Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Beginner's Questions => Topic started by: eyan on April 14, 2014, 06:30:51 am
-
Hi all; first post here. I am planning on taking up landscape photography seriously this year. I live close to some beautiful areas in the north UK, and always wish I had proper gear when out and about - I do a lot of walking and hiking. I'm not a complete beginner, but it probably has been around 15 years since I used anything but a point and shoot.
So I'm planning my first DSLR purchase (last SLR I used was in the film days so lots has changed), along with tripod, ND filters etc, coming in at entry level first so I can get myself up and running. After many hours of research, it seems that nobody can give clear 'one is better than another' advice, as everyone has different opinions and brand loyalties, and most conclude after much argument that its personal preference as to which camera you end up with. Plus, the 'what camera' question has been asked a billion times.
So I thought I would ask the question in a slightly different way and hopefully get some real world opinions, as opposed to another 'what's the best camera' question - for you, what features on a DSLR are most important to you for landscape photography?
I.e., do I go Pentax k30/50 for weather sealing, Canon 100d/t5i for size and weight, Nikon d3200 for pixel count, Nikon d5100 for swivel screen and good low light performance........ The list goes on but interested to hear general thoughts, it's such a minefield out there. I don't plan to do any portraits or video etc, just landscape as this is my passion. Unfortunately budget won't stretch to a camera and new lenses just yet, so will be stuck with DSLR and kit lens for now, but lens availability for the future could play a part in my decision.
Cheers for any comments!
-
Welcome!
Let me add sensor dynamic range to the list and one question: how big do you intend to print? If I were in your shoes today, I'd most likely go for a camera with the best dynamic range and most megapixels. Not that familiar with budget models, but I think there is a Nikon out there that would fit the bill (and this comes from a long-time Canon guy).
-
You say you had an Slr ..Do you still have that system? The lenses? If you do, and the glass is decent, you might consider a mirrorless system.. The Fujii Xe1 is priced rather amazing now and is an excellent platform camera to use with legacy lenses via adapters.
Just thinking,
Peter
-
Cheers for the replies.
In answer to the questions, it would be good to have the option to print to 2-3 feet wide if I can get some really good shots once I've learnt how to do it. I have been informed that 16mp should be more than enough for this? There is the Nikon D3200 with 24mp, but a couple of things I've read say it's a bit of an overkill?
Re my previous SLR, it was very much a hand me down from my dad when I was much younger, I gave it back years ago and I believe he's got rid of most of his old equipment. I think it was a minolta if I remember right? Mirrorless could be an option, but I haven't really investigated it too much - most things I've ready all say SLR wins for landscape stuff? From an initial look, prices for a good mirrorless system if you go for better lenses all turns out to be roughly the same as a decent entry level SLR that does the same things.
-
Most cameras nowadays are better than most photographers, for most purposes. Each has its strengths and weaknesses. Instead of fretting about which is which, one should learn to take advantage of the strengths and manage the weaknesses.
If the above is to general to be useful, let's dive into details then. One other useful feature for landscape would be mirror lockup or live view.
Oh, and there is no such thing as overkill when it comes to megapixels and big prints. The more, the better, other things being equal.
-
Thanks Slobodan - that was exactly the purpose of this thread. I've spent so much time reading websites and reviews etc, I've realised that most DSLRs are very good in many ways, but some have tiny advantages in areas and vice versa. So I wanted to find out for landscape specific purposes, what people more experienced than me couldn't live without in their experience (bearing in mind we're talking entry level end of the market!), then I can go away and find the one with the most of these things on it I can find.
-
Just a few points to add to the posts above, petermfiore makes avery good case for the X-E1 - the advantage of mirrorless is that you can adapt a variety of lenses to the body at a later date, if you so wish.
Anything with 16MP and above will be an excellent starting point. For Landscape, as Slobodan says, you can never have enough pixels. What you don't say is whether you'll be using Photoshop or not. If you are, Ps has a built-in panorama/stitching function which will be extremely useful for making larger MP files - all without having to consider upgrading. If you're not, there's AutoPano Pro, amongst others, which is truly excellent - that will set you back 99euros ( about £85 ).
Regarding stitching, this site has a resident expert in stitching , Bernard Languillier. If you do a search on him, you'll find some very useful and informed posts.
-
Hi Manoli - I will likely purchase image editing software of some sorts (another cost to the budget to consider!). It's likely that I'll probably go with Lightroom to start with, think about full PS at a later date. But I would quite like to (re)learn photography to get the original image as good as I can in the field as opposed to relying on software to make up for shortfalls - I'm an outdoors person, I spend far too much time infront of a computer for my job as it is!
Re the X-E1 - I've had a look, and it does seem to be a good bit of kit. However, price wise over here in the UK, it seems to be priced very similar to the DSLRs I'm considering (if not higher in some places). So aside from weight, is there a massive advantage in going mirrorless that I'm missing? I'm not sure how the lenses differ in price / availability? Are the sensors in mirrorless cameras not inferior to SLRs?
-
Hi Eyan - I don't like to generalise but a couple of more points to consider :
1-If you're dead set on landscape as your field-of-interest , you don't really need autofocus. Mirrorless, via an adapter, will give you the option of a greater selection of lenses. Nikon lenses can be used on a Canon but not Canon on a Nikon - on a mirrorless you can you use either as well as many others ( Zeiss, Contax, Leica etc ) Also you won't need the f1.4 speed beasts. An f2 will be substantially more economical for no loss of quality when you're shooting at f4 - f8
2-Liveview on a mirrorless is generally considered better implemented than the Canon/Nikon versions. Also you don't need mirror lock up on a CSC (mirrorless).
3-Yes, you're going to have to budget for software, but Lr plus AutoPano Pro will be the bulk of what you need. Don't underestimate the cost savings that stitching will give you. All you need as a starter kit is a body and a 50mm lens. 2 or 3 frame stitches will save you the wide-angles and you'll have superb hi-resolution landscapes. Your 16mp sensor will soon be turning out 30-40mp shots before you know it.
I'm not a landscape guy - but yesterday, went out and shot a couple of 2/3 frame stitches for fun, hand held, literally point and shoot, amazing results. Both Lr and AutoPano are available as trial downloads and AutoPano interfaces with Lr as an 'external editor' - simplicity itself - strongly suggest you try them before making any definitive lens choices.
As to hardware, I can't/don't like to make specific recommendations as a lot of it is personal, but I would say that the sensors are now very advanced. Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic - they all produce good gear and it would be incorrect to think that mirrorless sensors are necessarily inferior to SLR's.
Good luck !
-
So I thought I would ask the question in a slightly different way and hopefully get some real world opinions, as opposed to another 'what's the best camera' question - for you, what features on a DSLR are most important to you for landscape photography?
Perhaps more to the point - how do we help you figure-out what equipment might be better for you over the next couple of years.
It sounds like you'll make photos for your own enjoyment - so look at the P&S photos you've taken and see if there are specific subjects you repeatedly photographed or particular things which you liked about a photo or situations where the P&S frustratingly limited what you were able to do. Look for clues, maybe you'll find some, probably you won't.
I'd started photography again with a nice little P&S (http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/W300/W300A.HTM), and was given the opportunity to have something a bit better. Like you, I did the research; I tried to find the lowest-cost camera that wouldn't have the limitations of the P&S, and would be fun (http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/AA35/AA35A.HTM).
If I could go back in time, a couple of things would be different:
- I'd know that I wouldn't be using jpg, I'd always be using raw.
(I only use jpg now because some of the camera fun-stuff only works with jpg.) - I'd know that I wouldn't use AE Bracketing for fine-tuning, I'd use it for exposure blending - so big steps help.
- I'd know not to buy the kit-lens.
I'd start with the same cheapest/best fixed-focal-length lenses I have now (35mm (http://kurtmunger.com/sony_dt_35mm_f_1_8_reviewid235.html) and 85mm (http://kurtmunger.com/sony_85mm_f_2_8_reviewid189.html) on APS-C). - I'd be quicker to spend the big-bucks: $40 for a used tripod (http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Manfrotto_M-Y_7301YB_tripod/), $15 for a Digital Gray Card (http://store.rmimaging.com/digitalgraycard-100.aspx), $10 for a wired remote (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/765688-REG/Vello_RS_S1II_RS_S1II_Wired_Remote_Switch.html/prm/alsVwDtl).
