[dcstep]

No offense taken Michael. I do respect that you actually practice what you preach. When I looked at you EXIF on Flickr, almost every image was at ISO 100 with the lens wide open. I might use ISO 100 for static cars, but I'd almost never shoot wide open, unless I was going for bokeh.

We can agree to disagree, for sure.

I would suggest to noobs that they try both our methods and see which works best for them. The preference, I suspect, will be subject-dependent.

[Mik3ymomo]

Fair enough Dave. You are right I do shoot as I preach with the exception of my landscape photos and I still shoot those at ISO 100 but anywhere and everywhere from F5.6-F22.
I do shoot the night stuff just as you stated with a Tripod, mirror up and a remote shutter release.

The static car stuff I shoot mostly wide open or at least 75% of it. The rolling and rig shots are always stopped down with the proper shutter speed for effect.

I am not saying there isn't a place for ISO but I avoid it and I know my photos are better for it.

If you want to compare lenses in a purely scientific way on your particular camera check out DXO labs. They lab test most lenses of major brands and they are rated on a few key performance features that give you a good idea where certain lenses stand out from the rest.

Sometimes you have to do what you are saying with ISO so I don't want people to think to never shoot that way. I try to preach it as a last resort.

Here is an example of both methods being used. It's a $20k lens on an $8k body but he still had to shoot it at 2200 ISO.
All his stuff is this good too.
http://flic.kr/p/qsbFvs

[dcstep]

Interesting example Michael. Given that good looking light, I would have shot that at ISO 800 instead of 1600!!

I run into too many shooters in the field, trying for birds-in-flight and getting disappointing results because the won't raise their ISOs to get shutter speeds up in the 1/1000-range. Many of them are holding onto an old "keep the ISO low" mantra that's holding them back unnecessarily. To maximize IQ, I also think that it's important to ETTR (expose to the right).

Dave

[daberlin]

I own both a Nikon D800 and D700. Also highly recommend the D810. I've used it on a wedding shoot once. Just awesome!

Lenses I own: 85mm 1.4, 50mm 1.4, 14-24mm 2.8, 24-70mm 2.8, 70-200mm 2.8

No sense for me to weigh in on the discussion above. Pretty simple to see where I fall in the debate.

[- Paul -]

I've had the d810 in and out of my Amazon basket for months now - coming from a D7000. £1200 uk with Nikon Grip seems a great deal. I've not been using the camera for ages due to work and think I may be using the excuse of not taking photos being down to the camera. It isn't of course - my D7000 is a good camera plus I'd need to start dropping 1000's on new lens's.

[atwoody]

I bought a Nikon d810, it's the successor to both the D800 and D800E cameras. It give excellent images and quality videos.If you are looking for a camera with the latest technology and will last you and long time then you would look at the D810

[Trijicon]

Lens choice should follow your shooting style.

Portraits, weddings, event, journalism... fast lenses are essential. Either to achieve the thin DOF or decent shutter speeds in poorly lit environments. Landscape and some portraits... you are always stopping down so it doesn't make how fast your lens is. Sports is different.. reach and a fast AF is priority. Each lens has a purpose.

You should have a mix of all types of lenses.

[Spinny02]

just to derail the tread... I swapped the 810 for a D750. I like the updated features and the 810 was a bit much for my needs.

[Mik3ymomo]

Resolution isnt the only reason to own a D800/D810. The dynamic range in those files is astounding! I can edit a raw file to go from nice to just WOW!
There is so much range in those raw files on the D800/D810 I can't imagine using any other camera short of a medium format for that reason alone.

Also as far as camera bodies go. Buy the best lenses for whatever camera body you want. Too many people spend thousands of dollars on a camera body only to put a $200 lens on it. Then you still end up with a $200 photograph.
The image is being projected on the sensor by whatever glass you have on the front of that camera body and the image won't ever exceed the lenses capabilities no matter what camera body it's on.

Lenses should be a priority over camera body in my opinion.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Railgun

I went from a 700 to an 810 last fall. I mainly do a lot of pans...landscapes and cityscapes. While 12MP is great, and that body was faster than the 810, some I will blow up to pretty large prints. A pan I did of HK will be 7.5'x14". 12mp could have probably done that, but I'm a fan of detail.

Large prints are the reason for going full frame.

Low ISO dynamic range is a forte' of Nikon 810, but it's unrelated to full-frame vs. crop and more to do with sensor design choices by Sony/Nikon. Canon, OTOH, rewards at higher ISO and preforms best when Exposed To The Right. The 5DsR has super resolution, but so does the 7D MkII, with the same pixel-pitch. It does have improved DR at higher ISOs than the 7D2, but that's problem more a function of the sensor's newer design than full-frame vs. crop-sensor. In the long haul, full-frame is out big prints and resolution.

Dave