New Photographer, which Nikon camera to go with?

Started 8 months ago | Discussions thread
jkokura Regular Member • Posts: 114
Re: New Photographer, which Nikon camera to go with?

harvophoto wrote:

Thank you for the in-depth reply. One reason I want to get another camera is because some gigs straight up have a 20-24 megapixel minimum. I've run into this problem a few times now in just a short while. I want to avoid working for other people and work with clients directly, but at the moment I need to have craigslist, etc gigs open to me, where I would work as a contractor. I would probably just spend my money on lenses if it wasn't for this. I thought about selling the D3s to buy another body, but I am sort of emotionally attached to it because it is my first camera haha.

Got it. I can be ruthless when it comes to attachment to things. If you wanna keep it, go for it. Doesn't mean you don't upgrade to a D5 or D850 or something like that, but it will mean that when you do you'll end up not using the D3s, and then it will sit unused. As long as you're kosher with that, it's cool.

So the 15-30mm f2.8 is an FX lens? I want to make sure I have at least a 16mm equivalent for real estate, as those gigs seem relatively plentiful.

The Tamron 15-30mm G2 is an FX lens. It often wins in the shootouts between the Nikon, Sigma and Tamron Wide Angle Zooms, for example see the Fstoppers youtube video. It can be had for $800 used, give or take.

The 200-500mm seems like a good bet to me. I was also just checking out the 200-400 f4, which goes for around 1400 used. Slightly more than the 200-500, but the extra stop in aperture would be really useful.

I own the 200-500, and I can verify it is very good. However, it's not bright enough for indoor work without pushing the ISO up high. On my D500 outside I can't think of something at that price point that I'd rather have. That said, I have only compared it to the 150-600 lenses from Sigma and Tamron. If I could compare it to the 200-400 from Nikon, or any of the bright primes, I might have a different opinion.

I'm thinking I might buy a 1.4x teleconverter right now, so I can at least up my max focal length to 280mm with my 70-200, as well as buy a Nikon D810. I feel like the extra resolution would be great for portraits and landscapes, as well as meet the megapixel minimum of course. I've made some money recently on portraits so it could help with that. From there I could save up for a 300mm f2.8 and have a legit sports setup that could be used for large fields and night games.

That is a really good call. A lot of people recommend the TCs for use with the 70-200, so if that gets the range you want that helps. Again, another way to do it might be to use the D500, as it's a precropped image at that focal range. But if you want the wide angle stuff, the D850 is really that much better than the 810 that it might be too little of a step up from your D3s. But that said, it's waay cheaper right now, and that holds a certain level of importance for most.

I really appreciate the advice Jacob.

You're welcome! Good luck with your enterprise.

Jacob

 jkokura's gear list:jkokura's gear list
Nikon D500 Nikon D5600 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR Nikon 85mm F1.8G Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Art +4 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow