alright! fair enough! thanks for the input. i was at the store again earlier looking at all of them again. Something about that 810!!! I'm gonna wind up spending far more than i should. those sexy little bodies and those smooth lenses. yum. lol. i need a different hobby

:tup:

You know whats funny is they actually do place vehicles there, but we obviously replace them with cgi. So there are some factors that come into play.

1. This job for instance, the truck isn't really made yet except for a few prototypes so we couldn't get access to a truck to drive around USA to shoot without anybody taking photos etc...

2. Lighting, its easier for us to grab a backplate during magic hour and then spend hours getting the vehicle perfect in the render, special highlights, etc...

3. I also do think its cost effective, esp if you pay for location, again same as number 2. We shoot the setup real quick and then spend hours getting it perfect haha.

Other than those things I am honestly clueless myself, however it gives me a job to do and I cant complain haha.

Ohh and the other thing is, if they ever need a base changed to platinum its easier to do in 3D vs trying to find the right trim to bring onto location.

We actually shot a whole superduty commercial before with a dummy truck which had tracking markers all over it, and afterwards replaced it with a cgi truck. That was a pain!

I have D750. Love it. It has most advanced autofocus system that Nikon can provide. Better than D810's. Especially in low light. And it's faster than the D810 too. But if you care about the megapixel and image quality, D810 is the way to go.

My friend shoot D610. It's a nice full frame camera. I like it. But between the D610 and Canon 5D mark III, I'd go with the 5D mark III.

http://i1037.photobucket.com/albums/...psz4jcmlm3.jpg

http://i1037.photobucket.com/albums/...psailrqqla.jpg

Dat second shot doe... :drool:

That makes sense, very good info and insight:tiphat: Its amazing what CGI can do, I mean you'd honestly could never tell it was CGI. I've seen more real photos from manufacturers that look faker than the CGI which is ironic:icon14: You guys do a bitchin job thats for sure!

Thanks for the info. Low-light shooting is super important so the 750 still sounds like the way to go.

Why not just rent both and try em out?

didn't know you could do that. But at what cost?

I use borrowlenses.com. You can set a rental period for as short as two days to cut costs.

Rent professional cameras or camera lenses for Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Leica and Pentax

Honestly, if you're just starting out, spending that much on a body is kind of pointless. There are advantages to shooting full-frame...heck medium format or even film. Buying the most expensive camera a company makes only gets you a lighter wallet. I think people forget why they even need the extra pixels and high ISO settings in the first place. The best night photographs are captured using low ISO and the right techniques. You don't need a billion trillion megapixels or ISO 1 billion for that. Just about any DSLR out there can do what you want.

Lenses are where you should really be spending money on. It's a better investment and they tend to hold their value. It's also the most important aspect of your gear. It's what that dictates what your sensor sees. That's not to say a good body isn't a good investment....just don't get caught up in the spec sheet or price. The D810 is a great camera.... but so is the D750, D610 or D7200.

Personally, I'd buy the D610 since it doesn't really hurt to go full frame if you can afford it. If you have more money leftover, buy a really nice zoom lens with a fast, continuous aperture or a bunch of fast prime lenses. I'd also grab the SB-910 speed-light. Comes in handy for indoor low-light shots and you won't need stupid high ISO's. ISO 6400 is plenty if you can't use a flash. Unless you're some wannabe paparazzi or someone shooting a once in lifetime event where for some reason you don't have a fast lens, can't use a flash, can't use a tripod/monopod and the only source of light is a flashlight 200' away, you really don't need to be shooting at that high of an ISO. The majority of my shots...especially the night shots are done at ISO 200 or less and with a longer exposure or with a flash. Once you understand the concepts, you can decide for yourself if its worth spending the extra cash.

Your gear accounts for a 1/4 of what makes for a great image.... and that's being generous. The rest is talent, technique, patience and a little bit of luck. I guarantee you you'll get better shots buying a used DSLR, a 50mm prime and taking 10,000 shots than you ever will buying the most expensive gear the camera store has on display. If you must spend money on the top of the line gear, there's also nothing wrong with refurbished or used gear. Adorama or B&H usually sell them with warranties which takes the worry out of the equation.

I honestly wouldn't bother. Renting gear is great if you just need one for a shoot, but not if you're in the market to buy one. Try it in the store and just buy the camera which feels right. Return it if you're not happy. Even if they charge an open box fee, it's still cheaper than renting both cameras. Unless you have a nice lens already, you'll probably have to rent one of those too. That's probably around $150-$200 that could be going towards a piece of gear you're going to own.

thanks!!!

Thanks man :tiphat:

Yea the D750's auto focus is so good at night. It's very accurate. My buddy and I was shooting under the bridge the other day. Both of us has aperture wide open at f1.4. He was shooting the D610 and had to use tripod. He was so surprised my image came out sharper than his without the tripod and flash. But then again, my lens is 24mm 1.4 which is superb in the low light too.

If you do decide to go with the D750, however, there is a known issue about unusual flare under the intense lighting condition in the early batch. But Nikon has addressed this issue by adjusting the auto focus unit position.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ncN6ceeX1A