JWCoop

I am essentially an hobbyist photographer, semi-retired from my own advertising/marketing company, who still occasionally is paid for food photography. However, by volume most of my photography is of family and friends with an occasional trip to Alaska, out West, or soon to Baja California.

My first camera was a Canon AE-1, followed by a Canon EOS. I then switched to a Nikon D70 (all I could afford), and upon a regular food photo gig, I upgraded to a Nikon D300S. I mostly rented a Nikon 14-24. Recently I had some spare funds and upgraded to a Nikon 24-70 as a general (walk-around) lens. Using either of those two lenses has made a noticeable difference in the resolution (clarity) I get versus what I bought with the D300S which was a Nikon 16-85 3.5 DX lens.

So I am now at the point that I can keep the lightly-used (18,000 actuation, original owner) D300S, or purchase a lightly-used D800E or D810.

I found that upgrading to a more-expensive set of golf clubs, did not eliminate my banana hook on drives, and, thus, improve my golf score.

So the question for the group is: (1) keep the D300S and use it with top-of-the line glass (2) rent an 810 back, or (3) purchase a lightly-used D810 back.
(a new D800 or D810 is not an option due to cost.)

I am likely to continue food photography for a few years which is used in collateral printing. I am also likely to use my camera for family and on vacations for many years to come.

Specifically, how much improvement could I expect in image quality assuming Nikon's good glass in all scenarios?

Thanks, and look to see your thoughts.

ebbote Loc: Hockley, Texas

Welcome to the Hog JW, enjoy.

LEGALDR Loc: Southern California

JW, some years ago, I took my camera to the driving range and took a load of photos of guys beating the dickens out of the golf balls. The thought was to try and help my stroke. Didn't help. I stopped playing golf, put the clubs into the garage, and worked on my camera grip. I feel much better now! Welcome to the Hog!

Designdweeb Loc: Metro NYC & East Stroudsburg, PA

Before offering an opinion, please offer more details. Offer a few samples of the range of your desired results. What is the subject matter, style and techniques? Is it formal, informal, studio or ambient lighting? Heavily styled or photojournalistic? What are the end uses of the images? What quality is needed? How do you decide without more parameters?

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Who are your clients (not specific, but type of client) - they will tell you what you need.

The improvement in detail capture, noise in the shadows, dynamic range and overall image quality will be noticeable with a full frame camera. But if your work is going to simply go on social media sites or restaurant websites, hell, a cellphone is all you really need.

You can buy a D810 for $1300 these days, or a D800 for under $900. A new D810 is $2200.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Your lenses are great. The limiting factor on quality probably will not be the camera unless you use it at high ISO or make huge prints. There are too many other factors.

I would probably rent a D810 body and put it to a head-to-head comparison test. Process the images to match (Use the same exact menu settings on both cameras for JPEGs, and process raw images for the same look.

Be careful how you evaluate results. View the images the same way they will be used, if at all possible. If your work is seen on the Internet, evaluate the tests on a smartphone, tablet, and computer monitor. If your work is printed for large displays, make a couple to size, and see what they look like at actual customer viewing distances. If your work will be printed in a magazine or cookbook, order actual working size test prints made on an Epson inkjet printer made for pre-press proofing. They should be printed on typical web offset proof paper.

What full frame cameras will give you is shallower depth of field at a given aperture (for the same field of view). Perspective will change, because you will have to get closer when using the same focal length lens. There may be a bit smoother transition between tones, more color depth, and better low light performance. But whether those things affect your image quality *in the final result* — and whether they matter — is a circumstantial judgement call.

The D300s IS a bit old. It came out 8.5 years ago. The D810 came out 3.5 years ago. A lot happened with processors and sensors in five years. So you may see quite a bit of improvement on your monitor at 100% pixel peeping magnification. (No one in the real world views output like that... only we photographers do that!)

The D810 is a well-respected body with lots of improved features, so you may enjoy having it for all the little things. But try a used D500 or D7200 or D7500 if you can find or rent one.

If you're not too old, you haven't run into the weight vs fatigue factor yet. But consider that as you age, everything tends to seem heavier, harder to hold steady, and less appealing to drag around on a tour. Full frame bodies and lenses are heavier than bodies and lenses made for smaller formats. You may find that switching to a smaller system is a valid consideration. Cameras from all brands have come a loooooooong way since 2009.

Joe Blow

Since you are experienced in marketing, you should be aware of the requirements for publishing advertising photos. Sharpness is preferred over the file size. Instead of looking at a new camera, stick with what you have and maybe looking into a 24mm prime, possibly used and don't forget Sigma and Tamron have some very quality products out there.

