|
KS posted:I tried an A7 III and 100-400 FE at a demo day recently and it felt like the future. This was shortly after failing hard at a Blue Angels show with my 70D and a mediocre telephoto lens -- I felt limited by ISO, AF, and burst but I probably just suck. I don't have a significant investment in Canon glass, so it may be time to switch to mirrorless if I want to start buying faster lenses. How's the AF speed/tracking for wildlife ie birds in flight etc? That seems to be the big complaint for wildlife with mirrorless and telephotos over APS-C DSLR I have no personal experience though so take that with a pinch of salt. Also the really big fast prime (f/4 500mm/600mm) lenses are still only really there at the moment on the Canon/Nikon DSLR platform if you ever wanted to go that route with a hire. Before you go the mirrorless route, demo/try a Nikon D500 and appropriate lens.
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 16:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 17:40 |
|
|
I shoot airshows and planes with a full frame Sony (a99ii) but it's not the only thing I do. The 42MP sensor means I can touch the one-button crop and get an immediate 18mp crop when I need it, but I still do a lot of other work where having the full 42 MP makes a lot of sense. The pushability of the sensor means even if I get an exposure off, I can still pull it back even when cropped. I generally rock a 70-400 G. A blue angels example, this was cropped from 400mm to about 1.5x equivalent (the cropped dimensions are 4500 wide, IIRC) and I pushed the shadows a bit since the lighting was tough.   E-mount has a lot more options, of course, and you can kit out some serious stuff. The 200-600 f/5.6 is an airshow and wildlife shooter's dream lens, especially with the 42MP bodies and the one-touch crop. The price point is perfect, too. Yes, an Olympus with a 300 f/4 is a lot smaller and lighter, but it can't reach the light gathering that a 600 f/4 can. But for the average sunny day wildlife shooter m4/3rds can save a lot of bulk. E-mount's advantages with TCs (such as keeping native AF on more lenses with 1x and 2x TCs) also applies to m4/3rds, so it's not strictly an advantage, but compared to an SLR user, it's like night and day. But if you had to pick between a 24MP FF and a 24 MP crop for wildlife, I'd probably take the crop body. Stepping up to the higher MP bodies is more money, but it can net you a best of both worlds, especially since telephoto lenses just don't get smaller unless you compromise on aperture. jarlywarly posted:How's the AF speed/tracking for wildlife ie birds in flight etc? That seems to be the big complaint for wildlife with mirrorless and telephotos over APS-C DSLR I have no personal experience though so take that with a pinch of salt. Also the really big fast prime (f/4 500mm/600mm) lenses are still only really there at the moment on the Canon/Nikon DSLR platform if you ever wanted to go that route with a hire. E-mount has a full array of supertelephoto lenses (both prime and zoom). The 600 f/4, 400 f/2.8, 100-400, and 200-600 will give pretty much any wildlife shooter the options they need. You can get them all from LensRentals, borrowlenses, etc right now. There's also the A-mount 300 f/2.8 and 500 f/4 which can be used with adapters, but these lenses will likely be replaced with E-mount native versions next year. kefkafloyd fucked around with this message at 16:48 on Dec 2, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 16:38
|
|
|
What is your use case (hobby/professional)? How much money is in your budget? I think you'd hardly be disappointed with the A7R4 given you've tried a worse (but still very strong performing) version of it. You could go APS-C or M43 to take advantage of the crop factor but as you've noted, a 24mp cropped image is still available and standing on par with most every available APS-C body right now. The only place I'd hesitate on and recommend you shop around for is the size/cost/weight of the telephotos. Full frame gets unwieldy (imo) very quickly. As always, budget not mattering, if you're not 100% sure already, ergonomics are always a good filter.
