Stepping up from a D3300 - D7200 or 5D mkII?

[niksy]

Hey guys, I've got a huge dilemma and would absolutely love to hear your thoughts on this.

What's going on is that I've had a Nikon D3300 for a full year now (my first dSLR!) and a few guys at work asked to buy it off from me. That got me thinking about stepping up to a higher class body and my mind's been a mess ever since

I've not gotten in too deep into the Nikon ecosystem, as I've only bought the 35mm 1.8 DX lens a few months back (I love it!) and have nothing else except the kit lens that would be sold together with the body. I'll of course have some loss on the body-kit lens combo, but not too bad (bought for 400e, selling for 300) and the 35mm would easily sell at what I paid for it (120-130e).

My first thought was the D5500 and I was set on it for a few days, but, asking a few friends for ideas and thoughts about what they would get soon got me to where I'm now - Nikon D7200 vs a Canon 5D Mk2.

With the D5500 I thought I would be getting the best video camera, especially with the new AF-P 18-55 kit that's silent and supposedly sharper, too. But the truth is I'm not a videographer and likely won't be looking into serious video work any time soon. On the contrary, I'm getting into stock photography. That's the reason I'm not looking into any older full-frame bodies, like the D700, for example. The D600 is also in my price range, but their shutters are faulty (or are they not too faulty?)
 

D7200 - would set me back 830e new and I would have my 35mm 1.8 DX straight away.

 

5D mk2 - would set me back 750-800e used and I would also need to get a lens for it (which is okay, because I'd be getting some more money in from the 35mm).

 

Would a 50mm on a full frame be similar to a 35mm on the crop/DX? I'm not 100% sure on this... Because I could get a 50mm for the Canon easily for the money I would get from the 35mm nikkor. The plastic fantastic 50mm one, not the higher end 1.4 one, although I've seen those for around 200e, so even they're not out of reach, really. But I don't reckon there would be much of a quality difference between the two lenses (35mm dx vs the cheaper 50mm)?

 

 

What do you guys think? Is an excellent full frame from 2008 still overall better than an excellent crop body from 2015?
I would really like to get a new body, like I did last year, but I'm no stranger to buying used tech and I know that the average lifetime for 5dmk2's shutters is ~120k, so I wouldn't feel too bad about buying a 50-60k shots body, although ~20k ones do show up here and there.

[AkiraDaarkst]

35mm on a Nikon APS-C body gives the FOV approximately equivalent to 50mm on a Full Frame body.

 

The 5DmkII was a fantastic camera, but if your focus is on photography I think it might not be the ideal camera.  It's not a bad camera by any means but improvements in sensor and image processing technology since then has made modern cameras better.

 

I wouldn't say a D5500 is a significant upgrade from a D3300.  Any fault that the D600 or D610 might have had has been resolved or should have been resolved by Nikon.

[niksy]

Thanks for joining the discussion @AkiraDaarkst 

 

Yeah, I figured that the D3300 and D5500 have the exact same sensor, so it's just higher build quality + the articulated screen + touchscreen + wifi that's better on the D5500.

 

So you would say that the 5DmkII is actually more of a video camera? Interesting. I've seen many on sale that claim that they've used them in photo studios and never even tried the video mode... Not saying that that has to mean anything, though.

 

The fault that the D600 had was that the shutter would collect far too much dust (and even oil?). But I've seen a few D600 on sale and they are in my price range. The updated D610, on the other hand, is quite a bit more expensive (a 100k shots bodies are going for 1000 euros). The 2 used D600s that I currently see in my local listings have had their shutters replaced with presumably non-faulty versions or whatever... Hmm.

Am I right in understanding that you would recommend the D600 if I'm chosing between the D7200, D600 and the 5D mk2?

 

 

Then there is the issue of the more expensive Nikon lenses... Any cheap lens recommendations on the Nikon fx side? What's a good 50mm for them?

[AkiraDaarkst]

15 minutes ago, niksy said:

 

Nikon has a few 50mm options, the 50mm 1.8D, the 1.8G, the 1.4D and the 1.4G.  Plus older 50mm lenses.  Most of them fantastic.  The 50 1.8D is relatively cheap, around $120-150 if not less.  If you get any Nikon lenses that have a manual aperture ring, it's best to generally get a camera that is at the tier of the D7200 or above.  D3300 and D5500 and any of the cameras in their tier do not have an AF motor in the camera body, so it relies on the AF motor inside the lens and older Nikon lenses do not have a motor inside.

 

I wouldn't say the 5DmkII was more of a video camera.  It is more of a photo camera, however sensor technology (or imaging technology) is improving all the time.  A recent camera with a recent sensor would perform better than a camera from 8 years ago.  For example, ISO 6400 on a recent camera may likely have less visible noise than ISO 6400 on a older camera.

 

I try to avoid telling people what specific camera to get. If you feel more comfortable with Nikon cameras (and since you've been using one for about a year) perhaps sticking to Nikon might be a good idea.  If you have friends who own a Canon body or can visit a store that has working display models they will let you try out, see if you like the handling of a Canon.

[niksy]

6 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

Nikon has a few 50mm options, the 50mm 1.8D, the 1.8G, the 1.4D and the 1.4G.  Plus older 50mm lenses.  Most of them fantastic.  The 50 1.8D is relatively cheap, around $120-150 if not less.  If you get any Nikon lenses that have a manual aperture ring, it's best to generally get a camera that is at the tier of the D7200 or above.  D3300 and D5500 and any of the cameras in their tier do not have an AF motor in the camera body, so it relies on the AF motor inside the lens and older Nikon lenses do not have a motor inside.

Yep, I'm aware of the entry-level DXs lack of in-body AF motor. That's why I definitelly won't be going below a D7200

 

6 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

 

I wouldn't say the 5DmkII was more of a video camera.  It is more of a photo camera, however sensor technology (or imaging technology) is improving all the time.  A recent camera with a recent sensor would perform better than a camera from 8 years ago.  For example, ISO 6400 on a recent camera may likely have less visible noise than ISO 6400 on a older camera.

Of course, but isn't there also the discussion of full frame vs aps-c sensors, where a full frame one is bound to take in more light? But I do agree that 8 years is definitely a huge difference.

 

6 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

I try to avoid telling people what specific camera to get. If you feel more comfortable with Nikon cameras (and since you've been using one for about a year) perhaps sticking to Nikon might be a good idea.  If you have friends who own a Canon body or can visit a store that has working display models they will let you try out, see if you like the handling of a Canon.

Fully understand this... I'll be visiting the shops recently to see how a few cameras feel in the hand. Although most of these that I mentioned will no longer be there. We'll see.

 

Thanks, mate!

Looking to hear some more opinions

[cc143]

The cheapest FF camera you can get at the moment is I believe the Sony a7, which given you are looking to swap systems might be a better option than the 5d2, which I would get on a budget because I a) have a lot of Canon Glass and accessories and b)prefer DSLRs to mirrorless for a main camera and Canon to Sony any day. 

 

Now, don't get me wrong, the 5d2 is still a very capable camera, and have over the past 2 months considered on a number of occasions to buy one myself, but the Sony might be worth considering. 

 

Between Canon and Nikon, while personally I prefer Canon, it has been said either of the 2 systems is fine for anyone, and if you already entered the ecosystem, then regardless of the fact you don;t have any FX glass, it might be worth it sticking with nikon. 

 

What I'd do is this, look at used lenses, see which comes cheaper at the end, after the body and buying a couple of lenses, like a nifty fifty and a constant aperture zoom, like the 24-105L, and then go with the one that offers better value and stick with it. Buying any body today doesn't constitute a reason to go nikon or canon, since you'll want another one next year, and will probably upgrade in 5 years anyway. 

 

If prices for the glass for both systems are similar, then flip a coin. Note: I would go with a system with better/relevantly more affordable glass than with a system with better bodies available at the time of purchase. 

[niksy]

Sonys are not as common here, so the prices may not be in line with the Canon and Nikon stuff I've just found one used Sony A7 which is going for 850e, meaning more expensive than all of my other options (D7200, D600, 5Dmk2...)

 

The lenses are definitely cheaper on the Canon side, but there are good deals to find on the Nikon side, too. But I'm not that crazy about having a bunch of them, anyway, I really love the 35mm 1.8 dx that I got and I would probably get a 50mm next, that would be an 85mm equivalent on the d7200 so great for portrait work, and finally a good zoom, but nothing too soon.

Ahh... Wish this was simpler. Wish the D600 wasn't faulty, as it's a great camera, or at least it would've been if it weren't for the dodgy shutter... I've just been reading comments from people who had their shutters replaced with (supposedly) D610 units who still had problems with too much dust and oil spots on the sensor way too soon. So the D600 is out of the equation, I'm just not willing to take that risk.

