advertisement


Best used Nikon DSLR for wildlife - £600 ish, FX or DX?

Fretbuzz

Fretbuzz

pfm Member
Just saw there was a photography section on PFM! This is what I've been pondering lately if anyone can help please.

Currently use a D90 and various FX, mainly prime lenses. Mainly wildlife (don't do landscapes any more really), and main lens for it is Nikon 300mm f/4 AFS.

Priorities for a new camera:
- Higher usable ISO in low light. 800 seems the limit in the D90 and it can feel restrictive wrt speed. Could also allow the use of teleconverter.
- Ability to crop more. This is where the FX vs DX aspect come in too. For the same end result crop, would you get better result from say a D7200 or D610?
- Better AF performance would also be nice. I only use the central AF point (could never trust the 3D tracking) but it could still be better.

Example would be a raptor flying around at dusk, which camera would get you the best end result?

Cheers.
 
If going up from a D90 I would personally be looking at the second market for something like a D700 (which I have used for years) or a D3 / D3s. These are still absolutely amazing cameras that give more than enough resolution for good size prints. They are (imho) unbelievable value for money - check out MPB. Both cameras are FX but also have the flexibility to shoot in DX mode. Shooting in FX allows for much tighter cropping. For me, it's all about the glass though. I owned the Nikon 300mm F4 which is a cracking lens, I also used to own a Nikon 300mm F2.8G which is simply awesome, best lens I owned by some margin. Unfortunately, I had to sell the 300mm F2.8G as I was made redundant and have since struggled to find work, I will own one again when life improves.

Check out my Insta (hopefully its okay to post this) wow_and_flutter_photos, all of the photographs on here were taken with either a D200 or D700 and with 24-70mm F2.8G, 70-200mm F2.8G, 300mm F2.8G, 300mm F4. Both cameras have been rock solid and have never let me down.

I would also recommend having a 1.4 teleconvertor for some extra reach, especially with the 300mm F4, it works very well.

Hope this helps a little

ATB

GB
 
Gingerbeard said:
If going up from a D90 I would personally be looking at the second market for something like a D700 (which I have used for years) or a D3 / D3s. These are still absolutely amazing cameras that give more than enough resolution for good size prints. They are (imho) unbelievable value for money - check out MPB. Both cameras are FX but also have the flexibility to shoot in DX mode. Shooting in FX allows for much tighter cropping. For me, it's all about the glass though. I owned the Nikon 300mm F4 which is a cracking lens, I also used to own a Nikon 300mm F2.8G which is simply awesome, best lens I owned by some margin. Unfortunately, I had to sell the 300mm F2.8G as I was made redundant and have since struggled to find work, I will own one again when life improves.

Check out my Insta (hopefully its okay to post this) wow_and_flutter_photos, all of the photographs on here were taken with either a D200 or D700 and with 24-70mm F2.8G, 70-200mm F2.8G, 300mm F2.8G, 300mm F4. Both cameras have been rock solid and have never let me down.

I would also recommend having a 1.4 teleconvertor for some extra reach, especially with the 300mm F4, it works very well.

Hope this helps a little

ATB

GB
Click to expand...
Nice pictures!

Cheers for the thoughts. What's the D700 like for ISO, as in how high can you go in lower light without feeling compromised? Isn't the D610 better in that regards too? (Sure I read that somewhere).
 
Might have been tempted for a D500 at that price...! Last I saw they were £1k ish.

I'd seen D800s were going for not that much now too (thanks).

How do you reckon a D800, D610, and D7200 would compare in that scenario given above - bird photography in low-ish light for the same end photo (ie with extra crop for the FX bodies)? If that makes sense. I'd want it to be game-changingly good from the D90 really, not just a bit better.

Or worth a bit more for something like the D500?
 
Fretbuzz said:
Nice pictures!

Cheers for the thoughts. What's the D700 like for ISO, as in how high can you go in lower light without feeling compromised? Isn't the D610 better in that regards too? (Sure I read that somewhere).
Click to expand...

I've owned a D700 for a few years now - still a wonderful camera, and whilst it was a low light beast in 2008, it's not that great now. I don't (or rarely, let's say) push mine over ISO1600, and with only 12MP it doesn't leave a massive amount of lee-way for cropping. Saying that, the noise it does produce at higher ISO is fairly benign, and actually quite film-like in its nature.

From what I've seen of nature photography with the D500, it's a bit special.
 
Fretbuzz said:
Nice pictures!

Cheers for the thoughts. What's the D700 like for ISO, as in how high can you go in lower light without feeling compromised? Isn't the D610 better in that regards too? (Sure I read that somewhere).
Click to expand...

Your welcome and thank you for the positive feedback

ISO is very good, it can comfrtably take good photographs up to ISO 6400 but does go higher although as you might expect things start to get a bit grainy at this point. I'm sure newer models will have improved ISO performance, I guess it just depends on your budget and what you are looking to spend :)
 
Fretbuzz said:
Might have been tempted for a D500 at that price...! Last I saw they were £1k ish.

I'd seen D800s were going for not that much now too (thanks).

How do you reckon a D800, D610, and D7200 would compare in that scenario given above - bird photography in low-ish light for the same end photo (ie with extra crop for the FX bodies)? If that makes sense. I'd want it to be game-changingly good from the D90 really, not just a bit better.

Or worth a bit more for something like the D500?
Click to expand...

The D800 was the replacement (I believe) for the D700, so it will definitely benefit from the year on year up grades etc. whether this is worth the extra cost, I don't know.

