Should I get a better camera? I got my first DSLR about a year

>>2961638
What lens are you using?
What kind of spec make you feel restrained using your d3200?

You won't take better photos. Your photos might be sharper IF you're competent at using the camera settings. Build quality will be in a different league.

On the web, I would bet that I could take the same photo with a d3200 and d810, with the only exceptions being shallow DOF and uncompressed 4K wallpapers.

>>2961642
I am currently using the 2 lenses that came with the camera. The D810 has better low light performance and some other higher stats. I just don't know if it is worth upgrading to. I feel like I have a pretty good understanding have how to use my camera, but honestly I'm still fairly new to photography.

>>2961642
>>2961649
A D810 with crop zooms "package" you say?

>hook, line and sinker

>>2961638
I went from a D3200 to a D800

Sure the D800 images are better.
But the biggest difference is in how the camera feels:
- much bigger viewfinder
- way more buttons and dials, so less menu diving needed.
- buttons and dials are much better quality.
- it's bigger, so fits (big) hands better.
- the metal body is sturdier and the rubber grips feels nicer.

It's simply a lot more enjoyable to use.

It is also a lot heavier though, so I would definitely try one in a shop, or even rent one for a weekend before buying and maybe compare it to the much lighter D750.
I personally don't mind the weight but I know some people do.

>>2961669
Thank you. That is what I was looking to find out. I'll do some more research and take a look a the D800 and D750 and go from there.

>>2961669
the kid said he's "Fairly new at photograpy" and you're gonna help him drop $3K on something he doesn't need at all, and is better off learning on the excellent camera he has now.

>>2961671
sure, feel up a D810 and see if the ergonomic differences are important to you. imo, unless you're doing lowlight sports and regularly print images larger than several feet across, don't bother. don't start thinking that better gear will make you a better photographer. if you need to buy something, try a nice prime lens, like the dx 35mm f1.8

>>2961675
Which reminds me:

-D810 is easier to learn on.

>>2961671
>>2961663
>>2961638
You are looking to buy a $3K camera without even understanding what it does better than your current one

You should seriously stop and reconsider your life choices. When you're done you can reconsider your camera choices

Here's the cheat sheet: The logical upgrade choices for you if you want to stay in Nikon are D7200 or D750. The D500 is also great, but that's a special camera you should only buy if you know that you need it

Look up those cameras. And look up the difference between crop sensor and full frame sensor and what it means for your images and lenses. Any difference between cameras (assuming there isn't a five year gap in sensor tech between them) that is not crop vs full frame will only be related to auto-focus, shooting speed, and ergonomics

Also lenses are more important than the camera.Do you evem know what an aperture is? Look that up. And look up what a prime lens is. If the 35mm f/1.8G DX is not one of the ones you got with the camera (I'm guessing you have the 18-55mm and the 55-200mm?) then buy that immediately and play around with it

I didn't come here to be insulted by anybody nor do I currently have the money to even think about purchasing a new camera. All I was wondering is what camera I should look at buying later on and the benefits of having a better camera if i even should by one. I had read up some on the 810 and know of some people that are currently using it so I thought it would be a good goal to set. I do know the basics of my camera and I am improving through the little I can gather online and just playing around with it. I would love to have somebody that could keep in contact with that could help me improve and better understand all of this. It is all very overwellming and confusing at times for an amuteur.

>>2961695

Just lurk more. You'll get the swing of it soon enough.

Shoot with the camera that you have and don't worry any more about it. More important, vastly more important, is the subject matter and what you choose to shoot, not what you choose to shoot it with.

>>2961695
>that tone of fey innocence only a seasoned shitposter can convey

You're on a roll son

I plan on doing a lot with landscapes and was looking at wide angle lenses. Any idea what a good one to start with would be?

>>2961697
How much pleasure do you get for making fun of easy targets without repercussions? You really can't escape the cancer on here.

>>2961638
That kit you're looking at is no good. You're getting crop lenses with a full frame camera, and while the D810 will automatically crop shots to fit the imaging circle of the DX lenses, you're just wasting all of its potential on that.

Before you even consider upgrading I would shoot a lot more to figure out if 1.) you intend to continue photography for a long time and 2.) what lenses suit your shooting style and subjects best.

On the topic of lenses, get good lenses first. Get great ones, actually. You're going to feel better when you pair a nice camera body with great lenses rather than a nice camera body with lenses you are not 100% satisfied with.

>>2961695
The problem with buying a D810 to "learn" on is that the time you spend learning will see a significant depreciation on the value of the D810 body. Plus, if you have a top of the line ff body like the D810, you really need a decent set of full frame lenses to go with it. Factor in a further 1k to 3k for this.

Buy a prime or two for your current body. Spend a year or two with this set up.

Get the D600 or 810 it doesn't matter. I had to use both for lighting classes at school and honestly it takes a week at max to learn to use either camera. Plus you're buying tanks that will last you forever and they're IQ good enough for years to come.

File: wawled.jpg (959KB, 1800x1130px) Image search: [Google]

959KB, 1800x1130px

the body will barely make your images better, the lens however will. "gearfag" and "it's not the camera, it's the photographer" are both shitty memes, a very good lens simply makes images way better

>>2963566
>a very good lens simply makes images way better
Could you post an example?

>>2963595
the one i posted it a good example don't you think?, a mundane image but really shows how good that lens is, in my opinion

File: pop.jpg (1MB, 1644x1259px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1644x1259px

>>2963595
another example shot wide open

>>2961638
good goy.
buy iy.

Listen OP, I've been down the same round you're treading, so imma just write this like a letter do myself.

Do more research on cameras; specifically, why are there lenses more expensive than mid range bodies. You'll come across the answers right for you and I guarantee you'll spend 3,000 much more wisely.

>>2961638
Buy a sigma 17-50 f2.8 or sigma 18-35 f1.8 for your d3200 and you're good to go.

>>2961666
I don't use Nikon. My system doesn't have primitive lens incompatibility issues. Sorry to hear that yours does

>>2963737
yes get a sony.

>>2961638
>D810

I hope you have a good computer. The files those things make are fucking huge.