Entry Level Fx Camera
- Thread starter eloitay
- Start date
think the 2 advantages that FX still really holds over DX is extremely shallow DOF, and using AIS lenses cos they were made for and are optimized for the FX format. there're still some advantages in low light, but if thats the only thing you re considering then it might not be best to move to fx.
as for weight, yes, theres quite a jump in weight from a d7k to a d700(havent played with d800), when i moved from the d200 to the 700 i had to be more careful with weight, usually having to take 1 lens out of the bag as compared to the d200. its also chunkier..
for travel id suggest dx: d7k, tokina 11-16 2.8, 35 1.8, tamron 17-50 2.8, tokina 50-135 2.8.
if you want to play on both fields, get the D800 which will let you use the 18-200 at 16mp..
personally i use d700, 17/3.5, 35 1.4 ais, 50 1.2 ais, 50-135 3.5 ais for travel
as for weight, yes, theres quite a jump in weight from a d7k to a d700(havent played with d800), when i moved from the d200 to the 700 i had to be more careful with weight, usually having to take 1 lens out of the bag as compared to the d200. its also chunkier..
for travel id suggest dx: d7k, tokina 11-16 2.8, 35 1.8, tamron 17-50 2.8, tokina 50-135 2.8.
if you want to play on both fields, get the D800 which will let you use the 18-200 at 16mp..
personally i use d700, 17/3.5, 35 1.4 ais, 50 1.2 ais, 50-135 3.5 ais for travel
Last edited:
Grey prices from artworkfoto:
-D7000 ($1650 - local set according to the website)
-Sigma 10-20 ($670 - grey)
-Nikon 24-120 f4 VR ($1523 from technogadgets, artworkfoto doesn't sell 24-120 f4)
-Sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS HSM ($1560 - grey)
Total is $5403, just barely enough to get a grey set SB900 ($590). However if you get the flash you won't have any dry cabinet or flash modifiers or tripods or any other accessories.
I still think a DX camera with FX lenses will be better than the incomplete FX setup though. Fact is photography gear and accessories are expensive; $6000 is not nearly enough for a full setup.
I actually would second the notion of going for a D700 and getting more lenses.
OR as mentioned earlier in the thread, buy a DX with full frame lenses (then take the plunge when you're ready. also provided that for your own shooting you don't need the wide end)
I'm personally waiting for the true entry level FX to come out
and I was reminded of brownboots' thread in the landscape travel... really really spectacular photos from a very very modest canon set up
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/land-city-scapes-travel/942909-105-days-europe-adventure.html
it's all about knowing exactly what you need
just to share, my 4 lenses setup + body(Canon 7D), already cost in excess of 6k.
haven't factor in flash, dry cabinet, tripod, accessories, bags(you need good quality one, seriously), nitty gritty stuffs etc.
to be honest, 6k is barely enough for a decent crop setup, let alone going 35mm full frame.
haven't factor in flash, dry cabinet, tripod, accessories, bags(you need good quality one, seriously), nitty gritty stuffs etc.
to be honest, 6k is barely enough for a decent crop setup, let alone going 35mm full frame.
now that this has been mentioned, TS what is your preference in terms of:
first hand/ second hand/ grey set
original vs third party lenses
do you need a flash? do you already have a dry cabinet?
LOL help us help you plan (or rather, let me dream what I might do with $6000) :bsmilie:
my setup gives me flexibility over what i want/can/know-how-to shoot.
but my focus is on landscape photography(the bulk of the focus) and family portrait, which is why i'm willing to spend on tripod, filters and flash accessories.
so yes, maybe TS can point us to his genre of photography, so that we can(help him) better spend the 6k budget. :bsmilie:
You got to ask yourself why you need FF. Or perhaps you just can (valid too)
Do you print very large A0 or larger, there the MP makes a difference?
Will you need the best low light sensor performance? Or use a tripod to get the best quality out of landscape/travel shots?
There are plenty of good/capable camera systems out there nowadays. Some without the encumbrance of a FF system.
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/land-city-scapes-travel/968740-traveling-my-mirrorless-pen.html
D7K is a very capable camera too. I don't see how its that limiting, especially in the portraits/travel/landscapes/product genres you'd like to focus on.
Do you print very large A0 or larger, there the MP makes a difference?
Will you need the best low light sensor performance? Or use a tripod to get the best quality out of landscape/travel shots?
There are plenty of good/capable camera systems out there nowadays. Some without the encumbrance of a FF system.
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/land-city-scapes-travel/968740-traveling-my-mirrorless-pen.html
D7K is a very capable camera too. I don't see how its that limiting, especially in the portraits/travel/landscapes/product genres you'd like to focus on.
