Nikon D5500 vs D750, which one to buy

dpenthusiast · Mar 9, 2016

Current equipment:

1. Nikon D80 Camera

2. Nikon 50mm 1.4D lens

3. Nikon 18-200mm VR I lens

4. Nikon SB-600 flash

5. Manfrotto 3221W tripod

Obviously, I am looking for some purchasing advice. I've looked at the Sony Mirrorless cameras, the Nikon 7000 series and Canon cameras. None of them seemed comfortable in my hands, while the Nikon D5500 and the D750 felt very comfortable. I would say that I am a hobbyist who has taken enough classes, 3 semesters at a local community college, to be dangerous, but by no means am I an expert.

My photography focus tends to lean more towards landscape (both night and day), stills, portraits of my wife and lots of pictures when I go traveling.

The unfortunate thing about taking tours while traveling is that you don't really have much time to stop, setup a tripod, take a photograph and then put away the tripod. So, lots of handheld pictures are taken that really should have been taken on a tripod. With all that said, I'm having trouble choosing between the D5500 and the D750. I am trying to find out how well the D5500 focuses in low light situations as compared to the D750. Going into No FLASH churches and museums has made me appreciate a good focusing system that can focus accurately and quickly in low light. Another challenge is taking pictures from a moving bus of buildings or people walking along. What is the difference in speed of focusing between the cameras in these situations? I know this is a decision I will ultimately need to make myself, but I am looking for opinions on whether to go D750 FX or D5500 DX?

Thank you.

Cato1040 · Mar 11, 2016

The new D500 may be the fastest focusing one if that is a priority and the D7100 would be fast as well. That being said, the D5500 and D750 focus fast enough for most people who aren't shooting sports or wildlife (which you didn't mention).

I don't think autofocus should be an issue in the places you're mentioning as they aren't really that dark. The main thing you are looking for is the ability to use fast shutter speeds. For that, the full frame camera may be more useful as it does better in low light, meaning you can boost the ISO a bit more to increase the shutter speed. This reduces hand shake and blur when shooting out of buses.

For lenses, you could consider getting a 24-120mm f/4 or 28-300mm if you want a replacement for your 18-200mm.

Photoexplorer · Mar 12, 2016

The D5500 doesn't focus very well in low light. As a crop sensor, it already needs stabilized lenses or the shutter speed needs to be raised compared to the D750. If the 1.8D behaves like the 1.8G, it needs a shutter speed of around 100 to eliminate handshake.

However, the D5500 has the advantage of being significantly cheaper so the difference can be put into better lenses.

a_c_skinner · Mar 12, 2016

"As a crop sensor, it already needs stabilized lenses or the shutter speed needs to be raised compared to the D750" Can you help me with the physics of that? I cannot see why taking the same scene and printing to the same size (accepting you'd need different focal lengths) that should be so and it isn't a point widely made. A genuine question, but you'll gather I am sceptical.

As to the OP's question I don't think there is a need for FX unless they are going to spend a lot of money on faster, wider lenses. I'd be looking to get rid of the 18-200 while it still has resale value.

Photoexplorer · Mar 12, 2016

a_c_skinner said:
"As a crop sensor, it already needs stabilized lenses or the shutter speed needs to be raised compared to the D750" Can you help me with the physics of that? I cannot see why taking the same scene and printing to the same size (accepting you'd need different focal lengths) that should be so and it isn't a point widely made. A genuine question, but you'll gather I am sceptical.

a_c_skinner · Mar 13, 2016

To take the same scene would need 35mm on DX and 50mm on FX. Shooting both at the same shutter speed and by the time you've made a print of the same size the differences have been removed?

Limburger · Mar 13, 2016

You say you like portraiture and do mention you got a flash so I'd look into the flash capabilities of the cameras too (flash sync. speed and high speed sync).

Usually I'd say travel lightweight but you don't seem to bother to carry some bulk.

So for now I'd say try the D750 in low light (focusses -3EV) and test it out with a fast focussing lens.

The reason is that you mention low light churches etc. imho for low light there are only three things that matter, FF,AF and fast aperture/focus lenses.

Also have a look on what lens(es) you'd need so you get an estimate on what cost that would bring to the table.

I do have a Sony A7 (great for travel, with FE35 2.8 under 600 g combined) yet it won't stand up in terms of AF performance to the D750 but once FF you never look back imho.

Here a shot I took yesterday with 50mm 1.5 Voigtlander (MF).

--
Cheers Mike
Register and vote.

dpenthusiast · Mar 15, 2016

Good picture. How much light was in the room? I'm a great believer that a backpack helps with carrying around heavy gear. I have my 50 as my fast lens and the 18-200 as my overall carry around lens because of the versatility of the long zoom. Although it is not a fast lens which with my unsteady hands has meant that I have missed some pictures or that they have been softer than I would like.

dpenthusiast · Mar 15, 2016

Interesting, I had never thought of the limitations of the APS-C format in that way. Mostly I focused on the fact that my 18-200mm zoom lens acts like a 27-300mm zoom in a FF camera body and didn't think about the fact that the shutter speed would be slower than the equivalent in a FF body.

Limburger · Mar 16, 2016

dpenthusiast said:
Good picture. How much light was in the room? I'm a great believer that a backpack helps with carrying around heavy gear. I have my 50 as my fast lens and the 18-200 as my overall carry around lens because of the versatility of the long zoom. Although it is not a fast lens which with my unsteady hands has meant that I have missed some pictures or that they have been softer than I would like.

Thanks,

Not so much light though it was daytime.

1/60 iso 1000 and f1.5 if I remember correctly.

dpenthusiast · Mar 16, 2016

Limburger said:
1/60 iso 1000 and f1.5 if I remember correctly.

Craig Gillette · Mar 16, 2016

dpenthusiast said:
Obviously, I am looking for some purchasing advice. I've looked at the Sony Mirrorless cameras, the Nikon 7000 series and Canon cameras. None of them seemed comfortable in my hands, while the Nikon D5500 and the D750 felt very comfortable.

Individual grip size preferences vary. Not sure why you'd like the D750 and D5500 but not the D7xxx series. It's not too different from the D750 but it is different in grip shape. I just got a D7200 and because the cost to me to upgrade to the ff D610 or D750 was too great, I didn't spend too much time handling them. Some of it is grip size, some weight and balance of the lenses involved, etc.

dpenthusiast said:
My photography focus tends to lean more towards landscape (both night and day), stills, portraits of my wife and lots of pictures when I go traveling.

The unfortunate thing about taking tours while traveling is that you don't really have much time to stop, setup a tripod, take a photograph and then put away the tripod. So, lots of handheld pictures are taken that really should have been taken on a tripod. With all that said, I'm having trouble choosing between the D5500 and the D750.

IIRC, the discussions I've read consider that the D750 or ff cameras may well have about a stop advantage in low light/high iso scenarios. So your 1/1000 ff image needs 1/500 for the aps-c. But that's a bigger deal when you get down to your limits of handholding and camera/lens anti-shake performances. Where 1/50 might be the answer instead of 1/25

dpenthusiast said:
I am trying to find out how well the D5500 focuses in low light situations as compared to the D750. Going into No FLASH churches and museums has made me appreciate a good focusing system that can focus accurately and quickly in low light.

Many if not most/all of those "No Flash" interiors are also likely to be no tripod interiors as well. Technique, bracing, noise tolerance, anti-shake, multiframe noise reduction "modes" and the like all can come into play. (The NEX had the advantage in bracketed/stacked shooting that it wasn't a dslr but even the comparatively quiet NEX got some looks on rattling off a burst of shots at times).

Not directly comparable but on our Italy trip, interiors in the Vatican, other churches, etc., ran into "light" problems before I had focus problems with an NEX-6 and a middlin slow lens. These are interiors, not trying to shoot indoor sports so I wouldn't expect to have focus problems between the D5500 or D750 in those mostly static subject situations. Of course, a faster lens would have helped significantly, not withstanding to some extent you need to stop down for depth of field in some subjects.

dpenthusiast said:
Another challenge is taking pictures from a moving bus of buildings or people walking along. What is the difference in speed of focusing between the cameras in these situations? I know this is a decision I will ultimately need to make myself, but I am looking for opinions on whether to go D750 FX or D5500 DX?

The D750 is a better focus system but it seems to me, more is going to be a part of setting up the camera for that scenario, being ready for the opportunities, etc. Windows can be problems because they may have reflections that impact the system and lens speed and one's own reactions will make a difference. Of course that can be easily tested on local buses or transit systems. One could even try interior shots in local museums, churches, etc., to test ways of approaching a type of shot. to some extent I kind of feel that the places I test ran for low light in the US (SoCal) seemed to be somewhat brighter than some of the venues in Italy but that's hard to really judge.

dpenthusiast said:
Thank you.

The D750 is a more adaptable camera, more readily accessed control features versus menu controls, a higher performing focus system, a higher performing sensor (with some consideration that those benefits may be somewhat moot because the D5500 may be suitable for what you want to do).

Lots of advantages to the D750.

Offsetting issues? To really take advantage of the higher iso and focus system performance, one might well consider building on the body by using fast lenses to maybe grab a couple more stops of performance. F2.8 over f4 or slower zooms. Fast primes. Now you are also talking about possibly spending (for some folks anyways) a significantly larger amount of money along with the added body cost. This is also a significantly bulkier and heavier kit. Takes up more space to carry in transit, in room storage at times, in lockers if necessary, on the tour bus, in the group wandering the streets, trying to subtly keep safe in restaurants, subways, buses

NoTx · Mar 17, 2016

Craig Gillette said:
dpenthusiast said:

Obviously, I am looking for some purchasing advice. I've looked at the Sony Mirrorless cameras, the Nikon 7000 series and Canon cameras. None of them seemed comfortable in my hands, while the Nikon D5500 and the D750 felt very comfortable.

Click to expand...

Individual grip size preferences vary. Not sure why you'd like the D750 and D5500 but not the D7xxx series. It's not too different from the D750 but it is different in grip shape. I just got a D7200 and because the cost to me to upgrade to the ff D610 or D750 was too great, I didn't spend too much time handling them. Some of it is grip size, some weight and balance of the lenses involved, etc.

Craig Gillette said:

My photography focus tends to lean more towards landscape (both night and day), stills, portraits of my wife and lots of pictures when I go traveling.

The unfortunate thing about taking tours while traveling is that you don't really have much time to stop, setup a tripod, take a photograph and then put away the tripod. So, lots of handheld pictures are taken that really should have been taken on a tripod. With all that said, I'm having trouble choosing between the D5500 and the D750.

Click to expand...

IIRC, the discussions I've read consider that the D750 or ff cameras may well have about a stop advantage in low light/high iso scenarios. So your 1/1000 ff image needs 1/500 for the aps-c. But that's a bigger deal when you get down to your limits of handholding and camera/lens anti-shake performances. Where 1/50 might be the answer instead of 1/25

Craig Gillette said:

I am trying to find out how well the D5500 focuses in low light situations as compared to the D750. Going into No FLASH churches and museums has made me appreciate a good focusing system that can focus accurately and quickly in low light.

Click to expand...

Many if not most/all of those "No Flash" interiors are also likely to be no tripod interiors as well. Technique, bracing, noise tolerance, anti-shake, multiframe noise reduction "modes" and the like all can come into play. (The NEX had the advantage in bracketed/stacked shooting that it wasn't a dslr but even the comparatively quiet NEX got some looks on rattling off a burst of shots at times).

Not directly comparable but on our Italy trip, interiors in the Vatican, other churches, etc., ran into "light" problems before I had focus problems with an NEX-6 and a middlin slow lens. These are interiors, not trying to shoot indoor sports so I wouldn't expect to have focus problems between the D5500 or D750 in those mostly static subject situations. Of course, a faster lens would have helped significantly, not withstanding to some extent you need to stop down for depth of field in some subjects.

Craig Gillette said:

Another challenge is taking pictures from a moving bus of buildings or people walking along. What is the difference in speed of focusing between the cameras in these situations? I know this is a decision I will ultimately need to make myself, but I am looking for opinions on whether to go D750 FX or D5500 DX?

Click to expand...

The D750 is a better focus system but it seems to me, more is going to be a part of setting up the camera for that scenario, being ready for the opportunities, etc. Windows can be problems because they may have reflections that impact the system and lens speed and one's own reactions will make a difference. Of course that can be easily tested on local buses or transit systems. One could even try interior shots in local museums, churches, etc., to test ways of approaching a type of shot. to some extent I kind of feel that the places I test ran for low light in the US (SoCal) seemed to be somewhat brighter than some of the venues in Italy but that's hard to really judge.

Craig Gillette said:

Thank you.

Click to expand...

The D750 is a more adaptable camera, more readily accessed control features versus menu controls, a higher performing focus system, a higher performing sensor (with some consideration that those benefits may be somewhat moot because the D5500 may be suitable for what you want to do).

