Nikon Suggestion?

redleash · November 27, 2015

In a recent thread I asked about excess noise with my D300S. One suggestion (was it you, Joel?) was that it is time for a new camera. So, in case Santa is reading, I am looking for info/suggestions. Is it time for a full-frame camera? If so, which one. Since I don't do a lot of lowlight shooting, might I be happy with new glass for my D300S instead? Or is a newer DX camera the way to go?

I shoot mainly landscapes, also some nature and various outdoor subjects. I also photograph dogs and cats for one of the local shelters. I do occasionally shoot outdoor, natural light pet and family portraits, mostly for friends. I am considering doing more pet shoots.

Glass: Sigma 10-20, Tamron 17-50 2.8, Nikon 50 1.8, Nikon 85 macro, Nikon 70-300 4.5-5.6. The Sigma is like new. The 50 is in fine shape, as is the Macro. Both the 17-50 and 70-300 need to be replaced. I want a walk around lens with more reach than the 17-50. I have tried the Nikon 85 1.8 and really liked it so am thinking of getting one; it will work nicely for portraits and some outdoor work. I cannot decide about a 70-200 2.8, although I know how versatile it is. I am concerned about the weight since arthritis keeps me less steady than I once was. I do need something long for landscape details. The 70-300 has served me well but is not the sharpest glass in the bag.

I have not done any research, just stopping here first for suggestions. What say you all?

Hope everyone had a Happy Thanksgiving!

Lauren

DivinusImaging · November 27, 2015

Well if I had to say, I would consider the Nikon D800. The difference between the D300 AND D800 are pretty big simply due to the sensor size and the processors. The D800 will give you better Dynamic Range as well as better color. The increase in detail will add to your work flow because along with more detail will come more flaws and blemishes. As far as getting a lens. You hit the nail on the head with the 70-200. For the arthritis I would say maybe get a monopod. That should help with the movement.

redleash · November 27, 2015

Thanks for the ideas. I appreciate you commenting.

ziggy53 · November 27, 2015

Either a Nikon D800 or D810 (the current model) would be a massive upgrade to your D300s.

For that matter, the Nikon D750 should also be considered since it is a bit lighter than the D800 series bodies. The D750 is also less expensive but still has a very good AF system and enough pixels to allow cropping options and large prints.

D750 is around 26.5 oz. and around $1900USD
D810 is around 31.1 oz. and around $2800USD

The FX zoom lenses are much heavier than DX zoom lenses of the same apertures and equivalent FOV.

If you were to go with a Nikon D7200, for instance, your Sigma Sigma 10-20mm would still work the same as on the D300. To get the same relative FOV on an FX body you would need something in the 15-30mm range, probably the Nikkor AF-S 17-35mm, f/2.8D IF-ED the closest choice.

The Nikkor FX AF-S 17-35mm, f/2.8D IF-ED weighs 26.3 oz. compared to the Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC (HSM) at 16.4oz. and the Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 EX DC HSM at 18.3oz. There's also a pretty large pricetag on the Nikkor FX AF-S 17-35mm, f/2.8D IF-ED to go with the extra weight.

Similarly, a standard zoom for a DX body like the D7200 could be the Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC (OS) HSM (currently $419.00USD and weighs 19.9oz.), a pretty fine standard zoom by most measures. (I have this very lens for my Nikon D7100.) It's reasonably lightweight and has optical stabilization to help with camera shake.

Compare this with an FX standard zoom like the Nikkor AF-S 24-70mm, f/2.8E ED VR (currently $2,399.95USD and weighs 38.4 oz.), although it too has optical stabilization to help with camera shake. (It's likely that this stabilization works better than the Sigma stabilization, but at twice the weight you will tire more easily.)

I do agree that a 70-200mm, fast aperture zoom is an important focal length, but the f2.8 versions are very heavy lenses partly because they cover FX sensors and need big, heavy glass to provide f2.8 apertures. You might consider a Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f/4G ED VR instead, to save quite a bit of weight and which should work pretty well for your indicated applications.

If you did go with another DX body you might be able to find a used Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM II (they are no longer available new) with a similar FOV and a considerable weight savings. (The Sigma is no match in quality of construction or durability compared to the Nikkor 70-200mm zooms, but image quality is said to be very good.)

