I have a D7000 which causes noise in low light and when cropping pictures of small birds. I take wild life photos in low light. Which camera would be best? I have a 70-200mm VRI, 50mm, and 14-24mm wide angle lens.
#2. "RE: D600 vs D800" In response to Reply # 0 Sun 10-Mar-13 05:19 AM by jamesvoortman
The 70-200 lens you are using is of high quality but not very long focal length for wildlife photography, especially birding. Even on DX camera you are presumably cropping some of your shots quite a lot.
In this case the D600 can only put 10.5Mp on a DX sized frame in comparison to your D7000 with 16 Mp.
In a choice between D600 and D800, the D800 would be better in this respect as it has 15.5Mp on a DX crop. D800 will give better high ISO performance but it does not give any extra pixels on target than your D7000. Also, both D600 and D800, being FX, will give a much wider field of view, giving the impression of less reach with same lenses.
the more pixels you can get on the target, the less bothersome the noise will become. Noise becomes more prominent the more you crop.
So, if distance-to-subject is an issue with your relatively short 70-200mm lens, I agree with the previous poster that D7100 seems to be a better choice for your shooting requirements.
If you can afford to consider a D800 then you could also maybe consider a longer fast lens such as Sigma 120-300 f2.8, which can be used in conjunction with a 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverter at the cost of a little loss in image quality. This would get a lot more pixels on target and reduce the need for cropping. Another good option for birding that is within the price range of a D600/D800 is the 300 f/4 AF-S lens used with or without a 1.4x converter.
Local wildlife photographers reckon that generally, the loss of image quality you get with a converter is not as bad as cropping more agressively to get the same view from a pic taken without the converter. This may not hold true for all lenses though.
The D800 is a little sharper due to the greater number of pixels. The large files handle editing and sharpening nicely. The biggest difference is the AF system is a little better in the D800, so for rapidly moving subjects it probably is better.
The D600 is a little smaller and lighter. For hiking and handheld work, the lighter weight might be useful. Image quality and low light performance is excellent.
The biggest advantage of FX is better subject isolation. Using a longer lens for the same capture does a better job of blurring the background. Of course, the shallow depth of field can work against you with other subjects. And if you are not close enough, you may have to crop.
Your 70-200 VR1 will vignette slightly on FX. It is noticeable.
While a teleconverter adds reach, with the high resolution you are more likely to see the impact on image quality. I use a 1.4 teleconverter but try to avoid using the 1.7 or 2.0 teleconverters.
You'll certainly want a longer lens for more reach. The 300 f/4 works nicely and is sharp. The new 80-400 is a good option.
Hmmm, last year I found a really good combo of light and shadow to shoot hummingbirds. It only lasts about two weeks a year, I used a D7000 and a very sharp 300 f/2.8. This year I'm using a D800e with the same lens and setup. The D8's greater dynamic range makes processing easier and yield's a more satisfying image at greater ISO numbers.
These are rough galleries. Look at them if you wish to compare (that means I process and throw in everything without a lot of consideration) D7 to D8:
Between these two cameras, I'd suggest the D800e as well. The AF alone is better but higher resolution allows more cropping. It amazes me everytime I zoom in on my LCD the detail that is retained.
That said, the new D7100 is reported to have the same AF system as the D4 which is amazing and would be a serious feature for BIF. If I was looking at strictly wildlife photography, this camera would be a serious contender. I'm still waiting/hoping for a D400 but aside from ergonomics, buttom layout and weather sealing, I'm not sure what they can do internally to best the D7100.
> I'm not sure what they can do internally to best the D7100.
Could go off-topic here .....
It needs, among others: - a much bigger buffer and maybe a faster frame rate - 10 pin remote connector on the front - the settings bank system of D200/300/800 updated as necessary. This provides up to 8 times as many setup options as U1 and U2 - AF-on button - one handed ISO adjustment like on some Canon DSLRs - press a button and spin an adjacent command dial - full magnesium body - touchscreen interface on rear LCD - Higher ISO sensitivity
If you put a 70-200mm f2.8 zoom on a D7000 and D800 and are taking a picture of a small bird and blow them up to 100% crop the images are very similar in quality. The D800 is a little better due to EXpeed 3.