Looking for a suitable FF camera.

[Albert Sim]

Good day to everyone.
I try to make this short.
Now using Nikon D7000, would like to have one Full-Frame. Not sure which model to go for.

Initially I was keen at the new D4 but after going over many of its reports, I am a bit down on it. Because :- (correct me please if I am wong)
1) I am a keen amateur, not a pro. Though I have enough savings for it. May be going pro later.
2) I don't think I need some of its high-tech features such as the high fps (I am not a Sport Photographer), extreme ISO range (well, sometimes I shoot at night, but might not to that extreme), and the worst is its fantastic very very high-tech video and wireless features (I don't need that at all !), and all these have included in its high price tag!

My favourite fields of photography are landscape, macro and wildlife.

Can anyone show me some lights please ? Thankkkkkk you.

[Mark von Kanel]

im in exactly the same situation, though i have a wife drooling over my D7k!! so I'm asking the same questions but have pretty much decided that the d4 isn't for me even though wifie is encouraging me to go for it so I've decided on the d800 though i don't really need 36mp either and would prefer a slightly faster frame rate but i suppose that i can use it in DX mode for that extra reach with the lenses, faster frame rate and smaller file size..... maybe the d700?..... but its almost the same price.....should i go canon?!! any advice from owners would be cool and the less i spend on cam can go on studio equipment.....

[Donald]

Albert and Mark

In wasn't sure from either of your posts why you thought you needed a full frame camera. Perhaps if you were able to say that, people might be better able to make suggestions.

[Albert Sim]

Hi Mark,
just a piece of info for you.
As far as I know about the high 36mp D800, you need a real good focusing on that camera !
Else you will get into troubles when you enlarge the image.

[Manfred M]

I was in exactly the same position. I've been shooting with a D90 since shortly after it first came out and it did not take me long to figure out that I would be heading to FF in the future and based my lens purchases on that assumption. Financially, I could have gone in any direction and came to the same conclusion on the D4; too much of stuff I would never use and the features that set it apart from the "competition" were not worth the money to me.

I had a good hard look at the D3 variants and the D700. Frankly, these cameras have not been discounted nearly deeply enough as compared to the newer offerings. Sorry folks, paying top money for 4-1/2 year old technology does not make a lot of sense to me.

I ordered the D800 the day it was announced and it arrived about a week ago, and I have been learning how to use it ever since. In my view, definitely the right move, and other than storage costs in camera (bought a few CF cards) and installed a 4TB drive on my computer, the camera has been great. I find I do a lot more shooting with fixed lenses off a tripod to get the maximum resolution out of the sensor, I does create fine looking hand-held images as well.

I still shoot like a film shooter and very rarely use burst mode. It's a wonderful studio and landscape camera. The only wildlife I've shot so far are birds and some deer in the woods, and no complaints there. The only thing that I don't love is that it is a lot harder on batteries than my old cameras. Would I go Canon? No, just too much money invested in Nikon glass and accessories. I had a good look at the Canon 5D Mark III last week; nice camera, but priced too high versus the Mark II, in my opinion.

[Manfred M]

Hi Mark,
just a piece of info for you.
As far as I know about the high 36mp D800, you need a real good focusing on that camera !
Else you will get into troubles when you enlarge the image.

Carefully said, that has not been my experience. I did side by side shots that were hand held with my D90 and my D800. For the same size of enlargement (my Epson 3880 printer goes up to a 19" x 22" print), the D800 had better quality. If I were to do a 2m x 3m print and viewed it with a magnifying glass, perhaps. But at that resolution my D90's print would look even worse.

[Albert Sim]

Albert and Mark

In wasn't sure from either of your posts why you thought you needed a full frame camera. Perhaps if you were able to say that, people might be better able to make suggestions.

Hahaaa Donald, you got me.
well, let me structure it a bit...
1) bigger sensor bigger pixels to produce better and smoother images, (am i right or wrong ?)
2) I'll have my 70-200mm fixed on my D7000 to get the advantage of its crop factor and to reduce the risk on changing lenses in some of the extreme conditions. While the FF can have my wide-angle or macro or prime on it.
3) may be...... may be... I think I should have one FF .

[thatguyfromvienna]

You might want to consider the D3.
Still a great camera without a doubt and the price has dropped considerably ever since the D4 hit the shelves.
OTOH, in terms of value for money, you can hardly beat the D800.

[Manfred M]

Hahaaa Donald, you got me.
well, let me structure it a bit...
1) bigger sensor bigger pixels to produce better and smoother images, (am i right or wrong ?)
2) I'll have my 70-200mm fixed on my D7000 to get the advantage of its crop factor and to reduce the risk on changing lenses in some of the extreme conditions. While the FF can have my wide-angle or macro or prime on it.
3) may be...... may be... I think I should have one FF .

1. Depending on the camera you may or may not have "bigger pixels"; the D800 pixel size is slightly larger than the D7000.

2. The 70-200mm lens only appears to give you more coverage. Crop to the same size and you will have virtually the same image (i.e. same number of pixels; again using the D7000 / D800 comparison). The FF will merely have more "image" that you can crop for the same quality.

What I love about the FF is the viewfinder size. I usually shoot with my glasses on and the larger viewfinder is so much better to use. The other thing that I love is that I have less to worry about when I crop as I still have the larger image that I can work with.

