@@SEAME7their book is great , it really helped me to get started in photography when I couldn't afford school. I've also found their advice to be right about 90% of the time. The only thing I feel that's inept is a random account on UA-cam insulting two people who've done a lot for the photography world over the years. Once they've made enough money off of gear videos (because that's the only things people watch), I hope they go back to education and helping folks, because they're really good at that
Recommending old DSLRs and new budget but crippled to the oblivion cameras from the 3 big companies without a mention of Panasonic LUMIX? As an enthusiast, last year I've shot Canon FF DSLR and Sony APS-C and it was a dreadful experience comparing to LUMIX. Trying an old Lumix with tiny micro4/3 sensor brought back fun and pleasure of photography. This year I've had 5 different Panasonic cameras and while Canon APS-C, Sony RX100, GoPro11(and others) are on the shelf I pick a (500euro 2nd hand) Lumix S5 when I want amazing results with actual fun of using a camera. Amazing IBIS, colours, dynamic range, photo and video features, hybrid capabilities, NO OVERHEATING when recording for longer than 15min are just some of the factors. I like and respect you guys but seeing lack of Panasonic in your videos(while others recognise and highlight capabilities and growing position in the camera market) makes me wonder why...
right, just picked up the ii and its an amazing camera for the size! i think the main thing is that it retailed at $2199..most were looking for it to be closer to the $1999 mark...i picked mine up as a open box and saved $150.
LUMIX Tony have you heard of them? S5IIX should definitely been mentioned in the video section. Your recommendations are also just Sony, Canon, Nikon (and a random DJI). Quite limiting. You speak of wildlife but never mention m4/3...Olympus is a great shout for wildlife.
Thanks for a great in depth video. A couple things I'd add (IMHO): 1) I think for hobbyists, enthusiasts, or those looking for a general travel/general purpose camera, the XT-30 is the best bang for buck camera you can get. I recommend it to a lot of people, and I think it still holds up today. 2) Bridging the gap in the portrait category between the D750 and the A7IV, I highly recommend the Nikon z7ii (or z6ii). As a working portrait photographer, it's my daily driver, and it's a fantastic camera, producing fantastic results. Nikon also has some absolutely beautiful portrait lenses, and the files SOC are amazing. I know you're not a huge fan of the autofocus, and yes, it lags behind its competitors, but for portrait use, it's more than sufficient. My hit rate is over 99% on an average shoot, so while I can see the limitations for tracking fast moving subjects, I've shot everything from headshots to outdoor portraits to concerts, and have had amazing results. There's my $0.02 - thanks for reading.
Overall, I agree with most of the recommendations, but I don't know about the Canon 600mm f/11 for Wildlife beginners. I feel like a lot of people will be very disappointed by that setup, just because of how limiting it is at a fixed focal length and f/11. I'd probably also steer someone on a very tight budget to the R10 but pair it with the 100-400mm. More flexibility, and 400mm f/8 on APS-C is enough, in my opinion. I assume that lens would also be better for the occasional "semi-macro" of insects or flowers.
Yeah I was torn because the 100-400 works well, and zoom is useful for beginners, but 400 even with aps-c crop is still pretty wide for most beginning wildlife stuff.
400mm CAN be enough but it totally depends on how close you can get obviously. I know when I had a full frame camera and finally had the money to get a 100-400 I was wanting for years I was surprised how little reach it actually had. I could see a beginner being disappointed especially if they had a smartphone that could reach as much or even further.
@@escapegoat32 no smartphone can reach that far, the Samsung 10x lenses got a focal length of 200mm FF equivalent, the 400mm on APS-C got a 600mm equivalent and mich better image quality.
Tony, there is a camera company that deserves your attention for video. You apparently have never heard of it. It's LUMIX camera models, and they're wonderful for video---better than any camera you named in this video. Their micro four thirds camera can get fantastic wildlife results, save you a ton of money (and a ton of weight) as well. The colors, dynamic range, and video features are a dream for people who love video and hate having to do ridiculous things to get something as simple as a manual white balance (Canon I'm looking at you). IMO it's a shame that you totally neglected this company in any of your categories. a Shame!
It's probably failing today's competition in autofocus terms. Today, having a sub-standard autofocus destroys a brand, unless it has a big sensor size so that it could at least score on image quality parameters. Medium format is probably the only niche left today, which still can 'afford' having a sub-standard autofocus. The other issue is, that by today, too many (and certainly Tony) have comprehended lens equivalency. When comparing equivalent lenses, MFT and APS-C (Fuji X) are neither cheaper nor more lightweight than equivalent full frame lenses, partly because of physics, but also because the recent FF lens generations became much more compact than older generations.
@@tubularificationed Auto focus is no longer an issue on Lumix cameras. In fact, they are probably tied second best behind Sony and in or around equal with Canon. On M4/3, I owned one in the past and I say they are the best for wildlife. Great compact lenses. The lenses are also way cheaper too.
OK I'm not a wildilfer. All I heard that today, animal eye AF is a top criteria. It just never came to my attention yet whether Pana would have made noteworthy achievements already in the animal eye AF domain. It might not matter much for "lame ducks" or birds sitting still in trees, but for running / fighting / playing animals, or for birds in flight, it would be understandibly a decisive benefit. Having the eyes in focus, not e.g. some random more contrasty edges such as the wing tips most of the time.
@@tubularificationed Panasonic/lumix is excellent in autofocus. You’re behind the times on Panasonic. The S5ii and S5iiX and G9ii are all excellent with autofocus.
Notice that in wildlife nikon is the only one to have mid quality glass so if you want to have better quality than 180-600 you can have 800f6.3, 500f5.6, 600f6.3 .... you dont need to jump directly in the 400f2.8 or 600f4 which cost 15k
Still getting great results from my Nikon d7200 with tamron 24-70(v1) and Nikkor 200-500. Mainly landscapes and wildlife. I’m probably the limiting factor as far as quality shots goes.
I've gotten plenty of amazing shots with a d5600 and Tamron 150-600g2. Can be found for dirt cheap nowadays lol. Gotta say tho, good deals on d500's still pop up every now and then too, which is some serious power for not a lot of money and for newer photographers, it's hard to beat
Surprised you didn’t mention the NIKKOR Z 180-600 which is (arguably) more versatile than the 600TC for general-purpose wildlife capture (excluding birding).
For wildlife i'll just low-key suggest the R6II/R8 + RF 200-800mm for medium budget. The lens covers basically everything one could need and the R6II/R8 have great autofocus and are just amazing at dealing with low-light and the "slow" F/9 lens (using quotation marks since i'll dare everyone who complains about the F/9 to go out *right now* and buy a 800mm F/5.6 lens for 20k bucks). Alternatively, a neat step up to the suggested R10 + 600mm F/11 would be R8 + 800mm F/11, the combo is giving you very similar reach, while dealing much better with less light availaible at dawn/dusk. It's a bit heavier, but still extremely light for a full-frame wildlife setup.
He jumped from $4.4k to $19k for wildlife. There are much more intermediate options. Nikon 600mm pf+ z8 is a great combo at a much lighter weight and price.
@@atanuhalder7750 i'm not really a Nikon shooter (i do have a really old one but.. yea) but Z8 + 600 PF definitely sounds like getting (almost) the best quality for a still (relatively speaking) decent price. But honestly, for me it's kinda hard suggesting buying a camera with a single prime lens, since it is quite limiting. yes, 600mm is definitely a lot better than 600mm on APS-C or 800mm on FF, but having some kind of flexibility is also definitely useful. That's why i like the 200-800 so much. Obviously, if someone has other lenses too, then it's not really a big deal (i really love my 24-240).
