Adding a second body

If you're worried about low light performance of the D810, don't be. The D750 may be better, but it's not going to be a lot better. Remember that you also need to resize the images to make things even, and downsizing a 36mp file to 24mp downsizes noise as well. The resolution of the D810 is so high that you can still get a lot of fine detail even after you apply some noise reduction techniques.

Here are some examples, from recent scuba dives where I used a D810 underwater.

In this first example, I forget the fiber cables needed to fire my strobes, so I was stuck shooting with no flash, at 45 feet, on a cloudy rainy day. I didn't think there was much hope for this shot until I post-processed it.

Right out of camera, ISO 3200:





After correcting white balance, cropping and some sharpening:





Here's another ISO 3200 shot, out of camera:





After some Lightroom work:







--
Phoenix Arizona Craig
www.cjcphoto.net

I would get a more modern body and probably use it as the primary. You have enough time to learn the newer camera pretty well by spring. I've been shooting events (not weddings) with two bodies for several years now and the only problem I have is carrying around all the gear. I have a sling bag and it's no problem for the 24-70 and 70-200. I keep one body in the bag and the other in my hand.

The 24-70 and the 70-200 get approximately 1/3 or 2/3 of the shots, but it depends on the event which one predominates. For crowds (e.g. receptions) the 24-70 predominates. For individual shots in a large room (e.g. the ceremony) the 70-200 predominates. For some events I even use the 200-500 f/5.6 a lot. The 14-24 gets very little use. Most of the time if I need ultrawide shots I stitch several shots together. Standing up and taking shots in different directions even without a pano head or even a tripod can give surprisingly good results stitched together, but not all the time, so you have to take several sequences to be have a better expectation of success. Of course it works best on relatively static scenes, but even people walking about can be included.

I started using 2 bodies when I got a D800e. I had planned to use it primarily for documentation since it had high resolution but it did pretty well as a second body to complement a D4. Having 2 bodies enabled me to react to transient shots more quickly since I didn't have to worry about changing lenses. The D800e did OK, but many of the events can be classified as low light (think about that ceremony in the poorly lit church) so I got a D5 to do the low light thing. I find the D4 and D5 to be pretty close in low light situations, but the D5 has the edge.

Most of my shots are used on the internet or in newsletters or PR releases so high resolution is not essential. The D4 will get good results up to ISO 12K while the D5 looks similar up to 20K (I haven't had the D5 long enough to do significant comparison -- that's a winter project). Those ISO levels are fine for my purposes, but probably too high for wedding work. PS: ISO 3million in the D5 is great for marketing but useless for photography.

stratman1976 said:

Thanks Barry. I re-read the D810 review this evening and that struck me as quite a letdown. Especially for weddings. I've noticed it with my D700 too, when shooting low-key potrtraits with dim modeling lights.

Click to expand...

The d810 should be an improvement over the d700 for high iso image quality. But my df is more than a stop better than my d800 and I believe the d750 is at least as good or a bit better than that. So in my experience the d800 excells in good light but gives up some iq in bad light.

I can tell you what I do for this exact type of event.

Two D750's and for that matter just two cameras that are the same. IMO, button layout and performance and constancy and muscle memory and same manufacture. The spider holster or Black Rapid or waist pack camera bag are all ideas of how to carry everything.

Always shoot RAW and cameras with two card slots IMHO are a must for this stuff.

Lenses. All you need 70-200 mm 2.8 a must have no question on a tripod or monopod for the ceremony

Macro lens for detail shots and then it pretty much goes back in the back as focusing is too slow to use other wise. I have the 60 mm macro (nikon )

You need lighting with a battery pack for flash recycle or you will be changing batteries are the worse time and miss a shot or the flash will not recycle fast enough and you will be under exposed

Past that is your style I use the 24-70 mm 2.8 and some may have the 28,35,50,85 primes to reduce weight.

The 70-200 usually goes back in the bag after the ceremony

The reception and formals can be done with the 24-70 or 35 & 85

You can add the 16-35, 14-24 for room shots and creative wide stuff

I use Nikon speed lights and pocket wizards. consider collapsible reflectors like white and silver and lots of other stuff.

Search how to videos as well. scout the location. insure all of your gear (murphy's law) get a written contract is very important on both sides

You need a back up flash as well and really need to be ready to do OCF

Know how to pose, how to light, compose, direct people you are in charge not Uncle Joe and be sure they feed you a regular meal, wear good shoes and comfy but professional clothing. It takes planning, create a check list so you do not forget gear, do a sweep so not to forget gear at the end. Put the lens cap and little pieces in the same place so not to loose them

Know what backups you need, oh extra batteries and no question get an assistant at minimum so no one steals your gear unless you plan to keep everything with you or the DJ will watch it etc.

This is only the tip of the iceberg

PHXAZCRAIG said:

If you're worried about low light performance of the D810, don't be. The D750 may be better, but it's not going to be a lot better.

Click to expand...

No, i'm not worried about noise at higher ISO's, but i AM worried about the autofocus in lowlight conditions. Do you have any experience with that?

PHXAZCRAIG said:

Remember that you also need to resize the images to make things even, and downsizing a 36mp file to 24mp downsizes noise as well. The resolution of the D810 is so high that you can still get a lot of fine detail even after you apply some noise reduction techniques.

Click to expand...

True, and i've come across that with 12MP a couple of times, so resolution wise, The D810 is obviously better, but the 24MP is more than enough in 99% of the time IMO

PHXAZCRAIG said:

Here are some examples, from recent scuba dives where I used a D810 underwater.

Click to expand...

Nice, saw them in the other post.

In terms of color and contrast.

HP1999 said:

This is only the tip of the iceberg

Click to expand...

Thank you for your tips, they are all good. Luckily, those are all on my checklist! Good to know i'm on the right track ;-)

The fact i did events and a lot of (corporate) portraits the past year (studio/natural/mixed), is the only reason i accepted the job. I told the couple that too when they approached me earlier this year.

I think weddings are one of the hardest things to do, as you are a great deal responsible for their memories. That is a scary thought for sure. I feel it's like driving your car for the first time right after you passed your driving test

Coming across new situations is also exciting and triggers your creativity. One of the reasons i think i like wedding photography

I recommend just buy a second D700. It's your first wedding, stick with what you are familiar and comfortable with and avoid introducing new variables to the equation.

Also, it's more convenient in post-processing when you have the same cameras as you can just apply the same certain settings to all images. D750 sensor is totally different to D700 with different response curves so you have to process the images separately.

Thank you all for your thoughts and tips, they were very helpful!
I decided to first rent a D750 and see how it'll work out when switching bodies.

The D810 focuses in low light about like the D700, if I'm recalling correctly. Pretty dim light - usually the ISO goes too high before I run out of autofocus. I rarely have an issue, and I always have the focus aid light turned off.

That said, an advantage here is definitely worth considering, as the place you have AF issues in dim light with the D810 is with low-contrast subjects, especially dark ones. That kind of advantage could be significant in a wedding, though I really don't recall any big complaints about D810 autofocus.

I'm guessing the D750 and D810 replacements will pick up the even-better D5/D500 focus modules.

The D810 definitely does better in low light focus than D700. It may not be a huge improvement to some people, but to me, it is enough to be satisfactory.

With the center focus point, I generally don't have a problem. However in low light, I have to avoid focus points away from the center.

j_photo said:

With the center focus point, I generally don't have a problem. However in low light, I have to avoid focus points away from the center.

Click to expand...

The thing is, in f/1.4/1.8/2.0 territory, i don't use focus and recompose, but only off-centre points. I will also rent the D810, excellent opportunity to test them both indoors in artificial l or candle lights. The only way to be sure.

PHXAZCRAIG said:

I'm guessing the D750 and D810 replacements will pick up the even-better D5/D500 focus modules.

Click to expand...

Yes, hopefully. That's why i can also rent a second body for the time being if i'm not sure yet and thest them out in the field and either pick up a new one, or a discounted previous model.

And I have to admit that I rarely use other than the center point, with focus and recompose. Very shallow depth of field shots (f1.4 and the like) is one exception, but a lot of times I'm trying to photograph moving children, so I'm just as likely to put the center point on an eye and crop later.

I recently bought a used D700 on eBay for $875. It is in mint condition with less than 6,000 shutter activations. In the month or so I shopped eBay I saw similar D700 bodies for between $800-$1100. At the higher end some cameras had between 0-100 clicks.

I looked at all of the current Nikon DSLRs and in the end a D700 met all my requirements. I don't need more than 12MP nor video. My take on highlight-weighted metering is that it's not all it's cut out to be. (I already have all the metering options I require to obtain a desired exposure.) The sound of the D700 shutter did take a bit of getting used to but now it sounds reassuringly robust after reading about all the D750 shutter problems. . .

Just ask yourself if the differences between the newer Nikons and the D700 is worth paying 2-3 times as much as a D700. Can you use some of the money you would save to buy something you really need? Or would it just feel good putting it away toward a more comfy retirement? What's best for you? That's what it really comes down to, not what I or anybody else would do.

Good luck with your decision and the wedding.

lightandaprayer said:

Just ask yourself if the differences between the newer Nikons and the D700 is worth paying 2-3 times as much as a D700. Can you use some of the money you would save to buy something you really need?

Click to expand...

Well i've been asking myself that question a lot and that's why invested in lenses and studio equipment so far (and still have only the D700). I bought the D700 2,5 years ago. It feels kind of weird to invest in that now. Next weekend i'll be renting the D810 and see how it performs. After that, i'll try the D750 and compare both to my D700. The only way to be sure.

Reading everyones thoughts and comments made me realize just to get to know these bodies and see which one fits best alongside the D700.

lightandaprayer said:

Or would it just feel good putting it away toward a more comfy retirement? What's best for you? That's what it really comes down to, not what I or anybody else would do.

Click to expand...

Yes, but it's nice to hear everyone's experience. And i'll post my findings.

lightandaprayer said:

Good luck with your decision and the wedding.

Click to expand...

Thank you!

stratman1976 said:

Hi all,

(Snipped.)

So far, I've come up with this:

• buy a 2nd D700. Know this camera inside out and it's cheap 2nd hand. Seamless swithing between bodies. Leaves me room to get a 35mm prime. Upgrade later to the D750 successor with hopefully pro-control layout and a more D500-like build.
• buy a D750, use D700 as 2nd body for reasons stated above. But not sure using 2 different bodies at the wedding. Maybe rent a second D750 for this event?
• Rent 2 D750's. Very hesitant about this one, as I don't want to shoot a wedding with a body I'm not familiar with. Could just rent one beforehand and see how it goes?

Has anyone gone down the same path, does anyone use 2 different bodies for events?

all advice welcome!

Click to expand...

1. A second D700 is the easy answer, at least short-term, as you are familiar with the D700, and two matching cameras are a best practice, to minimize the chance of fumbling after a transition. An extremely dark venue would be a significant reason to choose a different solution.

2. D700 and D750 controls do not match each other very well, but both are about the same size. If using two cameras, of similar size but differing control interfaces, in order to minimize fumbling, I prefer that they be VERY different, so I have an instant tactile clue that I have switched bodies, such as a 7D-series paired with a 1D-series, a D700 paired with a D3s, or a Df paired with anything. (A Df might be the ideal compact companion DSLR to pair with any other camera, regardless of brand, but a pre-owned Df will be costly, and a new Df costs more than current new prices for the D810, in the USA.)

To be clear, others' experience may vary, regarding fumbling while using similar-sized bodies with dissimilar control interfaces.

3. Two D750 cameras would be a good idea, if you have time to become familiar with them.

4. I brought a 7D Mark II and D700 to my son's wedding. At that point in time, I had not yet shot moving subjects, in low light, with the Canon, and the D700's familiar AF, with a Nikkor 24-70/2.8G, was spanking the Canon badly. (Not trying to start a Canon-v.-Nikon war; the point is that I was less-familiar with active subjects, with the Canon, in low light, at that point in time.) I should have brought a second D700, and a compact prime lens, for back-up, and left the 7D II at home.

The only camera that closely matches the control interface of the D700 is the D300, and it being 12MP and DX may not be desirable for weddings/events.

--
I wear a badge and pistol, and make evidentiary images at night, which incorporates elements of portrait, macro, still life, landscape, architecture, and PJ. I enjoy using both Canons and Nikons.

So, i rented the D810 this weekend. Did some outdoor zoo shooting, indoor portraits with studio lights and casual indoor shots. Here are my findigns

The positives (for me)

• Good build, a breeze to switch from the D700
• Nice, lighter weight. Really like the feel.
• Very good AF-tracking
• Very clean at base ISO
• Nice, sort of quiet, shutter
• Less strain on my iMac than expected

The negatives (for me)

• The grip is just a little bit shallow for me, it hurts my middle- and ring finger, when using the D810 for more than, say, an hour.
• Gets grainy very fast at higher ISO's (from 400 and up)
• At higher ISO's (>ISO800) it seems all the detail is gone and replaced with grain, which gives the picture a kind of a " it's not tack sharp"-look. Don't like it
• I get way more "blurred" pics. But i can't find a consistent factor. I get tack sharp ones too, at 1/60 f/2.8 for example. But also unsharp pics at 1/320 f/5.6, which makes no sense to me. Tried my primes too, at various apertures. Could it just be technique, or shutter shock? Any ideas? I do feel quite a tremble when pressing the shutter..
• Autofocus in low-light isn't much better compared to my D700

Of course, one weekend is too short to really get to know a new camera. It took me a couple of weeks when i switched from my Alpha700 to my D700.

Any other experiences?

stratman1976 said:

The negatives (for me)

• Gets grainy very fast at higher ISO's (from 400 and up)
• At higher ISO's (>ISO800) it seems all the detail is gone and replaced with grain, which gives the picture a kind of a " it's not tack sharp"-look. Don't like it
• I get way more "blurred" pics. But i can't find a consistent factor. I get tack sharp ones too, at 1/60 f/2.8 for example. But also unsharp pics at 1/320 f/5.6, which makes no sense to me. Tried my primes too, at various apertures. Could it just be technique, or shutter shock? Any ideas? I do feel quite a tremble when pressing the shutter..

Any other experiences?

Click to expand...

Jumping from 10Mp to 36Mp is significant. When you view a D810 file at 100% you are zoomed in far more than you would be with a D700 file. My guess is that with more experience working with D810 files, you would find that the iso noise isn't as bad as your first impression. But in the end, it's up to you, depending on your own expectations.

Regarding image sharpness, same consideration applies. At 100%, motion blur or missed focus is more evident. This could be a technique issue or some lens fine tuning might be needed.

If you are brave, post some sample images. Others with the same body could tell you if your results are typical or if something unusual is involved.