Moderator: E.J. Peiker

All times are UTC-05:00

  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 37 posts | 
by Bill Chambers on Sat Feb 13, 2021 7:48 pm
User avatar
Bill Chambers
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4015
Joined: 8 Feb 2006
Location: Milton, Florida
I know this question comes up from time to time, but systems seem to change so fast now I didn't want to search through past threads and see what WAS the best.

I just moved to medium format for landscape work, which is probably 85-90% of my work.

I've made my Nikon D810 into a wildlife camera using my Nikkor 80-400, but I want something newer, better, faster, and hopefully, lighter.

I will probably sell all of my Nikon stuff, so brand is not important.  

Mirrorless vs. DSLR - my only concern about mirrorless is battery usage.  If I leave my DSLR on (not using Live View), the batteries don't drain at all, but I'm afraid a mirrorless might drain quickly.  Honesty, I DO NOT know if this truth or fallacy.

Please give me your best recommendations for:

Camera body

Lenses (200mm & longer - zooms or primes)

Many thanks!
Please visit my web site, simply nature - Photographic Art by Bill Chambers
Bill Chambers
Milton, Florida
 

by SantaFeJoe on Sat Feb 13, 2021 8:57 pm
User avatar
SantaFeJoe
Forum Contributor
Posts: 8622
Joined: 28 Jan 2012
Location: Somewhere Out In The Wilds
Bill Chambers wrote:.......Mirrorless vs. DSLR - my only concern about mirrorless is battery usage.  If I leave my DSLR on (not using Live View), the batteries don't drain at all, but I'm afraid a mirrorless might drain quickly.  Honesty, I DO NOT know if this truth or fallacy. ............
Not to be obnoxious, but I really don’t understand why people are so concerned with battery usage. Extra batteries are cheap enough and so quick to change out. They are easily charged and carried. As an old timer, I remember carrying pockets full of film and changing rolls every 36 shots or so. That was an extreme inconvenience and expense compared to changing a battery out. Batteries last for hundreds of shots and memory cards last for several hundred shots, as well. To me, it’s really no big deal at all and no reason to not buy a camera that is power hungry, but otherwise very desirable performance wise.(Yeah, I know that last sentence is odd sounding with no, not etc. ,).

Joe
Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist.  -Pablo Picasso
 

by Bill Chambers on Sat Feb 13, 2021 9:43 pm
User avatar
Bill Chambers
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4015
Joined: 8 Feb 2006
Location: Milton, Florida
SantaFeJoe wrote:
Bill Chambers wrote:.......Mirrorless vs. DSLR - my only concern about mirrorless is battery usage.  If I leave my DSLR on (not using Live View), the batteries don't drain at all, but I'm afraid a mirrorless might drain quickly.  Honesty, I DO NOT know if this truth or fallacy. ............
Not to be obnoxious, but I really don’t understand why people are so concerned with battery usage. Extra batteries are cheap enough and so quick to change out. They are easily charged and carried. As an old timer, I remember carrying pockets full of film and changing rolls every 36 shots or so. That was an extreme inconvenience and expense compared to changing a battery out. Batteries last for hundreds of shots and memory cards last for several hundred shots, as well. To me, it’s really no big deal at all and no reason to not buy a camera that is power hungry, but otherwise very desirable performance wise.(Yeah, I know that last sentence is odd sounding with no, not etc. ,).

Joe
OK, I can accept that line of thinking, but are mirrorless better than DSLR?  The Fuji medium format I just went with is mirrorless but I haven't had enough experience with it yet (it's one week old) to know if it is better or worse than DSLR viewfinder.  

I understand mirrorless shutters can give more frames/sec but does going mirrorless have downsides that could offset that upside?  Serious question, I'm not trying to argue, just wondering.
Please visit my web site, simply nature - Photographic Art by Bill Chambers
Bill Chambers
Milton, Florida
 

by Lensmaster on Sun Feb 14, 2021 7:34 am
Lensmaster
Forum Contributor
Posts: 145
Joined: 30 Jan 2012
Electronic shutter can give rolling shutter effect when panning it is minimal with a a9 -a9ii -a1 other than that I don't see a down side to mirror less .
Rob.
 

by Gary Gulash on Sun Feb 14, 2021 3:57 pm
Gary Gulash
Forum Contributor
Posts: 702
Joined: 8 Dec 2005
Location: Alberta, Canada
SONY (Alpha 1, 600 f4 GM or 400 2.8 GM, 135 1.8 GM, 24 1.4 GM) comes to mind for me.
 

