glgracephoto Loc: Arlington, WA

I own the D7200 and D810 both. Never dreamed I would be able to get the D810 but came into a lump of totally unexpected cash. However I have been able to shoot landscapes quite well with the D7200. Furthermore, I don't see why the coming D500 would have any better image quality for landscapes than the D7200. I am very impressed with the specs it has, and will certainly shoot faster, but as for sharper and better resolution? I don't know. I suspect it will do a bit better than the D7200 in low light, but the D810, being FF will far surpass either.

Meanwhile you have a rather soft 18-200 lens, and are looking for a better camera for landscapes. I would suggest the Tokina 11-20 F/2.8 DX wide angle, and the Tamron 17-25 F/2.8 DX both together for under $1000, would blow you away with the high quality images you could be shooting with your current set up.

If you wish to go FF, I do think the D810 is the most superb for landscapes, and yes it CAN shoot wildlife also, but for sports shooting it is on the slower side for frames per second. Anyway, I think you are on the right track as for which cameras you are looking at, but I also think you are selling what you have now short, when the only thing wrong with the D7200 is the 18-200 lens on it. Beyond that, image sharpness is also up to the photographer knowing the hyperfocal distances, shooting motion free, using either a remote shutter or in camera timer delay and Mirror UP, and a good sturdy tripod. In fact, a good sturdy tripod and ball head will do more for sharp images than anything else in the whole debate.

If you do go with the D810 I do suggest keeping the D7200 as a backup, and yes, also when you want that extra DX reach, but I also could see it gathering dust as well.

Bret Loc: Dayton Ohio

Maybe consider the Nikon 10.5mm dx fish eye...takes some getting used to...but its really super wide.

jackpi Loc: Southwest Ohio

Is this question really about landscape photography? I assume you already have a decent tripod (you need one for landscape photography). Just take panoramas with the camera you have.

Of course if you really want a new camera and lens, the panorama excuse might fool your wife.

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

Stick with the aps-c unless you plan on papering a wall. The so-called full-frame really offers no advantage except theoretical. Of course people who have them are supporters. They've just mortgaged their home to buy it and spend a lot of time in the gym pumping iron so they can carry it. And spent even more money on over-priced and over-weight lenses. So they are psychologically forced to defend their decision.

But reality is that you won't get any better images.

If you are really anxious to up your game, you need to go to a Hasselblad or at least a Pentax 645Z. Otherwise, invest in a better button-pusher.

:-D

drizztguen77 Loc: Tualatin, OR

Part of what is driving my concern a little with the cropped frame is a couple weekends ago I went down to a place where there are a lot of bald eagles to get some eagle pictures. I set my camera to auto ISO to let it decide on the ISO. Well it took most the pictures at 1600 ISO. When I got home and put them on the computer they were really noisy and pretty much garbage. So if I can't take pictures at 1600 ISO on my D7200 that really seems to limit me as to what I can do with it. Also it seems most the lenses I have now are FX lenses and will probably replace the 18-200 with the 24-120 which is also an FX lens. So then I start wondering if all my lenses are FX then why not have an FX body that can utilize them to their fullest. I want to get a wide angle lens but if I go with FF then I would rather get a FX wide angle. So I need to decide whether to get an FF body or stick with the DX body. I would definitely keep the 7200 as backup and for some of those really long telephoto pictures. Right now my backup body to my D7200 is a D90 LOL. These are just the thoughts that are driving my question on this.

drizztguen77 Loc: Tualatin, OR

I do have a good tripod and ball head. It isn't a top of the line Gitzo but it is a good tripod. The panorama idea is a really good one if I decide to stick solely with the APS-C body.

ggttc Loc: TN

Here are some fairly fast birds shot with a d810...my wife shoots an 810..hand held with a pistol grip.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

I think the real issue here is that you need to define your decision process and parameters.

It is abundantly clear that full frame cameras generally offer superior results to smaller sensor cameras, but the real question is by how much and how much is that worth to you?

Unless you have unlimited financial resources, which does not appear to be the case, then choices and compromises have to made.

As an example, how much are you willing to spend on photography in the next five years, and how can you justify that to yourself or anyone else that could influence that decision?

Then, why don't you build a few lists of your dream list of equipment for the next five years, cameras, lenses, tripods, other stuff. If it exceeds your budget envelope, well make some changes and add up the the cost again.

Full frame will clearly be better but also cost a bunch more. So do you want less equipment but better low light performance or detail? Do want fast action performance or static shots the most? Do you want more lenses for flexibility or a smaller number of really good lenses?

Do the math, it may help!

jackpi Loc: Southwest Ohio

I don't understand why you got so much noise at ISO 1600 with a D7200. What lens were you using, and what was your aperture and shutter speed?

But regardless of why you got so much noise at ISO 1600:
Going from a D7200 to a D810 (with the same aperture and shutter speed) would allow you to reduce the ISO by one stop.

Changing lenses on the D7200 won't fix your noise problem. The 18-200mm lens is f/3.5 and the 24-140 lens is f/4 (a smaller aperture = less light). Going to a wider aperture or slower shutter speed might allow you to reduce your ISO more than changing lenses or cameras will.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

The easiest way to make this decision is to conisider what you do with your images....

If you ever make big prints... say larger than 13x19... then it might make sense to consider a full frame camera and just deal with all the additional size, weight and cost that come along with it. But if you rarely or never print that large, there's little to be gained and you would likely be better served sticking with your crop camera, getting a crop-only wide angle lens (DX format, in Nikon-speak), and eventually upgrading to a more advanced crop sensor camera.

I DO NOT think it a good idea to get an ultrawide FX lens to use on your DX camera, in anticipation of someday maybe getting an FX camera to use with it. This is false economy because if you ever do switch to an FX camera, you can simply sell off and replace any DX lenses at that time. In the meantime you'll have a wider, more affordable, and more compact DX lens to use on your DX camera.

drizztguen77 Loc: Tualatin, OR

I actually took them at way too high of a shutter speed. I think I set my shutter speed high thinking they were going to fly or I wasn't paying attention to what my shutter speed was or something. I look at them now and think "why did I set the shutter speed that high?" so I don't know what I was thinking at the time. But the fact that a 1600 ISO picture came out so grainy and terrible looking concerned me that I'm pretty much limited to 800 and below on ISO speed.

I think the discussion on changing from the 18-200 wasn't so much to fix the grainy problem but to just get a better lens for general shooting. I use the 18-200 right now for general purpose shooting and for wide angle as that is all I have for wide shots. Someone suggested the 24-120 for a much better quality lens for general shooting.

Jackdoor Loc: Huddersfield, Yorkshire.

I've not been through all the pages on this, but I'd suggest a used D800 or D800E from a reputable supplier, plus Sigma's 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 DG II HSM. You'll have to spend a lot to beat this combination for wide landscapes. The D810's improvements are minimal for twice the money.

orrie smith Loc: Kansas

In that case try the d750

drizztguen77 Loc: Tualatin, OR

I don't quite understand this. The D800 is a full frame sensor but the Sigma 12-24mm lens is an APS-C lens. Why put that lens on a full frame body?

drizztguen77 Loc: Tualatin, OR

After looking more at that the D750 does look like it might be the better option for me to move to full frame. The places it lacks to the D810 like shutter speed and flash sync speed my D7200 can handle. I doubt I really need 36 MP.