$1800, Nikon/Canon photography

[That Phil]

Hi,

 

I've been using my iPhone 6s to take photos on a daily basis. It works okay, right.

Then I also have a Nikon D5100 that I use whenever I have time I can spend exclusively to snap some photos.

 

My question is though, because I want to step up my game even further, what Camera should I buy which have a priceroof of $1800 (USD) ?
The prior would be the following:

Ridicolous image resolution,

Price,

Ability to shoot in the dark.

 

Oh, and the choices is limited to Nikon and Canon. No chineese fakes or so.

 

Thank you.

 

[79wjd]

You'd be better off putting that money towards lenses than a new body. 

[That Phil]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

You'd be better off putting that money towards lenses than a new body. 

A new body is a must though. The D5100 have some rough erros like catastrophic batterylife, non-working LCD and also I've managed to break the flash. Aswell, it only got on SD-card slot

[79wjd]

Just now, That Phil said:

A new body is a must though. The D5100 have some rough erros like catastrophic batterylife, non-working LCD and also I've managed to break the flash. Aswell, it only got on SD-card slot

Well, what kind of photography do you do? Landscape, cityscape, wildlife, other? What kind of dark-photography do you do? What lenses do you currently have? And do you really need dual SD card slots -- again, you may or may not be better off going with a cheaper body and putting the rest of it towards lenses.

[That Phil]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

Well, what kind of photography do you do? Landscape, cityscape, wildlife, other? What kind of dark-photography do you do? What lenses do you currently have? And do you really need dual SD card slots -- again, you may or may not be better off going with a cheaper body and putting the rest of it towards lenses.

I mostly do landscapes and star-landscapes.
I can't remember the lenses' modelnames atm, I will have to comeback with that at a later time unforunately.

Yes, I'm totally in need for dual SD slots. I'm mostly shooting in Raw and since I'm going for great resolutions, my cards get filled pretty fast.

 

Still you have a point, a cheaper body would result in better lenses, but I will prior a new body to begin with. Because the D5100 doesn't have a working LCD I have to shoot on Automatic.

[79wjd]

20 minutes ago, That Phil said:

I mostly do landscapes and star-landscapes.
I can't remember the lenses' modelnames atm, I will have to comeback with that at a later time unforunately.

Yes, I'm totally in need for dual SD slots. I'm mostly shooting in Raw and since I'm going for great resolutions, my cards get filled pretty fast.

 

Still you have a point, a cheaper body would result in better lenses, but I will prior a new body to begin with. Because the D5100 doesn't have a working LCD I have to shoot on Automatic.

Well, without knowing what lenses you have no I wouldn't really make a suggestion as it could depend a lot on what specific lenses you have.

 

D5200 would be my cheap body suggestion -- the 5300 and 5500 don't really add much to warrant the higher price tag imo. Or something like a D7100 (the D7200 didn't add much either). I'd lean towards the D7100 personally. 

 

If you wanted to go with an FX body, then I'd look towards a D610. I currently have a D7000 and part of me wants to upgrade to a D610 as I do a lot of landscape photography, and so an FX body (without the crop factor) would be really nice to have (but I also have a couple good FX lenses already). The larger FX sensor would also be beneficial for night time shooting, although not enough to warrant the fact that it would be about twice as much as a D7100. 

 

/I'm assuming you don't care much about video as that could change things 

[ALwin]

1 hour ago, That Phil said:

Yes, I'm totally in need for dual SD slots. I'm mostly shooting in Raw and since I'm going for great resolutions, my cards get filled pretty fast.

With Nikon, dual memory card slots start at the tier of the Nikon D7x00 and above, all tiers of cameras below the D7x00 are single slot.  That's also the level where Nikon adds the in-body AF motor.  The next model up that is still within your budgetary range would be a D610.  Either of these two models will still save you some money to buy something else.

 

But know that if you do go to the FX line of cameras, you will probably have to get new lenses to replace any DX lens you are using.  With the D7200 you won't have this problem, with the D610 you will.

[Evanair]

ALwin, the D750 has dual SD slots as well. It's also Full frame so more light for the sensor.

 

http://www.adorama.com/inkd750r.html  It's refurbished, but still a great camera, really depends on if the OP has FX or DX lenses.

 

Also, the D500 gray market price hits the 1800 dollar price (1799.99 is close right?)  and you can run into issues repairing it.

[79wjd]

10 minutes ago, Evanair said:

ALwin, the D750 has dual SD slots as well. It's also Full frame so more light for the sensor.

 

http://www.adorama.com/inkd750r.html  It's refurbished, but still a great camera, really depends on if the OP has FX or DX lenses.

 

Also, the D500 gray market price hits the 1800 dollar price (1799.99 is close right?)  and you can run into issues repairing it.

The D500 doesn't really offer anything all too compelling over something like a D7100 to warrant spending almost triple on it. 

[Evanair]

 

11 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

The D500 doesn't really offer anything all too compelling over something like a D7100 to warrant spending almost triple on it. 

Besides a much cleaner and higher ISO, two generation newer image processor, better AF and much higher build quality?  That's not to mention video capabilities, but the OP didn't ask about video.

[79wjd]

8 minutes ago, Evanair said:

 

Besides a much cleaner and higher ISO, two generation newer image processor, better AF and much higher build quality?  That's not to mention video capabilities, but the OP didn't ask about video.

The better image processing doesn't make that much of a difference if he's using RAW. Sure it has a higher ISO, but there is rarely ever a reason to shoot at such a high ISO anyway. The D7100 has a pretty sturdy construction....sure, it's not quite as durable, but he can also completely break two of them and still have saved money. For video there are better choices than both the D7100 or the D500. 

[thekillergazebo]

yeah the Nikon d7100 is really nice. I've done a few night shoots with it, but I still feel like I enjoy shooting with Sony more at night. I know there is a way to make the mirror not shake show much for long exposures, but when I'm shooting at the beach in thick grain sand I still never get a super sharp shot. Mirorless has never failed me when I need absolutely no shake. Not to say you will shoot like this but just food for thought. An the a7 I think is like $1000 and the a6300 is a $1000 pair that with a 10-18 which is $750 your on point. Or could use a ziess 12mm f2.8 for $600. Or even a rokina 14mm f2 

[79wjd]

1 minute ago, thekillergazebo said:

yeah the Nikon d7100 is really nice. I've done a few night shoots with it, but I still feel like I enjoy shooting with Sony more at night. I know there is a way to make the mirror not shake show much for long exposures, but when I'm shooting at the beach in thick grain sand I still never get a super sharp shot. Mirorless has never failed me when I need absolutely no shake. Not to say you will shoot like this but just food for thought. An the a7 I think is like $1000 and the a6300 is a $1000 pair that with a 10-18 which is $750 your on point. Or could use a ziess 12mm f2.8 for $600. Or even a rokina 14mm f2 

Use mirror lock up mode. It locks the mirror up before you take the shot so you don't get any vibration from it moving. 

[ALwin]

1 hour ago, Evanair said:

ALwin, the D750 has dual SD slots as well. It's also Full frame so more light for the sensor.

I know the D750 has dual card slots too.  Every Nikon FX body has a dual card slot I believe, along with Nikon's top two lines of DX cameras (D7x00 and Dx00 (D300, D500) series), the only ones that do not have dual card slots are the entry level bodies (D3x00 and D5x00).

 

You are right about grey market issues, Nikon does not tend to provide coverage for grey market imports.

 

@OP, If you haven't invested too much into Nikon gear (mainly glass) perhaps look into other camera systems.  Otherwise a Nikon 7200, D610 and a D750 refurbished (if you can find one) are good camera systems.  Just keep in mind that glass for full frame cameras are usually more expensive than glass for cropped sensor cameras.  A full frame camera is not necessarily needed for the type of photography you do.  People have been producing fantastic landscape and night sky photos for years on DX cameras.

 

If you want to be able to produce better photos, become a better photographer.

[DominicNikon]

the d7200 is nice or a d750 if you have full frame lens and a somewhat higher budget 

[That Phil]

16 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

/I'm assuming you don't care much about video as that could change things 

That's right, I never do video so it's not worth paying for such features.

 

16 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

Well, without knowing what lenses you have no I wouldn't really make a suggestion as it could depend a lot on what specific lenses you have.

Yeah, I'm sorry but I haven't had the time to grab the lenses just yet.

 

15 hours ago, ALwin said:

If you want to be able to produce better photos, become a better photographer.

Well I need functional gear to improve, as well as I've been in-need for higher resolutions for the editing.

You've done a great job mentioning different models and which got dubble SD slots e.t.c. I really appreciate it
I know that much of the decisions lie on what lenses I have and if I'm willing to give them up or not, I'll be sure to hit you up with the exact models when I get home later this afternoon!
 

9 hours ago, DominicNikon said:

the d7200 is nice or a d750 if you have full frame lens and a somewhat higher budget

The only reason I'd higher my budget would be if there's a package deal that ships internationally. The $1800 budget is just for the body though.

Edited August 20, 2016 by That Phil

[That Phil]

The first lens is a AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR.

The second lens ia a AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR.

 

Now I know that the second one isn't exactly used for landscapes, but atm it was a nice complement if you'd ever wanted to shoot in the city or portrait.

[ALwin]

1 hour ago, That Phil said:

Well I need functional gear to improve, as well as I've been in-need for higher resolutions for the editing.

That's a fine reason to buy a new camera, because your current camera is not 100% functional and it may be more cost effective to buy a new one than repair the old one.  By the way, shooting RAW doesn't give you more resolution, it gives you more latitude.  Resolution comes with the MP count.

 

My point is, don't spend all $1800 on just buying the most expensive camera body available.  If you do, that means you need to fork out more cash to buy other items, such as new lenses, spare batteries, memory cards, etc.

 

A D7200 brand new costs around $1100, which gives you around $700 left to buy other things.  Invest in a good lens, or spare batteries because I doubt the batteries from a D5x00 camera will work with a D7200.  Larger capacity memory cards, or even a good tripod.

 

48 minutes ago, That Phil said:

The first lens is a AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR.

The second lens ia a AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR.

 

Now I know that the second one isn't exactly used for landscapes, but atm it was a nice complement if you'd ever wanted to shoot in the city or portrait.

These are nice kit lenses for generic use, they are basic kit lenses.  Also, landscape photographers do use telephoto focal lengths from time to time for landscape photography.

 

 

[79wjd]

4 hours ago, That Phil said:

The first lens is a AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR.

The second lens ia a AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR.

 

Now I know that the second one isn't exactly used for landscapes, but atm it was a nice complement if you'd ever wanted to shoot in the city or portrait.

Both are actually fair mediocre lenses tbh. 

 

I would personally do something like this: 

• D7100 ($800)
• 70-300mm f4.5-5.6G ($500) -- IF you use your 55-300mm a lot, otherwise if you only rarely use it, then you may as well just stick with what you've got. I personally have this lens and it's great, although I do a lot of wildlife photography so I would really like to upgrade to the 70-200m F2.8, although I don't have $1500-$2000 to drop on a lens. (along with the $2000~ 24-70mm f2.8g)
• 24-85 f2.8g ($750). You lose a bit on the wide end, but I find it to be a sharper lens, and having the option for f2.8 can be really nice -- although it's probably not super meaningful for the kind of photos you take. 

Although, fwiw I would start out with just the body and then upgraded your lenses if you decide yours just aren't cutting it anymore.

[DominicNikon]

5 hours ago, That Phil said:

The first lens is a AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR.

The second lens ia a AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR.

 

Now I know that the second one isn't exactly used for landscapes, but atm it was a nice complement if you'd ever wanted to shoot in the city or portrait.

i would say this is a nice camera 

[xQubeZx]

12 hours ago, That Phil said:

That's right, I never do video so it's not worth paying for such features.

 

Yeah, I'm sorry but I haven't had the time to grab the lenses just yet.

 

Well I need functional gear to improve, as well as I've been in-need for higher resolutions for the editing.

You've done a great job mentioning different models and which got dubble SD slots e.t.c. I really appreciate it
I know that much of the decisions lie on what lenses I have and if I'm willing to give them up or not, I'll be sure to hit you up with the exact models when I get home later this afternoon!
 

The only reason I'd higher my budget would be if there's a package deal that ships internationally. The $1800 budget is just for the body though.

Better glass will improve the image quality. I'm nit super into nikons lineup but if I remember any camera with 24megapixels+ are very expenisve. Only high megapixel camera I know for around 1000-1200 is the Sony A7r (mark 1) with its 37megapixel something. That paired with the Zeiss 16-35 f/4 would be like 2000. 

 

But I would trust the others and get a 7xxx body probably seems like the smartest idea. 

[79wjd]

8 minutes ago, xQubeZx said:

Better glass will improve the image quality. I'm nit super into nikons lineup but if I remember any camera with 24megapixels+ are very expenisve. Only high megapixel camera I know for around 1000-1200 is the Sony A7r (mark 1) with its 37megapixel something. That paired with the Zeiss 16-35 f/4 would be like 2000. 

 

But I would trust the others and get a 7xxx body probably seems like the smartest idea. 

Basically all Nikon cameras have 24mp at this point. 

[xQubeZx]

24 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Basically all Nikon cameras have 24mp at this point. 

Yea but does anyone have more than that? Im not so good on Nikon cameras but if you want more you would have to spend quite a bit right? 

[79wjd]

5 minutes ago, xQubeZx said:

Yea but does anyone have more than that? Im not so good on Nikon cameras but if you want more you would have to spend quite a bit right? 

Yeah, I'm pretty sure the D810 is the only one with 36mp, the rest are all capped at 24mp. But there isn't that much of a need for more than 24mp unless you're doing insane levels of enlargement. And in Canon's space, only the 5DS has more than 24mp (at 50mp).

[That Phil]

22 hours ago, ALwin said:

A D7200 brand new costs around $1100, which gives you around $700 left to buy other things.

That sounds resonable to me.

 

I've also got my eyes cought on this lens;
Nikon 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5G ED DX

Thought it would cost around $800..

 

Then I did something stupid and looked up the difference between FX and DX... Guess that FX cost too much..