D610 or D810? Landscapes. Also lens advice

Mike79

Until now I have been primilarly interested in photographing wildlife for several years. I have a D7100 and 500 f/4 VR lens which covers the task well. But I am now wanting to branch out into other areas and try my hand at landscape shooting. I would like a full frame body for this.

I know the D610 and D810 are comparable with dynamic range and that is a high priority. In terms of landscape style shooting only, does the D810 offer enough other advantages to justify the higher cost? I rarely print and never massive so 36mp is not of great importance for landscapes for me.
I would like to keep my investment as small as possible (not buying more than I need unnecessarily) but if the D810 has a significant advantage for landscape photography I would love to hear about it. Obviously it would be the better choice if I also wanted to use it for my wildlife shooting at some point which is something I need to consider too.

As for lenses. I am leaning to the 16-35 f/4. Is this a good choice?
I think I would love the 14-24 but can not justify the cost at this point, and also the filter issue. Speaking of filters, which filters should a newbie landscape shooter be looking at investing in? As you might tell, I'm quite new to this style of shooting so apologies for the basic questions :-S

Thank you for any advice you might be able to provide!

Mike79

Another alternative I failed to mention, perhaps picking up a used D600 that has had the shutter mechanism replaced?

Msmoto

I happen to have the 16-35mm f/4 VR and think it is exceptionally sharp, albeit some barrel distortion is present which can be managed in post.

I also shoot a D800E. There is something about the image recored with 36 mp, vs 16 MP on my D4, which is difficult to describe. But there is a characteristic, similar to what one sees in large format.....4" x 5" or larger in the days of film.

So, for landscapes a possible way to do it might be a used D800/E and the 16-35mm. Works for me.n Here is one taken with the 16-35mm
https://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/14629545365/sizes/o/

My preference is to use prime lenses, and for landscapes I like the 24mm f/3.5 PC or the 24mm f/1.4 Nikkor.

PB_PM

The D800/D810 are best in class for landscape shooting, but the question is will you be taking advantage of it? If you are viewing the pictures on a computer screen, or small prints, and nothing else I doubt you'd notice much difference between the 24 and 36MP sensor.

The 16-35mm F4 VR is a great landscape lens, and is much lighter than the 14-24, which is advantageous for any hiking. The VR is also extremely effective. As for filters, a good circular polarizer and a set of graduated neutral density filters would be a good place to start.

heartyfisher

What other lenses do you have besides the 500 f4 ?

I find it rather unusual if that the only lense you have. the main criteria for a landscape lense is edge to edge sharpness at f8. That means almost any lense is suitable for "trying" landscape photography. Landscape usually means "printing large" but you say its not what you are aiming for. Again that points to almost any lense for your requirement.

Why not just use your current camera and get a second hand wide angle lense for it to try landscape? say 10-24 ? and if you like it sell it and consider the FF with 16-35. or you may find the 10-24 is all you need.

Mike79

Hi heartyfisher, I also have the 70-200 f4 and 50mm 1.8G as well as the 105 Nikon macro. None of these are suited to landscapes. I would prefer to use a full frame camera for landscapes due to the wider field of view, and increased dynamic range.

PB_PM - yes that is my main concern, whether i would be taking full advantage of a D8xx camera, whichever one I might go for. I think if i went this path I would fork out for the D810 as it seems to be quite a lot better in many areas compared to the older models.

MSmoto - I would also prefer a prime lens however I didn't think 24mm would be wide enough. I imagine taking a lot of shots in rainforest environments and i'd like to have a wider view than what 24mm can provide I think. With that said, I've never shot full frame and am not familiar with just how wide 24mm might feel on it.

thanks everyone for the responses. Much food for thought

PB_PM

24mm (16mm is the DX crop equivalent), just so you know. It's wide, but in a tight spot it's not. You might also want to consider the 20mm F1.8G, which would fit the category of primes and 20mm (13mm in DX) is a lot wider than 24mm. Just something else to consider.

WestEndFoto

The 50 is better for landscapes than you think. The 7O-200 will be useful to. All you need is the 20 1.8 and 28 1.8 with a D800 and you are set. If you get a zoom 24 megapixels is enough.

You will not need anything wider than 2O often.

Of course, "parlais in FX".

jjb930

I personally love the Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8. Great solid lens. Similar filter issue as Nikon's 14-24mm, but I got mine on sale from B&H for about $550 and it was worth every penny.

WestEndFoto

Don't forget a tripod. Your shutter will be slow at blue and golden hour. If you are on a budget, get the best ballhead that you can afford. You can always steady a cheap tripod with your hand, but a cheap ballhead is frustrating.

heartyfisher

As @westendfoto says the 50 and 70-200 are more useful than you think for landscape.

Have a look at these. http://www.boredpanda.com/amazing-landscape-photos/ I would say at least half are 50 mm or longer. I would take his suggestion of the 20mm f1.8 to complement your current lenses if you still are adamant on going FF. otherwise consider the 10-24 or 12-24 dx lenses

Regarding dynamic range, I have a friend who is a very good landscape photographer. His photos are amazing. You will be surprised to see what a tripod and a subtle touch of HDR can produce. The difference between FX and DX is you may need 3 photos instead of 4 to make the HDR.

