Which Nikon body would you get as a 2nd to back up a D810 ?
I'm undecided between the D750 and D7200 but at the same time I'm concerned that I'll just leave either sitting on the shelf because each has too many compromises when compared to the 810.
My instinct is that the 750 is more user friendly but I'm ND filter adverse and 1/4000 is a nasty limit on a camera.
The 7200 has appeal due to the extra reach afforded by the pixel density but I'm unsure if the results will match up to 810 standards. How will the 7200 fare with TC14 and 300mm 2,8 ? Birding etc.
Any experience or input along these lines is appreciated.
Comments
How many FF lenses do you own? While the DX reach may be appealing, it can also disrupt your visual workflow when you're jumping from FX to DX with the same lenses.
Also, why not consider a D800? You can pickup a new one at Amazon for $1800. This would give you a backup camera that would seamlessly fit right into your established workflow.
If you want reach, it is the D7200.
If you want better low light, it is the D750.
If you only want a second body just in case, get a D800 or D810.
I think the D750 would give the same pic quality as a D7200 but with a low light advantage ..but the D750 is not a birding camera ..Tom Hogan is convinced a D400 is on its way in August.
I am not totally convinced that FX lenses work there best on DX.
Two cameras has the advantage of no needing to change between lenses.
I think the 300+1.4 will work well provided you have the ~AF fine tune spot on for each combination of with and without the 1.4 but any birder know that
In addition to the 1/8000 the 7200 is lighter, it has one click higher ISO, deeper buffer, and it costs $1000 less.
http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussion/comment/144916#Comment_144916
You are basically asking if a #2 phillips is better than a #3. Different tools for different jobs.
You mentioned the 300mm + TC1.4 and if the D7200 can take advantage of that combination. Are you saying that you think the D7200 may be inferior to the D810? or that the D7200 would show the limitations of that Combination. I think the Photographylife review of the D7200 shows that the D7200 is a very capable camera that can take advantage of any sharpness any lens can bring to the table, more so than any other camera in the NIKON lineup anyway. On the other hand I think the 300 + TC14 combination is a very very capable team. The PF version should not be exposed though the older version may be, I am not sure.
Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.
what/ why do you want a back up camera
If you want to avoid changing lenses, or are on expedition and worried about the D810 getting damaged, get a second D810
If you just want another camera, then tell us what is wrong ( if anything) with your D810
Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.
I had a D800E and a D700. I wrestled with the D750 vs. D7200 to replace the D700. I went with the D7200 because:
- It allowed me to buy the 10-24 and 16-85 DX zooms for about the money of the D750 alone. The D7200 and the two zooms make a very nice walk-around set that is substantially lighter than the equivalent in FX. I needed this because I travel for work and got tired of lugging the FX gear.
- For birding and wildlife (in pretty good light) the AF system + the density in the D7200 sensor make it a very good wildlife camera. For my style of shooting, the buffer in the D7200 has never been an issue, even shooting raw+jpeg. It was constantly with both the FX cameras.
- For landscape and low light, the D800E still the one I grab. It is substantially better at low light than the D7200. There have been images I've taken where the 36MP really popped next to the 24MP. The D700 is better in low light than the D7200.
I do prefer the controls on the D800E over the D750/D7200 but I'm getting used to the new mode. It's not a significant problem for me.
I have the AF-S 300 f/4D. It works great on the D7200, better than the AF-S 80-400 f/5.6. I've tried the TC-14EII but prefer to crop instead.
So for me there is a clear choice of which body I grab. Neither sits on the shelf. Like Ironheart says, different tools for different jobs, and for me, that is a Good Thing.
I rejected the D750 fearing it had enough in common with, or better than, the D800E that one or the other would sit idle. Both are great in low light. Both need FX lenses. While the D750 saves weight, the FX lenses do not. And, for where I live, I also feared the ribbon connecting the LCD wouldn't deal with the very cold temps. For birds/wildlife, I did not see that the D750 would buy me much besides the improved AF over the D800E.
I've been very pleased with the D7200 (and the two DX zooms I bought with it). I still like the D800E very much. I don't miss the D700.
The only time I don't mind the D7100 is for birding or long macro. I'm thinking of a D610 as a back-up, since I can't afford $3000 for a second D810. I also wouldn't want to be that invested in one camera model.
https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/
The D400 should be here at the end of the year .. ;-) .. jks
Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.
So, maybe instead of a D750 or D7200, a used or refurb D4? This expands the range of capabilities. As to BIF, something I have as yet to master, the D4 is pretty nice:
Bigger: https://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/13915237925/sizes/o/