| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/15/2013 07:06:04 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Cory:
Ok.
I'm going a different direction on this one.
Wendy, I notice that you have mentioned a couple of times a desire to not bother your family while still getting pictures, and a desire for more portable gear.
Any guesses where I'm headed with this?
:)
.. That's right! I think you need a new small-format camera. Some really good options out there right now as well, and I think it's starting to sound very much like you need a smaller, more portable, and FUN camera. |
This could be an excellent idea. I haven't been keeping up at all on this -- what are people getting these days? |
Canon S series is good, as is the Sony RX100.
If you have stupid money, the Sony RX1 is awesome, but I'd probably consider a Leica at that point. |
|
|
|
08/15/2013 07:10:28 PM · #27 |
| are they just glorified point and shoots? The reason that I ask is, I never use point and shoots, even for small things, because of the delay. Can't handle a delay. |
|
|
|
08/15/2013 07:14:28 PM · #28 |
| 2800 for a little bitty camera?!? I don't think so... I mean, really -- it looks like you can't shoot an egret with it unless it's standing on your feet! |
|
|
|
08/16/2013 06:36:52 AM · #29 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
2800 for a little bitty camera?!? I don't think so... I mean, really -- it looks like you can't shoot an egret with it unless it's standing on your feet! |
Point and shoots are not replacements for wildlife photography, they're replacements for life photography. You have them more often, they're less obtrusive, they're quick and versatile. To answer your question, there are very few that focus quite as fast as a dslr owing to their contrast based AF (some exceptions to this rule), but overall the delay is not bad except in dark conditions. The Panasonic LX series is very good, as well.
Manfrotto vs Gitzo- Gitzo's locking mechanisms and sliding bits seem much better so far as quality goes (less slop, quick, sure lock) but that's not to say Manfrotto isn't good. You can often find used Gitzos since they last forever, so that's nice. So far as heads go, you've got lots of good choices there- Kirk, RRS, Acratech are all top notch.
For lenses- what do you think of a 300 F4? I'm not as up on the Canon side, but I know the Nikon version takes a 1.4 tele wonderfully, which would make it the same speed (f5.6) but 420mm and sharper in the corners, while being faster and sharper for work at 300? Beyond that, it focuses relatively close and you can slap an extension tube on and make it a long reach mid size macro? Here's some specific discussion- Canon 300 F4 bird photography. If you look around, it seems to be a common setup for birders, especially and specifically for birds in flight. I've considered using the Nikon equivalent myself, but haven't because I just don't shoot enough of that lately to justify it. Here's one in awesome condition. FWIW, having bought a lens from KEH at that grade, you'll find it to be "like new" condition. |
|
|
|
08/16/2013 09:06:51 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
Originally posted by vawendy:
2800 for a little bitty camera?!? I don't think so... I mean, really -- it looks like you can't shoot an egret with it unless it's standing on your feet! |
Point and shoots are not replacements for wildlife photography, they're replacements for life photography. You have them more often, they're less obtrusive, they're quick and versatile. To answer your question, there are very few that focus quite as fast as a dslr owing to their contrast based AF (some exceptions to this rule), but overall the delay is not bad except in dark conditions. The Panasonic LX series is very good, as well.
Manfrotto vs Gitzo- Gitzo's locking mechanisms and sliding bits seem much better so far as quality goes (less slop, quick, sure lock) but that's not to say Manfrotto isn't good. You can often find used Gitzos since they last forever, so that's nice. So far as heads go, you've got lots of good choices there- Kirk, RRS, Acratech are all top notch.
For lenses- what do you think of a 300 F4? I'm not as up on the Canon side, but I know the Nikon version takes a 1.4 tele wonderfully, which would make it the same speed (f5.6) but 420mm and sharper in the corners, while being faster and sharper for work at 300? Beyond that, it focuses relatively close and you can slap an extension tube on and make it a long reach mid size macro? Here's some specific discussion- Canon 300 F4 bird photography. If you look around, it seems to be a common setup for birders, especially and specifically for birds in flight. I've considered using the Nikon equivalent myself, but haven't because I just don't shoot enough of that lately to justify it. Here's one in awesome condition. FWIW, having bought a lens from KEH at that grade, you'll find it to be "like new" condition. |
Thanks for the other info -- it was very helpful. Especially tripod. I definitely need a new tripod since mine is broken.
one note about point and shoot: it's not the focusing speed, it's the shutter delay. My husband's and kids' point and shoots all have a shutter lag. You press the button, but the shot doesn't actually happen for about 1 second. That's what I'm wondering: is there one that doesn't have the shutter lag?