As Gromit has said and from what I have read the D500 is supposed to be a bit special for wildlife and bird photography

The following pics were taken a few weeks ago on my D700 with my 70-200 and 1.4 teleconvertor. The first image is ISO 3200 and the second is ISO 5000. These have just been quickly cropped in iPhoto and and the second image a slight lift in the shadows as it was really dark in the bush where the wren was. You would be able to do more to make the image better in Photoshop or Lightroom, but I haven't looked at doing this yet.

To be honest, when photographing such small birds, like wrens, it's where I long for a 300mm lens again, as even with a televonvertor a 70-200mm just doesnt cut the mustard. Still, it is quite challenging and fun trying!

_DSC6014 by Paul Fitzgerald, on Flickr

_DSC5968 (1) by Paul Fitzgerald, on Flickr
 
Nice. The 3200 one seems good for the ISO (and age of camera).

I've only just started reading in to all this again, re upgrade, and the type/naturalness of any noise is an interesting point, raised above - I'll see what's said about the models.
 
That was my D500 that I sold for £800. MPB sell them used in excellent condition for around £1k with a warranty but you can pick them up for £800 from other places or less if you don't mind a higher shutter count. £800 was what I was offered from the likes of our local LCE. The D500 is really unbeatable as a wildlife camera for its burst speed, af and buffer size.
 
@Fretbuzz I have both the D7200 and D610 - with similar interests to you by the sound of it. The image / ISO noise in the D610 is definitely better, it's just way better at low light situations and I do like the image quality (eg landscapes) . But in most ways the D7200 just seems a bit more sorted - I really like it.

I'm marking the D610 down quite heavily at the moment because the focus points cover such a small area in the centre of the frame - I use single focus point and like to move it around so suit the composition but for loads of my subjects (moving animals etc) their eyes / heads always seem to lie near the edge of the frame and therefore outside the D610's focus areas. It's very frustrating and I know I'll replace it with another FX body at some stage but definitely keep the D7200. I use the 300f/4 PF lens with 1.4 TC on both and to be honest if I'm out to get some animal / bird / wildlife shots I'd choose to take the D7200 9 times out of 10 - for its useful extra reach and better focus. I think the viewfinder may be clearer / brighter too. I always feel it gives me a better connection with the subject in any case.
 
Gromit said:
Paul - those are superb of the Wren :)

Just done a quick'n'dirty comparison between my D700 and Df - obviously done in good light, but plenty of dark/black surfaces to show up noise:

D700 & Df at base:

D700...

D700 base by Boxertrixter, on Flickr

Df...

Df base by Boxertrixter, on Flickr

D700 at 6400:

D700 6400 by Boxertrixter, on Flickr

Df at 6400:

Df 6400 by Boxertrixter, on Flickr

Df at 25600:

Df 25600 by Boxertrixter, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Cool - I'll look properly on the PC (not phone) tomorrow
 
Colinb said:
That was my D500 that I sold for £800. MPB sell them used in excellent condition for around £1k with a warranty but you can pick them up for £800 from other places or less if you don't mind a higher shutter count. £800 was what I was offered from the likes of our local LCE. The D500 is really unbeatable as a wildlife camera for its burst speed, af and buffer size.
Click to expand...
Thanks - were you able to compare it to any equivalent or predecessor bodies at all?
 
ian123running said:
@Fretbuzz I have both the D7200 and D610 - with similar interests to you by the sound of it. The image / ISO noise in the D610 is definitely better, it's just way better at low light situations and I do like the image quality (eg landscapes) . But in most ways the D7200 just seems a bit more sorted - I really like it.

I'm marking the D610 down quite heavily at the moment because the focus points cover such a small area in the centre of the frame - I use single focus point and like to move it around so suit the composition but for loads of my subjects (moving animals etc) their eyes / heads always seem to lie near the edge of the frame and therefore outside the D610's focus areas. It's very frustrating and I know I'll replace it with another FX body at some stage but definitely keep the D7200. I use the 300f/4 PF lens with 1.4 TC on both and to be honest if I'm out to get some animal / bird / wildlife shots I'd choose to take the D7200 9 times out of 10 - for its useful extra reach and better focus. I think the viewfinder may be clearer / brighter too. I always feel it gives me a better connection with the subject in any case.
Click to expand...
Nice one. That does sound much in the same kind of boat, scenario wise.

I get the AF thing. Even though I only use one focus point at a time, and mainly the centre one, I have occasionally used a outer one for eyes etc on reflection - just as you say. Good point.

What ISOs seem usable for each please? And if you took the same pic at say 1600 with the same lens and cropped to the same result, with each, would there be much difference?
 
My previous body was a D300, which I had for a long time waiting for its successor, the D500, which I still have. It was a big step up in IQ, AF, burst rate, buffer etc so far superior, although the D300 was no slouch. I sold the D500 as I bought a D850 at a really good price. I had all three for about a year. Obviously the D850 wins out on resolution, newer processing engine and the ability to focus stack, which I use for macro work. AF, burst shooting and buffer are not as good as the D500 unless you add the grip and use the fastest cards available. In crop mode its pretty much the same as the D500 with a slightly slower frame rate and AF. Compared to the D300 both are a big step up in terms of ability to customise everything.
 
Gromit said:
Paul - those are superb of the Wren :)

Just done a quick'n'dirty comparison between my D700 and Df - obviously done in good light, but plenty of dark/black surfaces to show up noise:

D700 & Df at base:

D700...

D700 base by Boxertrixter, on Flickr

Df...

Df base by Boxertrixter, on Flickr

D700 at 6400:

D700 6400 by Boxertrixter, on Flickr

Df at 6400:

Df 6400 by Boxertrixter, on Flickr

Df at 25600:

Df 25600 by Boxertrixter, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Thanks Gromit, most kind of you to say
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top