Camera discussion - Mirrorless/FF/etc.

[M636C]

As I've said earlier, lenses are most important.

https://www.dxomark.com/best-lenses-under-13000-dollars

It is interesting to see that brand and price are not directly related to lens quality.

If you are interested in wide angle zoom lenses, Tokina make very nice lenses in that category for relatively low prices: and they can be puchased with various mounts....

Peter 

[samfp1943]

Not being very good at taking photos, other than for my own benefit.. I saw the following item while reading another story. It seemed that it might be of interest in this Thread, so I am posting a link to the article:

@ http://the-japan-news.com/news/article/0004478492

"Canon shutters 80-year history of film cameras"

[article By:ALL GENRES]

[The EOS-1v model camera, a photo of which was featured on the link]

7:00 pm, May 31, 2018

FTL:"...The Yomiuri Shimbun Canon announced Wednesday it would end sales of its EOS-1v, the last remaining model of film camera that the company has sold in Japan. The company’s film cameras, which symbolize Canon’s old-time roots, will come to the end of their 80-year history.

As the sales of film cameras have been on a decline due to the spread of digital cameras, the company stopped the production of the EOS-1v in 2010 and currently is shipping its remaining stock.

The company said it will continue to accept repair orders and other customer inquiries until Oct. 31, 2025, even after finishing selling the product..."

[Sometime back a poster had posted an article referencing the end of Kodak's Film Processing operations, and the last private lab was located in Parsons,Ks. This seemed to be of some information here , as well? ]

 

[M636C]

One thing that irritates with my DSLRs is no fine focusing area in the view finder. No microprisim. No Split image. Sorry, but autofocus does not do it all. 

Many autofocus cameras include a Focus indicator in the viewfinder, for use with manual focus operation.

I had this really bad autofocus Pentax film SLR which just wouldn't focus. It went back for repair three times with the result "no fault found". Fortunately it had a spot that lit up green when focus was correct, which worked with my manual K mount lenses. That camera was stolen from my home within hours of its last return from "repair" so I was able to claim its insurance value.

But Canon and Nikon DSLR cameras have a similar indicator, with focus points lighting up when that point is in focus. This would seem to work as well as the old SLR devices.

Peter

[CopCarSS]

zugmann

I did look at the Pentax K-1mII, but I only have the DA lenses, so from what I understand (I could be wrong), they will only work for their cropped sensor length (if that makes sense... I'm not too hip on the terminology).

Correct. You might be able to tell the camera to shoot in full frame mode but the image circle will most likely not cover the entire frame. I've read a couple reports that a few of the DA's like the DA 70mm f2.4 Limited will illuminate the whole frame, but the far edges might be a little soft. So it's probably just easier to figure on getting a new lens set, even if you stick with Pentax.

I have nothing against Pentax, but their focus on primes doesn't fit my style ( of what there is).   Plus I do like shooting wide, so that's what has me thinking full frame.

More later, probably.

If you're interested in zooms, I'd definitely look to Canon, Nikon or Sony. Pentax doesn't even make their kit lens that comes with the K-1. It's a Tamron rebadge. In addition to OEM products being better, Canon and Nikon both will have the best 3rd part support. Again, Sony is getting there but isn't there yet.

If you want to shoot really, really, stupidly insane wide, Canon makes an 11-24mm lens that is unmatched (Keep in mind this is full frame 11mm!). They're expensive, huge and extremely heavy but it's a focal length that's hard to match in other brands and no other lens that wide will be as good as the Canon is. They hit one out of the park with it.

That being said, I'd rent that bad boy before plunking down the debit card. It's hard to see that wide. I have a 12-24mm full frame Sigma that I use with my Nikon system and it definitely challenges me. I have a few portfolio grade images made with it and a lot of other stuff that qualifies as interesting in a weird sort of way. Here's a recent effort with it taken at Kenefick Park in Omaha:

Uncle Pete Welcomes You - Omaha, NE by Chris May, on Flickr

If you don't need quite so wide, Canon, Nikon and Sony all have pretty good 16-35mm options. Canon and Nikon are f4 lenses and the Sony is f2.8. The Canon and Nikon lenses come with image stabilization (and most of the Sony mirrorless bodies are stabilized so it would work, too). Canon also offers a 16-35mm f2.8 lens that isn't stabilized. From what I've read, unless you really, really need that extra stop, the f4 lens is a better option. Nikon has an old (in lens terms) 17-35mm f2.8 that is still listed but I'd avoid it. They also offer a 14-24mm f2.8 that is excellent. It's big and heavy like the Canon 11-24mm, though. Neither the Canon 11-24mm or the Nikon 14-24mm take filters, either (if that's important to you).