Last edited:
if planing to get on $6k for FX.
my list here for 2nd hand price :
1) D700 = $2000~2300
2) 20mm f2.8D = $600
3) 28-300mm VR = $1300
4) SB-910 = $650
still got balance for $1150 to buy some dry cabinet, filter, battery, memory card etc.
my list here for 2nd hand price :
1) D700 = $2000~2300
2) 20mm f2.8D = $600
3) 28-300mm VR = $1300
4) SB-910 = $650
still got balance for $1150 to buy some dry cabinet, filter, battery, memory card etc.
It's possible but a very weird setup. Not taking advantage of the thinner DOF that FF sensor gives, too. For portraits, with a cheaper DX setup, can easily get thinner DOF than such a FF setup. For travel, a D7000 + Tamron 18-270 does (arguably) even more than the D700 + 28-300 does. For products, would be nice to have 1 more flash, and maybe a lens with larger aperture (20mm is just not for shooting products) or a macro lens
D200, D300, D300s and D700 are all classified as professional camera bodies by Nikon, thou they are not in the flagship.
however, using such camera does not classified users as professionals.
of course, there are more casual users owning such cameras than the professionals.
Ok, I think I make a mess out of the requirement and discussion.
This is my whole chain of thought, maybe someone can help fix my decision making flaw in my brain a bit.
Basically you can say I have clean sheet kind of equipment since I cannot be forever borrowing my dad's equipment and he do not intend to invest.
So I am a neutral dude.
I was looking at D7000 since it is pretty much top of the DX range and I would say pretty decent but as shared by some poster here, DX do have limit in the bokeh they can have. Ok this seems conflicting to the equipment I want that is a 28mm to 200mm zoom lens.
Basically I work out my math, with my budget range and fx body I can only get one zoom lens and one fx body and the rest of the equipment either I inherit from my dad or I just going to buy them but that is excluded from the 6k.
Reason why I am doing so is immediate need is travel so zoom lens = more important, I wait out a few months I will get the 85mm for portrait then maybe year end I get a macro lens for product shoot. So yes, I do understand if I go straight for DX, i can get one full set for 6k compare to my slow expansion strategy in FF.
I considered canon also because people claim that it is cheaper for lens I mean given x dollars, canon probably get more value since limited money with cheaper lens means you get a variety for a tad lesser? I am not sure if that is considered as advantage since my peers who use canon seldom use that as a convincing point.
So to cut thing short
I have the following choice
canon 60d nikon d7000 with fx lens
5d mark 3 nikon d800 with fx lens
Usage: (Priority)
1. Portrait (Possible low light situation prefer to shoot without flat)
2. Landscape (Travel) Possible low light situation
3. Product shoot (Macro) Studio lighting (Light tent and etc)
Portrait I am looking at 85mm prime for FX or 50mm prime for DX.
Landscape I am looking at 28 to 200mm zoom very tempted to get the one with fixed aperture but I think that probably cost like twice the variable aperture one.
I estimated my price based on US site, so I might be off in the term of my budgeting, and I am not strict off saying I want to burn 6k right away, more of initial outlay I am estimating that if I can do with 3k, I am more than happy.
In term of when I need to use
1. Landscape
2. Portrait
3. Product shoot
Prefer not to use tripod as far as possible.
I strongly prefer lens with VR since it does seems to help when I cannot use fast shutter due to not as optimal lighting, yes I do know that opening up the aperture helps but that will make the background defocus which in some situation is not what I want to achieve.
So do I need all the lens now, I doubt so since on travel i hate to say I will not be bringing everything with me to shoot the perfect shot, therefore for the first lens, I want something really flexible. Since we are on this travel topic, what would be some thing I should look out for in the camera bag. Weather proof is probably the most important but what else? My dad got one from Kata I think it is pretty good except you look like ninja turtle when you wear it but damn usable.
I know this is not short but oh well. For me deciding the camera is one thing, but deciding if I should stick to which camp is probably the hardest. Since DX to FX, it is a straight forward requirement checklist to decide but Nikon to Canon to me is like tough since there is no single camp that is straight out champion and everything come with a trade off. If only I am buying the camera for one single use then it will be a straight forward choice for me.
This is my whole chain of thought, maybe someone can help fix my decision making flaw in my brain a bit.
Basically you can say I have clean sheet kind of equipment since I cannot be forever borrowing my dad's equipment and he do not intend to invest.
So I am a neutral dude.
I was looking at D7000 since it is pretty much top of the DX range and I would say pretty decent but as shared by some poster here, DX do have limit in the bokeh they can have. Ok this seems conflicting to the equipment I want that is a 28mm to 200mm zoom lens.
