Hi one and all! I am torn between two big changes in my camera gear. One choice is expensive: go ahead and buy all new mirrorless camera and lenses. I don’t need to point out how exciting that would be! The second choice is simply to replace my damaged gear. I have favored Nikon for years and have been using a D750. Through my own fault I dropped it and it fell about 3 feet, hitting concrete garage floor, and landing on the leading rim of the lens:AF S Nikki’s 24-120. On the lens was a neutral density filter. The lens leading edge bent so the neutral density lens is locked in place and of course other lense adjustments such as polarizer etc cannot be used. Amazingly no glass was cracked and the camera is fine. Even the lens still zooms in and out, so one could say the set up still takes good shots. So I guess I would love some input. Part of what I would like is straight on comparison of Full frame DSLR vs mirrorless. My own preferences for photos are landscapes, travel photos, macros, and some portraits. Hardly ever do sports or rapid motion shots. Thank you! Rich Whiting
Well, for starters, why would that be exciting? Secondly, why not have the filter removed? It's a heck of a lot less expensive to do a minor repair to the lens, if needed than purchasing an entirely new kit, for whatever excitement that may arouse.
--Bob
Richard B Whiting wrote:
Hi one and all! I am torn between two big changes in my camera gear. One choice is expensive: go ahead and buy all new mirrorless camera and lenses. I don’t need to point out how exciting that would be! The second choice is simply to replace my damaged gear. I have favored Nikon for years and have been using a D750. Through my own fault I dropped it and it fell about 3 feet, hitting concrete garage floor, and landing on the leading rim of the lens:AF S Nikki’s 24-120. On the lens was a neutral density filter. The lens leading edge bent so the neutral density lens is locked in place and of course other lense adjustments such as polarizer etc cannot be used. Amazingly no glass was cracked and the camera is fine. Even the lens still zooms in and out, so one could say the set up still takes good shots. So I guess I would love some input. Part of what I would like is straight on comparison of Full frame DSLR vs mirrorless. My own preferences for photos are landscapes, travel photos, macros, and some portraits. Hardly ever do sports or rapid motion shots. Thank you! Rich Whiting
Hi one and all! I am torn between two big changes... (
show quote)
You are going to get all sorts of replies to your question. Occasions like this can certainly be used to justify buying new equipment. I would probably take a more conservative approach and have the lens and camera checked for internal damage and have that front piece of the lens replaced. (I'm assuming it is the lens that is bent, and not the filtr ring, or maybe in addition to it.) The drop may certainly have resulted in internal damage which causes failure later, either to the camera or lens or both as happened to me a few years ago.
If you decide not to do that, I will buy the lens from you, but I cannot offer the prevailing price for it. Reply via PM if interested. Unfortunately, I don't have a good use for the D750.
Gene51
Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
Richard B Whiting wrote:
Hi one and all! I am torn between two big changes in my camera gear. One choice is expensive: go ahead and buy all new mirrorless camera and lenses. I don’t need to point out how exciting that would be! The second choice is simply to replace my damaged gear. I have favored Nikon for years and have been using a D750. Through my own fault I dropped it and it fell about 3 feet, hitting concrete garage floor, and landing on the leading rim of the lens:AF S Nikki’s 24-120. On the lens was a neutral density filter. The lens leading edge bent so the neutral density lens is locked in place and of course other lense adjustments such as polarizer etc cannot be used. Amazingly no glass was cracked and the camera is fine. Even the lens still zooms in and out, so one could say the set up still takes good shots. So I guess I would love some input. Part of what I would like is straight on comparison of Full frame DSLR vs mirrorless. My own preferences for photos are landscapes, travel photos, macros, and some portraits. Hardly ever do sports or rapid motion shots. Thank you! Rich Whiting
Hi one and all! I am torn between two big changes... (
show quote)
I recently dropped a D810 and a Sigma 150-600 Sport that it was attached to. It was a no-brainer to send them both to their respective mfgrs to repair the damage. $500 later, I had stuff that was as good as new. Too bad my deductible is $500, though.
Get the lens repaired and save the GAS.
Personally I don't buy the mirrorless but in your case I think you will be happier buying the entirely new system.
Have the lens repaired and get the body checked. It will be less expensive than all new kit.
