I find it amazing that in 2021 manufacturers still get away with refusing to repair things because they were bought in a different country. As if people don't move around a lot nowadays. And it's one thing to say the warranty isn't valid in another country, but it's another to refuse to even sell the parts to a repair shop so you can't even pay to get it repaired.
German situation: Your warranty is with the seller of the goods not the manufacturer. If you bring a grey market camera to Canon CPS (like a certain Ex-coworker thst boasted about how big a dealmaker he was had to) they give you the choice "Contact the seller or pay for the repair as if the warranty has expired" If you bring a german market camera to the CPS they take over the warranty (they need to see a bill with date of service). AFTER they have accepted the camera they politely ask "why not the seller" (at least if the seller is a resonably close brick and mortar shop). That"s okay - why would one skip the seller, the CPS was a bit out of the way until recently so this might hint at problems with service quality at an official dealer. In my case - the dealer was 25km, half through a large city and in the evening. CPS was 1000m down the road during lunchbreak
You should be able to repair at your cost no matter where you bought the equipment. I live in UK, tomorrow I might move to Poland, next year in Thailand. So I can't fix camera if I am abroad? That is not right!
"Grey Market" is a name made up by 'official' sellers in their respective countries in order to force people to buy expensive, overpriced gear from them. All my camera gear since my Nikon D5200 was "Grey Market" and I never had any issues with them all, I currently own a D850 and D780 complete with scary "Grey Market" lenses. I have saved thousands of pounds in avoiding over priced camera gear.
Yeah, I dont know if this story with Nikon is true or not, but If its is its totally their BS. I would be extremely bad customer if they would told me that they wont service the lens or camera because its from different region. Im not sure that they can legally tell this to customers in EU anyway.
In Canada I've run into issues where they won't service Grey market nikon stuff .. also forfeit warranty, not worth it imo here in Canada.. I understand Eu often pays an extra premium though so may be worth it in that case, assuming you don't get a lemon.
I have the same kit. I also use an older Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF too, this is comparable due to crop, to the 80mm high end Portrait/Fashion Nikkor MF that I used to use back in the day on my F3hp back in the wonderful film days.
I believe generally what they are saying are correct.....bigger sensors in average bodies are better IQ wise, and low light wise. But when you go to flagship type cameras, sensors are so excellent, like the D500, that gives you a tremendous sensor, and the advantage of length from a crop sensor, it’s really insignificant the loss of any perceived image quality over the full frame equivalent, and actually adds benefits that are more important in particular situations.
They actually say if you use full frame lense with cropped sensor, the pixel density is higher on the body. So if the lense was for 34mp on a full frame, then if you use a 20mp cropped, you are fine. But if you use something higher, you lose to sharpness. Where cropped lenses usually take this into consideration so they are generally sharper at the same price. But in your case it should be fine because it is a telephoto that won't be really sharp anyway and your camera isn't a crazy high megapixel one.
@@chuckdavidson5483 It's not affordable.. it's preowned.. and if you really want to know what pisses me the EFF off is that it's only $300 less than a brand new one.. The thing is that with the MP they build like maybe 100 (if that) a year.When they get shipped to a store that has a waiting list of 10 people or more -yeah that shop will get 2 pieces.
Tony and Chelsea, I just wanna say that I love your videos. You guys put so much work into them and you passion really shines right through. I'm a new photographer and still have much to learn, but I have gained so much from your videos and podcasts. Keep up the good work!!
Still harping on about not using full frame lenses on APS-C bodies eh. Funny, my Nikon D500 doesn't seem to mind - it is a joy to use with my 300mm f/2.8 + 1.4 TC. I know many people also use the D500 with the Nikon 200 - 500mm f/5.6, both of these lenses are full frame and these combos produce the goods. Even my old AF-S 300mm f/4 D is an amazing match with the D500.
I agree! I even use my diddy Nikon z50 toy camera, connected via the ftz adapter to the 200-500 f 5.6. It certainly resolves more detail than I expected with phenomenal sharpness. Yet we were told it was a useless idea putting aps-c in a Z mount. I couldn't be happier. There's a lot of misconceptions and media hype out there. There's soon to be a ftz adapter with screw drive announced. So I think Nikon is certainly the most loyal brand out there.
@@timothylatour4977 FX lenses generally have better optics. Nikon did make a few good DX lenses, but you get better quality with FX lenses. Price wise, well the good DX lenses like the 17-55 f2.8 and 12-24 f4 are expensive too. You can also find good lenses on the used market. Especially now that Nikon’s dropped many of its f lenses. And when I buy a good used D700, I’ve got my lenses already. Best of all, I can buy DX or FX lenses.
D7500 with Sigma 35mm ART 1.4 and Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2, they work together without a problem. I am thinking to upgrade to a Z6 II, but i am not in a hurry.
A FF body will give better IQ than it’s equivalent crop body, but it has nothing to do with lens compatibility, it’s simply the FF sensor vs the smaller crop sensor. Though Tony obviously believes there’s more to it than that.
Good video! Now I have been buying quite some used gear, but always from sellers around where I live so that I can test before buying. Recently bought a new camera. Spent hours in a store discussing with store employees and customers + handling the gear. I very nice experience
I enjoy shooting 35mm color film. Being 21 years old and native to digital photography, I find film much more satisfying and rewarding to me. I have been doing this for about a year and one of the mistakes I made was wanting a camera that did everything. I would buy and sell over and over, looking for a camera I was truly satisfied with. It finally dawned on me that there was no camera that was going to be great at everything I wanted to shoot. So, I bought a Nikon N90 for fast moving objects with its sharp autofocus, a Canon AE-1 Program for amazing still life and macro photos, and an Olympus OM-1 for its small and lightweight body and to take more casual photos with. I also enjoy the fact that the shutter doesn't require a battery. Just realize sometimes that perfect all in one camera you may seek doesn't exist. And while, each of these cameras can do it all, they may not do it as well as others will.
I have bought a lot of gear used online and I can knock on wood say I have never had an issue with a single item. The one thing I have done on every occasion is get to know the user of the gear who is selling it. most of the gear has been expensive bodies and lenses so its my expectation that the user is a practicing photographer. Red flags are people selling expensive gear who wouldn't know a F stop if it hit them in the face. I have asked to see their Instagram page to see if they have work they produced with the gear. I think this has saved me from buying something that is questionable or even worse could be a fraud.
Good discussion. With due respect, two big issues I had with professional reviewers when I was upgrading from my D750: 1 - Pro reviewers don’t give nearly enough weight to the cost of changing brand systems. The Sony xxxx might be superior to the Nikon yyyy is some areas, but most people with a big investment in lenses won’t see that improvement as worth a wholesale change. 2 - For my work as a non-vlogger, I really don’t care if the Sony/Fuji has a flip screen and the Nikon does not. I’ll almost never need it even if a vlogger thinks it’s indispensable.
Oh yes this second thing happens way too much. So many of the reviews are from vloggers or streamers and they only focus on their own personal use-case! It's frustrating and not so audience friendly. I like about Tony and Chelsea that they buck this trend and frequently talk about "what works for you" and the different ways things are used in different situations. I wish there was more of that.
That’s why you should buy for the glass. I shoot Canon because I researched and bout a lot of Vintage EF L lenses. It might not be as sharp as other lenses but the unique look makes my photos stand Out. EF135 f2 is one gem.
You did it again, your ideas kept me from impulse buying. I have yet figured what I want. I think I need to use my existing gear and identify really what I would like. Or need. Great job for me, not so much for the camera store.
Thank you both for what you do, your #1! Thank you for introducing me to KEH, sold an older camera Nikon 1 J5, and the lenses for it and my lenses for my D7000 and got just enough to get 2 used lenses for the D7000. I got the Nikon 18-140 and the 50mm F1/8 so it should be fun to see what I can do with these lenses.
I would actually disagree with that somewhat. Learning about gear and lenses can be useful and if you got a DSLR it might be the best type of camera to learn with as it provides more options for you, more future potential. Sure you can also learn fundamentals like color balance, exposure and such on phone, but a full DSLR will make you learn way more than that.
I run a D800e and a senior friend of mine says - I have some wonderful old lenses in the upstairs in a box - so I went up and got them - Olympus OM , broke my heart - then she said - look in the bottom and there is an "F" mount adapter . Have to do everything Manual - and manual focus but I shoot that way anyhow - they are sharp as a tack - made in the late 60's , early 70's I'm told . Great video ! Enjoyed it !!!
Great as usual. After nearly 40 years using SLRS and DSLRS, My biggest mistake was going micro4/3 to cut weight, not because of sensor size but because of really terrible autofocus. Still, with experience in ancient manual focus, starting with an SRT-101, and practice with the touch screen, I overcome. I then got a good cellphone camera and now rarely use the camera. I’m thinking of getting a new camera with eye detect since all cameras seem much more manageable in weight, but I often think why bother when my cellphone pictures with a little processing are sharper than many of the great photos of the past. Oh, what to do? I am a gear head so be sure I will eventually buy more stuff. Keep up the incredible work. You guys are the best.
Yeah I'm pretty unhappy with the iPhone 14 pro after shooting only with Sony gear for many years. I would never consider using my phone with my old android. I thought that the newer iPhone would be able to replace the old A6000 and it's tiny kit lens that I kept in my purse. I should have just bought a cheap phone and continued to use the A6000.
I always buy used gear and if I don't get on with it I'll sell it on, usually for about the same money. That way I get my gear fix on the cheap. By the way, my favourite combo is the D500 with the 200-500mm so mixing fx and dx isn't a problem for me. Good vid though guys
This is the way....also, If you buy from boomers with too much money they tend to buy from autosized dealers, and you avoid the grey market situation as well.
My strategy for looking through reviews is to look for similar negative reviews. If one person says the lens has slow AF then maybe that was user error or they got a malfunctioning lens or something. If a dozen people say the lens has slow AF, maybe it has slow AF. Almost every product has positive reviews if it has enough reviews, and positive reviews don't often get specific.
The problem with 5 star reviews is that people often make them right away with no time to find the little problems. Unless they say something like "After using it every weekend for a year" you have to take reviews with a grain of salt.
Yes I am a negative review reader too. Same as you, I look for consistency. When Amazon used to let you comment on reviews the negative reviews got lots of haters. I want to thank all of you out there that leave negative reviews. Even if I don't agree, I don't take it as a personal affront if you don't like my favorite gear.
thanks for this. All my DSLR bodies are used: Canon 40D, 5D (orig) 7D (orig) and 70D. I have lenses that span 10mm to 400mm, most are secondhand. Have rarely been disappointed buying gear via ebay.
Great vid and some really excellent advice. The only point I’d debate is FF lenses on APS bodies. Certainly I’ve found the D500 with a 300PF with a 1.4TC or a 200-500mm Nikon lens works brilliantly. Maybe these are the exceptions rather than the rul?
I think they are correct with average consumer body’s between FF and crop......but flagships like D500 with great sensors and processors, and added reach, it’s a mute point.
I totally agree. I would like anyone to explain to me what are the problems with using a FF lens on an APS-C camera in terms of image quality (it sounds in fact that the quality should be better as the camera is only using the center of the circle of light.
Yes, "exception". Typical examples of "FF lens on APS C being a bad idea" would be my Sigma 14/3.5 or 24/1.8 or buying an expensive bulky wide FF zoom instead of a significantly cheaper APS counterpart, like a good kit zoom or a 12-24/4, that could still take pictures while you are saving up for 2nd & 3rd FF bodies. 50mm and up FF lenses might be OK (I'm happy with mine but didn't invest in high res crop bodies. Mediocre glass on FF seemed more appealing.)
This video would be very useful for me a year ago, I bought a full frame sony camera and didn't know about the meaning of APS-C lens thought is was just about the field of view and later I understood that the resolution of my images was divided by 2! 🙄
Always check out the layout of the buttons, dials, and knobs. I’m a very dedicated back button focus shooter, and the placement of the af-on button on the back of my full size Nikon was perfect. I switched systems to the lighter, smaller Olympus (which I love), but I assumed the placement and size of the button to be used for back-button focus on the OM-D M5 MkII would be the same, but it is bad. The button can be enabled for BBF but not a comfortable experience.
That's my strategy--2 cheap bodies (18mp/Digic 5/crop) and several mid range lenses. Buying used, my lenses each cost me 3 times the used value of the body. Works for me.
Well. It really depends. I mean you can get parts from grey market as well. And if one is a DIY guy, it's not that difficult to just do the repair by yourself. I bought a a6000 which ended up being broken when it arrived. No worry, I just tore it apart and found out that it was the sensor and shutter both which were not working since someone had let salty water in from the bayonet. I ordered new parts from ebay, washed the existing parts in bathroom sink from the salt residue, put it together and I have had it for 4 years now and it's still kickin'. And not only I have a functioning camera, I also have a fun story to tell. And the knowhow to fix it again.
Something similar happened to me when I purchased my Tamron 150-600mm G2 lens. I went through Amazon, The vendor I picked had the same price as others and said the lens came with Tamron's warranty. Except when I went to register the lens, Tamron would not accept the registration, saying I bought it from a camera shop that was not a licensed Tamron dealer. They wanted to keep 20 percent of my payment as a restocking fee, so I decided to keep the lens -- without the warranty. I also complained to Amazon, which did remove that vendor's Tamron lens listings. I hope I don't ever need the warranty.
i had a sony a7ii but the eye AF never really worked fast enough for action photos, eg competitive ballroom dancing. so i changed to the A6400 as it uses the latest eye AF used on the A9. my images went up to 95% in focus. i wanted an 85mm lens or 105mm 1.8 lens which are not available for APSC so i bought a full frame 85mm Zeiss Batis which gave me awesome results. i know it gives 127mm f2.7 but this works as i dont have any other prime options for APSC Sony
Tony and Chelsea, I enjoy your videos and find you give good advice. You gave good advice on not buying FX lenses for DX cameras and vice versa. For most things that is good advice. I'm not sure it is all the time though. I have a D7500, a camera I really like, and wanted a telephoto lens for multipurpose use. 70-300mm seemed to be the ideal range for me so I looked at Nikon's offerings. They have both a DX and FX version of the same lens with the DX version being much less expensive. When I compared the two I didn't like the plastic lens flanges on the DX version and the ones on the FX one were metal. I liked the additional half a stop speed, f5.6 vs. f6.3, as well. So I spent the extra money and got the FX lens. I have been pleased with the results. It focuses quickly and accurately when shooting my grandson's soccer games and has good resolution for when I need a telephoto lens for other work. As my grandson is getting interested into photography I got him a used D3300 with the kit lens. He does great with that combo just starting out. I decided to add a telephoto lens to his kit so I got a used DX version of the 70-300mm lens, the very same one I had rejected earlier. Before I gave it to him I tested it by shooting some soccer and found that the lens focused just as quickly as the FX lens. However, wide open it has a visible amount of vignetting, something the FX lens didn't have on the D7500. In addition, I found that since both lenses were being shot wide open the added half a stop was helpful. Given that I don't shoot indoor sports or evening sports I think I made the right choice for me. In all fairness both lenses do the job well, I do prefer the more sturdy construction of the FX lens and its more even exposure. But for low end shooters like myself either would work. However, I don't regret buying the FX lens.
Very informative video! I am falling in line with the adapter stuff right now, but I will be carrying some DSLRs over with me, so I might be leaning on the mirrorless lens for the mirrorless body and sticking to the DSLRs for the older lenses. I am hoping to get some more miles out of my 600mm prime, but I’ll see how rough it is. I can definitely attest to the attacks on a forum from the fan boys! I wanted to let people know about a support issue, and everyone took it personally instead of realizing I legitimately had been snubbed on an electronic switch I was using on a light. Some people just can’t handle the truth about their favorite toys!
If you’re a Nikon nps member just ask for the serial number and add it to your gear list. It will either give the green checkmark indicating that’s it’s a USA model or it will give an error.
There is a lot of muddy thinking about value. The concepts I am exploring are not specific to photography: they are used by fortune 500 companies to buy everything from paper clips to new buildings. A FEATURE: is a characteristic specific to a product or service, but has no inherent relationship to any specific user It can be be expressed by the phrase: "this is what we have, is it any use to you?" A BENEFIT: is specific to the potential purchaser and represents something that will either improve their performance, or mitigate a limit to their performance. This could be expressed by the line by the Spice Girls: "Tell me what you want, what you REALLY, REALLY want!" VALUE: is only achieved when you can map a feature to a benefit. So, to give an example. A camera has an ability to shoot 4k video - that's a FEATURE. However, since I don't shoot video it does not map to a benefit I need, so it has no value in my buying evaluation. The following process works: 1. Establish Your Criteria: Define BENEFITS you want, rank them in priority: MUST HAVE, Want, would be nice... 2. Research for Products: Find products that have FEATURES the match your benefits list 3. Compare and Filter: Remove any that don’t match your “must have” criteria 4. Reduce the list to 2-3. 5. Evaluate: Try out the gear with a hands-on evaluation 6. Make your purchase: Shop around for good deals from reliable vendors that support local warranties. As regards advice for camera buyers: I contribute to a couple of fora ( yes, I admit it!!! I was a professional but am now retired), and see frequent inquiries on the theme of 'what camera should I buy?' As mentioned, I inevitably see these requests with the absolute minimum of information provided (which tells you something), yet members (some very senior) respond (without further clarification) with a recommendation based on THEIR shooting situation. I resist this, and instead suggest the following questions for the potential purchaser to consider, and hopefully answer, if they want a valid response. 1. If you have camera gear, what specifically are its limitations that hold you back from taking the images you want? If they don't know, it might well serve them better to invest in education, via on-line on local courses and workshops, camera societies or for those just starting, question #5 becomes relevant... 2. What is the budget? So many people over-invest in gear that offers them no benefit (as per the above) and blow their budget, or are tempted to keeping upping the investment. They are encouraged by the GAS community, who believe that the latest iteration of gear will unleash the hitherto latent talent that lies within them. I was working with an educational facility that was conducting a series of courses on photography. Despite clear guidelines that the right camera should have controls for aperture and shutter priority, and manual and that the maximum size was 1500 pixels on the long dimension of an image, students were being persuaded to put themselves into debt to get the latest and most expensive gear. GAS is different from those who engage with the gear from a purely technical perspective as they are not necessarily seeking to leverage a photographic performance benefit. 3. What Subjects will you take: This helps to identify the types of equipment - e.g. video or not, general-purpose, travel, wildlife, portraits - all of these will give clues to the consultant about Fields of View, sensor dynamic range etc. (impacting lenses and sensors). For specific purposes, or to evaluation gear, renting equipment may be a much better solution. For that once-in-a-lifetime trip to the Masai Mara to shoot the great migration, not having to invest in a suitable super tele lens, transport it to Africa, use it and return it may not be the best solution: especially if one is not likely to need that type of gear again. Many such travel companies can arrange renting of gear at the location of the shoot, thus reducing investment and risk. 4. What Will you PRODUCE: I rarely see this question asked, yet it is arguably the MOST significant question! It takes a lot greater investment to provide the gear for high end Art (with a capital A), large, hi-res prints, than for social media sites that are likely to downsize images or digital displays. In the end, the final output is what it is all about. For those looking at part-time professional work, the challenge is balancing an often limited budget with a need to be able to provide images in the event of unexpected situations or gear failure. 5. What are your intentions: People take photos for a huge range of reasons: from purely social and casual photography: where the priority is not the taking of images, but the engagement. Parents with kids, school events, social events. Then there are students in photography who likely have limited budgets and are yet to confirm their specific career and gear choices. Enthusiasts who may be engaged in competition for example, and finally professionals for whom the camera is a tool to produce products or services (although they are unlikely to be engaging in this process). Each of these perspectives will have a different value-set and priority, and establishing those can make a huge difference. When looking at a long-term engagement, the gear as a system is worth considering, as changing brands can be an expensive process... 6. What are you prepared to carry: Depending upon the activity, large and heavy gear may not be appropriate. For example: for travel, one may want more compact and lighter gear to reduce risks during transit and offer more convenience. Multi-day hikers may well choose a similar type of gear as it has to compete with hiking equipment in the pack but may also have to be more rugged. As we age, or have injuries, less is often more. In the end the best camera is the one you are prepared to carry with you. 7. Ergonomics and Interface: Simply looking at specs and reviews does not offer the experience of manipulating the controls and menus of a camera. I have seen people pay out significant sums for gear and then hate how it feels and operates in the hands. They either have to sell it and get something else (at a cost), or suck it up and get used to the limitations.
Trevor Thanks very much for sharing your experience. I'm 55, a Master Plumber, and have been scouring multiple sources for information for my first camera, lens, and accessories purchase. I'd like to do general photography and video of friends and family, landscape with sunsets over lakes, and some wildlife including hummingbirds. Luckily, I've had the time to read and watch hours of UA-cam videos and read multiple fora (yes, 4 years of H. S. and 2 yrs of university Latin!). Unlucky is that I had the time from two cancer surgeries (all is well) and spine fusion surgery (meh), all in 2021! All of your thoughts are spot on. Many people buy with their emotions, and decisions based on emotions are usually not wise. This advice can be used not only for camera purchases, but for anything, even regular, everyday decisions. I've taught many Apprentices in my career who love GAS. Good quality tools are important, but the skills behind them are what's important. Like they say in shooting pool: It's not the stick, it's the shooter! Going to try and get in touch with you on your Channel. Thanks
I buy new gear only. I will buy third party accessories and lens but I am picky about the brand, buying mostly based on previous experience. For certain items such as adapters, batteries, and remotes I buy camera manufacturer only as I have found 3rd party are hit or miss. As someone who has been shooting for many years, I agree there is no perfect camera or perfect lens. Your advice to figure out what camera and lens work best for you is spot on.
That "don't put ff lenses on crop bodies" is just for pixelpeepers. Sorry, but gradually switching to FF works for sooo many people, and the quality difference might be completely irrelevant for most people. "Image" comes from imagination, not from pixel-perfection.
Even pixelpeepers should be satisfied. I definitely would like anyone to demonstrated that FF lenses are worse on an APS-C body than an APS-C lens. It sounds rather ludicrous to me for many technical reasons.
I bought a used Hasselblad X1D a couple of years ago. I started with the 45P as it is in my "affordable" price range. I've added an HC 50-110, CF 500, and as of today a CF 140-280 all used off of EBay. We live next to a park and I have wanted to be able to blow up wildlife pics and see the details of animals that walk by our house. I had doubts about using 34 year old lenses designed for 6x6 film cameras or a 20 year old lens designed for 6x4.5 film cameras with a modern 44x33 mm medium format digital sensor and its electronic shutter. Happily it works and many of the pics have turned out great! Should we call this "Hasselblad on a Budget"? Hey, that may make a good video!
I totally agree with your point on battery. I tried to use third party battery on my XT3 and after 2 months of use, it’s puffed and gets stuck on battery bay.
Using a FF lens on a APSC body can be extremely good, but you just have to check the pixel density first, if you have a 24mp APSC body, it will have the same pixel density as a 54mp Full Frame body, so you need very sharp glass because the limitating factor of the overall sharpnes will be the optics and not the sensor. I would say that An APSC body can work with all the good wildlife/sport/macro lenses, but fast portrait lenses (105 1.4, 85 1.4... etc) that are made to have a smooth rendering on a Full-Frame would just be too soft on an APSC. That goes also with fast wide angle lenses (20 1.8, 24 1.8... etc), these are difficult to manufacture, and therefore not sharp enough wide open on an APSC (but honestly, a wide angle on a crop sensor is a waste).
??? Generally FF lenses are built to higher standards than APS-C lenses (more metal, more high resolution glass, more protection against moisture and dust and that is why they are generally more expensive). In terms of resolution whatever lens you use, FF or APS-C,(of a similar grade), they generally have the same resolution regardless of the resolution (what you call pixel density) of the sensor. Later lenses have also got around 50% more resolution than the previous generation (film).
@@BrunoChalifour i think i made some confusion between resolution and definition (i am french, and résolution can be used equally for overall pixel count or resolvinlq) Everything depends on which Lens you are comparing. Yes, FF lense are usually (by usually i mean "High grade", not "crappy kit stuff") betters built, but comparing build quality and resolving power is different, apsc sensors have very High resolving power (a 24 mpx apsc has 2,25 Times the resolving power (=pixel density), as a FF 24 mpx, because it has the same number of pixels on a 1,5x1,5 tinier surface), so FF lenses needs to be 2,25 times less sharp than their apsc counterparts to obtain the same sharpness results on the sensor each is made for. You can look on dxo mark for example, the sharpness results of a lens drop if you lower the sensor size. My point being, if your FF sensor resolving power already matches or exceed the one of your lens, then you don't wanna adapt this lens to an apsc body, because it will not give you better results than cropping a photo from your full frame body. So yes, adapting a zoom like a nikkor FX 28-300 to an apsc is a bad idea, whereas the 200-500 1:5.6 is a common assembly, one is sharp enough for a crop sensor, and the other is made for 24mpx FF bodies, and awon't give you more range on apsc. I think that you'll almost always get better results from a FF Lens than its apsc counterpart, on an apsc body. But sticking a FF lense to an apsc body doesn't necessarily means that you'll have more rea le
@@pierrevilley6675 Comme je l'ai écrit ailleurs, les (bonnes) optiques, qu'elles oient FF ou APS-C, ont des résolutions que l'on peut considérer identiques, soit environ 60 paires de lignes par millimètres (alors qu'environ seulement 40 pour les optiques pour appareils utilisant du film),... peu importe le type (et la capacité) des capteurs auxquels elles sont destinées. De toutes façons, la discussion est sur la valeur comparée des optiques, non des capteurs... et ces valeurs sont quasimment identiques (même si souvent celles des optiques FF sont légèrement supérieures car elles s'adressent à un public plus exigeant car professionnel (ils en vivent), et il faut aussi justifier leur prix plus élevé ; la qualité de leur fabrication (résolution comprise) n'est pas seulement une conséquence du public auquel elles s'adressent mais bien des matériaux employés et du soin pour leur production. C'est le cas, par exemple, de la différence entre les optiques pour le système CL (APS_C) chez Leica (qu'on ne peut accuser de laxisme en matière d'optique) et le système SL [au besoin renseignez vous, voir entre autre la chaine UA-cam RedDotForum où même l'exposé du directeur du programme optique chez Leica aussi sur UA-cam]. Même chose chez Canon et Nikon. Quant à la résolution des capteurs la différence entre un APS-C à 24 Mp et un FF à 47-50 Mp (qui sont les références courantes) voire 60 est nulle. Donc les exigences/besoins en matière d'optiques sont totalement identiques : aucune raison d'avoir des optiques FF de résolution inférieure à celles des optiques APS-C [en plus bonjour la publicité négative chez les pros si c'était le cas]. Par contre la GROSSE différence entre les optiques APS-C et les FF consiste en leurs cercles de lumière : bien plus important pour les optiques FF, ce cercle permet d'éviter les problèmes de vignettage et de perte de définitions dans les coins à pleine ouverture avec des capteurs APS-C. Donc oui, optiquement un objectif FF peut non seulement être un bon remplacement pour une optique APS-C sur un boitier APS-C mais il sera meilleur. Les seuls arguments négatifs que l'on peut donner sont : poids, encombrement et prix. Mais certainement pas qualité optique et qualité de photographie obtenue.
