snerkler
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,078
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Yeah, shame you sold your old one as they haven't half gone up in price
Downgrading from fx to dx ?
- Thread starter Thats my sock
- Start date
JJ!
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 5,822
- Edit My Images
- No
Why do you want to move from FX? If its the size then rule the D500 out straight away. Its bigger than the D750.
If its for getting more reach then yes the D500 is a good shout.
I do not use my camera as much as a could/should but having considered changing to Fuji a few times I cant see any benefit (for me).
I don't take the D750 out because of its size or weight. That's never been an issue.
Its more a complete lack of inspiration. I think that's something that comes and goes for all of us though.
If its for getting more reach then yes the D500 is a good shout.
I do not use my camera as much as a could/should but having considered changing to Fuji a few times I cant see any benefit (for me).
I don't take the D750 out because of its size or weight. That's never been an issue.
Its more a complete lack of inspiration. I think that's something that comes and goes for all of us though.
gramps
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 44,805
- Name
- 'Gramps'
- Edit My Images
- No
I suppose it's because of being used to D3S/D4/D4S but I can't think of the D500 as being chunky or weighty, without the grip it feels small to me, though I think the D750 is smaller again. Even without the speediest of cards it's fast enough for me to get brilliant sequence shooting for wildlife or sports, so fast that CH is a very rarely used setting and the extra 'reach' does make a difference. I know you can crop a D8xx and that's brilliant, done it many times, but seeing a fuller frame in the viewfinder makes a lot of difference and having the superior AF is fantastic ... I loved Group Area-AF in the D810 but the D500 AF is leaps and bounds ahead again.
snerkler
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,078
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
I completely agree, and this is the advantage of 'reach' for me rather than the final image per se. It also means that, when shooting from a distance, your subject fills more of the AF box and therefore a better chance of more accurate AF acquisition
JJ!
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 5,822
- Edit My Images
- No
Agree with this. With the D750 and D500 I believe Nikon have the best DX and best 'budget' FX on the market.
It does give users a great choice though. It just goes to show how good DX has become. But this obviously has come at a price. Or is that a reflection of how cheap FX has become? But
If I was to go DX and doing sports or wildlife I would get one straight away.
But as my shooting has changed I find the D750 perfect and I wouldn't want anything bigger.
If I ever change it I'm pretty sure it would be for a Fuji.
@rookies I thought you had a Sony or were going to Fuji? I'm confused!
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
For you a D500 must be a dream camera.
I don't find a D8x0 series a cumbersome body for landscape/travelling. I have 2 of them with a 16-35 on one and a 24-70 on another and can add a PCE and 70-200 for the times I need something...err corrected or reached. They're not heavy and produce images of such outstanding quality when used right. For wildlife I would shoot what you have. A Manfrotto 190 tripod takes it all comfortable.
I tried a Fuji thing, couldn't get my head round its menus etc. Yes its smaller but it still needs a bag, tripod etc. Its not much more portable.
Depends how big photography is in your life and what sacrifies you are wanting to make. One of my workshoppers turned up with a D750. Certainly a fine camera but its just not a D8x0...
SsSsSsSsSnake
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 9,886
- Edit My Images
- Yes
