Looking to upgrade--thoughts on the D850?

Hello all! I am looking to upgrade my system. I've been traveling around with my Sony a6300+Sea & Sea housing, which I love for its portability and versatility--but the optics just aren't cutting it for me anymore. And, I've finally settled in a spot for a few months so I'm throwing portability out the window. I'm currently working on Ningaloo Reef during whale shark/humpback season and I'm looking for a solid wide angle setup. 

I have the D800, which I've used in Aquatech housing (back in the states, though) w/the Nikkor 20mm f/1.8G and I loved how the photos turned out, but I found the autofocus to be a bit slow/tough to pick up on a moving subject. I've been looking into the D850, but I'm looking for thoughts and opinions from people who have used this camera. After being released so many years ago, do you think that the D850 has some lifespan to it? I'm afraid to invest in a soon-to-be outdated system, but I've heard that the D850 is regarded (by some) as best of its class when it comes to DSLRs. The world is shifting to mirrorless, but the technology seems to be advancing so quickly--I don't really have the funds to continually upgrade. I'm looking for something reliable and high quality that can (hopefully) last me a few years. 

Cheers!  

Hi!

If you prime focus is WA It'd be worth giving some thought into which lens you would use and how you'd house it. 

I shot with the D800 for a long-time and just loved it. I was going to move to the D850 but was persuaded to switch to the D500 for the ease of WA reasons. This was back in 2017 and I've never regretted it for a second. I do appreciate though that you probably don't want to go as far back as D500 technology!

That said, I can't for the moment see any advance in technology that would make me want to upgrade and I have a Z6 and Z9 for topside.

I suspect the same would be true of the D850 as long as you crack the WA housing with something you can live with. Sounds like traveling is not an issue so a big 230 dome may not  be a problem - and maybe you are used to that anyway with the D800.

I'm sure others will chip-in, but I'd suggest that you'd be good for 5+ years with the D850 if you're relaxed about not having the latest technology.

Portability may be one thing but pushing a 230mm done through the water while swimming to keep up with a whale shark in another thing entirely to consider.  And a really heavy housing might need some buoyancy as well.  I know we had to swim hard to stay with the whale sharks. 

I would suggest starting with your subjects and working backwards from there.  For humpbacks you probably want a fisheye setup while for whale sharks, I know I was 3m away from a whale shark and found that 14mm equivalent was a bit small in frame for the small sharks we came across.  That tends to suggest a 16-35 in a big dome, but a 8-15 fisheye plus a 1.4x might be a good option as the smaller dome would be easier to deal with.

For what you're doing at a reasonable price I'd really consider a D500 setup. There is a small IQ difference with a full frame camera, but depending upon how you use your  images if might be as small as being un-noticeable. If you mainly post online and don't print huge then I doubt you'll notice too  much difference. What you will appreciate though is the ability to use smaller domes. 

A lot is (correctly) said about corner sharpness with smaller (8 inch) domes with lenses like the 16-35 on the D850. However, for big animals in the blue  it won't really matter, but if you then go to a  place where you want corner sharpness you'll then want a bigger dome. 

As pure IQ goes, I personally don't think we're going to get much better over the coming years. Cameras are improving but I doubt many pro's can tell the difference between a D850 shot and one  from a Sony A1. Once you get away from the pixel peepers (like me sadly...) then I doubt many could separate a D500 from the A1. 

The negative from going for a DSLR setup will be future sell on value. Like it or not, the world is going mirrorless. 

I went from a D500 to an A1 for 2 reasons - I wanted to use water contact optics, and the A1 has the best AF for tough topside subjects. Not a single viewer ever complained about the IQ I got from the D500 (with Nikon 8-15, 60mm and 105mm lenses)

Mike

What exactly is your issue with A6300? Not enough pixels? Not sharp enough? Autofocus? What is your current lens/port combo? What do you use for lighting? Are you doing photo, video, or both?

Thanks all for your feedback! I appreciate your time and thoughts. Lots of good points raised.

@Barmaglot to answer your questions: long story short, I was shooting with the 10-18mm, but my dome port started leaking and, for reasons, I sold the lens and switched to my kit lens + flat port. Basically, I don't want to sink a bunch of money into a new lens for the sony + new port for a camera that is now discontinued and likely soon regarded as outdated. I also found that, when I was shooting with my D800+20mm the photos just looked...clearer? Like, there was more depth to them? I'm not entirely sure how to describe it, but I much preferred the out-of-camera RAWs from the Nikon. I think I'd rather sell the system as a package now and use the money to fund something I can use for the next few years. I shoot with natural light and photo is my absolute priority for the system. When I bought the Sony, I thought I'd delve into video more, but it never happened. I love the process of taking still photos too much.

The flat port is threaded for 67mm, right? You can add a wet lens and have a very solid wide-angle setup.

Here are some full-res samples taken with an A6300 in a SeaFrogs housing with 16-50mm lens, flat port, and an AOI/Fantasea UWL-09F lens: Imgur: The magic of the Internet

A Nauticam WWL-1 should produce better results, and if you migrate to a full-frame Sony or Nikon mirrorless rig, you'd be able to reuse it.

Edit: didn't notice you were shooting with natural light... I'd say a pair of strobes is the single biggest thing you could add to your setup to improve image quality. Even without a wet lens, the difference between natural and artificial light photos underwater is staggering.

I've shot the D810 (4 years), D850 (2 years) and now Z9 underwater, in Nauticam housings.   I have some definite thoughts and feedback on the D850.  First, it's an awesome camera.  Can't beat it for stills, though you can I think equal it.  My Z9 seems pretty equivalent, or slightly better at autofocus with 3D Tracking (and firmware 3.1).  However, the D850 doesn't really do autofocus during video, so the Z9 easily bests it there, as does probably most ML cameras.

Comparing the D850 and D810 underwater, it's immediately apparent that the D850's autofocus is a leap beyond the D810.   Formerly tricky shots were now easy and reliable.  Shooting the 105vr is a joy on the D850.

Wide angle not as much.  Knowing next to nothing about big rigs, I bought a 230mm dome port as part of a full Nauticam system for my D810.  I used the 16-35vr as that is the main choice other than fisheye.  For years I was unhappy with the corners - the ones I'd gone to such lengths as a 230mm dome port to address!  Finally I stumbled on the Sea and Sea Internal Correction Lens, and I was finally happy with the corners.  Big improvement.

But now I'm shooting the Z9, which I bought just because I could, plus there were lens sales going on at 4th of July.  I went to Bonaire in June with the D850.  I went to Roatan in September with the Z9, and as many parts as would transfer between rigs, like the 230mm dome port.  I picked the 14-30 for underwater use as often find I want to zoom in as close as I can, so the 14-24 was out.  I also started with the (82mm) Sea & Sea IRC and never shot without it.

Comparing the two systems, it's clear that the 14-30 is sharper overall than the 16-35.  Underwater I normally shoot it at F8.  The 105s is also a little sharper than the 105vr, but then all macro lenses are pretty darn sharp.

Here is a 14-30 shot from this month in Truk.   If you zoom in you should see a number of Pedersen Cleaning Shrimp.

The 16-35 is close, but I think the wide lens mount does help lens design at these widths.  Anyway, I'm happy with the results.

Thing is about IQ - seems like the more you want, the less convenient it gets.   Go FX and not only are you lens-limited, you are hauling huge stuff around, like 230mm dome ports.  I have an entire Pelican suitcase dedicated to my Z9 rig.  47 pounds, it's full, and I still have 2 more strobes to pack in my other suitcase.     The reward is there if you make use of it.  Or the versatility in that a D850 shot cropped to DX size is about the same as a D500 shot.  I personally crop to whatever looks good in post, and I don't stop at traditional DX limits.  45mp can be very handy.

Here is a 16-35/D850 shot.  It's not bad either.

Post moved to Gear forum....