Trying to get a camera

overread said:
Odd the 7D should have had good enough AF if paired with a good 70-200mm; though for indoor action in very low light chances are the 5D III would have been superior (since larger sensors have improved low light performance and since the 5D III gained a similar AF system).

That said if low light work is a major part of what he's doing then Nikon currently has the significant edge with their ISO sensor technology that they got off Sony.
Click to expand...

Dormitator said:
I'm quite surprised to hear about your boyfriend's preference for the 50d over the 7d. I use both, having bought the 50d as a second lens to lug around, and in my experience there is nothing that the 50d does better than the 7d. In particular, having a much better AF system in the 7d (with the ability to change AF zones, and changing focus speeds to better match specific lenses) makes it in my eyes a godsend for shooting fast moving subjects.
Click to expand...

I know absolutely nothing about photography so I’m not entirely sure what was causing the problem. Luckily enough he should be working with better conditions now, primarily outdoors, when photographing animals. Although I’ve heard other people say that the 7D really wasn’t too great a camera (a staff member we spoke to in a camera shop the other week wasn’t very surprised that it hadn’t worked out for the purposes he had needed it for) .
 
overread said:
A 7D with a 70-200mmL should produce some fantastic photos, however I shifted from a 400D to a 7D and one big thing I noticed is that at 100% view (the view often used for sharpening and noise removal) the 7D could often look worse unless the shot was perfect. The reason is that the 7D was larger in megapixels so at 100% view it was far larger than the 400D. For me 60% on the 7D is where I view for generally checking sharpness as its closer to what I'm used too.

There is also a smaller chance of calibration issues - in general everything is made within tolerances not to exact values. So its possible to get a camera and lens at opposite ends of the tolerance scale. Neither is broken, but when put together their combined effect is less than it should be - although this issue is normally more apparent on superzooms (eg the 100-400mm type lenses) which are far more complicated and often have a wider tolerance band (although the newer superzooms from Canon and many 3rd parties have improved a lot over earlier models and its far less of an issue today)



It's all about personal standards and needs and also situation. Most would go for longer lenses with wildlife as they want a closer in shot; are often far back from the subject; and don't want to heavily crop their photos.
But at the same time this isn't the only approach and with higher MP Cameras it is possible to crop good shots much more than in the past - especially if your display is online which is often very forgiving and might only need 1000pixels on the longest side for good display.
Click to expand...
I agree with most of what you say. I have been reasonably pleased with the results I get, although there have been lots of times that I wished I had much larger, and much better quality lenses. The original question mentioned a budget of $1000 for camera and lens. Even used large lenses would be hard to find in the price range, and certainly getting a camera as well would be stretching your luck. By the way, my opinions are only based on my experience, which is not that wide! For many years I have concentrated on using camcorders, and have only fairly recently moved to still photography, so am no expert.
 
overread said:
Some 70-300mm (Eg Sigma 70-300mm APO) have a "macro" mode which is really close up not full macro, but its good enough for butterflies, dragonflies and flowers. Gives a bit more versatility.
Click to expand...
Something I forgot bout with this lens, the front element does not move within the case when focusing, which is a massive nuisance if you are trying press up against windows or fences as it extends/retracts while hunting for focus. Argghhh!
 
littleRedPanda said:
Something I forgot bout with this lens, the front element does not move within the case when focusing, which is a massive nuisance if you are trying press up against windows or fences as it extends/retracts while hunting for focus. Argghhh!
Click to expand...

I hate lenses that do this, not only is it irritating but it causes major wear to the motor over time. Most modern lenses have internal focusing fortunately, but obviously they're more expensive.

The major benefit for external focusing is the control of focus breathing, but I still don't like them in zoos.
 
Apologies to coming to this one late, but in response to the OP's 'what camera should I get?'.. a DSLR.

You will buy into a system that will evolve and grow with you, both in terms of the amount of control you take over light and the conditions, and in physical kit like camera bodies and lenses.

Bridge cameras - the all in one jobs - you can get some OK results but if you are genuinely interested in photography you'll find them frustrating and you'll be buying again.

I don't think there is a bad SLR system on the market. Canon and Nikon are the market leaders (probably for very good reason), and are really different sides of the same coin, it doesn't really matter which route you go down. Whichever feels best in your hands.

The best thing about either one of the systems is getting access to Canon/Nikon lenses, but beware in both cases they do make different ranges. But once you're 'in', you can and will always upgrade. I got my first SLR many many years ago and I don't think I've ever not had a lens or body on my wanted list :)

I will add, as the thread has diverted a bit - that I have a 7DII and although it is a different camera to a 7D it is absolutely superb. Its hard to imagine that pairing it with an L-series lens could deliver disappointing results. I've pushed the ISO right up on mine and have been astonished at how it copes (usually with a 100-400L lens on), so I'd caution against running to Nikon for that reason.
As noted above though, the full frame bodies are best for low light. Most of my photography away from zoos is outdoor action in reasonable light, hence I have a crop sensor camera; but its zoos where I do find there is little light at times.

But for the OP, you'll be looking at crop-sensor at your budget. Don't worry, they're fine!
 
Last edited:
NigeW said:
I will add, as the thread has diverted a bit - that I have a 7DII and although it is a different camera to a 7D it is absolutely superb. Its hard to imagine that pairing it with an L-series lens could deliver disappointing results. I've pushed the ISO right up on mine and have been astonished at how it copes (usually with a 100-400L lens on), so I'd caution against running to Nikon for that reason.
As noted above though, the full frame bodies are best for low light. Most of my photography away from zoos is outdoor action in reasonable light, hence I have a crop sensor camera; but its zoos where I do find there is little light at times.
Click to expand...

Thanks for this. The 7DII had been absolutely top of my partner’s want list before he stopped taking photographs altogether.
 
I'm a long-time Canon stalwart, so I'm surprising myself by saying...

Get a Sony Alpha. There's the α7500, or for a little more the amazing full-frame α7III. The auto-focus is vastly superior to Canon or Nikon, the high ISO performance is better and on the α7III and α7RIII the dynamic range is better than anything other than the Nikon D850, and then the Nikon only wins at low ISOs.

As much as it pains me to say, the Sony mirrorless are faster, have high frame rates, are smaller, lighter, more advanced and if you don't already have a large investment in glass, are a no-brainer at the moment.
 
As the long time user of Nikon, it pains me to say this, but buy the camera that feels the most comfortable in your hand.
Be it Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Olympus, Sony, Fuji or Panasonic.... There are no really awful cameras, just some are better than others. Money spent on lenses and learning how to use them is the most effective way to get good pictures.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top