2nd Camera Strategy

[Stagecoach]

I don't shoot nikon, but I do have both crop and FF. The key is pixel density.

If pixel density is the same, then cropping a FF is obviously the same as a crop sensor. In many cases, the crop sensor has a higher density. that is certainly true of my cameras (Canon 5D3, 7D I). I find the higher density to be better for 1:1 macro (more pixels on the subject) and when I need reach (more pixels on the subject for a given length of lens). I also prefer the smaller size and lighter weight. In other respects, the FF is superior. I use the FF for landscapes, night photography, and candids of people. I also generally use it for flower macros, which are often less than 1:1. I use the crop for macros of bugs and if I need reach, e.g., my rare shots of birds.

Dan, thanks for that useful explanation of how you use the two. My present train of thought would put me in a similar position which I believe is the way to go.

[Stagecoach]

Grahame...you also have to think of wall charger so that when you are doing studio work you do not have to worry about draining your battery. I do not know about the battery thingie but my D810 uses a different kind of battery than the D300s which is the same as yours. I just bought a wall charger for my FF today.

Hi Izzie, my studio type work is very limited to maybe a couple of hours with a friendly bug on the kitchen worktop or coffee table on the balcony. Battery drain has never been a concern of mine for the two I have by using good recharging management as soon as one is low and additionally I never use liveview.

I also have the rear LCD set at minimum timeout which helps.

Grahame

[Stagecoach]

Hello Bill,

Hi Grahame,

In your situation I would opt for the D610 without hesitation.

The main rationale for that opinion is the 4 points that you made in your OP and also Dan Kortez's point about Pixel Density.

Good to hear that you do not question my strategy and along with others support my D610 present preference.

I think that the main criterion for any new purchase is always to purchase useful features - all those five points describe abundantly more ‘useful features’ if you buy a D610 than if you buy a D7xxx.

I read here that the FF ability is a 'more useful' addition to my overall kit capability than just another CF camera with more pixels.

'Useful features' vary between users.

Very true, and I think I now have enough experience from what I have done over the years and how I see my progression continuing to be able to recognise features that are useful to me, and those I value most.

I think that also another useful feature is that when your D300 dies, you do have a 'replacement' immediately at hand, that's also 'a useful feature' - that's similar to, but what I mean is quite different to redundancy for your kit.

Also, I think that another useful feature in buying a D610 is that it puts you in a position of being able to choose at any time to make the D610 your main and 'only' camera and you resign the D300 to be for other uses - that might be as a spare, or what I use as my "car camera" i.e. always in the boot or glove box of the car, or for some other use.

I too see things this way Bill in that I would be getting a camera that can serve as a lead or backup unit and once that D300 fails replacement is a simple 'cheap' choice.


***

On another subject:

I refer to your previous thread about Heads for Monopods.

I am sorry, I intended to comment on that Monopod thread earlier, but time got away and then I simply forgot until I saw your ‘like’ on one of my comments this morning.

I shall address the Monopod thread here as my opinion was always going to be predicted on this point:


From memory you typically use a Monopod with a zoom lens (80 to 300?), and for Cricket, Football and Birds

I use a Monopod often, but rarely with any Head.

My Monopod use is mainly for Field Sport and usually it supports a 400 Prime. This Prime Lens has a Tripod Collar and I fix that Collar direct to the Monopod. I have at least one other camera on my person and at least three cameras in total.

For Field Sport, I am either running the sideline; at ground level stationary; or in a stand, stationary - this would be the same for you for Cricket and Football.

At ground level I have no need to have an Head to tilt the camera/lens. Even for Swimming Events, there is only one shot where the Monopod has an ever so slight backwards tilt and that is the shot of the blocks, before a start, from close to water line level. The Monopod is very stable even at this very slight backwards tilt because the Monopod is at its shortest extension and I am knelling on one knee.

Shooting from the Stands, I have no difficulty in tilting the Monopod forward whilst packing the ball (foot) of the Monopod into the arch of my right foot for stability. No Grandstand has ever been too steep such that the static rig of a Monopod and 400 Prime was tilted at too great an angle that it was unstable for me.

Also I do carry the monopod/lens/camera rig over my shoulder: it is very strong screw and the screw is well and truly tight into the lens’s tripod collar. I however would NOT perform this carriage if the Monopod had an Head on it and the lens had a Quick Release Plate on it.

So in summary, I rarely use any Head on a Monopod, but I think this is mainly because my whole Monopod rig is very solid and stable as its own self-contained unit and it is constructed for a singular purpose: I always carry another camera (usually with a 70 to 200) and sometimes a third camera (usually with a 24 to 70).

But as I recall one of your needs was to easily release the lens that you would carry on the Monopod, either to use it handheld and / or to use the camera with a different lens.

These points are linked to your intended purchase of a second camera, if you buy the D610 then you might reconsider how you might use your Monopod at Sporting Events.

Can’t comment much on Birding Pictures, because they are out of my territory of speciality.

WW

Thanks for the input on the monopod/head topic Bill. From the previous thread responses and web reading I came to the conclusion that this topic is very much 'style/subject/equipment mass' orientated.

I have decided to go ahead and get a monopod and ballhead for now. The ballhead is something I have thought of for a while as an option on the tripod as I only have a tilt and pan unit and this is a pain when using the centre column extended and angled to get the camera near the ground.

I can then assess how things go and what I find when using the monopod for my subjects. For info, my main reason for the monopod is to take the weight of the rig not for achieving sharper images.

Grahame

[rpcrowe]

I have been a two camera advocate forever and ever, at least since the 1980's when I shot with a Canon A-1 and AE1P film cameras.

There are benefits to shooting with two cameras of the same model: controls in the same position, same batteries and same type memory cards. However, I have only been doing this for the last two or three years (a pair of Canon 7D cameras). Prior to getting my second 7D (a refurbished model that was on sale) I always shot with two different model cameras. While it sometimes took a little logistic planning, it was just fine.

I did my trip to China using a Canon 30D and a Canon 40D. That was IMO, easier than when I shot with a Canon 10D and a Canon 350D because the two cameras used the same type batteries and the same memory cards.

Carrying the two cameras can be a problem. Trying to use them hanging on a pair of stock Canon straps can get tangled.

I carry my two cameras in different ways (most often with 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 70-200mm f/4L IS lenses).

1. Using an OPTECH Dual harness which is very efficient and a very safe way to carry the cameras because the straps will not tangle and if one strap is cut or breaks, the camera will still be supported. Each camera is held conveniently on either side of my body.

2. Occasionally, I don't want to have both cameras in view (except when shooting with the second camera). I then carry the camera with the short lens around my neck and the camera with the long lens in a holster case.

3. When I want a monopod, I carry one camera on the pod and the second camera around my neck. I use an Arca Compatible quick release clamp on the pod and an a/c clamp on the long lens (attached to the lens tripod ring) and an L bracket on the camera with the 17-55mm lens.

All of these systems have their advantages.

I don't like carrying both cameras around my neck (I originally used an OPTECH Photojournalist Strap) because the combined weight of two DSLR cameras and two lenses hanging from my neck can be tiresome during a long day of shooting.

Disadvantages of carrying two cameras:

Price... Obviously two cameras are more expensive than a single camera. But I bought both cameras a refurbished models so that helped the price.

Weight: Sure its a bit heavier but, my two 7D cameras and 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 70-200mm f/4L IS lenses are not much heavier than a single camera with 17-55mm and 70-200mm f/2.8L (series) lens.

ADVANTAGES:

I have a focal range of 17-200mm at my finger tips (don't really miss the 55-70mm gap) with excellent image quality, fast and accurate auto-focus and a constant f/2.8 aperture in my mid range and a constant f/4 aperture in my longer lens. I could never get that quality in a wide focal range lens covering my focal lengths.

No lens switching under dusty or dirty conditions. No chance of dropping or injuring lens when trying to switch in a hurry. No missing out on photos while switching lenses.

Batteries and memory goes farther because I am shooting between two camera setups...

