Stepping up from DX - and Hello :)

[EJV]

Rather than start two new threads I thought I would introduce myself here as well as ask a question.

Hi, Im new here. Stumbled across this forum while searching the interwebz for information on a camera. I'm really only learning - Photography is just a hobby for me.

I currently have a D7000 which I have been using for 3 years and have loved until recently. I use mainly prime lenses and shoot portraits but want to move into landscape and macro. I feel I've gotten a lot better at achieving sharp (well close to) well balanced photos in manual mode but a few things bother me with the D7000.

I don't like using the flash and I shoot either indoors using natural light or outdoors at dusk (e.g. recently I attempted to capture my kids surfing). I sometimes have to lighten the photo but even when I take it in RAW it's still lost a lot of the detail. Also while experimenting with landscapes/seascapes it's frustrating to have a lot of the scene cropped out. I was about to buy a wider lens (I have a 35mm) and a macro lens which is when I started thinking about a new body. I would still get the lenses but at least I wouldnt have to take DX/FX into consideration.

So my 3 thoughts are: 1. D610 (quite a few available second hand at the moment) 2. D750 - good reviews on recovering detail from shadow and 3. It's a user problem and I need some lessons.

I chose those two cameras as I dont want a huge camera - I've gotten used to the size of the D7000.

Thoughts suggestions?

Thanks in advance!

[arthurking83]

Welcome to AP EJV.

Unless you have other as yet undetermined reasons to switch to the larger format, for the two genres you listed,(macro and landscape), you are actually better off with the smaller formats(up to a point).

Just one possible reason why APS-C has an advantage over the Fx format size/weight/dof .. all three sub reasons being an amalgamation of the one major reason.

That is, for a similar FOV(lets say 15mm on Fx .. which BTW is really wide!) .. for an Dx camera you only need a 10mm lens for the same respective FOV.
This of course is commonly known as focal length equivalence.

In being a shorter focal length, for a given aperture value(say f/8 on both systems) you immediately achieve a bit of a bonus in extra DOF with the 10mm lens(on the Dx camera).
Of course there is no reason you couldn't use a 10mm lens on Fx too .. but it doesn't really exist(in an easily achievable manner).

In effect, you kind of gain a 1 stop advantage in using shorter(equivalent) focal length on Dx than using the longer focal length on Fx.
So for landscapes, where DOF is a primary requisite you would be considering .. it makes more sense to stay with a smaller sensor format.

In your situation, if you wanted 'better' landscape images, and you had some spare money to use, instead of looking at a 24Mp D610, a 24Mp D7100(or impending D7200) could be a better option.

NOTE!!! .. this is not to say you won't get good/great/or better images with an Fx system .. just that one advantage of staying with the smaller format clearly reveals itself.
You can create just as good landscape images with any camera system, if you have the creative conscience and technical ability to do so.
So apart from the one obvious advantage of DOF that Dx has over Fx, all other technical aspects are in effect equal.

As a contrast tho, megapixels do have an alarming advantage effect as the count increases!

This was the most striking difference in having stepped from a D300(12Mp) to a D800E(36Mp and no AA filter).
When(if!!) I get it all right, the ability to render detail with the higher res camera can be a major advantage.

An almost similar situation exists when you're dealing with macro images too. Up to a point, the Dx format has a DOF advantage(and smaller formats do so again) in that the image has a cropped view compared to Fx again. So this notion of focal length equivalence and DOF again go hand in hand to complement each other.
The only problem is if your macro gets to a more technical or scientific level of curiosity, and you decide that closeups aren't enough, you want to know and catalog a more scientific approach to macro.
Here you need to deal with magnification levels instead of the more casual just shoot as close as you can and get something within the frame methodology.

When you start dealing in magnification levels only the lens type, focal length and format type are less relevant. In fact it could be argued they are irrelevant in achieving a specific magnification reproduction of your subject.

That is, no matter if you use a 10mm or a 1000mm lens at any aperture value, on any format, if your interest is in recording detail at a set magnification level, it's all the same. You will achieve the same magnification and DOF no matter what.
Where the larger format has the advantage, is that you capture more of the subject if the subject is fairly large within the frame.

