Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

D810 vs D7200


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 Scubavinny

Scubavinny

    Sea Nettle

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 10 posts

Posted 30 October 2017 - 09:41 AM

Hi Everyone.  Well I just got back from Great White Shark diving off Guadalupe Island and it was amazing.  I took my current setup with me which is a Nikon D3200 in an Ikelite housing.  I took a ton of photos and some of them look really good (or so I thought).  There were a few divers that had top of the line equipment that cost 10 times what I have and their photos looked unbelievable.  I have attached a photo of mine and a photo from one of the other divers.  Mine is the 2nd photo.

 

So I am now at the point where I want to upgrade my equipment.  I am debating on whether to bite the bullet and get a D810 and new housing, but I would have to buy all my lenses again.  The alternative is to get a D7200 and new housing which is the best crop sensor Nikon makes at the moment.  If I get the D7200, I already have all of the lenses.

 

So here is my question, is the D810 worth the extra $3000 after I buy all new lenses?  I've used the D7200 and D810 topside a couple times, and they are both great cameras.  I did some low light tests and that is where the D810 seems to excel.  But does is it worth spending $3000 extra?

 

Let me know what you think.  I appreciate any help you can give me.

 

Thanks

Greg

Attached Images

  • 22550547_10215202635686096_3561654284592669418_o.jpg
  • 37944015416_8c41266952_k.jpg


#2 Matt Sullivan

Matt Sullivan

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 166 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Jersey

Posted 30 October 2017 - 11:26 AM

why not the d500? or even d7500? i've used both the d810 and the d500 and in 95% of situations prefer the d500 for underwater shooting. 


Matthew Sullivan

 

 


#3 Scubavinny

Scubavinny

    Sea Nettle

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 10 posts

Posted 30 October 2017 - 12:13 PM

I've never considered the D500.  What makes the D500 better than the D810 in your opinion?



#4 SwiftFF5

SwiftFF5

    Manta Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 491 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Interests:Water Rescue (Public Safety Diving) - yeah, I'm a mud crawler.

Posted 31 October 2017 - 03:06 AM

Hi Scubavinny, check out the discussion here:

 

http://wetpixel.com/...showtopic=60626

 

Lots of information there for you.


Canon Vixia HF-S30, L&M Bluefin Pro
Public Safety Diver

#5 Scubavinny

Scubavinny

    Sea Nettle

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 10 posts

Posted 31 October 2017 - 05:21 AM

Wow.  That's a lot of good information.  I think the decision has been made.  I'm going with the D500.  I can use my current lenses and the image quality I am seeing with the D500 seems just as good as the D810.  Looks like I can get the D500 cheaper also.  Going from a D3200 to a D500 should be a HUGE difference for me.  Heading to Iceland in a couple months so I need to make sure I have it by then.  BTW, if anyone is thinking of going to Guadalupe Island to dive with the Great Whites, DO IT.  Most amazing trip I've ever been on.

 

Thanks

 

Greg



#6 divengolf

divengolf

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 216 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia
  • Interests:User name says it all- Dive & Golf, plus a little fishin' when I can.

Posted 31 October 2017 - 04:08 PM

If you do buy the D500, the Nikon manual is not great. I'd suggest that you look at Thom Hogan's D500 manual (www.bythom.com). It contains far more depth and explanation than the Nikon manual. Thom is a recognized Nikon expert (and critic). I used his book to learn the D500 and get the settings correct for a recent trip to Africa (not UW). My UW rig is a D7000 and Aquatica housing. Probably good enough for me. I don't plan to take the D500 UW, but the focus system is amazing.

Harry

#7 Scubavinny

Scubavinny

    Sea Nettle

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 10 posts

Posted 01 November 2017 - 04:16 AM

Thanks everyone for the information.  I am very excited now to get the D500.  I've read a ton of articles and seen a lot of photos from the D500.  It looks like an amazing camera and should help me take even better photos.  Looks like when I get everything, I will be doing a lot of pool testing first before we take a trip.

 

Thanks again

 

Greg



#8 JohnVila

JohnVila

    Triggerfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 32 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vanuatu

Posted 01 November 2017 - 04:44 PM

Thanks everyone for the information.  I am very excited now to get the D500.  I've read a ton of articles and seen a lot of photos from the D500.  It looks like an amazing camera and should help me take even better photos.  Looks like when I get everything, I will be doing a lot of pool testing first before we take a trip.

 

Thanks again

 

Greg

 

Hi Greg - you will not regret it!! Changed to D500 in March this year from RX100 II - results are fantastic!The wishlist of extras grows daily! Cheers



#9 Scubavinny

Scubavinny

    Sea Nettle

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 10 posts

Posted 02 November 2017 - 04:38 AM

Thanks John



#10 Undertow

Undertow

    Tiger Shark

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 524 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bermuda

Posted 04 December 2017 - 08:16 AM

I'm sure you'll be very happy with the D500, its a fantastic camera. However I'd be hesitant to suggest that it will significantly help you take better photos.

The difference between the photos isn't due to the camera but the position of the shark and a bit of post processing. At web size, the image quality of the two look similar.

Lenses are more important. Quality cameras require quality lenses to realize their potential.

If you're ready to upgrade go for it, I've no idea how old the D3200 is and the D500 is awesome. If its simply an image quality issue, there are plenty of ways to improve without upgrading the camera.
Cheers,

Chris

#11 JamesR

JamesR

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 256 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Austin, TX USA

Posted 06 December 2017 - 07:29 PM

D500 has significantly better:  AF, low light, viewfinder, battery life, and more. It will certainly not hurt. It'll let you use more lenses as well over the 3200.

 

I'm trying to talk myself out of the D850 from D810, so yeah.. haha i get it.


-James
 

Flickr | 500px (some nsfw in both)


#12 troporobo

troporobo

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 760 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 December 2017 - 09:53 PM

I hesitate to critique a photo without knowing more about it but I've got to agree with Chris.  The first photo looks like it has had the saturation and contrast dialed way up, whereas the second shot looks more like it is straight out of the camera (with more believable blues too).  Try playing around with adjustments to your shot to see what might be possible with some post processing.

 

Of course that won't make the gear lust go away . . . 



#13 Scubavinny

Scubavinny

    Sea Nettle

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 10 posts

Posted 13 December 2017 - 07:22 AM

There is definitely a lot of post processing in my photo.  I'm hoping a better camera might help it so I don't have to make so many adjustments.  



#14 Scubavinny

Scubavinny

    Sea Nettle

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 10 posts

Posted 18 December 2017 - 12:11 PM

And the D500 has been ordered.  Now I just need a new housing for the D500.



#15 ComeFromAway

ComeFromAway

    Moray Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 07 January 2018 - 11:18 AM

And the D500 has been ordered.  Now I just need a new housing for the D500.

There's one for sale here (an Ikelite) in the Classifieds forum. I almost pulled the trigger on it myself!



#16 ChrisRoss

ChrisRoss

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 272 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney Australia

Posted 07 January 2018 - 04:40 PM

There is definitely a lot of post processing in my photo.  I'm hoping a better camera might help it so I don't have to make so many adjustments.  

Hi Scubavinny, there may be a lot of post processing, but the fundamentals aren't quite there, I had a quick look at your image and the histogram is blocked up on the shadow end so the image is underexposed and the white point needs to be pulled in from 255 to about 224.    The first step in your processing after RAW development should be levels to set the black and white points, this can also be used channel by channel to get the colour balance where it should be.   I tend to use the raw converter to set the exposure with a little room on the black point as it makes colour balancing easier afterwards in PS or whichever program you use.  The histogram really is everything! If you shoot in raw (you should be!) you can adjust exposure to get a good histogram for PS processing and with modern cameras it really is a get out of jail free card, as long as you are close.  Mke sure you have 16 bit processing as that helps avoid gradients and posterisation in the water.

 

To demonstrate here are the histograms for you image, the comparison image posted and the individual adjustments needed to colour balance the image, then the resultant histogram.  Basically you pull each triangle for the black and white points up to touch the edge of the histogram curve.  Doing this as your first step you are normally 90% of the way there or better.  Note how your image is blocked up on the LHS of the histogram  while the comparison image has a touch of space - there is room to tweak the levels on your comparison image:

 

Histograms.jpg