New to Digital Photography

[willentrekin]

"I personally have the 6000 and I find it to be the perfect balance of size, quality and price."

Just want to echo this. Just this past year I first purchased a NEX5 before upgrading almost immediately to an a6000, and it's been a great experience. Takes awesome pictures and I think that for what one might spend on just the DSLR body and a couple of decent lenses one could pick up an a6000 and a few great lenses. Plus, as has been mentioned, it's compact and light.

 

[jerwin]

The 24-70mm and 70-200 mm are highly regarded lenses, but they're also big and heavy. Some photographers prefer primes for that reason.

 

[Apple fanboy]

The 24-70mm and 70-200 mm are highly regarded lenses, but they're also big and heavy. Some photographers prefer primes for that reason.

Does it really work out lighter with primes? A 70 mm Prime + a 200 mm Prime would way more than my 70-200 I'm betting.

 

[jerwin]

Does it really work out lighter with primes? A 70 mm Prime + a 200 mm Prime would weigh more than my 70-200 I'm betting.

Hmm.

Let's see,
200mm f2G AF-S ED VR II: 6.46 pounds, 5999 dollars
NikonAF DC-NIKKOR 135mm f/2D Lens: 1.8 pounds, 1395 dollars
AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED: 1.6 pounds, 984 dollars
85mm f 1.4: 1.3 pounds, 1699 dollars




70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II: 3.375 pounds 2400 dollars

Four lenses to cover only only 90 percent of the 70-200 range (at discrete points), while costing four times as much, and weighing more than three times as much.

And what does that get you? Not much-- f2 at 200mm, f1.4 at 85mm, macro, defocus control, and sharper images.

Seriously, though--if you prefer one or two focal lengths, the primes are attractive. Zoom with your feet and all that. The trick is knowing enough about your own style to be able to pare it down to the essentials.

 

[duncanapple]

Just another vote to check out the mirrorless options; in particular Fuji. Other than maybe sports where you need the best autofocus systems and access to relatively inexpensive telephoto lenses, I don't know why a non pro would want to lug around DSLR gear. I recently sold off my 5D and prime L glass for the Fuji X100S (now T) and couldn't be happier. Better IQ, far smaller camera, and I actually TAKE the camera places now.

I found the fixed lens set up on the fuji X100s was plenty for me (the 35mm lens was what was on my 5D 99% of the time) but if you think you want the flexibility of other lenses, look into the X-Pro fuji line which is about the same camera as the X100s (or T) but with interchangeable lenses. I really didn't know much about Fuji and in my inexperienced mind, it was sort of a tier below Nikon and Canon. In reality they are every bit as good, they just don't compete as much in the old point and shoot and DSLR space like the aforementioned two. They are doing a lot of things right and IMO are making some of THE best consumer (maybe even pro) cameras out there right now.

Different strokes for different folks, so not knocking canon/nikon, etc. But given what you said above, you should at least research and consider the mirrorless options IMO.

Good luck!

 

[MCAsan]

One of the Nikon diehards I know works at Showcase Camera which is the biggest camera store in the Atlanta area. He has sold all his Nikon gear off and went Fuji and Capture One Pro for post processing. He could not be happier. Two other Showcase staff sold off their Canon sets and went Olympus E-M1. Those are folks who eat and sleep photography and depend on the business for the income. Mirrorless is not the lunatic fring some may think.

 

[ChrisA]

There are two kinds of photography

1) Where the main activity is making images. You are at the event or location specifically so that you can get photos. This is where you can use the large size DSLR.

2) Where you are doing something else and decide you want to take a photo. This is where the iphone is best.

It sounds like you don't do much of #1. The dSLR may not be the best match. These are compromises, the best might be one of the "mirrorless" cameras. They are much smaller and have about the same features and image quality is the SLR.

One thing the SLR has is a direct view, through the lens optical viewfinder so yo do not need to use the live view screen. If you'd this then you can't use the mirrorless camera. The DX size Nikon is smaller and uses much lighter and smaller lenses. That 70-200 F/2.8 is a monster, nice lens but very big. But with a DX size sensor maybe you can use a smaller lens, one that would not require a backpack or roller luggage to cary.

 

[Apple fanboy]

Your explanation of type 1 and type 2 photography is actually very good. Here's my slight expansion.

1. If I'm out taking photos, I'm carrying 2 DSLR's and 3 or 4 lenses. Filters, cleaning stuff, remote trigger, maybe even a speed light. Probably a tripod.
2. If I'm doing photography as well as something else, I take my small bag, one DSLR, one lens, maybe a flash if I'm inside.
3. If I'm doing something else and decide I want a photo, I use my iPhone.

A point and shoot or mirrorless could be used in my scenario 2, but I don't own one, and a D750 with a 24-70 isn't that big and heavy IMO.

 

[swordio777]

Hey bt22! You mentioned at the start that you had a canon Rebel - do you still have this camera? If so, really not sure why you want to upgrade. And in particular, why you want to upgrade to the Nikon D610 - nothing against that camera, but it seems like an extreme jump.

If you still have the rebel and it still works then stick with it to learn the ins and outs of an SLR system. You may decide that it's not what you want after all & opt for a mirrorless system instead (better to find that out before blowing $3000+ on heavy full-frame slr kit). You asked "Is it best to go full frame?" and the only (albeit not particularly helpful) answer is: it depends. As someone who has made the switch from crop to full-frame I can honestly say it is massively over-rated. You'll need to spend a lot more money on camera bodies and lenses, but there is very little that you can do on a full-frame camera that you can't do on a crop one. For most people I honestly think that full frame is an unnecessary expense.

If you're determined to start an slr system and to go full-frame then I'd definitely suggest the D750 instead of the D610. You mentioned that your daughter is getting into volleyball - if you want to shoot sports then there is no competition in terms of autofocus ability. I'd also suggest a used D700 over the D610 - it's an old camera but has pro level autofocus, the image quality still holds up, and they can be picked up very cheaply these days.

The glass you mentioned is incredible, but very heavy and far more than most people will want to carry around. I own both the 24-70 and the 70-200. I use them for professional work and love both lenses; however I'd never consider taking either one on holiday with me - I just couldn't justify carrying all that weight. My travel camera is an old 6mp D70 with a cheap plastic sigma 18-200mm f/6.3 lens. It's light, and cheap, and perfectly sufficient for the job of taking holiday photos.

I have absolutely no doubt that you'd be able to get excellent results using the gear you mentioned, however I also believe you could get equally good results with lighter kit.

I hope that gives you a few things to consider and really hope you find exactly what you're looking for. Keep us posted with your decision, and welcome back to the world of photography!

 

[jerwin]

I got my first DSLR when my daughter was born 12 years ago, it was a Canon Rebel.

Hey bt22! You mentioned at the start that you had a canon Rebel - do you still have this camera? If so, really not sure why you want to upgrade.

Is it the 6MP Rebel, or the film Rebel?

 

[jerwin]

I can imagine at least a few reasons why a D610 with f2.8 lenses might be more ideal to the parent of 12 year old than an iphone, film camera or not entirely sensitive early digital camera. Sports, especially indoor sports., Theater.