Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: spacevoid8 on June 17, 2009, 02:19:41 am
-
in insane category [price doesn`t matter] and in common sense category [optimal for money].Your opinions?
-
I like the Canon G10 for landscape work. With enough light the image quality is great, 15mpx, super compact size and the DOF is just what you usually need in a landscape.
Luigi
-
maybe this one:
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympusep1/ (http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympusep1/)
-
in insane category [price doesn`t matter] and in common sense category [optimal for money].Your opinions?
Best landscape usually means large format with movements. A more compact offering here might be the Sinar arTec which should be excellent for urban landscapes. Better bring money!
Denis K
-
Best landscape usually means large format with movements. A more compact offering here might be the Sinar arTec which should be excellent for urban landscapes. Better bring money!
Denis K
portable...for travel... i`dont have car or a slave to carry my stuff!
-
portable...for travel... i`dont have car or a slave to carry my stuff!
as you can tell from the replies, "compact" is a very relative term :-) You would probably need to supply a bit more information, then imagination and unlimited cost :-)
hope you find what you are looking for
Henrik
-
G10 would be a reasonable choice, but you need good light. Leica M8 with short lens may be a possibility, but slightly larger than the G10 (i.e. not pocket size). One of the large-sensor compacts might be a good way to go, if you can live with the other limitations of those cameras.
-
I would guess that the Olympus E-P1 will be blowing all other 'compacts' out of the water as soon as it is released. It offers full DSLR controls with use of a wide range of Olympus 4/3 and m4/3 lenses plus mounts for many other 35mm lenses. It is far more than a P&S, such as a G10 or LX3, could ever be. Additionally it will directly accept the new tiny and superb Panasonic m4/3 lenses that include a 7-14mm (14-28mm), 45-200mm (90-400mm) and 14-150mm (28-300mm). If you had three pockets to carry three lenses in you would cover everything from macro to very wide to very long and not come away with a bad back.
Steve
-
The Olympus E-P1 with a 17mm f/2.8 plus OVF sounds like a pretty sweet setup for landscapes. It will never replace a DSLR, but for a compact, I think the options are pretty good.
-
The M8 fits pretty well in the 'insane' category
-
in insane category [price doesn`t matter] and in common sense category [optimal for money].Your opinions?
Along with the Olympus E-P1 you might consider the Panasonic G1. It offers essentially the same options as the E-P1 plus it has a tilt and swivel LCD which can be useful in certain situations.
A long shot might be the Sigma DP1, which is more portable than the G1, but has a fixed 28mm (35mm eq.) lens. It's slow, but speed isn't as critical for landscape, and the image quality up to and including 400 ISO is very high, higher than any other P & S.
-
I'd suggest one of the portable large format cameras, myself, and a scanner. But I'm funny that way
But seriously - 4X5 scanned at even a sub-standard 1200dpi(which everyone here would agree is far, far below normal scanning/the point where grain starts to be an issue) nets a massive 29MP or so file.
Another option would be a medium format 6x9 camera and the same setup. Big film may be old-school, but it gets you big pictures for a lot less money than a DB or professional setup.
-
A camera with raw format files and lots of dynamic range. Nothing puts a strain on dynamic range like landscapes. Also nice to have a camera with well implemented bracketing, sublte HDR and exposure blending techniques do wonders for landscapes unless you like blown out skies and black hole shadows. I would look at low end dslr's, and possibly the Sony A900. I am currently headed towards buying a Nikon D5000 to replace a D2X (for landscape panoramas only).
If you want hi reso files, stitch, it works so well these days.
-
The M8 fits pretty well in the 'insane' category
Actually, I know someone who shoots landcape with this camera and it works out pretty well.
Paul
-
The M8 fits pretty well in the 'insane' category
I agree on M8, in the digital category. Light, small and very high image quality.
In film, I would say Mamiya 7ii + Velvia 50.
Anders
-
The Sigma dp1 (equivalent 28mm focal lens) or dp 2 (I think like a 50mm) are quite compact. The image quality is very good. The dynamic range is amazing IMO. The size of the image is limited.
I own the dp1. I have owned the Leica in the past, loved the image quality, but it's not as compact as the Sigmas and very very expensive with Leica lenses. Also it seemed like a risky investment.
Wasn't very good at high ISOs, but that shouldn't be an issue with landscape photography. The Sigmas only have really good image quality at ISO50 and 100, which is probably fine for landscape.
Bert
-
http://www.lensbaby.com/ (http://www.lensbaby.com/)
Or a tilt-shift lens. The only reason 4x5 cameras are great for landscape is because of the ability to correct the geometry before you take the picture. Of course software does a good job now as well...
-
I agree on M8, in the digital category. Light, small and very high image quality.
In film, I would say Mamiya 7ii + Velvia 50.
Anders
I shoot landscapes with an M8.
www.johnbrewton.zenfolio.com
-
Unless you are shooting big time, all the time, with a full commitment to make a living out of landscape photography, it will probably be more sensible pricewise to shoot film, especially if you develop it yourself, which is a hassle but can be done very well. BW is almost a must to be developed by oneself.
And don't underestimate the cost of electronic archiving. Film technology is pretty unbeatable in this aspect. That will go into the economic equation as well. We are really blinded by all those shiny mirrors that are being waved in our faces these last decades, but we underestimate the value of simple technologies as paper itself. The aspects of image permanence in its electronic form and the costs in money and effort to keep your images thru your lifetime are the weak points of digital photography. Analog technologies are way better in this regard.
-
And don't underestimate the cost of electronic archiving. Film technology is pretty unbeatable in this aspect.
Hmmm, I'm not so sure. For around £80 the last time I looked you could buy a separate hard drive that would save 12,000 or so (on average) scanned medium format or digital images. So for £160 you could have that AND do a full backup on a separate drive. What is the cost of doing a full backup of 12,000 film images, in which you should add the time to scan them if not the cost to copy them?
Steve
-
Hi:
I am new to the site as well as the topic. I just got back from the mountains after a three week trip. Lugging a Nikon D200, tripod and lenses at 17,000+ feet gave me a new appreciation for the force of gravity as well as not being born a sherpa; so most pictures were taken with a Canon G9. I would appreciate the members' input on my next camera choice; I have listed a few desirables and constraints below. Thanks in advance for your comments and suggestions. The D200 has been a faithful companion but the weight and bulk is becoming a factor.
1. The max size I enlarge the pictures is 16x20. Rarely beyond this size.
2. Landscapes are my preferred subjects but about 5-10% are portraits of people.
3. I would like the gear to fit in a case or backpack that can be carried on i.e. not checked as baggage.
4. I would like a camera with interchangeable lenses. I would like the camera to be reliable and have good sharp lenses available. I am looking for two bodies, a macro lens, a wide angle to mid zoom and a mid to telephoto zoom.
5. Good quality video is a definite plus (I do some volunteering for NGOs on my trips and they appreciate getting videos of their activities).
6. I travel the world over and to less accessible places - it would be good if the camera runs on AAA or AA batteries.
7. The two bodies + lenses should be around $6K or less.
So is the micro4/3rds good bet for me or are there other possibilities? I have heard that the Panasonic GH1 is made in China and has had quality problems - the Olympus but with Panasonic lenses may seem a better bet?? All suggestions to address the above are welcome.
Thanks.
-
54 folding sheet film camera... Plenty of res, movements, foldable therefore (relatively) compact, No need for digital, batteries...
-
Sigma DP1 + DP2
-
The Panasonic G1, or GH1, are incredible cameras, especially with the recently released lenses, 20mm f1.7 pancake, and 7-14mm super wide angle zoom. There are no quality problems from being made in China -- I don't know where you're getting your information from.
I've had a Canon 5D for 4+ years and a 5DII for about a year, with top "L" lenses, of which I've always tested several copies and selected the best.
Guess what -- the G1, at least at base iso of 100 matches the 5D I (not 5D II) in detail. And it's so much smaller and lighter, and the user interface of the G1 is fantastic. Then there's the folding LCD screen. At iso 400 to 800 the G1 is still very very good but it is already falling behind the 5DI by then. Iso 1600 is usable but you give up a lot of quality by then.
I can't believe how good this camera is. I thought I'd never find anything to rival the 5Ds for weight, quality, and utility. I will definitely be traveling with the G1 from now on because it's so much lighter.
Oh, and before the 5D, I used a view camera. At print sizes of up to about 22" in the long dimension the g1 rocks!
Check out the www.getdpi.com forum if you want to congregate with micro 4/3 users.
So is the micro4/3rds good bet for me or are there other possibilities? I have heard that the Panasonic GH1 is made in China and has had quality problems - the Olympus but with Panasonic lenses may seem a better bet?? All suggestions to address the above are welcome.
Thanks.
-
Sigma DP1 + DP2
+ 1
Regards, K
-
As an owner of both a 5D2, EP1 kit and Nikon D300 kits, I offer the following opinions. Horses for courses. If I was going hiking at high altitudes, there would be only one kit, and that would be the Olympus. I am 50+ and in fair health and even walking around town with my D300 kit is more then many days I want to do, despite loving this camera. The 5D2 kit with heavier lenses, is reserved for those days I am shooting from a vehicle, and most comparisons between the two real dslr's would still yeild nice indisgtinguishable prints up to 36", if I do MY PART. On short trips, I have decided that either I will purchase a D90 and take only two zooms for it, a 16-85mm and 70-300mm, or just take the EP1 kit. Even comparing those last two options, unless I plan on shooting rapidly moving subjects, the EP1 will do fine, and I have found the prints from the Oly more then acceptable to 30-36" wide. If you were a Sherpa, you would not even have posed the question, but in the real world I would rather have a camera that I still have enough energy to use when I get to a place, then carry a more comprehensive kit and not feel like using it, even if that was only a P&S....jmho...
-
I have heard that the Panasonic GH1 is made in China and has had quality problems - the Olympus but with Panasonic lenses may seem a better bet??
I don't know about the GH1, but I have the GF1, 7-14mm F4, 14-45mm F3.5-5.6, and 20mm F1.7, and they all have "Made in Japan" or 日本製 written on them. It's nice to know that at least a few electronic devices are still made in free countries.
-
I have a Panasonic Lx-3 that 'm very happy with. It shoots RAW which is one of the main reasons I selected it over a bunch of other P&S contenders. It is also slimmer than the Canon G10. It can actually fit in a pocket.
Cheers.
Bud