Nikon D850 vs Used Nikon D810 and a nice lens? (Page 5): Thanks to you and all the others for this guidance. I always like to get more and better equipment than I need or am worthy of.

markstjohn

Thanks to you and all the others for this guidance. I always like to get more and better equipment than I need or am worthy of. That way I am sure that I am the problem ... and not the equipment. It sounds like the D810 is more than enough to keep me on a good learning curve...

therwol Loc: USA

markstjohn wrote:

I am a just beyond beginner photographer. I want to get better, especially at landscapes. I am wondering whether to get the best new Nikon, the D 850, so that it will be good for me for many years to come. Or to realize that the D810 is probably plenty of camera for me, and to buy a used version at about half the cost of the D850. Then I could use the money for a landscale lens like the 16-35mm. I am really vexed by this one. Thanks for any ideas.

I believe that with both of these cameras, the lens or lenses you use will be the greatest influence over image quality. If you really have to choose between the more expensive body and a more expensive lens, go for the lens. The D850 has some interesting improvements over the D810, but I'm not personally willing at this point to upgrade and probably get little in return with the lenses I own.

pmackd Loc: Alameda CA

jnuss wrote:

If you're relatively new to dslr photography, I'd ... (show quote)

The most sensible post yet. If you are just beyond beginner, what makes you think you need a full frame high MP camera for landscapes? Are you intending to make huge prints, bigger than 24 x 36? Sell to galleries? If not a recent model APS/C (crop, Nikon DX) camera will do just fine, while you hone your skills. And while you do this, you do not need to shoot on a tripod, mirror up, hyperfocal distance or any other fancy stuff. I know people with going businesses selling big landscape prints to tourists; photographers who are using a just beyond entry level Canon APS/C camera.

PhilP

But you do have to buy lenses. I'd suggest that those be FX lenses. One could end up wit a drawer full of useless lenses if they decide on a full frame later.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

pmackd wrote:

The most sensible post yet. If you are just beyon... (show quote)

Knowing what I know now after 6 years which isn’t much, I would say that the suggestion to get FF or the D810 is righ on the money. Why waste $$$ on entry level cameras? The learning curve is the same.

therwol Loc: USA

markstjohn wrote:

I am a just beyond beginner photographer. I want to get better, especially at landscapes. I am wondering whether to get the best new Nikon, the D 850, so that it will be good for me for many years to come. Or to realize that the D810 is probably plenty of camera for me, and to buy a used version at about half the cost of the D850. Then I could use the money for a landscale lens like the 16-35mm. I am really vexed by this one. Thanks for any ideas.

I would be interested in knowing what you're using now. What are you "upgrading from?" I would suggest that before you invest in either camera, go into a store that has one example of either and hold it with a few different FX lenses attached and see if you really want to carry around the extra weight and bulk over a fine DX camera like a D7xxx or D500. I was naive when I bought my D810 and kept buying larger and heavier lenses for it to the point where it is uncomfortable to lug around the gear. This issue has been discussed in this forum, and many have no problem with it, so it's really up to you.

Sinewsworn Loc: Port Orchard, WA

DavidPine wrote:

The D810 is a wonderful camera you will be able to use for some time. I would concentrate on building your lens collection unless you can afford to do both at the same time. I think my D850 is an excellent upgrade camera but it isn't light-years ahead of other Nikon cameras like the D810, D800, D500, and D750. The proof of the pudding is always product results. Lenses, lighting and self-made opportunity will get you there first.

PhilP

tdekany wrote:

You also need to be open minded. Maybe “for you” there isn’t, but many wouldn’t go “back” to a mirrored camera. I can use my camera’s electric shutter handheld, no need for locking up a mirror and have the camera on a tripod.

You are correct. For me, there is little need to go back to mirrorless that I left some time ago. Using the Nikon mirror up is a no brainer. The first first click swings the mirror. The second fires the shutter. Coupled with EFSC (DX, D810, D850) and a good Nikor VR, hand helds are simple and quiet. Admittedly, I shoot a lot photomicrographs and hand held/rail stacked macros. I have compared mirrorless and an 810. The results are virtually indistinguishable in the perceived motion column. The image quality for the D800's series are among the best FF DSLRS ever made. Side by side tests have shown that time and time again. Video is equally simple and accurate.

SusanFromVermont Loc: Southwest corner of Vermont

jnuss wrote:

If you're relatively new to dslr photography, I'd ... (show quote)

Perhaps starting with a more basic body works for some, but the OP sounds like he is already serious about photography, so there is no need to go through this type of "evolution". Buying the best you can afford means you are getting a better tool for accomplishing your goals. It also means that you will have a camera to grow into, not out of! The learning curve is there, no matter what model you choose, because all DSLRs have certain features in common. It is possible to learn the basics of using the camera first, and to tackle the new concepts as you go.

No matter what camera a person purchases, there will be a newer model coming out sooner or later. The upgrades may or may not be significant, but the D810 is sufficient to keep the OP satisfied for quite a while [probably not so with the D3200 or D5400].

SusanFromVermont Loc: Southwest corner of Vermont

tdekany wrote:

Knowing what I know now after 6 years which isn’t much, I would say that the suggestion to get FF or the D810 is righ on the money. Why waste $$$ on entry level cameras? The learning curve is the same.

markstjohn

All good thoughts... I have a D5500 DX format which is great for travel. I am thinking, perhaps incorrectly, that a FF camera like the 810 or 850 will be better for landscape in particular. But if this is not the case it would be good to know...

tdekany Loc: Oregon

markstjohn wrote:

All good thoughts... I have a D5500 DX format which is great for travel. I am thinking, perhaps incorrectly, that a FF camera like the 810 or 850 will be better for landscape in particular. But if this is not the case it would be good to know...

If we are nitpicking, TECHNICALLY speaking FF provides better image quality, especially the D810.

However, reality is that no camera can help with choosing an interesting subject matter, composition, or when to take the picture.

All one needs to do is search for images taken with any high end camera. You will see work of art and snap shots that should really be deleted. Same with any other format.

fergmark Loc: norwalk connecticut

SteveLew wrote:

If you are just past a beginner the d810 is a lot of camera and is great for landscapes. Forget about the d850 since this camera operates the best with expensive glass. The d810 will serve your needs for a very long time. Take the time to master this camera and focus on composition, post processing and glass which is more important than the camera body.

I completely agree with this advice.

jeof1000

tdekany wrote:

Knowing what I know now after 6 years which isn’t much, I would say that the suggestion to get FF or the D810 is righ on the money. Why waste $$$ on entry level cameras? The learning curve is the same.

It make sense... +1