# Need buying advice: Nikon D7200/d5500 for moving horses / animals outside and lightbox macro work?



## iLLucionist (Apr 10, 2016)

Hi,

Last time I did photography was in the era of the Nikon D40/D70/D90. I need some serious buying advice. I am a beginner. I do grasp basic concepts, but I have a lot to learn. Making quick perfect pictures is most certainly not in my muscle memory.

I want to buy a new camera for two things:
1) moving horses outside
2) lightbox work: macro photos of technology

Oh and I like vivid, a bit oversatured photos. I find "reallife" a bit dull (does that sound weird?)

I am leaning towards either the Nikon D7200 or D5500. Would that fit the purpose? What do I need to look for? Or should I consider canon / sony or what else?


----------



## jaomul (Apr 10, 2016)

Both are great,  the d7200 does have the advantage of having better autofocus and more frames per second along with being weather sealed and having better handling,  but as for image quality they are both so similar it won't matter most times. 

It be better to buy a d5500 with a very good lens,  than buy a d7200 with a poorer quality lens


----------



## JonA_CT (Apr 10, 2016)

iLLucionist said:


> Hi,
> Oh and I like vivid, a bit oversatured photos. I find "reallife" a bit dull (does that sound weird?)


I agree with jaomul...but I'll also add that the "oversaturated" look is something that can be done in post-processing very easily, so the camera doesn't matter so much with that, as long as you shoot in RAW.


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 10, 2016)

jaomul said:


> Both are great,  the d7200 does have the advantage of having better autofocus and more frames per second along with being weather sealed and having better handling,  but as for image quality they are both so similar it won't matter most times.
> 
> It be better to buy a d5500 with a very good lens,  than buy a d7200 with a poorer quality lens



Thanks! What kind of lens should I be betting? I've seen two kits for the d7200, one with a 18-105, and one with an 18-140. Now I've googled on wildlife photography and people use a 300mm zoomlens? Do I really need that when photographing horses? I think I'm standing mostly 60 meters apart.


----------



## jaomul (Apr 10, 2016)

60 meters is a lot.  I suggest you buy with either kit lens you mentioned,  both are pretty good and represent great value when bought in a kit.  You will probably need a lens that goes to 300mm as said,  or even more.  You would have to say what your budget is before lenses can be recommended but initially I'd look at the tamron 70-300mm vc usd


----------



## goodguy (Apr 10, 2016)

Both are excellent cameras and share same sensor so you are looking at same low light performance, same image quality.
One of main differences will be auto focus system and while the one on the D5500 is excellent the D7200 has a better AF system and for moving horses it will be better to get the D7200.
Oversaturated pictures is more about how you process the pictures (shoot in RAW) Lightroom is good for that.
As for lens, well 18-105mm, 18-140mm are kit lenses and are good but not top notch lenses.
70-300mm VR is also good but again not top of what you can get, if you can afford it then consider getting 70-200mm 2.8 either Sigma, Tamron or Nikon depends of your pocket.
But if you are on limited funds I would start with the 18-140mm and 70-300mm and then upgrade as I improve my skills.
Good luck


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 10, 2016)

jaomul said:


> 60 meters is a lot.  I suggest you buy with either kit lens you mentioned,  both are pretty good and represent great value when bought in a kit.  You will probably need a lens that goes to 300mm as said,  or even more.  You would have to say what your budget is before lenses can be recommended but initially I'd look at the tamron 70-300mm vc usd



Thanks for the info. Budget.. it's all relative. If I'm in for a D7200 with 18-140, it'll cost me around 1315 euro's here in the Netherlands. I've been looking at the Nikon AF-S 18-300mm lens, which is around 729 euro's here. That's very expensive, I believe. Around 300-400 euro's would be better. If it takes good photos of course. If I have to drop 729 euros for an acceptable lens, I could.


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 10, 2016)

goodguy said:


> Both are excellent cameras and share same sensor so you are looking at same low light performance, same image quality.
> One of main differences will be auto focus system and while the one on the D5500 is excellent the D7200 has a better AF system and for moving horses it will be better to get the D7200.
> Oversaturated pictures is more about how you process the pictures (shoot in RAW) Lightroom is good for that.
> As for lens, well 18-105mm, 18-140mm are kit lenses and are good but not top notch lenses.
> ...



