Upgrading to a D750 or D810?

A

Andrew Smith

Suspended / Banned
Messages
313
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
No
I currently shoot on a D7000 and D7100. Am I going to see much benefit if I upgrade to a 750 or 810 and is the AF on these models any good in pitch black as the 7000 and 7100 struggle in low light to focus correctly. All comments welcome. Thanks.
 
Either camera will give a vast improvement over the D7000/D7100 ... the D750 will give you better low light capability but overall the D810 will give you the better image results, however a lot will depend on what your subject photography will be :)
 
In terms of what I shoot, that ranges from motor sport to street scenes, underground exploration to sunsets and an awful lot of travel photography. The low light autofocus is of specific interest to me as both the 7000 and 7100 struggle in this respect when in caves etc. So which do you think would be better based on that info, the 750 or the 810?
 
I would recommend trying them both as there's subtle differences in ergonomics that could sway you one way or the other. IMO the D750 has the edge as an alrounder and I believe has better low light focussing by 1ev. The tilt screen on the D750 is handy for landscapes. In terms of outright detail the D810 will have the edge (no aa filter and more MP), but of course technique and light play a much bigger part. The D750 is smaller and lighter. The D810 is said to be better built but I can't say I noticed anything significant.
 
you say in the op "focus in pitch black" and the after "caves" so potentially truly pitch black. most if not all auto focus would struggle in those conditions without other illumination.
i presume you use a light of some sort to see what you pointing the camera at?
 
If low light is the single most important criteria the D750 would be the choice.
 
Interesting gramps that you think it'd be a "vast improvement" to change to FX as a pal of mine (who's a Wedding tog) recently swapped his two D7100s for two D750s and the total cost of this swap was close to £5,000 with the new lenses too

He's a few months into the swap now and in his opinion yes the D750 is better at low light focusing and better too at higher ISO, but in pretty much every other aspect he's kinda wishing he hadn't bothered as the 'improvement' is nothing like as great as he was hoping

Of the 750 or 810 though, the 750 would be my choice all day long

Dave
 
DG Phototraining said:
Interesting gramps that you think it'd be a "vast improvement" to change to FX as a pal of mine (who's a Wedding tog) recently swapped his two D7100s for two D750s and the total cost of this swap was close to £5,000 with the new lenses too

He's a few months into the swap now and in his opinion yes the D750 is better at low light focusing and better too at higher ISO, but in pretty much every other aspect he's kinda wishing he hadn't bothered as the 'improvement' is nothing like as great as he was hoping

Of the 750 or 810 though, the 750 would be my choice all day long

Dave
Click to expand...

Well my choice would be the D810 but my criteria would be different to the o/p's and budget was not a stated criteria ... come on, the D750 or D810 not a vast improvement over the D7000 or D7100 ... you're joking, right?
 
gramps said:
come on, the D750 or D810 not a vast improvement over the D7000 or D7100 ... you're joking, right?
Click to expand...

This is my pal's view, I've not used an FX myself but we have chatted at length about it both before and after he 'invested' in the change

Most of the time his images are printed up to, but no bigger than, A3 in a Wedding Album and at that size then no, he doesn't think there's any real difference in quality to make the change worth it. He changed from a 24mp camera to a 24mp camera and, most of the time, he's shooting at lower than 1000 ISO and there's b****r all quality difference that he can see printed. So while he's happy with the D750 and the new shallower DoF at the same aperture, he doesn't feel the change was truly justified

So no, not a joke

Dave
 
DG Phototraining said:
This is my pal's view, I've not used an FX myself but we have chatted at length about it both before and after he 'invested' in the change

Most of the time his images are printed up to, but no bigger than, A3 in a Wedding Album and at that size then no, he doesn't think there's any real difference in quality to make the change worth it. He changed from a 24mp camera to a 24mp camera and, most of the time, he's shooting at lower than 1000 ISO and there's b****r all quality difference that he can see printed. So while he's happy with the D750 and the new shallower DoF at the same aperture, he doesn't feel the change was truly justified

So no, not a joke

Dave
Click to expand...
I recently brought 8 prints to my camera club meeting, 4 of red squirrels and 4 mountain landscapes. 2 of the red squirrels were taken with the D7000 and sigma 150-500, 2 with the D750 and sigma 150-600. 2 of the landscapes were taken with the D7000 and sigma 10-20, the other 2 with the D750 and nikon 16-35f4. No one was able to get more than 3 or 4 out of 8 right when trying to guess the camera. I could have saved 1000's!
 
None of you are reading the original post ... what was the o/p's criteria?
I use a D500 and a D7200, that's my choice with my criteria ... for the o/p it's "The low light autofocus is of specific interest to me as both the 7000 and 7100 struggle in this respect when in caves etc.". Telling the o/p that he can save ££££ by keeping to what he has just isn't helpful ... the D750 will perform much, much better under his criteria.
 
Not wishing to throw the proverbial spanner but ....

If low light AF is the prime objective, wouldn't the D500 be the better choice as it will af @ -4 EV according to the specs ... the added advantage is that the OP's current lenses will work as they do now and he won't need any new ones.
 
PaulButler said:
Not wishing to throw the proverbial spanner but ....

If low light AF is the prime objective, wouldn't the D500 be the better choice as it will af @ -4 EV according to the specs ... the added advantage is that the OP's current lenses will work as they do now and he won't need any new ones.
Click to expand...

The D500 will not generally give such clean images in low light as the D750, it excels at speed but produces a small grainy noise, especially in shadow or OOF areas.
 
gramps said:
The D500 will not generally give such clean images in low light as the D750, it excels at speed but produces a small grainy noise, especially in shadow or OOF areas.
Click to expand...
Yep I'm well aware that the noise levels will be different, but if AF is the primary objective ... (a noisy in focus image is better than a blurry noiseless one and all that) ... just presenting options is all :)
 
PaulButler said:
Yep I'm well aware that the noise levels will be different, but if AF is the primary objective ... (a noisy in focus image is better than a blurry noiseless one and all that) ... just presenting options is all :)
Click to expand...
Yes, that is a very valid option :)
 
Looking at the responses I think I need the resolution of the 810 with the low light capability of the 750 or 500!! Another essential criteria for me is for the camera to have 2 memory card slots so that I can save images onto both cards simultaneously. I have a huge distrust of memory cards having had a couple fail over the years, so I like the fact that you have 2 mirrored cards recording exactly the same thing at the same time. If one card fails or gets damaged/lost, you still have the second.
 
Why do you need the resolution of the D810?

Are you printing wall size images?

I have the D750 and see no need for more than 24MP.

I used to have the 12MP D700 and was more than happy with that for 80% of what I photograph.

Don't become a megapixel whore, you don't need 'em.
 
I have a D810 and am a big fan of it but I don't think it quite fits the OP's criteria. The AF system is good rather than excellent. The D750 and D500 are much better in that regard. The lens fitted makes a big difference too it must be said.
 
interesting post, I am also thinking of upgrading D7100 to D610 or 750. Ruled out D800 or 810 on cost, weight and file size. Have read all the reviews I can lay my hands on and come to the conclusion that the D750 is probably the best all round Nikon camera. I should think that for you in a cave the tilting screen is also going to be an advantage, this screen is one of the factors which is swinging me to the 750, also the latest exceed processor and the Mk 2 sensor.
 
Andrew Smith said:
Looking at the responses I think I need the resolution of the 810 with the low light capability of the 750 or 500!! Another essential criteria for me is for the camera to have 2 memory card slots so that I can save images onto both cards simultaneously. I have a huge distrust of memory cards having had a couple fail over the years, so I like the fact that you have 2 mirrored cards recording exactly the same thing at the same time. If one card fails or gets damaged/lost, you still have the second.
Click to expand...
Do you "need" 36mp or just want 36mp? What's your viewing medium? Just remember that even 4K TV's are only 8.3mp so even a 12mp is enough for viewing on 4k.
 
I am exploring all options, but think that I 'want' rather than 'need' 36MP. Seems like the 750 is getting the most recommendations. But I appreciate all comments on this thread.
 
I've used a D700 since 2009 and last year had the funds to move to a newer camera. I read all the reviews (and comparisons) of the D750 and D810 and concluded that the D750 was the camera for me.

This was the case right up to the point where I tested them both in a shop. The D750 felt remarkably like my old D70 from 2005, whereas the D810 felt just like my D700. So I bought the D810, as I still use the D700 as the near identical controls are a godsend when I'm using both bodies.
Don't get me wrong, I could have adapted to the D750, it just felt like a backward step to me.
 
The way I choose between two similar items of gear is to list all the features each one has that I want or need, and those I'm not fussed about. The one which has the most features I KNOW I'll use a lot gets the nod. Sometimes there'll be one feature which others could live without that will swing the deal. There are no bad cameras about these days. It's all about weighing up what is important in a camera for YOU.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top