[Albert Sim]

I was in exactly the same position. I've been shooting with a D90 since shortly after it first came out and it did not take me long to figure out that I would be heading to FF in the future and based my lens purchases on that assumption. Financially, I could have gone in any direction and came to the same conclusion on the D4; too much of stuff I would never use and the features that set it apart from the "competition" were not worth the money to me.

I had a good hard look at the D3 variants and the D700. Frankly, these cameras have not been discounted nearly deeply enough as compared to the newer offerings. Sorry folks, paying top money for 4-1/2 year old technology does not make a lot of sense to me.

I ordered the D800 the day it was announced and it arrived about a week ago, and I have been learning how to use it ever since. In my view, definitely the right move, and other than storage costs in camera (bought a few CF cards) and installed a 4TB drive on my computer, the camera has been great. I find I do a lot more shooting with fixed lenses off a tripod to get the maximum resolution out of the sensor, I does create fine looking hand-held images as well.

I still shoot like a film shooter and very rarely use burst mode. It's a wonderful studio and landscape camera. The only wildlife I've shot so far are birds and some deer in the woods, and no complaints there. The only thing that I don't love is that it is a lot harder on batteries than my old cameras. Would I go Canon? No, just too much money invested in Nikon glass and accessories. I had a good look at the Canon 5D Mark III last week; nice camera, but priced too high versus the Mark II, in my opinion.

Yes Manfred, we have the same thinking.
Paying lots of money to buy an old model.... eeeeeemmmmm I think it is a bit stupid .

[Mark von Kanel]

i want a full frame for the shallower depth of field, better for portrait work, which seems to be the way I'm going, i was only jesting about going canon HONEST!

Albert the pixel density is about the same for the D7k so the focusing issues will be the same on both cameras (i think!!!) i had trouble with focusing with my D7k when i first got it but sorted it out with technique and faster shutter speeds....

now i need someone thats going to the US to pick me one up!! ripoff nikon europe strikes again!

[Colin Southern]

i want a full frame for the shallower depth of field, better for portrait work

I don't think FF or crop makes much difference overall when it comes to portraiture.

[Colin Southern]

My favourite fields of photography are landscape, macro and wildlife.

Full Frame will work against you to a degree in each of these areas (some more than others).

- For wildlife, a crop-factor camera will allow you to fill the frame from further away (safer, and less chance of spooking them)

- For macro, a crop-factor camera lets you shoot from further away where you'll get more DoF - and DoF is a huge problem with macro.

- For landscape, with a FF camera, you need to shoot at 1 stop narrower aperture for the same DoF - so you need either more light or a longer exposure.

[Ricco]

Colin,

Can you please clarify your last comment regarding narrower aperture. I know there is a logical reason, I just can't figure it out.


Thanks.

[dan marchant]

Can you please clarify your last comment regarding narrower aperture. I know there is a logical reason, I just can't figure it out.

He was pointing out that the same lens/aperture setting on a FF will give a narrower DOF compared to a cropped body. Narrow DOF is generally bad in Landscape photography where you are trying to get as much as possible in focus. This means that using FF you will have to compensate for the narrower DOF by using a narrower aperture, which in turn means you need more light or a longer exposure.

[bedantabd]

Colin,

Can you please clarify your last comment regarding narrower aperture. I know there is a logical reason, I just can't figure it out.


Thanks.

Hi Ricco,

DOF depends on aperture and sensor size:
Narrow aperture: More DOF
Bigger sensor: Less DOF

So, FF cameras have shallower DOF compared to cropped sensor cameras for the same aperture. So, in order to maintain same DOF, you need to stop down aperture in FF cameras. This will result in less light coming in, which is to be compensated either by slower shutter speed or higher ISO.

Sorry Colin for jumping in, correct me if I am wrong......

[Albert Sim]

Full Frame will work against you to a degree in each of these areas (some more than others).

- For wildlife, a crop-factor camera will allow you to fill the frame from further away (safer, and less chance of spooking them)

- For macro, a crop-factor camera lets you shoot from further away where you'll get more DoF - and DoF is a huge problem with macro.

- For landscape, with a FF camera, you need to shoot at 1 stop narrower aperture for the same DoF - so you need either more light or a longer exposure.

Then, Colin, looks like I shall stay put with my D7000.

But, Sorry Sir, why & what are the purposes of most photographers talking and taking the upgrades ?

[Albert Sim]

Hi Ricco,

DOF depends on aperture and sensor size:
Narrow aperture: More DOF
Bigger sensor: Less DOF

So, FF cameras have shallower DOF compared to cropped sensor cameras for the same aperture. So, in order to maintain same DOF, you need to stop down aperture in FF cameras. This will result in less light coming in, which is to be compensated either by slower shutter speed or higher ISO.

Sorry Colin for jumping in, correct me if I am wrong......

Thank you Bedanta, but there must be so-much-better reasons in justification for photographers in upgrading to an expensive FF, right ?
I am confused really. Please help to verify.

[Albert Sim]

You might want to consider the D3.
Still a great camera without a doubt and the price has dropped considerably ever since the D4 hit the shelves.
OTOH, in terms of value for money, you can hardly beat the D800.

Alexander, have you seen those comments and advice ?
Looks like D800 is a good one to go for; and at the same time, seems not advisable in upgrading to a FF !
OMG, NOT a FF? I really don't think so. But ?????????
I am more confused now.

[Albert Sim]

Manfred,
Seen the comments from Colin ?
Seems better to stay put with my D7000, Then why people upgrading ?
Please help to strengthen my thoughts of buying a FF.