In my case (and only because of the kinds of things I'm interested in!), I found it an advantage to go from Dx to Fx for macro photography.
If I were just interested in capturing 'bees in flight' or really close closeups of spiders .. then the smaller format would be the better option.

Again, it's probably less likely you will find any advantage in switching to the Fx format here too.

With respect to your surfing kids comments, your issue is too fast shutter speed, too low ISO, or too small aperture.
if any of those variables can't be altered to suit, then you could see an advantage in the larger format(only because it will give you a bit of leeway in higher ISO) .. nothing else really.

I've had the chance to play with and record images with a D7K, and I can't see any of those settings issues being a problem for the D7K with an appropriate lens.

You haven't specified which lens you have been using for surfing, so there is no point trying to offer advice on this.
All I can help you with is that at ISO6400 you should have no problem with the D7K shooting well exposed raw files for surfing(unless you do so at night time! :p)
Your lens could be an issue tho, or the aperture value you choose .. etc.

Hope this helps in some way, rather than causing more confusion.

[MissionMan]

The new full frames are very accessible compared to the old D700 and D800 when they were released so it does open the door to beginners.

You mention you have primes so it would be interesting to hear what you have. I'm a big fan of investing in good glass if your body is adequate for what you need. I.e. what do you think is missing? If its picture quality, glass will help a lot. one of the options you shouldn't discount is renting a good lens for a day and seeing how much of a difference it makes.

[shaneando]

Welcome to AP!

The D7000 is an excellent landscape camera, I've taken many great images with mine. Its sensor has a wide dynamic range and is also very good at recovering details in shadows providing the exposure is correct.

With regard to lenses, there are some very good wide angle lenses for DX format cameras. My favourite on the D7000 is the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8. This gives a very wide angle of view, equivalent to about 17mm on an FX camera. Image quality is very good, and the fast aperture is handy for low light and for astrophotography. Nikon also makes a number of wide angle zooms - 12-24mm f/4, 16-35mm f/4, 16-85 f/3.5-5.6, 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5. There are also good options in this range from Sigma 10-24mm, 18-35mm, 17-50mm. Of course among that lot there is a wide variety in price, focal range, size, weight and aperture. All in all there are a lot of choices for wide angle zooms that work well on the D7000; it's a matter of considering what and how you shoot, what the lens options are, and of course your budget!

What there isn't much choice on is wide angle primes. Nikon have recently come out with some good f/1.8 primes - 20mm, 28mm, 35mm (FX version that is larger and more expensive than the smaller DX version). There is also a 24mm f/1.8 rumoured to be released soon. These are good on FX bodies but not so wide on DX bodies. However they are relatively small and affordable, so the 20mm or 28mm might suit to give you a wider field of view than your 35mm.

As far as bodies go, I recently bought a D750 to go with my D7100. In my view it's the sweet spot of the FX range right now - better performance and more features than the D610 for only ~$400 more. The D810 gets you 12Mp and a different control layout for ~$1000 more, which doesn't stack up for me.

In terms of image quality, any of the cameras you have in mind, including your D7000, are quite good enough. What really separates purchases at this level are features, controls, and perhaps some differences right at the extreme end of performance. As Thom Hogan says, if you can't make a good image with any of today's DSLR's, it's not the camera.

If you are on a budget, the best bang for your buck by far is to look at your current lens collection vs your shooting needs, and get some more lenses to fill the gaps.

One more option I thought of - the D7100 is now available at very good prices (less than $1000) - it will give you a bit more image quality, better AF and some other nice features if you really want a newer body.

[danny]

Welcome EJV,

I moved from the D7000 to the D610 recently and have loved the move. I find that my images are sharper and it works great in low light. I would say however that if the D750 had been released I may have gone that way. Mainly because of focal points. On the D610 the points are more in the centre of the frame which does pose an issue when shooting quickly. In reality the D610 is a great little (relatively speaking of course) FX camera that will do my needs for some time to come yet.

[J.davis]

My new d750 outshines my old d7000 by a large margin, a new body (with all new gizmo's inside), SURE makes a difference to old lenses.
I always was told the lens is the god, but now I think they are on even ground with a good body.
As Arthur says "tin foil hats on".