Jump to content

DSLR to Mirrorless 2022


Recommended Posts

One of my favorite lenses is a manual Nikon 50mm f/1.2 that I bought on ebay for $40 back in 2008. mbp offered me $450 for it back in 2018 - I dithered but decided to keep it and on the Sony it's great. Beautiful bokeh. My old Olympus Zuiko film lenses also have great bokeh. A lot of deciding whether you like a lens is what you use it for, taking advantage of its strengths and knowing its weaknesses. 

 

@Chuck Nacke mentioned disliking the Nikon 20mm f/2.8 - mine is great - sharp, no CA to speak of, nice color. I use it for architecture and landscape. It was AF on my Nikon (not with my current Sony adapter) but it has a manual aperture ring so maybe you are speaking of a different one? Plenty sharp on my high MP Sonys. I've blown up images many feet wide and they look great. I like it better than the Zuiko 35mm I bought. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 09/09/2022 at 17:53, Harry Harrison said:

Very odd to criticise a camera body for having more noise in the corners, that just couldn't be correct.

 

Indeed, but it can appear in to be the case if significant vignetting correction is applied (either in camera jpg processing or RAW post processing) to correct significant light fall off in the corners of the frame.  Users may not even be aware of the levels of correction being applied and only notice the end result (noisier corners) and incorrectly blame the camera body when the real culprit is the lens.

 

Mark

Edited by M.Chapman
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, M.Chapman said:

and incorrectly blame the camera body when the real culprit is the lens.

True, I was rather clumsily trying to move the OP away from blaming the D810 camera for all the problems he (and Alamy) were noticing that were instead down to a poor lens coupled with poor technique. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, M.Chapman said:

 

Indeed, but it can appear in to be the case if significant vignetting correction is applied (either in camera jpg processing or RAW post processing) to correct significant light fall off in the corners of the frame.  Users may not even be aware of the levels of correction being applied and only notice the end result (noisier corners) and incorrectly blame the camera body when the real culprit is the lens.

 

Mark

 

Yes the simplest explanation is that the noise is just more visible in the corners which are darker due to heavy vignetting. Noise is generally more visible in the darker areas of images - it doesn't mean it's not there in the lighter areas. Tne  top image posted by the OP has horrendous noise right through. 

Edited by MDM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, MDM said:

Tne  top image posted by the OP has horrendous noise right through. 

Yes - a surprising level. I note the OP has Active-D lighting set to High. That presumably won't have helped the in camera jpg under these conditions? Much better to shoot in RAW and use LR to adjust shadows and control noise.

 

I note the level of vignetting is also pretty high. Expecting to pass Alamy QC using a high MP camera whilst using a below par zoom lens, without downsizing is just asking for trouble.

 

Mark

Edited by M.Chapman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 07/09/2022 at 16:50, MDM said:

Just to be clear, Frank already owns a great Nikon camera and is asking if he needs to buy a mirrorless camera, as he is wondering if his camera his out of date. The answer is a definite no if he is doing mainly property photography. He is not going to get better results going mirrorless. There is no harm except financial in going mirrorless but he does not need to do so to get sharp pictures, he just needs to adapt his technique. 

 

Now if he was thinking of doing action photography as well then the answer would be he does want to be thinking about something with a bigger buffer and better AF than the D810 but not necessarily mirrorless.

Totally agree. Absolutely no reason to change your Nikon D810, it certainly isn't the reason you are failing QC. The quality from this camera is exceptional and it isn't out of date.

As discussed there may be lots of other reasons why some images are failing but it certainly isn't the camera. Save your money. Personally I'd shoot everything in raw but the jpeg quality is still very good. Keep the iso as low as possible for stock images (that applies to the Z series too) especially if shooting jpegs. I don't think I've had an image fail QC from an 800, 810 or 850.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks again for all of your replies, and a special thanks to Steve for that detailed information. I’m definitely not ignoring any advice and I’m thoroughly digesting it all, even if it tastes like eggs! 😊

 

I’ve been using LR since 2018, primarily to correct CA, straighten lines, and make typical corrections for property photography. But from here forward only shooting RAW, I noticed a huge difference in how LR reacts to RAW images vs jpeg.

 

I recently photographed a high-end London property in RAW using my D810 and Nikon AF-S 16-35mm f/4G ED VR wide/zoom lens, and the results were great. Here's a few of the shots scaled down for customer delivery, so please let me know if this is the sharpest I can expect from this 16-35mm wide/zoom.
https://www.screencast.com/t/wT1yjEVTM

https://www.screencast.com/t/qTHLiiYT

 

On average, these were taken in RAW, ISO 320, f/8, 1/8th to 1/25th sec, manual bounce flash. Lightroom, lens profile for my lens selected and CA checked, sharpening 60, radius 1.0, detail 40, masking 0, luminance 80, detail 60, contrast 0, color 25, detail 50, & smoothless 50. Exported to PS and cleaned up to remove dust bunnies, then saved jpeg at 2400x1600 at 150dpi. Those LR settings were average but overall, it seemed those were the best settings to keep the image as sharp as possible and remove as much noise as possible.  I might have been able to get away with luminance set to around 60, but there was still noticeable noise at 60.  But, I am open for recommendations and suggestions. I use a BenQ SW270C monitor.

 

I had a bit of a learning curve adjusting to the sensitivity I was now experiencing editing RAW in Lightroom, but the results are truly amazing when compared to editing jpeg's.

 

But yes, I definitely need to buy better glass and I’ve duly noted all of the recommendations/lenses in use. I like the versatility of the wide/zoom but, I found a used Nikon AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D at mpb for around £180, so that will be a hard deal to pass over.

 

 

A few questions though… what is best setting for the D810 “Color space” setting. Adobe RGB or sRGB? And for vignette control, should it be off, low, normal, or high.  I always had it set to high and of course I never had any vignetting, but I turned it off for my plastic skyline shot, just to see how the camera would react.

 

I’m setting out to try the skyline shot again this Saturday night, with the same cheap 70-300 lens. But, I’m shooting in RAW and getting closer to the buildings to try and keep the focal length below 200mm, as I read this lens may produce better results below 200mm.

 

Anyway, thanks again and have a great weekend!

 

Frank


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, frankbiganski said:

A few questions though… what is best setting for the D810 “Color space” setting. Adobe RGB or sRGB? And for vignette control, should it be off, low, normal, or high.  I always had it set to high and of course I never had any vignetting, but I turned it off for my plastic skyline shot, just to see how the camera would react.

 

Makes no difference. If you shoot in RAW as LR will apply whatever settings you want when developing the RAW file. LR works in its own Colour space, but when you export to jpg for Alamy you can use sRGB or AdobeRGB, it makes little difference because Alamy will (unfortunately) convert all received images to sRGB anyway and then strip the profile. I would argue it's best to submit Alamy as sRGB because the export conversion to sRGB in LR or PS will be done with 16 bit precision uncompressed data. Whereas if Alamy converts AdobeRGB to sRGB it's starting from 8 bit compressed (jpg) data. In reality the differences in the final image are not easy to spot, but they are there.

 

38 minutes ago, frankbiganski said:

I recently photographed a high-end London property in RAW using my D810 and Nikon AF-S 16-35mm f/4G ED VR wide/zoom lens, and the results were great. Here's a few of the shots scaled down for customer delivery, so please let me know if this is the sharpest I can expect from this 16-35mm wide/zoom.

 

They look pretty sharp to me, but the examples posted have been downsized to below the minimum size requirement for Alamy. If you want the best comments on sharpness, it would be best to post a full size image or at least 6MP (Alamy's minimum size) depending on what size you typically plan to upload.

 

38 minutes ago, frankbiganski said:

On average, these were taken in RAW, ISO 320, f/8, 1/8th to 1/25th sec, manual bounce flash. Lightroom, lens profile for my lens selected and CA checked, sharpening 60, radius 1.0, detail 40, masking 0, luminance 80, detail 60, contrast 0, color 25, detail 50, & smoothless 50.

 

Some might say sharpening set to 60 is a bit high and risks visible edge artefacts/halos and QC fails, so 40 or 25 is more commonly used. But I note you've also applied quite high luminance noise reduction which may counteract that to some extent. I tend to apply much less of both when preparing for Alamy, although shadow areas might get more NR if I've lifted the shadows a lot. But I'm using a very different cameras/sensors (Lumix G100 and Sony RX100 Mk III and shooting around ISO 200) so you probably need input from other D810 owners.

 

Mark

 

Edited by M.Chapman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, frankbiganski said:

Thanks again for all of your replies, and a special thanks to Steve for that detailed information. I’m definitely not ignoring any advice and I’m thoroughly digesting it all, even if it tastes like eggs! 😊

 

I’ve been using LR since 2018, primarily to correct CA, straighten lines, and make typical corrections for property photography. But from here forward only shooting RAW, I noticed a huge difference in how LR reacts to RAW images vs jpeg.

 

I recently photographed a high-end London property in RAW using my D810 and Nikon AF-S 16-35mm f/4G ED VR wide/zoom lens, and the results were great. Here's a few of the shots scaled down for customer delivery, so please let me know if this is the sharpest I can expect from this 16-35mm wide/zoom.
https://www.screencast.com/t/wT1yjEVTM

https://www.screencast.com/t/qTHLiiYT

 

On average, these were taken in RAW, ISO 320, f/8, 1/8th to 1/25th sec, manual bounce flash. Lightroom, lens profile for my lens selected and CA checked, sharpening 60, radius 1.0, detail 40, masking 0, luminance 80, detail 60, contrast 0, color 25, detail 50, & smoothless 50. Exported to PS and cleaned up to remove dust bunnies, then saved jpeg at 2400x1600 at 150dpi. Those LR settings were average but overall, it seemed those were the best settings to keep the image as sharp as possible and remove as much noise as possible.  I might have been able to get away with luminance set to around 60, but there was still noticeable noise at 60.  But, I am open for recommendations and suggestions. I use a BenQ SW270C monitor.

 

I had a bit of a learning curve adjusting to the sensitivity I was now experiencing editing RAW in Lightroom, but the results are truly amazing when compared to editing jpeg's.

 

But yes, I definitely need to buy better glass and I’ve duly noted all of the recommendations/lenses in use. I like the versatility of the wide/zoom but, I found a used Nikon AF Nikkor  20mm f/2.8D at mpb for around £180, so that will be a hard deal to pass over.

 

 

A few questions though… what is best setting for the D810 “Color space” setting. Adobe RGB or sRGB? And for vignette control, should it be off, low, normal, or high.  I always had it set to high and of course I never had any vignetting, but I turned it off for my plastic skyline shot, just to see how the camera would react.

 

I’m setting out to try the skyline shot again this Saturday night, with the same cheap 70-300 lens. But, I’m shooting in RAW and getting closer to the buildings to try and keep the focal length below 200mm, as I read this lens may produce better results below 200mm.

 

Anyway, thanks again and have a great weekend!

 

Frank


 

Frank,

 

As I have written before: The AF NIKKOR 20 f2.8D is a Dog (an insult to Dogs) I've owned several and the only thing they are good for is holding down paper.

The 16-35 f4 is a better optic in my and a lot of people's opinion.

 

RE color space: I keep everything in Adobe RGB, aRGB, 

 

Chuck

Edited by Chuck Nacke
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Chuck Nacke said:

As I have written before: The AF NIKKOR 20 f2.8D is a Dog (an insult to Dogs) I've owned several and the only thing they are good for is holding down paper.

The 16-35 f4 is a better optic in my and a lot of people's opinion.

Thanks Chuck. I could see your reference in a previous post but someone else said is was a fine lens. But using the selling price vs. quality analogy, the lens should rank low as you've mentioned. I'll try to keep my bar set high when considering lenses from here forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here’s a RAW image at 100% with the various luminance and adjustments applied.

https://www.screencast.com/t/G6i8xfjCXGt

 

I admit that since I’ve been using Lightroom (2018), I've not taken the time to thoroughly educate myself on the proper way to utilize the controls within LR. I do get great results, and my clients are extremely happy, but I also know that I may not be using LR to reach its fullest potential or, I may be using the tools improperly/incorrectly. I found Anthony Turnham’s YouTube channel and he provides some great tutorials on using LR that my right-brain can comprehend. But I shall crack-on looking for additional tutorials (the tutorials on Adobe are not designed for my dyslexic right-brain at all).

 

And can anyone recommend a 24-70mm (or so) variable lens that’s on the level of a prime lens? I’m no longer partial to Nikon lenses, but I’ve been reading how great Sigma lenses are since the 1970’s. I’m simply trying to find a lens that produces those “tack sharp” results I’ve been reading about for years (unless that's just not possible in a variable zoom lens).

 

Cheers!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, frankbiganski said:

A few questions though… what is best setting for the D810 “Color space” setting. Adobe RGB or sRGB? 