There is a Tokina AT-X 535 PRO DX, 50-135mm f/2.8 Lens, for Nikon F-mount DX (AF-D type), but I don't think that it's in quite the same league as any of the Nikkors discussed nor the Sigma 50-150mm, f2.8.

Mitchell · November 28, 2015

For a landscape photographer, I would look for a low mileage D800e. I went that route and could not be happier. Great sensor with no AA filter and saved money over buying a new D810. If you want to stay DX (I wouldn't as a landscape shooter) the D7200 is your best option.

If you are worried about weight, do not consider the 70-200mm, f2.8. While I love that lens for portraits, it is big and heavy. Perhaps consider a nice, light 85mm, f1.8 which handles beautifully on the D800e and is a great portrait lens.

Ferguson · November 28, 2015

When I get NAS (Nikon Acquisition Syndrome) I always try to ask "what problem am I trying to solve". You seem to be looking for a replacement, but I did not read any particular issue you think needs solving with the D300s, other than glass and perhaps walk around glass. In particular I did not hear anything that says "You need FX". If you shift to FX, you will add significant weight and size and cost, but not necessarily solve any other problem. I have a D800, and love it. A low mileage D800 (+/- E) would, as mentioned, be a huge upgrade for you. But I wonder if you wouldn't find it better served to get a 7200, and some nice glass. The 70-200 is a terrific "long" walking around lens, e.g. say for some casual wildlife, zoos, etc. On a DX body you get a fair amount of reach. The F2.8 version is pricey and heavy but is also a long life lens, and suitable if later you upgrade to FX. It's also fast, so suitable for lower light. And while it is not a complete replacement for the 85/1.8, but is darn close. The F4 is more "walk around" friendly by far, just not as good for low light and portraits if you like thin DOF.

The biggest need you might not have really noticed is that there is a dearth of really wide angle lenses on DX. If you do a lot of WIDE landscapes, that might be a reason to push into the FX realm.

NikonsandVstroms · November 30, 2015

The D7100 would be your best bang for the buck addition as a landscape photographer at under 500 for a refurbished body.

You'll be getting about a stop in high ISO performance and doubling your resolution which with a high quality lens can lead to some very impressive results. I use one myself for landscape work over my D700.

Also what size do you plan to print at?

kave · December 1, 2015

I bought a D750 as a companion to my old D90. I can say in real word work they are quite similar. After I bought it I compared the D750 to the D7200 on dpreview.com, I must say it is nearly impossible to tell a difference.
The lenses are what matters most, if you are concerned about noise, get as fast lenses as you can, it will have much more importance than what camera is connected to it.

denisegoldberg · December 1, 2015

Lauren -
I know you are asking about Nikon as an upgrade - but given that you mentioned weight as an issue, have you considered a mirrorless camera? I still have my Canon 7D but I am using my Fuji XT1 more and more. The weight difference between the two is pretty amazing, and I am happy with the image quality.

In case you haven't seen it, there is some good discussion in the thread D750 or Fuji XT1?

--- Denise

redleash · December 2, 2015

Thanks, everyone! Some great ideas and info, including things I had not considered (Ziggy's 70-200 f/4 and Denise's mirrorless).

Here is a bit of clarification based on some of your replies: Both noise at ISO above 400-800 and resolution are issues with my D300S. I would like to be able to print larger and also have more crop options while maintaining high image quality. Newer/better glass won't solve those issues. The 85 1.8 portrait lens I mentioned above would be a "bonus" lens for specific situations but would not be a walkaround. I need to replace the 17-50 and the 70-300 for better quality, regardless of which format camera I choose. For scheduled landscape shots the weight is not as big an issue because I can use a tripod. However, I have often roamed around (say, on the San Antonio Riverwalk) with my 70-300 so I really do need to account for that option. Maybe the combination of a 70-200 f/4 + monopod would do the trick.

So, I guess I am looking at a new camera plus 3 lenses if I do everything I am wanting to accomplish. I am not set on either camera format so I will mull it all over some more. I am on my second DX and if moving to full frame--with the right glass-- would enhance the quality of my landscapes then that is a definite possibility and it seems like the D800 would be a good choice.

Further suggestions/comments are welcomed and appreciated!

Lauren

time2smile · December 4, 2015

Lauren,

Look into a Nikon 610 and a 28-300 for walkaround

GL

Nikon Suggestion?

Comments