Thanks for the info! Is here other post process software than lightroom? Or do I just need to get and learn lightroom?

Is a 70-200 2.8 Sigma/Tamron/Nikon a better bang for the buck than the 70-300mm VR?


----------



## fmw (Apr 10, 2016)

What I like about the 7000 series Nikons is the use of the same thumb/finger wheels as the D80/90.  I used to use a D80 and was accustomed to that.  Otherwise, it shouldn't make any difference.


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 10, 2016)

fmw said:


> What I like about the 7000 series Nikons is the use of the same thumb/finger wheels as the D80/90.  I used to use a D80 and was accustomed to that.  Otherwise, it shouldn't make any difference.



Thanks! Yeah... that's the only really complaint I could find about the D5500.. only one dial and a bit "unintuitive" placing of the buttons.

I guess that the placing of the physical buttons / dials / knobs is very important.


----------



## goodguy (Apr 10, 2016)

iLLucionist said:


> goodguy said:
> 
> 
> > Both are excellent cameras and share same sensor so you are looking at same low light performance, same image quality.
> ...


I don't think bang for the buck is the point here, it depends how important image quality is for you and if you want a fast lens.
70-300mm VR is a good lens and used will cost a fraction of the much faster 70-200mm 2.8 lenses.

You can get Faststone, its a free RAW processing software, its considerably limited compared to Lightroom but it will get the job done, its easy to move skills you learned on it to Lightroom in future, I used Faststone for few years till I moved to Lightroom.


----------



## Overread (Apr 10, 2016)

Question - you say you want to do macro of technology items - just how big are these items that you want to photo and how big in the frame do you want them to be


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 10, 2016)

goodguy said:


> I don't think bang for the buck is the point here, it depends how important image quality is for you and if you want a fast lens.
> 70-300mm VR is a good lens and used will cost a fraction of the much faster 70-200mm 2.8 lenses.
> 
> You can get Faststone, its a free RAW processing software, its considerably limited compared to Lightroom but it will get the job done, its easy to move skills you learned on it to Lightroom in future, I used Faststone for few years till I moved to Lightroom.



Image quality is *very* important for me. That's the whole point: crisp and sharp picture of the horse with or without the horseback rider, perhaps with the rest fading to the background. Question: Do I *need a fast lens*? For this kind of photography?

Nah I'll use lightroom :-D No problem with investing in it. I just thought perhaps there is better software out there but apparently not.


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 10, 2016)

Overread said:


> Question - you say you want to do macro of technology items - just how big are these items that you want to photo and how big in the frame do you want them to be



From largest to smallest: motherboards, keyboards, mice, mice PCB's, keycaps.


----------



## jaomul (Apr 10, 2016)

Spending money on lenses can be from small money to remortgage the house money. Most say it's better to put the money on lenses over the camera body, personally I think its a bit of both.

The tamron 70-300mm usd vc is a fine lens. If you intend on shooting in good light it probably is a better option than a 70-200 f2.8 for the fact that it has a better range and is lighter and of course cheaper. When light levels drop the 70-200 f2.8 come into their own because they let more light in and will have more confident focus.

You asked also about macro. I suggest you look at the sigma 105mm f2.8 OS or the tamron 90mm f2.8 vc. Both are fine macros, with a focal length that means you are not on top of your subject when you are shooting, making it better for scared little bugs and for not casting a shadow on your subject. I am not sure how relevant this is for you using a lightbox, but there probably isn't any relevant reason to spend double on a nikon brand here.

lightroom is great, but even in jpeg, your camera will have settings that allow the high saturation look straight out of camera


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 10, 2016)

jaomul said:


> Spending money on lenses can be from small money to remortgage the house money. Most say it's better to put the money on lenses over the camera body, personally I think its a bit of both.
> 
> The tamron 70-300mm usd vc is a fine lens. If you intend on shooting in good light it probably is a better option than a 70-200 f2.8 for the fact that it has a better range and is lighter and of course cheaper. When light levels drop the 70-200 f2.8 come into their own because they let more light in and will have more confident focus.
> 
> ...



