Camera / photography question

[Mr.Cambio]

I used to use 35mm SLRs, developed my own stuff, moved onto DSLR and then couldn't be arsed to drag around all the kit along with children and all the family blah blah so downscaled to a compact. it's limitations became infuriatingly apparent on holiday in Costa Rica last year when I just couldn't get close enough, enough light or a fast enough speed to shoot anything that hadn't been nailed to a branch. I'm no expert but can find my way around a camera... but I'll need to brush up a bit. Well, a lot!

Have you considered compact Panasonics? Some models have a big lens. I also do not like to carry a suitcase full of lenses on my holiday

 

[zagatoes30]

Distance, movement and compromise lighting all need the best quality lens and more often than not that means weight. My 6d with its F2.8 70-200 L Series gets some awesome results, I have looked at the 100-300 L Series version which has a further reach but at an extra cost of weight & price but in almost all case I can crop my 200mm image to get the result I need. (these uploads aren't a patch on the originals but you can see my point)

 

[Phil H]

Some seriously good photography:

Peregrine Falcon image wins bird photo award

A selection of the winning images from the 2023 Bird Photographer of the Year award.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Felonious Crud]

Have you considered compact Panasonics? Some models have a big lens. I also do not like to carry a suitcase full of lenses on my holiday

I have a Panasonic at the moment and get no joy at all from using it. The menus are not intuitive and my phone does a far better job. Phone tech has advanced far faster than compact camera tech in the last few years to the extent that investment in compact camera R&D is pretty much zero just because the market has been killed by phones that do a pretty good job in 90% of consumer use cases (friends, pets, the ******* endless shitflood of selfies).

Agree fully re lenses, Nikos. A short and long zoom would be fine, but also something very small would be great. A fixed 35mm, for example. But three is too many.

 

[zagatoes30]

I just carry two lenses with me these days both L Series, the F2.8 24-70mm & F2.8 70-200. The former is attached to the camera 90% of the time and is just stunning it gets great reviews everywhere, the latter gives me those longer shots and even though its only 200 with the 6D body I can get an image that has the quality I can crop for detail where necessary.

 

[Wack61]

My first digital camera was 2mp and I could print A4 , anything above that and it started to drop off

Quality pictures isn't about megapixels , it's technique and lenses , I've only ever bought one body & lens new, sony, with a pancake lens it'll fit in a coat pocket , with a battery grip its still nowhere near the size of a dslr , the Sony 200-600 is exceptional for the money

I'd go with a Sony mirrorless and that lens for anything distance , you can put a teleconvertor on it and it still autofocuses

I was at oulton park with a friend , he was trying to get a shot of a bird in a tree that far away you could barely see it , with his 200mm canon lens he still couldn't make out what it was

I took a pic with the 200-600 Sony & TC and said it's a water bird , how do you know, so I showed him the picture i'd just taken of its feet

 

[Gooner]

We all agree don’t worry about megapixels. And actually most lenses are very good these days.

The thing that damages quality the most is noise, which is a product of the quality of the sensor, especially the sensitivity to light, and the ISO setting you choose. On high ISO settings the software groups pixels together to get a signal anyway so the effective resolution drops. The more the camera software has to process the noise, the less detail you will see. The better the light sensitivity the stronger the signal from the sensor and the less noise processing is needed. I believe the Sony DSLRs mentioned are particularly good at this.

Or you can do what I do, and go for 35mm and medium-format film. You don’t have to worry about noise anymore, instead you can enjoy the beautiful grain of high-ISO film which is just another creative opportunity rather than something to be eliminated .

 

[Mr.Cambio]

I have a Panasonic at the moment and get no joy at all from using it. The menus are not intuitive and my phone does a far better job. Phone tech has advanced far faster than compact camera tech in the last few years to the extent that investment in compact camera R&D is pretty much zero just because the market has been killed by phones that do a pretty good job in 90% of consumer use cases (friends, pets, the ******* endless shitflood of selfies).

Agree fully re lenses, Nikos. A short and long zoom would be fine, but also something very small would be great. A fixed 35mm, for example. But three is too many.

I was thinking of the tz100 which is not mirrorless, it has the biggest sensor for a compact plus decent zoom and its menu is like a dslr.

 

[Mr.Cambio]

Lovely pics Andy, i have never photographed a race, also never worked on fast moving objects. Should give a practice session..

 

[Guy]

Distance, movement and compromise lighting all need the best quality lens and more often than not that means weight. My 6d with its F2.8 70-200 L Series gets some awesome results, I have looked at the 100-300 L Series version which has a further reach but at an extra cost of weight & price but in almost all case I can crop my 200mm image to get the result I need. (these uploads aren't a patch on the originals but you can see my point)

View attachment 118510

View attachment 118511

View attachment 118513

View attachment 118514

Spot on Andy and those 2 great zoom lenses are phenomenal. Better than most fixed. For ultimate stationary results I use a f1.4 35mm L lens or my 2.8 300mm for sport but a good full size sensor sensor and the lenses you are using are key to great results.