 

Back to square one, I guess, D7200 vs a 5Dmk2. I'm hesitant about the D7200 because I don't feel like sticking around a crop sensor for much longer, but then again... It will allow me to use any Nikon AF glass, so I wouldn't have to stick to DX stuff and therefore I would be preparing for a switfh to FX in a few years. Then the 810 will drop down or something.

 

I'd just really like to get a big toy, like the 5Dmk2 is, but I do also feel like D7200 is the smarter choice. And it is impressive in many ways, like the updated autofocus system and the 1000+ shots battery life etc etc.

 

Still open to new comments, either way

[xQubeZx]

Have you seen the 6D for any reasonal price? As you seems to be thinking of moving the full frame the 6D may be an option to look out for. My friend managed to buy one for a quite good price. And tbh that is a great body. Sure I have not tried any other high end full frame bodies but the 6D really feels like a semi pro body. It lacks a few stuff like articularting screen and so but the images from it are extremely sharp and the ISO performance was great when we went out shooting car trails. 

 

Otherwise the options you have on the Nikon side is probably a very good buy too and to the avantage of not needing to buy new lenses. You would also have to consider that full frame glass is quite a bit more expensive which could make the D7200 a good choice however at the cost of an smaller sensor. 

[niksy]

The 6D looks absolutely fantastic, I agree! Alas, I see two for sale at the moment - one's up for 800euros and it's at 300k shots. 300.000! Damn... And the other's barely done a few thousand and it's priced at 1050e (so 1.000 most likely). Brutal

 

I'll be following the classifieds closely and hope that a 6D or D610/D750 pops up for some nicer numbers.

If they don't - D7200 it is.

 

 

And now that you mentioned the 6D... Man, the dxomark says it's good at ISO2300! Wow... That's almost double the 1300 they've graded the D7200 at. I'm so keeping my fingers crossed that a good deal on a full frame shows up.
Thanks for jumping in @xQubeZx!

[xQubeZx]

2 hours ago, niksy said:

The 6D looks absolutely fantastic, I agree! Alas, I see two for sale at the moment - one's up for 800euros and it's at 300k shots. 300.000! Damn... And the other's barely done a few thousand and it's priced at 1050e (so 1.000 most likely). Brutal

 

I'll be following the classifieds closely and hope that a 6D or D610/D750 pops up for some nicer numbers.

If they don't - D7200 it is.

 

 

And now that you mentioned the 6D... Man, the dxomark says it's good at ISO2300! Wow... That's almost double the 1300 they've graded the D7200 at. I'm so keeping my fingers crossed that a good deal on a full frame shows up.
Thanks for jumping in @xQubeZx!

Yea it is a bit expensive. My buddy was doing a similar deciscion as you but basically said "screw it" and bought a full frame even though it meant a larger cost. And I can really say the ISO performance of it is amazing. (Love to have a buddy with exepnsive body I can play around a bit with haha) ISO 6400 is very usable without any troubles, you barley need to do any noise reduction on that even in my opinion. The body feels quite nice in the hands but I have not the largest hands so it is a bit large but nothing to complain about. Only real thing I would miss from it is an articulating screen and focus peaking when using manual focus. And you will get the avalibilty of the Canon EF that has a loot of great lenses. Many quite expensive though but the 50 1.8 can be had for 100us new pretty much. Otherwise you can look out for used 24-70L f/2.8 and 24-105L f/4. This is some amazing L glass that can be found used for around 400-500US. Sure that is quite a bit but considering that they go for 1000-1500us new. (Especially the older models of them are a lot cheaper and well there is nothing wrong with these at all.) 

[cc143]

I'm not sure if I'd go for the 6d over the mk2 personally. 

 

Its more expensive, has about the same sensor and AF system and is less durable, which you should consider when buying used. 

 

Granted its a bit newer and has GPS and wifi, but still I think that between the 2, the 5d2 might be a better value right now. 

 

also, is there focus peaking on any dslr without ML? (Like in the VF?) that'd be awesome! 

 

I also agree with the EF prices, you can get amazing glass on the canon side for quite cheap if you are willing to go used. 

[niksy]

Okay, guys. I just called up a 5Dmk2 guy and arranged to meet on Sunday. It's a 60k shots body, looks like it never left the studio, 700e for the body alone or 750euros with the BG-E6 grip.

 

Should I go for the grip? The guy says he used it just for better ballance/steadier hands - does that make sense? Never held a dSLR with a battery grip so far

 

Besides that, I think I'm going to get the plastic fantastic 50mm f1.8 for 50e which I could probably re-sell it at any day later on and save up for something nicer in a few months - say the 50mm f1.4 or whatever pops up.