Kalsco fucked around with this message at 17:06 on Dec 2, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 16:52
|
|
|
One thing to keep an eye on when debating between FF or crop for action shooting is burst rate. Crop sensors are generally faster because there's less data to flush out of the buffer. No matter how good the AF is you're still probably going to be machine gunning as you pan to track the target.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 17:14
|
|
|
Yeah ergonomics and weight are a huge concern if you're packing this stuff too. Get your hands on what you can first. The EM1x fits my hands beautifully but i'm a 6'6" flesh golem, so...xzzy posted:One thing to keep an eye on when debating between FF or crop for action shooting is burst rate. Crop sensors are generally faster because there's less data to flush out of the buffer. also a very good point
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 17:21
|
|
|
xzzy posted:One thing to keep an eye on when debating between FF or crop for action shooting is burst rate. Crop sensors are generally faster because there's less data to flush out of the buffer. This depends on the camera. Sony FFs, for example, use windowed readouts so that your buffer size increases if you use APS-C mode on the body. Always check actual reviews to see what performance is when running cropped and uncropped.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 17:55
|
|
|
Dr Strangepants posted:Hello gear thread! I would like a recommendation for a camera, and I'm particularly curious if anyone knows of good Cyber Monday deals that might be happening. I see some cameras on Amazon but I'm not sure what this thread thinks of them. I'd give the Nikon Z50+16-50 a long, hard look. Despite the Youtube know-it-alls proclaiming the Death of Nikon with the change to the Z mount, it looks to be turning out a really solid system. The optics are excellent (check the review for the "kit" lens) and the roadmap is looking very good for the Z lenses. But I am probably in the minority here!
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 17:56
|
|
|
If you buy a z50 and want a prime lens your stuck with bulkier full frame lens, even if you choose to adapt. Canon has a couple of options at least, and Fuji/mft has multiple options at almost every focal length, and tons of cheap stuff on the used market. The only apsc z mount lens announced is a super zoom. I think they make one prime for apsc f-mount that's not a macro or fisheye. I'm sure the z50 and my lens covers what many people need, but it sure seems like less fun for the money.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 18:49
|
|
|
kefkafloyd posted:I shoot airshows and planes with a full frame Sony (a99ii) but it's not the only thing I do. The 42MP sensor means I can touch the one-button crop and get an immediate 18mp crop when I need it, but I still do a lot of other work where having the full 42 MP makes a lot of sense. The pushability of the sensor means even if I get an exposure off, I can still pull it back even when cropped. I generally rock a 70-400 G. A blue angels example, this was cropped from 400mm to about 1.5x equivalent (the cropped dimensions are 4500 wide, IIRC) and I pushed the shadows a bit since the lighting was tough. Thanks, that's great info. I like the blue angels shot. My biggest struggle was gathering enough light to get plane details at usable ISOs and shutter speeds high enough to stop blur. I don't shoot wildlife and airshows exclusively, so looking for a good all-rounder, but don't want to make a poor choice for these. Kalsco posted:The only place I'd hesitate on and recommend you shop around for is the size/cost/weight of the telephotos. Full frame gets unwieldy (imo) very quickly. As always, budget not mattering, if you're not 100% sure already, ergonomics are always a good filter. This makes sense for sure -- the Sony setup was heavy and the 100-400 lens doesn't have a zoom lock and loves to extend itself. I probably would have already pulled the trigger if it were lighter. DJExile posted:These are all with a 300mm lens on a 2x crop body, just a shitload of reach. The detail on these is great and I'm going to look into it more. Here are some of my A7 shots. I love the ability to shoot through exhibit enclosures. XBenedict posted:This is a good and valid point. A M43 might be better for your use case. Most of the bodies are still tiny as hell and easy to travel with, and the long telephoto lenses are a ton smaller than you'll get on a FF camera. The Olympus O-MD E-M5 III is the new hotness for small M43 bodies, and will easily fit your budget. Thanks for the recommendations -- I'll check them out before I pull the trigger. The Olympus setup is pretty impressive -- 150-600 equivalent lens + body for substantially less weight and $$$ than just the Sony 100-400 lens.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 19:18
|
|
|
Looking at compact point and shoots on sale today - Sony Rx100 for $399 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00889ST2G/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awdb_t1_PMx5DbM0HDA4G a Panasonic LUMIX DC-ZS70K for 297.99 and a Nikon Coolpix B500 for 226. Anyone own these/have any experiences with them? Will mostly be used while traveling and sometimes at shows/concerts/some sporting events .
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 21:57
|
|
|
Fools Infinite posted:If you buy a z50 and want a prime lens your stuck with bulkier full frame lens, even if you choose to adapt. Canon has a couple of options at least, and Fuji/mft has multiple options at almost every focal length, and tons of cheap stuff on the used market. You make a good point. I think of the Z50 + 16-50 as a compact-ish camera on steroids, not as much as a proper system. But the 28 pancake should make for a decent walkaround once released.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 22:05
|
|
|
a cat youtube posted:Looking at compact point and shoots on sale today - Sony and Panasonic both make solid PS cameras. I don’t like that Nikon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 22:10
|
|
|
I love my rx100m2. I've had it for years and still love the photos it takes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 22:12
|
|
|
You can get an rx100 iii that has a pop up evf for less used than the rx100 deal. An panasonic lx100 used is cheaper too, and has a larger m43 sensor and an evf, but isn't as pocketable. Deals on camera stuff happen all the time, camelcamelcamel says the rx100 was the same price for most of this year, and has even been cheaper.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 22:30
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:Fuji X-T30 with the 18-55mm lens. harperdc posted:Yep Thanks for the quick feedback! I went to a store today to try out the ergonomics of some cameras. I have to say, the Fujifilm X-T3 felt fantastic, but unfortunately more than I want to spend. The Fujifilm X-T30 felt alrightish, but I do like that it's incredibly small for travel (edit: I see some nice grip accessories that should help). While I am going for a new body today, availability of used lenses and accessories is a big plus for the future. The Sony a6400 was suggested in store as a comparable option, same price range, and feels slightly better to hold. Any strong opinions on that, or reason why it was not suggested here? I'm reading recent posts in the Mirrorless thread now and I do see some love for the Fuiji over Sony - looks like lens quality is a big factor. Is the weather sealed body of the Sony nice or irrelevant? I noticed a big sale on Sony a7II putting it into the same price range, but I don't think I need full frame, and a 5 year old model is going to lack some of the small features that new cameras have. Dr Strangepants fucked around with this message at 01:06 on Dec 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 00:57
|
|
|
Dr Strangepants posted:Thanks for the quick feedback! I went to a store today to try out the ergonomics of some cameras. I have to say, the Fujifilm X-T3 felt fantastic, but unfortunately more than I want to spend. The Fujifilm X-T30 felt alrightish, but I do like that it's incredibly small for travel (edit: I see some nice grip accessories that should help). While I am going for a new body today, availability of used lenses and accessories is a big plus for the future. If video is not your main thing, and you otherwise liked the X-T3, then consider the X-T2. The biggest changes were on the video side, so stills are just as good on the X-T2 and the bodies are virtually the same. New, they are like $500 cheaper.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 01:29
|
|
|
Sony's more older lenses and kit lenses tend to have a pretty bad reputation. There are an affordable trio of fast sigma primes with some amount of weather sealing, but are a bigger than other slower aperture options. A sigma 16mm 1.4 for landscapes and sigma 56mm 1.4 for portraits is a very nice kit, but would be over budget unless you got some of it used, and isn't as compact as a the fuji and set of slower primes. The opinion on sony is the menus are pretty bad, layout/button placement isn't very good, etc. The camera bodies get more updates than the apsc lens lineup does, the full frame system gets a lot more attention. The competing fuji model also has an af joystick, which is a highly valued feature for many. And fuji has great jpegs/film simulation options if you aren't ready to get into raw development (which you should try, it can be a lot of fun). An x-t2 is a good option. Another option is to get the x-t30 and buy an attachable front or thumb grip. You can bulk up a camera with a more comfortable grip, but still have the option to leave it behind if you attach a very small lens like the 27mm.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 01:47
|
|
|
Get a Fuji. They’re fun as h*ck to shoot with.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 01:53
|
|
|
Dr Strangepants posted:Thanks for the quick feedback! I went to a store today to try out the ergonomics of some cameras. I have to say, the Fujifilm X-T3 felt fantastic, but unfortunately more than I want to spend. The Fujifilm X-T30 felt alrightish, but I do like that it's incredibly small for travel (edit: I see some nice grip accessories that should help). While I am going for a new body today, availability of used lenses and accessories is a big plus for the future. Couple of notes:
Sorry for the  but trying to explain in more detail than just “get da Fooji” which I know I’m even guilty of now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 05:10
|
|
|
Agree with all of that. A Fuji X-Twhatever + 18-55mm or the 16-80mm is a pretty incredible combo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 05:16
|
|
|
re: Sony, I shot Canon for 10 years before switching to Sony. I have no regrets. I went from Digital Rebel XT -> 40D -> 1D Mark III -> 5D Mark III + 6D in my Canon days, shooting weddings, portraits, and events along with sports-heavy photojournalism. Now, I shoot mostly weddings and sports, so I needed a true all-rounder. I now shoot with a Sony A7R III as my primary camera, and frequently borrow an A7 III. I have zero reservations recommending either for basically any use case outside of one that involves regular unprotected exposure to harsh environments or weather. With the A7R III I have everything I need for weddings: quick and accurate autofocus (with eye AF as a huge bonus I never had with Canon that is _clutch_ when shooting with lenses like my 50mm f/1.2) and a ton of resolution with a lot of dynamic range. It also has what I need for sports: 10 frames per second, an excellent 18MP crop mode at the push of a button, and again that quick and accurate autofocus. Anecdotally, I average more keepers with my Sony (shooting with the 70-200 2.8 GM) than I ever did with Canon (and the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II), even with terribly-lit high school football stadiums. One drawback I have is that Canon's teleconverters perform much better than Sony's, so whereas I used to use a 2X TC on my 70-200 for baseball or day football games with good results, I now just use the crop mode and lose a bit of reach. If I _really_ needed that reach, though, the Sony 100-400 is a great lens. My use for it would be fairly niche, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 14:40
|
|
|
Thanks so much for the advice everyone, it's very helpful! I'll take a look at some used X-T2 options, and might just go new X-T30. I'll play around with them in my local store and see what feels right.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 18:40
|
|
|
dakana posted:re: Sony This was very similar to my experience but the A7iii from a 5d2. I get noticeably more in-focus keepers and overall the tech in the Sony body has made wedding photography so much easier. Eye and face AF is BANANAS. I didn't realize that was such a huge feature until I used it. I trust the AF much more and feel like it allows me to pay more attention to the actual scene/action vs my AF points/nailing the focus. I was scared of leaving canon because I was comfortable with that system and knew its limitations. No joke, 10 minutes into my first wedding I had a grin ear to ear and didn't think twice about my canon bodies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 19:46
|
|
|
After fooling around with a few other cameras I pulled the trigger on the A7R IV ($2080 out the door!) but skipped the 100-400 lens -- I'll rent the 200-600 at some point at kefkafloyd's recommendation. I did pick up a 24-105 f/4 for travel. Eye AF is too cool. Thanks to everyone that helped with suggestions and advice!
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 21:20
|
|
|
24-105 ain't a bad place to start. I'd deff recommend waiting until you need to use one of the superteles and rent the different options and try them out. The 200-600 is heavier than the 100-400 but the 200-600 is actually easier to balance and shoot with because it's a fixed length zoom. $2000-ish for an a7RIV is a hell of a deal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 21:29
|
|
|
What are the best sites for buying used camera gear? There are so many options, e.g. Adorama Used, B&H used, mpb, keh, swappa, usedprophoto. Are there any that should be avoided?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 22:24
|
|
|
Can’t go wrong sticking with BH, Adorama, KEH. I’ve bought used off of eBay. It’s fine but be hesitatant if a seller has a sketch listing (like a too good to be true price, stock photos, etc) or low or no previous transactions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 22:26
|
|
|
I’ve bought from a handful of vendors/sites too. Ebay’s okay for less expensive stuff, but for things like camera bodies, nice lenses, etc. I usually get my used stuff from KEH. They have a warranty and I’ve found their grading system to be pretty conservative (although folks here who have been into photography longer than I have say they’ve actually slipped a bit). For new I usually go with Adorama/B&H.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 22:41
|
|
|
eBay sellers in Japan that have physical storefronts tend to have really good stuff, in my anecdotal experience. My D610 was near flawless, and I bought my 80-200 from the same seller but at their storefront next time I was in Tokyo. Excellent experience. Not saying you won't get a lemon, but it's likely to be less of a "some dude out of their apartment who doesn't really care" situation, and Japanese secondhand goods tend to be in really good condition.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 23:43
|
|
|
Splinter posted:What are the best sites for buying used camera gear? There are so many options, e.g. Adorama Used, B&H used, mpb, keh, swappa, usedprophoto. Are there any that should be avoided? I've recently dealt with B&H, Cameta camera, and Jo Geier Mint and Rare, and am super happy all of them. I have also dealt with KEH a long time ago and they were great as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 04:18
|
|
|
X posting from general questions thread I’m getting back into photography after a few years off. Going to Paris for New Years. I currently have a D3200 and a bunch of lenses with it. My question is whether the D3200 is still a decent crop camera or have things progressed so much that it is worth it to buy an upgrade (assuming the cost isn’t too high). I’d still like to use my current lenses.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 07:43
|
|
|
beergod posted:X posting from general questions thread Rather than asking if tech has moved on, ask yourself if that camera is holding you back or not. If the answer is yes in what ways? Is it just low light performance? Then sure a newer model 3xxx or 5xxx will net you better low light. If its ergonomics then look at jumping to the 7xxx range. Just don't fall into the trap of 'my camera is x years old now, I should get the newer model'.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 09:49
|
|
|
Is there anything that your 3200 isn't doing for you at the moment? Just because it's an older model doesn't mean you need to upgrade. E:FB Also re: used Recently dealt with mbp and had no issues.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 11:57
|
|
|
tater_salad posted:Recently dealt with mbp and had no issues. Selling or buying?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 22:01
|
|
|
Are mini-softboxes (something you attach to your on-cam external flash) any useful? Been thinking of getting one for con/event use, but my flash already has one of those tiny plastic diffuser things. Something like this: https://s.lazada.com.ph/s.Z6Zqt
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 05:28
|
|
|
Better than none, I've used them and got decent enough results
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 05:40
|
|
|
Personally I think they are clunky and look dumb. I used one for one event and didn't like the results. I felt like It created very hot/harsh light. I prefer a lightsphere (rubbery bowl with plastic caps). I used to use the omnibounce (plastic cover) but it didn't diffuse well enough.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 06:48
|
|
|
Verman posted:Personally I think they are clunky and look dumb. I used one for one event and didn't like the results. I felt like It created very hot/harsh light. I prefer a lightsphere (rubbery bowl with plastic caps). I used to use the omnibounce (plastic cover) but it didn't diffuse well enough. Lightsphere? You mean like this one? https://s.lazada.com.ph/s.Z6SR5
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 10:08
|
|
|
XBenedict posted:Selling or buying? Buying
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 11:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 17:40 |
|
|
At speedlite scale you'd be better served by making a light scoop or collapsible beauty dish than using a mini-box, any kind of soft box big enough to have a decent enlarging and softening effect is going to be ridiculously awkward.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 15:10
|
|
