Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Afternoon all.  I've decided at last I need to get a full frame camera.. not just for stock, but mainly for events etc.  I've got a Fuji Xt4 ( appreciate this isn't FF ) which I'm happy with and the lenses are great so I'll keep this a camera 2, but just occasionally it doesn't start up, it moans about and SD card, and it doesnt like one of the lenses I have. I always manage to get round this, but it can take a couple of minutes ( other than the lens issue ).  At an event where you can't afford to miss a shot I really don't want to  be dealing with that. My D500 never missed a beat.  However I like the smaller footprint of mirrorless, so the question is will I find the Nikon Z6 II or Sony A7 III the most reliable ?  The Nikon seems like the more expensive option, especially if I go F2.8  .  I was toying with a second hand Nikon DSLR D780 as well, but the weight of the F2.8 24-70 is putting me off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't speak for Nikon although I did have a D750 some time back for a short while and liked it a lot.

 

Moved on to Sony and have A7II and A7III bodies and love them both but hardly use them now as I am mostly doing stock and use Sony a6000 and a6500 bodies for that purpose. I find them to be reasonably light, the A7's that is but lenses are not much lighter than DSLR lenses.

 

Allan

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Allan Bell said:

Can't speak for Nikon although I did have a D750 some time back for a short while and liked it a lot.

 

Moved on to Sony and have A7II and A7III bodies and love them both but hardly use them now as I am mostly doing stock and use Sony a6000 and a6500 bodies for that purpose. I find them to be reasonably light, the A7's that is but lenses are not much lighter than DSLR lenses.

 

Allan

 


Nikon or Sony both make excellent cameras, choice depends upon budget, lens availability and how the camera feels in you hands. 
 

My Nikon D750’s are getting on a bit now, but still do almost everything I need. At times I could do with a faster burst rate. I often toy with buying a Nikon D500 mainly for that reason, and I haven’t yet moved on my DX lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, sb photos said:


Nikon or Sony both make excellent cameras, choice depends upon budget, lens availability and how the camera feels in you hands. 
 

My Nikon D750’s are getting on a bit now, but still do almost everything I need. At times I could do with a faster burst rate. I often toy with buying a Nikon D500 mainly for that reason, and I haven’t yet moved on my DX lenses.

 

The Fuji XT-4 has a pretty good burst rate, but not as long as the D500 . that was one of the reasons I got it, but rarely used it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

People were having billboards printed from 6 mp cameras back in the day. I think my 24mp Fuji X-T4 is very adequate. I’ll not spend the $$$$ for anything else at the returns we are now getting.

Used to, I made enough from stock to easily handle my upgrades and having spending money to fill my closets with new shoes, as is my tendency. No longer.

If that’s no consideration, and one just enjoys the latest, has the expendable $, that’s great.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Betty LaRue said:

People were having billboards printed from 6 mp cameras back in the day. I think my 24mp Fuji X-T4 is very adequate. I’ll not spend the $$$$ for anything else at the returns we are now getting.

Used to, I made enough from stock to easily handle my upgrades and having spending money to fill my closets with new shoes, as is my tendency. No longer.

If that’s no consideration, and one just enjoys the latest, has the expendable $, that’s great.

 

Billboard printing uses a totally different process and it is apparently possible to make huge billboards from tiny files.

 

You seem to be confusing megapixel size with sensor size. The Nikon Z6 and Z6II have 24 MP like your Fuji but they are full frame so have physically larger sensors. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MDM said:

 

Billboard printing uses a totally different process and it is apparently possible to make huge billboards from tiny files.

 

You seem to be confusing megapixel size with sensor size. The Nikon Z6 and Z6II have 24 MP like your Fuji but they are full frame so have physically larger sensors. 

 

Apparently it has to do with viewing distance -- billboards are usually viewed from far away, so resolution isn't that important. I can remember hearing about billboards made from images taken with 2 MP cameras.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, John Mitchell said:

 

Apparently it has to do with viewing distance -- billboards are usually viewed from far away, so resolution isn't that important. I can remember hearing about billboards made from images taken with 2 MP cameras.