Message edited by author 2013-08-16 09:07:36.
|
|
|
|
08/16/2013 09:26:06 AM · #31 |
I have the Tamron 18-270mm Piezo as my only lens (mostly due to money, but also largely due to convenience). Make sure to get the newer Piezo version of the lens - it is a LOT better than the original version. Not sure what to tell you about quality - your shots are amazing, and mine are... well... er... not so amazing. I ran across a great article on the web on the lens, and it has helped a lot. For example, it said the quality drops off significantly over 220mm. I find that if I bump out to about 200-220, and then crop in pp, I get a better quality image than if I'm shooting full 270.
The lens will cover just about anything I want to shoot - about the only time I'm frustrated with getting a shot with it is on the wide angle end. Coupled with the 60D, it isn't overly heavy - though heavier than I'd like. However, be warned, the zoom is opposite Canon's. My first dpc entry with the new lens was May 14, 2013, so you can take a look at before and after Piezo. If you're already using L glass, you probably won't be happy with the Tamron.
Before going DSLR, I had the Fuji finepix S500 & subsequent versions - never happy with quality. Don't know what they've done lately, but they have prosumers now with 30X (like 720mm equivalent).
Best to you in your decision.
Edit to add note about shutter lag. I was pretty happy with the Fuji prosumer cameras' lack of shutter lag. The Canon's is faster, but the Fuji was quick enough you didn't feel like you had to "freeze" while the camera held a committee meeting on when they should actually release the shutter.
Message edited by author 2013-08-16 09:29:02. |
|
|
|
08/16/2013 10:06:46 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
Originally posted by vawendy:
2800 for a little bitty camera?!? I don't think so... I mean, really -- it looks like you can't shoot an egret with it unless it's standing on your feet! |
Point and shoots are not replacements for wildlife photography, they're replacements for life photography. You have them more often, they're less obtrusive, they're quick and versatile. To answer your question, there are very few that focus quite as fast as a dslr owing to their contrast based AF (some exceptions to this rule), but overall the delay is not bad except in dark conditions. The Panasonic LX series is very good, as well.
Manfrotto vs Gitzo- Gitzo's locking mechanisms and sliding bits seem much better so far as quality goes (less slop, quick, sure lock) but that's not to say Manfrotto isn't good. You can often find used Gitzos since they last forever, so that's nice. So far as heads go, you've got lots of good choices there- Kirk, RRS, Acratech are all top notch.
For lenses- what do you think of a 300 F4? I'm not as up on the Canon side, but I know the Nikon version takes a 1.4 tele wonderfully, which would make it the same speed (f5.6) but 420mm and sharper in the corners, while being faster and sharper for work at 300? Beyond that, it focuses relatively close and you can slap an extension tube on and make it a long reach mid size macro? Here's some specific discussion- Canon 300 F4 bird photography. If you look around, it seems to be a common setup for birders, especially and specifically for birds in flight. I've considered using the Nikon equivalent myself, but haven't because I just don't shoot enough of that lately to justify it. Here's one in awesome condition. FWIW, having bought a lens from KEH at that grade, you'll find it to be "like new" condition. |
Thanks for the other info -- it was very helpful. Especially tripod. I definitely need a new tripod since mine is broken.
one note about point and shoot: it's not the focusing speed, it's the shutter delay. My husband's and kids' point and shoots all have a shutter lag. You press the button, but the shot doesn't actually happen for about 1 second. That's what I'm wondering: is there one that doesn't have the shutter lag? |
How old are their PnS cameras?
The shutter lag on my Canon S100, if there is any, isn't noticeable in most shooting. The only times I notice any delay is taking pics one right after another without using the HQ burst mode and that's from the camera having to switch the LCD between image review and viewfinder. It goes away if you switch off image review or use the HQ Burst mode. There can be also be a delay if you tell the camera to fire the flash and the flash isn't ready. Sometimes there's a focusing delay, but overall the AF is very good.
Any delay is usually centered around how the camera is set rather than inherent in the camera design.
|
|
|
|
08/16/2013 10:13:45 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Ok.
I'm going a different direction on this one.
Wendy, I notice that you have mentioned a couple of times a desire to not bother your family while still getting pictures, and a desire for more portable gear.
