Need advice on a camera

colinuk

colinuk

colinuk

Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2005
Posts
3,137
Location
Versailles
Alright all...

I use a Fuji S2 for weddings and portraits and its a fine camera for this, but now i have started walking and biking and find its not that great for landscapes and buildings to much.

What camera - say around £1200 for a good decent one...

any ideas.

ColiN
 
Why do you feel this camera does not perform for Landscapes? Although its a more 'mature' body, I would have thought that it was still more than up for the job. What lenses do you have? I would suggest you'd be better off spending your money on some nice wideangle lenses, a good tripod and some filters. However if you do want a new body, how about looking at the Nikon D300 as then you can keep on using whatever lenses you have.
 
Well, lenses at the mo i use a 19-35mm tameron a 50mm nikon and a 80-200 nikon f2.8 zoom.

I find that for detail of distance pictures the fuji s2 isnt as clear as a canon, but i havent tested a nikon camera much yet so not sure how good they are. The fuji is good for skin and weddings, for the price, id say the best there is for now, but for sports, landscapes ect, its not that good.

I guess what i am after is a list of people who use different cameras to say what they like about each of them and what they dont like.

ColiN

Also thinking of getting the 17-55mm nikon lens, but at £750 they aint cheap!
 
I would suggest it more likely to be the lenses used that are causing the 'lack of clarity'. Also if you use the 19-35mm Tamron as your lendscape lens, then this isn't hugely wide if you take into account the crop factor. As you say, the 17-55mm nikon sure would be nice, but also not cheap. You might also want to consider something like the Nikon 12-24mm or even the much cheaper Sigma 10-20mm (If you get a good copy.) If you do decide on a new body though, I would seriously consider sticking with Fuji or Nikon so you can use your existing glass.
 
A D300 sounds like the camera for you. Alternatively, get a used Nikon D200 (~£450) and buy the 17-55 with the spare cash?

Any Nikon DSLR is a million times easier to use than the Fuji so you won't be disappointed :P
 
Fair point about sticking with nikon bodies for the lenses. Any nikon good for sports and landscapes that you would recomend?

Will go check the 12-24 and the 10-20 sigma now and see what kind of price they go for.

Cheers for the info :)

ColiN
 
OK, had a look at the D300 - hmm, looks nice on paper but from the test shots and samples doesnt seem that sharp of an image, so i wont be getting that one. Maybe time i raided my bank account and bought something the next level up.

Will test the 10-20 lens out this weekend as that sounds fun and useful.
 
you could sell all of the fuji stuff, get a canon 40D and use the leftover cash and that from the fuji to buy new glass..
 
neil_g said:
you could sell all of the fuji stuff, get a canon 40D and use the leftover cash and that from the fuji to buy new glass..
Click to expand...

Think he might just lose out on that option as he has already invested in glass and no point selling his existing glass/ making a loss and then buying more glass?
 
I could Neil g, problem is, i have seen what canons are like at weddings, and i prefer the fuji S2 to anything i have seen from canon so far, but canon do seem really good at sports and landscapes.

Maybe i need to buy a S5 for the weddings and a canon for everything else...

lol - will go check the nikon cameras and see if they have anything that peaks my interest again.
 
colinuk said:
canon do seem really good at sports and landscapes.
Click to expand...

Are you serious? Maybe you've just seen fewer photos from photographers who use Nikon cameras because there are fewer photographers who use Nikon cameras.

I am nowhere near convinced you know the limits of digital photography. The Nikon D200/D300 are extremely capable cameras, there is no point in losing money switching systems because of a hunch that Canon are better at "sports and landscapes".
 
robertgilbert86 said:
Are you serious? Maybe you've just seen fewer photos from photographers who use Nikon cameras because there are fewer photographers who use Nikon cameras.

I am nowhere near convinced you know the limits of digital photography. The Nikon D200/D300 are extremely capable cameras, there is no point in losing money switching systems because of a hunch that Canon are better at "sports and landscapes".
Click to expand...

Wasnt a hunch, its from seeing exapmles of pics on the web and from people who use nikons. The canons just seem to be sharper than nikons. As for knowning the limits, yup - your right, i dont know, if i did, i wouldnt be asking on here :)

Maybe the fact that there are fewer nikon photographers than canon says something too. For weddings and portraits, cant beat the fuji, for sports and action everyone i know uses a Canon, as for landscapes the only mate i know who does this uses something called a Leafback, and they cost way to much for me. So, although i want to keep with nikon/fuji as i have spent a fair bit on glass, if canon are really much better than others for speed, colours and sharpness, why not buy one and use it?

Hope that comes out right lol.

Colin
 
robertgilbert86 said:
Are you serious? Maybe you've just seen fewer photos from photographers who use Nikon cameras because there are fewer photographers who use Nikon cameras.

I am nowhere near convinced you know the limits of digital photography. The Nikon D200/D300 are extremely capable cameras, there is no point in losing money switching systems because of a hunch that Canon are better at "sports and landscapes".
Click to expand...

While the landscape point is dubious Canon is the superior system for sports. Just look at the sidelines of any major sporting event, swathes of white Canon lenses with the odd black lens mixed in.
 
colinuk said:
OK, had a look at the D300 - hmm, looks nice on paper but from the test shots and samples doesnt seem that sharp of an image, so i wont be getting that one.
Click to expand...

Your not serious are you? You've ruled out one of the best cameras pound for pound avaiable at the moment because of a few shots on the internet? Did you take into account the lenses those shots used? The tripod and release method used? The weather at the time the shot was taken? I really think you are overestimating the effect the camera (in particular modern Prosumer and Pro SLRs) has on imagesharpness. Trust me, with the right glass and good technique the D300 is more than capable of a sharp image. If its not sharp enough, id suggest you look at a Phase one or Leaf digital back. Not that you'd get much change from your £1200. ;)
 
You raise a good point there MK, maybe i am being to hasty in taking it off the list from a few pics on the net. I will try and get to a shop that sells one of the 300 bodies and see what its like when i get the image home.

Id rather not go Canon, as the glass will cost me too much to replace what i have on the Fuji. But from what ive seen of them in sports areas and some landscape shots, they seem very good.

Will go rent a d300 this weekend and see how it performs.

TY all for the comments.

ColiN
 
xolotl said:
While the landscape point is dubious Canon is the superior system for sports. Just look at the sidelines of any major sporting event, swathes of white Canon lenses with the odd black lens mixed in.
Click to expand...
that's because they basically bought that market 20 years ago or so ...
& as a result teles have remained their strength, Canon's wides are nothing to write home about.

On the other hand a lot of pros have started switching from Canon to Nikon since the D3 & D300 incl. supposedly 2 major agencies in Scandinavia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom