Equipment upgrade

R

rhote182

Suspended / Banned
Messages
13
Edit My Images
No
Hi,

I've been reading so much on options for new gear, but wanted to get some other people's suggestions to see whether it matches my ideas, or points out things I have missed.

Currently I have a Sony NEX-6 but wanting to upgrade to something full frame.

I was originally looking at the A7 or A7R. Thought it would be ideal until I realised my NEX lenses would be cropped, so they're irrelevant in terms of saving money by using kit I already have and I've read bad reviews on the AF.

I need it for concert photography (mainly metal, low light and lots of movement), architecture, fashion shoots in a studio and urbex.

Quite a broad range, but the main considerations are that i needs a good, quick AF system (avoid mirrorless?) and to be good in low light (avoid Canon?).

I wouldn't want to go below 20MP but would quite like to hit 30MP although not a necessity.

It seems everything is pointing at Nikon, what do you guys think? Any recommendations on which models?

Looking to stay below the £3000 mark for body.

Suggestions? Thanks in advance.
 
I have no experience of the Sony A7 range so cannot comment on the AF performance but as they use the same sensors (albeit tweaked a little) as Nikon their sensor performance in low light etc will be excellent.

The first thing to suggest is to handle the various camera bodies you may consider, ergonomics are far more important than most folk imagine.

In the DSLR realm, consider the Nikon D750 and possibly the D810 which will be excellent for the studio, but will exceed your MP requirement. The AF is good on both, with the D750 just edging it in very low light. If size isn't a major concern then obviously the D4 and D4s come into contention but you will need to buy used to meet your price point.

In Canon the 5D MkIII isn't all that bad, avoid underexposing and it performs very well - I found it to be very capable. I've had very little use of the 6D but that probably edged the 5D MkIII in IQ terms in low light though not sure how good the AF is, a canonista will have to advise ;). Don't discount the brand new 5D MkIV though, it will improve on all aspects of the 5D MkIII if history is anything to go by and may meet all of your needs.
 
PaulButler said:
I have no experience of the Sony A7 range so cannot comment on the AF performance but as they use the same sensors (albeit tweaked a little) as Nikon their sensor performance in low light etc will be excellent.

The first thing to suggest is to handle the various camera bodies you may consider, ergonomics are far more important than most folk imagine.

In the DSLR realm, consider the Nikon D750 and possibly the D810 which will be excellent for the studio, but will exceed your MP requirement. The AF is good on both, with the D750 just edging it in very low light. If size isn't a major concern then obviously the D4 and D4s come into contention but you will need to buy used to meet your price point.

In Canon the 5D MkIII isn't all that bad, avoid underexposing and it performs very well - I found it to be very capable. I've had very little use of the 6D but that probably edged the 5D MkIII in IQ terms in low light though not sure how good the AF is, a canonista will have to advise ;). Don't discount the brand new 5D MkIV though, it will improve on all aspects of the 5D MkIII if history is anything to go by and may meet all of your needs.
Click to expand...

I always think with regards to ergonomics, I would prefer to get the best performing camera and just get used to it. Although, I will tkae a trip down Jessops just to have a feel and make sure it's not too bad to handle consdering the amount of money I'll be investing.

D810 definitely seems like it would come out top for studio and as a better all rounder, if they were the same price I'd more than likely go for that over the D750 but at the moment it's proving be a hard call!
 
I'm not sure any of the Nikon DSLRs are particularly quick in live view. They are really designed to be used with the OVF. I think the same applies to Canon too. So far I have never used Live View on my D810 ...
 
rhote182 said:
Thanks, Craig. Definitely liking the look of the D750. Although, I have been reading that AF is slow in live view. I never use viewfinder but looks like I'm going to have to start!
Click to expand...

All dslr's are slow in live view as it's a completely different focusing technology. Canon is a bit better from what I've seen but If live view is what you want look at mirrorless systems though for low light concert work I'd be wanting best performing AF I could get which mirrorless or live view will not give you. Once you get used to a viewfinder I doubt you'll want to use live view very often. The size, weight and ergonomics of full frame cameras also lend them selves to being used with a viefinder.
 
Agreed, I think viewfinder will be the way forward. Everyone I've ever spoken to prefers it to live view so sure I'll get used to it soon enough. Have either of you used both the D750 and D810, is there that much difference in practice between the performance of AF for the two?
 
The AF systems are broadly the same most of the time. The D810 has a slightly wider spread of AF points but the D750 has better low light AF performance, which may be important @ gigs etc ... In terms of speed and accuracy, they are the same ime/o.The other thing that may be useful on the D750 is it has a tilt screen. There are some differences in layout of buttons and controls too, so again, try them out if you can. Both are capable of producing exceptional images.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top