I am off to Iceland at the end of the year. I have been looking to get a camera for a while and was wondering on people's thoughts as to what direction to head in. I like the idea of something like the Olympus om1 mkii but am a bit worried that a 43rd sensor will be too limited on light? Other than that thinking of a aspc (Sony 6700?) or possibly full frame (weight and cost of required lenses and issue?). Have around 3k in total to spend, happy to spend less. Really struggling with what to get!!
Iceland trip camera
- Thread starter FNG
- Start date
Soldato
What sort of things are you wanting to be shooting? Will you be taking a tripod and if so would that be enough to counter the light issue (depending on what you're shooting)? For lenses are you looking for a one lens does all or get a couple to cover wide as well as a longer reach?
In Iceland I am thinking mainly landscapes. Back home probably more wildlife. Not really much in the way of portraits. I am thinking at least a couple of decent lenses to cover wide and reach. Probably more zooms than primes just for space issues, but happy to consider primes. I think 43rd would suit this well. A tripod might be a push, it is not a photography holiday per se. I wonder if the ibis on the Olympus would help compensate against the light issue?
Soldato
Take a look at Henry Turner on Youtube, I'm sure he shoots the OM system (OM5 not OM1) https://www.henryturnerphotography.co.uk/my-gear He usually raves about the ibis system when he's using the camera hand held. An alternative to a proper tripod is the Jobi Gorilla pod or a couple of bean bags to level things off a bit.
Associate
Do you ever do any video? Seen a few people raving about the Panasonic S5ii really good bang for buck.
You don't really need an OM-1 for what you'll be taking. The OM-5 paired with a 12-100mm f4 will probably cover most of what you need and you can add an 8-25mm for wider shots. That should just fit within your budget. It's what I use....
Soldato
I would first ask yourself what kind of aesthetic you like the look of image wise and then question how long you want to spend editing in combination with learning this if you don't already know about it. There is a notable difference between wanting to try and make your digital image perhaps look more how you perceieve a photograph to look, and then wanting to try and make your digital image look less like a photograph and more lean towards digital art whilst still being an image. Perhaps you like a mix of the two. Perhaps you want to be able to do both. There is no right and wrong. If you want to try and make things look more 'photo' like for example - do you require the best image quality, detail and excellent sharpeness amongst other things.
You're then into lens choice, bodies, weight/size and cost. I can recommend having a look at specific flickr groups showing individual lenses to get an idea on focal length for the given camera you like. A zoom covering a wide range is always useful for travel.
You're then into lens choice, bodies, weight/size and cost. I can recommend having a look at specific flickr groups showing individual lenses to get an idea on focal length for the given camera you like. A zoom covering a wide range is always useful for travel.
Daylight will be limited at the end of the year so I’d recommend prioritising low-light / high ISO performance. Personally I wouldn’t be looking at M43 gear. When in Finland in the winter I frequently find myself shooting at ISO 12800 and thats with an f/1.4 lens. Having a camera that produces acceptable results in that range will make all the difference.
Not necessarily, although it would do no harm. I use a Fuji X-S10 with an APS-C sensor. It’s far from the pinnacle of low light performance, but it’s good enough, and with access to wide aperture lenses. It really comes down to what you want from your photos. I would much rather have a high ISO noisy, but relatively sharp photo than a low noise (& low ISO) blurry mess. Some people aren’t willing to make that compromise. If you are one of those people then a larger sensor and a fast lens should be a priority.
Caporegime
Yup but those lenses once you get into the larger zooms are large and very expensive.
Locked in indecision at the moment. I don't think I want to lug full frame gear around which is why I had ruled that out in the past. The camera bodies are a decent size but if I want to do wildlife after thr trip the larger zooms are just too big. So I am focusing on Apsc or m43. Of the Apsc the sonys look well supported, as do the Fuji. I don't think canon has enough support with third party lenses. M43 seems to have some lovely glass and great body stabilisation, but is even more cropped and so less light. It is all very annoying 
Cameras are so good now that the relatively minor differences generally won't impact anyone but the most demanding photographers, so go with the camera you are more likely to have in your hand. A camera is no good if it is left behind.
In your scenario, I (possibly slightly biased) would go for something like a Fuji X-S20, or the X-M5 is you want smaller, and some fast lenses to suit your style. The X system has some fantastic lenses. I think the X-T5 is too big for you and it sounds like you'd be better off with the PASM dials of the other models.
If you're going to be shooting fast moving targets and require exceptional autofocus, look at Sony instead.
But I'd encourage you to ignore that advice and get yourself down to a LCE or similar and have a play with the cameras in your budget. You'll get a feel pretty soon which camera you want and you'll be happier with your decision.
In your scenario, I (possibly slightly biased) would go for something like a Fuji X-S20, or the X-M5 is you want smaller, and some fast lenses to suit your style. The X system has some fantastic lenses. I think the X-T5 is too big for you and it sounds like you'd be better off with the PASM dials of the other models.
If you're going to be shooting fast moving targets and require exceptional autofocus, look at Sony instead.
But I'd encourage you to ignore that advice and get yourself down to a LCE or similar and have a play with the cameras in your budget. You'll get a feel pretty soon which camera you want and you'll be happier with your decision.
Personally.....
I would buy a good used Sony A7C and a Tamron 17-28 f2.8 from MPB. Should come in around £1.5k.
If you wanted brand new, then a new A7C2 and Tamron 17-28 is going to cost you most of your £3k.
Either way you will have a very compact and immensely capable pair for landscapes in low light.
Associate
So I have had a look at them and like the look of the Sony 6700 and A7C2. There are advantages to both so I am really no further on
I’m stuck between them two myself. But leaning more towards the A7Cii.
London Camera Exchange | Our Stores
Visit London Camera Exchange, the UK's premier photo, video specialists for new and used camera equipment! Best deals, trade in prices and expert advice on photography, binoculars, scopes, lenses and more. Shop locations, online sales and click & collect.
www.lcegroup.co.uk
Strongly recommend going to one of those stores and having a play. I think you’ll find the right camera for you very quickly whereas with ordering online you may always be wondering if you made the right choice.