As for the rest of the zoom lens lineup, all three manufacturers make pro level glass with f2.8 maximum apertures as well as prosumer grade (still very good) f4 lenses.

Additionally, some of the third party manufacturers have really upped their games. Sigma's "Art" line in particular, is excellent. Some of the Sigma Art prime lenses are up at the Zeiss Otus level (that's about as good as you can get for 35mm optics). It's really been something to see these brands that were once pretty awful cranking out some top quality glass.

However, it sounds like I'm in ramble mode again, so I'll cut it off here. If there are any specific questions I can answer, please let me know!

[zugmann]

CopCarSS

Hey Zug, Ed sent me a message telling me that you were looking into upgrades. I'll admit that I'm a little hesitant to dispense any advice since I think I kind of directed you towards Pentax last time and it sounds like that might not have been the best fit for you. I've kind of become a bit more objective about cameras lately so hopefully that comes across.

You don't have to worry Chris, I'm always open to your advice.   I'll have to read your post again about 6 more times to get everythting out of it, but it is helpful.  I did look at the Pentax K-1mII, but I only have the DA lenses, so from what I understand (I could be wrong), they will only work for their cropped sensor length (if that makes sense... I'm not too hip on the terminology).

I have nothing against Pentax, but their focus on primes doesn't fit my style ( of what there is).   Plus I do like shooting wide, so that's what has me thinking full frame.

More later, probably.

 

 

[tree68]

A woman I know locally who does a lot of nature and sports photography has been known to rent a lense to try it out - but she likes the camera she's using, so the foundation is there.

[CopCarSS]

Hey Zug,

Ed sent me a message telling me that you were looking into upgrades. I'll admit that I'm a little hesitant to dispense any advice since I think I kind of directed you towards Pentax last time and it sounds like that might not have been the best fit for you. I've kind of become a bit more objective about cameras lately so hopefully that comes across.

For starters, the most important thing when it comes to gear is finding something that you like using. Just about any camera today can take images that are worthy of hanging in a gallery. This extends even to the realm of phones. Literally. I'm Chairperson of Publicity for one arts organization in Southern Colorado and the Photographer-in-Residence at another and both have work hanging that was photographed will cell phones. So the important point is to pick a camera that you enjoy using.

The other thing to keep in mind is that the rumor mill is fired up about Nikon and Canon when it comes to mirrorless. The rumors are strong that both will be releasing new full frame mirrorless cameras at Photokina (which is held in Cologne, Germany in September). Both have only offered limited mirrorless options up until this point. The days of the DSLR are coming to a close within the next decade or so (possibly and probably a lot sooner than that, even). The new releases will probably point the way for what's ahead for both of these giants.

As of today, though, I can tell you that the full frame arena looks like this:

Canon - There are four current full frame models available from Canon (as well as some new, old stock of a few previous bodies). The entry level model is the 6D Mk II. It's a prosumer camera that is kind of mid range in features and build. The consensus I hear from my Canon friends is that it's not that big of an upgrade over the original 6D and it might be worth it to look into deals on the original model. Last I looked, those were running sub $1K, though I haven't checked lately.

The next level up is the Canon 5D Mk IV. A lot of pros use these and they're really nice. Good autofocus, good low light performance, good resolution, good build, etc. Just an all around good camera to shoot with. These go for about $3100 brand new.

There is also another 5D body available. That's the 5DS (and related 5DS R). These cameras have the highest megapixel count available in a 35mm format camera currently. They're both 50.6 megapixel monsters. The R version removes the anti-aliasing filter for slightly sharper images at the risk of encountering moire. Both require top notch glass and flawless technique to extract all that they are capable of. The detail can be jawdroppingly amazing. They're not as good as the 5D Mk IV in many ways, though (low light noise, autofocus, video abilities, etc.). If you want to count rivets, though, this is a great camera for it.

At the top of Canon's heap is the 1DX Mk II. This is the pro sports/photojournalist camera. It's expensive and kind of specialized so I won't talk too much about it. If you want a camera that can survive as much abuse as you can throw at it and still be able to shoot at 14 frames per second afterwards, this is your camera.

Nikon - Nikon has a boatload of full frame cameras and sometimes it doesn't seem like they make a lot of coherent sense as far as an organized line-up goes. I'll try to make the most sense of it as I can.

At the entry level, there's the D610. It's on par with Canon's 6D Mk II. The comments I made about the Canon apply here. Good mid level camera with excellent image quality.

One notch above that is the D750. It's getting a little old and the rumor mill seems to think that the rumored full frame mirrorless will replace the D610, the D750 or possibly both of them. Still, it has a good autofocus system, excellent image quality, decent build and can be found pretty cheaply since it's at the end of its product run.

Above that is the D850. This camera wins when it comes to stats. It can shoot for detail with it's 45.7Mp sensor but it can also shoot for speed (7 frames per second on its own and 9 if you get the vertical grip). It has the AF system from the pro level D5 which is really, really, really good (really!). The consensus I've read is that it's a camera than can do everything well and most things excellently. The only problem is that getting one is a bit of a challenge. They're backordered everywhere.

At the top of the heap is the D5. It's Nikon's sports/PJ camera so same comments about the 1DX Mk II apply. An expensive pro tool.

Nikon also offers the Df. It's...different. It was supposed to be kind of a retro thing but it only partially succeeds at that. It looks kind of retro but it has a lot of modern components. It does offer a great lowlight sensor but it's also limited to 16Mp. Kind of a different beast and one that really doesn't know where to fit in Nikon's lineup.

Pentax - I know you said that you and Pentax didn't get along so I'll keep it brief. They do offer the K-1. It's kind of...unique. Like many Pentax cameras, it has a different feature set. The biggest appeal of the camera is that it has shake reduction on board and will therefore stabilize any lens that you put on it. This system also allows for a multi-image stitch function that negates the effects of Bayer demosaicing. It's a little involved to describe what that is, so I'll just say that you can get very sharp and detailed images of things that don't move. So probably not the greatest feature for railroad photography but it is an option. The autofocus and such are not as good as what you'll get with the other manufacturers.

Sony - And then we get to Sony. Sony does offer some full frame SLR-esque (they actually use translucent mirrors but I digress). I don't think that system has as much of a future as their mirrorless cameras, though, so I'm going to stick to commentary on the mirrorless stuff. Also, Sony has truckloads of old stock available, so every model I mention will have some previous generations available at lower costs. If you're curious about any of them, I can detail the older models in another post. Ignoring the new old stock, the current lineup looks like this.

The A7 Mk III is the entry level mirrorless. It's an all around good camera at 24 Mp that does most types of shooting very, very well. A lot of the major camera sites have started recommending this as their beginner full frame camera. It has basically every feature you can imagine including onboard image stabilization like the Pentax. A good to great option.

The A7S Mk II will probably be upgraded to Mk III soon, but the A7S line is a little different and I don't know if it would appeal to you. It is a low megapixel (12 Mp) camera designed for low light and video work. It excels at both. It's a competent daily shooter, but I think the other models would be better choices for everyday shooting.

The A7r Mk III is Sony's high megapixel camera and basically everything I said about the D850 applies to it. They're two cameras trying to do the same thing (be good to excellent at all types of photography) different ways (DSLR for the D850 vs mirrorless for the A7r Mk III). This is probably the camera duo that generates the most holy war fanaticism currently. Both are truly excellent cameras and it comes down to what you like.

The A9 is Sony's pro entry made to compete with the 1DX Mark II and the D5. Same caveats apply to it as to the others. It's a pro level camera that can pound nails and then be used to photograph a basketball game but you pay a lot of money for it.

There are two things I need to mention about Sony. One is that their lens lineup is not as developed as Canon's or Nikon's. For railroad photography, I think it's more than sufficient. You can also adapt just about anything under the sun to Sony (although adapting is a whole different discussion). Still, Canon and Nikon basically make any lens you could ever need. Even if it's a super specialty thing, it would be easy to rent for a weekend or something. Sony isn't there yet but they're working on it.

Sony is also different when it comes to menus and such for their cameras. You can definitely tell that they come from a general electronics background and that pro level cameras are new-ish territory for them. Some people like their menus. They drive me nuts, though.

The best advice I can offer is to head to a brick and mortar camera store and try a couple of the models that interest you and see how they feel in your hand and how they operate for you. Maybe try a weekend rental (I highly, highly recommend www.lensrentals.com for this) with one or two of the cameras you're thinking about.

This is just a mild overview. I've shot with many but not all of the cameras on this list. If I can expound on anything any further or send full resolution images from anything, let me know!

[selector]

zugmann

...

 

I have a pentax setup (K30 plus a few lenses), but that never really clicked with ...

This statement begs for some light on it.  What about the Pentax didn't seem to work for you, and in what way do you think another camera model will help you to overcome that problem?  It's like having to know where you is at before you figure out how to get to the new place.

 

zugmann

...So, what's everyone shooting?  Is anyone here shooting?  Does anyone care?

 

Between 2006 and 2011 I used a common CANON Powershot.  It was a 7 mp xoom with image stab, the A710is.  I still use it on my train layout for closeup photography.  It still works, even though one of us sat on it somehow and popped the casing open.  It went back together, don't remember how, and it still works fine.

In 2015, I treated myself to a wonderful Panasonic Lumix FZ-1000 with 16 times zoom and a feature called intellizoom.  People who reviewed and use this camera like it very much, and so do I.  APSC sensor, superior lens.  Excellent.

Most recently, which I carry everywhere on me, a smaller-than-a-cigarette-package CANON ELPH HS-330 with 10 X zoom.  You can't get them anywhere.  They were quickly found to be so good that they only come up very rarely used or on a refurb sale.  I can't say enough about this pocketable point-'n-shoot.  Unfortunately, CANON seem to have dicked around with its successors, now four of them, and they just don't get the love.  I think I'd try one out, the 360 or whatever, to see for myself, if I were in the market for a replacement.

Of course, then there's my Samsung S7 Edge which I usually have with me....pretty darned good in decent light.

[Victrola1]

One thing that irritates with my DSLRs is no fine focusing area in the view finder. No microprisim. No Split image. Sorry, but autofocus does not do it all. 

I shoot a lot of events in low light using existing light. Autofocus will focus on the  podium, or mic and leave the subject fuzzy. Fiddle with the setting to point focus and hold the button down is not as quick as twist the lens barrel ring. 

Shut down the autofocus. Focus as best you can on the subject. It is not as precise as with the old film SLRs with a fine focus area in the middle of the view finder, nor the range finder on a Yashica. 

[edblysard]

You may get ahold of Cop Car Chris, (Chris May) and see what he recommends…

I use a old Cannon Rebel…he likes Nikon, but may have a better idea of what you need after talking to you.

[Electroliner 1935]

zugmann

I have a pentax setup (K30 plus a few lenses), but that never really clicked with me,

Good unintended pun, ZUG

[zugmann]

Murphy Siding

     Whatever the brand, get one with an alarm that goes off if you try to take a 3/4 wedge shot of a locomotive.

 

Can only take them if uncoupled in front, hoses tucked away and knuckle closed.  And MU cable in proper dummy receptacle.

[Murphy Siding]

     Whatever the brand, get one with an alarm that goes off if you try to take a 3/4 wedge shot of a locomotive.

[zugmann]

I want to go fullframe.  Just debating DSLR vs. mirrorless, mostly.

[zardoz]

Still plodding along with my Nikon D300 ("only" 12mp). When not needing a big zoom, my favorite lens is a Nikon 16-85 F/3.5.  The combo makes for a nice combination of quality at a reasonable price. 

IMHO, there is no discernable difference in image quality between Nikon and Canon bodies; and both companies make some really good lenses, and both make some clunkers. And unless you're going Pro, or are going to enlarge your images to over 16x20, you may want to determine just how many MP you really need. 

What I liked about the Nikon system was the photo-editing NX-2 software (I never did figure out Photoshop); however, Nikon's lack of continued support lately leaves me a bit cold.

An excellent site for information: https://www.dpreview.com/

 

[M636C]

I currently use Nikon full frame. Only a 24mp D750, but I think the results are excellent. The sharpness and clarity of the photos are really impressive.

I think lenses are most important.

Go to dxomark.com which has tested DSLR lenses for years.

I ended up going with Nikon because they had some specific lenses that seemed more useful to me than Canon.

But there are good third party lenses, Tamron and Sigma for example.

The sharpest zoom lenses are generally in the 70-200 range, but it is always worth checking test results. Even the 18-55 kit lenses supplied with basic DSLRs are often quite good.

But even APS-C sensor DSLR images appear to me to be much sharper than any 35mm image I've ever seen and full frame DSLR images look as good to me as many medium format photographs, if good quality lenses are used.

I am still a DSLR user. The full frame lenses are heavy but the results are worth it, at least to me.  Using  a wide range zoom, If it is sharp enough gives a lot of options from only one lens.

Peter

[john_edwards]

I use two systems, Canon 1Ds2 with Zeiss 21mm pretty much glued on and Sony.  With the Sony (A6000) not only do I use Sony glass but with adapters Canon mount, M42, Leica M mount.  there are adapters that will do auto focus on some mounts, but I prefer manual focus when using non Sony glass.  Oh, Sony does have view finders at least on the A6000 and up series.  The full frame Sonys are extremely nice cameras but I started O scale proto48 modeling so the $ is heading in that direction.

Actually any new camera will do what you want.

john

[tree68]

I still like my Digital Rebel - the only gripe, if you will, is the undersized sensor.  I've never invested in other lenses with it as I don't do a lot of specialized photography, but my old Pentax K1000 has several lenses which got regular use.

The Rebel, when it first came out, was an 8Mb camera.

That said, I'm used to a mirror and viewfinder.  Maybe I'm a purist, but it always bugs me to see someone looking at the screen on the back of their DSLR instead of looking through the viewfinder. 

 

[Victrola1]

I have used Pentax equipment since 1971. 

I used film K mount and with an adapter 42mm threaded lenses on my KX. I did buy new lenses with my K70. Being old school, I would never buy anything without a manual setting. This applies to manual focus as well. 

Go for quality glass (lenses). How good is the recording medium be it flim, or sensor also counts. Learn your system. Learn the work arounds to get the result you desire. 

The physical size of your recording medium is also an issue. With film, it was not that much more expensive to go for medium, or large format film sizes. Digital sensors increase in price exponetially with size. 

If larger sensors come down in price, I would consider buying such a system. Until then, I will pull old twin lens film cameras out for special occassions. Negatives will still be readable for years to come. Finding a machine to handle old RAW data sofware could become problematic. 

[NorthWest]

A lot of people get into pretty intense turf wars over this stuff on photography forums, but most of the Nikon vs Canon etc is over basically equivalent gear. I'm currently shooting Canon merely because it feels better in my hand than the nearly identical Nikon model I tested at the same time. I don't think it makes a real difference. Mine is a mid-range model, but I've seen great stuff done with enty levels and high end stuff as well. The glass tends to be more important.

I actually upgraded from a mirrorless bridge camera, and have played with a new Sony A7 II. The image quality isn't quite as good, but they're a lot smaller and lighter for running around. The electronic viewfinder is nice because you don't have to take test exposures, but this means the sensor is always on and battery life is shorter.

There are a lot of phot blogs that detail this extensively. A lot of things depend on what you're trying to do with the equipment.

[IbanezGuiness]

I've always been a Canon guy but I have nothing against other brands. I currently shoot with a 7D and 5D MkII and a variety of L series lenses. I know the mirrorless cameras have come a long way but to me they still don't compare to a good DSLR, even the older models like I have. I've found it is best to spend your money on good glass, even older DSLR bodies can produce amazing results with a good lens, and lenses don't go obsolete nearly as fast as the bodies do. 

[zugmann]

I've been out of the photography game for a few years.  Work things and personal life things got in the way.  But lately, I've been thinking of taking up the hobby again.  Mainly boredom.

 

I have a pentax setup (K30 plus a few lenses), but that never really clicked with me, so I'm  open to changing setups.  I did use Nikon before, and I liked that more (even if it was a beginning DSLR type.  I forget the model).

Looking at fullframes (definite), possible mirrorless (maybe?).  I'm not afraid to spend a few Gs on it all.

 

So, what's everyone shooting?  Is anyone here shooting?  Does anyone care?