Safety in that I will not lose out on a photo opportunity due to one camera failing. I fell climbing a slippery slope in Alaska and broke my Canon 40D. My 30D saved me from losing out on photo coverage of that very photogenic area.

[Stagecoach]

I'm going to throw a few spanners in the works....

Not really spanners but just different options. There will always be alternatives Robin and whilst it's always easy to say what one camera has compared to another it very much comes down to the value of those individual differences to the user.

The D610 isn't particularly robust, nor is it particularly weather sealed, the AF covers a smaller area of the viewfinder than other bodies, the AF is poor in low light, it lacks a 1/8000s shutter and a fast sync speed, it also lacks the 15 pin connector and it doesn't have an AF-ON button. I'm not a fan of the mode dial either - but I get that most bodies have them instead of the pro layout with buttons.

I can't see anything in this list of facts or opinion that would persuade me that I 'need' a D800 rather than a D610 for my personal use. That is not to say that the D800 does not have some functions that are 'better'.

If it were me it go with a used D800 - try Greys of Westminster

I have been looking at Greys second hand listings and would certainly consider buying used if it made financial sense, but to be honest nearly new mint newer models are not far off what they can be purchased new with a 2 year worldwide warranty.

[William W]

Hi again,

. . . I read here that the FF ability is a 'more useful' addition to my overall kit capability than just another CF camera with more pixels.

Correct. I think exactly that.

As a general comment: For as much as any of us in the membership here at CiC can form a picture of another Member’s uses and purposes, I think that I have a reasonable enough snapshot of your uses and purposes to allow me step out and make such a strong comment of recommendation as to how you should spend your money.

*

. . . input on the monopod/head topic . . . I have decided to go ahead and get a monopod and ballhead for now. The ballhead is something I have thought of for a while as an option on the tripod as I only have a tilt and pan unit and this is a pain when using the centre column extended and angled to get the camera near the ground. I can then assess how things go and what I find when using the monopod for my subjects. For info, my main reason for the monopod is to take the weight of the rig not for achieving sharper images.

I think that’s sound progression.

When I use any head on my Monopod it is only a Ballhead that I use – again that’s because that arrangement suits MY purposes. The specialty Monopod Heads that TILT only would not serve me as well as a Ballhead.

I use my Ballhead on my Tripod as well.

The reason and method that I use my Ballhead on my Monopod is usually to set the camera at the angle that I require for a specific coverage of an area of the field and then I lock it. Note that the ‘angle that I require' might NOT be TILT ONLY, so that’s why I mentioned that a specialty Monopod head which has TILT ONLY, would NOT serve my purposes.

For example, I do a lot of Field Hockey and I might be in a mainly static and elevated viewpoint whilst particularly following the attack member or members of one team. In this case I am only interested in the larger goal area at one end. Setting the ‘angle’ of the Ballhead allows the camera to more easily keep the horizontal, horizontal. I cannot achieve that as easily with a specialty TILT ONLY Monopod Head.

Example here – the brief to cover one player in one area of the field. The camera is situated slightly elevated in the Grandstand. Ballhead on Monopod. Ball was set at a slight angle to more easily keep the horizontal of the image, without the need for extensive cropping in Post-production. (In this particular case the rig was a 70 to 200/2.8 with x2.0 MkII, but, effectively still a 400mm Lens)



Thanks for the added information regarding the reason why you are to use a Monopod.

WW

[Richard Lundberg]

Is there some reason you don't take your D300 to the shop and get it cleaned up?

[xpatUSA]

Is there some reason you don't take your D300 to the shop and get it cleaned up?

Grahame, is there actually an Authorized Nikon Service Center on Fiji?

[Black Pearl]

Not really spanners but just different options. There will always be alternatives Robin and whilst it's always easy to say what one camera has compared to another it very much comes down to the value of those individual differences to the user.



I can't see anything in this list of facts or opinion that would persuade me that I 'need' a D800 rather than a D610 for my personal use. That is not to say that the D800 does not have some functions that are 'better'.



I have been looking at Greys second hand listings and would certainly consider buying used if it made financial sense, but to be honest nearly new mint newer models are not far off what they can be purchased new with a 2 year worldwide warranty.

Cool.
As you're aware of the differences and feel you can step down from a pro body then go for it - the D610 has a wonderful sensor.

[Stagecoach]

Or for less then half the price a D700. Same batteries and same memorycards as the D300.
I understood the D800 is more a studiocamera.

George

George, something just does not ring right to me in purchasing a 12 Mp FF camera even if it can be picked up for half the price of a D800.

Regarding the D800 being more of a studio camera, I'll not go there as I have no experience of one.

[pnodrog]

A D800/810 more of a studio camera? ...

They are certainly capable of studio work but they are also considered one of the best camera's for landscape photography - not exactly studio work. They are in fact very good all round cameras, maybe not the first choice for sport due to a sightly slower 5 fps but the 1/8000 shutter speed, high dynamic range and ability for the image to be cropped significantly will for some sports be more important.

[Stagecoach]

I have been a two camera advocate forever and ever, at least since the 1980's when I shot with a Canon A-1 and AE1P film cameras.

There are benefits to shooting with two cameras of the same model: controls in the same position, same batteries and same type memory cards. However, I have only been doing this for the last two or three years (a pair of Canon 7D cameras). Prior to getting my second 7D (a refurbished model that was on sale) I always shot with two different model cameras. While it sometimes took a little logistic planning, it was just fine.

I did my trip to China using a Canon 30D and a Canon 40D. That was IMO, easier than when I shot with a Canon 10D and a Canon 350D because the two cameras used the same type batteries and the same memory cards.

Carrying the two cameras can be a problem. Trying to use them hanging on a pair of stock Canon straps can get tangled.

I carry my two cameras in different ways (most often with 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 70-200mm f/4L IS lenses).

1. Using an OPTECH Dual harness which is very efficient and a very safe way to carry the cameras because the straps will not tangle and if one strap is cut or breaks, the camera will still be supported. Each camera is held conveniently on either side of my body.

2. Occasionally, I don't want to have both cameras in view (except when shooting with the second camera). I then carry the camera with the short lens around my neck and the camera with the long lens in a holster case.

3. When I want a monopod, I carry one camera on the pod and the second camera around my neck. I use an Arca Compatible quick release clamp on the pod and an a/c clamp on the long lens (attached to the lens tripod ring) and an L bracket on the camera with the 17-55mm lens.

All of these systems have their advantages.

I don't like carrying both cameras around my neck (I originally used an OPTECH Photojournalist Strap) because the combined weight of two DSLR cameras and two lenses hanging from my neck can be tiresome during a long day of shooting.

Disadvantages of carrying two cameras:

Price... Obviously two cameras are more expensive than a single camera. But I bought both cameras a refurbished models so that helped the price.

Weight: Sure its a bit heavier but, my two 7D cameras and 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 70-200mm f/4L IS lenses are not much heavier than a single camera with 17-55mm and 70-200mm f/2.8L (series) lens.

ADVANTAGES:

I have a focal range of 17-200mm at my finger tips (don't really miss the 55-70mm gap) with excellent image quality, fast and accurate auto-focus and a constant f/2.8 aperture in my mid range and a constant f/4 aperture in my longer lens. I could never get that quality in a wide focal range lens covering my focal lengths.

No lens switching under dusty or dirty conditions. No chance of dropping or injuring lens when trying to switch in a hurry. No missing out on photos while switching lenses.

Batteries and memory goes farther because I am shooting between two camera setups...

Safety in that I will not lose out on a photo opportunity due to one camera failing. I fell climbing a slippery slope in Alaska and broke my Canon 40D. My 30D saved me from losing out on photo coverage of that very photogenic area.

Thanks for the comprehensive ideas regarding managing the two camera scenario Richard.

The additional problems this gives is something I am going to have to learn to overcome but what I can say is that I do not forsee me doing this very often. I very rarely take my camera and gear that far from my car simply because that's the way it is here, you can park at the side of the rugby pitches, near the foreshore or on a track in the hills near to the view you want.

Additionally I never seem to wander around with my camera looking for things to photograph but will go out to shoot a particular topic knowing the lens I will want and have others near by should I need them. But, with my recent interest in sports I do see the two camera scenario being a viable option not just for speed of being able to use a different FL but saving having to change lenses in adverse humid/salty air conditions.

[Stagecoach]

Hello Bill,

When I use any head on my Monopod it is only a Ballhead that I use – again that’s because that arrangement suits MY purposes. The specialty Monopod Heads that TILT only would not serve me as well as a Ballhead.

I use my Ballhead on my Tripod as well.

The reason and method that I use my Ballhead on my Monopod is usually to set the camera at the angle that I require for a specific coverage of an area of the field and then I lock it. Note that the ‘angle that I require' might NOT be TILT ONLY, so that’s why I mentioned that a specialty Monopod head which has TILT ONLY, would NOT serve my purposes.

For example, I do a lot of Field Hockey and I might be in a mainly static and elevated viewpoint whilst particularly following the attack member or members of one team. In this case I am only interested in the larger goal area at one end. Setting the ‘angle’ of the Ballhead allows the camera to more easily keep the horizontal, horizontal. I cannot achieve that as easily with a specialty TILT ONLY Monopod Head.

Example here – the brief to cover one player in one area of the field. The camera is situated slightly elevated in the Grandstand. Ballhead on Monopod. Ball was set at a slight angle to more easily keep the horizontal of the image, without the need for extensive cropping in Post-production. (In this particular case the rig was a 70 to 200/2.8 with x2.0 MkII, but, effectively still a 400mm Lens)

WW

Thank you for providing the reasoning and method behind your use of the ballhead Bill. I can see this is going to quite a learning curve for me but I'm sure I'll get there.

[Stagecoach]

Is there some reason you don't take your D300 to the shop and get it cleaned up?

Richard, 'cleaned up' would at a minimum, be a new camera rear by any reputable dealer service centre. The repair cost of this plus postage/insurance is very unlikely to be viable. A used D300 can be purchased in mint condition for just less than £300 from a UK very respected dealer.

If it was a second camera, and I lived in the UK I would possibly consider getting a repair quote.

[Stagecoach]

Grahame, is there actually an Authorized Nikon Service Center on Fiji?

Ha Ha Ted, there's not even a camera shop in Fiji.

That's not quite true because there's one that sells washing machines, vacuum cleaners, P&Ss and they did have a single D7000 on a shelf that they told me a few weeks back was Nikon's top of the range latest camera and I kept a straight face.

And there's one other that has some entry level Canons and camera bits and pieces next to the watches and jewelery.

Seriously, the nearest Nikon centre is in New Zealand, Macillisters.

[xpatUSA]

Ha Ha Ted, there's not even a camera shop in Fiji.

I suspected as much, Grahame.

It was the question about just "taking it to the shop for cleaning" that goaded me into action, nice guy that I am

[pnodrog]

Ha Ha Ted, there's not even a camera shop in Fiji.

That's not quite true because there's one that sells washing machines, vacuum cleaners, P&Ss and they did have a single D7000 on a shelf that they told me a few weeks back was Nikon's top of the range latest camera and I kept a straight face.

And there's one other that has some entry level Canons and camera bits and pieces next to the watches and jewelery.

Seriously, the nearest Nikon centre is in New Zealand, Macillisters.

Not anymore the new agent in NZ is Lacklands http://www.lacklands.co.nz/page/6/Brands.html

Macalisters to everyone's surprise, closed down completely. I understand it may have been partly due to the biggest asset the company had was a building and property they owned in a prime developing commercial area.

[Stagecoach]

Not anymore the new agent in NZ is Lacklands http://www.lacklands.co.nz/page/6/Brands.html

Macalisters to everyone's surprise, closed down completely. I understand it may have been partly due to the biggest asset the company had was a building and property they owned in a prime developing commercial area.

Thanks for that Paul. When I purchased the 80-400mm a couple of months back from Camera & Camera in Auckland a week later after receiving it they went into liquidation, I was lucky.