Looking for outside opinions

Dooginfif20

So here I am. I have owned my D90 for about 4-5 years now. It has served me very well! The problem is I rented a D600 for a wedding I was shooting recently and fell in love with it. On top of that I have some other things that I would like to do as well. My budget is around $1500-2000 and the options are:

Purchase a referbished D600
Purchase a used 70-200 2.8 VRI
Purchase PW miniTT1/flexTT5 and MC2 for my Einstein to be able to shoot more action stuff outdoors
Hold onto the money and just dream about buying more stuff

Any help would be greatly appreciate my friends!

Ryan

ziggy53

If this is for business, purchase what you "need" first.

Dooginfif20 wrote: »

... I rented a D600 for a wedding I was shooting recently and fell in love with it. ...

Are the things you "loved" about the D600 needs or wishes?

Dooginfif20 wrote: »

...

Purchase a used 70-200 2.8 VRI
Purchase PW miniTT1/flexTT5 and MC2 for my Einstein to be able to shoot more action stuff outdoors
Hold onto the money and just dream about buying more stuff

...

Would any of these satisfy a greater need than a new body?

Dooginfif20

Dang you Ziggy and your logic! Well the biggest factor for me and the D600 is that it nailed exposure every time. The amazing ISO performance was also pretty much awesome. I have been in a few spots where that would have been great to have. Im not saying that the low light performance of my D90 isnt good, to me its just not good enough at this point. The D600 is light which is great because my 24-70 and SB-900 arent. The dual memory card slot was a life saver as it went seemlessly from one to the other. There are a lot of things I loved about it that my D90 doesnt have.

As for the lens the only reason its on the list is I feel like I need more reach. There were a couple times where I felt like I came up short and would have loved more zoom. The VRII is just too much for me right now so a used VRI is what would need to happen.

As for the tt1 and tt5 that is honestly for fun and really doesnt add any value from a business stand point. It would only make my life a little easier when trying to shoot action outside and also to allow me to shoot my Einstein in rear sync for mixed lighting shots.

If you were in my shoes what would you do?

NikonsandVstroms

What lenses do you currently have beyond the 24-70?

And the cheaper (or similar price but new) options to think about in addition would be the Tamron 70-200 VC, and the D7100. I'd try that camera out before making the purchase but since buying one myself I'm loving the output for my work.....so yeah I'm bias though I can't speak to its auto exposures much since almost all the shots I've done so far have been manual.

Which brings up the DX + DX VS DX + FX (I'm assuming you're keeping the D90, and if you're going to shoot events/weddings let me just say it is very important to have the 2 camera setup).

DX + DX is nice since DX lenses from what I've been seeing are pretty well priced on the used market as people are moving up to FX so you can get some great deals there.

DX + FX which is how I'm shooting and here you have overlap in some lenses but it adds versatility to the rest of your collection.

Final thought, what's your timescale for all of this? I ask because if you picked up say an even cheaper 70-200 like the Sigma HSM which isn't the sharpest in the segment but is fast focusing and still a nice lens....plus it can be had for ~500 IIRC. So if you really need that range filled it could act as a stop gap giving you quality images and when the time comes to upgrade to the lens you really want sell it losing maybe 100 dollars but say 200 to be on the safe side. Pretty much this is all going off of Ziggy's what do you really need right now for your work?

Dooginfif20

NikonsandVstroms wrote: »

What lenses do you currently have beyond the 24-70?

And the cheaper (or similar price but new) options to think about in addition would be the Tamron 70-200 VC, and the D7100. I'd try that camera out before making the purchase but since buying one myself I'm loving the output for my work.....so yeah I'm bias though I can't speak to its auto exposures much since almost all the shots I've done so far have been manual.

Which brings up the DX + DX VS DX + FX (I'm assuming you're keeping the D90, and if you're going to shoot events/weddings let me just say it is very important to have the 2 camera setup).

DX + DX is nice since DX lenses from what I've been seeing are pretty well priced on the used market as people are moving up to FX so you can get some great deals there.

DX + FX which is how I'm shooting and here you have overlap in some lenses but it adds versatility to the rest of your collection.

Final thought, what's your timescale for all of this? I ask because if you picked up say an even cheaper 70-200 like the Sigma HSM which isn't the sharpest in the segment but is fast focusing and still a nice lens....plus it can be had for ~500 IIRC. So if you really need that range filled it could act as a stop gap giving you quality images and when the time comes to upgrade to the lens you really want sell it losing maybe 100 dollars but say 200 to be on the safe side. Pretty much this is all going off of Ziggy's what do you really need right now for your work?