 

Yes that and the ability to print at very low resolution.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, MDM said:

 

Billboard printing uses a totally different process and it is apparently possible to make huge billboards from tiny files.

 

You seem to be confusing megapixel size with sensor size. The Nikon Z6 and Z6II have 24 MP like your Fuji but they are full frame so have physically larger sensors. 

 

With physically larger photo sites which make for less noise in the images at higher ISO settings.

 

Allan

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Allan, have you looked at the Sigma 56mm f/1.4 for your Sony bodies? It's sharp, and light, and small, and fast — a nice portrait lens at 82mm on your a6000s.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ed Rooney said:

 

Allan, have you looked at the Sigma 56mm f/1.4 for your Sony bodies? It's sharp, and light, and small, and fast — a nice portrait lens at 82mm on your a6000s.

 

Thanks for the heads up Edo sir. I am not spending my ill gotten gains, what little there are of them, on gear for the foreseeable future. I am happy with my a6000 with 10-18mm wide fitted permanently and my a6500 with 18-135mm tele permanently fitted for now. Make a good lightweight carry about for the type of images I take now.

When I say "permanently fitted" I don't mean glued or screwed. What I mean is I do not keep swapping other lenses onto these bodies.

 

Allan

 

I see that Sigma lens is at a good price but I already have the Sony 50mm f1.8 lens and that is a good lens giving 75mm on the a6000 bodies which is close enough to the range of the Sigma lens for portraits.

 

ITMA

 

Edited by Allan Bell
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yes, I also have the 10-18 "permanently fitted" to my a6000. The 56mm Sigma is a honey — so light. But I don't do any portraits these days. I also have that Sony 50. It's time me to sell off a few items. If I go out to shoot now, I have the a6000 with the 10-18 and the RX100-VII. Walking around casually, I just have the VII. 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/10/2021 at 15:18, Simon said:

Afternoon all.  I've decided at last I need to get a full frame camera.. not just for stock, but mainly for events etc.  I've got a Fuji Xt4 ( appreciate this isn't FF ) which I'm happy with and the lenses are great so I'll keep this a camera 2, but just occasionally it doesn't start up, it moans about and SD card, and it doesnt like one of the lenses I have. I always manage to get round this, but it can take a couple of minutes ( other than the lens issue ).  At an event where you can't afford to miss a shot I really don't want to  be dealing with that. My D500 never missed a beat.  However I like the smaller footprint of mirrorless, so the question is will I find the Nikon Z6 II or Sony A7 III the most reliable ?  The Nikon seems like the more expensive option, especially if I go F2.8  .  I was toying with a second hand Nikon DSLR D780 as well, but the weight of the F2.8 24-70 is putting me off.

I can't help with the Nikon/Sony decision, but if weight is a big consideration I'd check carefully the weight of lenses.  I'm using the D850 and have the 24-70.  It is heavy and cumbersome, but during a period when I was thinking should I go mirrorless for weight/size advantages I checked out the weight of equivalent NikonZ lenses, and was surprised at how little difference there often actually was, at least for the ones I used most.  From memory the 70-200 lenses are almost identical in weight.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kay said:

I can't help with the Nikon/Sony decision, but if weight is a big consideration I'd check carefully the weight of lenses.  I'm using the D850 and have the 24-70.  It is heavy and cumbersome, but during a period when I was thinking should I go mirrorless for weight/size advantages I checked out the weight of equivalent NikonZ lenses, and was surprised at how little difference there often actually was, at least for the ones I used most.  From memory the 70-200 lenses are almost identical in weight.

