The truth is, the longer you wait to purchase a new camera system, the better the technology and the better your choices.
However ...
It's always best to purchase what you need, when you need it. If you "need" a FF/FX body now then evaluate your needs and purchase the proper "tools" to satisfy and meet those needs.
... On the occasions I felt I wanted more I planned on stitching multiple shots. For 99% of what I have done or plan to do I doubt I'd be limited by 24 megapixels. ...
... and that's still true with Nikon. For scenic and vista landscapes stitched overlapping exposures is often a wonderful way to increase detail and/or increase FOV. You can also use multiple identical exposures in a single view to "stack" the exposures for additional resolution, or multiple "bracketed" exposures for additional dynamic range.
My point is that there are no really bad choices these days. Almost any modern digital SLR, with the best lenses, best photographic technique and best processing, can produce images with qualities and image quality far beyond just a few years ago.
In your position, you may also wish to consider 2 bodies; one for your landscape work and one for general, personal and family photography. To this end you might consider used bodies and lenses. KEH has 6 months warranty on its used bodies so the economic risk is largely mitigated.
My primary recommendation, considering your stated use in this thread, would be to start with a Nikon D7100 and a few lenses. This would let you back into the game with an excellent feature set and most of the capabilities you wish (again, considering some of the additional techniques and post-processing above). Then add a second body as you need and desire (and budget). The second body could be a FF/FX body.
If you change your mind later, you can sell off equipment for basically less monetary loss than equipment rental, but you will have (hopefully a ton of) photographs from your time with the equipment.
Ziggy - thanks for the detailed reply. If I'm being honest with myself, the camera I truly want is the D800. The price and size are the only turn-off. Despite the size, I think the D800 feels more comfortable in my hands... That said, I think that, ego aside, the D600 is a fabulous option. I'm hesitating on the purchase due to the continued reports of dust/oil on the sensors leading to the rumored D610 release. As for the D7100, I'd rather not get too heavily invested in DX glass only to move to FX (what I really want) and sell the DX gear - I went that route when I owned the 20D -> 40D -> 7D and then migrated to the 5D MK II.
I recently picked up a Sony RX100 II for snapshots of the family and such and have been very pleased with that as a take-anywhere 2nd camera option - it truly is a pocketable little gem.
Ziggy - thanks for the detailed reply. If I'm being honest with myself, the camera I truly want is the D800. The price and size are the only turn-off. Despite the size, I think the D800 feels more comfortable in my hands... That said, I think that, ego aside, the D600 is a fabulous option. I'm hesitating on the purchase due to the continued reports of dust/oil on the sensors leading to the rumored D610 release. As for the D7100, I'd rather not get too heavily invested in DX glass only to move to FX (what I really want) and sell the DX gear - I went that route when I owned the 20D -> 40D -> 7D and then migrated to the 5D MK II.
I recently picked up a Sony RX100 II for snapshots of the family and such and have been very pleased with that as a take-anywhere 2nd camera option - it truly is a pocketable little gem.
Then do what I plan on doing. Get a D800 for when you're feeling badass and eager to lug around the beast and all it's ridiculous full-frame lens goodness, but get a D5200 or something cheaper for when you'd just rather have something tiny and light but you don't want to give up your fantastic Nikon DSLR image quality...
I just recently made a decision along these lines too, as a full-time wedding photographer whose hobby is landscapes. I honestly hate shooting with more than ~12 megapixels for weddings, it's just absurd overkill for 90% of a wedding day. But the landscape photographer inside me is getting more and more jealous of the 24-36 megapixel range, and all the image quality goodness...
I considered going all the way to mirrorless for my walk-around setup. But I just didn't like the idea of such a drastic change. I don't need something THAT lightweight and small, and I'm not yet ready to part with my OVF. So the D5200 fit the bill very nicely. Its got a flippy LCD screen which I'm loving for general nature photography, and just about the only feature I miss is the one-click 100% zooming during image playback. (A feature which the D600 also lacks, but the D7100 and anything else semmi-pro does have)
Anyways, that's my opinion. Get a used D8000 and a new D5200 or something. Get a nice shiny red one, for when you're feeling extra hip. :-P
D600 v d800
I have a D600 and really enjoy using it and get good results in all light conditions. HOWEVER, the oil spots are a real problem; there are ALOT of them. I really wanted a D800E; the price was the deciding factor, After using the 600 and having to deal eith the oil spot problem; I now wish I had taken the dive and bought the D800E.
I took a hiatus from the world of FF DSLRs last year, largely due to financial reasons - I sold my 5D Mark II and a bunch of lenses to help pay for a move and house purchase. I've replaced it with an Olympus OM-D which I do love. However, I miss the large, bright FF viewfinder, fast auto-focus, and stellar low-light performance. Finances are at a point now where buying new gear is now an option.
I could buy another 5D Mark II (or Mark III), but I'm contemplating switching it up and trying the Nikon side this time. I also like the sensors in Nikon's current models. I'm thinking of buying either a D800 or D600 but am having a hard time deciding between them... Current prices put them about $800 apart (new). My artistic photography is primarly landscape stuff and so I'm drawn to the D800 for that. Both seem to have similar excellent dynamic range and comparable low-light performance. However, for more day-to-day photography, I think the D600 might be more practical due to the smaller physical size as well as smaller file-size (don't really need 36mp for casual shots of my kids).
I occasionally print big (20x30) and I would imagine the D800 would yield slightly better results due to the 36 megapixels. This assumes, of course, that I use the best glass, take the photo with optimal technique, etc...
From what I've read it seems the D800 has superior autofocus but that BOTH are superior to what I had with the 5D Mark II.
I know the D800 is better built, but I don't forsee this being a deciding factor.
The rumors of dust / oil splattered D600 sensors scares me a bit, but it's hard to know how wide-spread or problematic this issue truly is - things tend to get blown out of proportion on forums.
I do need to go handle both of them some more to see if there are differences in control layout and handling that would be a deal-breaker as well. Both will feel a bit foreign at first due to the long history I have with Canon.
I'd appreciate feedback from people who have used either both of these cameras!
Comments
However ...
It's always best to purchase what you need, when you need it. If you "need" a FF/FX body now then evaluate your needs and purchase the proper "tools" to satisfy and meet those needs.
Previously you said:
... and that's still true with Nikon. For scenic and vista landscapes stitched overlapping exposures is often a wonderful way to increase detail and/or increase FOV. You can also use multiple identical exposures in a single view to "stack" the exposures for additional resolution, or multiple "bracketed" exposures for additional dynamic range.
My point is that there are no really bad choices these days. Almost any modern digital SLR, with the best lenses, best photographic technique and best processing, can produce images with qualities and image quality far beyond just a few years ago.
In your position, you may also wish to consider 2 bodies; one for your landscape work and one for general, personal and family photography. To this end you might consider used bodies and lenses. KEH has 6 months warranty on its used bodies so the economic risk is largely mitigated.
My primary recommendation, considering your stated use in this thread, would be to start with a Nikon D7100 and a few lenses. This would let you back into the game with an excellent feature set and most of the capabilities you wish (again, considering some of the additional techniques and post-processing above). Then add a second body as you need and desire (and budget). The second body could be a FF/FX body.
If you change your mind later, you can sell off equipment for basically less monetary loss than equipment rental, but you will have (hopefully a ton of) photographs from your time with the equipment.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I recently picked up a Sony RX100 II for snapshots of the family and such and have been very pleased with that as a take-anywhere 2nd camera option - it truly is a pocketable little gem.
Then do what I plan on doing. Get a D800 for when you're feeling badass and eager to lug around the beast and all it's ridiculous full-frame lens goodness, but get a D5200 or something cheaper for when you'd just rather have something tiny and light but you don't want to give up your fantastic Nikon DSLR image quality...
I just recently made a decision along these lines too, as a full-time wedding photographer whose hobby is landscapes. I honestly hate shooting with more than ~12 megapixels for weddings, it's just absurd overkill for 90% of a wedding day. But the landscape photographer inside me is getting more and more jealous of the 24-36 megapixel range, and all the image quality goodness...
I considered going all the way to mirrorless for my walk-around setup. But I just didn't like the idea of such a drastic change. I don't need something THAT lightweight and small, and I'm not yet ready to part with my OVF. So the D5200 fit the bill very nicely. Its got a flippy LCD screen which I'm loving for general nature photography, and just about the only feature I miss is the one-click 100% zooming during image playback. (A feature which the D600 also lacks, but the D7100 and anything else semmi-pro does have)
Anyways, that's my opinion. Get a used D8000 and a new D5200 or something. Get a nice shiny red one, for when you're feeling extra hip. :-P
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
I have a D600 and really enjoy using it and get good results in all light conditions. HOWEVER, the oil spots are a real problem; there are ALOT of them. I really wanted a D800E; the price was the deciding factor, After using the 600 and having to deal eith the oil spot problem; I now wish I had taken the dive and bought the D800E.