Lots of advantages to the D750.

Offsetting issues? To really take advantage of the higher iso and focus system performance, one might well consider building on the body by using fast lenses to maybe grab a couple more stops of performance. F2.8 over f4 or slower zooms. Fast primes. Now you are also talking about possibly spending (for some folks anyways) a significantly larger amount of money along with the added body cost. This is also a significantly bulkier and heavier kit. Takes up more space to carry in transit, in room storage at times, in lockers if necessary, on the tour bus, in the group wandering the streets, trying to subtly keep safe in restaurants, subways, buses

The one stop advantage is normally for noise. Same aperture and shutter speed and iso, but the image gains more noise. The push for longer exposure is to shoot a lower ISO. Granted from what I have seen you are fine in any current system 3200 I so or lower.

dpenthusiast · Mar 26, 2016

I would like to thank everyone for their advice. I ended up with the d750 for the Faster Focussing, the bigger sensor, the fact that I can use my DX lens in DX mode on the camera and what just seems, from my testing in the store, a much smoother cleaner and better focussing system. Overall it just came down to the fact that I liked how the d750 felt in my hands more than the d5500. Now that I blew my budget on the d750 and the 24-120mm lens, I need to save up for the next year and decide between the 14-24mm, 70-200mm (will be looking at used lenses, need to find the best place to buy them), a strong but lighter and easier to use tripod for travel, daily carry and well for all around use outside a studio (my current tripod is good for local and studio work, but I have found it too heavy for easy transport). I'll keep using my sb600 flash, I don't think I need the latest and greatest. And some other accessories and necessities - bigger faster memory card (I don't think the 2 32gb (One is old and slow) cards will hold 4-5000 d750 NEF photos), filters, a new camera bag (my current one is an over the shoulder, I'd like a backpack that would allow me to go on day trips with my d750, flash, 2-3 lenses, tripod, and some change of clothing, food, etc.)., etc.....

Sorry for the rambling... But I would like to once again thank y'all for the advice...

Happy ~~Hunting~~, ~~Shooting~~, I mean photographing ....

Cato1040 · Mar 27, 2016

One thing to consider is that you can get a 16-35 instead of a 14-24. It's not as wide but it's more normal, so if you want something you can use for everything, that would fit the bill better. But if you just want a wide specialist, then yes, the 14-24 would give you much more angle.

The 70-200 is a good one, but you can get the 80-200 for cheaper...

dpenthusiast · Mar 27, 2016

Cato1040 said:
One thing to consider is that you can get a 16-35 instead of a 14-24. It's not as wide but it's more normal, so if you want something you can use for everything, that would fit the bill better. But if you just want a wide specialist, then yes, the 14-24 would give you much more angle.

The 70-200 is a good one, but you can get the 80-200 for cheaper...

Unfortunately the 80-200 doesn't have VR and that is something I definitely need, especially with the way my hands shake, I need the additional 4 stops the VR gives a lens just to be able to follow the normal reciprocal rule.

For me the biggest difference between the 16-35 and the 14-24 is the f4 vs the f2.8 and not the 16mm vs the 14mm. In fact, I generally do not like the distortion you get with the wider lenses. If the 16-35 was a 2.8 or faster I would get it in a heartbeat, but as a f4, I am hesitant, especially since I would be paying full market price as either an used or new lens unlike when I got the 24-120mm as a kit lens with the d750.

a_c_skinner · Mar 27, 2016

"As a crop sensor, it already needs stabilized lenses or the shutter speed needs to be raised compared to the D750."

My appreciation of this is that same angle of view needs the same shutter speed. I'm very open to a coherent explanation if this is a mistake.

Limburger · Mar 27, 2016

a_c_skinner said:
"As a crop sensor, it already needs stabilized lenses or the shutter speed needs to be raised compared to the D750."

My appreciation of this is that same angle of view needs the same shutter speed. I'm very open to a coherent explanation if this is a mistake.

Parks71a · Mar 27, 2016

I know a lot of people love the 7200 ( same sensor) but I couldn't stand the noise from it even at low ISO. I love the way the D750 resolves photos.

Cato1040 · Mar 27, 2016

There is a 17-35mm f/2.8D though that's losing another mm...

Nikon D5500 vs D750, which one to buy

New member

Veteran Member

New member

Forum Pro

New member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

New member

New member

Veteran Member

New member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

New member

Veteran Member

New member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts