1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  1. Phil V

    Phil V

    Messages:
    19,369
    Name:
    Phil
    Edit My Images:
    No
    That's been my point, but start by not underestimating someone's budget though, people often want to spend thousands on cameras and hundreds on lenses. A 6d and several really good lenses is cheaper than a 5dIV, but newbies will often convince themselves they need 'the best camera'. I'd rather have a 40d and 17-55 than a 750d and kit lens, the 40d will outperform the newer camera right up till the light disappears, but there's ways round that limitation.

    My favourite example of this was a bloke who wanted to set up a product photography studio, he bought a d810 and started asking about suitable lenses, he 'couldn't afford' any of the suggestions, and then he wanted to know how to set up his studio, but had literally no budget for lighting.o_O

    His total budget would have got him everything he needed if he'd bought a £500 camera, but he spent all his money on the best camera he could find and was shocked to discover it wouldn't be any use at all. He refused to hear that his best bet was to return the camera, because he was very happy with his purchase of 'the best', he simply couldn't understand what he'd done wrong.
     
  2. antonroland

    antonroland Inspector Gadget

    Messages:
    4,061
    Name:
    Anton
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I suppose most of us made that mistake in some way...I am only beginning to see the light now:D
     
    Phil V likes this.
  3. Phil V

    Phil V

    Messages:
    19,369
    Name:
    Phil
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Indeed most people do.
     
  4. Kell

    Kell

    Messages:
    41
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
  5. Mr Badger

    Mr Badger

    Messages:
    1,046
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Once again, I think artificial lighting is an area that's improved noticeably over the last 40 or so years. Historically, I'd been very reluctant to use flash, probably as it didn't really suit the type of photography I did (outdoor stuff, and later some gig photography where flash would have drained the atmosphere out of everything on stage, plus flash was frowned upon at most gigs and banned altogether at others anyway). However, when I got my 6D I bought a Speedlite 480 EX II (mainly as it didn't have a built in flash to use if absolutely necessary) and I've been amazed how much better and more natural the results with it have been. Gone are the night and day shadows and contrasty harshness I remember when using flash years ago (even with some of the early swivel head and bounce stuff). Now even the cat's eyes look OK, and not as though it's suffering from a bout of demonic possession!

    Most of the photos I really like from history didn't use artificial lighting - probably because it just wasn't practical as much as it not being necessary, so I'm afraid I can't see this amateur/enthusiast buying much lighting kit, however, I would like to learn a bit more about non-studio type flash/fill-in flash use, so if anyone can suggest any good books or YouTube video tutorials then please let me know. Sorry, it seems we've gone a bit off topic here but I hope there's some stuff that's of at least some use to the OP in the last two or three posts. (y)
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2017 at 2:45 PM
  6. Mr Badger

    Mr Badger

    Messages:
    1,046
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Indeed, there's at thread about it in the Film and Conventional section, I doubt I'll be buying one though, I've got plenty of old film cameras to feed and play with instead. :)
     
  7. Kell

    Kell

    Messages:
    41
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Mr Badger likes this.
  8. Kell

    Kell

    Messages:
    41
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    OK - so I've had a little more time to digest this and I think as I said in my first post, I always thought my next move would be full frame.

    But having looked at

    1. the expense, and
    2. the actual physical need
    I've decided against it. I'm not a pro-photographer (clearly), and I'm not even really what you'd describe as a keen hobbyist. By that I mean I take my camera with me for 'events' - weddings, holidays, parties etc - and with some success. The last wedding I took my camera to, the couple used most of my shots in their book over and above the ones they'd paid for. But these days I rarely, if ever, go out with my camera purely to take pictures.

    And while I think I've always preferred the 'feel' of shots directly out of a Nikon (whether this is the camera or the lenses) I think sticking with a crop sensor and switching systems at this time would be too expensive to justify and I'd gain more by selecting a couple of better lenses and improving my technique.

    To that end, and given that I said up front I like working with my 30mm lens, I may look to replace the one I have with the 35mm Sigma Art Lens. It does get great reviews and it's an EF mount, so would still fit if I ever do decide to upgrade to Canon FF. The suggestion of the STM Canon 50mm may be a better lens than my current one, but part of the reason I switched to the Sigma was that the 50mm ended up being too close in most situations. So that £100 saving would go towards the 35mm Art Lens.

    I've also just looked back over some of the shots I took before I 'upgraded' to the Sigma 18-250. Despite not being able to zoom in as much (or perhaps because of it) I think the shots are better. Certainly that lens doesn't produce anything like as much noise as the Sigma.

    So the 18-250 might be the next to go. We're going back to South Africa next year, so I might look to try and pick up something like one of the 70-300 lenses mentioned above.

    Thank you all for the comments and for those that took the time to respond.

    I did take all my lenses out in the back garden at the weekend and went up and down all the f stops at various focal lengths to see where the drop off point is. What I forgot to do is do the same with ISO. So it might be worth repeating the exercise this weekend, but indoors to get an idea of how bad the noise is and when it creeps in.

    Just for the record, here are the prices I was quoted by MPB for my current gear. I forgot to add the flash, but as I've decided I'm sticking with that, it's probably not relevant.

    Camera prices.png
     
  9. Kell

    Kell

    Messages:
    41
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    This was in particular reference to the nifty fifty. It will often hunt for focus for several seconds before deciding to lock in on something which is clearly way out of focus.
     
  10. Kell

    Kell

    Messages:
    41
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
  11. ABTog

    ABTog

    Messages:
    620
    Name:
    Alistair
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Yup. That one.
    There is now a Mk2 version of that lens, but even though it's a little older, it's still a very good lens and has the benefit of being full frame compatible for future proofing.
    There is also a Tamron equivalent, 70-300mm f4-5.6 VC USD (VC=Image stabilised and USD is their silent ultra sonic drive AF).
    Sadly MPB don't have any stock right now. :https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/used-equi...n-sp-70-300mm-f-4-5-6-di-vc-usd-canon-ef-fit/
     

Share This Page