Best Next Upgrade Option: I am an amateur photographer and currently have a Nikon D7200. I do primarily landscape, macro and wildlife photography. Currently I don't have a wide angle...

drizztguen77 Loc: Tualatin, OR

I am an amateur photographer and currently have a Nikon D7200. I do primarily landscape, macro and wildlife photography. Currently I don't have a wide angle lens. I've been using the 18-200mm lens for anything I would normally use a wide angle for (at 18mm). I've heard full crop cameras are better for landscape so I've been considering buying an 810 with a wide angle lens for landscape photos. But now I see the D500 coming out that looks really nice so I'm wondering if I should just stick with the crop frame and upgrade to the D500 and just get a crop frame wide angle lens instead of the full frame 810. Which would be the better option?

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

soaro77 wrote:

I am an amateur photographer and currently have a ... (show quote)

Just get a full frame wide angle so it will work if you ever do go to a FF body. It will give the same angle of view on a crop frame body. It will be a bit more expensive than a crop lens. But you won't have to replace it if you do get a FF body.

drizztguen77 Loc: Tualatin, OR

robertjerl wrote:

Just get a full frame wide angle so it will work if you ever do go to a FF body. It will give the same angle of view on a crop frame body. It will be a bit more expensive than a crop lens. But you won't have to replace it if you do get a FF body.

The only problem with that is FF wide angle lenses usually start around 14mm. On a crop frame that is like 21mm so while it is still considered wide angle it isn't really all that wide. Or does that not really matter?

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

soaro77 wrote:

I am an amateur photographer and currently have a ... (show quote)

If, and only if, your budget an tolerate the hit, a D810 is a better choice for landscape work, especially with a wide angle lens. It is probably better for macro, but that depends on what kind of macro work you do. Wildlife is similar, as that depends on how much you can spend on long focal length lenses.

The D500 is targeted at those who would do well with a D5 and don't have deep enough pockets. It shoots fast, which is great at a baseball game and for bird photography and that sort of wildlife. Nothing about the D500 is better than a D810 for landscape or portraits, except of course the lower price.

On a more general basis, all those pixels available with a D810 are a double edged sword. They take up a lot of space, and processing large images is slower. But... if you tend to crop or tend to print large, those pixels are absolutely wonderful.

Which is best for you is a decision only you can make.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

soaro77 wrote:

The only problem with that is FF wide angle lenses usually start around 14mm. On a crop frame that is like 21mm so while it is still considered wide angle it isn't really all that wide. Or does that not really matter?

Doesn't matter, 14 mm is 14 mm, just a crop frame only "sees" the center of the image circle the lens projects. It is why crop sensor lenses are cheaper, they can be made smaller and lighter with glass that is not as wide because they don't need to throw as big an image circle.

Violameister Loc: michigan

I used to be a big advocate of a good rather wide angle lens for landscape photography. I have lately found that if my wide angle is not wide enough, I can always do the same thing in panorama mode with excellent results. Therefore not needing an ultra wide angle lens any more.

That might be a good argument for getting the full frame lens for the future even if it is not super wide angle when used with the crop sensor camera.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

robertjerl wrote:

Doesn't matter, 14 mm is 14 mm, just a crop frame only "sees" the center of the image circle the lens projects. It is why crop sensor lenses are cheaper, they can be made smaller and lighter with glass that is not as wide because they don't need to throw as big an image circle.

That misses the point entirely.

A 14mm lens is a 14mm lens on a FX camera just as it is on a DX camera. On the FX body it has an angle of view of 104 degrees on the horizontal axis. On a DX body it has an 81 degree angle of view.

At 1000 feet distance, a 104 degree angle of view will image a scene that is 2571 feet across when shot with an FX body, but a DX body will capture only a 1714 foot section. That is a huge difference!

Getting a 14mm lens for a FX camera is possible. But to have the same functionality on a DX camera means finding a 9 mm lens. The shortest DX lens that Nikon sells is a 10mm f/3.5 as compared to a FX 14mm f/2.8 lens... which is close but not quite there.

drizztguen77 Loc: Tualatin, OR

Apaflo wrote:

If, and only if, your budget an tolerate the hit, ... (show quote)

I get a bonus each year from work so I can definitely afford either option. I currently have a Tamron 150-600mm lens and a Sigma 150mm Macro lens. Both those will work on a FF camera although the Tamron will get the equivalent reach of 900mm on the crop frame so photographing wildlife (including birds) would probably be better with that and the D500. The D500 and a 10-24mm wide angle would definitely be much cheaper than the 810 and a 14-24mm wide angle. But I'm trying to keep the future in mind. I don't make money right now with my pictures but would like to in the future if I ever get good enough.

I guess I'm mostly wondering if the IQ with the 810 would be significantly better than that of the D500 to justify the extra $2k I would likely end up spending for it and the lens.

Bill_de Loc: US

Robert is correct, technically. But the fact remains that the outcome, the all important landscape photograph, will be better served by a full frame sensor. That's particularly true if the pixel count is high enough to allow cropping after the shutter is pressed, instead of before.

In practical terms, a 14mm lens on a ff sensor will show more of the landscape. As Apaflo said, the D500 is built for speed, but most landscapes stay put, so there is no sense paying for speed. The D810 will show more with any lens than a cropped sensor camera with the same lens. It also gives you plenty of pixels to crop if desired.

drizztguen77 Loc: Tualatin, OR

Bill_de wrote:

Robert is correct, technically. But the fact remai... (show quote)

It's starting to sound like I need to choose whether I prefer wildlife or landscape in order to make this decision. Sounds like the D500 would be the better choice if I want to do more wildlife and the 810 would be better if I want to do more landscape. Tough decision.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

soaro77 wrote:

It's starting to sound like I need to choose whether I prefer wildlife or landscape in order to make this decision. Sounds like the D500 would be the better choice if I want to do more wildlife and the 810 would be better if I want to do more landscape. Tough decision.

Might be true, might not too! If "wildlife" is birds in flight, go for the speed of the D500. If "wildlife" is a bird in the tree, floating on water, or something like an alligator or buffalo, get the D810.

Also it's not that fast moving birds in flight can't be photographed with a D810. It isn't that you'll get no good shots. Just half as many. It makes a big difference if that puts food on the table and shoes on the kids. If the main purpose is to hang a picture in the hall... get a D810.

If your main purpose was to take pictures of basketball games and hang even just one of those in the hall, I'd say go for a D500.

Bill_de Loc: US

soaro77 wrote:

It's starting to sound like I need to choose whether I prefer wildlife or landscape in order to make this decision. Sounds like the D500 would be the better choice if I want to do more wildlife and the 810 would be better if I want to do more landscape. Tough decision.

It also depends on the type of wildlife photography. The D810 does shoot at 5 frames per second. Not too many years ago that was considered lightning speed.

--

drizztguen77 Loc: Tualatin, OR

Apaflo wrote:

Might be true, might not too! If "wildlife&q... (show quote)

That makes sense. I'm a falconer so am quite interested in taking pictures of hawks and falcons too. So maybe the answer is to get the D810 next and use my D7200 for birds and faster wildlife and then the following year upgrade my D7200 to the D500 :-)

drizztguen77 Loc: Tualatin, OR

Violameister wrote:

I used to be a big advocate of a good rather wide angle lens for landscape photography. I have lately found that if my wide angle is not wide enough, I can always do the same thing in panorama mode with excellent results. Therefore not needing an ultra wide angle lens any more.

That might be a good argument for getting the full frame lens for the future even if it is not super wide angle when used with the crop sensor camera.

Hmmm that's a very creative idea. I never thought of doing something like that.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Apaflo wrote:

That misses the point entirely. ...

A 14mm lens is a 14mm lens on a FX camera just as it is on a DX camera. ... which is close but not quite there.

Which part of a crop frame only "sees" the center of the image circle the lens projects didn't you read? That gives the same info as all of your math in a much shorter form.