D7000 or D800 for macro

[Shibang]

Hi All,

I'm hoping somebody can offer some advice here.

I currently use a D7000 + MB-D11 with the 17-55 2.8, 35mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8, 85mm 1.8 and 105mm 2.8 VR.

The 17-55mm never leaves my bag, I really like my primes better and really feel I am covered with anything from the 35mm to the 105mm. Not often do I feel I need something wide but later down the line maybe I will look for a wider prime

Now I used to have a lot of hotel points which were usless in The Netherlands for what you could buy but now that has changed and I cashed them in for vouchers for an electrical shop.

As I really don't need anything I thought I might sell the D7000 + MB-D11, 35mm 1.8 and the 17-55mm 2.8 and replace them with the D800.

Basically it would be like doing a straight swap for the D7000 + MB-D11, 35mm 1.8 and the 17-55mm 2.8 for the D800 without paying anything out of my own pocket.

Everybody always says lenses but as I feel I am covered for what I shoot and I figured if I got the D800 I would be getting something I use everyday compared to something I don't need that I might use now and then.

I mostly shoot macro, people, street and a little landscape but not much.

Does anybody have any experience shooting macro with the D7000 and the D800 and would you say it is worth replacing the D7000 with the D800 mostly for macro.

Thanks and regards

[Polar01]

Gary: if you go to the D800, your lens will be what they are the 105mm will be 105mm whereas it was equalivate to 157.5mm on your D7000. However you will now be able to zoom in and crop the the final image in post production. The D800 is a great camera however I feel that it is best for those who need to produce and print large images.
Here is something I am not really getting my head around where you state:
"I figured if I got the D800 I would be getting something I use everyday compared to something I don't need that I might use now and then."
If you do not use the the camera everyday now, why would you now, use it everyday.

Cheers:

Allan

[Shibang]

Gary: if you go to the D800, your lens will be what they are the 105mm will be 105mm whereas it was equalivate to 157.5mm on your D7000. However you will now be able to zoom in and crop the the final image in post production. The D800 is a great camera however I feel that it is best for those who need to produce and print large images.
Here is something I am not really getting my head around where you state:
"I figured if I got the D800 I would be getting something I use everyday compared to something I don't need that I might use now and then."
If you do not use the the camera everyday now, why would you now, use it everyday.

Cheers:

Allan

Thanks for the reply Allan,

I understand the 1.5 crop factor and that I don't often go below 35mm in DX so that's why I think I will be happy with just my 50mm, 85mm and 105mm. When I say something I will use every day, I use my D7000 every day. What I meant was buying something other than camera gear like consoles or other electrical goods that just sit there collecting dust. I could even get something like the 70-200mm as glass is important but I used to have the Sigma 70-200mm and sold it as it was not used enough to justify keeping it.

Regards,

Gary

[xpatUSA]

Hi Gary,

You might want to check this DPR comparison:

http://www.dpreview.com/products/com...ts=nikon_d7000

I see no real advantage in replacing your D7000 with a D800:

Virtually same pixel size and technology.
Can't comment on the Expeed III, vs II, processor though.
D800 is 900g vs. 780g.
Some prefer APS-C but with FF lens for slightly less aberration (arguable).
Enormous D800 files, esp. RAW.
Double the price - US $3000+ over here.

Have you considered the D800E which has no blur filter and could give slightly sharper images? But still not worth the money, IMHO.

A significant difference in macro is, with the same lens, having to get a bit closer with the D800 for the same subject framing. This will affect the DOF and perspective, all other things being equal.

[disclosure: I have not shot with either camera, so opinions are based on the literature]

[evan47]

if you shoot cropped or full frame a 1;1 macro lens will give the same sized image at minimum focusing distance. minimum focusing distance also remains the same too, or so i have been told. ie; i you took a pic of a coin on a table in cropped mode, and then full mode at min distance with a true macro 1;1 lens the coin itself would be the same size in both modes, the difference being the shot taken in full mode would show more of the table, plus slightly shallower DOF.
although cropped mode will give a 100mm macro the same field of view as a 150mm macro but will not give 1.5;1 magnification.
if you want more pixels for macro in cropped mode wait for the d7000s replacement. it is likely to have 24mp (more than the d800 in cropped mode).

[gtpete]

if you want more pixels for macro in cropped mode wait for the d7000s replacement. it is likely to have 24mp (more than the d800 in cropped mode)

I agree with above, however do you really know more pixels will get you what you are looking for?
the D800 will drive you crazy with the file sizes but you could cash in your hotel points with the D800 and then sell it leaving you with money to spend on more important things or just save it for a rainy day.

[Letrow]

Gary, I went from a D7000 to a D600. I do a lot of macro shooting and so far, the D600 performs pretty good as a macro shooter. It has 24M, more than ample for what you need. I contemplated the D800 as well, but TBH it didn't make sense to me. Handling the D600 feels very familiar, it has the 2 user modes, like the D7000 has and it does what it needs to do. Price difference and file size decided the issue for me.

[NorthernFocus]

I've owned both. As already stated it is virtually identical pixel density and frankly I don't think the ISO performance is any better at 100 percent crop. IMO there is virtually no difference in image quality in spite of what you may read in reviews etc. What is a huge difference is the superior focus module in the D800 and overall handling/ergonomics. But the handling is highly subjective and if you don't shoot moving targets or low light the focus is no real advantage. If you do true macro, then the additional megapixels equate to additional detail.

The 800 is a darn fine camera but not cheap.

[Shibang]

Thanks all for the replies, I thought it should be time to reply.

I did go with the D800 and honestly, I'm amazed.

The guy in the shop got a D600, D800 and Canon 5D III, put the 85mm 1.8 on each and let me use my memory cards.

I spent about 1 hour taking lots of shots of the same thing at different f-stops and two of each just in case there was camera shake so I could go home and pixel peep. I'm not normally a pixel peeper but it was nice to be able to for free

After about 60 shots and a bit more home work I went for the D800.

I liked all three bodies I tried but I ruled out the Canon because of the 50mm, 85m and 105mm I already had and would have worked out pretty expensive to replace then along with the 5D III which was about 300 euro more also.

The D600 I liked but, the focus points really seemed too clustered and that alone would have driven me mad eventually. Also for flash sync speed and max shutter speed I might have had problems with.

I still have a lot to learn about the D800 and one day I will get around to uploading a few shots for you to rip apart.

Thanks all, you gave me a lot to think about.

Regards,

Gary

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Gary,

Thanks for the follow up, nice to know what happened

Have fun with the D800 - a colleague at work has one (with currently just the 24mm prime), but I don't want to try it in case I like it

Cheers,