Been shooting with a D200 for a few years now, and will be upgrading

It'll blow your mind what the D810 is capable of, compared to your D200. It's a monumental upgrade in every conceivable way.

My only advice is wait for the D850 or whatever it is to release. Should be soon, as the D810 has a few years on it already. You can either then buy the new D850, or buy a used D810 for much cheaper than you can now.

Don't be afraid to look at other brands either, unless you have to many lenses that will work for full frame. I'd stay away from cannon but sony definitely has a lot of perks. Nikon is great though pretty much anything in the D810 range will give you great pictures.

>>3020380

>It'll blow your mind what the D810 is capable of, compared to your D200. It's a monumental upgrade in every conceivable way.

That's great to hear. I'm sure the D850 will probably drop at close to $3000 upon release, which I probably can't afford. I'm actually getting a good deal on the D810 brand new, which is why I'm going for that. I'm sure that even being a few years old, it won't be obsolete for a good while.

>>3020382

I only have two lenses, both which will work with full frame bodies.

50mm f/1.4 D

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/5014af.htm

28-80mm G

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/28-80mm-g.htm

(Disclaimer: It's purely coincidence that the OP image is from Ken Rockwell and so are these links, but it was just the first thing I found where it displayed the lenses I have)

Never been a Canon fan, their cameras feel like a children's toy and the overall layout is awful. I've heard Sony is doing some amazing things, but I'm not really interested in switching over to a whole new brand.

Yeah it looks like you know what you want, the only other reason i would say to switch to sony would be if you wanted to shoot 4k at all. Otherwise yeah just get the D810 barring some sort of camera revolution i could see that lasting you 10 years easy.

>>3020385
>only other reason i would say to switch to sony would be if you wanted to shoot 4k at all

Gotcha, appreciate the tip. I'm not very interested in doing video with this camera though, maybe if I had to, but it would mainly be for photos.

>>3020382
What's wrong with Canon?

File: DSC_6150.jpg (1MB, 1400x933px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1400x933px

>>3020375
Had it since a couple months after it came out.

It's a great camera. Great image quality, has all the necessary features like more buttons and dials for less menu diving. What sold me on it particularly were a couple of things. First, it has a true ISO of 64, not a 'lo 1' setting but it truly has a base of 64. Not the hugest difference but if you're on a tripod and want to squeeze out a bit of extra DR it's great.

Next, it has a highlight-weighted metering mode. It'll meter for the brightest thing in the frame and expose for that. If you use it you may need to set EV comp to +.3 or even +.7 but since shadow recovery on this camera is so good that's not such a big deal. You'll love not blowing highlights on accident ever again.

ISO performance is not class leading, but certainly leagues above your D200.

Regarding file size, I usually get about 70-75 MB per file if I use lossless 14 bit RAWs. They aren't a pain to edit if your computer is fast enough. I don't know what the minimum threshold would be but my last PC was a laptop with an i7 and 8 GB DDR3; current rig has an i7 and 32 GB DDR4 memory. Of course, nobody's saying you have to shoot the largest file size, either, but you'll get the most out of your files that way of course.

Here's a sample if it means anything.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D810
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Photographer	Ian Lindo
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	894
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	14 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:12:21 10:44:38
Exposure Time	10 sec
F-Number	f/7.1
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/7.1
Exposure Bias	1/3 EV
Metering Mode	Other
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	14.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1400
Image Height	933
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Landscape
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3020384
You don't need a camera you need lenses.
If you're gonna blow all you have on a body like you said, then what will you do? Make a hole on the body cap?

Also, those two lenses are pants on head retarded on a D200.

>>3020531
>First, it has a true ISO of 64, not a 'lo 1' setting but it truly has a base of 64. Not the hugest difference but if you're on a tripod and want to squeeze out a bit of extra DR it's great.

>Next, it has a highlight-weighted metering mode. It'll meter for the brightest thing in the frame and expose for that. If you use it you may need to set EV comp to +.3 or even +.7 but since shadow recovery on this camera is so good that's not such a big deal. You'll love not blowing highlights on accident ever again.

Awesome. Now I'm a little more excited.

>Regarding file size, I usually get about 70-75 MB per file if I use lossless 14 bit RAWs. They aren't a pain to edit if your computer is fast enough.

Yeah, I don't think that will be an issue. I'm running i5 6500 with 16GB RAM, and I can easily do video editing and gaming on this thing.

Nice shot btw.

