Equipment & Techniques > Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear
6D vs D610
Nir_Hason:
Hi,
I know that many people asked this question already and there are a lot of YT videos on it, but my question is more specific.
I want to move from crop to FF and I don't know if I do need to switch from Canon to Nikon. Because moving from crop to FF it's a big step from me that's why I'm thinking on the option to switch (if I had FF Canon DSLR already wouldn't open such topic at all).
Photography for me it's only an hobby, and I do care about image quality.
Mainly I'm shooting:
- Landscapes and nature (I'm not doing wildlife).
- Street photography.
- Macro, not extreme.
(You can check my flickr and see)
My current gear is:
- Canon 650D
- Canon 70-200 f4 IS
- Canon 100m 2.8 macro
- Tokina 11-16 ATX 2.8 II
- Canon 18-66 kit lens.
- YNG flash for canon.
For what I'm shooting which DSLR will give me the best for what I'm doing? or maybe there is no a big difference.
I know that the 6D is better in low light, and of course I can use it without changing my lenses. What I don't like about the 6D it's feels like Canon removed some 'pro' DSLR features (like focus sys, dual slot) from it.
The D610 got a better AF system and a sensor with more dynamic range (good for landscapes, right?).
The problem moving to Nikon is that I need to sell all my gear.
So do you think that the switch is the right thing to do, there will be a big difference for my type of photography?
I do want to buy with the new DSLR another lens - Sigma 35 1.4 and in DXoMark I saw that it's one of the best lenses for the 6D.
Thank you in advanced!
Nir.
BernardLanguillier:
Considering that it costs only 400 US$ more, I would also consider the D750 that offers even more than the D610 (it is a competitor to the 5dIII), including what may be the best AF available.
After you factor in lenses prices and think over 3-4 years, this initial 400 US$ gap will be mostly irrelevant.
Cheers,
Bernard
NancyP:
I am a bit biased, as I do have the 6D and have not used a recent digital Nikon body. For landscape and nature (excluding fast-moving wildlife and birds), an 11-point AF system is fine. In fact, I tend to manually focus most of the time with landscape, all of the time with macro. Dual cards I don't care about, as I have not had a card fail, and I am not shooting professionally where even an 0.01% failure, if it happens to you, can be a reputation killer. Most of the time when I shoot landscapes with the 6D I am working on a tripod and am using live view, and the live view implementation on the 6D is good and one can shoot from live view (which is the equivalent of mirror lock up). The low light performance of the 6D is very good, and this matters to me because I like to shoot astro-landscapes. I would like more dynamic range than the 6D possesses. I don't know how the Nikon 610 rates for DR and low light use. I have started using graduated neutral density filters, to supplement my other strategies of post-processing gradient-making.
There are a lot of options for macro for Nikon, both new and old Nikkor lenses, and some very good third party lenses by Tamron and Sigma. In theory you could try to find an adapter to fit your Canon to a Nikon mount, but you would lose infinity focus and electronic communication to the camera. My Canon macro is the EF 180 f/3.5L - I like long focal length macros - both for the bokeh and for the distance separating me from shy (or venomous) critters. The Nikon equivalent is the well-regarded 200 f/4, which is an old design about to be refreshed - but that means that a lot of copies will be hitting the used market soon.
I love the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art. Great landscape lens, and decent bokeh for when you want to shoot at f/1.4. Splendid for astrophotography. This and the tiny (and cheap at under 200 bucks USD, and dam' sharp) 40mm f/2.8 STM are the "normal" lenses for my 6D. The 40mm f/2.8 STM is inconspicuous and might be better for "street" than the Sigma f/1.4. I haven't yet bought a modern 50 to 55 mm lens for it, but have some legacy manual Nikkors and Mamiya-Sekors that I use with adapters.
Nir_Hason:
--- Quote from: NancyP on October 29, 2014, 10:28:12 am ---I am a bit biased, as I do have the 6D and have not used a recent digital Nikon body. For landscape and nature (excluding fast-moving wildlife and birds), an 11-point AF system is fine. In fact, I tend to manually focus most of the time with landscape, all of the time with macro. Dual cards I don't care about, as I have not had a card fail, and I am not shooting professionally where even an 0.01% failure, if it happens to you, can be a reputation killer. Most of the time when I shoot landscapes with the 6D I am working on a tripod and am using live view, and the live view implementation on the 6D is good and one can shoot from live view (which is the equivalent of mirror lock up). The low light performance of the 6D is very good, and this matters to me because I like to shoot astro-landscapes. I would like more dynamic range than the 6D possesses. I don't know how the Nikon 610 rates for DR and low light use. I have started using graduated neutral density filters, to supplement my other strategies of post-processing gradient-making.
There are a lot of options for macro for Nikon, both new and old Nikkor lenses, and some very good third party lenses by Tamron and Sigma. In theory you could try to find an adapter to fit your Canon to a Nikon mount, but you would lose infinity focus and electronic communication to the camera. My Canon macro is the EF 180 f/3.5L - I like long focal length macros - both for the bokeh and for the distance separating me from shy (or venomous) critters. The Nikon equivalent is the well-regarded 200 f/4, which is an old design about to be refreshed - but that means that a lot of copies will be hitting the used market soon.
I love the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art. Great landscape lens, and decent bokeh for when you want to shoot at f/1.4. Splendid for astrophotography. This and the tiny (and cheap at under 200 bucks USD, and dam' sharp) 40mm f/2.8 STM are the "normal" lenses for my 6D. The 40mm f/2.8 STM is inconspicuous and might be better for "street" than the Sigma f/1.4. I haven't yet bought a modern 50 to 55 mm lens for it, but have some legacy manual Nikkors and Mamiya-Sekors that I use with adapters.
--- End quote ---
Hi Nancy, thank you for the help, i will take what you're saying in consideration.
I think that the 35 1.4 will be much better for both street and landscape.
--- Quote from: BernardLanguillier on October 29, 2014, 10:19:43 am ---Considering that it costs only 400 US$ more, I would also consider the D750 that offers even more than the D610 (it is a competitor to the 5dIII), including what may be the best AF available.
After you factor in lenses prices and think over 3-4 years, this initial 400 US$ gap will be mostly irrelevant.
Cheers,
Bernard
--- End quote ---
As I mentioned, photography is an hobby for me, and I already spent some money on it. I do know that lenses are expensive and I do want to invest in glass more then a DLSR body (after I'll move to FF).
I'm living in Israel and photography equipment is not so cheap here. So 400$ do count for me, because I can invest that money (and put some more $ of course) on a lens. I'll switch to Nikon I'll need to sell my gear and buy the new body and some lenses for my usage. It will be something like:
- UW lens
- Sigma 35mm 1.4
- some sharp tele lens
- macro lens (that I can buy in the future, not so critical for me right now, even though I like macro).
Buying that gear will cost more money if I will take the D750 (400$ more). I know that I opened this topic on which one do you think I need to pick up based on the info I gave you, and I didn't mentioned the financial part, which is quite important, and that's why I asked if you think that the differences between the two DSLR are worth selling my gear and buy new one.
BernardLanguillier:
I am not recommending you to switch to Nikon, but if you do then going for a D750 is IMHO a reasonably low cost high value addition that would probably account for less than 10% of the cost.
Being able to get access to that level of image quality/AF/functions at that price point is IMHO the biggest appeal of the Nikon system at the moment.
Cheers,
Bernard
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version