by Bill Chambers on Sun Feb 14, 2021 4:09 pm
User avatar
Bill Chambers
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4015
Joined: 8 Feb 2006
Location: Milton, Florida
Gary Gulash wrote:SONY (Alpha 1, 600 f4 GM or 400 2.8 GM, 135 1.8 GM, 24 1.4 GM) comes to mind for me.
Excellent.  Thank you, Gary.
Please visit my web site, simply nature - Photographic Art by Bill Chambers
Bill Chambers
Milton, Florida
 

by Bill Chambers on Sun Feb 14, 2021 4:09 pm
User avatar
Bill Chambers
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4015
Joined: 8 Feb 2006
Location: Milton, Florida
Lensmaster wrote:Electronic shutter can give rolling shutter effect when panning it is minimal with a a9 -a9ii -a1 other than that I don't see a down side to mirror less .
Rob.
Thank you, Rob.
Please visit my web site, simply nature - Photographic Art by Bill Chambers
Bill Chambers
Milton, Florida
 

by Lensmaster on Mon Feb 15, 2021 9:38 am
Lensmaster
Forum Contributor
Posts: 145
Joined: 30 Jan 2012
Just seen a vid apparently you loses a little light when shooting above 1/1000 sec with a electronic shutter and the back ground is not quite so blurry .
as for best I think the a1 and fe 600 f4 also a 1.4 tc is about as good as it gets a lot cheaper system a9mkII and 200/600 this works very well .
Rob.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQTarMu ... e=emb_logo
 

by Bill Chambers on Mon Feb 15, 2021 12:06 pm
User avatar
Bill Chambers
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4015
Joined: 8 Feb 2006
Location: Milton, Florida
Lensmaster wrote:Just seen a vid apparently you loses a little light when shooting above 1/1000 sec  with a electronic shutter and the back ground is not quite so blurry .
as for best I think the a1  and fe 600 f4 also a 1.4 tc is about as good as it gets a lot cheaper system a9mkII and 200/600 this works very well .
Rob.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQTarMu ... e=emb_logo
Excellent.  I think the a9mkII and 200/600 match my budget much better, especially since I don't take many wildlife/bird shots.  Thanks for your advice.
Please visit my web site, simply nature - Photographic Art by Bill Chambers
Bill Chambers
Milton, Florida
 

by Gary Gulash on Mon Feb 15, 2021 2:20 pm
Gary Gulash
Forum Contributor
Posts: 702
Joined: 8 Dec 2005
Location: Alberta, Canada
Bill, clearly the term "Best" is quite dependent on an individuals situation. I understood best in the sense of state of the art, bleeding edge tech, highest fps, most mp newest etc. If you bring cost into the equation then "best" is completely subjective. Your existing equipment may be "best". All the major camera companies make usable gear.
 

by Bill Chambers on Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:08 pm
User avatar
Bill Chambers
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4015
Joined: 8 Feb 2006
Location: Milton, Florida
Gary Gulash wrote:Bill, clearly the term "Best" is quite dependent on an individuals situation. I understood best in the sense of state of the art, bleeding edge tech, highest fps,  most mp newest etc. If you bring cost  into the equation then "best" is completely subjective. Your existing equipment may be "best". All the major camera companies make usable gear.
Yes, I do understand that.  I should have been more specific in my initial question; I apologize for that.

90 % of what I shoot is landscapes, and I'm now using a medium format camera for that, but for what little wildlife/bird shooting I do, I want a "decent" system that is newer than what I currently have.  I don't want to spend $10,000 - $20,000 for something I basically just want to "play" with.  At the same time, I do want a good system (good as being lighter weight than what I have now, faster focusing, more FPS, more accurate focusing, with decent available lenses, and good build quality & weather proofing).  I'm willing to spend $3,000-$6,000, and I'm willing to purchase used equipment if it's in excellent condition.  I would prefer something in the 20-30 MP range.  I don't need anything more in the MP arena because I will not be enlarging these images to any great extent, if at all.  

Allow me summarize it below to make it easier to quicker to get an overall view:

Budget - $3-6 K
MP needed/requested - ~ 20-30 MP, won't need anything bigger.
Systems I would be open to - Nikon, Canon, Sony - I say these 3 because of quality of available lenses. I would consider others if a special        deal was available perhaps.
Currently using Nikon D810 & Nikkor 80-400 - this setup is TOO HEAVY; want something lighter.
Build quality & weather proofing is very important to me.
Would consider USED equipment if in excellent condition

I'm open to mirrorless, but only if mirrorless works well for wildlife/bird images.  I've never shot mirrorless until VERY recently, and only for landscapes.  Are birders using mirrorless and, if so, is it working well for them?

Again, I apologize for not being as specific as I should have been.  Thanks for your help.
Please visit my web site, simply nature - Photographic Art by Bill Chambers
Bill Chambers
Milton, Florida
 

by Bill Chambers on Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:15 pm
User avatar
Bill Chambers
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4015
Joined: 8 Feb 2006
Location: Milton, Florida
Lensmaster wrote:Just seen a vid apparently you loses a little light when shooting above 1/1000 sec  with a electronic shutter and the back ground is not quite so blurry .

Rob.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQTarMu ... e=emb_logo
Wow, using the electronic shutter makes a huge difference!  Thanks for posting the video link!

Bill
Please visit my web site, simply nature - Photographic Art by Bill Chambers
Bill Chambers
Milton, Florida
 

by Gary Gulash on Mon Feb 15, 2021 6:23 pm
Gary Gulash
Forum Contributor
Posts: 702
Joined: 8 Dec 2005
Location: Alberta, Canada
Hi Bill, no apologies necessary. I was going to ask what your priorities and budget was before my initial response but decided to respond with more of a "dream" setup that might satisfy even the most discriminating. Your situation more closely approximates the situation most people are in, trying to balance a lot of factors into what would work best.
 

by hullyjr on Mon Feb 15, 2021 8:45 pm
hullyjr
Forum Contributor
Posts: 507
Joined: 26 Oct 2005
Location: Grayslake, IL, USA
Bill Chambers wrote:
Gary Gulash wrote:Bill, clearly the term "Best" is quite dependent on an individuals situation. I understood best in the sense of state of the art, bleeding edge tech, highest fps,  most mp newest etc. If you bring cost  into the equation then "best" is completely subjective. Your existing equipment may be "best". All the major camera companies make usable gear.
Yes, I do understand that.  I should have been more specific in my initial question; I apologize for that.

90 % of what I shoot is landscapes, and I'm now using a medium format camera for that, but for what little wildlife/bird shooting I do, I want a "decent" system that is newer than what I currently have.  I don't want to spend $10,000 - $20,000 for something I basically just want to "play" with.  At the same time, I do want a good system (good as being lighter weight than what I have now, faster focusing, more FPS, more accurate focusing, with decent available lenses, and good build quality & weather proofing).  I'm willing to spend $3,000-$6,000, and I'm willing to purchase used equipment if it's in excellent condition.  I would prefer something in the 20-30 MP range.  I don't need anything more in the MP arena because I will not be enlarging these images to any great extent, if at all.  

Allow me summarize it below to make it easier to quicker to get an overall view:

Budget - $3-6 K
MP needed/requested - ~ 20-30 MP, won't need anything bigger.
Systems I would be open to - Nikon, Canon, Sony - I say these 3 because of quality of available lenses. I would consider others if a special        deal was available perhaps.
Currently using Nikon D810 & Nikkor 80-400 - this setup is TOO HEAVY; want something lighter.
Build quality & weather proofing is very important to me.
Would consider USED equipment if in excellent condition

I'm open to mirrorless, but only if mirrorless works well for wildlife/bird images.  I've never shot mirrorless until VERY recently, and only for landscapes.  Are birders using mirrorless and, if so, is it working well for them?

Again, I apologize for not being as specific as I should have been.  Thanks for your help.
Hi,

My recommendation for birds is Nikon D500 + 500mm f/5.6PF. Excellent travel kit (throw in the 1.4x). I love this set-up when I don't want to bring the bigger lenses. I don't know if this is lighter/heavier than your current Nikon set-up. If you need to go lighter there is a limited choice from those manufacturers.