I read that the tamron 70-300mm usd vc is not that good for moving sport photography? Do I have other options? It needs to be water proof / resistant btw. I hope you don't mind asking.. this is really new territory for me.

Macro sounds good, I'll check out those lenses.

I wasn't aware that these cameras have so many options to tweak photos. I'm already curious to try one out.


----------



## robbins.photo (Apr 10, 2016)

iLLucionist said:


> jaomul said:
> 
> 
> > Spending money on lenses can be from small money to remortgage the house money. Most say it's better to put the money on lenses over the camera body, personally I think its a bit of both.
> ...


Not sure where you read that, works great for action/sports photography.  AF speed is just as fast as the nikkor or at least close enough that you'd never be able to tell any difference

Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk


----------



## jaomul (Apr 10, 2016)

iLLucionist said:


> jaomul said:
> 
> 
> > Spending money on lenses can be from small money to remortgage the house money. Most say it's better to put the money on lenses over the camera body, personally I think its a bit of both.
> ...



The tamron isn't weather resistant, but is quite able to focus fast and do well in good light. Obviously pro spec lenses are in a different league build wise etc


----------



## Overread (Apr 10, 2016)

OPtech rain-sleeves - all the waterproofing most people will need day to day. Cheap and simple to use and will generally fit any lens. There are more durable covers on the market of course, but with a much higher price so depends a little on the environment you're in. 

If its wildlife you could also consider something simple like a throw-over poncho that is waterproof for yourself and the camera at the same time.


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 10, 2016)

jaomul said:


> iLLucionist said:
> 
> 
> > jaomul said:
> ...



Is there a comparable lens that IS weather resistant? Comparable as in performance and price-wise?


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 10, 2016)

Overread said:


> OPtech rain-sleeves - all the waterproofing most people will need day to day. Cheap and simple to use and will generally fit any lens. There are more durable covers on the market of course, but with a much higher price so depends a little on the environment you're in.
> 
> If its wildlife you could also consider something simple like a throw-over poncho that is waterproof for yourself and the camera at the same time.



Thanks! Didn't knew that that existed even.


----------



## goodguy (Apr 10, 2016)

iLLucionist said:


> Image quality is *very* important for me. That's the whole point: crisp and sharp picture of the horse with or without the horseback rider, perhaps with the rest fading to the background. Question: Do I *need a fast lens*? For this kind of photography?


Well a fast lens will help you blur the background nicely, this is something that a 70-300mm cant do.
70-200mm 2.8 will also let you bring more light on the sensor and that's important in case you shoot in less then ideal lighting condition, you probably will need to shoot 1/500 or faster shutter speed to freeze the horse so fast lens will help with that because you will not have to bump up ISO.

The most important thing to get sharp and crisp shots is skills and experience, all the equipment in the world will not help you if you don't know what you are doing so do your research, learn, shot, learn more and shoot more, in time your pictures will get better and better.
Nikon D7200 is a superb piece of equipment so you can expect with right glass to get amazing results.


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 11, 2016)

Thanks for all the input! I can't wait, I'm taking the plunge. I'll try a kit first and then buy additional lenses. I want to check some reviews some more.

What kit is better for me? The one with the 18-140 or the 18-105 AF-S ED VR?


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 11, 2016)

Oh, and any tips on carrying bags?


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 11, 2016)

So I was thinking:

for what is it more important to buy a separate lens?
70-200mm for moving horses photography, stick with 18-105 for macro / object photography in my lightbox, buy decent macro lens later?

Or 18-140 for moving horse photography, buy proper macro lens straight away?


----------



## jaomul (Apr 11, 2016)

In your position I'd buy the camera with either the 18-105 or 18-140 and use for a while. Once you have an appreciation for what that camera/lens combo can do, you'll be able to make a more informed decision on what you need. Possibly that kit might be enough. 

It's easy to spend lots of money in gear you don't need. Buy a basic setup, add later 

Look into electrical macro tubes also, they might be ideal for the macro you need,enabling whatever lens you buy to focus much closer, and they are cheap


----------



## goooner (Apr 11, 2016)

I agree with Jaomul. I've got the D7200 and with the 18-140 and will be using it for the next 6 or 7 months. The 18-140 has better build quality as well.