 

I admit that since I’ve been using Lightroom (2018), I've not taken the time to thoroughly educate myself on the proper way to utilize the controls within LR. I do get great results, and my clients are extremely happy, but I also know that I may not be using LR to reach its fullest potential or, I may be using the tools improperly/incorrectly. I found Anthony Turnham’s YouTube channel and he provides some great tutorials on using LR that my right-brain can comprehend. But I shall crack-on looking for additional tutorials (the tutorials on Adobe are not designed for my dyslexic right-brain at all).

 

And can anyone recommend a 24-70mm (or so) variable lens that’s on the level of a prime lens? I’m no longer partial to Nikon lenses, but I’ve been reading how great Sigma lenses are since the 1970’s. I’m simply trying to find a lens that produces those “tack sharp” results I’ve been reading about for years (unless that's just not possible in a variable zoom lens).

 

Cheers!

 

 

 

 

As I said way back in the thread and Mark has just said, Color Space is irrelevant if shooting raw. Lightroom uses ProPhoto RGB which is a huge colour space. When you convert the raw image you choose which colour space it will be converted to in Lightroom Prefs. If you have not been shooting raw all along then you have not been utilising Lightroom properly at all but it's never too late to start. Your clients are probably not photographers and probably do not have any specialist knowledge of photography so are just looking at the pretty pictures, not at the technical quality. That is why Alamy can be a good teacher as well as the experienced photographers willing to share knowledge here.

 

Sigma has a good reputation but that does not mean that every lens they produce is a good lens. For a high MP camera like the D810, you need to be going for Sigma Art Lenses which have a very good reputation. Here is a link to a good DxO review of the 24-70. If buying a 24-70, make sure it has stabilisation which is invaluable. Nikon's stabilised  F mount zoom (AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8E ED VR) is an amazing lens in terms of sharpness across the field of view ( they use it for comparison to the Sigma in the review) but it is a lot more expensive than the Sigma.

 

Your lack of partiality to Nikon lenses is unfounded by the way. The new Nikon Z mount lenses for Nikon mirrorless cameras are out of this world in terms of quality. The 24-70 f4 is razor sharp - undoubtedly the best kit lens in the world. 

Edited by MDM
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The older Nikon 24-70 has a known flaw, which is the focus ring can stick. I’ve been on chat boards where quite a few people have reported the problem. It happened to mine, which was never dropped or mishandled. I’d only used it gently for about 1-2 years.  I sold it cheap to someone who had the guts to take it apart and fix it. It was a great lens, other than my 80-400 for birds, it was my go-to until it froze up on me. I read that Nikon repair blamed the problem on the user dropping it when they didn’t, then charged $600 to fix it, for a well-known flaw.

I believe a VR version came out since then that’s ok.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/09/2022 at 07:54, frankbiganski said:

Here’s a RAW image at 100% with the various luminance and adjustments applied.

https://www.screencast.com/t/G6i8xfjCXGt

 

What ISO was that taken at? Earlier in this thread you said..

 

On 16/09/2022 at 20:33, frankbiganski said:

On average, these were taken in RAW, ISO 320, f/8, 1/8th to 1/25th sec, manual bounce flash.

 

But the "Default LR Settings: Luminance 0" 100% image crop is much noisier than I'd expect if it was taken at ISO 320 and processed with everything at default in LR. Maybe the ISO was much higher for this shot? Or maybe there are other settings in LR (exposure and shadows) which have been boosted and it's only the LR Detail panel that's at default? Maybe your LR export to PS settings included extra sharpening?

 

For comparison I downloaded the 810 RAW image at ISO 400 from here https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d810/12 and it looks quite a bit cleaner.

 

Anyway, that's really an aside. The interesting question is what settings are best used to fix this noise whilst keeping the detail. MDM is probably the expert on this as he has extensive experience with the 810. Personally I think you've done a pretty good job if only using global settings. If you made the actual RAW file available I'm sure a number of folks hereabouts would have a go and see what settings they come up with - but you may not want to make the RAW available. I often use a Topaz AI Denoised AI layer in PS and adjust opacity to around 50% because I just tend to get lost and "bogged down" amongst the myriad of possible slider combinations in the LR/ACR Detail panel.

 

Mark

 

 

Edited by M.Chapman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, M.Chapman said:

What ISO was that taken at? Earlier in this thread you said..

 

 

But the "Default LR Settings: Luminance 0" 100% image crop is much noisier than I'd expect if it was taken at ISO 320 and processed with everything at default in LR. Maybe the ISO was much higher for this shot? Or maybe there are other settings in LR (exposure and shadows) which have been boosted and it's only the LR Detail panel that's at default? Maybe your LR export to PS settings included extra sharpening?

 

For comparison I downloaded the 810 RAW image at ISO 400 from here https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d810/12 and it looks quite a bit cleaner.

 

Anyway, that's really an aside. The interesting question is what settings are best used to fix this noise whilst keeping the detail. MDM is probably the expert on this as he has extensive experience with the 810. Personally I think you've done a pretty good job if only using global settings. If you made the actual RAW file available I'm sure a number of folks hereabouts would have a go and see what settings they come up with - but you may not want to make the RAW available. I often use a Topaz AI Denoised AI layer in PS and adjust opacity to around 50% because I just tend to get lost and "bogged down" amongst the myriad of possible slider combinations in the LR/ACR Detail panel.

 

Mark

 

 

 

 

The image with Luminance Noise set to default (0) has an extraordinary amount of luminance noise for a D810 at ISO320. Perhaps it has been severely underexposed which would effectively mean that the ISO is much higher than 320. The pattern of the noise is strange as well. It is pointless trying to diagnose what is wrong without seeing the original raw image (Dropbox). The OP says that this is a raw image but it is a compressed JPEG.

 

I have a few noise presets which I apply based on the camera, the ISO and whether the image is underexposed or not. I will tweak further if necessary but that is usually only the case at high ISO. I don't get bogged down in all the various LR settings - a few will do fine. As you know I don't like Topaz Denoise as it is too slow for my workflow, it does not work on raw files and it can produce some weird artefacts.

 

With the D810, I use default Lightroom noise settings from ISO 64 to about ISO 320 or so. From ISO 400-800 I would probably use L 25-50-50 C 25-50-50. At higher ISO my preset is L 50-50-50 C 25-50-50. The D810 is effectively noise free at ISO64-100 (with proper exposure). Different people have different perceptions or tolerance of noise. Mine is very low. I can see noise at ISO 200 on the D810 and similar Nikon sensors. The monitor used is also important. Noise is much more visible on a matte monitor than on a shiny reflective one. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, MDM said:

As you know I don't like Topaz Denoise as it is too slow for my workflow, it does not work on raw files and it can produce some weird artefacts.

Indeed. Out of curiosity I just processed the Nikon 810 NEF RAW file from here https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d810/12 using Topaz Denoise AI 2.4.2. It took about a minute, but the results leave a lot to be desired. Their RAW development "engine" is nowhere near as good as LR. I tend to the Topaz AI plugin as the last step in my processing in PS on images that are often already downsized (and I have a lower resolution sensor to start with), so processing time is about 20 secs. If I had to denoise at the raw conversion stage I'd just use LR/ACR or  maybe DXO Pure RAW.

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, M.Chapman said:

Indeed. Out of curiosity I just processed the Nikon 810 NEF RAW file from here https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d810/12 using Topaz Denoise AI 2.4.2. It took about a minute, but the results leave a lot to be desired. Their RAW development "engine" is nowhere near as good as LR. I tend to the Topaz AI plugin as the last step in my processing in PS on images that are often already downsized (and I have a lower resolution sensor to start with), so processing time is about 20 secs. If I had to denoise at the raw conversion stage I'd just use LR/ACR or  maybe DXO Pure RAW.

 

Mark

 

I did all my experiments with Topaz a couple of years ago when we were looking at slide copying and I've not upgraded it. All my opinions on it are from that time. In fact I don't even have the original one installed on my Mac now.

 

The Nikon cameras I use have excellent sensors anyway and noise only becomes a problem at high ISO so Lightroom is more than adequate for my purposes. I would always prefer to work on the raw file as far as possible. If I have noise images taken at high ISO, I just downsize as well as applying NR in LR. That is more than good enough for me. I've not checked out DXO Pure RAW or anything else so can't comment there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/09/2022 at 15:46, Marianne said:

 

 

@Chuck Nacke mentioned disliking the Nikon 20mm f/2.8 - mine is great - sharp, no CA to speak of, nice color. I use it for architecture and landscape. It was AF on my Nikon (not with my current Sony adapter) but it has a manual aperture ring so maybe you are speaking of a different one? Plenty sharp on my high MP Sonys. I've blown up images many feet wide and they look great. I like it better than the Zuiko 35mm I bought. 

 

I remembered trying one wide angle lens on my D300 and trading it for another -- the first one was a Nikon manual focus 20mm f/2.8, and the second one was an AI 24mm f/2.8, which I kept until I left the US.  Just checked Lightroom For details.  Lens variance?   Sorry I didn't keep the 24mm lens -- I have an 18mm Batis, but that's a bit too wide on full frame.  The D300 could record details of manual focus lenses used on it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what it's worth and seeing the title of the thread, the best mirrorless camera - lens combo and best value for general purpose photography in the Nikon world is the Nikon Z6II and 24-70 f4. This combo weighs a little over 1Kg so is really light. The 24MP sensor is easier to handle than a 36 or 45 MP sensor for many people and many computers as well. IBIS, incredible lens quality, superb dynamic range and noise handling + much more. However,  the D810 remains a fantastic camera for static photography and no camera upgrade is necessary (lens upgrade yes). 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to everyone for their contributions! My eyes are bleary and blurred, and my brain is foggy, but I’m finally on a clearer path to effectively utilizing Lightroom while also utilizing my D810 to its maximum potential. Mirrorless of course is not off the table, but a new 24-70mm lens is on the horizon. Here’s my homework results, which should not look like the plastic eyesore I started with two weeks ago. I got A LOT closer to the subject matter using my 16-35 wide/zoom shooting at 35mm.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/6gnjxx7dmm5v6sz/02-canary-wharf-02.jpg?dl=0

 

Thanks again, and we’ll see you around the digital watercooler!

 

Frank

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, MDM said:

For what it's worth and seeing the title of the thread, the best mirrorless camera - lens combo and best value for general purpose photography in the Nikon world is the Nikon Z6II and 24-70 f4. This combo weighs a little over 1Kg so is really light. The 24MP sensor is easier to handle than a 36 or 45 MP sensor for many people and many computers as well. IBIS, incredible lens quality, superb dynamic range and noise handling + much more. However,  the D810 remains a fantastic camera for static photography and no camera upgrade is necessary (lens upgrade yes). 

I can absolutely vouch for that. I was finding my D610 with 24-70 f2,8 a bit of a lump to lug around and traded them in for the Z6 ll and 24-70 f4 combo. A good decision and far more comfortable when on walkabout. I honestly don’t miss the two stops of aperture sacrificed for the f4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 07/09/2022 at 12:37, wiskerke said:

And age of the body.

Not the camera body.

😁

 

wim

Exactly why I switched from my beloved Canon 1D to Olympus E-M1

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, frankbiganski said:

My eyes are bleary and blurred, and my brain is foggy, but I’m finally on a clearer path

 

 

My head grew heavy and my sight grew dim
I had to stop for the night... 🎸

 

Frank, homework looks great, much better. Might want to remove it if you're putting it up for sale though.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, MDM said:

For what it's worth and seeing the title of the thread, the best mirrorless camera - lens combo and best value for general purpose photography in the Nikon world is the Nikon Z6II and 24-70 f4. This combo weighs a little over 1Kg so is really light. The 24MP sensor is easier to handle than a 36 or 45 MP sensor for many people and many computers as well. IBIS, incredible lens quality, superb dynamic range and noise handling + much more. However,  the D810 remains a fantastic camera for static photography and no camera upgrade is necessary (lens upgrade yes). 

 

My D750's are fine in normal to dusk light, and just about cope with noise from poor lighting in some venues and under street lighting at night at slower shutter speeds. I've been researching to see how I can cut down the weight I sometimes carry as I'm not getting any younger. I now regret using a shoulder bag instead of a backpack on Saturday afternoon, especially as the light would have been good enough for my tiny RX100 M7.  I recently came to the same conclusion as you re the Nikon z6ii, but with the 24-120 f4. That lens would likely cover 90% of what I usually shoot. All I need to do now is to finally draw my last pension and use some of the lump sum for new kit.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Steve F said:

 

My head grew heavy and my sight grew dim
I had to stop for the night... 🎸

 

Frank, homework looks great, much better. Might want to remove it if you're putting it up for sale though.

Steve

I could use for a week holiday in the Cali beaches for sure Steve!  I just noticed that I was in your neck of the woods (in Basingstoke that is) for my drone operational exam last week.

Cheers!

  • Love 1
Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • 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.