I'm so excited (and I just can't hide it...)

[xQubeZx]

49 minutes ago, niksy said:

Okay, guys. I just called up a 5Dmk2 guy and arranged to meet on Sunday. It's a 60k shots body, looks like it never left the studio, 700e for the body alone or 750euros with the BG-E6 grip.

 

Should I go for the grip? The guy says he used it just for better ballance/steadier hands - does that make sense? Never held a dSLR with a battery grip so far

 

Besides that, I think I'm going to get the plastic fantastic 50mm f1.8 for 50e which I could probably re-sell it at any day later on and save up for something nicer in a few months - say the 50mm f1.4 or whatever pops up.

I'm so excited (and I just can't hide it...)

You will probably be very happy  The grip really depends does batteries include in those extra 50US it might be worth it. But how it feels in the hand really depends but with larger lenses it can give a bit more balance. Personally I usally don't like grips as they make the body quite a bit larger but for portrait work I can enjoy it as it becomes a lot more ergonomical to shoot vertically. 

 

And make sure to look out for cheap used EF glass. If you are lucky you can find some L glass for good price. (The 24-105 for example, I often see that one being sold here in Sweden for good prices)

[cc143]

I have a grip with me whenever I shoot at clubs to avoid changing out batteries. I also carry it with me if I go somewhere where I may not have access to a plug to charge the batteries, since it has an AA battery adapter with it, but I usually just have it in my bag. 

 

It is ergonomic to use when shooting portraits, but, keep in mind if you also have a large lens its gonna be too heavy to carry around. 

 

If he will also throw in 2 extra batteries go for it, but I don't think grips are that expensive for the 5d2, my 50d has essentially the same battery (grip might be different though) and I got the grip used from ebay 2 years ago for 30 quid. (It was in the box etc.). its the BG-E2. Keep in mind that beattery life may have deteriorated over the years and, while 3rd party batteries are cheap, they are not that cheap. 

 

First lens you buy should be the 24-105L, its at a relevantly good price and its a great all around lens. If you are really strapped, the 28-135 USM may also work, but its not as good, its at less than half used though. If you have the cash though, I'd go for the 24-70L 2.8 for a walkaround. 

 

Also look for a 50mm f1.4 instead of the 1.8, I like the thing a lot and think it was worth the extra 60-70 quid. (Got mine from Cex.co.uk for £145.)

 

If you want a wide angle, I find the 17-40mm is great, especially considering the price used in comparison to the 16-35 alternatives. 

 

Happy shooting (I'm actually jealous, I wanted to get a 5d for some time now, even 2 generations older.) 

[AkiraDaarkst]

1 hour ago, niksy said:

 

I would get the grip, even if it ends up not being used 99% of the time.  For the times that a grip does become useful you will have it ready.  You can probably negotiate with the owner to see if he is willing to lower the price a little more.   But yes, the grip will add a bit more weight and bulk to the camera.  In fact, 5D type bodies with the battery grip attached tend to be slightly larger than 1D type bodies which have the vertical grip integrated into the design.

 

When you check the camera, take a memory card and laptop with you.  Check the shutter count yourself, take a few test photos, take test photos to check for sensor dust.  Examine the physical body for any serious wear and tear, loose or broken bits, etc.

 

Unlike Nikon, Canon shutter counts are a bit harder to access and often people assume that only a Canon service center can access it, but there are ways.  Check this website out.

http://canon5dtips.com/on-the-web/shutter-count-number-for-your-canon-eos-dslr/

 

The Canon 5D mark II is a great camera, I once owned one myself some years ago.  The three things I didn't like about the 5D mark II:

• I preferred the ergonomics of my D700
• My D700 was faster (photography of course)
• The 5D mark II suffers from fixed pattern noise when shooting at high ISO

The 5D mark II was my first "pro video" camera.  Now I've moved beyond using DSLRs for video.

 

On 10/17/2016 at 10:44 AM, niksy said:

Of course, but isn't there also the discussion of full frame vs aps-c sensors, where a full frame one is bound to take in more light? But I do agree that 8 years is definitely a huge difference.

While it is generally true that larger sensors tend to be able to collect more light (larger surface area and the pixel pitch of a 24MP Full Frame sensor should be larger than the pixel pitch of a 24MP cropped sensor), the noise reduction and image processing done in camera has improved in the past years.  A Nikon D3 from 10 years ago is nothing compared to a D5 that's currently available.