To clarify my suggestion, the Fx cameras are nice. you don't need an excuse to get them. However, your D7100 is no slouch. You can get very very good landscape photos from it. Your main issue now is probably technique. You know the joke where people say "your cooking is great, you must have a good stove" ? you may be saying it to yourself?

sevencrossing

If you are only going to buy one lens
then the 16 -35 is the one to get
VR is a big advantage, as you can hand hold at remarkably slow shutter speeds, without having to carry one of those heavy things with three legs
This sunrise won me £1,000 in a local competition - 24 hours in Bristol
No its not quite sharp at the edges so do look at the new 20mm f 2.8
also beware there are reports of batch variations with the 16 -35

As other have said there are times when you may need something longer, this was taken @92mm with the 80-400


Do you need 36 mp ?
you never know when you or a client, might want a big print or poster
I like the ability to shoot wide, and do the final crop, in the comfort of my own home
( yes I know I should get it right in camera but when shooting sunrises at stupid O'clock my brain is not always fully awake)

Advantages of the D750 - lighter and a tilt screen for those low level shots
If you don't like zooms look at the new 20mm f 2.8

Pistnbroke

36 MP every time .but avoid the D800 if you are looking to save money noisy vibrating shutter go D810. The 14mm Samyang is a great lens but clearly its foot zoom!

Golf007sd

@Mike79: First things first...welcome to NRF. Second, would you be able to give us a budget?

A few good points made above are worth noting again:

+1 on WestEndFoto on good tripod
+1 on sevencrossing in considering the D750
+1 on PB_PM recommendation on CPL's & Grad ND filters & ND's (3-5 stop)

Given your past knowledge base in photography, I think it is safe to say you are not a novice, thus my point will be with that in mind.

1) Depending on the lighting condition, the faster the lens the better. You want DR...then you need to keep ISO as low as possible; and fast lenses, hence 2.8 or less.
2) Use a tripod for all shots to get sharp, clean images.
3) Get a remote release shutter cable; many shots will require long exposures (.5-2 sec. or more).

The 16-35 f/4 will do the job, but you are right: you will love the 14-24 2.8 (don't worry about the filters...for now). But should you go with that lens, consider getting this filter as well: Hoya 77mm FLW HMC Lens Filter

Lastly, take your D7100 & 50 1.8 and play around. You will be surprised at what you can capture. Moreover, this will help in saving funds toward your new adventure.

More to say but, that should provide some more "food for thought."

heartyfisher

LOL you guys love to spend others peoples money ! :-) seriously go look at all the amazing landscape photos with all the dx wide angles like the sigma 10-20, tamron 11-16, nikons own 10-24 and 12-24 not to mention the micro43 cameras and their lenses. yes Fx is nice but ...

sevencrossing

LOL you guys love to spend others peoples money !

The whole point of NRF is spending OPM

The Op already has a D7100
He want more dynamic rage. It does not matter what lens he uses the dynamic range of the D7100 will be 13.7. If he wants more, the answer is full frame. The D810 has 14.8 the D750 14.5

Yes you can shoot great landscapes even , with an iphone but if you shoot against the light, dynamic range is vital
Big advantage of the D810 if you pictures sucks, you know it's you, not the camera, that is the problem

dissent

He want more dynamic rage.

Excellent typo. Ranks right up there in awesomeness with Msmoto's "poet processing".

Lovely images also, btw.

sevencrossing

posts from me without typos are probably forgeries

donaldejose

In my opinion the best current DSLR for landscapes is the Nikon D810 because it has the lowest base ISO, the highest megapixels and the largest dynamic range. You might as well go for that one if you can afford it. It will also be better for wildlife in good light and in low light as long as you don't need the extra reach offered by the D7100.

tcole1983

If I were shooting landscapes for more than a hobby I would have the d810. +1 to msmoto's thought on the look from them (and I am pro dx). As for lenses...to me that is a harder question. Even though many recommend ultra wides it really depends on the type of landscape. At times the 14-24 is probably great but at other times the 24-70 or even something falling in your 70-200 range might be more appropriate. When I shoot my 17-55 it is usually stuck at two different sides for landscapes the 17 or 55.

I find lots of times in city scapes or in a forested area hiking around I am more on the wide as I can go side. When I am in a more open area or mountains I find myself more at the long end. When I first started more landscapes I was gung ho on an ultra wide and got the 12-24 f4. I found it very limiting as it only zooms 12 mm and it was in fact too wide many times. I took it to the mountains and I was getting my 105 out.

heartyfisher

Totally agree that D810 is the best DR out there at the moment but 1ev more DR above 13.7 for $3000.. ?
The best way to get more DR is multi exposure and really the D7100 has more than enough DR compared to other brands. and if you are going to do multi frame DR with a tripod you just need to take one more frame to get more DR than the D810. I would say get a few more techniques ticked off before you spend $5000-6000 or more for an FX system to "try" landscape. further more the D7200 is just around the corner.. i would expect at least half a stop of DR improvement. there are some really nice Landscapes with just the kit lenses. Remember you are shooting at F8 most times for landscape., almost any lense is reasonably sharp at F8.

sevencrossing

He want more dynamic rage.

Excellent typo. Ranks right up there in awesomeness with Msmoto's "poet processing".

PitchBlack said :
crap with reckless abandon

PB_PM

36mp is not just for printing big, it's to be able to crap with reckless abandon.

I don't need 36MP, or any for that matter to crap with reckless abandon, it's a natural occurrence of the human body. )

Now when it comes to cropping, that's another story.

Golf007sd

@heartyfisher: Shooting at F8 is not the underling factor for landscape in relation to the lens. It is the available light that is key. During the blue or golden hour, your aperture setting will very quite hard. Getting the most out of a camera's dynamic range, without having to take multiple exposure, ISO needs to be kept to a minimal. In addition, one of the advantages of having wide angle lenses, when used for landscape in difficult lighting condition, is that you can shoot wide open because the plane of focus is so wide that the entire landscape is in focus.

sevencrossing

The best way to get more DR is multi exposure

Yes but that needs one of those heavy cumbersome three legged thingys
it does not work very well if anything is moving eg: water, the sea, trees, boats, grass in foreground, birds or people

Parke1953

You guys are grate. LOL