@@BrunoChalifourje limitais ma comparaison aux capteurs de même définition et de taille différente, sinon ça n'a aucun sens. Je reprends mon point de vue, sur apsc on a un corps factor de 1,5, ce qui multiplie l'allonge par ce facteur, mais aussi les défauts, si vous avez des aberrations chromatiques visible sur un FF de 24 mpx, elles apparaîtront seront 1,5 fois plus grosse sur apsc de même définition, d'autre part, si un objectif définit 60 LP/mm sur le capteur, cela signifie qu'il définira (24x60) 1440 lignes horizontales sur un capteur Full frame, et seulement (16x60) 960 sur un apsc. Et c'est quelque chose que j'ai déjà testé (en adaptant un 75-300 qui était tout à fait correct en full frame à un capteur MFT sur lequel il s'est transformé en grosse merde). Et non, toutes les optiques ne sont pas construite pour des boîtiers full frame de 50mpx, les optiques pros oui, mais un zoom de kit non, beaucoup de vieilles optiques non plus, et si ces dernières restent utilisables sur un gros capteur, elles seront mauvaise en apsc. C'est pourquoi je dis : -Adapter une optique déjà molle ou avec des défauts visibles en FF sur un apsc va l'empirer, si elle est déjà molle avec un gros capteur, en faire un crop ne va pas l'arranger. -Posseder un boîtier APSC n'a de sens que si vous recherchez une allonge supérieure (ou pour son prix), mais si vous possédez déjà un boîtier comme un D850, un APSC de 24mpx ne vous donnera rien de plus qu'un crop apsc sur le D850. -Aussi, je n'essayais pas de répondre à la question "est-ce qu'utiliser des objectifs FX en apsc à la place des DX, est bien ?" mais plutôt à "est-ce qu'adapter mes optiques FX sur un apsc me donnera plus d'allonge que ce que j'ai sur mon boîtier FX?" et la réponse est oui uniquement si le capteur était le facteur limitant du système (de par sa densité de pixels), sinon faire un crop de votre FX vous donnera des résultats au moins aussi bons que l'apsc.
@@pierrevilley6675 Il me semblait que le point de départ des commentaires était la vidéo. Il y était de savoir si monter un objectif FF sur un boitier APS-C en valait la peine (et la réponse de la vidéo était "non" ce qui demeure une hérésie si on compare les optiques actuelles), pas de se limiter au boitier de même nombre de pixels (en fait on compare des objectifs et leur capacités pas les capteurs, ce qui est un autre débat)... Il ya beaucoup de commentaires qui semblent dériver, s'éloigner du sujet, et servir de prétexte à des exposés et théories personnelles. Donc je m'en tiens à un commentaire de la vidéo. Dire que monter un objectif FF médiocre (film) sur un boitier APS-C risque de voir le piqué des images baisser (car l'objectif a été construit aux normes anciennes de résolution et non aux normes courantes [et communes] des aps-c ET des ff) est un fait mais c'est une comparaison limitée et il aurait fallu le préciser (ce qui n'était pas le cadre de la vidéo). Le constat est simple : effectivement monter un objectif FF potable (film) sur un boitier APS-C ne rapporte pas grand chose (sinon une économie financière dans le cas d'un objectif ancien conçu pour le film), mais monter un objectif FF courant et de qualité (comparé à un objecvtif APS-C courant et de qualité car il faut comparer ce qui est comparable et ne pas dériver dans un relativisme qui ne mène à rien), les avantages de l'objectif FF sont : mieux construit, cercle de lumière supérieur donc élimination de beaucoup de problèmes optiques inhérents aux cercles de lumière qui ne couvrent qu'un peu plus que la diagonale du capteur (objectif APS-C sur boitier APS-C ou objectif FF sur boitier FF). Ce qui me semble une évidence est que l'objectif FF sur APS-C aura moins de vignettage et de perte de définition dans les coins à grande ouverture. Quant à la résolution des OBJECTIFS courants et de qualité pour APS-C et FF, elle est quasimment identique avec souvent un plus pour les optiques FF (il faut bien en donner au consommateur pour son argent et le prix permet aussi moins de compromis sur la fabrication). En résumé acheter des objectifs FF courants et de qualité quand on a un boitier APS-C est loin d'être une abbération au niveau qualité optique. Cela permet de rester ouvert à une évolution vers un boitier de format FF sans avoir à renouveler (avec perte) son parc optique (ce qui est en opposition avec la façon de traiter le sujet de la vidéo et rectifie une mauvaise conception du problème et de sa solution)... et en plus c'est plus "sportif" ;o)
I use a Sigma f2.8 70-200mm on my Nikon d7500 and it's my go to for outdoors. Seems quite flexible. On the other hand, I bought a sigma f4 24-105mm full frame to replace my kit lens and that was a mistake. I didn't have the 24 mm when needed.
I went total Micro 4/3 and my main output was stills. I ultimately sold all my Nikon gear as my 810 with an 80=200 2.8 was to heavy for my 74 year old hands. I unloaded everything and bought a new A7RII for the Megapixel count dealing with the small batteries. I also got a A7III, I know a new one is coming I like last years state of the art. I got the F4 Trio the 12-24 was used but clean. I put Sony warranties on the new gear. The 2.8 Trio was just too heavy and expensive for me. I decided to get the inexpensive 35 1.8 and 75 1.8 24 F2.8 Rokinon Samyang fixed. These will be travel with the long lens in a shoulder bag as needed. I got used Sony battery grips for them, they were better than the cheap plastic ones. I am going to save up for when a A7RIII gets cheap, and I am looking for a 100-400 Sony used next year.
There are specs for viewfinder latency... Also when shooting BIF turn off the IBIS and lens stabilization - This can cause significant shift of the image and it's not helpful in anycase with a moving subject. When shooting my G9 with a red dot sight and Dual-IBIS on, the captured frame of a moving bird or plane lags the boresight by half the width of the frame.
i have bought 4 items of grey equipment. The first was a Nikon 70-200 f2.8. it was defective on arrival. I had a hell of a job trying to get a refund Ebay 8 yrs ago. The next was a Tokina zoom lens, that was defective on arrival the quality of the photos were appaling. It was as thougn it was a cheap copy not a proper Tokina. That went back to Digital Rev for a full refund. Last try was a Nikon D500 from Panamoz, the viewfinder was defective, it had hundreds of tine little silver speckless all over(in the glass pentaprism) and would not show the image in foucus properly. That went back for a full refund. I think people get conned with this grey import thing by thinking that VAT or exices duties are not being paid on these items. I think that is untrue and that all the duties are paid but the cameras have failed the quality tests and are passed off through the grey market cheap(the fools think duty is being avoided when it's not). Ask any of these grey importers how they can sell cameras cheaper than the genuine market and none of them will tell you. And don't think they would not tell you they avoid the duty because the tax man might find out. The tax man is fully aware of all the grey's being imported and knows all the taxes are paid. If you use genuine dealers which I do now, you don't get battery problems, front/back focusing issues, lens coupling issues and more. Just go on some of the forums and read were people are complaining about these sort of problems and when you ask were they got the camera from it's nearly always a grey. If you are a proper photographer who wants to just go and take photos with reliable gear DON'T but greys, they are cheap for a reason. Some amatures will not even realise their grey is defective.
5:22 I think this can go both ways. I went this route and it worked great for me but I stayed in the Nikon system. I purchased old used fx glass to put on my D90. I didn't buy any bundled kits... Bodies only and lenses only. Ebay was my go-to when I couldn't afford new. When I eventually got a D700 I didn't stop using the D90 (or the D200, D7000, etc) I'd take both. Having the FX glass meant I didn't have to also buy new lenses which I didn't have the budget for. As I sold more jobs, I made enough to buy better gear and recover faster. At some point I started buying pro bodies so the dx cameras were rotated out but it allowed me to ease into fx with the hassle of selling gear. Being able to get a 80-200mm f2.8 used for the price of a kit lens made me images that would get clients. Maybe this is good for the hobbyist, but I went in it to make money. I started with nothing, so making very specific choices in gear allowed me to take on more business and grow to the point where my income could afford better gear (which in turn sped up my workflow).
I have the opposite of 'confirmation bias' - I spend hours researching something until I'm sure it will be good, AND then when I get it, complain endlessly about how disappointed I am because it didn't hold up to my high expectations. LOL. A frustrating bad habit to have. I agree with buying just what you need and maybe buying two cameras for different tasks - especially if you can get one cheap-ish. However, I really struggle to do this, as I keep mentally spending incrementally more for slight gains, until I eventually buy that expensive version that is more than I need...
Know what you mean about 3rd party lenses, many many years ago I had a Rollie SL35E with a Tamron 17mm full frame fisheye that delivered stunning results on ilfochrome 200 (later used Fuji as I couldn't get the ilfochrome) so when I purchased my Nikon D7200 a while ago I bought a Tamron 10-24mm lens as I had good results from a previous Tamron lens. The results though were ok, not great, lacking in saturation so, I bought a Nikkor 10-24mm lens and the difference was marked, better colours, better saturation, all told a much better lens so even with previous good experience you cannot always rely on consistent results from the same manufacturer.
Informative video. I am hesitant to purchase used lenses from people rather than companies even though I have sold lenses on eBay in the past. I've made a few mistakes too. I purchased the Panasonic G9 which is a great camera but it was too large for my hands and it slowed down my photography too much so that was sold. I tried Olympus, many people rave about how great and light the system is but I didn't have that experience so that was sold. Now, I am back with a DSLR and that is fine.
I have Canon R5. I have had good luck with EF L glass adapted. I still have 5D IV as a backup body.The RF28-70 is so expensive but I love it for events. I also use the RF 600 and 800. I was so surprised at how good it is for perched Birds.
On my first lens purchase, I bought a 5-pin Tamron lens for a D3300, had no idea I needed the 8-pin model in order to have autofocus, nothing I read made that clear, even Tamron's lens compatibility guide. Also, the lens I did get, works 100% fine, but I cringe when I look at the elements and there is dust inside the lens, but doesn't effect image quality, but that's just me. Another thing, I bought my Nikon from a individual, not a company that can repair it with some type of warranty. I did get my moneys worth with an included $200 35mm 1.8 lens, thrown in the deal. But.
Is it possible to go wrong getting into Hasselblad? It will be my first camera(s). I live on Maui, and looking to go into an artistic direction. I'm thinking about getting two 907x's. One will have the control grip, and the xcd 1.9 lens, the other will have another lens that I have yet to decide on. Even though it isn't ideal for video, I'd like a versatile lens that would look good when shooting video. If need be, I'm open to getting a third 907x and putting another lens on it. The reason being that I don't even want to remove the lenses off the camera. I want them to be permanent fixtures. Depending on the situation, I'd rather just switch cameras. I also haven't looked into flash gear, or tripods. To recap, I'd like advice on a second and potentially third lens, flash, tripods, and other accessories. I live in a beautiful place in the world, and am witness to so many little magical moments. I'll be shooting a little bit of everything. Maybe not fast things, so I'm okay with these not being sports cameras. Weddings, portraits, outdoor events, scenic vistas, waterfalls, art, night time, street, videos (artisanal storytelling), and fashion/beauty/glamour. If I can do it with two cameras and two lenses great, If I need a third camera and third lens even better.
Thx for a great video - the whole talk about features I think is one the most important ones. Find out what you need and don't get lost in specs. on things you do not use :-)
In the old days, the lens was "independent" from the body. Now, it is an integrated system, with Auto Focus, and Stabilization. Especially in body and lens stabilization working together.
Not sure I agree on the Mix and Match so much. For professional photographers, sure, but as an amateur, you are working within a tight budget and there is no "return on investment". This is a hobby and you buy the best you can, when you can. Frankenstein it if you have to. I got my first DSLR in 2004 (Nikon D70) then upgraded in 2011 (D7000) and 2021 (D850). I wanted to move to full frame in 2011, but at the time, the D7000 had video, whilst the Full frame of the time (D700) did not. Yes ... as Tony said, I always said that I would move to full frame, but years later .... 17 years....I finally did. My first few lenses were the Kit lens (18-70) the "Nifty Fifty" 50/1.8 and a trashy 70-300 - why? Because they were cheap and it's all I could afford at the time. As I took photography more seriously, I started to invest, slowly, one lens at a time, in only FX glass. If I had bought DX only glass, then that eventual step up to an FX camera would have been prohibitive. Now I have my D850 along with a 50/1.8, a 24/1.8, a 105/2.8 micro and an 80-200/2.8. It all matches now, but I was playing the long game, and I do not need to throw away or replace any old DX glass. 1 - Could I have sold the old gear? Not really. My wife uses a D5200 and my 12yo daughter borrows the D7000. They have a few DX lenses and I've given them the 18-70. I miss the upgrade funds, but the lenses are not wasted. 2 - Why not go mirrorless in in 2021? I did not even consider it. Tried it a few years ago, and the poor EVF and low battery life were a no go. The new Nikon Mark II line up looks awesome, and maybe I should have waited a year .... but then again, compared to a D850, the Z7MkII + an FTZ adapter would have been cost prohibitive. The D850 and all my glass will still be good for another 10 years :)
Best to go to a camera shop to handle the camera. Be clear what you want to use it for. Decide the must have features. I got my M50 for the viewfinder the mike jack good autofocus and the articulating screen. You may have different requirements.
