Entry Level Fx Camera

[eloitay]

I am currently using D7000 borrowed from my dad and thinking of getting a system for myself.

With not much investment already made to lens I have the flexibility of making a choice between Nikon and Canon.
Namely 5D Mark 3 and D800.
I read around and found like plenty of comparison but I am still kind of stump.

There is only 3 things I am truly interested in getting the Camera for, travel, portrait and product shoot. I am thinking of the system and 1 travel lens (28mm to 300mm) for a start to be under 6000.

I really love the color on canon, it is just so natural but people seems to comment quite a bit on their auto focus and low light auto focus since it does not have the auto focus light and also auto white light balance seems so accurate.

For nikon, I love how sharp it is, everything seems so clear and how snappy the focus is. But its auto white light balance seems off and so is the color of the image taken. A secondary thought is the cost of usage, since being a high megapixel camera, it will require me to buy quite a bit of memory cards for travelling trip.

I understand that some of the stated problem can be fixed by post processing so I been thinking if I should just focus on which company have better lens for the usage I am aiming for and just ignore whatever downside of the system I am buying and hope I get used to the quirk.

On the side note, which system have better VR on their lens, this is pretty important feature for me since I hand hold most of the shots and some low light environment make life hard for me.

Another line of thought is just get a high end dx like d7000 and use FX lens and wait until I find a suitable system that I like but I think there is much disadvantage is doing so and I am kind of concern how different is the weight for a D7000 and D800 with a similar reach since I want to do travel with it, not just studio and portrait.

 

[eloitay]

I am currently using D7000 borrowed from my dad and thinking of getting a system for myself.

With not much investment already made to lens I have the flexibility of making a choice between Nikon and Canon.
Namely 5D Mark 3 and D800.
I read around and found like plenty of comparison but I am still kind of stump.

There is only 3 things I am truly interested in getting the Camera for, travel, portrait and product shoot. I am thinking of the system and 1 travel lens (28mm to 300mm) for a start to be under 6000.

I really love the color on canon, it is just so natural but people seems to comment quite a bit on their auto focus and low light auto focus since it does not have the auto focus light and also auto white light balance seems so accurate.

For nikon, I love how sharp it is, everything seems so clear and how snappy the focus is. But its auto white light balance seems off and so is the color of the image taken. A secondary thought is the cost of usage, since being a high megapixel camera, it will require me to buy quite a bit of memory cards for travelling trip.

I understand that some of the stated problem can be fixed by post processing so I been thinking if I should just focus on which company have better lens for the usage I am aiming for and just ignore whatever downside of the system I am buying and hope I get used to the quirk.

On the side note, which system have better VR on their lens, this is pretty important feature for me since I hand hold most of the shots and some low light environment make life hard for me.

Another line of thought is just get a high end dx like d7000 and use FX lens and wait until I find a suitable system that I like but I think there is much disadvantage is doing so and I am kind of concern how different is the weight for a D7000 and D800 with a similar reach since I want to do travel with it, not just studio and portrait.

 

[dodgethis]

You're a Nikon user, stick with that.

/thread

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that this thread can only end well.

 

[spawnx]

You could possible start a brand war here... But to answer your question objectively, between D800 vs. 5D3, Canon 5D3 should be a better bet for you.

Reason being, while D800 is one awesome camera... it is perhaps not suited for a beginner like you as you will not be able to enjoy the advanced features as much as a pro user.

Secondly, if you do much travel photography... the 36mp might set you back quite a bit on memory storage options and for the average user 36mp is over-kill for travel photography (commercial/portrait another thing lars)

So the 5D3 would suit you much better, and if you had to choose just 1 lens for travel.. it'll be the Canon 24-105L which Nikon has yet to match in terms of value, and quality at that price.

 

[yrh0413]

my advice: go to shops and put both on your hands, and leave the shop with the one that fits your hands the most.

Both are equally good, since you are coming from DX format you are perfectly neutral in getting either FX body as your investment will be similar.

Still, just FYI Canon lenses are cheaper than Nikon's equivalent.

 

[kwanhan]

1) Why do you need a full frame?
2) How much shooting experience do you have? (do you know exactly what lenses you need?)

why not a d7000 and 18-200?

 

[avsquare]

Based on your use, whether it's a 5D3 or D800 is pretty quite your preference already. Both cameras can do exactly what you want to do.

Some 2 cents from me:
- You may like Canon's colours, but if you are a fussy customer, you may find Canon's sensor losing to Nikon's in dynamic range. It's quite a known thing that Canon's sensor are lacking in DR.

- A travel lens like 28-300: Are you looking for good quality ones, or consumer grade? Top grade lens of this range is in the thousands, it WILL exceed your budget of $6000 for body + lens (Body is easily $4.5k plus minus, top grade 28-300 another $2k plus).