In Sax-Zim Bog today, starting temperature -40[font=Arial, sans-serif]°! [/font]

Cheers,

Jim

Cheers,
Jim Hully
Grayslake, IL
Images now at https://www.flickr.com/photos/138068378@N06/
 

by DChan on Mon Feb 15, 2021 9:17 pm
DChan
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2206
Joined: 9 Jan 2009
If you want a light system, get a crop sensor camera and consumer-grade lenses. Full-frame mirror-less can be small in camera body but its lenses are still bulky relatively speaking.
 

by photoman4343 on Tue Feb 16, 2021 9:56 am
photoman4343
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1952
Joined: 1 Feb 2004
Location: Houston, TX
I also recommend the Nikon D500 and the Nikon 500mm f5.6 pf lens and the Nikon 1.4x tc if needed. This is what I use for most of my wildlife shooting.

If you are willing to use a camera with a 1 inch sensor, the Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV
with a fixed 24-600mm might meet your needs.
Joe Smith
 

by Bill Chambers on Tue Feb 16, 2021 10:03 am
User avatar
Bill Chambers
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4015
Joined: 8 Feb 2006
Location: Milton, Florida
photoman4343 wrote:I also recommend the Nikon D500 and the Nikon 500mm f5.6 pf lens and the Nikon 1.4x tc if needed. This is what I use for most of my wildlife shooting.

If you are willing to use a camera with a 1 inch sensor, the  Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV
with a fixed 24-600mm might meet your needs.
Thank you, Joe.  I will look at the D500.  I haven't looked at the 500 PF yet, but have heard good things about it.
Please visit my web site, simply nature - Photographic Art by Bill Chambers
Bill Chambers
Milton, Florida
 

by Scott Fairbairn on Tue Feb 16, 2021 10:26 am
User avatar
Scott Fairbairn
Forum Contributor
Posts: 5131
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Member #:00437
Bill Chambers wrote:
photoman4343 wrote:I also recommend the Nikon D500 and the Nikon 500mm f5.6 pf lens and the Nikon 1.4x tc if needed. This is what I use for most of my wildlife shooting.

If you are willing to use a camera with a 1 inch sensor, the  Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV
with a fixed 24-600mm might meet your needs.
Thank you, Joe.  I will look at the D500.  I haven't looked at the 500 PF yet, but have heard good things about it.
I have the D500 and 500PF. It is a fantastic combo for birds and wildlife. The lens is almost comically small compared to a 500f4. But it easily fits into a bag and is a very lightweight combo. IMO, if you're shooting Nikon, I would skip their mirrorless for now. It packs down into a small shoulder bag quite easily. 
If you are considering Sony, the 200-600 is a great choice, and the zoom is convenient being internal, and it only requires a quarter turn to go from 200-600. It is effortless to zoom in when panning flying birds, for example. It also works well with the 1.4x TC on an A9. I would not recommend any Sony crop body. The ergonomics are horrible on all the A6XXX series cameras. There is nothing wrong with their performance, but the bodies are tiny, controls are tiny, and the viewfinder is as well. Using them with gloves is a torture test. IMO, of course.
 

by Bill Chambers on Tue Feb 16, 2021 2:50 pm
User avatar
Bill Chambers
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4015
Joined: 8 Feb 2006
Location: Milton, Florida
Scott Fairbairn wrote: I have the D500 and 500PF. It is a fantastic combo for birds and wildlife. The lens is almost comically small compared to a 500f4. But it easily fits into a bag and is a very lightweight combo. IMO, if you're shooting Nikon, I would skip their mirrorless for now. It packs down into a small shoulder bag quite easily. 
If you are considering Sony, the 200-600 is a great choice, and the zoom is convenient being internal, and it only requires a quarter turn to go from 200-600. It is effortless to zoom in when panning flying birds, for example. It also works well with the 1.4x TC on an A9. I would not recommend any Sony crop body. The ergonomics are horrible on all the A6XXX series cameras. There is nothing wrong with their performance, but the bodies are tiny, controls are tiny, and the viewfinder is as well. Using them with gloves is a torture test. IMO, of course.
Thanks Scott, that's great information; exactly what kind of personal info I was looking for.  Greatly appreciate your advice.
Please visit my web site, simply nature - Photographic Art by Bill Chambers
Bill Chambers
Milton, Florida
 

by Gary Gulash on Wed Feb 17, 2021 12:33 am
Gary Gulash
Forum Contributor
Posts: 702
Joined: 8 Dec 2005
Location: Alberta, Canada
Hi Bill. Not related to your question, but since you mentioned it, what medium format system did you purchase? Medium format is enticing (but I suspect my computer would need an upgrade to chug on those files).
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
37 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group