DSLR for serious Photography

[FrantzM]

Handheld or tripod? If handheld you have steady heands altough 1/800 would help ... [/quote]
Tripod. I can hold my 500 for maybe 10 minutes but after that, my arm will be aching. For this kind of action wildlife shooting, you do it without a cable release. So it is best to have the shutter speed near 1/focal length. I could have probably gone down one step and been OK.

I am sliding toward the D-7/800.. It seems to have slam-dunked over the competition with those 31.5 MP and the price remained the same ... I must say I am really surorised to se how much eveolved zoom lenses have become 24~105 encompasses all the lenses one is likely to use in most photographic situations .. I hope they give fixed focal lenses a good run for the money ...

One of the problems here is that there is so little demand for fixed lenses that most of them are older designs. The zooms on the other hand, using the latest computer modelling and material and as such, do very well. That said, F4 is not very bright so I carry my "pocket" 50mf1.4 with me. I rarely need it but it doesn't take much to carry it. Also, for shooting portraits, I like to have longer focal lengths and lower f stop.

As for printers which one would you recommend?

Epson is really the market leader but also a pain to maintain. If you use the unit all the time then the heads don't clog and you are OK. There is more support for it as far as paper choices, etc. that any other brand. I have a large format unit that I use to print poster size (4000 series). They are actually not that expensive. Where they get you is the ink of course. Best resource for research there is here: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/index.shtml. I have not been in the market for a couple of years so don't know if HP or Canon are on top now.


=====================================================================

Your honor .. I know , I am under oath... I NEVER, never wrote the above post . it is due no doubt to some evil moderator ... likely the one who goes by the Amirm handle .. I decline all responsibilities from any actions that the above might provoke or instigate in the future ...

Frantz (the real FrantzM)

 

[rblnr]

If you want to stay under 3K for a camera and lens and go full frame, your choices are a Canon 5Dmkii or Nikon D700. Their successor models,, the 5Dmkiii (3500) and D800 (3000) put you over. I don't think you will see the price move down until at least the fall in the new models. There is quite a bit of pent up demand and neither company is fully up to speed yet after the nuclear disaster and flooding in Thailand so supply may be constrained for awhile. And just an instinct, but I think both companies are committed to protect the profit on these for for quite awhile.

Selection has more to do with ergonomics and how they feel in your hand IMO. IQ is close enough to be insignificant and differences are completely obviated with minimal post-post processing. I happen to like the way Nikons feel in my hand better, the contouring and grip shape -- this is part of the reason I've been a Nikon shooter for many years. The breadth of either system will probably satisfy your needs though some think that Canon has a better range of wide angle zooms while the Nikon flash system is superior.

Don't know if it matters to you, but the 5Dmkii has good video capability, the D700 does not. One of the goals of the D800 was to better the MKii's video capability and anticipate the MKiii. We'll see. I have a D800 on order and have shot several commercials with the MKii so know it well. Low light performance will be interesting -- the Nikon has a much higher pixel count which usual means more noise, but Nikon claims to have solved this. Again, we'll see. I'll bet one of the things you'll be most surprised about coming back to photography is just how transformative it is to be able to shoot cleanly a 800 or even 1600 ISO.

That said, F4 is not very bright so I carry my "pocket" 50mf1.4 with me.

and by the above I mean that T4 really isn't so slow anymore because you can shoot many things at these higher ISOs. Not being able to limit depth of field is often the larger T4 issue for me. My walk around on a recent trip to Argentina was the Nikon 24-120/T4. Very good quality lens and the VR buys you a couple of stops.

As with things audio where even after a ton of research you still need to listen, you really should get these cams in your hand if possible.

I use an Epson R1900 that turns out terrific prints up to 13x19. Drives me nuts though that it seems every other time I use it, one or more of the many ink cartridges needs replacing. I understand a couple of their latest photo printers have larger ink cartridges -- very welcome

 

[DonH50]

^ If you let the printer sit the cartridges dry out at the head and you have a "dead" cartridge full of ink. Has happened to me many, many times with my i9900 has I only use it now and then. Running a print through every few days or at least once a week helps.

If you use it a lot, look into a tank system.

 

[rblnr]

Good advice, but like you, I don't use the printer much so rarely think about it and think to run a page thru. Epson sent me a thank you note recently

 

[DonH50]

Yeah, me too. The thing takes 8 ink carts and every time I go to use it at least a couple have dried out.

Clearly, I need to get a new camera and print out more pictures.

 

[KeithR]

I would hesitate dropping 3k on a camera if you havent shot in 20 years. Go rent one for a weekend.

Im selling my dslr for the canon s100. Its quite good and i dont have to take camera bags on trips. I am also going to borrow my brother's nikon1, buts its pricy.

I only have a d40 bought 3 years ago, but go see ken rockwells reviews on it vs the higher end stuff. Unless you are a pro every day, most of what you seek is on much cheaper and more importantly, lighter dslr alternatives.

Good luck

 

[Steve Williams]

Keith you will love the S100. I have the S95 but am constantly amazed at not only how good the photos are but just what the camera can do. And you can put it in your pocket

 

[Syntax]

I was a few days abroad and I decided to be lazy, so I left my DSLR at home and took a good pocket Camera with me plus iPhone4s...
Well, to make the story short, it depends of course what you want (kind of quality) and what kind of knowledge of have (ability to understand what is going on with the light). What a waste of time for me. I mean, the pocket camera pics were ok, but no more. They may be rated as "good" when somebody is also not able to get good pics with a DSLR, but for me this "recommendation" to go for pocket cameras is good for ignorant amateurs who shoot 100's of pics which aren't good anyway. These cameras are ok in perfect light conditions, but when there are some shadows you need much more work to get some adjustments, normally all these pics have to be reworked in Adobe or similar...
And iPhone pics, oh my God...these Phone cameras are a pain for the eyes.
But our times are modern.

 

[amirm]

I travel a ton and used to constantly vacillate between taking my DSLR and a couple of lenses and my pro point and shoot. At the end, the image were disappointing from my point and shoot from the point of view of creating "art." If you want to capture memories, they do the job. But if you want to create a masterpiece it just is hard. The sensors are tiny on these meaning depth of field is always high. Most of the time in a good picture you want to isolate things. Having too much in focus destroys this. As syntax says, noise performance is just horrible compared to DSLR. The image looks fine on the LCD but when you look at it on the computer, it just is too noisy. I can clean up some of it in photoshop but it takes a lot of work and at the end, it is not the same thing.

On the other hand, carrying a DSRL, even with two light lenses means a lot of weight and bulk. It can easily take the fun away.

So what I do is decided if I am going to want to come back with serious images and if so, the DSLR goes with me. A 24-105 lens makes for a good, compact package. I then add 70-200 f4 to cover telephoto. Add a super lightweight and compact Gitzo carbon fiber tripod and a cable release and you can come back with pro-level images. Even when I travelling light on business trips, I can find room for these in my carry on.

 

[Steve Williams]

Have you used the 70-200 f2.8

 

[amirm]

Have you used the 70-200 f2.8

It was one of the first lenses I bought. My main use of it is candid photography where I need shallow depth of field and longer zoom. Alas, it is too heavy and big for general use. I use my 70-200 F4 probably five times more.

When I am near home though, I use it a lot. But on trip, I won't take it unless I know specifically that I need it.

 

[Steve Williams]

do you have the series ll with AIS

 

[amirm]

No, I have the generation back that is IS but not the latest.

 

[Steve Williams]

that IS on the series ll raised the price of the lens $1000 over the series l

 

[amirm]

The prices for newer generation lenses are just insane. I don't know how Canon gets away with such huge price increases where the technology should make them cheaper. I thought my old super telephotos were expensive at $8K or so and now they are up to $12-$14K. It is just crazy expensive. That's why I stopped upgrading.

 

[KeithR]

I travel a ton and used to constantly vacillate between taking my DSLR and a couple of lenses and my pro point and shoot. At the end, the image were disappointing from my point and shoot from the point of view of creating "art." If you want to capture memories, they do the job. But if you want to create a masterpiece it just is hard. The sensors are tiny on these meaning depth of field is always high. Most of the time in a good picture you want to isolate things. Having too much in focus destroys this. As syntax says, noise performance is just horrible compared to DSLR. The image looks fine on the LCD but when you look at it on the computer, it just is too noisy. I can clean up some of it in photoshop but it takes a lot of work and at the end, it is not the same thing.

On the other hand, carrying a DSRL, even with two light lenses means a lot of weight and bulk. It can easily take the fun away.

So what I do is decided if I am going to want to come back with serious images and if so, the DSLR goes with me. A 24-105 lens makes for a good, compact package. I then add 70-200 f4 to cover telephoto. Add a super lightweight and compact Gitzo carbon fiber tripod and a cable release and you can come back with pro-level images. Even when I travelling light on business trips, I can find room for these in my carry on.

Yeah, clearly you use the vast array of features and can create art. I havent created art since photojournalism in high school with a K1000! My habits lean more to the memory and a cool shot or two these days.

 

[rblnr]

An interesting note, the body of the Nikon D4 and D800 like some other Nikons were designed by Geiorgetto Giugiaro, better known for Ferraris, Fiats, etc.

http://nikonrumors.com/2012/04/07/n...ras-were-designed-by-giorgetto-giugiaro.aspx/

A reason I'm a longtime Nikon fan vs. Canon is the way they feel in my hand