Hey thanks for the respons! Now to answer some of your questions here I go:

Yes I plan to keep the D90. That is why I rented the D600 for the last wedding as I couldnt risk not having a functioning camera come the day of the wedding.

My current lenses are the 24-70 2.8, 50.14G, and 12-24 2.8. All are Nikon. I actually rented a Tamron 70-200 and was actually shocked at how not sharp the images were. The photographer I interned for had a Nikon 70-200 VRI and it was spot on every shot hence the reason I want to stick with the Nikon route vs a third party.

I have thought about getting a D7100 and I am 100% sure it is a great. The main reason I want to go FX is because of low light performance. The D600 exceeded my expectations to be honest. I also told myself that the next camera I buy was going to be FX. When I was buying lenses I was making sure that they were made for FX so when I made the move I wouldnt have to sell and rebuy. I honestly dont mind having a DX backup because no matter what lens I slap on the D90 I will get extra reach because of the crop.

The problem I am having is deciding what the need is vs the want. I need a second body which I dont currently have. I also need a 70-200 2.8 as I dont have one and it would come in handy for weddings and portraits. Its just tough to decide which is more improtant

ziggy53

Dooginfif20 wrote: »

Dang you Ziggy and your logic! Well the biggest factor for me and the D600 is that it nailed exposure every time. The amazing ISO performance was also pretty much awesome. I have been in a few spots where that would have been great to have. Im not saying that the low light performance of my D90 isnt good, to me its just not good enough at this point. The D600 is light which is great because my 24-70 and SB-900 arent. The dual memory card slot was a life saver as it went seemlessly from one to the other. There are a lot of things I loved about it that my D90 doesnt have.

As for the lens the only reason its on the list is I feel like I need more reach. There were a couple times where I felt like I came up short and would have loved more zoom. The VRII is just too much for me right now so a used VRI is what would need to happen.

As for the tt1 and tt5 that is honestly for fun and really doesnt add any value from a business stand point. It would only make my life a little easier when trying to shoot action outside and also to allow me to shoot my Einstein in rear sync for mixed lighting shots.

If you were in my shoes what would you do?

In your shoes I would go for the glass first. I have 4 - zoom lenses in the 70-200mm(ish) range because I felt it was that important for wedding, event and sports photography. I also use that range for landscape and travel photography too.

Then again, Adobe RAW conversion allows for very effective upressing at the time of demosaicing. You could get the D600 and use the 24-70mm zoom. When you don't get enough reach, just upres and crop to gain a smaller FOV.

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=158823

NikonsandVstroms

Dooginfif20 wrote: »

Hey thanks for the respons! Now to answer some of your questions here I go:

Yes I plan to keep the D90. That is why I rented the D600 for the last wedding as I couldnt risk not having a functioning camera come the day of the wedding.

My current lenses are the 24-70 2.8, 50.14G, and 12-24 2.8. All are Nikon. I actually rented a Tamron 70-200 and was actually shocked at how not sharp the images were. The photographer I interned for had a Nikon 70-200 VRI and it was spot on every shot hence the reason I want to stick with the Nikon route vs a third party.

I have thought about getting a D7100 and I am 100% sure it is a great. The main reason I want to go FX is because of low light performance. The D600 exceeded my expectations to be honest. I also told myself that the next camera I buy was going to be FX. When I was buying lenses I was making sure that they were made for FX so when I made the move I wouldnt have to sell and rebuy. I honestly dont mind having a DX backup because no matter what lens I slap on the D90 I will get extra reach because of the crop.

The problem I am having is deciding what the need is vs the want. I need a second body which I dont currently have. I also need a 70-200 2.8 as I dont have one and it would come in handy for weddings and portraits. Its just tough to decide which is more improtant

I did a little research....looking at samples the D600 is about 1 stop better high ISO than the D7100 which is considering for B&W at least I like the D7100 at the same ISO better than my D700. Sorry for more questions but what ISO's did you find yourself shooting at? And what is the largest prints you sell as part of the wedding package? The answers to that will show more if that high of ISO performance is a want or need. The only other issue to come up is the small AF coverage of the D600 VS the larger and 51 points of the D7100.....for 2 outwardly similar cameras they definitely have different strengths/weaknesses so it's hard to head to head compare them. If you found yourself wishing for more points spread out further maybe give it a try. Actually thinking about it that's the only reason I'd recommend giving the D7100 a close look because with your 24-70 you'll have a true standard zoom with the D600.

Rental prices seem about the same for the body and lens, so what I'd do is get the body and rent the lens until you can buy it. There's a lot more to get used to on a new body so that familiarity will help you out while shooting.