- D800 is a high MP camera but if you don't need high MP, you can always shoot at lower resolution. No issues on your memory cards.

- IS (Canon) or VR (Nikon), it's good. You've seen people starting wars about how this Canon camera fares against a Nikon camera (those typical endless Canon VS Nikon wars), but you don't really see Canon IS VS Nikon VR do you. However, you can read up the extensive reviews and comparisons of the 5D3 VS D800 in terms of high ISO, because you can raise shutter speed higher and compensate by using higher ISO. Which camera has better high ISO noise management? For you to decide, I don't want to start a flame war

- Weight when travel: my view is that you can't have everything in a package. You want a high performing camera and use high end lenses, you have to put up with the weight. You want something light for travel, drop your top-end DSLR system and go compact/m43 etc.

 

[rain5533]

Full frame is not for entry level
for entry FX body and need to invest of FX lenses.

There is very very expansive & most of time if you only can afford the AFD lens the quality will be slightly bad on high CA and Light falloff.

But i found the D7000 is really consider better like D700 performance.

If you when to FX : the suitable lens has double cost of DX format.

Izit ok for you?

 

[AnsQ]

I am currently using D7000 borrowed from my dad and thinking of getting a system for myself.

With not much investment already made to lens I have the flexibility of making a choice between Nikon and Canon.
Namely 5D Mark 3 and D800.

You should stick with Nikon, can share lenses with your dad (if he has a good collection of lenses already)

There is only 3 things I am truly interested in getting the Camera for, travel, portrait and product shoot. I am thinking of the system and 1 travel lens (28mm to 300mm) for a start to be under 6000.

$6K may be short of what you will need if you are looking at Canon L lenses. A 5Dmk3 is already $4.4K, that leaves you only $1.6K for lense from 28mm to 300mm. A second-hand 24-70 f2.8 can cost $1.6K.

I really love the color on canon, it is just so natural but people seems to comment quite a bit on their auto focus and low light auto focus since it does not have the auto focus light and also auto white light balance seems so accurate.

For nikon, I love how sharp it is, everything seems so clear and how snappy the focus is. But its auto white light balance seems off and so is the color of the image taken. A secondary thought is the cost of usage, since being a high megapixel camera, it will require me to buy quite a bit of memory cards for travelling trip.

Colours can be adjusted in-camera settings and PP. I haven't use any Nikon cameras yet, so I can't comment about their AF and low light issues, but Canon's work for me most of the time. However, that will also depend on your definition of low light vs mine. Btw, can't the user specify the size of the output?

I understand that some of the stated problem can be fixed by post processing so I been thinking if I should just focus on which company have better lens for the usage I am aiming for and just ignore whatever downside of the system I am buying and hope I get used to the quirk.

On the side note, which system have better VR on their lens, this is pretty important feature for me since I hand hold most of the shots and some low light environment make life hard for me.

Lens, it might be good to do some research and check the specific reviews for the lenses you are planning to get if VR/ IS is something that will affect your choice of system since not all lenses have the same VR/ IS capability.

 

[MechaEd]

You're a Nikon user, stick with that.

/thread

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that this thread can only end well.

I second this. For both statements I might add.

You might as well go with Nikon so at least you can share lenses and other stuff with your dad. Don't want the full 36MP? Then consider the D700.

 

[kollybie]

your dad is already in the nikon camp... why not join him... as you could share the lens with him....

 

[mayhemics]

1) Why do you need a full frame?
2) How much shooting experience do you have? (do you know exactly what lenses you need?)

why not a d7000 and 18-200?

i don't see dx as a necessary rite of passage -- heck, why not begin with hp, compact, and then mirrorless before considering dslr? i started out with the d60 and moved to the d90, before quickly moving to the d700. sure i fumbled a bit in the early days but photography is not as hard as people make it out to be. of course, to be technically proficient, to really maximise the utility of the camera, to be a pro at processing -- that takes years, if not decades. but most of us handling high-end dx or entry fx are not at that level nor will we be. yet that would not stop us from taking reasonably good pictures; i mean i think it's reasonable to assume most of us shoot things that aren't terribly challenging. understanding composition and the basics of exposure is all about practice and more practice, and why not practice with as good a camera as you can begin right off the bat. in the end if you like the hobby enough you would want to explore fx. the only real obstacle is cost, but it doesn't seem to apply in this case.

 

[tecnica]

Either of the brands is good.

The usual bottleneck is what lies behind the viewfinder.

If your dad uses a Nikon, I say you just stick to it.

 

[rain5533]

Either of the brands is good.

The usual bottleneck is what lies behind the viewfinder.

If your dad uses a Nikon, I say you just stick to it.

Yes I agree with you.

If you earn more income sure what brand you also can have one complete set.