Informative video. If there is one thing I kind of disagree with is buying full frame lenses for APS-C body. Some good quality, decently priced full frame lenses (especially primes) are quite good on APS-C body because of the maximum corner sharpness and less amount of vignetting.
I always ask before buying some gear if the warranty is valid internationally, since i am always traveling. A lot of times they ask for an email to register the serial number online.
I have two camera, one APS-C, a 7dII and 5diii, the 7dii was brought new years ago, and 5diii was second hand from a dealer, I use the 5diii for landscapes and night photography with a 1.4 sigma lens second hand, and I use 7dii for wildlife with second hand 5.6 400mm canon lens as recommended by you. The sigmas great, but i am not doing portraits, often manual focus for the stars!
I'm about to buy new gear and struggelig of what to choose. I own a Canon 60D, and like many I like to go fullframe. Been looking at both R6 and R5 and really can't deside. I like to shoot all kinds of stuff, and need an alround gear. I'm also a dronepilot, flying a mavic 2 pro. I do a lot of editing in Lightrom and Photoshop. I guess my lenses and other stuff is outdated too, so it means I have to make serious investments in lenses too. Got any tips?
I bought a Canon 5DsR. Don't get me wrong the camera is insane, but I just didn't need any of the features and I ended up selling it and sticking with my 6D. I mostly shoot handheld macro and it was really difficult to avoid motion blur on the 50mp. The shots I nailed had detail down to the pixel but being a pixel peeper I couldn't help but look at every shot closely, even if I didn't need to crop and reject what would probably be an otherwise good photo when scaled. Also, when shooting on 50mp I tend to get lazy and not thing about framing, step back a bit and think "I'll come up with a crop in post". On the 6D's 20mp it only has about 30% max crop before 4K so the shots matter a little more.
I bought a great D800e camera and a bargin used 28-105mm f3.5-5.5. It turned out the lens probably had been dropped on the floor and was only sharp in the middel and right side, left side is very blurry. The seller would not take it back, and it was too expensive to have it repaired so now I have to stop it down to f8 to get sharp photos over the entire photo. I feel that I dont get full value of my camera even though it works ok, but sometimes my photos from the Iphone seems sharper than from the dslr. It was a bad experience and the conversation with the seller of the lens went all wrong as he claimed that I had damaged the lens, and I should had reacted asap, The lens also has a strange mechancal clicking sound when zooming in.
Hi! I've watched a ton of your videos & others and still don't know what I need. Now the more I watch the more Im confused. I'm semi new and not looking to contract out for photography. I do it as a passion. That said I am a snob for sharpness and clarity. We have a martial arts business and 3 little kids that are my main subjects so lots of fast moving. I like working with raw images in Photoshop and do blow up images for large prints so clarity, focus, and high pixel are a must. I don't mind photoshoping images but not trying to live in the program so I like great raw and camera processed. Because of this I tend to lean towards liking Fuiji and Cannon's end colors. Not sure if I should invest in a cannon if 3rd party lenses are not available. Lighting situations are often uncontrolled so something that can handle a good range. I go from being able to get super close to being up in bleachers. It all depends. Is there a great mid range lense to cover a wide mid zoom range? Do very little video. Just short clips of kids and some instructional and promo videos for the business. It's nice if they look nice but no super video effects needed. I don't care about camera size. I can handle whatever. Interested in jumping into the mirrorless game but open to whatever you think I should look into. Any recommendations greatly appreciated. Thanks sooo much.
I have bought grey Nikon everything. Saved ££££ Here in the UK it is a right rip-off how much extra is charged, not just on cameras, but everything. The retailers I purchased from did not disclose they were grey (naughty but I knew they were buy the price difference). They did offer their own UK warranty. I have never had to use it, so don't know how good it would be. Maybe other peeps have? I managed to damage as SD card slot on one camera, I dropped it off at Nikon service in SW London (alas they have moved and drop-off is no longer possible, only post) and collected it a while later, no issues with repair, only a large bill for a complete new board. (It was out of warranty by that time anyway and my fault for using a cheap micro USB adaptor) I requested the old board back and it looks a simple repair as the SD card slot is just a standard surface mount component.
Just got a new Canon D90 to replace my Canon 450D (which still looks and works as good as new), I’ll never use most of its features. Mirrorless was a big no for me, spend enough time at work looking at computer screens, my hobby is about getting out and not looking at computer screens. Looked around and bought Canon macro, wide angle and telephoto lens 2nd hand, and heavily reduced(damaged box!). With my limited skills I couldn’t see the point of going full frame, if I do my some miracle of god start taking decent photos and feel the need to upgrade, I think medium format will be the way to go. I really wanted a camera with a split focusing screen to have the option to manually focus, but its auto focusing all the way down now.
I agree with your points. I've been struggling for the last months trying to decide which camera to buy. I used a Nikon D3200 for some years, and now I'm using a Sony RX100 M4, and wanted my next camera to be a Full Frame. But why would I need one? The cheapest FF cameras are somehow limited in terms of specs, and the kit lenses they come with are not what I want. But yet again, why am I struggling trying to pick a FF, when I know I am perfectly comfortable with a APS-C. I know I don't care that much about FPS, I barely shoot sports, I even prefer taking long exposures; I want the camera to have 2 memory slots, but I've had no problems with any camera regarding memory cards. The same applies for the rest of the specs I've read over and over, I want something better, but the camera becomes more expensive, and I may not even need it or use it.
That is true. I have had on two occasions err message and camera shut down with my EOS R using Sigma A35mm f1.4 and lost a video file for a wedding shoot. Sad!!!
One more idea relates to the Theory of Dust Collection: essentially what that means is, if you purchase photo equipment but it sits idle for very long periods of time (gathering dust), then you have purchased 'bad gear'. In other words, any gear is a bad buy unless it is actually going to be used. THAT is where the value is measured. Rest assured, there is a lot of equipment that gets purchased with a lot of emotion, and that emotion drains away quickly. Not unlike the associated wallet.
I have a D7100 which is 1.5 crop, as you know. Mostly kit lenses, the 50mm (actually 75mm bc crop factor?), 55-200, 18-55, and 14/2.8 Rokinon. I shoot outdoors, hiking, skiing, camping, climbing, mountain biking, wildlife, etc., etc. Is there more optimal body for that sort of photography? Or is sticking with the 7100 and maybe expanding into higher quality lens quiver the smart play? Is jump to full frame worth the $$$?
D500 from B&H currently selling for &1,596.00. Just bought one and I love it....my first high-end DSLR. Purchased for wildlife photography. Will use this camera with the Nikon 200-500 5.6.
Most folks that buy a low end body don’t buy high end glass . Usually FF glass is phenomenal on apsc bodies because you get the best part of the lens quality within the apsc circle of light but not always. And I now realize on the Micro four thirds with the metabones adapter why we are getting flaring . Thanks for that tip .
I totally agree about using FF on a APS-C body. The opinion stated in the video sounds quite unfounded to me. I would like someone to explain to me what are the problems with using a FF lens on an APS-C camera in terms of image quality (it sounds in fact that the quality should be better as the camera is only using the center of the circle of light.
@@BrunoChalifour if we are talking 50 & 100mm macro lenses, yes they are great. If you want an APS wide, the FF lens will be super wide, catch light sources you don't see in your view finder and flare and its maker sacrificed resolution for image circle. The latter is a bearable compromise on a low resolution FF sensor but not on high res APS. Try it out or dive into DxO mark's PMP ratings. I own no Pentax / k-mount FF wide, that would shine on APS. Even the ZM 21/2.8 doesn't really impress me on APS-H. If you want to enjoy a cheap old 70-300 film zoom, better get an early FF beater to go with it.
2 роки тому
for me i will never use adapters again, if it is not a dumb adatper without electronics i will not buy it ever again. We adapted a Irix lens so the adapter only controlled the Iris. We tested it a couple of times then we had to do a timelapse and in the middle of the night the camera bugged and opened the iris, a day of work completely gone and we had so much stress to keep up... the other thing is incompatible lenses. We had MANY adapters, sigma mc, metabones etc. and the sigma internals simply shorted out because we used a incomatible lens. Metabones speedbooster Sony A to Sony E... it does not get easier. the Lenses stuttered, missed focus, it was horrible... now i will only use native or fully manual lenses... that is a reason why i completely dith canon ... the bigger cinema bodies still have ef mount, but ef mount is dead, the smaller have rf mount but are apsc and rf apsc do not exist and using typical fullframe lenses means you have the strangest focal lenghts on the body. etc. ... Fun fact, many are upgrading to fx9 andfx6 right now because they are full frame and have amazing AF and i so often read about using apsc lenses or adapting ef lenses... they are destroying everything they just upgraded to ... :D strange
I bought a 5DS R a few years back. It's a wonderful camera on a tripod. I shoot on a tripod about 2% of the time. So it's really not the camera I expected when I bought it.
I have EOS 80D and I use both EF and EF-s lenses. No matter what, noise is a big drawback to my eye... How "sufficient" or not is EOS RP/6D mkii? Will this give me much more image quality or I should go for EOS R? This is mainly portrait-landscape photography.
I love photographing wildlife but I only have the old EF 100-400mm Mark I. I am looking to upgrade but I can’t afford the RF 100-500mm. I have the EOS R6. What lens would you buy out of the new RF 100-400mm, the RF600mm or the RF800mm? Or something else? Thanks in advance for any advice given.
Even the reputable vendors will often mislead. Where everything is back ordered if something is in stock but "Imported" or "Open Box", contact customer service to clarify what that means and the limits of warranties and service.
I’m wondering if Tony was shooting the mark i or mark ii 24mm 1.4L adapted onto Canon mirrorless. I shoot the mark ii version on the R5 and R6 and have found it to be a faster and more accurate focus and shooting experience than my 5d4 and 5dsr, even after having microadjusted on those bodies. Overall, shooting the latest generation EF 24, 35 and 85 L’s and other L primes (14, 50, 100 and 135) adapted has been flawless for me, so I would have to generally disagree with them on shooting EF adapted to RF bodies. In my experience, if you can find good copies of EF L primes, they are a great bargain to shoot adapted on RF bodies for quality that 99% of clients/customers could not tell the difference from native RF glass (I own RF zooms and primes so I can speak to this), with autofocus performance that is still acceptable. I avoid mistakes by buying new filters, lenses and bodies from B&H/Adorama and used lenses from KEH and Lensauthority, which have great service and trustworthy, conservative equipment grading and optical performance verification. I sell/trade via MPB, which I find to provide the highest offers and have been flawless so far on transactions. KEH is very reputable as well, but stingier on offers for sold equipment (unless you get a rare promo code on offers). I also avoid mistakes and headaches by maintaining equipment and liability insurance, using only OEM batteries (I’ve found it’s actually better to buy OEM used than 3rd party in any condition!) and sticking with my policy of only buying zoom lenses new (which have more complexity and things that can go wrong than primes).
Hey Tony & Chelsea. Love the channel. I know you are opposed to adapters but have you had a look at the megadap ETZ11 it looks good and is a way of expanding a virgin Z line of lens with E mount Sony and third party alternatives. Would love your thoughts as I have a Z6 and I’m an enthusiast not a pro and would widen my lens options. Thanks 🇦🇺
interesting note about the third party batteries. i have not had an issue with third party, i have 8 nikon enel3 and 17 watson gh5 batteries going on 2 years of service no issues yet. sometimes you might get a dud but that happens with name brand too.
I'm getting a sony a-mount a77ll as my first digital camera. I'm going to be utilizing my minolta a-mount full frame lenses but the a77ll has a croped sensor. Can't find info on this. Dose sony make a-mount lense for a-mount apsc camera?
This is yet another prime example of why right to repair is so damn important!
I find it amazing that in 2021 manufacturers still get away with refusing to repair things because they were bought in a different country. As if people don't move around a lot nowadays. And it's one thing to say the warranty isn't valid in another country, but it's another to refuse to even sell the parts to a repair shop so you can't even pay to get it repaired.
I couldn’t agree more! It’s completely against right to repair
German situation:
Your warranty is with the seller of the goods not the manufacturer. If you bring a grey market camera to Canon CPS (like a certain Ex-coworker thst boasted about how big a dealmaker he was had to) they give you the choice "Contact the seller or pay for the repair as if the warranty has expired"
If you bring a german market camera to the CPS they take over the warranty (they need to see a bill with date of service). AFTER they have accepted the camera they politely ask "why not the seller" (at least if the seller is a resonably close brick and mortar shop). That"s okay - why would one skip the seller, the CPS was a bit out of the way until recently so this might hint at problems with service quality at an official dealer. In my case - the dealer was 25km, half through a large city and in the evening. CPS was 1000m down the road during lunchbreak
Nikon is the biggest prick in this regard!
You should be able to repair at your cost no matter where you bought the equipment. I live in UK, tomorrow I might move to Poland, next year in Thailand. So I can't fix camera if I am abroad? That is not right!
@@Sayanmondalncbs I disagree. Sony is.
"Grey Market" is a name made up by 'official' sellers in their respective countries in order to force people to buy expensive, overpriced gear from them. All my camera gear since my Nikon D5200 was "Grey Market" and I never had any issues with them all, I currently own a D850 and D780 complete with scary "Grey Market" lenses. I have saved thousands of pounds in avoiding over priced camera gear.
Yeah, I dont know if this story with Nikon is true or not, but If its is its totally their BS. I would be extremely bad customer if they would told me that they wont service the lens or camera because its from different region. Im not sure that they can legally tell this to customers in EU anyway.
Not sure if they’ll reject grey market stuff, but you’ll definitely be missing out on a warranty, as it’s not sold by a licensed dealer.
@@sauceboss94 it's your money mate, spend it for the peace of mind.
In my country Nikon said they will happily repair a grey market item.
In Canada I've run into issues where they won't service Grey market nikon stuff .. also forfeit warranty, not worth it imo here in Canada.. I understand Eu often pays an extra premium though so may be worth it in that case, assuming you don't get a lemon.
I am a big believer in buying used, especially if you are a professional who takes advantage of professional service programs.
I use a crop camera (Nikon D500) with a full frame lens (Nikkor 200-500mm), combination you recommended , with no problems and excellent results.
I don’t think that they’re referring to that.. that’s a really common combo
I don’t believe that theory is correct.
I have the same kit. I also use an older Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF too, this is comparable due to crop, to the 80mm high end Portrait/Fashion Nikkor MF that I used to use back in the day on my F3hp back in the wonderful film days.
I believe generally what they are saying are correct.....bigger sensors in average bodies are better IQ wise, and low light wise. But when you go to flagship type cameras, sensors are so excellent, like the D500, that gives you a tremendous sensor, and the advantage of length from a crop sensor, it’s really insignificant the loss of any perceived image quality over the full frame equivalent, and actually adds benefits that are more important in particular situations.
They actually say if you use full frame lense with cropped sensor, the pixel density is higher on the body. So if the lense was for 34mp on a full frame, then if you use a 20mp cropped, you are fine. But if you use something higher, you lose to sharpness. Where cropped lenses usually take this into consideration so they are generally sharper at the same price. But in your case it should be fine because it is a telephoto that won't be really sharp anyway and your camera isn't a crazy high megapixel one.
0:23 Tony: "Hopefully this will save you thousands of dollars."
Me, looking at my sickly bank account. "That will definitely not be a problem."
Mine is pretty anemic also you aint alone
@Charles Davidson Although with that same Anemic acct I'm trying to find me a Leica MP.
@@gewglesux I'd like to score an affordable Leica too.
@@chuckdavidson5483 It's not affordable.. it's preowned.. and if you really want to know what pisses me the EFF off is that it's only $300 less than a brand new one.. The thing is that with the MP they build like maybe 100 (if that) a year.When they get shipped to a store that has a waiting list of 10 people or more -yeah that shop will get 2 pieces.
I scored me a wicked Olympus Mirrorless OMD 10 MkII for $300 WITH the 75-150mm :) Long live the frugal budgeters!
Tony and Chelsea, I just wanna say that I love your videos. You guys put so much work into them and you passion really shines right through. I'm a new photographer and still have much to learn, but I have gained so much from your videos and podcasts. Keep up the good work!!
Great video thanks, some really interesting points raised here, thanks for sharing your experience.
Still harping on about not using full frame lenses on APS-C bodies eh. Funny, my Nikon D500 doesn't seem to mind - it is a joy to use with my 300mm f/2.8 + 1.4 TC. I know many people also use the D500 with the Nikon 200 - 500mm f/5.6, both of these lenses are full frame and these combos produce the goods. Even my old AF-S 300mm f/4 D is an amazing match with the D500.
I agree! I even use my diddy Nikon z50 toy camera, connected via the ftz adapter to the 200-500 f 5.6. It certainly resolves more detail than I expected with phenomenal sharpness. Yet we were told it was a useless idea putting aps-c in a Z mount. I couldn't be happier. There's a lot of misconceptions and media hype out there. There's soon to be a ftz adapter with screw drive announced. So I think Nikon is certainly the most loyal brand out there.
@Nate Dog What are those benefits? And do they cancel the downside which is much more money for ff lenses and more weight?
@@timothylatour4977 FX lenses generally have better optics. Nikon did make a few good DX lenses, but you get better quality with FX lenses. Price wise, well the good DX lenses like the 17-55 f2.8 and 12-24 f4 are expensive too. You can also find good lenses on the used market. Especially now that Nikon’s dropped many of its f lenses. And when I buy a good used D700, I’ve got my lenses already. Best of all, I can buy DX or FX lenses.
D7500 with Sigma 35mm ART 1.4 and Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2, they work together without a problem. I am thinking to upgrade to a Z6 II, but i am not in a hurry.
A FF body will give better IQ than it’s equivalent crop body, but it has nothing to do with lens compatibility, it’s simply the FF sensor vs the smaller crop sensor. Though Tony obviously believes there’s more to it than that.
You guys are awesome! thanks for your time and all the great content you give your viewers.
Good video!
Now I have been buying quite some used gear, but always from sellers around where I live so that I can test before buying.
Recently bought a new camera. Spent hours in a store discussing with store employees and customers + handling the gear.
I very nice experience
Helpful Video, I just noticed your chapter tiles...that is the first time I've seen it in that form...Pretty Cool!
I enjoy shooting 35mm color film. Being 21 years old and native to digital photography, I find film much more satisfying and rewarding to me. I have been doing this for about a year and one of the mistakes I made was wanting a camera that did everything. I would buy and sell over and over, looking for a camera I was truly satisfied with. It finally dawned on me that there was no camera that was going to be great at everything I wanted to shoot. So, I bought a Nikon N90 for fast moving objects with its sharp autofocus, a Canon AE-1 Program for amazing still life and macro photos, and an Olympus OM-1 for its small and lightweight body and to take more casual photos with. I also enjoy the fact that the shutter doesn't require a battery. Just realize sometimes that perfect all in one camera you may seek doesn't exist. And while, each of these cameras can do it all, they may not do it as well as others will.
I have bought a lot of gear used online and I can knock on wood say I have never had an issue with a single item. The one thing I have done on every occasion is get to know the user of the gear who is selling it. most of the gear has been expensive bodies and lenses so its my expectation that the user is a practicing photographer. Red flags are people selling expensive gear who wouldn't know a F stop if it hit them in the face. I have asked to see their Instagram page to see if they have work they produced with the gear. I think this has saved me from buying something that is questionable or even worse could be a fraud.
Good discussion. With due respect, two big issues I had with professional reviewers when I was upgrading from my D750: 1 - Pro reviewers don’t give nearly enough weight to the cost of changing brand systems. The Sony xxxx might be superior to the Nikon yyyy is some areas, but most people with a big investment in lenses won’t see that improvement as worth a wholesale change. 2 - For my work as a non-vlogger, I really don’t care if the Sony/Fuji has a flip screen and the Nikon does not. I’ll almost never need it even if a vlogger thinks it’s indispensable.
Oh yes this second thing happens way too much. So many of the reviews are from vloggers or streamers and they only focus on their own personal use-case! It's frustrating and not so audience friendly.
I like about Tony and Chelsea that they buck this trend and frequently talk about "what works for you" and the different ways things are used in different situations. I wish there was more of that.
That’s why you should buy for the glass. I shoot Canon because I researched and bout a lot of Vintage EF L lenses. It might not be as sharp as other lenses but the unique look makes my photos stand Out. EF135 f2 is one gem.
You did it again, your ideas kept me from impulse buying. I have yet figured what I want. I think I need to use my existing gear and identify really what I would like. Or need. Great job for me, not so much for the camera store.
Thank you both for what you do, your #1! Thank you for introducing me to KEH, sold an older camera Nikon 1 J5, and the lenses for it and my lenses for my D7000 and got just enough to get 2 used lenses for the D7000. I got the Nikon 18-140 and the 50mm F1/8 so it should be fun to see what I can do with these lenses.
Thanks for this guys. It really did give me some useful advice to consider. 👍👍
The greatest mistake I have seen is buying an expensive camera and lenses to make up for poor technique.
I would actually disagree with that somewhat. Learning about gear and lenses can be useful and if you got a DSLR it might be the best type of camera to learn with as it provides more options for you, more future potential. Sure you can also learn fundamentals like color balance, exposure and such on phone, but a full DSLR will make you learn way more than that.
Good job on the video. Great color, lighting and sharpness!
Thanks for the candid and informative talk.
I run a D800e and a senior friend of mine says - I have some wonderful old lenses in the upstairs in a box - so I went up and got them - Olympus OM , broke my heart - then she said - look in the bottom and there is an "F" mount adapter . Have to do everything Manual - and manual focus but I shoot that way anyhow - they are sharp as a tack - made in the late 60's , early 70's I'm told . Great video ! Enjoyed it !!!
Great as usual. After nearly 40 years using SLRS and DSLRS, My biggest mistake was going micro4/3 to cut weight, not because of sensor size but because of really terrible autofocus. Still, with experience in ancient manual focus, starting with an SRT-101, and practice with the touch screen, I overcome. I then got a good cellphone camera and now rarely use the camera. I’m thinking of getting a new camera with eye detect since all cameras seem much more manageable in weight, but I often think why bother when my cellphone pictures with a little processing are sharper than many of the great photos of the past. Oh, what to do? I am a gear head so be sure I will eventually buy more stuff. Keep up the incredible work. You guys are the best.
Yeah I'm pretty unhappy with the iPhone 14 pro after shooting only with Sony gear for many years. I would never consider using my phone with my old android. I thought that the newer iPhone would be able to replace the old A6000 and it's tiny kit lens that I kept in my purse. I should have just bought a cheap phone and continued to use the A6000.
I always buy used gear and if I don't get on with it I'll sell it on, usually for about the same money. That way I get my gear fix on the cheap. By the way, my favourite combo is the D500 with the 200-500mm so mixing fx and dx isn't a problem for me. Good vid though guys
This is the way....also, If you buy from boomers with too much money they tend to buy from autosized dealers, and you avoid the grey market situation as well.
My strategy for looking through reviews is to look for similar negative reviews. If one person says the lens has slow AF then maybe that was user error or they got a malfunctioning lens or something. If a dozen people say the lens has slow AF, maybe it has slow AF. Almost every product has positive reviews if it has enough reviews, and positive reviews don't often get specific.
The problem with 5 star reviews is that people often make them right away with no time to find the little problems. Unless they say something like "After using it every weekend for a year" you have to take reviews with a grain of salt.
Yes I am a negative review reader too. Same as you, I look for consistency. When Amazon used to let you comment on reviews the negative reviews got lots of haters. I want to thank all of you out there that leave negative reviews. Even if I don't agree, I don't take it as a personal affront if you don't like my favorite gear.
thanks for this. All my DSLR bodies are used: Canon 40D, 5D (orig) 7D (orig) and 70D. I have lenses that span 10mm to 400mm, most are secondhand. Have rarely been disappointed buying gear via ebay.
14:00 - 100% agree that not every consumer needs the latest and greatest. I'm trying to buy a Nikon from 2013 or another from 4+ years ago.
about pricing the full kit, it's so true for comparing aps-c vs full frame cameras, learned it the hard way.
Great vid and some really excellent advice. The only point I’d debate is FF lenses on APS bodies. Certainly I’ve found the D500 with a 300PF with a 1.4TC or a 200-500mm Nikon lens works brilliantly. Maybe these are the exceptions rather than the rul?
I agree.
Set up and ex with a D500 and all FF lenses so when she moved up she'd have great glass. She never had an issue.
I think they are correct with average consumer body’s between FF and crop......but flagships like D500 with great sensors and processors, and added reach, it’s a mute point.
I totally agree. I would like anyone to explain to me what are the problems with using a FF lens on an APS-C camera in terms of image quality (it sounds in fact that the quality should be better as the camera is only using the center of the circle of light.
@@BrunoChalifour Exactly. There is no technical reason why a lens on APS-C should perform worse than on a FF.
Yes, "exception". Typical examples of "FF lens on APS C being a bad idea" would be my Sigma 14/3.5 or 24/1.8 or buying an expensive bulky wide FF zoom instead of a significantly cheaper APS counterpart, like a good kit zoom or a 12-24/4, that could still take pictures while you are saving up for 2nd & 3rd FF bodies. 50mm and up FF lenses might be OK (I'm happy with mine but didn't invest in high res crop bodies. Mediocre glass on FF seemed more appealing.)
This video would be very useful for me a year ago, I bought a full frame sony camera and didn't know about the meaning of APS-C lens thought is was just about the field of view and later I understood that the resolution of my images was divided by 2! 🙄
Always check out the layout of the buttons, dials, and knobs. I’m a very dedicated back button focus shooter, and the placement of the af-on button on the back of my full size Nikon was perfect. I switched systems to the lighter, smaller Olympus (which I love), but I assumed the placement and size of the button to be used for back-button focus on the OM-D M5 MkII would be the same, but it is bad. The button can be enabled for BBF but not a comfortable experience.
Thanks for the 2 "cheap" cameras versus the one really expensive camera idea. Will probably help me a lot in the near future.
That's my strategy--2 cheap bodies (18mp/Digic 5/crop) and several mid range lenses. Buying used, my lenses each cost me 3 times the used value of the body. Works for me.
Loved the tips but the Lighting and colors look fantastic and had me captivated.
Well. It really depends. I mean you can get parts from grey market as well. And if one is a DIY guy, it's not that difficult to just do the repair by yourself. I bought a a6000 which ended up being broken when it arrived. No worry, I just tore it apart and found out that it was the sensor and shutter both which were not working since someone had let salty water in from the bayonet.
I ordered new parts from ebay, washed the existing parts in bathroom sink from the salt residue, put it together and I have had it for 4 years now and it's still kickin'. And not only I have a functioning camera, I also have a fun story to tell. And the knowhow to fix it again.
Something similar happened to me when I purchased my Tamron 150-600mm G2 lens. I went through Amazon, The vendor I picked had the same price as others and said the lens came with Tamron's warranty.
Except when I went to register the lens, Tamron would not accept the registration, saying I bought it from a camera shop that was not a licensed Tamron dealer.
They wanted to keep 20 percent of my payment as a restocking fee, so I decided to keep the lens -- without the warranty. I also complained to Amazon, which did remove that vendor's Tamron lens listings.
I hope I don't ever need the warranty.
i had a sony a7ii but the eye AF never really worked fast enough for action photos, eg competitive ballroom dancing. so i changed to the A6400 as it uses the latest eye AF used on the A9. my images went up to 95% in focus. i wanted an 85mm lens or 105mm 1.8 lens which are not available for APSC so i bought a full frame 85mm Zeiss Batis which gave me awesome results. i know it gives 127mm f2.7 but this works as i dont have any other prime options for APSC Sony
Tony and Chelsea, I enjoy your videos and find you give good advice. You gave good advice on not buying FX lenses for DX cameras and vice versa. For most things that is good advice. I'm not sure it is all the time though. I have a D7500, a camera I really like, and wanted a telephoto lens for multipurpose use. 70-300mm seemed to be the ideal range for me so I looked at Nikon's offerings. They have both a DX and FX version of the same lens with the DX version being much less expensive. When I compared the two I didn't like the plastic lens flanges on the DX version and the ones on the FX one were metal. I liked the additional half a stop speed, f5.6 vs. f6.3, as well. So I spent the extra money and got the FX lens. I have been pleased with the results. It focuses quickly and accurately when shooting my grandson's soccer games and has good resolution for when I need a telephoto lens for other work.
As my grandson is getting interested into photography I got him a used D3300 with the kit lens. He does great with that combo just starting out. I decided to add a telephoto lens to his kit so I got a used DX version of the 70-300mm lens, the very same one I had rejected earlier. Before I gave it to him I tested it by shooting some soccer and found that the lens focused just as quickly as the FX lens. However, wide open it has a visible amount of vignetting, something the FX lens didn't have on the D7500. In addition, I found that since both lenses were being shot wide open the added half a stop was helpful.
Given that I don't shoot indoor sports or evening sports I think I made the right choice for me. In all fairness both lenses do the job well, I do prefer the more sturdy construction of the FX lens and its more even exposure. But for low end shooters like myself either would work. However, I don't regret buying the FX lens.
Very informative video! I am falling in line with the adapter stuff right now, but I will be carrying some DSLRs over with me, so I might be leaning on the mirrorless lens for the mirrorless body and sticking to the DSLRs for the older lenses. I am hoping to get some more miles out of my 600mm prime, but I’ll see how rough it is. I can definitely attest to the attacks on a forum from the fan boys! I wanted to let people know about a support issue, and everyone took it personally instead of realizing I legitimately had been snubbed on an electronic switch I was using on a light. Some people just can’t handle the truth about their favorite toys!
If you’re a Nikon nps member just ask for the serial number and add it to your gear list. It will either give the green checkmark indicating that’s it’s a USA model or it will give an error.
Great advice... thanks for sharing.. cheers 😀
There is a lot of muddy thinking about value. The concepts I am exploring are not specific to photography: they are used by fortune 500 companies to buy everything from paper clips to new buildings.
A FEATURE: is a characteristic specific to a product or service, but has no inherent relationship to any specific user It can be be expressed by the phrase: "this is what we have, is it any use to you?"
A BENEFIT: is specific to the potential purchaser and represents something that will either improve their performance, or mitigate a limit to their performance. This could be expressed by the line by the Spice Girls: "Tell me what you want, what you REALLY, REALLY want!"
VALUE: is only achieved when you can map a feature to a benefit. So, to give an example. A camera has an ability to shoot 4k video - that's a FEATURE. However, since I don't shoot video it does not map to a benefit I need, so it has no value in my buying evaluation.
The following process works:
1. Establish Your Criteria: Define BENEFITS you want, rank them in priority: MUST HAVE, Want, would be nice...
2. Research for Products: Find products that have FEATURES the match your benefits list
3. Compare and Filter: Remove any that don’t match your “must have” criteria
4. Reduce the list to 2-3.
5. Evaluate: Try out the gear with a hands-on evaluation
6. Make your purchase: Shop around for good deals from reliable vendors that support local warranties.
As regards advice for camera buyers:
I contribute to a couple of fora ( yes, I admit it!!! I was a professional but am now retired), and see frequent inquiries on the theme of 'what camera should I buy?'
As mentioned, I inevitably see these requests with the absolute minimum of information provided (which tells you something), yet members (some very senior) respond (without further clarification) with a recommendation based on THEIR shooting situation.
I resist this, and instead suggest the following questions for the potential purchaser to consider, and hopefully answer, if they want a valid response.
1. If you have camera gear, what specifically are its limitations that hold you back from taking the images you want?
If they don't know, it might well serve them better to invest in education, via on-line on local courses and workshops, camera societies or for those
just starting, question #5 becomes relevant...
2. What is the budget? So many people over-invest in gear that offers them no benefit (as per the above) and blow their budget, or are tempted to keeping upping the investment. They are encouraged by the GAS community, who believe that the latest iteration of gear will unleash the hitherto latent talent that lies within them.
I was working with an educational facility that was conducting a series of courses on photography. Despite clear guidelines that the right camera should have controls for aperture and shutter priority, and manual and that the maximum size was 1500 pixels on the long dimension of an image, students were being persuaded to put themselves into debt to get the latest and most expensive gear.
GAS is different from those who engage with the gear from a purely technical perspective as they are not necessarily seeking to leverage a photographic performance benefit.
3. What Subjects will you take: This helps to identify the types of equipment - e.g. video or not, general-purpose, travel, wildlife, portraits - all of these will give clues to the consultant about Fields of View, sensor dynamic range etc. (impacting lenses and sensors).
For specific purposes, or to evaluation gear, renting equipment may be a much better solution. For that once-in-a-lifetime trip to the Masai Mara to shoot the great migration, not having to invest in a suitable super tele lens, transport it to Africa, use it and return it may not be the best solution: especially if one is not likely to need that type of gear again. Many such travel companies can arrange renting of gear at the location of the shoot, thus reducing investment and risk.
4. What Will you PRODUCE: I rarely see this question asked, yet it is arguably the MOST significant question! It takes a lot greater investment to provide the gear for high end Art (with a capital A), large, hi-res prints, than for social media sites that are likely to downsize images or digital displays.
In the end, the final output is what it is all about. For those looking at part-time professional work, the challenge is balancing an often limited budget with a need to be able to provide images in the event of unexpected situations or gear failure.
5. What are your intentions: People take photos for a huge range of reasons: from purely social and casual photography: where the priority is not the taking of images, but the engagement. Parents with kids, school events, social events.
Then there are students in photography who likely have limited budgets and are yet to confirm their specific career and gear choices.
Enthusiasts who may be engaged in competition for example, and finally professionals for whom the camera is a tool to produce products or services (although they are unlikely to be engaging in this process). Each of these perspectives will have a different value-set and priority, and establishing those can make a huge difference.
When looking at a long-term engagement, the gear as a system is worth considering, as changing brands can be an expensive process...
6. What are you prepared to carry: Depending upon the activity, large and heavy gear may not be appropriate. For example: for travel, one may want more compact and lighter gear to reduce risks during transit and offer more convenience. Multi-day hikers may well choose a similar type of gear as it has to compete with hiking equipment in the pack but may also have to be more rugged.
As we age, or have injuries, less is often more. In the end the best camera is the one you are prepared to carry with you.
7. Ergonomics and Interface: Simply looking at specs and reviews does not offer the experience of manipulating the controls and menus of a camera. I have seen people pay out significant sums for gear and then hate how it feels and operates in the hands. They either have to sell it and get something else (at a cost), or suck it up and get used to the limitations.
Good read Great info. Thanks for sharing.
Trevor
Thanks very much for sharing your experience. I'm 55, a Master Plumber, and have been scouring multiple sources for information for my first camera, lens, and accessories purchase. I'd like to do general photography and video of friends and family, landscape with sunsets over lakes, and some wildlife including hummingbirds.
Luckily, I've had the time to read and watch hours of UA-cam videos and read multiple fora (yes, 4 years of H. S. and 2 yrs of university Latin!). Unlucky is that I had the time from two cancer surgeries (all is well) and spine fusion surgery (meh), all in 2021!
All of your thoughts are spot on. Many people buy with their emotions, and decisions based on emotions are usually not wise. This advice can be used not only for camera purchases, but for anything, even regular, everyday decisions.
I've taught many Apprentices in my career who love GAS. Good quality tools are important, but the skills behind them are what's important.
Like they say in shooting pool:
It's not the stick, it's the shooter!
Going to try and get in touch with you on your Channel.
Thanks
@@tomhill9027 Thanks for your kind comments Tom. Sadly, I don't have a channel - I'm just a voyeur! :-)
I work with manual focus full frame lenses on APS-C using focal reducers and achieve excellent results.
Thank you!
I buy new gear only. I will buy third party accessories and lens but I am picky about the brand, buying mostly based on previous experience. For certain items such as adapters, batteries, and remotes I buy camera manufacturer only as I have found 3rd party are hit or miss.
As someone who has been shooting for many years, I agree there is no perfect camera or perfect lens. Your advice to figure out what camera and lens work best for you is spot on.
That "don't put ff lenses on crop bodies" is just for pixelpeepers. Sorry, but gradually switching to FF works for sooo many people, and the quality difference might be completely irrelevant for most people. "Image" comes from imagination, not from pixel-perfection.
Even pixelpeepers should be satisfied. I definitely would like anyone to demonstrated that FF lenses are worse on an APS-C body than an APS-C lens. It sounds rather ludicrous to me for many technical reasons.
With the price of one good FF lens you could get two FF bodies. If you want to go full frame go. EOS RP with a zoom is now 1300 € here.
@@okaro6595 The R system has nearly no cheap lenses. I wouldn't go for that system on a budget.
I bought a used Hasselblad X1D a couple of years ago. I started with the 45P as it is in my "affordable" price range. I've added an HC 50-110, CF 500, and as of today a CF 140-280 all used off of EBay. We live next to a park and I have wanted to be able to blow up wildlife pics and see the details of animals that walk by our house. I had doubts about using 34 year old lenses designed for 6x6 film cameras or a 20 year old lens designed for 6x4.5 film cameras with a modern 44x33 mm medium format digital sensor and its electronic shutter. Happily it works and many of the pics have turned out great! Should we call this "Hasselblad on a Budget"? Hey, that may make a good video!
I totally agree with your point on battery. I tried to use third party battery on my XT3 and after 2 months of use, it’s puffed and gets stuck on battery bay.
Using a FF lens on a APSC body can be extremely good, but you just have to check the pixel density first, if you have a 24mp APSC body, it will have the same pixel density as a 54mp Full Frame body, so you need very sharp glass because the limitating factor of the overall sharpnes will be the optics and not the sensor. I would say that An APSC body can work with all the good wildlife/sport/macro lenses, but fast portrait lenses (105 1.4, 85 1.4... etc) that are made to have a smooth rendering on a Full-Frame would just be too soft on an APSC. That goes also with fast wide angle lenses (20 1.8, 24 1.8... etc), these are difficult to manufacture, and therefore not sharp enough wide open on an APSC (but honestly, a wide angle on a crop sensor is a waste).
??? Generally FF lenses are built to higher standards than APS-C lenses (more metal, more high resolution glass, more protection against moisture and dust and that is why they are generally more expensive). In terms of resolution whatever lens you use, FF or APS-C,(of a similar grade), they generally have the same resolution regardless of the resolution (what you call pixel density) of the sensor. Later lenses have also got around 50% more resolution than the previous generation (film).
@@BrunoChalifour i think i made some confusion between resolution and definition (i am french, and résolution can be used equally for overall pixel count or resolvinlq) Everything depends on which Lens you are comparing. Yes, FF lense are usually (by usually i mean "High grade", not "crappy kit stuff") betters built, but comparing build quality and resolving power is different, apsc sensors have very High resolving power (a 24 mpx apsc has 2,25 Times the resolving power (=pixel density), as a FF 24 mpx, because it has the same number of pixels on a 1,5x1,5 tinier surface), so FF lenses needs to be 2,25 times less sharp than their apsc counterparts to obtain the same sharpness results on the sensor each is made for.
You can look on dxo mark for example, the sharpness results of a lens drop if you lower the sensor size. My point being, if your FF sensor resolving power already matches or exceed the one of your lens, then you don't wanna adapt this lens to an apsc body, because it will not give you better results than cropping a photo from your full frame body. So yes, adapting a zoom like a nikkor FX 28-300 to an apsc is a bad idea, whereas the 200-500 1:5.6 is a common assembly, one is sharp enough for a crop sensor, and the other is made for 24mpx FF bodies, and awon't give you more range on apsc.
I think that you'll almost always get better results from a FF Lens than its apsc counterpart, on an apsc body. But sticking a FF lense to an apsc body doesn't necessarily means that you'll have more rea le
@@pierrevilley6675 Comme je l'ai écrit ailleurs, les (bonnes) optiques, qu'elles oient FF ou APS-C, ont des résolutions que l'on peut considérer identiques, soit environ 60 paires de lignes par millimètres (alors qu'environ seulement 40 pour les optiques pour appareils utilisant du film),... peu importe le type (et la capacité) des capteurs auxquels elles sont destinées. De toutes façons, la discussion est sur la valeur comparée des optiques, non des capteurs... et ces valeurs sont quasimment identiques (même si souvent celles des optiques FF sont légèrement supérieures car elles s'adressent à un public plus exigeant car professionnel (ils en vivent), et il faut aussi justifier leur prix plus élevé ; la qualité de leur fabrication (résolution comprise) n'est pas seulement une conséquence du public auquel elles s'adressent mais bien des matériaux employés et du soin pour leur production. C'est le cas, par exemple, de la différence entre les optiques pour le système CL (APS_C) chez Leica (qu'on ne peut accuser de laxisme en matière d'optique) et le système SL [au besoin renseignez vous, voir entre autre la chaine UA-cam RedDotForum où même l'exposé du directeur du programme optique chez Leica aussi sur UA-cam]. Même chose chez Canon et Nikon. Quant à la résolution des capteurs la différence entre un APS-C à 24 Mp et un FF à 47-50 Mp (qui sont les références courantes) voire 60 est nulle. Donc les exigences/besoins en matière d'optiques sont totalement identiques : aucune raison d'avoir des optiques FF de résolution inférieure à celles des optiques APS-C [en plus bonjour la publicité négative chez les pros si c'était le cas]. Par contre la GROSSE différence entre les optiques APS-C et les FF consiste en leurs cercles de lumière : bien plus important pour les optiques FF, ce cercle permet d'éviter les problèmes de vignettage et de perte de définitions dans les coins à pleine ouverture avec des capteurs APS-C. Donc oui, optiquement un objectif FF peut non seulement être un bon remplacement pour une optique APS-C sur un boitier APS-C mais il sera meilleur. Les seuls arguments négatifs que l'on peut donner sont : poids, encombrement et prix. Mais certainement pas qualité optique et qualité de photographie obtenue.
@@BrunoChalifourje limitais ma comparaison aux capteurs de même définition et de taille différente, sinon ça n'a aucun sens.
Je reprends mon point de vue, sur apsc on a un corps factor de 1,5, ce qui multiplie l'allonge par ce facteur, mais aussi les défauts, si vous avez des aberrations chromatiques visible sur un FF de 24 mpx, elles apparaîtront seront 1,5 fois plus grosse sur apsc de même définition, d'autre part, si un objectif définit 60 LP/mm sur le capteur, cela signifie qu'il définira (24x60) 1440 lignes horizontales sur un capteur Full frame, et seulement (16x60) 960 sur un apsc. Et c'est quelque chose que j'ai déjà testé (en adaptant un 75-300 qui était tout à fait correct en full frame à un capteur MFT sur lequel il s'est transformé en grosse merde).
Et non, toutes les optiques ne sont pas construite pour des boîtiers full frame de 50mpx, les optiques pros oui, mais un zoom de kit non, beaucoup de vieilles optiques non plus, et si ces dernières restent utilisables sur un gros capteur, elles seront mauvaise en apsc.
C'est pourquoi je dis :
-Adapter une optique déjà molle ou avec des défauts visibles en FF sur un apsc va l'empirer, si elle est déjà molle avec un gros capteur, en faire un crop ne va pas l'arranger.
-Posseder un boîtier APSC n'a de sens que si vous recherchez une allonge supérieure (ou pour son prix), mais si vous possédez déjà un boîtier comme un D850, un APSC de 24mpx ne vous donnera rien de plus qu'un crop apsc sur le D850.
-Aussi, je n'essayais pas de répondre à la question "est-ce qu'utiliser des objectifs FX en apsc à la place des DX, est bien ?" mais plutôt à "est-ce qu'adapter mes optiques FX sur un apsc me donnera plus d'allonge que ce que j'ai sur mon boîtier FX?" et la réponse est oui uniquement si le capteur était le facteur limitant du système (de par sa densité de pixels), sinon faire un crop de votre FX vous donnera des résultats au moins aussi bons que l'apsc.
@@pierrevilley6675 Il me semblait que le point de départ des commentaires était la vidéo. Il y était de savoir si monter un objectif FF sur un boitier APS-C en valait la peine (et la réponse de la vidéo était "non" ce qui demeure une hérésie si on compare les optiques actuelles), pas de se limiter au boitier de même nombre de pixels (en fait on compare des objectifs et leur capacités pas les capteurs, ce qui est un autre débat)... Il ya beaucoup de commentaires qui semblent dériver, s'éloigner du sujet, et servir de prétexte à des exposés et théories personnelles. Donc je m'en tiens à un commentaire de la vidéo. Dire que monter un objectif FF médiocre (film) sur un boitier APS-C risque de voir le piqué des images baisser (car l'objectif a été construit aux normes anciennes de résolution et non aux normes courantes [et communes] des aps-c ET des ff) est un fait mais c'est une comparaison limitée et il aurait fallu le préciser (ce qui n'était pas le cadre de la vidéo). Le constat est simple : effectivement monter un objectif FF potable (film) sur un boitier APS-C ne rapporte pas grand chose (sinon une économie financière dans le cas d'un objectif ancien conçu pour le film), mais monter un objectif FF courant et de qualité (comparé à un objecvtif APS-C courant et de qualité car il faut comparer ce qui est comparable et ne pas dériver dans un relativisme qui ne mène à rien), les avantages de l'objectif FF sont : mieux construit, cercle de lumière supérieur donc élimination de beaucoup de problèmes optiques inhérents aux cercles de lumière qui ne couvrent qu'un peu plus que la diagonale du capteur (objectif APS-C sur boitier APS-C ou objectif FF sur boitier FF). Ce qui me semble une évidence est que l'objectif FF sur APS-C aura moins de vignettage et de perte de définition dans les coins à grande ouverture. Quant à la résolution des OBJECTIFS courants et de qualité pour APS-C et FF, elle est quasimment identique avec souvent un plus pour les optiques FF (il faut bien en donner au consommateur pour son argent et le prix permet aussi moins de compromis sur la fabrication). En résumé acheter des objectifs FF courants et de qualité quand on a un boitier APS-C est loin d'être une abbération au niveau qualité optique. Cela permet de rester ouvert à une évolution vers un boitier de format FF sans avoir à renouveler (avec perte) son parc optique (ce qui est en opposition avec la façon de traiter le sujet de la vidéo et rectifie une mauvaise conception du problème et de sa solution)... et en plus c'est plus "sportif" ;o)
I use a Sigma f2.8 70-200mm on my Nikon d7500 and it's my go to for outdoors. Seems quite flexible.
On the other hand, I bought a sigma f4 24-105mm full frame to replace my kit lens and that was a mistake. I didn't have the 24 mm when needed.
I went total Micro 4/3 and my main output was stills. I ultimately sold all my Nikon gear as my 810 with an 80=200 2.8 was to heavy for my 74 year old hands. I unloaded everything and bought a new A7RII for the Megapixel count dealing with the small batteries. I also got a A7III, I know a new one is coming I like last years state of the art. I got the F4 Trio the 12-24 was used but clean. I put Sony warranties on the new gear. The 2.8 Trio was just too heavy and expensive for me. I decided to get the inexpensive 35 1.8 and 75 1.8 24 F2.8 Rokinon Samyang fixed. These will be travel with the long lens in a shoulder bag as needed. I got used Sony battery grips for them, they were better than the cheap plastic ones. I am going to save up for when a A7RIII gets cheap, and I am looking for a 100-400 Sony used next year.
There are specs for viewfinder latency... Also when shooting BIF turn off the IBIS and lens stabilization - This can cause significant shift of the image and it's not helpful in anycase with a moving subject. When shooting my G9 with a red dot sight and Dual-IBIS on, the captured frame of a moving bird or plane lags the boresight by half the width of the frame.
i have bought 4 items of grey equipment. The first was a Nikon 70-200 f2.8. it was defective on arrival. I had a hell of a job trying to get a refund Ebay 8 yrs ago. The next was a Tokina zoom lens, that was defective on arrival the quality of the photos were appaling. It was as thougn it was a cheap copy not a proper Tokina. That went back to Digital Rev for a full refund. Last try was a Nikon D500 from Panamoz, the viewfinder was defective, it had hundreds of tine little silver speckless all over(in the glass pentaprism) and would not show the image in foucus properly. That went back for a full refund. I think people get conned with this grey import thing by thinking that VAT or exices duties are not being paid on these items. I think that is untrue and that all the duties are paid but the cameras have failed the quality tests and are passed off through the grey market cheap(the fools think duty is being avoided when it's not). Ask any of these grey importers how they can sell cameras cheaper than the genuine market and none of them will tell you. And don't think they would not tell you they avoid the duty because the tax man might find out. The tax man is fully aware of all the grey's being imported and knows all the taxes are paid. If you use genuine dealers which I do now, you don't get battery problems, front/back focusing issues, lens coupling issues and more. Just go on some of the forums and read were people are complaining about these sort of problems and when you ask were they got the camera from it's nearly always a grey. If you are a proper photographer who wants to just go and take photos with reliable gear DON'T but greys, they are cheap for a reason. Some amatures will not even realise their grey is defective.
5:22 I think this can go both ways. I went this route and it worked great for me but I stayed in the Nikon system. I purchased old used fx glass to put on my D90. I didn't buy any bundled kits... Bodies only and lenses only. Ebay was my go-to when I couldn't afford new.
When I eventually got a D700 I didn't stop using the D90 (or the D200, D7000, etc) I'd take both. Having the FX glass meant I didn't have to also buy new lenses which I didn't have the budget for. As I sold more jobs, I made enough to buy better gear and recover faster. At some point I started buying pro bodies so the dx cameras were rotated out but it allowed me to ease into fx with the hassle of selling gear. Being able to get a 80-200mm f2.8 used for the price of a kit lens made me images that would get clients.
Maybe this is good for the hobbyist, but I went in it to make money. I started with nothing, so making very specific choices in gear allowed me to take on more business and grow to the point where my income could afford better gear (which in turn sped up my workflow).
I have the opposite of 'confirmation bias' - I spend hours researching something until I'm sure it will be good, AND then when I get it, complain endlessly about how disappointed I am because it didn't hold up to my high expectations. LOL. A frustrating bad habit to have. I agree with buying just what you need and maybe buying two cameras for different tasks - especially if you can get one cheap-ish. However, I really struggle to do this, as I keep mentally spending incrementally more for slight gains, until I eventually buy that expensive version that is more than I need...
Know what you mean about 3rd party lenses, many many years ago I had a Rollie SL35E with a Tamron 17mm full frame fisheye that delivered stunning results on ilfochrome 200 (later used Fuji as I couldn't get the ilfochrome) so when I purchased my Nikon D7200 a while ago I bought a Tamron 10-24mm lens as I had good results from a previous Tamron lens. The results though were ok, not great, lacking in saturation so, I bought a Nikkor 10-24mm lens and the difference was marked, better colours, better saturation, all told a much better lens so even with previous good experience you cannot always rely on consistent results from the same manufacturer.
Informative video. I am hesitant to purchase used lenses from people rather than companies even though I have sold lenses on eBay in the past. I've made a few mistakes too. I purchased the Panasonic G9 which is a great camera but it was too large for my hands and it slowed down my photography too much so that was sold. I tried Olympus, many people rave about how great and light the system is but I didn't have that experience so that was sold. Now, I am back with a DSLR and that is fine.
I had third partie batteries for my Fuji XT-2 and they nearly all started deforming until they no longer fit in the camera.
I have Canon R5. I have had good luck with EF L glass adapted. I still have 5D IV as a backup body.The RF28-70 is so expensive but I love it for events. I also use the RF 600 and 800. I was so surprised at how good it is for perched Birds.
On my first lens purchase, I bought a 5-pin Tamron lens for a D3300, had no idea I needed the 8-pin model in order to have autofocus, nothing I read made that clear, even Tamron's lens compatibility guide. Also, the lens I did get, works 100% fine, but I cringe when I look at the elements and there is dust inside the lens, but doesn't effect image quality, but that's just me. Another thing, I bought my Nikon from a individual, not a company that can repair it with some type of warranty. I did get my moneys worth with an included $200 35mm 1.8 lens, thrown in the deal. But.
Hi. Great video. What do you think of using vintage Zuiko lenses on a Sony A6400?
Is it possible to go wrong getting into Hasselblad? It will be my first camera(s). I live on Maui, and looking to go into an artistic direction. I'm thinking about getting two 907x's. One will have the control grip, and the xcd 1.9 lens, the other will have another lens that I have yet to decide on. Even though it isn't ideal for video, I'd like a versatile lens that would look good when shooting video. If need be, I'm open to getting a third 907x and putting another lens on it. The reason being that I don't even want to remove the lenses off the camera. I want them to be permanent fixtures. Depending on the situation, I'd rather just switch cameras. I also haven't looked into flash gear, or tripods. To recap, I'd like advice on a second and potentially third lens, flash, tripods, and other accessories. I live in a beautiful place in the world, and am witness to so many little magical moments. I'll be shooting a little bit of everything. Maybe not fast things, so I'm okay with these not being sports cameras. Weddings, portraits, outdoor events, scenic vistas, waterfalls, art, night time, street, videos (artisanal storytelling), and fashion/beauty/glamour. If I can do it with two cameras and two lenses great, If I need a third camera and third lens even better.
Thx for a great video - the whole talk about features I think is one the most important ones. Find out what you need and don't get lost in specs. on things you do not use :-)
The colours looks fantastic. (I haven’t watched this channel for a few months)
In the old days, the lens was "independent" from the body. Now, it is an integrated system, with Auto Focus, and Stabilization. Especially in body and lens stabilization working together.
Not sure I agree on the Mix and Match so much. For professional photographers, sure, but as an amateur, you are working within a tight budget and there is no "return on investment". This is a hobby and you buy the best you can, when you can. Frankenstein it if you have to.
I got my first DSLR in 2004 (Nikon D70) then upgraded in 2011 (D7000) and 2021 (D850). I wanted to move to full frame in 2011, but at the time, the D7000 had video, whilst the Full frame of the time (D700) did not. Yes ... as Tony said, I always said that I would move to full frame, but years later .... 17 years....I finally did.
My first few lenses were the Kit lens (18-70) the "Nifty Fifty" 50/1.8 and a trashy 70-300 - why? Because they were cheap and it's all I could afford at the time.
As I took photography more seriously, I started to invest, slowly, one lens at a time, in only FX glass. If I had bought DX only glass, then that eventual step up to an FX camera would have been prohibitive. Now I have my D850 along with a 50/1.8, a 24/1.8, a 105/2.8 micro and an 80-200/2.8. It all matches now, but I was playing the long game, and I do not need to throw away or replace any old DX glass.
1 - Could I have sold the old gear? Not really. My wife uses a D5200 and my 12yo daughter borrows the D7000. They have a few DX lenses and I've given them the 18-70. I miss the upgrade funds, but the lenses are not wasted.
2 - Why not go mirrorless in in 2021? I did not even consider it. Tried it a few years ago, and the poor EVF and low battery life were a no go. The new Nikon Mark II line up looks awesome, and maybe I should have waited a year .... but then again, compared to a D850, the Z7MkII + an FTZ adapter would have been cost prohibitive. The D850 and all my glass will still be good for another 10 years :)
Best to go to a camera shop to handle the camera. Be clear what you want to use it for. Decide the must have features. I got my M50 for the viewfinder the mike jack good autofocus and the articulating screen. You may have different requirements.
Informative video. If there is one thing I kind of disagree with is buying full frame lenses for APS-C body. Some good quality, decently priced full frame lenses (especially primes) are quite good on APS-C body because of the maximum corner sharpness and less amount of vignetting.
I always ask before buying some gear if the warranty is valid internationally, since i am always traveling. A lot of times they ask for an email to register the serial number online.
I have two camera, one APS-C, a 7dII and 5diii, the 7dii was brought new years ago, and 5diii was second hand from a dealer, I use the 5diii for landscapes and night photography with a 1.4 sigma lens second hand, and I use 7dii for wildlife with second hand 5.6 400mm canon lens as recommended by you. The sigmas great, but i am not doing portraits, often manual focus for the stars!
I'm about to buy new gear and struggelig of what to choose. I own a Canon 60D, and like many I like to go fullframe. Been looking at both R6 and R5 and really can't deside.
I like to shoot all kinds of stuff, and need an alround gear. I'm also a dronepilot, flying a mavic 2 pro. I do a lot of editing in Lightrom and Photoshop.
I guess my lenses and other stuff is outdated too, so it means I have to make serious investments in lenses too. Got any tips?
I bought a Canon 5DsR. Don't get me wrong the camera is insane, but I just didn't need any of the features and I ended up selling it and sticking with my 6D.
I mostly shoot handheld macro and it was really difficult to avoid motion blur on the 50mp. The shots I nailed had detail down to the pixel but being a pixel peeper I couldn't help but look at every shot closely, even if I didn't need to crop and reject what would probably be an otherwise good photo when scaled.
Also, when shooting on 50mp I tend to get lazy and not thing about framing, step back a bit and think "I'll come up with a crop in post". On the 6D's 20mp it only has about 30% max crop before 4K so the shots matter a little more.
I bought a great D800e camera and a bargin used 28-105mm f3.5-5.5. It turned out the lens probably had been dropped on the floor and was only sharp in the middel and right side, left side is very blurry. The seller would not take it back, and it was too expensive to have it repaired so now I have to stop it down to f8 to get sharp photos over the entire photo. I feel that I dont get full value of my camera even though it works ok, but sometimes my photos from the Iphone seems sharper than from the dslr. It was a bad experience and the conversation with the seller of the lens went all wrong as he claimed that I had damaged the lens, and I should had reacted asap, The lens also has a strange mechancal clicking sound when zooming in.
Hi! I've watched a ton of your videos & others and still don't know what I need. Now the more I watch the more Im confused. I'm semi new and not looking to contract out for photography. I do it as a passion. That said I am a snob for sharpness and clarity. We have a martial arts business and 3 little kids that are my main subjects so lots of fast moving. I like working with raw images in Photoshop and do blow up images for large prints so clarity, focus, and high pixel are a must. I don't mind photoshoping images but not trying to live in the program so I like great raw and camera processed. Because of this I tend to lean towards liking Fuiji and Cannon's end colors. Not sure if I should invest in a cannon if 3rd party lenses are not available. Lighting situations are often uncontrolled so something that can handle a good range. I go from being able to get super close to being up in bleachers. It all depends. Is there a great mid range lense to cover a wide mid zoom range? Do very little video. Just short clips of kids and some instructional and promo videos for the business. It's nice if they look nice but no super video effects needed. I don't care about camera size. I can handle whatever. Interested in jumping into the mirrorless game but open to whatever you think I should look into. Any recommendations greatly appreciated.
Thanks sooo much.
I have bought grey Nikon everything. Saved ££££ Here in the UK it is a right rip-off how much extra is charged, not just on cameras, but everything. The retailers I purchased from did not disclose they were grey (naughty but I knew they were buy the price difference). They did offer their own UK warranty. I have never had to use it, so don't know how good it would be. Maybe other peeps have?
I managed to damage as SD card slot on one camera, I dropped it off at Nikon service in SW London (alas they have moved and drop-off is no longer possible, only post) and collected it a while later, no issues with repair, only a large bill for a complete new board. (It was out of warranty by that time anyway and my fault for using a cheap micro USB adaptor)
I requested the old board back and it looks a simple repair as the SD card slot is just a standard surface mount component.
Love you two, great video
Just got a new Canon D90 to replace my Canon 450D (which still looks and works as good as new), I’ll never use most of its features. Mirrorless was a big no for me, spend enough time at work looking at computer screens, my hobby is about getting out and not looking at computer screens. Looked around and bought Canon macro, wide angle and telephoto lens 2nd hand, and heavily reduced(damaged box!). With my limited skills I couldn’t see the point of going full frame, if I do my some miracle of god start taking decent photos and feel the need to upgrade, I think medium format will be the way to go. I really wanted a camera with a split focusing screen to have the option to manually focus, but its auto focusing all the way down now.
What camera and lens I should buy for wildlife photography? Nikon D500+200-500 or Nikon D850+500 mm
Just bought Canon R5 with RF 50mm f1.2 lens. What zoom lens would you recommend to buy for everyday personal use?
I agree with your points.
I've been struggling for the last months trying to decide which camera to buy. I used a Nikon D3200 for some years, and now I'm using a Sony RX100 M4, and wanted my next camera to be a Full Frame. But why would I need one? The cheapest FF cameras are somehow limited in terms of specs, and the kit lenses they come with are not what I want. But yet again, why am I struggling trying to pick a FF, when I know I am perfectly comfortable with a APS-C. I know I don't care that much about FPS, I barely shoot sports, I even prefer taking long exposures; I want the camera to have 2 memory slots, but I've had no problems with any camera regarding memory cards. The same applies for the rest of the specs I've read over and over, I want something better, but the camera becomes more expensive, and I may not even need it or use it.
That is true. I have had on two occasions err message and camera shut down with my EOS R using Sigma A35mm f1.4 and lost a video file for a wedding shoot. Sad!!!
One more idea relates to the Theory of Dust Collection: essentially what that means is, if you purchase photo equipment but it sits idle for very long periods of time (gathering dust), then you have purchased 'bad gear'. In other words, any gear is a bad buy unless it is actually going to be used. THAT is where the value is measured.
Rest assured, there is a lot of equipment that gets purchased with a lot of emotion, and that emotion drains away quickly. Not unlike the associated wallet.
I have a D7100 which is 1.5 crop, as you know. Mostly kit lenses, the 50mm (actually 75mm bc crop factor?), 55-200, 18-55, and 14/2.8 Rokinon. I shoot outdoors, hiking, skiing, camping, climbing, mountain biking, wildlife, etc., etc. Is there more optimal body for that sort of photography? Or is sticking with the 7100 and maybe expanding into higher quality lens quiver the smart play? Is jump to full frame worth the $$$?
D500 from B&H currently selling for &1,596.00. Just bought one and I love it....my first high-end DSLR. Purchased for wildlife photography. Will use this camera with the Nikon 200-500 5.6.
I dont know what you mean. i have a nikkor 50mm f1,8 fx lens on my Nikon d3100 dx dslr and the results are great.
Most folks that buy a low end body don’t buy high end glass .
Usually FF glass is phenomenal on apsc bodies because you get the best part of the lens quality within the apsc circle of light but not always.
And I now realize on the Micro four thirds with the metabones adapter why we are getting flaring . Thanks for that tip .
I totally agree about using FF on a APS-C body. The opinion stated in the video sounds quite unfounded to me. I would like someone to explain to me what are the problems with using a FF lens on an APS-C camera in terms of image quality (it sounds in fact that the quality should be better as the camera is only using the center of the circle of light.
@@BrunoChalifour if we are talking 50 & 100mm macro lenses, yes they are great. If you want an APS wide, the FF lens will be super wide, catch light sources you don't see in your view finder and flare and its maker sacrificed resolution for image circle. The latter is a bearable compromise on a low resolution FF sensor but not on high res APS. Try it out or dive into DxO mark's PMP ratings. I own no Pentax / k-mount FF wide, that would shine on APS. Even the ZM 21/2.8 doesn't really impress me on APS-H.
If you want to enjoy a cheap old 70-300 film zoom, better get an early FF beater to go with it.
for me i will never use adapters again, if it is not a dumb adatper without electronics i will not buy it ever again. We adapted a Irix lens so the adapter only controlled the Iris. We tested it a couple of times then we had to do a timelapse and in the middle of the night the camera bugged and opened the iris, a day of work completely gone and we had so much stress to keep up... the other thing is incompatible lenses. We had MANY adapters, sigma mc, metabones etc. and the sigma internals simply shorted out because we used a incomatible lens. Metabones speedbooster Sony A to Sony E... it does not get easier. the Lenses stuttered, missed focus, it was horrible... now i will only use native or fully manual lenses... that is a reason why i completely dith canon ... the bigger cinema bodies still have ef mount, but ef mount is dead, the smaller have rf mount but are apsc and rf apsc do not exist and using typical fullframe lenses means you have the strangest focal lenghts on the body. etc. ... Fun fact, many are upgrading to fx9 andfx6 right now because they are full frame and have amazing AF and i so often read about using apsc lenses or adapting ef lenses... they are destroying everything they just upgraded to ... :D strange
I bought a 5DS R a few years back. It's a wonderful camera on a tripod. I shoot on a tripod about 2% of the time. So it's really not the camera I expected when I bought it.
I have EOS 80D and I use both EF and EF-s lenses. No matter what, noise is a big drawback to my eye... How "sufficient" or not is EOS RP/6D mkii? Will this give me much more image quality or I should go for EOS R? This is mainly portrait-landscape photography.
I love photographing wildlife but I only have the old EF 100-400mm Mark I. I am looking to upgrade but I can’t afford the RF 100-500mm. I have the EOS R6. What lens would you buy out of the new RF 100-400mm, the RF600mm or the RF800mm? Or something else? Thanks in advance for any advice given.
Even the reputable vendors will often mislead. Where everything is back ordered if something is in stock but "Imported" or "Open Box", contact customer service to clarify what that means and the limits of warranties and service.
I have a fujifilm xt-4, I just added a 27mm pancake for travel.. It kinda seams perfect for all things 😍
I don't know how to research a camera. Is there a website that I can visit to tell me what cameras are used for and ratings?
Thanks Guys!
Good common sense information, particularly for anyone starting out with an interest in photography.
I’m wondering if Tony was shooting the mark i or mark ii 24mm 1.4L adapted onto Canon mirrorless. I shoot the mark ii version on the R5 and R6 and have found it to be a faster and more accurate focus and shooting experience than my 5d4 and 5dsr, even after having microadjusted on those bodies. Overall, shooting the latest generation EF 24, 35 and 85 L’s and other L primes (14, 50, 100 and 135) adapted has been flawless for me, so I would have to generally disagree with them on shooting EF adapted to RF bodies. In my experience, if you can find good copies of EF L primes, they are a great bargain to shoot adapted on RF bodies for quality that 99% of clients/customers could not tell the difference from native RF glass (I own RF zooms and primes so I can speak to this), with autofocus performance that is still acceptable.
I avoid mistakes by buying new filters, lenses and bodies from B&H/Adorama and used lenses from KEH and Lensauthority, which have great service and trustworthy, conservative equipment grading and optical performance verification. I sell/trade via MPB, which I find to provide the highest offers and have been flawless so far on transactions. KEH is very reputable as well, but stingier on offers for sold equipment (unless you get a rare promo code on offers). I also avoid mistakes and headaches by maintaining equipment and liability insurance, using only OEM batteries (I’ve found it’s actually better to buy OEM used than 3rd party in any condition!) and sticking with my policy of only buying zoom lenses new (which have more complexity and things that can go wrong than primes).
Hey Tony & Chelsea. Love the channel. I know you are opposed to adapters but have you had a look at the megadap ETZ11 it looks good and is a way of expanding a virgin Z line of lens with E mount Sony and third party alternatives. Would love your thoughts as I have a Z6 and I’m an enthusiast not a pro and would widen my lens options. Thanks 🇦🇺
interesting note about the third party batteries. i have not had an issue with third party, i have 8 nikon enel3 and 17 watson gh5 batteries going on 2 years of service no issues yet. sometimes you might get a dud but that happens with name brand too.
I'm getting a sony a-mount a77ll as my first digital camera.
I'm going to be utilizing my minolta a-mount full frame lenses but the a77ll has a croped sensor.
Can't find info on this. Dose sony make a-mount lense for a-mount apsc camera?
Nice to hear your stance on batteries. My name brand Panasonic batteries still work great 10 years later, and Wasabi and kastars are hit or miss
How can I use a serial number to determine if a nikon lens (that I'm considering buying from ebay) was intended for USA 🇺🇸?