If you have limited budget for wildlife and sports, buy a used fuji xt3 or a new xt-30 ii. It has 20fps electronic shutter and the electronic shutter is great in fuji cameras because of fast readout. It also has 30fps cropped stills and 240fps slowmotion video and the body is around 1000 usd!
@@truthseeker6804 well i think they trade blows. Canon has better autofocus, cheaper. Fuji is faster and better slowmotion. Fuji has better lcd. Fuji has film simulation which i love. Canon has 4k 60 with a big crop i think. Depends but fuji is really good looking i am always stopped and asked what camera is that and etc by other people. Canon for vlogging, fuji for portrait and street, similar in wildlife.
@@f.iph7291 in wildlife, autfoocus and FPS are the most important. widlife is not the same as street or portrait photography where you have much time to adjust.
The best all-around Camera adheres to the principle of KISS . The EOS R8 as a minimum of buttons and knobs, but all of are re-programmable, so they can be set up to meet your specific needs and changed when the needs change . For me, it seems to be the best for all categories, including movies.
Decent setup, I like the sigma on the R7 a little more for the MP and the 1.6x crop factor, however the R6mII was way better iso performance, dynamic range, and excellent readout speed.
I think I like the canon R7 over the canon R8, but I haven’t shot with either of them. I’m shoot with the original EOS R and the R5 usually. The Canon R5 is my favorite right for photography. I’ve shot with the Sony A7RV but didn’t have the greatest experience with the Sony 70-200 mark one version. I definitely need to try either the Tamron lens which is 70 to 180 or the mark two version of the G master 70- 200.
When you first get a real camera the first thing you'll be disappointed by is the image quality. With a kit zoom, it's just not going to be much better than your phone especially indoors. I would recommend primes for new photographers. Start with a 50, learn how to use the camera, then decide if you want something longer or shorter and go from there. Also, you need to learn how to use the camera and all about the exposure triangle. Tony and Chelsea is the right place to start.
@@bigdhav Absolutely agree! Where I live, they had an offer: S5 II X & 3 original lenses for $ 2600.- total! What a great camera, what a great deal! Best wishes
Brought my Q3 & A7R5 last month during our Europe vacation… my A7R5 was kept in the hotel room safe during the whole trip… maybe because the Q3 was the shiny new toy
It's so important to make it very clear to beginners that 'new' does not mean 'better' in photography. Cameras are a weird area of tech, and as the tech has improved, stills image quality has not. It peaked in 2018 (Nikon D850, Sony A7III, A7R III, Fuji X-T3), and new flagship cameras will NOT give you better image quality in photos than a flagship from 5 years ago. New lenses however are phenomenal and WILL significantly improve your image quality, and they'll outlast your body so focus your budget there. It's also important to be honest with yourself, avoid obsessing over brand new gear, and analyse what you 'need' from a camera. If you don't need the latest software, AF algorithms for hardcore sports and wildlife and you don't shoot serious video... Do not sink your budget into a brand new high-end body. I was all set to buy either an R5, Nikon Z7II or Z8 or Sony A7R IV or V... And after really analysing my needs, I just bought a brand new A7R IIIA in December 2023, on sale at Amazon for the same price as a Canon R8. Fact is, for my personal needs (I don't shoot video), with 42MP, it really is the sweet spot for price vs features vs image quality for photos. The specs are still relevant and the A7R III's sensor still ranks higher with DxO Mark than every flagship camera released since, including the A7R V, A1, Z8/9, R5 etc. I could have spent literally double or even triple that amount of money on a body and gained absolutely nothing in image quality and never used any of the added features.. So instead my budget went on some beautiful G-Master glass and I'm in love. Anyway, I was just admiring the new Fuji X-S20 which looks like a superb little hybrid camera for beginner enthusiasts. Ticks every box. That might be my choice given the large range of cheaper third party glass for the X-Mount (I couldn't recommend Canon RF to a beginner purely because of the price of lenses). As a cheaper option, the Fuji X-T30 II is also a brilliant beginner camera. For full frame photography, given the sheer amount of glass available, the A7III is still hard to beat. Currently a great price and Sony are running a cashback. Just my totally unsolicited and unwanted rambling opinion!
Nikon d800e is a great camera highly recommend but only if you dont need a high frame rate your only getting like 5fps but the images you can get are great quality
As Matthew said, sub-standard AF, but also you would have to subdue to X-Trans and all its associated issues and constraints. The lens choice is also limiting, the image quality doesn't match what's available for full frame today (see e.g. Nigel Danson's comparisons for landscape photography), most Fuji lenses are old by now, and optically slightly outdated against contemporary standards. It is also still limiting that Fuji is still a monopoly for the most past, serious choice (esp. zooms) from 3rd parties is still lacking to help filling quality gaps.
You can buy a used xt3 or xt30 ii for wildlife, it has 20fps in electronic shutter and 30fps cropped. And the electronic shutter in fuji cameras is great because of fast readout speed. So with a body under 1000 USD, you would have 20fps raw, 240fps slowmotion and a good enough autofocus. Pair it with a 70_300 or 100-400 lens, they are gorgeous lenses and don't really need updating
@@f.iph7291 but they don't track moving subjects to anywhere near the level of the latest Canon, Sony or Nikon offerings. It's a real shame as the images Fujis take are sublime. Have a look at any sports event, the pros never use Fuji which speaks volumes....
I have a oppo find X5 pro the firmware has Hasselblad controls the cameras and it's awesome in pro mode can switch off all the Ai features and even managed to manual mode and tripod mount for the four cameras the panoramics are impressive but the everything else would use a camera with a good prime lens
Tony, I'm looking to get back into photography again and I have a few 2.8 G lenses with an old D700. I was thinking of getting the Z7 II ineor III (when it comes out). And I'm deciding whether I need/want/should upgrade the G lenses to the new Z line since you practically get nothing for those G lenses.
While the Nikon ZFc with apsc sensor with kit lens did not outdo the phone 15 photo sample you showed at 900 iso, if you went to the full frame Nikon Z5 with its kit lens it would be better at this ISO than the iphone. Bigger pixels do make a difference in a full frame sensor (vs. apsc sensor) for cleaner images up to at least 1200 iso (or higher) in jpeg processed in camera, compared to in phone processed jpegs. I have the Z5 and I know. Canon R8 would be similar for clean low light as you showed.
I bought the Canon R8 about a month ago and while I love the performance (especially the autofocus) and picture quality, the battery life is a bummer. I mostly use it for travel photography and the battery has never lasted a full day. I do have a spare battery, but it is quite irritating having to switch from one to the other. I have disabled all the menu options which eat up the battery and while it has made some difference, it is still not enough. I can live with the other 'limitations' such as having only a single SD card or the lack of IBIS, but the abysmal battery life is one shortcoming that the camera could have done without.
Nice video! I don't know. for wildlife I love my Canon 90D with the 100-4000mm 4.5 - 5.6.. I seem to get great wildlife shots with it. Is it really worth changing over to a Canon R8 or R7 and R lens?
Z5 is less than $900 used and $1000 new and beats RP in most of the categories. Edit: Adding to this, the prices for Z lenses are more budget friendly than RF lenses and you get more 3rd party choices.
I agree with you. But.. 20K for the Nikon with the 600 that can go to 850mm compared to Sony A7 with the 600mm for 4.5k. Not worth it. I will take the leftover 15K and buy my wife a diamond for Christmas and get a new Honda Transalp 750 for me!!!
Great video overall, but I think it's worth mentioning MFT for those on a budget wanting to get into wildlife or even general purpose photography/video, if only because high-quality lenses with a lot of reach, fast aperture, etc. are comparatively inexpensive. Quality isn't ever going to be as good as a larger sensor in absolute terms, but for hobbyists and people shooting soccer games, MFT is still more than enough.
Huh, this is the first positive thing I've heard anyone say about the Powershot Zoom since it came out in late 2020. I guess thinking about it as a cameraphone accessory/gadget (and the price drop) gives it a niche, since pocket cams like the PowerShot SX740 never got modernized?
I got myself a sigma 28 70 f2.8 for my A7III for USD 757. I am worried it might be not quite wide enough for street photography while travelling. Should I go for sigma 24 70 (1200 usd) or sony (1750 usd) for those 4 millimeters of focal length.
Thanks for the nice overview. What do think of buying a used D5 (1300$) along with a used 70-200 VR II (700$) for shooting (mostly kids) athletics and running events? Is that still a good combo if you can handle weight and size?
70-200 probably isn't enough reach (i.e. zoom range) for outdoor sports like track, football, etc. on a full frame body like the D5. Likewise, the D5 has a bunch of pro features you'll likely never use/appreciate (vertical grip with huge multi-day battery, ethernet port for fast networked file transfers, etc.). With that in mind, something like the Nikon D500, which has an APS-C sensor, is a much better fit; it's the same resolution and even the same very-capable autofocus system of the D5, but with a smaller body and sensor. Likewise, the D500 sensor automatically applies a 1.5x crop, so your 70-200 becomes ~140-300 -- much more usable for sports. Oh, and the D500 will cost notably less too. MPB has them used "like new" for $970 USD.
@@JokingJay thanks for the advice. I actually got the D5 with 70-200 and have to say that so far I’m very pleased with it. I used it for a kids indoors athletics sports event and had the possibility to be close to the action. For that, reach was not an issue, rather I would have wished to have a more wide angle lens in my bag (which I didn’t bring). I was particularly impressed how the D5 handled the dim light. I shot with auto ISO and got very good results even above ISO 20.000. Focusing worked really well, though I still need to figure out my routine. I am used to single point AF-C, but face detect seems to work quite well, so I’ll have to explore this more. Also I love the vertical grip, I always get a sore wrist when using my D750 in vertical position for a longer time. The size and weight of the D5 can be a challenge, but the balance with the 70-200 is good and for ergonomics I can’t complain. Not a body I would take on a long trip, though. So for the time being, I’m very happy with the D5. It meets my needs and is a big step up from the D750 for shooting the kind of sports events I am interested in. However, I might (in a few years) switch to mirrorless and get a used Z8 to have a one fits all body.
I currently shoot sports and wildlife with a Nikon D500 and a Nikon D850 and am looking at the Nikon Z9 with an adapter so I can use my DSLR lenses? Downsides?
Skip the Z9, IMO. Your D850 is still about the best camera ever. Use the money you saved by not buying the (admittedly fantastic) Z9 to expand your store of lenses, lighting equipment, etc. 😊
@@georgefrench1907I think the Z9 has a couple of key benefits over the d850 so I can’t say I agree with this per se, but I will say if you want to use your f mount glass, I’d probably stay with your d850… unless you fully plan on eventually selling them for Z mount glass
i second @georgefrench1907 comment. specially as you have both the d500 and d850, you would gain almost next to nothing but lesser money. if you are satisfied with your current lenses as well, then the next better use of money is for travel expenses. not saying that z9(or even z8/z7) is not good, its just that d850 + d500 is more than plenty enough.
Thanks for the video. I always enjoy your work. I noticed there was not any discussion of the traditional portrait lenses such as 85, 105, 135. Do you really prefer a 70 - 200mm f2.8?
Pros do not watch your videos and know it is all about exposure, lighting and white balance. Most people who are not pros or semi pros never challenge their camera and suggesting cameras that have the potential to do 5x more than the average hobbyist will ever do is not doing the person who wants to spend
Lots of food for thought there Tony. I must admit to being a little disappointed that the Fuji XS20 didn’t get a mention. I have my eye on this at the moment, purely because of its size/weight which is important to me. My arthritis riddled hands are struggling with the size/weight of my Canon 80D which i have loved ( in good light). I Shoot Landscape, Street and wildlife so need a good all-rounder (i don’t shoot video). I was hoping that the XS20 was the perfect fit. As I write this, im struggling to get to grips with a mug of coffee because my thumbs hurt (early morning) so you can see that weight is going to be so important going forward. Any thoughts are welcome, i really dont want to contemplate having to give up my hobby.
canon r8 full frame lighter weight than the xs20. the canon r10 also lighter. the canon r50 lightest with viewfinder. i would also encourage stop the coffee. its not really good.
@@truthseeker6804 thanks for your interest, however both the R8 and R10 are slightly heavier than the X S20. Not by much i grant you. The R50 just doesn’t come close for image stabilisation and most other respects even though it is very slightly lighter.
@@paullavin5449 on fuji website xs20 including battery and memory card: Approx. 491g. on canon website r8 461g with card and battery. the r8 is full frame and lighter. r10 426 g with card and battery. the xs20 is the heavier among them.
As user of K1-II with alla HD-DFA lenses plus loads of vintage K-mount and Also A74 with Tamron 35-150 and Sony 200-600 plus some primes and former user of D500 I have to recommend a used K1 plus DA 16-45 (covers FF in 20-45) many DA lenses has the same possibility. It will be a 1000 USD/E combo with IQ making 6000 USD/E be at shame. No yellow Sony grass, 6 different green in the trees not 2 as Sony only can pull out. Greetings from Sweden.
Tony, great video with a lot of good ideas. I shoot with Nikon bodies and various lenses for my wildlife photography. Currently I go back and forth between a D810 and a Z50 depending on how much hiking, lighting, etc. I took my Z50 with a 200-500mm E lens to Costa Rica for two weeks and had pretty good results. I think this combination would be great for someone just getting into wildlife photography. Right now it would cost about $1,400 to get this combo used. I plan to upgrade the body when Nikon comes out with the mirrorless equivalent of the D500 and will probably upgrade to the new Nikon Z 180-600mm lens. The cost of the Z8 and the Z 600mm TC is way out of my range. Tony, do you think a mirrorless replacement for the D500 is coming anytime soon?
Nikon D500 w/200-500 for $2200 is a big ask. More like $1800. If you can buy them separately, some people are selling the 200-500 for 7-800 bucks all day. Can't wait to snag one, as well as a D500. I'm also looking at a 300mm ED IF. On a D500, that would be a beast setup on a decent budget.
I've been using the D500 for underwater shooting since 2017. I have had some pretty good shots over the years. I had a flood destroy my first one 2 years back, and I decided to just get another one rather than upgrade the camera, in order to keep using the same housing. My shots keep getting better as I learn more about photography techniques, so I will likely keep using it until I either get too old to dive, or something breaks and a replacement isn't any longer available. It may not have all the bells and whistles of the newer mirrorless cameras, but it certainly does the job well.
Osmo Santa think to seperate camera use from vlog use way to go small weather action proof device my take on it.With camera use so interesting the most useful general range and f stop and cost I'm finding 70 300 sweet spot some wide some long paired with 800 prime covers a lot of uses ,and 10 18 .My trilogy but that 70 300 on the camera one
Plus one on the intro portion. Smartphone have come a long way to squeeze out good pictures from those teeny little sensors. If you love to take photos and want them to be a lil better plus you won't ever take photography as a profession.. get a good camera smartphone.
Heads just been going crazy trying to figure out a wedding gift for my fiance. I wanna get a camera and extra lense for our 2 week alaska honey moon but stuffs so confusing 😂
For anything under 700$ there’s only one correct answer and that’s the a6100 and it’s not even close. The cameras you mentioned here in that price point don’t compete with it at all.
@@truthseeker6804 eh they trade blows realistically. The R50 is generally a bit more expensive as well. Canon glass is far too expensive imo to ever recommend to a noob
@@SneakyCaleb both the r50 and a6100 are the same price New. the r50 is an objectively better camera. theres no blows ot trade. yes canon RF lenses are more expensives, theres a few rfs lenses and also ef lenses would work.
What if one likes this hobby, interested in landscape and building n thinking about upgrading camera kit or smartphone but already has an old dslr nikon d610
i would say that if you are not thinking of doing photography as a means to earn money, then d610 still is a great camera. lenses would still be the better use of money, topped only by travel expenses. if you really want to upgrade body regardless, then check dslr choices first as i would assume that you already have lenses. at this point, i could only suggest going mirrorless to those who really have the money to spend. if money is not an issue though, go straight to mirrorless but then again, d610 still is a great camera. if you dont find anything lacking on it, theres no reason to buy a new body(unless ofcourse if you really want to)
D5300 with the 18-140mm is a great budget gear I use. Its a good idea to pair it with a prime lens like the 35mm or 50mm you recomended. For a upgrade instead of D750 im thinking in Nikon Z5 wich is full frame and mirrorless, so it is a change in everything. Im a little worried about the lenses for it. Another posibility is Canon R8. Always portraits is the main objective. But what I learned studying is that everything depends more on the photographer than on the equipment
I am a nikon fanatic but I don't recommend pairing a d5300 with a prime lens simply because the 5000 series from nikon don't have AF fine-tune adjust functions. I always front focused with my d5600, albeit i loved it i had to sell it. D7200 works great with those prime G lenses from nikon cause it has AF fine-tune function.
I never needed AF fine tuning on my D3xxx and D5xxx. They focused perfectly. They are cheap and are recommanded for a budget camera. Nevertheless, on my old D800, even AF adjustment didn't help because this camera has a known defect
@@bobamarmstrong i had the 50 f1.8g with d5600. Sometimes the focus was good and my images were sharper than anything I had seen but 90percent of the time my photos were soft af and front focused, i really needed af fine tune.
@@f.iph7291I don't know how much it can affect me if, in any case, a face has much greater depth than that half inch that may be out of focus. Maybe it works for macro, but I have a macro lens that gives better results even than those settings. And if I change cameras for that reason to one twice as expensive, the D7500 doesn't even make sense anymore, for that reason I should go directly to a much newer and better one than all of them. For that D5300 is great because I get great result inclusive with prime lenses, wich are preferred in particular cases of poor light or portraits. Anyway, maybe Tony should make a video about this, if he doesnt do it its because isnt important!
@@chargerdiecast you know why it bothered me? Because that 50mm f1.8g was beyond sharp it was amazing when it nailed the focus. I spent extra time on retouching and it was beyond amazing. But 90 percent of the time i couldn't get that level of details. The great sharpness made the front focusing an issue and i was always noticing it and it made me disappointed. I loved my d5600 and i would buy one again if i have the money. That was my first camera.
Wow, not a single mention of the S5ii or S5iiX, not here nor in the awards. Really? Fantastic video and photography cameras, with an enormous amount of in-camera features and excellent AF. Pana got robbed here, imo.
Give me a photography first and moderate video camera around 2000$ (Looking for alternative choices of A7IV) At the moment i have Xiaomi 13 ultra with leica colours)
Why for wildlife do you just immediately jump to $3000? There's plenty of used Canon and Nikon DSLRs that are great for wildlife, and for that price You can get a used Nikon D850 and 200-500mm.
I wouldn't recommend Canon's APS-C cameras to anybody because their lens selection is terrible. They only have 3 kit lenses. For APS-C I would recommend Fujifilm or Sony because they have a lot of native and third party lenses.
Your sports camera recommendations are way off base. I shoot professional NBA and NFL games, and the majority of the pros on the sidelines are currently using Canon R3 cameras.
SOP!! Just Stop! That is what I'm telling myself... nine cameras are PLENTY. It's hard to pass up a good camera when the price is just too good. For me, it's all just for fun.
Leica cameras have been taking many a award winning pictures for many a years. Yet you have placed them in the none serious catagory. As well as you have laft out the micro 4/3's companies as well. They take great pictures and videos too. Why?
Tony where is Chelsea, is she still recovering from that olive? You two are such fun to watch.
Fun but inept !
LOL!
😂😂😂
Seems like this video was recorded before that one
@@SEAME7their book is great , it really helped me to get started in photography when I couldn't afford school. I've also found their advice to be right about 90% of the time. The only thing I feel that's inept is a random account on UA-cam insulting two people who've done a lot for the photography world over the years. Once they've made enough money off of gear videos (because that's the only things people watch), I hope they go back to education and helping folks, because they're really good at that
Recommending old DSLRs and new budget but crippled to the oblivion cameras from the 3 big companies without a mention of Panasonic LUMIX? As an enthusiast, last year I've shot Canon FF DSLR and Sony APS-C and it was a dreadful experience comparing to LUMIX. Trying an old Lumix with tiny micro4/3 sensor brought back fun and pleasure of photography. This year I've had 5 different Panasonic cameras and while Canon APS-C, Sony RX100, GoPro11(and others) are on the shelf I pick a (500euro 2nd hand) Lumix S5 when I want amazing results with actual fun of using a camera. Amazing IBIS, colours, dynamic range, photo and video features, hybrid capabilities, NO OVERHEATING when recording for longer than 15min are just some of the factors. I like and respect you guys but seeing lack of Panasonic in your videos(while others recognise and highlight capabilities and growing position in the camera market) makes me wonder why...
Surprised the Sony A7CII or A7CR didn't make this list anywhere. Maybe you needed a travel category?
right, just picked up the ii and its an amazing camera for the size! i think the main thing is that it retailed at $2199..most were looking for it to be closer to the $1999 mark...i picked mine up as a open box and saved $150.
LUMIX Tony have you heard of them? S5IIX should definitely been mentioned in the video section. Your recommendations are also just Sony, Canon, Nikon (and a random DJI). Quite limiting. You speak of wildlife but never mention m4/3...Olympus is a great shout for wildlife.
Thanks for a great in depth video. A couple things I'd add (IMHO): 1) I think for hobbyists, enthusiasts, or those looking for a general travel/general purpose camera, the XT-30 is the best bang for buck camera you can get. I recommend it to a lot of people, and I think it still holds up today. 2) Bridging the gap in the portrait category between the D750 and the A7IV, I highly recommend the Nikon z7ii (or z6ii). As a working portrait photographer, it's my daily driver, and it's a fantastic camera, producing fantastic results. Nikon also has some absolutely beautiful portrait lenses, and the files SOC are amazing. I know you're not a huge fan of the autofocus, and yes, it lags behind its competitors, but for portrait use, it's more than sufficient. My hit rate is over 99% on an average shoot, so while I can see the limitations for tracking fast moving subjects, I've shot everything from headshots to outdoor portraits to concerts, and have had amazing results.
There's my $0.02 - thanks for reading.
Overall, I agree with most of the recommendations, but I don't know about the Canon 600mm f/11 for Wildlife beginners. I feel like a lot of people will be very disappointed by that setup, just because of how limiting it is at a fixed focal length and f/11. I'd probably also steer someone on a very tight budget to the R10 but pair it with the 100-400mm. More flexibility, and 400mm f/8 on APS-C is enough, in my opinion. I assume that lens would also be better for the occasional "semi-macro" of insects or flowers.
Yeah I was torn because the 100-400 works well, and zoom is useful for beginners, but 400 even with aps-c crop is still pretty wide for most beginning wildlife stuff.
400mm CAN be enough but it totally depends on how close you can get obviously. I know when I had a full frame camera and finally had the money to get a 100-400 I was wanting for years I was surprised how little reach it actually had. I could see a beginner being disappointed especially if they had a smartphone that could reach as much or even further.
@@escapegoat32 no smartphone can reach that far, the Samsung 10x lenses got a focal length of 200mm FF equivalent, the 400mm on APS-C got a 600mm equivalent and mich better image quality.
Tony, there is a camera company that deserves your attention for video. You apparently have never heard of it. It's LUMIX camera models, and they're wonderful for video---better than any camera you named in this video. Their micro four thirds camera can get fantastic wildlife results, save you a ton of money (and a ton of weight) as well. The colors, dynamic range, and video features are a dream for people who love video and hate having to do ridiculous things to get something as simple as a manual white balance (Canon I'm looking at you).
IMO it's a shame that you totally neglected this company in any of your categories.
a Shame!
It's probably failing today's competition in autofocus terms. Today, having a sub-standard autofocus destroys a brand, unless it has a big sensor size so that it could at least score on image quality parameters. Medium format is probably the only niche left today, which still can 'afford' having a sub-standard autofocus.
The other issue is, that by today, too many (and certainly Tony) have comprehended lens equivalency. When comparing equivalent lenses, MFT and APS-C (Fuji X) are neither cheaper nor more lightweight than equivalent full frame lenses, partly because of physics, but also because the recent FF lens generations became much more compact than older generations.
@@tubularificationed Auto focus is no longer an issue on Lumix cameras. In fact, they are probably tied second best behind Sony and in or around equal with Canon.
On M4/3, I owned one in the past and I say they are the best for wildlife. Great compact lenses. The lenses are also way cheaper too.
OK I'm not a wildilfer. All I heard that today, animal eye AF is a top criteria. It just never came to my attention yet whether Pana would have made noteworthy achievements already in the animal eye AF domain.
It might not matter much for "lame ducks" or birds sitting still in trees, but for running / fighting / playing animals, or for birds in flight, it would be understandibly a decisive benefit. Having the eyes in focus, not e.g. some random more contrasty edges such as the wing tips most of the time.
@@tubularificationed Panasonic/lumix is excellent in autofocus. You’re behind the times on Panasonic. The S5ii and S5iiX and G9ii are all excellent with autofocus.
@@tubularificationed The Panasonic G9II has great animal eye detect.
Great overview, Tony. I especially liked your encouraging people to shop used and to invest in education.
Notice that in wildlife nikon is the only one to have mid quality glass so if you want to have better quality than 180-600 you can have 800f6.3, 500f5.6, 600f6.3 .... you dont need to jump directly in the 400f2.8 or 600f4 which cost 15k
exactly. he jumped directly from $4.4k to $19k. Many pros would also prefer 800pf or 600 pf simply because of their weight
Still getting great results from my Nikon d7200 with tamron 24-70(v1) and Nikkor 200-500. Mainly landscapes and wildlife. I’m probably the limiting factor as far as quality shots goes.
I've gotten plenty of amazing shots with a d5600 and Tamron 150-600g2. Can be found for dirt cheap nowadays lol. Gotta say tho, good deals on d500's still pop up every now and then too, which is some serious power for not a lot of money and for newer photographers, it's hard to beat
the camera autofocus is just not good for fast sports or wildlife. its not really your fault. get a better camera. canon r7, r8, or nikon z8.
@@truthseeker6804 I’ve had no problems with autofocus with fast moving subjects. Put a 2.8 70-200 lens on it and improve your technique.
Surprised you didn’t mention the NIKKOR Z 180-600 which is (arguably) more versatile than the 600TC for general-purpose wildlife capture (excluding birding).
For wildlife i'll just low-key suggest the R6II/R8 + RF 200-800mm for medium budget. The lens covers basically everything one could need and the R6II/R8 have great autofocus and are just amazing at dealing with low-light and the "slow" F/9 lens (using quotation marks since i'll dare everyone who complains about the F/9 to go out *right now* and buy a 800mm F/5.6 lens for 20k bucks).
Alternatively, a neat step up to the suggested R10 + 600mm F/11 would be R8 + 800mm F/11, the combo is giving you very similar reach, while dealing much better with less light availaible at dawn/dusk. It's a bit heavier, but still extremely light for a full-frame wildlife setup.
He jumped from $4.4k to $19k for wildlife. There are much more intermediate options. Nikon 600mm pf+ z8 is a great combo at a much lighter weight and price.
@@atanuhalder7750 i'm not really a Nikon shooter (i do have a really old one but.. yea) but Z8 + 600 PF definitely sounds like getting (almost) the best quality for a still (relatively speaking) decent price.
But honestly, for me it's kinda hard suggesting buying a camera with a single prime lens, since it is quite limiting. yes, 600mm is definitely a lot better than 600mm on APS-C or 800mm on FF, but having some kind of flexibility is also definitely useful. That's why i like the 200-800 so much. Obviously, if someone has other lenses too, then it's not really a big deal (i really love my 24-240).
If you have limited budget for wildlife and sports, buy a used fuji xt3 or a new xt-30 ii. It has 20fps electronic shutter and the electronic shutter is great in fuji cameras because of fast readout. It also has 30fps cropped stills and 240fps slowmotion video and the body is around 1000 usd!
the canon r10 does 15fps mechanical and 23fps electronic. and im sure the autofocus is better on the canon
@@truthseeker6804 well i think they trade blows. Canon has better autofocus, cheaper. Fuji is faster and better slowmotion. Fuji has better lcd. Fuji has film simulation which i love. Canon has 4k 60 with a big crop i think. Depends but fuji is really good looking i am always stopped and asked what camera is that and etc by other people. Canon for vlogging, fuji for portrait and street, similar in wildlife.
@@f.iph7291 in wildlife, autfoocus and FPS are the most important. widlife is not the same as street or portrait photography where you have much time to adjust.
The best all-around Camera adheres to the principle of KISS . The EOS R8 as a minimum of buttons and knobs, but all of are re-programmable, so they can be set up to meet your specific needs and changed when the needs change . For me, it seems to be the best for all categories, including movies.
The R8 is The latest full frame on the market great for hiking in nature, work where weight is a factor.
That’s the lightest full frame
For budget sports or wildlife you could also throw in the bridge cameras like the RX10IV or P1000.
nah. you cant change lenses when youre ready to upgrade to a better lens.and theyre not good for low light with outdated autofocus.
Some people will never upgrade,.though. And others - say those who are older - have a pretty firm weight limit.
Hey Tony nice video but what about the Lumix S5ii?? For under $2k it can't be beat.
What is your opinion on using a Sigma 150-600mm contemporary lens with a Canon R6 mk2 ??
Decent setup, I like the sigma on the R7 a little more for the MP and the 1.6x crop factor, however the R6mII was way better iso performance, dynamic range, and excellent readout speed.
wait for the rf 200-800, people have complained about the sigma missing focus on the rf cameras. you can research on that.
Hello! May I ask what your thoughts were on the Fuji XH-2 with the Fuji X 18-55mm kit lens?
It's good. You won't be disappointed. But what's the purpose for your photography?
I think I like the canon R7 over the canon R8, but I haven’t shot with either of them. I’m shoot with the original EOS R and the R5 usually. The Canon R5 is my favorite right for photography. I’ve shot with the Sony A7RV but didn’t have the greatest experience with the Sony 70-200 mark one version. I definitely need to try either the Tamron lens which is 70 to 180 or the mark two version of the G master 70- 200.
When you first get a real camera the first thing you'll be disappointed by is the image quality. With a kit zoom, it's just not going to be much better than your phone especially indoors. I would recommend primes for new photographers. Start with a 50, learn how to use the camera, then decide if you want something longer or shorter and go from there. Also, you need to learn how to use the camera and all about the exposure triangle. Tony and Chelsea is the right place to start.
I really like the comment about getting a camera that's fun to use. That's more important than anything else
For people on a budget, I'd recommend the Tamron 28-200mm over Sony's 24-105mm. Brighter, similar sharpness, and way more reach.
Yup the 28-200 is far better it’s not even close
I slightly missed 2 cameras being mentioned:
Panasonic S5 II X
Nikon D850
In my opinion both great bang for the buck!
Best wishes
Panasonic never gets any love.
@@bigdhav Absolutely agree!
Where I live, they had an offer:
S5 II X & 3 original lenses for $ 2600.- total!
What a great camera, what a great deal!
Best wishes
In addition to wildlife, the Nikon D500 & 200-500 lens is also very good for field sports in daylight.
And both of those can be found for dirt cheap nowadays. Insane value
Canon R7 for wildlife every time !
Brought my Q3 & A7R5 last month during our Europe vacation… my A7R5 was kept in the hotel room safe during the whole trip… maybe because the Q3 was the shiny new toy
It's so important to make it very clear to beginners that 'new' does not mean 'better' in photography. Cameras are a weird area of tech, and as the tech has improved, stills image quality has not. It peaked in 2018 (Nikon D850, Sony A7III, A7R III, Fuji X-T3), and new flagship cameras will NOT give you better image quality in photos than a flagship from 5 years ago. New lenses however are phenomenal and WILL significantly improve your image quality, and they'll outlast your body so focus your budget there.
It's also important to be honest with yourself, avoid obsessing over brand new gear, and analyse what you 'need' from a camera. If you don't need the latest software, AF algorithms for hardcore sports and wildlife and you don't shoot serious video... Do not sink your budget into a brand new high-end body.
I was all set to buy either an R5, Nikon Z7II or Z8 or Sony A7R IV or V... And after really analysing my needs, I just bought a brand new A7R IIIA in December 2023, on sale at Amazon for the same price as a Canon R8. Fact is, for my personal needs (I don't shoot video), with 42MP, it really is the sweet spot for price vs features vs image quality for photos. The specs are still relevant and the A7R III's sensor still ranks higher with DxO Mark than every flagship camera released since, including the A7R V, A1, Z8/9, R5 etc.
I could have spent literally double or even triple that amount of money on a body and gained absolutely nothing in image quality and never used any of the added features.. So instead my budget went on some beautiful G-Master glass and I'm in love.
Anyway, I was just admiring the new Fuji X-S20 which looks like a superb little hybrid camera for beginner enthusiasts. Ticks every box. That might be my choice given the large range of cheaper third party glass for the X-Mount (I couldn't recommend Canon RF to a beginner purely because of the price of lenses). As a cheaper option, the Fuji X-T30 II is also a brilliant beginner camera.
For full frame photography, given the sheer amount of glass available, the A7III is still hard to beat. Currently a great price and Sony are running a cashback.
Just my totally unsolicited and unwanted rambling opinion!
for a beginner who would like a do-it-all camera, which would you recommend for someone who on a budget? Thanks!
Nikon d800e is a great camera highly recommend but only if you dont need a high frame rate your only getting like 5fps but the images you can get are great quality
I'm a point-and-shoot guy. I bought a Galaxy S23+ this February and sold my Sony ZV-1 in September.
Although I agree Fuji is a very fun system, I wouldn't reduce them to just that. They are very capable cameras, especially the XT-3/4/5.
not only fun to use but also technically better than some of those mentioned above, I would pick XT-5 over R5 any day.
@@rezawilliams9400 not for tracking wildlife you wouldn't!!
As Matthew said, sub-standard AF, but also you would have to subdue to X-Trans and all its associated issues and constraints.
The lens choice is also limiting, the image quality doesn't match what's available for full frame today (see e.g. Nigel Danson's comparisons for landscape photography), most Fuji lenses are old by now, and optically slightly outdated against contemporary standards.
It is also still limiting that Fuji is still a monopoly for the most past, serious choice (esp. zooms) from 3rd parties is still lacking to help filling quality gaps.
You can buy a used xt3 or xt30 ii for wildlife, it has 20fps in electronic shutter and 30fps cropped. And the electronic shutter in fuji cameras is great because of fast readout speed. So with a body under 1000 USD, you would have 20fps raw, 240fps slowmotion and a good enough autofocus. Pair it with a 70_300 or 100-400 lens, they are gorgeous lenses and don't really need updating
@@f.iph7291 but they don't track moving subjects to anywhere near the level of the latest Canon, Sony or Nikon offerings. It's a real shame as the images Fujis take are sublime. Have a look at any sports event, the pros never use Fuji which speaks volumes....
No mention of Panasonic 😑 It's like as if only 3 brands exist 😕
Fujifilm
What about Canon R5 paired with the RF 100-500 mm for wildlife? Is that a good combination ? Any suggestions
Is there a better price per performance (used market) for sports photography than the A9 (mark 1) and a Sony 70-200? Looking for native glass.
I have a oppo find X5 pro the firmware has Hasselblad controls the cameras and it's awesome in pro mode can switch off all the Ai features and even managed to manual mode and tripod mount for the four cameras the panoramics are impressive but the everything else would use a camera with a good prime lens
Tony, I'm looking to get back into photography again and I have a few 2.8 G lenses with an old D700. I was thinking of getting the Z7 II ineor III (when it comes out). And I'm deciding whether I need/want/should upgrade the G lenses to the new Z line since you practically get nothing for those G lenses.
What about canon R10+ RF100-400 for wildlife?
good for sports and wildlife outdoor daytime.
While the Nikon ZFc with apsc sensor with kit lens did not outdo the phone 15 photo sample you showed at 900 iso, if you went to the full frame Nikon Z5 with its kit lens it would be better at this ISO than the iphone. Bigger pixels do make a difference in a full frame sensor (vs. apsc sensor) for cleaner images up to at least 1200 iso (or higher) in jpeg processed in camera, compared to in phone processed jpegs. I have the Z5 and I know. Canon R8 would be similar for clean low light as you showed.
Missed the chapter mark at 9:56 for Best Landscape Cameras
Woah, recommending the Z8 over your beloved A1, even for sports. Thanks for another informative and entertaining video!
well done!
I bought the Canon R8 about a month ago and while I love the performance (especially the autofocus) and picture quality, the battery life is a bummer. I mostly use it for travel photography and the battery has never lasted a full day. I do have a spare battery, but it is quite irritating having to switch from one to the other. I have disabled all the menu options which eat up the battery and while it has made some difference, it is still not enough. I can live with the other 'limitations' such as having only a single SD card or the lack of IBIS, but the abysmal battery life is one shortcoming that the camera could have done without.
Nice video! I don't know. for wildlife I love my Canon 90D with the 100-4000mm 4.5 - 5.6.. I seem to get great wildlife shots with it. Is it really worth changing over to a Canon R8 or R7 and R lens?
Z5 is less than $900 used and $1000 new and beats RP in most of the categories.
Edit: Adding to this, the prices for Z lenses are more budget friendly than RF lenses and you get more 3rd party choices.
The RP is trash... It's been replaced by the R8
I agree with you. But.. 20K for the Nikon with the 600 that can go to 850mm compared to Sony A7 with the 600mm for 4.5k. Not worth it. I will take the leftover 15K and buy my wife a diamond for Christmas and get a new Honda Transalp 750 for me!!!
Completely missed the Lumix S5 mark2X which is really good for the price.
I feel very happy with my R5
can you buy a smart phone camera that is just the camera?
This is a great idea
Great video overall, but I think it's worth mentioning MFT for those on a budget wanting to get into wildlife or even general purpose photography/video, if only because high-quality lenses with a lot of reach, fast aperture, etc. are comparatively inexpensive. Quality isn't ever going to be as good as a larger sensor in absolute terms, but for hobbyists and people shooting soccer games, MFT is still more than enough.
Huh, this is the first positive thing I've heard anyone say about the Powershot Zoom since it came out in late 2020. I guess thinking about it as a cameraphone accessory/gadget (and the price drop) gives it a niche, since pocket cams like the PowerShot SX740 never got modernized?
I got myself a sigma 28 70 f2.8 for my A7III for USD 757. I am worried it might be not quite wide enough for street photography while travelling. Should I go for sigma 24 70 (1200 usd) or sony (1750 usd) for those 4 millimeters of focal length.
Thanks for the nice overview.
What do think of buying a used D5 (1300$) along with a used 70-200 VR II (700$) for shooting (mostly kids) athletics and running events? Is that still a good combo if you can handle weight and size?
70-200 probably isn't enough reach (i.e. zoom range) for outdoor sports like track, football, etc. on a full frame body like the D5. Likewise, the D5 has a bunch of pro features you'll likely never use/appreciate (vertical grip with huge multi-day battery, ethernet port for fast networked file transfers, etc.). With that in mind, something like the Nikon D500, which has an APS-C sensor, is a much better fit; it's the same resolution and even the same very-capable autofocus system of the D5, but with a smaller body and sensor. Likewise, the D500 sensor automatically applies a 1.5x crop, so your 70-200 becomes ~140-300 -- much more usable for sports. Oh, and the D500 will cost notably less too. MPB has them used "like new" for $970 USD.
@@JokingJay thanks for the advice.
I actually got the D5 with 70-200 and have to say that so far I’m very pleased with it.
I used it for a kids indoors athletics sports event and had the possibility to be close to the action. For that, reach was not an issue, rather I would have wished to have a more wide angle lens in my bag (which I didn’t bring).
I was particularly impressed how the D5 handled the dim light. I shot with auto ISO and got very good results even above ISO 20.000.
Focusing worked really well, though I still need to figure out my routine. I am used to single point AF-C, but face detect seems to work quite well, so I’ll have to explore this more.
Also I love the vertical grip, I always get a sore wrist when using my D750 in vertical position for a longer time.
The size and weight of the D5 can be a challenge, but the balance with the 70-200 is good and for ergonomics I can’t complain. Not a body I would take on a long trip, though.
So for the time being, I’m very happy with the D5. It meets my needs and is a big step up from the D750 for shooting the kind of sports events I am interested in. However, I might (in a few years) switch to mirrorless and get a used Z8 to have a one fits all body.
Where's the a7R4? Solid build, excellent sensor, very good AF, less than $3k for a pro body..
As always, only 3 brands are mention.
I currently shoot sports and wildlife with a Nikon D500 and a Nikon D850 and am looking at the Nikon Z9 with an adapter so I can use my DSLR lenses? Downsides?
Skip the Z9, IMO. Your D850 is still about the best camera ever. Use the money you saved by not buying the (admittedly fantastic) Z9 to expand your store of lenses, lighting equipment, etc. 😊
@@georgefrench1907I think the Z9 has a couple of key benefits over the d850 so I can’t say I agree with this per se, but I will say if you want to use your f mount glass, I’d probably stay with your d850… unless you fully plan on eventually selling them for Z mount glass
i second @georgefrench1907 comment. specially as you have both the d500 and d850, you would gain almost next to nothing but lesser money.
if you are satisfied with your current lenses as well, then the next better use of money is for travel expenses.
not saying that z9(or even z8/z7) is not good, its just that d850 + d500 is more than plenty enough.
Thanks for the video. I always enjoy your work. I noticed there was not any discussion of the traditional portrait lenses such as 85, 105, 135. Do you really prefer a 70 - 200mm f2.8?
Pros do not watch your videos and know it is all about exposure, lighting and white balance. Most people who are not pros or semi pros never challenge their camera and suggesting cameras that have the potential to do 5x more than the average hobbyist will ever do is not doing the person who wants to spend
The same type of video about the lenses would be greatly appreciated
R7 for the win
Ok it’s official. Yours is the only UA-cam channel on which I can use split screen on iPhone without premium. What sorcery have you pulled?
Weird!
Lots of food for thought there Tony. I must admit to being a little disappointed that the Fuji XS20 didn’t get a mention. I have my eye on this at the moment, purely because of its size/weight which is important to me. My arthritis riddled hands are struggling with the size/weight of my Canon 80D which i have loved ( in good light). I Shoot Landscape, Street and wildlife so need a good all-rounder (i don’t
shoot video).
I was hoping that the XS20 was the perfect fit. As I write this, im struggling to get to grips with a mug of coffee because my thumbs hurt (early morning) so you can see that weight is going to be so important going forward.
Any thoughts are welcome, i really dont want to contemplate having to give up my hobby.
canon r8 full frame lighter weight than the xs20. the canon r10 also lighter. the canon r50 lightest with viewfinder.
i would also encourage stop the coffee. its not really good.
@@truthseeker6804 thanks for your interest, however both the R8 and R10 are slightly heavier than the X S20. Not by much i grant you.
The R50 just doesn’t come close for image stabilisation and most other respects even though it is very slightly lighter.
@@paullavin5449 on fuji website xs20 including battery and memory card: Approx. 491g. on canon website r8 461g with card and battery. the r8 is full frame and lighter.
r10 426 g with card and battery. the xs20 is the heavier among them.
Thanks so much Tony. Love this vid and all your content :))
As user of K1-II with alla HD-DFA lenses plus loads of vintage K-mount and Also A74 with Tamron 35-150 and Sony 200-600 plus some primes and former user of D500 I have to recommend a used K1 plus DA 16-45 (covers FF in 20-45) many DA lenses has the same possibility. It will be a 1000 USD/E combo with IQ making 6000 USD/E be at shame. No yellow Sony grass, 6 different green in the trees not 2 as Sony only can pull out.
Greetings from Sweden.
The Canon R6ii con soot 40fps in phone
Where's Nikon Z5 ???
Tony, great video with a lot of good ideas. I shoot with Nikon bodies and various lenses for my wildlife photography. Currently I go back and forth between a D810 and a Z50 depending on how much hiking, lighting, etc. I took my Z50 with a 200-500mm E lens to Costa Rica for two weeks and had pretty good results. I think this combination would be great for someone just getting into wildlife photography. Right now it would cost about $1,400 to get this combo used. I plan to upgrade the body when Nikon comes out with the mirrorless equivalent of the D500 and will probably upgrade to the new Nikon Z 180-600mm lens. The cost of the Z8 and the Z 600mm TC is way out of my range. Tony, do you think a mirrorless replacement for the D500 is coming anytime soon?
3 i love using
Nikon D7000
Samsung NX300
Olympus Pen E-P3
I still get great results (up to 16x20”) from my D7100.😊
Nikon D500 w/200-500 for $2200 is a big ask. More like $1800. If you can buy them separately, some people are selling the 200-500 for 7-800 bucks all day. Can't wait to snag one, as well as a D500.
I'm also looking at a 300mm ED IF. On a D500, that would be a beast setup on a decent budget.
I've been using the D500 for underwater shooting since 2017. I have had some pretty good shots over the years. I had a flood destroy my first one 2 years back, and I decided to just get another one rather than upgrade the camera, in order to keep using the same housing. My shots keep getting better as I learn more about photography techniques, so I will likely keep using it until I either get too old to dive, or something breaks and a replacement isn't any longer available. It may not have all the bells and whistles of the newer mirrorless cameras, but it certainly does the job well.
Osmo Santa think to seperate camera use from vlog use way to go small weather action proof device my take on it.With camera use so interesting the most useful general range and f stop and cost I'm finding 70 300 sweet spot some wide some long paired with 800 prime covers a lot of uses ,and 10 18 .My trilogy but that 70 300 on the camera one
The Nikon D610 is a great camera to use for portraits.
Plus one on the intro portion. Smartphone have come a long way to squeeze out good pictures from those teeny little sensors.
If you love to take photos and want them to be a lil better plus you won't ever take photography as a profession.. get a good camera smartphone.
Heads just been going crazy trying to figure out a wedding gift for my fiance. I wanna get a camera and extra lense for our 2 week alaska honey moon but stuffs so confusing 😂
Twilight, desert sunsets, under $3000, suggestions?
I have d7500 with two afp lens, which is cheaper and cost effective to take great photos, Even iPhone takes great photos for a common man.
For anything under 700$ there’s only one correct answer and that’s the a6100 and it’s not even close. The cameras you mentioned here in that price point don’t compete with it at all.
canon r50 better than a6100
@@truthseeker6804 eh they trade blows realistically. The R50 is generally a bit more expensive as well. Canon glass is far too expensive imo to ever recommend to a noob
@@SneakyCaleb both the r50 and a6100 are the same price New. the r50 is an objectively better camera. theres no blows ot trade. yes canon RF lenses are more expensives, theres a few rfs lenses and also ef lenses would work.
Great content
What if one likes this hobby, interested in landscape and building n thinking about upgrading camera kit or smartphone but already has an old dslr nikon d610
i would say that if you are not thinking of doing photography as a means to earn money, then d610 still is a great camera.
lenses would still be the better use of money, topped only by travel expenses.
if you really want to upgrade body regardless, then check dslr choices first as i would assume that you already have lenses.
at this point, i could only suggest going mirrorless to those who really have the money to spend.
if money is not an issue though, go straight to mirrorless
but then again, d610 still is a great camera. if you dont find anything lacking on it, theres no reason to buy a new body(unless ofcourse if you really want to)
Moral of the story is that Nikon needs to step up their entry level full frame line up...
And a new 33mp apsc body with the z8 autofocusing system
No 4/3 for wildlife?
Tony, I managed to get and use my Nikon zf. Where is your's man??
D5300 with the 18-140mm is a great budget gear I use. Its a good idea to pair it with a prime lens like the 35mm or 50mm you recomended. For a upgrade instead of D750 im thinking in Nikon Z5 wich is full frame and mirrorless, so it is a change in everything. Im a little worried about the lenses for it. Another posibility is Canon R8. Always portraits is the main objective.
But what I learned studying is that everything depends more on the photographer than on the equipment
I am a nikon fanatic but I don't recommend pairing a d5300 with a prime lens simply because the 5000 series from nikon don't have AF fine-tune adjust functions. I always front focused with my d5600, albeit i loved it i had to sell it. D7200 works great with those prime G lenses from nikon cause it has AF fine-tune function.
I never needed AF fine tuning on my D3xxx and D5xxx. They focused perfectly. They are cheap and are recommanded for a budget camera. Nevertheless, on my old D800, even AF adjustment didn't help because this camera has a known defect
@@bobamarmstrong i had the 50 f1.8g with d5600. Sometimes the focus was good and my images were sharper than anything I had seen but 90percent of the time my photos were soft af and front focused, i really needed af fine tune.
@@f.iph7291I don't know how much it can affect me if, in any case, a face has much greater depth than that half inch that may be out of focus. Maybe it works for macro, but I have a macro lens that gives better results even than those settings. And if I change cameras for that reason to one twice as expensive, the D7500 doesn't even make sense anymore, for that reason I should go directly to a much newer and better one than all of them. For that D5300 is great because I get great result inclusive with prime lenses, wich are preferred in particular cases of poor light or portraits.
Anyway, maybe Tony should make a video about this, if he doesnt do it its because isnt important!
@@chargerdiecast you know why it bothered me? Because that 50mm f1.8g was beyond sharp it was amazing when it nailed the focus. I spent extra time on retouching and it was beyond amazing. But 90 percent of the time i couldn't get that level of details. The great sharpness made the front focusing an issue and i was always noticing it and it made me disappointed. I loved my d5600 and i would buy one again if i have the money. That was my first camera.
WHY wouldn't you put the sensor shield on the Nikon Z9????? it's sole purpose is to protect the sensor
Wow, not a single mention of the S5ii or S5iiX, not here nor in the awards. Really? Fantastic video and photography cameras, with an enormous amount of in-camera features and excellent AF. Pana got robbed here, imo.
Love the video but those little cards at the bottom on the screen are really annoying.
Still love my Canon 70D
After 5+ Years, My a6300 Only Works in Silent Shooting Mode And Its Forcing Me To "Upgrade" 😩
My Samsung s2x Ultra Just Isn't GOOD ENOUGH🧐
The A7RV obviously
Give me a photography first and moderate video camera around 2000$
(Looking for alternative choices of A7IV)
At the moment i have Xiaomi 13 ultra with leica colours)
r6ii
XT5
@@truthseeker6804 r6ii is video first though 😅
@@f.iph7291 is there any Tamron 35-150 type lense on x mount?
I was looking for something like that
Why for wildlife do you just immediately jump to $3000? There's plenty of used Canon and Nikon DSLRs that are great for wildlife, and for that price You can get a used Nikon D850 and 200-500mm.
I wouldn't recommend Canon's APS-C cameras to anybody because their lens selection is terrible. They only have 3 kit lenses. For APS-C I would recommend Fujifilm or Sony because they have a lot of native and third party lenses.
I got rid of a camera to keh. Gave me a good deal.
Not a single Fuji camera :(
Your sports camera recommendations are way off base. I shoot professional NBA and NFL games, and the majority of the pros on the sidelines are currently using Canon R3 cameras.
SOP!! Just Stop! That is what I'm telling myself... nine cameras are PLENTY. It's hard to pass up a good camera when the price is just too good. For me, it's all just for fun.
Leica cameras have been taking many a award winning pictures for many a years. Yet you have placed them in the none serious catagory. As well as you have laft out the micro 4/3's companies as well. They take great pictures and videos too.
Why?
Landscape on a budget:
Sony A7R2
Minolta 35-70 f4 macro
Learn to focus manually
I’ve loved this setup😄
hello
Z5>>>>>>>>>>>>>RP
Pentax but only if you want a real camera.
Travel?
For anything under 2.000 dollars, don't listen to Tony. It is obvious that he doesn't move much in those budgets... 😅🤦🏻♂️