[viggen]

If you want more than what you already have, you gotta be willing to pay for it. Personally, I'm fine with my used D7000.

of course i am willing to pay for it.  not like i was expecting nikon to give me a free camera....

[viggen]

One thing some shooters may want to invest in is some good noise reduction software.  Even nice sensors like in Nikon D7xxx, Sony A7x, Canon 5xx eventually run into limitations when it comes to high ISO.  One morning, I saw a nice color at dawn, quickly dissipating, so I grabbed the 5D quickly and shot it, after which sunrise was gone.  I then realized, the settings were not where I thought I left them, and I accidentally shot at ISO 6400 with ridiculously fast shutter speed    The noise was annoying, which I could somewhat rescue with Noiseware. 

ACR default NR only

Noiseware (luminance slider to 7 out of 10)

This might make it worthwhile to stay with D7000 for another year or two.  I could jack up iso from 400 to say 640 with this software and remain noise free?

[Bob2]

Jon L,
that software looks to work very well.
Think I'll give it a try.
Picture afterwards looks pretty good!
Thanks for posting that!

[Jon L]

I could jack up iso from 400 to say 640 with this software and remain noise free?

Nothing is noise "free," but a good NR software allows lots of flexibility, with the main goal of decreasing noise while preserving detail and color.  One can play with separate sliders for Luminance noise reduction and Color noise reduction, but there are a host of other sliders one can play with as well.

NoiseWare by drjlo1, on Flickr

[viggen]

yah i didn't mean completely free of noise but making say 640iso as useful as 400iso.

thanks for the rec.  i will download trial and play with it this weekend.

[viggen]

question: what happens when you use a dx lens on an fx camera?  is there crop factor when fx camera is in crop mode?

[low.pfile]

Viggen,
a DX-specific lens projects a smaller image circle onto the sensor.

On an FX sensor camera. you have two options.
1. keep the crop at Full-Frame FX and the image projected onto the sensor will vignette out and you can crop yourself in post processing. there will be lots of darkness around the center image area. 
the rare instance I tried that... http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=42049.msg703365#msg703365
 
2. use the DX crop mode setting, which results in the camera only using the sensor area appropriate for the image circle of a DX lens. I am not sure but it may also correct any minimal vignetting in the camera. Since you are using a smaller area of the sensor, the image will only be approx 10MP resolution assuming the D750's 24MP FX sensor. That resultant 10MP resolution is obviously much less than your D7100's resolution of 24MP.

cheers, ed

[low.pfile]

yes the crop factor comes in on the perceived image framing...
your 17-55mm lens will be effectively 26-84mm when in DX crop mode on a full frame camera.

also see this: https://photographylife.com/using-nikon-dx-lenses-on-fx-cameras

[viggen]

Thanks Low.  Yes, it'll be only 10mp instead of 16mp in crop mode.  However, the 10mp on the D610 should be a lot cleaner since there's roughly only half the number of pixels in the same sensor size equivalent... at least that's my guess.

[low.pfile]

Viggen,
Yes, there are lots of factors that come into play. Pixel-pitch, AntiAlias filter. yes or no, focus engine.

My thoughts are... it depends on your use/application of the camera. I am a super low light/candid/motion user. and I know others take amazing photos of landscapes/stilll lifes.

and it is wise of you to look for real-world input.


to add my context... I was a late Nikon adopter [nikon film] -> D70 -> D80 -> D700 / D5000 / D3S -> D750. I still have 3 of those.

[gnuyork]

Canon 6D actually as slightly better IQ than 5D III and has the highest IQ/price ratio in Canonland, so good choice

One thing some shooters may want to invest in is some good noise reduction software.  Even nice sensors like in Nikon D7xxx, Sony A7x, Canon 5xx eventually run into limitations when it comes to high ISO.  One morning, I saw a nice color at dawn, quickly dissipating, so I grabbed the 5D quickly and shot it, after which sunrise was gone.  I then realized, the settings were not where I thought I left them, and I accidentally shot at ISO 6400 with ridiculously fast shutter speed    The noise was annoying, which I could somewhat rescue with Noiseware. 

ACR default NR only

EOSE2864noNR by drjlo1, on Flickr

Noiseware (luminance slider to 7 out of 10)

EOSE2864Nsware by drjlo1, on Flickr

I'll be the contrary opinion. I like the top image (a lot) better. Just look at the detail on the edge of the clouds and the mountains in the background. I think NR reduce noise at the expense of sharpness, and I can live with a little noise - doesn't bother me. I think it would be even less of an issue if you were to print.

[viggen]

The curiosity got the better of me.  I ordered the d7200 on amazon the first day it was available.  Been playing with it for a few hours.  It's sensor seems much better than the d7000.  Oh, I was wrong about it not worth the upgrade from 7000 to 7200.   

[Early B.]

The curiosity got the better of me.  I ordered the d7200 on amazon the first day it was available.  Been playing with it for a few hours.  It's sensor seems much better than the d7000.  Oh, I was wrong about it not worth the upgrade from 7000 to 7200.   

That's great news. I suppose cameras are like audio gear -- the specs alone don't tell you the full story about the performance, so you gotta test drive it.

[viggen]

well i returned the d7200.  at first i really liked the d7200 but the less i like it the more i use it.  the iso is better, the color is better, but i don't quite like the sensor's charactertic.  maybe my lens doesn't like the higher resolution vis a vis the d7000.  but, low light picture taking is harder to tame.  also, doesn't help that there's no adobe support for raw and am going on a trip soon so rather have dng work with whatever camera i take with me.

leaning towards either d750 or A7s... more latter since it's better for travel.  tested it at sony store.  hated my previous mirrorless the x100 because of focus issues.  A7s doesn't have much focus issues but didn't have memory card in camera when i was playing with it.

[Jon L]

leaning towards either d750 or A7s... more latter since it's better for travel. 

Read this before you buy the Sony..  I bought the Sony A7r, but I may have reconsidered if I had known a few things about Sony FE lenses.  Firstly, Sony service apparently charges exorbitant amount of money ($800 vs. $200-300 for Canikon) for similar lens repair jobs.  Secondly, the build quality of FE lenses seem VERY prone for malfunction, e.g. important internal parts simply glued onto smooth surface, which is destined to fail in due time.  Then the high repair costs mentioned...   Thirdly, even the expensive Sony "Zeiss" FE lenses apparently have very little optical adjustability internally, resulting in WIDE sample-to-sample variability. 

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/04/tearing-down-the-sony-24-70-f4-za-oss-vario-tessar

[viggen]

thanks jon.  i've been researching the d750 vs a7s during the past week.  didn't read anything about this issue you mentioned. so you're the first to bring it to my attention.

on the sony end, i was leaning more towards voigtlander lenses because they are smaller, less expensive than fe lenses and seems to be reviewed better than except the 55mm fe.  losing out on af and exif though.

thought i wanted the a7s instead of the other iterations because of the higher iso.  after playing with it at the sony store, i do like how its shutter is quiter and focuses much faster which isn't an issue if i go with voigtlander lenses.  recently been reading that a7s isn't that much better vs a7/a7r for low light in fact it's worse in regular light.

why i am still contemplating nikon is faster af, and overall cheaper since i have some nikon lenses.  50mm 1.8d which sat in my closet for 10 years as it's useless with dx.  and, probably could use the 17-55mm with d750 in crop mode 1.2 or 1.5x.  will probably get a 20mm too either 2.8d or 1.8g. 

[Early B.]

  50mm 1.8d which sat in my closet for 10 years as it's useless with dx.   and, probably could use the 17-55mm with d750 in crop mode 1.2 or 1.5x.

I don't understand this comment. I've been using the 50mm 1.8d on my Nikon DX bodies for several years. The beautiful images this lens has produced are useless? And why would you keep your 17-55mm DX lens for use on a full frame body? Sure, it will work, but not optimally.

[viggen]

oh sorry i made a blanket statement.  i meant 50mm on dx is useless for me because it's too much tele with crop factor.  doesn't mean it's useless useless.  the lens is great.  i just like using something in the 30-50mm equivalent range.  plus, after i got the 17-55mm, the 50mm has become redundant.

and, the 17-55mm supposedly does well on fx body between 24-55mm range in dx crop mode or even pretty good in 1.2x at 20-55mm (according to what i read and have no reason to doubt).  or, are you saying the glass is no good at all for fx?

[viggen]

price drop on a7 and a7ii about a week ago. don't like the way a7ii fit in my hand and like how the a7 resembles the older slr cameras more.  so, ended up with an a7 and got two lens to go with it: voigtlander 15mm 4.5 v2 and 35mm 1.2 v2.  currently, pretty thrilled with them.