Wildlife photography, crop sensor or full frame?

DennisdudeDennisdude Registered Users Posts: 1 Beginner grinner
I’m a wildlife photographer. I’ve been using an entry level Nikon d3400 with a Tamron 18 to 400. It’s time to upgrade my camera. I like the extra power I get with the crop factor, but it seems like getting another crop sensor camera like the Nikon d7500 wouldn’t be much of an upgrade. I’ve been considering a Nikon Z6. I loose the crop factor but gain what I think is a much better camera. I’ve narrowed my choice down to the Z6 or the d7500. Constructive thoughts would be much appreciated.


  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 23,789 moderator

    You might also consider a Nikon D7200.

    I agree that the D7500 might make a very good wildlife camera; basically a D500 in a lot of ways.

    A full-frame camera, like the Z6, is going to be considerably better in low-light, especially with faster [larger aperture] glass, which helps early in the morning and into the evening hours. Many animals emerge in those extra hours of reduced light. The Nikon Mount Adapter FTZ is available to allow "F-mount" lenses on Z-mount bodies, allowing a somewhat lesser financial investment into used Nikkor and third-party telephoto lenses.

    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • govindvkumargovindvkumar Registered Users Posts: 6 Beginner grinner
    During my initial days of wildlife photography, I had used crop camera bodies like the Canon 7D. But, now I prefer to use the full frame bodies because of its better noise performance at low light. Most of the best scenes in wildlife happens either late in the evening or early morning. In both these times, the light will be less. A full frame camera is a good choice. When it comes to mirrorless and DSLR, you can go for the mirrorless one since the DSLR market is getting shrinked slowly. Newer cameras and lenses are coming in the mirrorless line up.
  • pathfinderpathfinder Super Moderators Posts: 14,696 moderator
    edited November 22, 2021

    I have complained for some time that I REALLY wish Canon would build a follow up to the Canon 7D Mk II. It was not the equal of the 1 series bodies, but its AF was ptertty darn good, the sensor was pretty decent in good light, and I have thousands and thousands of frames of images shot with a 7D Mk II, far more than any other body. Despite owning a raft of other full frame Canon bodies.

    If Canon would introduce a crop sensor body with modern AF and frame rates, real pro body builds, with weather sealing, and 25-30 Mpxls I would buy one in a heart beat.

    I know that the web thinks DSLRs are dead in the water, but I must say after spending a week in south Texas - shooting with an R5 with an RF 100-500, and a 1DX Mk II( yes II, not III ) , with a Canon 200-400 + TC or a Tamron 150-600mm G2 lens, I expected most of my better shots might be with the R5

    But I found I shot many more frames with the bigger, heavier, slower 1DX Mk II - I was shooting both systems from Wimberley mounts, so there is that - but one can compare my images from both systems in my thread in the Wildlife forum, and I really doubt one can tell which camera and lens was used for any of my images - l have tagged them so they can be compared by viewers. And I love using the R5 with the RF 100-500 and I have an R3 that is supposed to be shipped in early December on order, so I have no bias one way or the other.

    I always like to say that true pros know more than one way to skin a cat... 😎


    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Sign In or Register to comment.