You might also want to invest in an inexpensive light set up for your food photos. That would give you more control over your DOF. (suggestion, and there are others, https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1133031-REG/interfit_int503_f5_fluorescent_3_light_kit.html?ap=y&c3api=1876%2C%7Bcreative%7D%2C%7Bkeyword%7D&gclid=Cj0KCQiA_JTUBRD4ARIsAL7_VeUSqMsd5Z4C-rJhuYvCCpZJ3YtxoQMOBQ3IlnT5d7mTRDHLrXa5NV8aAnmcEALw_wcB)

If you do a lot of cropping, even of your family shots, then you might want to look at upgrading the body. But an D810 won't give you any better shot than what your D300 is giving you. All a newer camera will give you is a larger file than may be cropped more. As many tests and comparison have shown, it is impossible to differentiate between a Full Frame camera image and an APS-C image.

If your D300 is still taking good shots, keep using it. However, like a new car, if you want to get something newer, go for it.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

JWC, welcome to the Hog!
First, I don’t see how you could have done commercial Food Photography and you need to ask that question?
First a Crop camera can’t out perform a FF in ANY shooting situation if it’s apples to apples!
So yes, go FF. The lenses will be secondary. I can’t see where a D300 even begins to fit in to this equation, get rid of it and as Gene said, go D810 at minimum.
As you already know, food is always lit, if not with strobes with GOOD existing light so there are rarely shadows.
BTW, how the analogy of a golf club could be brought into this is beyond me. Not anymore relevant than training to be a runner by playing chess!!! This is about photography, photography is NOT a sport!!!
SS

ecurb1105

Full Frame or medium format unless shooting just for the internet.

JWCoop

Thanks. I am looking forward to it on a daily basis.

JWCoop

Agreed. My clubs are in the basement, and have been unused for the past 3+ years.

JWCoop

Thanks for your replay. I have always enjoyed photography. When I began my marketing company in 2009, my main job function was to help advertisers improve their sales, and not take pictures. One client was a small fast food chain which also had one high end sit-down seafood restaurant. Because there was a need, I picked up the food photography myself, and it was acceptable for the needs of this client.

The food photography needed was for use on their websites, for eblasts, and for collateral printing. Our goal for all of our food advertising has been to make the food appear most appetizing to the point that someone wants to eat the food. Focus has to be sharp. We like brightly lighted, and I use the best light situation which almost always includes portable, florescent studio lighting which I take to the shoot site which is always near where the food is prepared. For printed collateral material (posters, counter cards, table cards, banners) we use 300 dpi. Even though the internet requires less than that, we always start it high. If someone clicks on the photo, then we can't have it go grainy.

I have been using the D300S for several years now, and learn something about using the manual settings every shoot. If I am shooting food which doesn't move, then I make many shots using different settings. Then I select the one that looks the most natural.

Does that answer what you were asking? I will look for your reply, and thanks for your interest.

JWCoop

Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I have a small photo shoot for another ad agency for which the photos are being used for printing. This was the excuse I needed to rent a D810 back, and shoot the exact same shot with both the 810 and 300S.

I did this before purchasing a new lens for the 300S, and found that it did not make much difference on Nikon's less expensive lenses compared to the 16-85 lens I owned. However, when compared to 14-24 or 24-70, there was a noticeable difference even on a cropped sensor Nikon. I bought the 24-70, but have not bought the wide angle because of what I think will be too limited opportunities to use it.

Good idea, i.e. test them on rental. Will let you know next week.

JWCoop

I think you missed my analogy.

I was trying to communicate that, as in photography, there is more to improving your golf game than your equipment. Your muscle memory, your technique, and the ability to control your emotions, are not by buying a improved through a more expensive set of golf clubs.

In regards to photography being a good photographer also includes an "artistic eye" for composition, patience, a knowledge of lighting, a mastery of the camera settings you are using, etc. Then comes the capture ability of the camera.

I was just acknowledging that upgrading camera backs from what I have (Nikon D300S) to a full frame camera might not add enough overall improvement to justify the purchase.

Thanks for the feedback.

JWCoop

Thanks for your reply. I read and appreciate learning from what others suggest.

Yes, I use an inexpensive set of studio lighting which is portable. Florescent. I manually adjust the white balance before each shoot just to be certain. In the past with my restaurant accounts, I set up something temporary near the kitchen since a food stylist I am not.

In the ambient lighting exists through a window for example, I might experiment with that if it is a packaged food product.

I am using manual settings on the D300S, and getting best results by tweaking to see the best combination. I use Photoshop, but have gravitated away from RAW images. For our use a FINE image that is naturally lighted without shadows, and in sharp focus is good enough for what our needs are.

I think the Nikon 24-70 looks pretty good using the D300S at least for our purposes.