Basically I work out my math, with my budget range and fx body I can only get one zoom lens and one fx body and the rest of the equipment either I inherit from my dad or I just going to buy them but that is excluded from the 6k.
Reason why I am doing so is immediate need is travel so zoom lens = more important, I wait out a few months I will get the 85mm for portrait then maybe year end I get a macro lens for product shoot. So yes, I do understand if I go straight for DX, i can get one full set for 6k compare to my slow expansion strategy in FF.
I considered canon also because people claim that it is cheaper for lens I mean given x dollars, canon probably get more value since limited money with cheaper lens means you get a variety for a tad lesser? I am not sure if that is considered as advantage since my peers who use canon seldom use that as a convincing point.
So to cut thing short
I have the following choice
canon 60d nikon d7000 with fx lens
5d mark 3 nikon d800 with fx lens
Usage: (Priority)
1. Portrait (Possible low light situation prefer to shoot without flat)
2. Landscape (Travel) Possible low light situation
3. Product shoot (Macro) Studio lighting (Light tent and etc)
Portrait I am looking at 85mm prime for FX or 50mm prime for DX.
Landscape I am looking at 28 to 200mm zoom very tempted to get the one with fixed aperture but I think that probably cost like twice the variable aperture one.
I estimated my price based on US site, so I might be off in the term of my budgeting, and I am not strict off saying I want to burn 6k right away, more of initial outlay I am estimating that if I can do with 3k, I am more than happy.
In term of when I need to use
1. Landscape
2. Portrait
3. Product shoot
Prefer not to use tripod as far as possible.
I strongly prefer lens with VR since it does seems to help when I cannot use fast shutter due to not as optimal lighting, yes I do know that opening up the aperture helps but that will make the background defocus which in some situation is not what I want to achieve.
So do I need all the lens now, I doubt so since on travel i hate to say I will not be bringing everything with me to shoot the perfect shot, therefore for the first lens, I want something really flexible. Since we are on this travel topic, what would be some thing I should look out for in the camera bag. Weather proof is probably the most important but what else? My dad got one from Kata I think it is pretty good except you look like ninja turtle when you wear it but damn usable.
I know this is not short but oh well. For me deciding the camera is one thing, but deciding if I should stick to which camp is probably the hardest. Since DX to FX, it is a straight forward requirement checklist to decide but Nikon to Canon to me is like tough since there is no single camp that is straight out champion and everything come with a trade off. If only I am buying the camera for one single use then it will be a straight forward choice for me.
eloitay said:
the magic behind a lot of landscape shots is long exposure. Just so you know.
Anyway, both Canon and Nikon can do exactly what you require, so I don't understand your dilemma. Just choose a system that you are comfortable with and stick to it I suppose.
You have already pointed out what you love about each system. It is, of course, unfortunate that you cannot have a hybrid of the best from each.
The only thing I can tell you now is that you can get a Canon 5D Mark III fairly easily. Whereas the Nikon D800 is going to be like finding truffles. Expensive and possibly frustrating to wait for it to be available.
Either way, both Canon and Nikon have excellent photographers who do what you want to do, and I am certain you won't be disappointed with either.
eloitay said:
You can't go wrong with either system. Some say Nikon has better sensors and af and canon have cheaper and better glass. But truth is you can really tell the diff. Be it FX or DX, canon or nikon, as long as the image that you produce please you, and the whole process is enjoyable, who cares what format/brand you use?
Bros here are recommending crop sensors due to lighter bodies and lenses since you are just starting out, a heavy body with many functions may not be of use to you. Especially since you're travelling with it.
Anyway, your criteria can be easily filled by crop sensor cameras. Makes no sense to lug around a FF camera with a very fast lens but can't get
Use to The thin DOF when shooting landscape or products right?
Btw price differences between lenses may
Not as big as you may think. Perhaps ~200
To be honest, none of the 3 genres you mentioned needs high ISO performance. Unless you are "not" doing staged portrait or staged product shoot.... But all 3 genres can both be achieve by either camera and more to D800 if you want to have them printed for large canvas for viewing distance less than 5m...
Portrait is more like out door on the move, something like wedding photography and since tons of wedding photographer uses Canon, I am leaning towards that but when it comes to landscape Nikon seems good. So I am kind of back to square 1. I not sure why but canon shoot a better skin tone out of box without post processing, my nikon peers are telling me that post processing will let you achieve similar to what canon give you. Yes both is competent system or else I would not even bother to compare but which is more suitable for me is a big question mark. Any one know of a shop that already have the d5 mk3 for rental? How much would the rental be.
Similar threads
