you really want the benefit of the FF sensor of the D600 over the extra benefits/features of the D7100 (e.g. 51 point focus, Auto-FP sync, 1/8000sec, etc.)


I wouldn't consider the d5100 prosumer.

 

[bullock1692]

I JUST bought a refurb'd D600 on Monday to replace my D5100, but I had to think long and hard about the D7100. There's still things about it that are better than the D600.

Both can handle your old lenses, so it's really a matter of if you really want the benefit of the FF sensor of the D600 over the extra benefits/features of the D7100 (e.g. 51 point focus, Auto-FP sync, 1/8000sec, etc.)


I wouldn't consider the d5100 prosumer.

Braineack, I've actually been scouring your thread for a few days mulling over everything...it's still open in my browser, haha.

I guess I'm most curious about the quality of my old lenses versus newer lenses...If old lenses truly render great images, then I have no use for the 51 point focus since I'm using fully-manual. However, if newer lenses make a significant difference in terms of quality, then it seems that's where I should go right now and wait to upgrade the body. Yeah?

 

[runnah]

I wouldn't get hung up on the FF vs. Crop issue. You can use a crop for ages before reaching the limit. Plus unless you are very wealthy lenses are very expensive for FF.

For the money you'd spend on a FF body and single lens you could have a very good crop body and a gaggle of lenses.

 

[sm4him]

As someone who upgraded from a D5100 to a D7000, I'd tell you not to underestimate that option (and the D7100 would be even better!). I can tell you that, unless Nikon introduces something new in the next year, my next upgrade will be from the D7000 to the D7100, not to full frame, even though I *have* started doing some portrait work. But I mainly shoot birds and other wildlife, and stuff like macros and abstracts, so for the most part, I just don't really need a FF.

Nobody else can tell YOU what you you should do here. Some people just want a FF body, and if you can afford that, and want it--go for it. But I don't really see anything on your list of what you tend to shoot that just begs for FF. If I were you, I'd invest in better glass, and if I just had to change camera bodies, it would be to a D7K or D7100.

 

[runnah]

Right on Sharon. FF is way over hyped and seems to be a lot of folks' "Magic bullet" for better photography.

 

[coastalconn]

I also do not buy into the whole full frame magic wand either.. but since you have a collection of older mf lenses, the sensor is more foregiving as it has a lower pixel density.. also the bigger viewfinder might be friendlier on MF lenses..

 

[Derrel]

The 35/50/85/105 lenses from Nikon in the Ai and AI-S era are models I am intimately familiar with, and I have owned multiple examples of each and every one of them for almost 30 years now. You might find it challenging to focus a 35mm manual focus lens with good hit rate on a D600 or D610, but as you go up in focal length, manually focusing those lengths gets easier.

My feeling is that primes in the 24/35/50/85/105/135/200 lengths are much more easily-used on FX than on DX. For example, a 50mm on DX indoors is kind of a PITA unless the "indoors" is a big room; but on an FX camera, 50mm indoors is useful in a lot of homes. Same with 85mm; on DX, you need to be 34 feet away to shoot a head-to-toe shot of a 6 foot person, and have some headspace and footspace; on an FX camera, with the SAME 85mm lens, you can take the same field of view, but from only 20 FEET away.

I would upgrade the 35mm lens to an autofocus model as soon as you can. Go with the 35/2 AF-D.

 

[djacobox372]

If you're a portrait photographer ff is really nice due to its shallower dof. But ff can be a liability if you shoot wildlife or sports.

One thing to consider is that higher end crop sensor cameras like the d7100 will meter with your old lenses letting u use aperture priority mode.

 

[shadowlands]

deals are to be had right now on refurbished D600's. if you can swing it, why not?