True for the 70-200 and other heavy lenses. However, the 24-70 f4 (superb lens) on a Z6 or Z7 (or II versions) body is just over 1kg whereas the D850 with 24-70 f2.8 (the VR version) is  pretty close to double the weight (around 2.2 kg) The f4 max aperture on the Z lens is not generally a big deal for light levels as the EVF brightens things up. So as a carry round combo the differences are very significant. I still have my D850 with the 24-70 f2.8 VR version, as it is the perfect camera-lens combo for a lot of what I do (e.g. weddings) with amazing low light ability, AF tracking but it no longer goes for walkies. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MDM said:

True for the 70-200 and other heavy lenses. However, the 24-70 f4 (superb lens) on a Z6 or Z7 (or II versions) body is just over 1kg whereas the D850 with 24-70 f2.8 (the VR version) is  pretty close to double the weight (around 2.2 kg) The f4 max aperture on the Z lens is not generally a big deal for light levels as the EVF brightens things up. So as a carry round combo the differences are very significant. I still have my D850 with the 24-70 f2.8 VR version, as it is the perfect camera-lens combo for a lot of what I do (e.g. weddings) with amazing low light ability, AF tracking but it no longer goes for walkies. 

That reminds me of having the Nikon 80-400 on my D800 mounted on a monopod. I’d do this circular trail near the lake, probably not much over a half mile with the camera/mono slung over my shoulder, but always with my hand up gripping the camera. I never trusted the mount, even though it held up.

By the time I made it back to the parking lot, I was practically crawling. Not worth the few bird images I managed to snap. I stopped that long ago. I did do a trail at the Great Salt Plains last year with my X-T2 & 100-400, no monopod. Because of my pain issues, I would not have made it back without my daughter carrying my camera when we headed for the parking lot.

I miss doing that, but I’ve learned my lesson.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, MDM said:

True for the 70-200 and other heavy lenses. However, the 24-70 f4 (superb lens) on a Z6 or Z7 (or II versions) body is just over 1kg whereas the D850 with 24-70 f2.8 (the VR version) is  pretty close to double the weight (around 2.2 kg) The f4 max aperture on the Z lens is not generally a big deal for light levels as the EVF brightens things up. So as a carry round combo the differences are very significant. I still have my D850 with the 24-70 f2.8 VR version, as it is the perfect camera-lens combo for a lot of what I do (e.g. weddings) with amazing low light ability, AF tracking but it no longer goes for walkies. 

If I ever have the option of having both I'll definitely get one as the D850 and rucksack is not my favourite combination, my shoulders are starting to feel it 😬

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heavy gear carried in bags can eventually cause neck problems, which can result in headaches. Especially for the weaker sex. That’s why I never carry bags. I carry my camera in my hands on a shoot, always.

And of course, back problems react from every bit of added weight due to spinal compression, even my camera carried in my hands. No way will I carry extra lenses/bags. You young, strong and healthy, enjoy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

Heavy gear carried in bags can eventually cause neck problems, which can result in headaches. Especially for the weaker sex. That’s why I never carry bags. I carry my camera in my hands on a shoot, always.

And of course, back problems react from every bit of added weight due to spinal compression, even my camera carried in my hands. No way will I carry extra lenses/bags. You young, strong and healthy, enjoy.

Yep, I can confirm that Betty!

 

Back in the 70's I could happily carry a couple of motor driven Nikon F2's plus half a dozen lenses with no problem. Through the 80's and early 90's I did the same with Hasselblad bodies, film backs and lenses. I now have all of the problems that you describe!

 

These day's I'm happy with a Sony A7lll and 24-70 lens. Even better, my wooden pinhole camera which weighs nothing!!!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Richard Coombs said:

Yep, I can confirm that Betty!

 

Back in the 70's I could happily carry a couple of motor driven Nikon F2's plus half a dozen lenses with no problem. Through the 80's and early 90's I did the same with Hasselblad bodies, film backs and lenses. I now have all of the problems that you describe!

 

These day's I'm happy with a Sony A7lll and 24-70 lens. Even better, my wooden pinhole camera which weighs nothing!!!

Good for you that you didn’t keep trying to plod on like a pack mule! 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.