As others have said, the least expensive option is to get the lens fixed. Of course, if you want to switch to mirrorless, one excuse is as good as another so, if you can afford it, upgrade.
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
Richard B Whiting wrote:
Hi one and all! I am torn between two big changes in my camera gear. One choice is expensive: go ahead and buy all new mirrorless camera and lenses. I don’t need to point out how exciting that would be! The second choice is simply to replace my damaged gear. I have favored Nikon for years and have been using a D750. Through my own fault I dropped it and it fell about 3 feet, hitting concrete garage floor, and landing on the leading rim of the lens:AF S Nikki’s 24-120. On the lens was a neutral density filter. The lens leading edge bent so the neutral density lens is locked in place and of course other lense adjustments such as polarizer etc cannot be used. Amazingly no glass was cracked and the camera is fine. Even the lens still zooms in and out, so one could say the set up still takes good shots. So I guess I would love some input. Part of what I would like is straight on comparison of Full frame DSLR vs mirrorless. My own preferences for photos are landscapes, travel photos, macros, and some portraits. Hardly ever do sports or rapid motion shots. Thank you! Rich Whiting
Hi one and all! I am torn between two big changes... (
show quote)
If this is what you like to do, landscapes, travel photos, macros, and some portraits, then a would for now get your lens repaired and stay tuned for further developments in mirrorless technology.
Jeffcs
Loc: Myrtle Beach South Carolina
Agree that you will get many responses to your question
The one answer that always amazed me is why do you want to purchase new save cash.
The one thing no one can answer, is what is in your heart, what do you really want to do?
Go with that!
After 3 years, My D750/24-120 combination still has many unexplored features. Just get the front of the lens fixed and ignore the new fangled stuff out there. The only reason to get them is if, in less than a year, the "advantages" they offer will pay you back for the investment.
ELNikkor wrote:
After 3 years, My D750/24-120 combination still has many unexplored features. Just get the front of the lens fixed and ignore the new fangled stuff out there. The only reason to get them is if, in less than a year, the "advantages" they offer will pay you back for the investment.
If you are not using your equipment to generate revenue, the return on investment is intangible. I'm 79 and the math told me that, while I wanted to convert to mirrorless, the cost to convert was too much per year of expected life. If I were 50 I'd probably do it.
I go with the majority here, repair the lens and have the camera also checked by Nikon. It will be considerably cheaper than going mirrorless.
See online on various ways to remove damaged filters, or send lens to a repair center.Using a different lens take all sorts of images & be critical to validate there is no damage on focus, auto focus, etc....unless you “want” to use this incident as a guiding point to upgrade
Richard B Whiting wrote:
Hi one and all! I am torn between two big changes in my camera gear. One choice is expensive: go ahead and buy all new mirrorless camera and lenses. I don’t need to point out how exciting that would be! The second choice is simply to replace my damaged gear. I have favored Nikon for years and have been using a D750. Through my own fault I dropped it and it fell about 3 feet, hitting concrete garage floor, and landing on the leading rim of the lens:AF S Nikki’s 24-120. On the lens was a neutral density filter. The lens leading edge bent so the neutral density lens is locked in place and of course other lense adjustments such as polarizer etc cannot be used. Amazingly no glass was cracked and the camera is fine. Even the lens still zooms in and out, so one could say the set up still takes good shots. So I guess I would love some input. Part of what I would like is straight on comparison of Full frame DSLR vs mirrorless. My own preferences for photos are landscapes, travel photos, macros, and some portraits. Hardly ever do sports or rapid motion shots. Thank you! Rich Whiting
Hi one and all! I am torn between two big changes... (
show quote)
I actually made the switch from a Nikon D500, with the 18-300 mm f/3.5-5.6 lens, to a Z6, with the "kit" 24-70 lens (subsequently bought the new 24-200 f/4-f/6.3 telephoto because I needed a bit more reach. In my case, I wanted to move up to Full Frame, and I am pleased with the result. I like the lighter weight and the better lower light performance of the full frame; I do miss the longer reach of the telephoto lenses though (I tend to take landscape shots primarily - not too many portraits and I am not a "birder"). I would suggest borrowing or renting a Mirrorless and see what you think. From your D750, maybe the Z7-II would be a good option.
Jeff
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.