What 'all purpose stock' camera would you buy?

[Jansos]

1) What new, all purpose, camera and lens (just one) would you buy for stock photography if money was no object?

 

2) What new, all purpose, camera and lens (just one) would you buy for stock photography if money was very tight?

[Bryan]

These things are always very personal, and people show sometimes misguided loyalty to brands that they are familiar with.

 

Becoming old and weaker I wouldn't want to lug around heavy gear, so my FF Canon DSLR with excellent  24-105 f4 lens is now hardly used, but would be fine for a more spritely person !

 

My pocket sized RX100 V is OK in good light, but I wouldn't want to rely upon it exclusively. Irrespective of brand,  I would go mirrorless with the best short range zoom lens that I could afford, but, unfortunately,  I have yet to discover a decent contender to go with the otherwise very good Sony a6500. So I continue to use a collection of mainly film era lightweight fixed focal length manual focus  lenses, the results from which are generally superb.

 

If money was very tight, and in this game that is increasingly the case,  I wouldn't be buying new !

 

 

 

 

[Mr Standfast]

1. Fuiifilm X-T5 and XF 16-55 f2.8 (I'd ideally have Hubble but you said new)

 

2. Fujifilm X-T30ii and XF18-55 f2.8-f4

 

As camera companies upgrade frequently a recent  model is usually a bargain and unless you must have a specific feature more than good enough.

 

I have quite few used items as well.

 

Good luck!

 

🦔

 

 

 

 

 

[MDM]

You don't say what money being very tight means. If it's extremely tight then the RX100 series cameras are excellent as Bryan mentions.

 

If you have a bit more to spare or want to get interest free credit, check out the Nikon Z6II with 24-70f4. This is a superb professional quality kit at an excellent price at the moment. It weighs just over 1 Kg so perfect for walkabout. The lens is unbelievable for a kit lens (it is an S lens so has the professional designation) - incredibly sharp.

 

Its predecessor, the Z6, was available with the same lens for about £1,400 direct from Nikon a little while back, which had to be bargain of the century, but it no longer seems to be available. I think you are a Nikon user so you can use F mount lenses with an adapter. 

 

Edited December 30, 2022 by MDM

[Harry Harrison]

Sticking to the definition of 'all-purpose for stock photography' rather than other specialisms I've no complaints about Fuji, nor APS-C,  but I wouldn't want 40MP files for stock photography from APS-C so wouldn't go for the new X-T5 or X-H2. I'll have a new X-T4 while it’s still available please, oh and I’ll take one of those 16-55 f2.8s as well.

 

If money was very tight  the choice would be more difficult as I wouldn't want a new camera at all, for stock I could easily manage with a 16MP APS-C, so s/h Fuji X-T1 for me with the 18-55. On the other hand if things were really tight I reckon I’d manage quite well for Alamy with a compact Micro 4/3 Panasonic LX100 II.

[Rebecca Ore]

I've had things pass quality control with a Nikon D50, a Panasonic GF1, a Nikon D300, and Sony cameras a6000 (APSC) and a7 ("full frame.")   I generally bought one model behind the latest.  My Nikon D300 was someone else's buyer's pique that Nikon released full frame just after he bought the D300 (heard this from the store).  Very light usage but a bit more camera than I wanted in Nicaragua as an older person.   20 to 24 MP is fine unless you're cropping a lot.

 

Best camera is the one the photographer is comfortable with, and brand bashing is for hobbyists with nothing better to do. 

 

 

 

 

[Jansos]

On 30/12/2022 at 16:15, MDM said:

You don't say what money being very tight means. If it's extremely tight then the RX100 series cameras are excellent as Bryan mentions.

 

If you have a bit more to spare or want to get interest free credit, check out the Nikon Z6II with 24-70f4. This is a superb professional quality kit at an excellent price at the moment. It weighs just over 1 Kg so perfect for walkabout. The lens is unbelievable for a kit lens (it is an S lens so has the professional designation) - incredibly sharp.

 

Its predecessor, the Z6, was available with the same lens for about £1,400 direct from Nikon a little while back, which had to be bargain of the century, but it no longer seems to be available. I think you are a Nikon user so you can use F mount lenses with an adapter. 

 

Thanks for for this. Does that mean I could use my existing Nikon F Mount lenses with the Nikon Z611 via the adapter?
A Happy and Peaceful New Year to all!

[MDM]

1 hour ago, Jansos said:

Thanks for for this. Does that mean I could use my existing Nikon F Mount lenses with the Nikon Z611 via the adapter?
A Happy and Peaceful New Year to all!

 

Yes but exactly what functions are retained depends on the actual lens. My Nikon and Tamron AF lenses work fine - full AF, metering etc. 

[Jansos]

11 hours ago, MDM said:

 

Yes but exactly what functions are retained depends on the actual lens. My Nikon and Tamron AF lenses work fine - full AF, metering etc. 

I have heard that the Nikon Z6II with 24-70f4 has quite a loud shutter release noise, even in quiet mode. Is that correct?

[Michael Ventura]

I am a fan of the Sony RX10 series.  Not a compact pocket camera but very versatile, with the later models having a 24-600mm zoom. It is the only camera I take on non assignment trips or wanderings.

[Allan Bell]

I am quite happy with what I have if I could only use one body and one lens and they are:-

 

Sony a6500 body with Sony f3.5 - 5.6 / 18 - 135 lens.

 

Yep! I know not everyones cup of tea but that setup produces most of the images I have uploaded to Alamy over the last few years.

 

Yes! I do have other bodies and lenses but they are not used very much so I could manage with my favourites above and that includes street, animal, scenic and seascapes and landscapes plus tabletop and food.

 

Allan

 

[MDM]

2 hours ago, Jansos said:

I have heard that the Nikon Z6II with 24-70f4 has quite a loud shutter release noise, even in quiet mode. Is that correct?

Not that I’ve heard (literally). The mechanical shutter is a bit louder than the electronic first curtain but nothing that would cause a major disturbance at a wedding in a quiet church. Best bet if you are really interested is to try one out in a camera shop. 

[Betty LaRue]

I'm with Allan. I have had the Fuji X-T1, the T2, and now the X-T4. Though them all, I probably have more stock images shot with my Fuji 18-135. It helps a lot to be able to stand in one place and get closeups and distant shots as one gets older, especially if you have mobility problems like I’ve had for years with my back. Almost all of my landscapes, virtually 100% of my storefronts were shot with this lens.

I prefer using my 80mm macro for flowers, bugs & such. I have a 35mm 1.4 that I use a lot indoors for food, and I have a 56mm 1.2 I like for portraits.  I can’t say there is one lens I use for everything but I have more images in my portfolio shot with the 18-135. For me, it made the perfect vacation lens.

Example: both from the same spot.

 

 

St. Croix, on vacation. Point Udall, both taken from same spot.

 

Edited January 2, 2023 by Betty LaRue

[Mr Standfast]

Interesting that the "money was no object" option did not flush out out any Leica or Hassleblad exotica? Are these just too much for Alamy or are we just very pragmatic??

[Harry Harrison]

2 hours ago, Mr Standfast said:

Interesting that the "money was no object" option did not flush out out any Leica or Hassleblad exotica?

Well I was being pragmatic, but I was assuming that the aim would still need to be cost-effective and I don't think either of those would necessarily help to take more saleable pictures. I actually like the look and feel of the Fuji medium format cameras but the same applies. I'm not sure that I want £10,000+ of camera equipment around my neck either, though could I claim for 24 hour security as well?

[Rebecca Ore]

2 hours ago, Mr Standfast said:

Interesting that the "money was no object" option did not flush out out any Leica or Hassleblad exotica? Are these just too much for Alamy or are we just very pragmatic??

 

When I had a Hasselblad body, I wanted the digital back for the original series Hassies, but it was $9K on sale.  Telephoto lenses for taking pictures of birds and animals are very expensive and with less reach than the full frame and ASP-C equivalents.  I've taken handheld pictures with film Hassies, but they're better on tripods.  For running around taking pictures in the local area, a smaller digital camera is just better.

[Marianne]

On the Sony, I love the FE 24-105mm f/4 G lens, a great walking around lens.

 

Since buying it last year, I've been using it for much of my landscape, portrait, and even some close up work, although I have wide angle primes - 8mm, 20 & 35mm - and the 90mm macro G series, which is also great for portraits. The lens is well balanced on both of my Sonys (FF a7rii & a7riv - both bought on sale when the newer models were released). Despite bad arthritis in my hands and a bad back & neck, I can wander around for several hours with the lens and camera combo. It's not as good in low light as my primes, but it's much lighter than the faster and more expensive option, and it is a G series lens, so very sharp end to end & a really great range.

 

If I  wanted the lightest kit, the Olympus micro 4/3rds is incredibly light. Since 2014, I never had a fail with any of the prosumer level lenses I have - the 24mm, 35mm & 24-70mm  have the original OMD 1. I can wander around all day with the camera and all three lenses in my bag or toss it with a prime attached into my purse. Not great in low light although the day I got it, a fire broke out down the street from me at 2am and I got amazing stills and video - the menu is the easiest I've seen and the jpegs in low light are quite good. The prime lenses are especially fast and the lens stabilization is outstanding. I imagine the new models are even better 9 years later. I tried the pro lenses at PhotoExpo (pre-Covid) and they are excellent. I bet you could get a great used kit for a song. 16MP is fine for stock and, as I said, never a fail with that camera (I had one fail with the 42MP Sony because the black grains of dirt mixed with sand on a racetrack were misinterpreted as noise by QC).

 

Honestly, for stock the high MP cameras are a lot of work in some ways as there is just so much real estate to spot check and you need top-notch and super clean lenses (the Sonys are a nightmare as far as dust is concerned - the Oly self-cleans beautifully).

 

I haven't shot with Nikon since 2018 when I went totally mirrorless, but their lenses are great. I kept a few that I use on my Sony with an adapter. Including a 50mm f/1.2 from the 70's I got on ebay for $40 back in 2007- one of the trade-in sites offered me $440 for it - the bokeh is something you can't find in any of the new lenses. If you have Nikon lenses, I'd look at their mirrorless offerings. I went mirrorless a little too soon, or I think I'd have Nikons instead of Sonys. 

 

Also keep in mind that you can get adapters for just about any combo - I have adapters for my Nikon and my original film 1970s Olympus lenses for my Sonys. I opted for inexpensive manual ones & since most of the lenses I use with them aren't autofocus. 

 

So many excellent choices. 

 

If money was no object, I'd want a full frame Fuji, but not sure it's practical for shooting stock. 

[Betty LaRue]

I have had the three Fuji cameras listed above in my earlier post and never had a dust spot show up. They must self-clean very well. My Nikons did get dust in them that always showed up in skies. I practice all the safe things one does when changing lenses.

[Jansos]

On 01/01/2023 at 14:05, Michael Ventura said:

I am a fan of the Sony RX10 series.  Not a compact pocket camera but very versatile, with the later models having a 24-600mm zoom. It is the only camera I take on non assignment trips or wanderings.

Interesting, thanks, not a camera I am familiar with. Fixed lens is my only concern but 24-600mm zoom sounds amazing. Still a bit pricey though given that it came out in 2014.

https://www.wexphotovideo.com/sony-cyber-shot-rx10-iv-digital-camera-1639100/

[Jansos]

On 02/01/2023 at 00:22, Betty LaRue said:

I'm with Allan. I have had the Fuji X-T1, the T2, and now the X-T4. Though them all, I probably have more stock images shot with my Fuji 18-135. It helps a lot to be able to stand in one place and get closeups and distant shots as one gets older, especially if you have mobility problems like I’ve had for years with my back. Almost all of my landscapes, virtually 100% of my storefronts were shot with this lens.

I prefer using my 80mm macro for flowers, bugs & such. I have a 35mm 1.4 that I use a lot indoors for food, and I have a 56mm 1.2 I like for portraits.  I can’t say there is one lens I use for everything but I have more images in my portfolio shot with the 18-135. For me, it made the perfect vacation lens.

Example: both from the same spot.

Thanks Betty. I've never looked at the Fuji range before but people do swear by them. Maybe I should cast my net wider? At the moment it is a toss up between Nikon and Sony.

[Jansos]

9 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

I have had the three Fuji cameras listed above in my earlier post and never had a dust spot show up. They must self-clean very well. My Nikons did get dust in them that always showed up in skies. I practice all the safe things one does when changing lenses.

Yes, I have had the same problems with my Nikons. Usually involves a yearly and costly (£50+) trip to have them cleaned professionally.

[Jansos]

17 hours ago, Marianne said:

On the Sony, I love the FE 24-105mm f/4 G lens, a great walking around lens.

 

Since buying it last year, I've been using it for much of my landscape, portrait, and even some close up work, although I have wide angle primes - 8mm, 20 & 35mm - and the 90mm macro G series, which is also great for portraits. The lens is well balanced on both of my Sonys (FF a7rii & a7riv - both bought on sale when the newer models were released). Despite bad arthritis in my hands and a bad back & neck, I can wander around for several hours with the lens and camera combo. It's not as good in low light as my primes, but it's much lighter than the faster and more expensive option, and it is a G series lens, so very sharp end to end & a really great range.

 

If I  wanted the lightest kit, the Olympus micro 4/3rds is incredibly light. Since 2014, I never had a fail with any of the prosumer level lenses I have - the 24mm, 35mm & 24-70mm  have the original OMD 1. I can wander around all day with the camera and all three lenses in my bag or toss it with a prime attached into my purse. Not great in low light although the day I got it, a fire broke out down the street from me at 2am and I got amazing stills and video - the menu is the easiest I've seen and the jpegs in low light are quite good. The prime lenses are especially fast and the lens stabilization is outstanding. I imagine the new models are even better 9 years later. I tried the pro lenses at PhotoExpo (pre-Covid) and they are excellent. I bet you could get a great used kit for a song. 16MP is fine for stock and, as I said, never a fail with that camera (I had one fail with the 42MP Sony because the black grains of dirt mixed with sand on a racetrack were misinterpreted as noise by QC).

 

Honestly, for stock the high MP cameras are a lot of work in some ways as there is just so much real estate to spot check and you need top-notch and super clean lenses (the Sonys are a nightmare as far as dust is concerned - the Oly self-cleans beautifully).

 

I haven't shot with Nikon since 2018 when I went totally mirrorless, but their lenses are great. I kept a few that I use on my Sony with an adapter. Including a 50mm f/1.2 from the 70's I got on ebay for $40 back in 2007- one of the trade-in sites offered me $440 for it - the bokeh is something you can't find in any of the new lenses. If you have Nikon lenses, I'd look at their mirrorless offerings. I went mirrorless a little too soon, or I think I'd have Nikons instead of Sonys. 

 

Also keep in mind that you can get adapters for just about any combo - I have adapters for my Nikon and my original film 1970s Olympus lenses for my Sonys. I opted for inexpensive manual ones & since most of the lenses I use with them aren't autofocus. 

 

So many excellent choices. 

 

If money was no object, I'd want a full frame Fuji, but not sure it's practical for shooting stock. 

Brilliant, thanks so much. 🙂

[Steve F]

I don't have the experience to give a good answer, I've only ever used Minolta back in the day and Sony for digital. 

 

18 hours ago, Marianne said:

On the Sony, I love the FE 24-105mm f/4 G lens, a great walking around lens.

 

But +1 to the 24-105mm that Marianne is using, I use this lens most of the time and I'm very happy with it. I'd want a more advanced camera than my 24MP A7III if money no object, but not sure I'd want the 33MP of the A7IV for stock. I'm already able to crop quite aggressively with 24MP.

Edited January 5, 2023 by Steve F

[Phil Crean]

If money was no object I would never have bothered with Stock!😏

Likewise if money was no object I'd have the latest Hasselblad and a Leica M11, and a 5 x 4 for when I felt like shooting film!😁

 

Phil

[wiskerke]

50 minutes ago, Phil Crean said:

If money was no object I would never have bothered with Stock!😏

Likewise if money was no object I'd have the latest Hasselblad and a Leica M11, and a 5 x 4 for when I felt like shooting film!😁

 

Phil

But then you would have been a dentist.

😁

 

wim