>>3020534

I do need new lenses, but I want to upgrade to a full frame body first. I never said I'm blowing all I have on this body, it's just within the price range of how much I want to spend.

Those lenses will work just fine with a full frame body, and with the power of the D810, I'm sure it will make for a decent combo until I upgrade to better lenses. The 28-80 was grabbed off an old N75 I had, and I got the 50mm for $100 from a friend. It's not like I went above and beyond to get these lenses, it's just what I had and they have done a decent job for me so far.

>>3020375
If you want the D810 performance but cheaper then you might take a look at the Pentax K-1 as well.

>>3020392
For a Nikon user? Lens mount and focus ring are the wrong way around, focus system behaves differently, metering is (usually) not RGB nor as robust as Nikon's, no rear thumb dial (no that funny d-pad wheel doesn't count), and possibly a few other niggles. UI and UX is vastly improved over Nikon though.
>>3020534
And they're not as pants on head retarded on a D810. There's no problem now.

>>3020633
>and switch entire lens system for lolnomodernlens memetax
How about no

>>3020654
>Lens mount and focus ring are the wrong way around

You say that as though Nikon's left handed screw is the standard.

>focus system behaves differently

How's that?

>metering is (usually) not RGB nor as robust as Nikon's

I've read about Nikon's matrix metering.
Does Canon's usually just read the green channel to make its measurements?

>no rear thumb dial

What's wrong with the dial?

>>3020531
What caused the streaking with the light atop the building?

>>3020654
>And they're not as pants on head retarded on a D810. There's no problem now.
>a 50mm usable only from f/2 on
>a slow ass plastic fantastic toy lens
They're possibly even more pants on head retarded on a D810.

OP is clearly a clueless idiot who's buying a D810 as if he was choosing a coolpix, and even more so since he's a poorfag. He could really buy a K-1 as >>3020633 said, it would be a less expensive brick on his desk in his case.

>>3020375
OP since half the people responding aren't actually responding to your question.

Main a D800 (had mine since release) exposed to the D810 enough to draw comparisons.

It's a solid camera, fixes all of the weird niggles the D800 had. Autofocus is much more accurate, you get slightly better high iso performance, higher burst rate is nicer too and the grip feels a bit more ergonomic than that of the D800.

>>3020531
I've found you don't really lose anything by running lossless compressed and the files are half the size.

>>3020375
Sony A7II or A7RII.

Don't be a fucking faggot and buy a DSLR in 2016.

>>3020659
I'm not exactly sure but the lens I had on it, the 14-24 2.8 Nikkor, has been notorious for flaring issues since it came out, so that might be it.

>>3020748
You are probably right, to be perfectly honest I haven't tested it for myself.

>>3020658
Like I said, the quirks are specific to Nikon users.
>You say that as though Nikon's left handed screw is the standard.
It means I'm only considering Bronica and Pentax for a MF setup...

>focus system behaves differently
No 3D tracking mode, or at least, not one that works nearly as well as Nikon's. Also, more cross points, Zone AF and AF Point Expansion work somewhat differently than GrP and D9/21/51.

>What's wrong with the dial?
I don't like it :^)

>Does Canon's usually just read the green channel to make its measurements?
As far as I know, Canon meters without ITR only read in luminance. If it's filtered for green, I don't know.

>>3020661
>implying a fast lens from 1986 is going to be great in the corners wide open
>implying there's AF 50mm primes from the 90s that aren't plastic toys
Maybe if you stopped spending so much time pixel peeping this wouldn't be a problem. It's going to be sharp enough, and fast enough. Spoiler: The FA 50 1.4 is going to perform about the same on the K-1.

>>3020771
Teehee I made a funny!

>>3020986
>confirmed for mentally challenged, with strong reading comprehension issues too
I hardly implied that, reality is quite the opposite actually and that lens is a shitfest of spherical aberration even in the center: I should know as I have both that one and the Ai version. Yes, the optical formula is like 50 years old.
Also, you never even saw the corners of that lens on your apsc Dinosaur200 retard: it's coma central lol.

>Maybe if you stopped spending so much time pixel peeping this wouldn't be a problem. It's going to be sharp enough, and fast enough.
Buy a d700 then, it's a fantastic camera, especially for you.

>The FA 50 1.4 is going to perform about the same on the K-1.
Awesome results lol, buy it.

>>3020375
Wait for the D850 specs just in case, every pro tog will dump their D810 on the used market to upgrade.