Cheap FX that is still worth buying?

Started 5 months ago | Discussions
bjn70 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,114
Re: Cheap FX that is still worth buying?
1

As above, I'd like to gain a bit of low-light quality compared with my D7200 with an f2.8 lens. Do D600s still have oil-on-shutter syndrome? I'd be looking to get a used 24-120 f4 to go with it. Thanks for any suggestions.

A D600 can be repaired, and there is always the D610, or even better the D750.

However there is no low light advantage of a full frame camera with f4 lens over a DX camera with f2.8 lens, they are effectively equal.  You only gain the advantage if you buy an f2.8 lens for the FX body.  You can again make them equal if you buy a faster prime lens for the DX body but you could buy faster prime lenses for the FX body in which case it will always have the advantage.  If you insist on zoom lenses then the FX will have the advantage except for the one case of the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 lens which for that zoom range will make the DX and FX bodies again equal.

rlandrigan Forum Member • Posts: 70
Re: Cheap FX that is still worth buying?
1

Ideally a used D750 is a best performing value - it's really a fantastic camera. A D610 would be good as well, but the cost difference would still push me to a 750, a little bit extra gets you a lot more.

I'd avoid anything before a D610 - the D700 and D3s are too old, too outclassed by the progress in sensors. The 800 series is bulkier and unless you need the megapixels in a major way, not any better.

.

rlandrigan Forum Member • Posts: 70
Re: Cheap FX that is still worth buying?

Echoing this - if what you are really for is low light performance - the sigma 1.8 zooms and 1.4 primes will do that better than a new body and f4 lens any day. Heck the 35 1.8 DX is a cheap sum forward try that first and see if you get enough light to be happy.

bjn70 wrote:

As above, I'd like to gain a bit of low-light quality compared with my D7200 with an f2.8 lens. Do D600s still have oil-on-shutter syndrome? I'd be looking to get a used 24-120 f4 to go with it. Thanks for any suggestions.

A D600 can be repaired, and there is always the D610, or even better the D750.

However there is no low light advantage of a full frame camera with f4 lens over a DX camera with f2.8 lens, they are effectively equal. You only gain the advantage if you buy an f2.8 lens for the FX body. You can again make them equal if you buy a faster prime lens for the DX body but you could buy faster prime lenses for the FX body in which case it will always have the advantage. If you insist on zoom lenses then the FX will have the advantage except for the one case of the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 lens which for that zoom range will make the DX and FX bodies again equal.

Thomas Hoven Junior Member • Posts: 32
Re: Cheap FX that is still worth buying?
1

rlandrigan wrote:

Ideally a used D750 is a best performing value - it's really a fantastic camera. A D610 would be good as well, but the cost difference would still push me to a 750, a little bit extra gets you a lot more.

I'd avoid anything before a D610 - the D700 and D3s are too old, too outclassed by the progress in sensors. The 800 series is bulkier and unless you need the megapixels in a major way, not any better.

.

I very much agree with the above. I was lucky and picked up a D750 new last winter when they were as low as $1000. I am very pleased with it, and have no upgrade plans. Good balance between size, price and quality - particularly if still photography is your main focus.

If you plan to buy used, make sure it is one of the more recent D750s, I have the impression the issues with the earlier D750s have been sorted on later samples. Mine had no issues (and I checked it for those I am aware of), and the latest firmware.

Went on a forest hike last week-end. Brought my D750. My friend lefty his D810 and D4 at home due to bulk. Who do you think got the best shots?

Thomas

 Thomas Hoven's gear list:Thomas Hoven's gear list
Sony RX100 Nikon D750 Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG Macro Sigma 24-105mm F4 DG OS HSM Nikon AP-F 70-300mm F4.5-5.6E +1 more
sh0wtime
sh0wtime Regular Member • Posts: 140
Re: Cheap FX that is still worth buying?

Bulk of the D810 over a D750?
its 125g heavier! same as a packet of peanuts. not exactly a dealbreaker

 sh0wtime's gear list:sh0wtime's gear list
Leica Digilux 2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 Nikon D2Xs Nikon D3 +13 more
New Day Rising
New Day Rising Senior Member • Posts: 5,033
Re: Cheap FX that is still worth buying?
1

sh0wtime wrote:

Bulk of the D810 over a D750?
its 125g heavier! same as a packet of peanuts. not exactly a dealbreaker

The meaningful difference isn't necessarily as much the weight as the bulk. The D810 is larger in all dimensions and that matters when space is at a premium.

https://camerasize.com/compare/#567,557

 New Day Rising's gear list:New Day Rising's gear list
Sony RX100 Nikon D50 Canon EOS 550D Sony Alpha NEX-6 Fujifilm X-T1 +13 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads