Switching from d90 do d610

[Rservello]

Thx for the replies. If there is no big impact the I don't see a need to through away any money. It would just be for the sake of having full frame and updated gear. I also believe that composition is the key component of photography, but many times I feel like my photos could be little sharper. When i do look at photos at different magazines or from popular photographers on many website, I am amazed of how sharp they are. I only use light room for the post processing and maybe that is just not enough or maybe I am not good enough in post processing or shooting technique. But in general with 50mm f/1.4 prime and 55-200mm f/4 I get the most satisfying photos.

The ability to lift detail out of the shadows is worth the upgrade alone in my opinion. The autofocus is more accurate for moving subjects. Higher ISO shooting, cleaner files, more detail. There is nothing wrong with the D90, I used mine for years & still own it. But there is a noticeable difference in what each can produce.

Jim

Mu understanding was that these 24?MP sensors do not yield to as much PP as earlier models, that pulling detail out of the shadow would not be as effective on a D7100 and D610 as on a D90, despite other obvious technical advantages of those cameras. I'm told the files degrade much more quickly than on D90 so if you're relying on a lot of PP, stay where you are.

 

[blwegrzyn]

OK, as promised, here goes.


D90 ISO 200


D600 ISO 200


D90 ISO 400


D600 ISO 400


D90 ISO 800


D600 ISO 800


D90 ISO 1600


D600 ISO 1600


D90 ISO 3200


D600 ISO 3200


D90 ISO 5000 (sorry, that's the limit)


D600 ISO 6400

And for a bonus:


D600 ISO 12800

All shot with the same 50mm 1.4G Nikkor lens. As you can see, there isn't much difference at low ISO. They both produce almost identical, beautiful images. But the D600 destroys the D90 at medium and high ISO.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/49019071@N03/
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2334596/
* Sensitive Internet User Disclaimer: All opinions are my own and are not meant to offend you or damage your precious beliefs.

thx for the test, yep they both look almost identical, hard to tell the difference, i can only notice difference in depth of field and higher iso, which makes my decision ever harder

 

[larrywilson]

How is the d610 for auto focusing on fast moving subjects such as bif? I like the thought of a 24 mp sensor camera. I had the d7000 with the 39 point focus points and didn't get along with it very well, had a lot of miss focus images.

Larry

 

[jtra]

blwegrzyn,
have you noticed my comparison in this thread? I see you did not commented on it.

 

[Rservello]

How is the d610 for auto focusing on fast moving subjects such as bif? I like the thought of a 24 mp sensor camera. I had the d7000 with the 39 point focus points and didn't get along with it very well, had a lot of miss focus images.

Larry

I use af-on set to the AE-lock button and it's pretty fast!

 

[JF69]

Hey guys, ignore the post if you want. I did a favor, and I don't have the time to test in manual o. I did not planned out the comparistion. I was in a hurry, but I wanted to get something out. Use the test if you want, if not, then go away. I didn't do this test to argue with you whether it is valid or not. I knew ahead of time it's going to subject to opinions. I have no time for this. I did someone a favor. So, if you can't find any usefulness, that's fine with me. I will not continue with any conversation here. Do I fee offended? YES. It's like someone did you a favor, and you say that not the way to do it. That's rude. At least you could havae said, thank you.

Hey, I did thank you

No need or cause to feel offended, your eyes were opened to the correct testing methodology. We all can learn from one another, no big deal.

 

[JF69]

a question for Nexu1 please:
what picture control were you using on the D610?
(not exposure mode but Picture Control; eg: Standard pic control?)

I like what I'm seeing, this SOOC** skin colour & skin tone is waaaaaaaay better thn the utterly hopeless SOOC output of previous Nikons like the D3, or D300/s.
**SOOC = straight-out-of-camera

 

[wasserball]

Hey guys, ignore the post if you want. I did a favor, and I don't have the time to test in manual o. I did not planned out the comparistion. I was in a hurry, but I wanted to get something out. Use the test if you want, if not, then go away. I didn't do this test to argue with you whether it is valid or not. I knew ahead of time it's going to subject to opinions. I have no time for this. I did someone a favor. So, if you can't find any usefulness, that's fine with me. I will not continue with any conversation here. Do I fee offended? YES. It's like someone did you a favor, and you say that not the way to do it. That's rude. At least you could havae said, thank you.

Hey, I did thank you
No need or cause to feel offended, your eyes were opened to the correct testing methodology. We all can learn from one another, no big deal.

Hey, I'm just having a little fun too. I don't normally shoot with the D90 and D600s anyway. I really had to go out of my way to re-energize them.

 

[fotolopithecus]

I plan to sell my d90 with all dx lenses and leave only 35mm and 50mm FX lenses and use them with d610. What i wonder is if the D610 will give me sharper images compared to d90? Would this be like "OMG" difference or not much? I cannot see too much on the example photos as there are no similar photos there. The studio comparison tool does not have images for d90.

thx

I have a D610, and I know the D90 to be a fine camera even to this day. Having had a D7000, I'd say you will see improvement in the overall look of your images with the D610, but don't expect the difference to be astounding. Too much hyperbole these days, yes D610 is better, and as a photographer the difference wont be lost on you, but don't expect the average non-photog to see the difference.

 

[wasserball]

Unfair comparison! No one would use a single flower for a comparison test and then make a decision from that. Take photos of a person, children, animals, buildings, or landscape. From those kind of photos, you can't tell the difference between the D90 and the D610. Certainly you don't buy a car solely because it is faster from 0-60.

 

[Rservello]

Unfair comparison! No one would use a single flower for a comparison test and then make a decision from that. Take photos of a person, children, animals, buildings, or landscape. From those kind of photos, you can't tell the difference between the D90 and the D610. Certainly you don't buy a car solely because it is faster from 0-60.

Lets not be spiteful.

 

[Nexu1]

Hi JF that photo was taken raw so no in camera picture controls processing. Just Lightroom for lens correction and a smudge of sharpening. For the record this one was a "worse" example of the poor d5100 white balance, most were not this bad. But under artificial lighting the D5100 was consistently more to the right on both temp and tint.

 

[j_photo]

All shot with the same 50mm 1.4G Nikkor lens. As you can see, there isn't much difference at low ISO. They both produce almost identical, beautiful images. But the D600 destroys the D90 at medium and high ISO.

thx for the test, yep they both look almost identical, hard to tell the difference, i can only notice difference in depth of field and higher iso, which makes my decision ever harder

For what it's worth: I went from the D7000 to the D800. With the Nikkor 17-55 on the former and the 24-70 on the latter, there was a easily noticed improvement in image quality under normal shooting conditions. In low light, the difference was even greater.

 

[blwegrzyn]

blwegrzyn,
have you noticed my comparison in this thread? I see you did not commented on it.

Yes i did , but because you have different lenses on both cameras i did not feel like it was real comparison.

 

[Nexu1]

blwegrzyn,
have you noticed my comparison in this thread? I see you did not commented on it.

Yes i did , but because you have different lenses on both cameras i did not feel like it was real comparison.

Your snobbyness about lenses is ill informed. Just like your shallow comment to the pics I posted. If someone posts two pictures from relatively comparable lenses, lenses that actually build in the crop factor for the sake of composition, then IMO you should rely on those comparisons heavily. I posted shots from 35mm f1.8 DX (on D5100) and 50 mm f1.8G on D610... which is very comparable. 35mm on DX = 52 mm on FX. The 2 lenses are of very similar quality. Would you prefer someone uses a zoom and racks it in and out to give you the same field of view? You think a zoom lens is a better than a prime for comparing a camera body? You want people to move forward and back until they get precisely the same framing with the same lens? Good luck. You think every zoom lens performs the same throughout it's entire zoom range (newsflash- most zooms end up being stronger at either the wide end or the tele end, but not both- try factoring that into whatever comparison pics you get)?

You ask a generic question about whether or not a body upgrade is going to give you a subjective "OMG difference" and then you turn your nose up at comparisons as if they aren't good enough for your uber precise standards. Whatever. I rented the D610 + 18-35 lens for a week and shot probably close to 100 side by side shots with comparable lenses (including my primes) using the cameras and lenses EXACTLY how I would use them in real world settings... you certainly don't make me want to share what I learned with you.

Based on your responses in this thread you should keep your D90.

 

[blwegrzyn]

blwegrzyn,
have you noticed my comparison in this thread? I see you did not commented on it.

Yes i did , but because you have different lenses on both cameras i did not feel like it was real comparison.

Your snobbyness about lenses is ill informed. Just like your shallow comment to the pics I posted. If someone posts two pictures from relatively comparable lenses, lenses that actually build in the crop factor for the sake of composition, then IMO you should rely on those comparisons heavily. I posted shots from 35mm f1.8 DX (on D5100) and 50 mm f1.8G on D610... which is very comparable. 35mm on DX = 52 mm on FX. The 2 lenses are of very similar quality. Would you prefer someone uses a zoom and racks it in and out to give you the same field of view? You think a zoom lens is a better than a prime for comparing a camera body? You want people to move forward and back until they get precisely the same framing with the same lens? Good luck. You think every zoom lens performs the same throughout it's entire zoom range (newsflash- most zooms end up being stronger at either the wide end or the tele end, but not both- try factoring that into whatever comparison pics you get)?

You ask a generic question about whether or not a body upgrade is going to give you a subjective "OMG difference" and then you turn your nose up at comparisons as if they aren't good enough for your uber precise standards. Whatever. I rented the D610 + 18-35 lens for a week and shot probably close to 100 side by side shots with comparable lenses (including my primes) using the cameras and lenses EXACTLY how I would use them in real world settings... you certainly don't make me want to share what I learned with you.

Based on your responses in this thread you should keep your D90.

if you feel like i don't understand how to compare the equipment , you might just be nice and educate me. You don't have to shout and scream. I was not offensive, so I don't need any of your attitude. I am still learning and every perspective is worth considering.

So i looked at your photos again. In your comparison you have different fstop, shutter speed and iso. Is this a good way to compare?

 

[Rservello]

"You want people to move forward and back until they get precisely the same framing with the same lens? Good luck."

hmmm, I did exactly that. It took 5 minutes out of my life. You've actually spent more time defending yourself on this thread than I spent shooting a proper comparison. Get over it. It's not that important.

 

[blwegrzyn]

So i went to the store to play around with d610 and few things cough me by surprise:

- focus points indicators barely visible comparable to d90 - i like to see where the focus is

[edit] - i forgot to add that pressing the shutter release button just to focus is very difficult to accomplish. Most of the time it would release the shutter.

- zoom buttons flipped- what a stupid idea

- eight-way controller much smaller then d90

All above are little things but it got me angry pretty quick as I am used to d90 which is much cheaper camera but seems like it has a perfect design.

Seems like I need to rent it or buy it to get a total feel of it.

Is your experience similar?

 

[Nexu1]

"You want people to move forward and back until they get precisely the same framing with the same lens? Good luck."

hmmm, I did exactly that. It took 5 minutes out of my life. You've actually spent more time defending yourself on this thread than I spent shooting a proper comparison. Get over it. It's not that important.

 

[Dr Paul]

For what it's worth, I was very close to upgrading from D7K to D610, and had adopted the strategy of only adding FX lenses. I have slowed down and decided to push my skills to the place that I know why my D7K won't accomplish what I seek, then I will upgrade. (There will probably be a D900sx by then) Sharp has never been a problem, even with legacy lenses, but learning how to do PP appropriately and shoot correctly for the result being sought has been a challenge. Those were challenges back in the Kodachrome and PanX days as well.

Clearly, the noise at higher ISOs IS a limiting factor for the D7K, but in good light I doubt I can yet justify the upgrade. The DR is compelling as well. . . when I learn enough to make use of it.

I KNOW I would enjoy the D610, and I also KNOW if I had it I would have nothing to blame but myself for frustrating result. What I am now focusing on is to avoid my old problem of "a poor workman blames his tools." I am not suggesting that is true for anyone else, but I do KNOW that I got caught up in a lot of technical reading and reviews and lost focus on why I got back into photography in the first place.

OK, thanks for the therapy. . . Paul K