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 11, 2016)

goooner said:


> I agree with Jaomul. I've got the D7200 and with the 18-140 and will be using it for the next 6 or 7 months. The 18-140 has better build quality as well.



Thanks for all the info! Better build quality? Can you give some details?

Is the 18-140 also suitable for some lightbox keyboard photography. I want details in term of keycaps and for instance the nib of a fountain pen. But I do not need to see the plastic fabric.

I read this: Test results: Nikon 18-140mm vs 18-105mm: Nikon SLR Lens Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

But if I understand correctly... photographing a keyboard is not REALLY macro photography as in photographing an ant am i right?


----------



## goooner (Apr 11, 2016)

Well for me (shooting birds), the 140 is better. It has a metal bezel (part that connects to camera), where the 105 is plastic. I think taking photos of keyboards and Fountain pen tips should be ok with the 140, but will much more depend on your lighting. You might need a biggish light box and or umbrellas and a few speed lights. I don't do product photography but I do recommend the Lighting Bible


----------



## Overread (Apr 11, 2016)

Honestly for what you want your normal lens plus a set of extension tubes is all you will need. Your macro demands are not too extreme so whilst a dedicated macro  might be the tool of choice; a regular lens will do much of what you want and extension tubes will cover the rest. A good set of tubes like the Kenko brand are affordable and have the metal contacts that you need to communicate from lens to camera; cheap brand options are out there for a very small amount but they lack the contact pins thus you can't control the lens (eg you've no aperture control).



For the equine photography I would go for the 70-200mm. Ideally what you need is the f2.8 and the longer focal lengths for two reasons:
1) Indoors and with action you will find light lacking. f2.8 is enough to shoot well and still cover horse and rider; any wider (smaller f number) and you make things a lot harder. I've often have my camera at its max ISO and its aperture at f2.8 and still needed more light. 

As a tip 1/640sec is the slowest speed for a showjumping horse for sharp results; 1/500 and you'll get hoof/mane/tail blurring but still pleasing on the main body if shot right. Any slower and its too blurry - faster is always ideal if the light allows. 

2) Horses are big subjects and if you take photos too close to them you get perspective distortion. This is where parts closer to the lens are enlarged over those further away - those classic "big nose in the camera face" photos are an extreme example. Thus for portraits or full body around 100mm or longer is recommended. Of course if you're doing a shot much further away - like a landscape - then a wider focal length (shorter) can work just as well since you're not close.


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 11, 2016)

Overread said:


> Honestly for what you want your normal lens plus a set of extension tubes is all you will need. Your macro demands are not too extreme so whilst a dedicated macro  might be the tool of choice; a regular lens will do much of what you want and extension tubes will cover the rest. A good set of tubes like the Kenko brand are affordable and have the metal contacts that you need to communicate from lens to camera; cheap brand options are out there for a very small amount but they lack the contact pins thus you can't control the lens (eg you've no aperture control).
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks!!

I hope you don't mind me posting another question...

which specific 70-200mm (with model type et al) do you recommend? I tried googling tamron 70-200 but there are multiple options and I'm really confused what is what.

Would the 18-140 be enough for lightbox product photography?

What specific extension tube would you recommend? I have never heard of these things... I hope you can point me to some specific products.

I hope to place my order tonight.. I'm going to play with photographing next weekend.


----------



## Overread (Apr 11, 2016)

Few thoughts:

1) 70-200mm I would recommend an f2.8 version. The newer Tamron with VC will likely be the best performer; you won't need the stabilizing; however the optics will be the best from Tamron. 

2) The 18-140mm should be more than enough; and because you will likely be using apertures such as f8 the lens should be more than suitably sharp for typical product photography.

3) Extension tubes are typically sold in a set of 3 - at least from Kenko. Basically they fit between the camera body and lens and when added remove its ability to focus on further off subjects. However they also reduce the minimum focusing distance as well; thus letting you focus closer to a subject for an enlarged magnification.


----------



## goodguy (Apr 11, 2016)

I have the Tamron 70-200mm 2.8, its an outstanding lens and much cheaper then the Nikon version.
If you are considering the Tamron then you want to get the model with VC which is the Vibration Control.
Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 VC is better then the older model for 2 reasons, it will auto focus much better in lower light and of course has vibration control which comes in handy when shooting in lower shutter speeds.


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 11, 2016)

Overread said:


> Few thoughts:
> 
> 1) 70-200mm I would recommend an f2.8 version. The newer Tamron with VC will likely be the best performer; you won't need the stabilizing; however the optics will be the best from Tamron.
> 
> ...



Thanks! I guess I don't need stabilizing because of not shooting video?


----------



## Overread (Apr 11, 2016)

Stabilization affects stills and video and helps with smooth hand holding.

A rough rule of thumb for stills and hand holding is 1/focal length. So in theory that's 1/200sec for a 200mm lens (or a zoom set to 200mm). So for equine shooting you'll already be at faster shutter speeds. That said its a common feature on newer lenses and thus newer lenses with improved optical performance often have it as a feature. So whilst the VC might not be essential the optics in the lens can be a good step up.

That said I don't know the Tamron line well; but their new 70-200mm VC I know does well in reviews.


----------



## robbins.photo (Apr 11, 2016)

iLLucionist said:


> I hope you don't mind me posting another question...
> 
> which specific 70-200mm (with model type et al) do you recommend? I tried googling tamron 70-200 but there are multiple options and I'm really confused what is what.
> 
> ...



Ok, so for 70-200mm if your looking at the tamron get the VC version if you have the budget.  If not look for a Sigma with OS, and if you don't have the budget for that the Sigma without the OS.


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 11, 2016)

Thanks for all the info!

I'v just ordered the D7200 with the 18-140 + carrying bag + 2x 32GB Sandisk extreme + extra EN-EL15 battery + microfiber cloth + lens pen + air blow thingy. I want the more upper end / expensive 70-200 for better results, so I have to wait a bit longer till I have money again. Man, photography is expensive!!

Should arrive tomorrow already.. Why do I have a job I have to go to? I want to play!


----------



## Overread (Apr 11, 2016)

Sounds good and hope you have fun 

And yeah it gets expensive if you want the quality items; but they are really worth it when you see the results they can achieve!


----------



## table1349 (Apr 11, 2016)

To go with what Overread had to say about expensive, if you have children this is something to keep in mind.


----------



## goodguy (Apr 11, 2016)

iLLucionist said:


> Thanks for all the info!
> 
> I'v just ordered the D7200 with the 18-140 + carrying bag + 2x 32GB Sandisk extreme + extra EN-EL15 battery + microfiber cloth + lens pen + air blow thingy. I want the more upper end / expensive 70-200 for better results, so I have to wait a bit longer till I have money again. Man, photography is expensive!!
> 
> Should arrive tomorrow already.. Why do I have a job I have to go to? I want to play!


Awesome news, congrats on your new purchase, you will love your new toy.
And BTW if you think photography is expensive try collecting watches 

Good luck and enjoy


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 12, 2016)

Thanks for all the great information and the help! I've received my Nikon D7200 with 18-140mm NIKOR lens today and went out for some pics:




































I'll start saving already for a nice 70-200. I really want to get semi-professional in equine photography so gonna check out how the 18-140 holds up with movement but I will be needing the 70-200. But first learn how to shoot and compose nice photos..


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 12, 2016)

Apparaently pics not showing up, album is here:

First Nikon D7200 18-140 Pics


----------



## table1349 (Apr 12, 2016)

No picks showed up for me.


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 13, 2016)

gryphonslair99 said:


> No picks showed up for me.



Here:

First Nikon D7200 18-140 Pics

Shortcode did not work apparently.


----------



## table1349 (Apr 13, 2016)

Trade ya.
How to post pictures and use forum functions: A pictoral guide to using TPF


----------



## iLLucionist (Apr 13, 2016)

gryphonslair99 said:


> Trade ya.
> How to post pictures and use forum functions: A pictoral guide to using TPF



Thanks!


----------