Any guesses where I'm headed with this?
:)
.. That's right! I think you need a new small-format camera. Some really good options out there right now as well, and I think it's starting to sound very much like you need a smaller, more portable, and FUN camera. |
I think Cory is on to something...purchase an used Olympus OMD-5 ( micro 4/3rd's mirrow-less) with a decent fast lens. Change up your photography and photograph some new wildlife---people! Your family...friends...and street photography!! The OMD is a fantastic camera...small form factor...light...not intrusive...and fun!! I need to add that it takes wonderful photos...full manual control too...and an amazing stabilization system that allows you to handhold at speeds you never thought possible...fantastic stabilized handheld video too! Also, Panasonic is now introducing the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 with focus peeking and video specs that rivals the GH3! Opens up a whole new world and photography experience for not a lot of money!!! |
|
|
|
08/16/2013 10:35:14 AM · #34 |
| I agree with spork- Shutter lag on decent point and shoots is all but a thing of the past. According to this, shutter lag once focused is .012 for my LX5, for instance. The delay comes in the form of focusing (per the same site, about a third of a second for my LX5 under most conditions). And I should've explained better that Manfrotto tripods are in fact made well, and I've checked them out in person plenty. I guess the better way to phrase it is that I'd not really hesitate to say that Gitzo's are better, but I might hesitate to say that they are always so much better they warrant the cost (depending upon your needs). |
|
|
|
08/16/2013 10:55:15 AM · #35 |
good to know that lag doesn't really exist anymore. That was one of the biggest concerns. I've hear people talk about their lumix before. (I don't know about how old -- it just seems like anytime people give me their camera to take a picture for them, it has the lag, but those are cheap little ps, so maybe that's it)
|
|
|
|
08/16/2013 12:28:58 PM · #36 |
Panasonic Lumix GX-7
Makes me drool. You'll be able to get the reach you want for birding with this system much less expensively. Sell all the Canon gear, move on with life :-) |
|
|
|
08/16/2013 12:46:19 PM · #37 |
FWIW, Leica's V-Lux 4 has a 600mm equivalent constant f/2.8 lens.
I hear it's quite good if you need that major zoom. Still, at this size, I barely consider it a compact. |
|
|
|
08/16/2013 12:50:06 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Panasonic Lumix GX-7
Makes me drool. You'll be able to get the reach you want for birding with this system much less expensively. Sell all the Canon gear, move on with life :-) |
Sell all my canon gear??
|
|
|
|
08/16/2013 12:52:45 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by Cory:
FWIW, Leica's V-Lux 4 has a 600mm equivalent constant f/2.8 lens.
I hear it's quite good if you need that major zoom. Still, at this size, I barely consider it a compact. |
Naw -- don't need that major zoom. I'm liking the idea of a walk around camera for the times I don't want to carry all my gear. I figure if there's a chance of good birds, I'll grab the rest of the gear. It would be nice if it could do a 270 or so, but I don't think I'd want to spend Bear's or Leica's 600mm equivalent on a walk around camera. (maybe in the future, small would be nice, but selling my canon gear gives me the shivers, at the moment!)
|
|
|
|
08/16/2013 12:55:35 PM · #40 |
Well, then take a really serious look at the Canon S series, and the Sony RX100 .. They're both very much pocket cameras.
..
I would also say this is a time when you can give yourself the opportunity to approach photography differently. The world is a different place when you're shooting with a discrete tiny-cam. I find that I often throw my S95 in my pocket while I'm out on a shoot, just because it's so darn good! |
|
|
|
08/16/2013 06:46:13 PM · #41 |
Sony HX50 with the viewfinder would be AWSOME. I am seriously considering one when I get myself out the shit.
IQ is stunning and the zoom is mental, I cannot recommend it enough for a pocket option.
|
|
|
|
08/17/2013 09:19:22 AM · #42 |
whoa... in looking at Bear's lumix, I came across this one:
it has a 60x optical zoom! 20-1200mm
5fps shooting
Message edited by author 2013-08-17 09:28:47.
|
|
|
|
08/17/2013 09:33:16 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by MAK:
Sony HX50 with the viewfinder would be AWSOME. I am seriously considering one when I get myself out the shit.
IQ is stunning and the zoom is mental, I cannot recommend it enough for a pocket option. |
I'm having problems finding one with the viewfinder -- do you have a link?
|
|
|
|
08/17/2013 09:59:45 AM · #44 |
Definitely need a viewfinder -- most of these don't seem to have view finders. Do any have them anymore?
|
|
|
|
08/17/2013 12:26:57 PM · #45 |
The one I showed you does. And an articulated LCD screen as well.
ETA: the ones where you have to mount an accessory viewfinder on the top kind of defeat the purpose of the camera, in my view.
Message edited by author 2013-08-17 12:28:41. |
|
|
|
08/18/2013 01:11:21 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Panasonic Lumix GX-7
Makes me drool. You'll be able to get the reach you want for birding with this system much less expensively. Sell all the Canon gear, move on with life :-) |
Sell all my canon gear?? |
Don't go looking at these cameras. I played with the OMD EM5 and absolutely fell in love.
Sold all my canon gear (7d, 60d, 17-55 f2.8 IS, 70-200 f4 IS, 60 macro, 10-22, etc plus flashes)
 Scarbrddid the same, selling off a Canon 5dmkii and all his gear for olympus also.
I have shot two weddings, corporate headshots, sporting club group and single shots, editorial awards night - all with my new gear.
I have top quality zooms (12-35 f2.8 & 35-100 f2.8 - equiv to 24-70 & 70-200), and amazing sharp primes.
I have two bodies so I often go out with the two zooms attached and then a couple of primes for whatever I think I might be shooting.
It is all sooooo light.
I originally only sold off the 60d and a couple of things to pay for a body just to have it as a carry around camera.
Then I just couldn't be bothered picking up the 7d, it was just too heavy and I found the image quality from the OMD EM5 was superior to that of the Canon cameras (my opinion of course)
I choose the OMD EM5 because it has a EVF and two wheels to adjust A and shutter.
One feature that I love is when you have shot a portrait and you want to see if it has focused properly on the eye....when you magnify the camera goes to the exact spot you had the focus point on.
No moving around the screen to view this. Such a minor thing but just amazing when needed.
You have been warned!!
You can check out some images here [thumb][/thumb]My Flickr site
As you scroll down all images are from the OMD until you get the the line of images with the tree and canon magazine.
Message edited by author 2013-08-18 01:18:30. |
|
|
|
08/18/2013 10:29:56 AM · #47 |
| The veiwfinder is extra, the Sony one is very very good but very expensive, the Olympus one is very good and way cheaper. The Sony IQ is absolutely stunning and it all folds away to fit in your pocket too. |
|
|
|
08/18/2013 04:22:15 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by RamblinR:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Panasonic Lumix GX-7
Makes me drool. You'll be able to get the reach you want for birding with this system much less expensively. Sell all the Canon gear, move on with life :-) |
Sell all my canon gear?? |
Don't go looking at these cameras. I played with the OMD EM5 and absolutely fell in love.
Sold all my canon gear (7d, 60d, 17-55 f2.8 IS, 70-200 f4 IS, 60 macro, 10-22, etc plus flashes)
Scarbrddid the same, selling off a Canon 5dmkii and all his gear for olympus also.
I have shot two weddings, corporate headshots, sporting club group and single shots, editorial awards night - all with my new gear.
I have top quality zooms (12-35 f2.8 & 35-100 f2.8 - equiv to 24-70 & 70-200), and amazing sharp primes.
I have two bodies so I often go out with the two zooms attached and then a couple of primes for whatever I think I might be shooting.
It is all sooooo light.
I originally only sold off the 60d and a couple of things to pay for a body just to have it as a carry around camera.
Then I just couldn't be bothered picking up the 7d, it was just too heavy and I found the image quality from the OMD EM5 was superior to that of the Canon cameras (my opinion of course)
I choose the OMD EM5 because it has a EVF and two wheels to adjust A and shutter.
One feature that I love is when you have shot a portrait and you want to see if it has focused properly on the eye....when you magnify the camera goes to the exact spot you had the focus point on.
No moving around the screen to view this. Such a minor thing but just amazing when needed.
You have been warned!!
You can check out some images here [thumb][/thumb]My Flickr site
As you scroll down all images are from the OMD until you get the the line of images with the tree and canon magazine. |
You are so right! I own the OMD too, and it is a fantastic camera that never ceases to amaze me! It is a camera that makes you want to bring it along. You don't realize how light and small it is until you see it with your own eyes...and you don't realize how capable it is until you use it! Hey---the new pro model OMD is right around the corner too...you can't go wrong!! |
|
