Hi pros, noob here.

I wanted to jumpship from nikon d610 to sony a7ii.

is it worth?

as i just play around 24,35 and 50mm.

I just jumped ship 3 weeks ago.... from a D600 to a D750(had this only a year) to A7ii .

I found that shooting D750 is way faster, even on telephoto and low light.

Way lighter...good gain here for mountain hikers like myself when pair with Sony FE 16-35mm f4.

DSLR AF still the best, mirrorless cant beat. If you into sports photography stick with DSLR. If you want lighter equip go for mirrorless.. but must sacrifice.. AF, unless you manual focus

Edit.

This post has been edited by MinusGear: Dec 8 2016, 10:47 AM

Yes.. if size & weight are ur main concern.

Saying that to sacrifice till the need to do manual focus, is very misleading. TS should get a hands on experience to gauge for him/herself before jumping to conclusions.

Its not a noticeable difference. In fact bigger body benefits more if FF lens are big.

This post has been edited by DaddyO: Dec 8 2016, 02:21 PM

Mirrorless isn't that bad la, in fact it's not far off from DSLR.

You can't just generalize DSLR AF system as well.

Let's take Nikon line-up, D500 / D5 / D4 whatever has superb AF, then D750 is great too but when you go with D610 or others the AF isn't that great already.

Same with Canon, 5D2 wasn't great, some people even bought a 50D to accompany the 5D2 for AF critical scene but Canon's 60D range, is good and it gets better with 5D3 / 5D4 / 1D range.

Also to say Mirrorless is lighter - well that depends as well, A7II with CZ lens + a bunch of batteries, the weight reduction isn't that much of a difference. A DSLR can be light too, say a Canon 1000D with 40mm f2.8 STM lens, now that's light.

The variables are so many and so varied that it can't be summarized within a sentence.

Yes, i found that my d610 has AF problems. always back focus except i use live view mode.

Ya, I should go test first before jumping.

so, apa difference between d600 with d750?

how to differentiate 1st and 2nd released of d750?

some said 1st batch got glare problems.

To summarize within a sentence - "it's a personal choice" ..
Haha, too subjective.

That D750 flare problem is nonsense la, so difficult to make it happen.

You have to be shooting without a hood and under certainly bright light condition like noon position sunlight then only can see that shadow.

D600 vs D750? Aiyoh use Google la please. Specs sheet very basic stuff.

For me the size and weight appeal is fine when it's small size, like say A6000 with small lenses.

Once it reaches A7 series, you need to use CZ or whatever expensive lenses to get the best out of it (IQ, AF, whatever else) and that pretty much negate the claim for "size and weight".

sudah google. seems like not much different unless upgrade to 800e or 810 (without aa filter).

wonder the AF system 750 more sharp/fast than 610.

some youtube video say not much different.

Agree, better go test first, A7ii + 55 Zeiss 1.8.. great combo to start

D750 has way superior AF system compared to D6xx
D750 has flip LCD
D750 has dual SD card slots
D750 has faster burst mode
D750 has Full HD 60fps recording
D750 has default 1-stop higher ISO
D750 has more AF points
D750 has wider AF sensitivity range
D750 has wider bracketing
D750 has more WB profile storage
D750 has more WB bracket range
D750 has more shots per EN-EL15 rated by CIPA.

Not much different?

Of course, it's not much different if you don't use those features but if you do, it's a whole lot of difference.

kool.

correction: both have dual sd slot.

ty admin

D600 is not as fast in focusing on subjects. So children/sports/wildlife type photography highly recommended D750. If you shooting non moving objects then D600 is sufficient.

Glare on D750 ?? hmmm....I didn't notice this problem on my unit.

Try it out on sony centers. They have demo cameras for you to try.

Don't just read on the camera specs. Look on the lenses as well.

Sony / Zeiss for the A7 are amazing, but expensive.

Nikon has an arsenal of great but not that expensive lenses (the 1.8 G AFS)

my d610 got something wrong. when i use liveview the photo captured is damn sharp but not when i use viewfinder. any tips?

Do u mean the photo captured isn't sharp when using viewfinder or the view in the viewfinder isn't sharp?

if set to normal AF.

the image in viewfinder looks sharp but the output does not sharp. (af time less)

the image in liveview looks sharp and does its output. (af time abit longger)

need to add on the price of each of these lenses cost a bomb.. 35mm f1.8 for the E mount cost me RM1.4k.. nikon ones are only rm650..

35mm nikon fullframe is like 1200+ for 2.0D and 1800+ for 1.8G

just wondering. do you wear glasses?

bro the ones i bought were only APSC and do not have the Z or G branding... One highly rated lens were the 55mm f1.8 for Full Frame.. and it cost 3 grand.. dang.. Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* FE 55mm F1.8 ZA

http://www.lazada.com.my/sony-carl-zeiss-s...ns-1801677.html

Dont think it matters if it is AF as mentioned by TS. Im guessing the mirror or the af module at the base need some adjustment.

Live view use on sensor AF as oppose to viewfinder which uses a different AF mechanism.

This post has been edited by DaddyO: Dec 22 2016, 10:41 AM

It costs 2.7k
http://www.lazada.com.my/sony-sonnar-t-fe-...ty-7629886.html

Bought the lens last week using Lazada's rm250 voucher. So net 2450

Thats making some sense. I tot it use same AF mechanism.

oh nice buy!