Author Topic: Upgrading Nikon d90 - Nikon D810 or Canon 5D Mark iii (Read 19627 times)

angelawaye · « **on:** July 24, 2015, 20:26 »

Hi fellow photographers,

After many many years I am ready to upgrade my camera. (I was using a Nikon d90 - I am blushing)
I found out that my current DX lens is not good for a Full Frame camera.

I am looking at these 2 cameras:
Nikon D810 or Canon 5D Mark iii

Please help!
The Nikon lens would be the:
AF-S NIKKOR 24-120mm f/4G ED VR Zoom Lens

The Canon lens comes with the kit:
EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens

What are your professional opinions? The Canon 5d mark has great reviews but the 810 is proving itself too.

Any thoughts or advice is greatly appreciated. I know anything will be better than the D90 - haha.

fotoVoyager · « **Reply #1 on:** July 25, 2015, 02:00 »

Either one will give excellent results.

Go to a camera store and play with both and just choose the one you prefer in your hands.

I use Nikon myself, but any modern DSLR is fantastic and the differences between the brands minimal, despite what the review sites say.

Biggest problem with upgrading will be file storage and handling.

Enjoy your new tool!

ITsME · « **Reply #2 on:** July 25, 2015, 03:20 »

I have the D810 absolutely wonderful machine ! If you are already used to nikon and have the glassworks as well i would stick with it.

langstrup · « **Reply #3 on:** July 25, 2015, 03:49 »

I´m shooting the D810. It´s no doubt the best camera I ever used!!!

Mikeme · « **Reply #4 on:** July 25, 2015, 11:14 »

Between those two I'd have to say D810 even though Im a Canon guy

The extra pixells will do you good, not metioning the ISO and dynamic range performance over the 5d3! How about 5Ds /r?

Tror · « **Reply #5 on:** July 25, 2015, 11:38 »

D810. Canon is basically out of the game due to their low performance sensors (low DR, ISO performance, color range etc.). Even the 5Ds/r is just a pixel blown up old sensor with additional disadvantages (sync time e.g.)

NandoPhoto · « **Reply #6 on:** July 25, 2015, 12:08 »

Like you I had a D90 until a few years ago. Then I upgraded to a D800 and now added a D810 to the equipment (I work with 2 cameras when shooting events). I have to say that even compared to the D800 the D810 is a great improvement (I guess because of the removal of the low pass filter).

Can't say anything about the Canon, but would find it difficult to transition after getting used to a system. I particularly like the position of the shutter speed and aperture dials on Nikons. Not too keen on their position on the Canons.

angelawaye · « **Reply #7 on:** July 25, 2015, 16:32 »

You guys are the best! You have reassured me that I am making the right choice with the 810. No camera stores have these cameras in stock so I can't go in and play with them. Thanks so much!

Mantis · « **Reply #8 on:** July 25, 2015, 17:07 »

Nikon has the worst customer service in the industry. For that reason alone I would stick with Canon.

robhainer · « **Reply #9 on:** July 25, 2015, 19:41 »

I would go with the Nikon, but that lens you picked isn't going to cut it. It's not a very good lens.

Both the Nikon 24-70 2.8 and the Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC are superior lenses and more capable of handling the additional resolution that the 24-120 can't really handle. There's not much point in getting the 810 and pairing it with a lens that can't resolve it. The Tamron is about the same price as the Nikon 24-120, has stabilization and resolves better. I use it with my D800.

If money is an issue, the D750 is pretty good and that leaves enough for a better lens.

angelawaye · « **Reply #10 on:** July 25, 2015, 20:36 »

I was afraid someone would mention the lens... I will look at the lenses you mentioned. Maybe it is better to downgrade the body to get a better lens ... I think I am losing sleep at night over the many decisions!

click_click · « **Reply #11 on:** July 26, 2015, 01:22 »

Quote from: Mantis on July 25, 2015, 17:07

Nikon has the worst customer service in the industry. For that reason alone I would stick with Canon.

I'm shooting with Canon now but in the past I once burnt out a Nikon external flash unit and mailed it in to their Service Center a couple weeks AFTER the warranty expired.
I swiftly received the fixed unit without a bill. So, the experiences with their customer service may vary.

Tror · « **Reply #12 on:** July 26, 2015, 03:43 »

Quote from: robhainer on July 25, 2015, 19:41

... Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC are superior lenses and more capable of handling the additional resolution that the 24-120 can't really handle. ...

I agree. The Tamron 24-70 is scored as one of the best zoom lens available for the D810 by DXO and the one I mostly use when it isn`t a prime.

langstrup · « **Reply #13 on:** July 26, 2015, 07:17 »

I would forget about the Nikon 24-120! If you are shooting the 810, every little "flaw" in the lens will show. And we all know that means rejected images ;-)

Save a little money, and buy the Sigma Art primes. A 35mm and a 50mm can do it most of the time, and the 35/50mm Art serie are so sharp, even at f. 1.6, that it is unbelievable. 98 % of my portfolio are shot on those two lenses. Never regret that I bought them! They are superior to the Nikon glas I´ve used before. Even way better than the L 50mm 1.2 from Canon (Former Canon user).

Thats a setup you smile every time you use!

Mantis · « **Reply #14 on:** July 26, 2015, 08:38 »

Quote from: click_click on July 26, 2015, 01:22

Quote from: Mantis on July 25, 2015, 17:07
Nikon has the worst customer service in the industry. For that reason alone I would stick with Canon.
I'm shooting with Canon now but in the past I once burnt out a Nikon external flash unit and mailed it in to their Service Center a couple weeks AFTER the warranty expired.
I swiftly received the fixed unit without a bill. So, the experiences with their customer service may vary.

My experience isn't with one product. It is with 20 or so. Poorly adjusted cameras upon arrival, oil splattering on sensors (D600's), lenses out of spec that won't focus. My returned product consists of (2) D800s, 2 D600's that I had to sell of Ebay, 3 D7100's all of which Nikon admitted they had issues but it was like pulling teeth getting them act. Then there are the lenses. All of them come to me out of spec. Why? According to Nikon it's because they farm their assembly out to Indonesia now and have lost some quality assurance because of that. I have a very expensive lens now I just bought (300 2.8 @ $5700) and it is now in for the third time. It is now being evaluated to replace it because they do not know what is wrong with it, but have verified the focusing issue. This required me to have to snail mail Nikon in New York (overnight mail) to get someone who can help with and accompanied by a case number with Consumer Protection Agency. Me, the customer, is having to jump through hoops to get what amounts to very poor Nikon equipment performance. The only reason I don't switch to Canon is because all of my underwater equipment is custom to Nikon and it would cost big bucks to change over.

For most consumers they do not zoom in at 100%. They are happy with what they see at 25%. This is what differentiates my assessment from everyday consumers. When Nikon then zooms in at 100% they see what I see and they agree that it may be a design flaw. But it took me all of this to get them to the next level of customer service.

The two things they f-ed up are the two things that make a company great: 1. Customer service 2. product quality. They have gone from a prosumer company to a consumer driven company and consumers simply do not have the knowledge to know when their products aren't performing correctly unless it is a feature they use that stops working altogether. But focus? rarely an issue unless they zoom in to 100%.

I was recently shooting on a great white shark dive with a new Nikon 10-24. In my view finder I was getting superb shots. Later that night on the boat (5-days at sea) I checked out my work from the day and not one image was in focus. The next day I swapped to my 16-35 and all images were in focus. I took in the 10-24 and just got it back. It was still not sharp at 100% but I was able to correct it with auto fine tune, so I am happy. The point is it still needed tweaking with my camera and I am glad I tested it.

Sorry for the rant. I purchased the 300 2.8 for a Hawaii safari and tested it two weeks before the trip. Didn't work. It sat at Nikon with zero communication to me. I had to overnight a letter to the New York headquarters and they got me my "repaired lens" the day of my trip. The next day I used it and it didn't work. It sat in my hotel for the entire trip. They "repaired" it again when I got back. Still doesn't work. Now, it's back at Nikon and has gone to up the food chain for replacement analysis.

Very, very frustrating.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #15 on:** July 26, 2015, 09:13 »

I guess it depends on what you shoot. I have a D800 and 5DMII. Both great cameras. The 5DMIII would probably have an advantage with faster frame rate for moving subjects. The D800 is higher resolution. Other than that it's probably down to personal preference of brand, features (flash vs no flash, etc), and how it feels in your hand.

angelawaye · « **Reply #16 on:** July 26, 2015, 11:21 »

I think I am going to go with the D750 and spend more on a lens. From what I was reading, there isn't much difference between the 750 and 810 other than the Megapixels.

Sorry to hear about the poor customer service with Nikon. Hopefully nothing goes wrong with mine. I am buying from ebay...

chuckcars · « **Reply #17 on:** July 26, 2015, 18:41 »

Nothing wrong with Nikon service. Expectations enter the equation. Just be a little patient. Stick with the Nikon due to the fact you already have experience with it. D810 is the superior product. I have owned one since they came out. Stick with Nikkor glass or upgrade to Zeiss. The 50 mm Planar is a perfect combination for go to everyday shooting.

All the best,
cec

matteo.curcio · « **Reply #18 on:** July 27, 2015, 01:47 »

I'd rather get a D610 and invest in a set of prime lenses (20, 50 and 85 f1.

Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

Symbiostock Official · « **Reply #19 on:** July 27, 2015, 11:39 »

As I'm sure I'm one of the few Sony users here, you should consider the Sony A99. Very cost effective, beautiful device, light as hell, full frame, and you have access to the myriad of Minolta lenses which are both inexpensive and on par with the high end Canons.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #20 on:** July 27, 2015, 11:53 »

I'm also a Sony user. My first experience with Sony's support/repair vendor Precision Camera is that they're absolutely incompetent. Not sure how their new Pro support is but I'm considering it. Sony really needs to check into this company or get a different support partner.

I thankfully haven't had to use Nikon support. I recently sent a Canon camera in for repair and it got lost. Not sure who to blame. Post office can't find it and Canon said they have no record of it. Either way, not good.

Pixart · « **Reply #21 on:** July 27, 2015, 12:18 »

I went with the 810 over the 750 because the flash synch is only 1/200 on the 750. Why? When every other Nikon I've owned is 1/250?

I feel like I made a mistake getting such a beast. Had to order faster cards or the buffering would drive me insane. My copy of Lightroom 4.4 does not recognize the 810 so I have to convert to DNG first - or ultimately get a CC subscription - and storage is a whole other issue.

It would be nice to think that with those big beautiful files it would boost my micro income, but in reality, a 38 cent sub is a 38 cent sub and I should just downsize everything I submit.

angelawaye · « **Reply #22 on:** July 27, 2015, 13:21 »

The 810 does seem like a beast of a camera! Look at me spending thousands of dollars to continue doing microstock while the monthly earnings are declining (badly too).

What is going on with 123! They use to be one of my best and now sinking and sinking...
I'm still going to buy the 750 though. Microstock is a strange addiction for me...

robhainer · « **Reply #24 on:** July 27, 2015, 15:34 »

Quote from: angelawaye on July 27, 2015, 13:21

The 810 does seem like a beast of a camera! Look at me spending thousands of dollars to continue doing microstock while the monthly earnings are declining (badly too).

What is going on with 123! They use to be one of my best and now sinking and sinking...
I'm still going to buy the 750 though. Microstock is a strange addiction for me...

I have the D800 with the 24-70 2.8 Tamron, Nikon 70-200 F4 (this lens is awesome, sharp, sharp), and Tamron 90 mm macro. My requirement for a lens is that it must give images that will pass the Shutterstock sharpness test with aperture anywhere from wide open 2.8 to f11 (f16 on macro). It's a good kit for microstock, if a little overkill.

But, if I did not have to occasionally shoot things in motion and need good continuous autofocus, I would drop the whole thing for the Fuji XT-1. So I don't know what you shoot, but if you don't have to do any action photos at all, I would look at that. The quality of the Fuji camera and lenses are second to none and cheaper than the Nikon kit by a large degree.

wordplanet · « **Reply #25 on:** July 30, 2015, 13:29 »

I'd go with the Nikon. Can't beat the low light performance.

I've had nothing but good luck with Nikon customer service. Twice they've let me ship my camera/lens to the NY center instead of out west since it's close to me/faster and fixed them on a rush basis at no charge for warranty work, even a few months past the warranty for the camera.

Just a hint: When I upgraded from my D70 to my D700 back in 2009 I made the mistake of selling all my DX lenses along with the D70 due to the full frame change since they work but cause some cropping depending on the settings and regretted selling the good lenses later. I bought a D5100 as a backup camera in 2011 (I also have a P7000 but wanted a better backup). I wished I'd kept the lenses. It's important to have a backup camera (at least if you shoot assignments/travel just in case something goes wrong) and it's also helpful to have two cameras with different lenses attached on certain assignments or even traveling when you want to switch fast. Two full frames are a big expense, so I'd consider keeping at least the better DX lenses.

With a camera that good, the kit lens may not be what you want. I'm not familiar with that lens but you want the best glass you can afford. Sure others can advise you there.

To go in a totally different direction:
If I was starting with a new kit from scratch, and especially if I was just shooting microstock, I'd consider the various mirrorless cameras. I have the Olympus OMD E-1 and can carry that and three lenses (the 25mm f/1.8, 17mm f/1.8 and the 40-150mm zoom) in a tiny backpack all day long. Far superior to my D5100 in low light and a tad sharper too - all three lenses including the inexpensive 40-150 are terrific - not quite as fine as the D700 but I've licensed these photos to magazines and calendar companies, used them on assignment, and have no trouble passing Alamy QC, SS etc. You can also get attachments to use your Nikon lenses on them. Not full frame like the Sony mirrorless but really fine camera and light as a feather. If there's a shop near you where you can try them out, I'd consider it. I still use my D700 for studio shots but have travelled extensively with just the Oly, leaving my D700 in the hotel room for backup and traveling light.

gillian vann · « **Reply #26 on:** July 30, 2015, 22:45 »

I've been a Nikon girl for a decade and happy about it... (upgraded from the D80, which was even worse) although I do have serious envy for that 50mm 1.2 canon lens.

OM · « **Reply #27 on:** July 31, 2015, 17:08 »

Quote from: gillian on July 30, 2015, 22:45

I've been a Nikon girl for a decade and happy about it... (upgraded from the D80, which was even worse) although I do have serious envy for that 50mm 1.2 canon lens.

Get a Sigma Art 50mm f1.4. better and cheaper apparently and they make it for Nikon.

angelawaye · « **Reply #28 on:** July 31, 2015, 22:20 »

I'm having a hard time adjusting to the D750 but change has always been hard for me. The display images look fine but then when I add them to my computer they are very dark and dull. It is certainly a learning process but LOVE the quality of images produced. I have to adjust everything via post processing. Not sure what is going on... Color balance is Adobe RGB. White balance is auto outside.

fotoVoyager · « **Reply #29 on:** August 01, 2015, 04:59 »

Don't judge your exposures by the results on the camera screen.

Get the exposure right by learning how to meter correctly for each scene, then check your results using the histogram (bearing in mind that it's a graph of the jpeg, not the raw file which has greater latitude).

robhainer · « **Reply #30 on:** August 01, 2015, 10:37 »

Quote from: angelawaye on July 31, 2015, 22:20

I'm having a hard time adjusting to the D750 but change has always been hard for me. The display images look fine but then when I add them to my computer they are very dark and dull. It is certainly a learning process but LOVE the quality of images produced. I have to adjust everything via post processing. Not sure what is going on... Color balance is Adobe RGB. White balance is auto outside.

The images displayed on the back on the camera add in-camera adjustments from whatever profile you have set (standard, neutral, vivid, portrait, etc.) When you import raw into lightroom or camera raw, those in-camera presets are stripped off depending on what you have set up under camera calibration.

Also, you need to set color space to sRGB, not Adobe RGB. It doesn't matter so much in camera as it does when you export from RAW to jpg from your computer. If you're exporting Adobe RGB instead of sRGB, you images will look flat, dark and strange when you upload them. You can easily convert the color space if you already have them edited in photoshop or lightroom.

wordplanet · « **Reply #31 on:** August 07, 2015, 12:00 »

Forgive me if this sounds really simple and obvious, but have you checked your screen settings on the back of the camera? I have three Nikons and I've found that I have to set the brightness differently for each so my photos better approximate what I'll see when I upload into Lightroom. Obviously you need to look at the histogram too since the photo on the back will be the jpeg version but the brightness settings on your camera back could be a big part of the problem.

Re color space - I have my camera set to AdobeRGB - and I always process my pix in that color space and haven't had any issues. That way magazines and other print applications have a larger color space to work with, but I shoot a lot of assignments and traditional stock where that is the preferred space. The color space you've chosen, however, while it makes a difference in whether something looks dull, shouldn't affect whether it's too dark.

Hildegarde · « **Reply #32 on:** August 09, 2015, 16:38 »

What about lenses of longer lengths? I just upgraded from Nikon D90 to 7100 after 2 D90s broke from usage within 48 hrs of each other. (and a lens within the same month!)

Right now my main lens is the 70-300mm AFS ED VR F/4.5-5.6 zoom which is a little short for some of my needs. Not rolling in money due to family medical issues but feeling the need for a longer lens a lot lately.

What do people think of the Tamron 150-600mm lens? Sigma?

robhainer · « **Reply #33 on:** August 09, 2015, 17:11 »

Quote from: Hildegarde on August 09, 2015, 16:38

What about lenses of longer lengths? I just upgraded from Nikon D90 to 7100 after 2 D90s broke from usage within 48 hrs of each other. (and a lens within the same month!)

Right now my main lens is the 70-300mm AFS ED VR F/4.5-5.6 zoom which is a little short for some of my needs. Not rolling in money due to family medical issues but feeling the need for a longer lens a lot lately.

What do people think of the Tamron 150-600mm lens? Sigma?

If money is an issue, I would get the Tamron 150-600.

Hildegarde · « **Reply #34 on:** August 09, 2015, 18:08 »

Thanks. Why Tamron over Sigma? Yes money is an issue right now.... talk about everything big breaking and family hospital bills all at once. I have seen a lot of photos from the Tamron 150-600mm on Facebook that look great small but, of course, I am not seeing them 1:1.

If/when money is not an issue, then what?

fritz · « **Reply #35 on:** August 09, 2015, 19:58 »

Hildegarde · « **Reply #36 on:** August 09, 2015, 20:34 »

Don't think those will work with my Nikon body.

I have a 200-400mm lens-- too short for my needs.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Upgrading Nikon d90 - Nikon D810 or Canon 5D Mark iii (Read 19627 times)

langstrup

Tror

Tror

langstrup

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors