FX for a casual shooter?

Started Feb 17, 2014 | Discussions thread
romfordbluenose Veteran Member • Posts: 3,383
Re: FX for a casual shooter?

Penny123 wrote:

I am just wondering if there is any huge advantage to using FX as a casual shooter to some of the newer DX models, ie D7100. I had a D40 and have been using a D90 this past year, I have had some focus issues but never really got to the bottom of if it was me or the camera. It has been to nikon and they found errors but never said what so I have it back with me. Focus issues aside I am starting to find the iso rather restricting. I have been using iso 800 at a push but really notice the quality fall especially if I need to start pulling shadows ad adjusting exposure. I take quite a lot of shots in woodland and Scotland can be pretty dull at times so to keep a good shutter speed I am often having to push it up a bit.

The D7100, D610 and D800 will all blow away your D90 when it comes to noise and high ISO performance. The dynamic range is fantastic on all 3 cameras so you can push the shadows. I tested all 3 when I moved to a D800 and found that the increase in performance is visible as you go from the D7100 to the D610 to the D800. However, for a casual shooter the D7100 should be fine for you and you can keep your current lens.  The main reason I chose the D800 was that I was coming from a D300 and I preferred the facilities of the D800 over the D600. I wanted FX as I do a lot of indoor architectural shooting where DR and wide angle is very important to me.

I mainly shoot portraits of my dog and landscape with a bit of everything else thrown in. I feel my photos have gotten better this past year but nowhere near the high standard I see on here and I will always purely be doing this as a hobby. What I am looking for is a camera that will last me the next 4 years (at least) and I have narrowed it down to the D610 or the D7100. FX seems appealing as a camera to develop my skills with but is it overkill for what I do? What I am after is a camera with excellent image quality (most new cameras fit this) and one where hopefully I can use ISO 800 or above but the images look just as good as if it were iso 200.

Unless you have a need for FX as mentioned above the D7100 will be fine and the autofocus is arguably better.

What put me off the D7100 is the buffer as I sometimes shoot shots of my dog running. She is a bit older now so this isn't a make or break deal and I would be happy shooting in crop mode. I also read that you need superior glass and good technique for the 24mp. I have a 40mm, 16-85 and 70-200.

There is no way round the speed issue without buying a PRO camera with a better buffer. Mind you do you really need more than 5fps?

On the other side of the coin what put me off FX is I have no way to try before I buy and I would need to see how it suits me with the different dof and clustered focus points. Am I correct in thinking that if I bought a 24-120 fx lens that would give me the same field of view of my 16-85? I would also need to assess if I would miss the extra reach that I get with my 70-200 on a cropped sensor.

Yes the 24-120 is equivalent to the 16-85. Reach maybe a problem with the D610 as in DX mode the number of mp is quite small. Don't forget though that the 24-85 is equivalent to the 24-120 when used in DX mode which is a cheaper alternative to the 24-120.

For my needs and what I am looking for what do you think D610, D7100 or hold tight with the D90 and see what might come out later in the year?

From what you have said I see no reason for you to move to FX and have to swap lens.

 romfordbluenose's gear list:romfordbluenose's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS30 Nikon D800 Nikon D5300 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +11 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow