I would like some opinions on the advantages upgrading to either a Nikon D500 or a Tamron 24-70 g2.
I currently have a Nikon D7100. I have a macro, a 10-14 wide angle, and other lenses. I use a 16-300 Tamron for most of my pictures. I seem to use it mostly in the lower ranges. I do not have a 2.8 zoom. I also take almost no sports or action pictures and usually use a tripod if possible.
Which of the two options will be the best upgrade in the quality of pictures?
Thanks for any help and your opinions.
Terry Sandlin
What's 'wrong' with the kit you have now?
latebloomer wrote:
I would like some opinions on the advantages upgrading to either a Nikon D500 or a Tamron 24-70 g2.
I currently have a Nikon D7100. I have a macro, a 10-14 wide angle, and other lenses. I use a 16-300 Tamron for most of my pictures. I seem to use it mostly in the lower ranges. I do not have a 2.8 zoom. I also take almost no sports or action pictures and usually use a tripod if possible.
Which of the two options will be the best upgrade in the quality of pictures?
Thanks for any help and your opinions.
Terry Sandlin
I would like some opinions on the advantages upgra... (
show quote)
The d7100 is a great camera, the d500 is a superior camera. That being said, the d500 is designed toward action and quick focusing, and will handle a higher noise range. If you have no interest in action, and your present camera is giving you the image quality that you desire, and you are not shooting in situations that require a higher ISO, stick with what you have and upgrade your lenses. If you do decide that the d7100 is not quite giving you what you want in quality, check out the d7200, it will handle a little higher ISO than the d7100, but may not be worth the cost of upgrading for what you enjoy taking photos of.
latebloomer wrote:
I would like some opinions on the advantages upgrading to either a Nikon D500 or a Tamron 24-70 g2.
I currently have a Nikon D7100. I have a macro, a 10-14 wide angle, and other lenses. I use a 16-300 Tamron for most of my pictures. I seem to use it mostly in the lower ranges. I do not have a 2.8 zoom. I also take almost no sports or action pictures and usually use a tripod if possible.
Which of the two options will be the best upgrade in the quality of pictures?
Thanks for any help and your opinions.
Terry Sandlin
I would like some opinions on the advantages upgra... (
show quote)
What kind of images do you enjoy taking?
Terry - you have a fine camera and a nice assortment of lenses. Direct your efforts toward getting the very most out of the gear you have. Practice, practice, practice. There is no "magic pill" for creating better images. When your gear can perform consistently as you want it to, then you will be in position to consider some alternatives.
Unless...you just want to spend some of your cash. Then do what you want.
twowindsbear wrote:
What's 'wrong' with the kit you have now?
I think he has a GAS attack..Gear Acquisition Syndrome
Japakomom
Loc: Originally from the Last Frontier
In your case the 24-70 might be the better choice for you since you do not shoot action. Take a look at dxomark.com and see what kind of differences there might be in your sensor. The technology of the d500 sensor might be enough to make you switch. You can also compare the 2 camera bodies with the lenses you already have and the lens you would like.
I appreciate your responses. I am wondering if the higher (wider F 2.8) would additionally bring out a similar improvement im comparison to the D500 low light improvement? My Tamron 16-300 has an F3.5 -F5.6 aperture. I like taking portraits by natural light, mostly indoors and often hand-held.
Thanks for anymore opinions,
Terry
PixelStan77 wrote:
I think he has a GAS attack..Gear Acquisition Syndrome
Right, and it's good for the spirit and good for the economy.
Sell some stuff and get them both.
Cdouthitt wrote:
Sell some stuff and get them both.
Yes! Selling on ebay is easy and fun. This morning, I sent one package to Martha's Vineyard and another to San Francisco. Each will get there on Wednesday. Shipping and insurance has gotten expensive, though!
The Tamron 24-70 is a kick ass lens.
I have a D500 and love it, but I’m beginning to feel its weight. I have a Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 which I use for shooting indoor sports. If your camera works well for the kind of work you describe, i would suggest a faster lense to improve your portraiture. A high quality and faster lenses (maybe 1.7 +/-) I believe, will give you much more satisfying portrait images with appropriate ambient lighting and less flash.
Jerryc41 is an excellent source of info and always provides helpful links, but this time I have to respectfully differ with his statement that a “lens is just a lens.”
I have found a noticeable difference when I use “good glass”. I would also suggest a fast fixed lens, maybe 35 or 50 mm, for even crisper images and creamier background blur.
Just my 2 cents. Have fun.
The photographer takes the picture, not the camera.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.