 

[kwanhan]

i don't see dx as a necessary rite of passage -- heck, why not begin with hp, compact, and then mirrorless before considering dslr? i started out with the d60 and moved to the d90, before quickly moving to the d700. sure i fumbled a bit in the early days but photography is not as hard as people make it out to be. of course, to be technically proficient, to really maximise the utility of the camera, to be a pro at processing -- that takes years, if not decades. but most of us handling high-end dx or entry fx are not at that level nor will we be. yet that would not stop us from taking reasonably good pictures; i mean i think it's reasonable to assume most of us shoot things that aren't terribly challenging. understanding composition and the basics of exposure is all about practice and more practice, and why not practice with as good a camera as you can begin right off the bat. in the end if you like the hobby enough you would want to explore fx. the only real obstacle is cost, but it doesn't seem to apply in this case.

i acknowledge the points as mentioned above

if I knew that I would have loved photography so much I wouldn't have started with a d5000, probably would have gone for something better.

my only concern is for the TS heavily investing in something ($6000) that he may only be exploring and checking out. (but if $ is not an issue, then by all means, rent both, shoot with both models, do your research on the equivalent lenses for your needs and come to a decision)

 

[Blur Shadow]

Any brand is fine really. I enjoy using the Canon 5D Mark III, and I expect the Nikon D800 to be a delight as well.

It really helps to use the same system as your dad since you can share lenses and other accessories.

But hey, go for Canon if you prefer. No sweat.

 

[Blur Shadow]

Same reply here as well. Both system works.

 

[pachero]

Why always must be the 2 more expensive and new models? D700 or 5D classic cannot meh?

TS, it is not exactly fun having to store and process 22 or 36 MP of images. I know $ is not an issue to many people nowadays, but I encourage you to spend more on glass since u are relatively still new.

 

[eloitay]

I never say Entry Level DSLR, I mention Entry level FX DSLR as in the cheaper range of them without super high ISO or fps.
My mentality of skipping DX and jump to FX is because i definitely going to stick around photography for a while and if I build my DX lens and jump to FX I will need to offload everything.
So I rather get a general lens for now and add on other better lens as time goes by.

Another question for those DX to FX user, is the weight that noticeable?

In term of what lens I want to get AF-S NIKKOR 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR for the travel lens and a 85mm prime for portrait.

I am definitely not a professional but I do my own product shoot so for me it is called value for money, best image value per dollar with a minimum standard. So money is surely an issue but not if I have a good reason for it.
D7000 is like the bottom limit for me, it is good enough but I want my own system now instead of borrowing from my dad so I am setting a limit of 6k. I am extremely attracted to FX because of the low light performance and also if I get FX lens, I have more room to grow since D7000 is already the top end of DX already.

 

[eloitay]

Hi Dodgethis
First, allow me to correct this I am not a Nikon user, rather I just used Nikon before, if this means I am a nikon user, I had used Canon before but that is during the manual film era.

My dad is not going to invest in lens so for me the choice is still flexible.

D800 is a high MP camera but if you don't need high MP, you can always shoot at lower resolution. No issues on your memory cards. ->> this is a sad problem for Nikon, for raw there is no smaller size option unless you go DX mode unlike Canon which have a small raw file size mode from what I read that is.

Yeah, I am kind of worried a lot about the file size that D800 is pumping out as well, I do strongly believe that if money is not an issue and the color quirk that I see on Nikon, I would lean a lot to nikon since I am familiar with it. But I was told that Canon lens is less expensive but is the quality similiar to Nikon one, i mean it is hard to compare since Nikon have superb lens at x range and canon have superb lens for y range, that is why I am so tied. I figuring that lens is more important since the system you can just change when new one come out but lens get stuck with you once you pick them, that is why I am looking at FX right away instead of DX first.

Unfortunately, I cannot afford the best grade of 28mm to 300mm since for lens I am looking at under 2k for my do it all lens before i invest in variety of prime. One question which I always wonder a lot, why does all the sports photographer and wedding programmers seems to all use Canon, same goes for bridal shoot and nikon seems to be used a lot in product shoot, magazine and etc. Granted that my sampling size of photographer is low but it seems a trend.

I am glad that this do not turn in brand war and I do not believe that both are equally good and bottleneck at the user. Equipment is used to help the user, granted that given superb skill you do not need that great of equipment to get good result, just think VR, without tripod VR will help a lot especially if your hand is not exactly super sturdy but given practise yes, you do not need that VR feature but it does help. So my mentality is get the best I can afford and enjoy the photography trip.
I am stump because I am considering way too much factor other than the enjoyment namely cost and upgrade path, if there is a camera with color like canon, DR like nikon, focus like nikon, auto white light balance from canon, I will pick that right away but that is in my dream. Anyone know where I can rent a 5D mark 3 to try out?