…in the north UK…
Maybe you'll want a faster lens if it's predominantly not-sunny.
Maybe a zip-loc bag and rubber-band won't be enough weather-proofing.
…to get the original image as good as I can in the field as opposed to relying on software to make up for shortfalls…
You will rely on software to make up for shortfalls -- to make 60MP images when you only have a 16MP sensor, to correct for lens faults that wouldn't exist in expensive lenses, … etc
What it means "to get the original image as good as [we] can" is different now we can use software to blend multiple exposures. For example, it could mean separate exposures for the sky and land, separate exposures for near and far, …
-
…so will be stuck with DSLR and kit lens for now, but lens availability for the future could play a part in my decision.
You'll probably enjoy your landscape photos more if they're quite sharp all across the image - center to mid-sections to corners; but you're looking for sharpness from low-cost lenses.
That's another way to narrow down what will work best for you from what's currently on offer -- search for the lens (lenses) that's best in the price range, and then get a camera to put on the lens.
(I assume each brand has some "low cost" lenses, check through lens reviews (http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/overview) and see if any of those lenses stand-out as offering much better resolution from center to corners at F5.6 F8.)
-
Here is what you should do:
1. Stop researching (you've done enough already)
2. Stop analyzing (you'll suffer from "analysis paralysis")
3. Stop obsessing about minuscule differences between systems, lenses, features, etc. None of that makes good pictures... you do.
4. Stop reading long, detailed advices (you'll get lost in overwhelming and controversial choices half-way through)
Then:
5. Narrow your search you've done so far to 2-3 choices, based on your budget and how they feel in your hand, and put them in front of you
6. Put a blind over your eyes, spin around and grab the first camera - that's your ideal choice
7. Go out and shoot
If I learned anything in my life and professional career so far, it is that it is not the ultimate choice you made that matters, it is the commitment to that choice that makes it or breaks it. So, whatever you choose, stick to it, learn its bad and good sides, and how to manage them to your advantage.
And above all, go out and shoot.
One of the most fascinating forum debates I ever witnessed happened some time ago on DP Review site. A guy was engaged in a prolonged, aggressive debate on merits of this or that system, lenses, etc., only to admit at the very end that he never actually used any. Why? He wanted to learn everything in advance, in order not to ruin any opportunity once he does go out and shoot. He was imagining that perfect, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity in front of him and dreaded that he won't have the perfect camera, perfect lens and perfect knowledge to do it justice.
It does not work that way. "Just do it" works.
-
Hi,
I would agree with Slobodan.
But, I would say that almost any equipment fills the bill. Personally I shoot Sony, because of lens legacy. I also have a Hasselblad with a P45+. On Sony I have full frame and APS-C.
What I have found is that all stuff I have with 12 MP or more makes a decent job up to A2 size (16x23"). The Sony sensors have a great dynamic range, but I have 75000 images and DR have been a challenge in just a handful.
I would say that a Sony Exmor sensor is state of the art, Nikon D800/D800E, Sony Alpha, Pentax K3 and 645Z, Phase One IQ 250, but you can also go with Canon DSLRs. Canon may have some of the best lenses.
Just take any of today's cameras and be happy!
Best regards
Erik
Welcome!
Let me add sensor dynamic range to the list and one question: how big do you intend to print? If I were in your shoes today, I'd most likely go for a camera with the best dynamic range and most megapixels. Not that familiar with budget models, but I think there is a Nikon out there that would fit the bill (and this comes from a long-time Canon guy).
-
Not to complicate things more, but....
1. Almost any new camera and a decent lens will do the trick. So, be assured that it is hard to make a wrong choice. See #2:
2. Think about weight and ergonomics - do you like holding and using the camera? I would advise getting a camera with a viewfinder that you like and a live view option that you like. Properly implemented live view is WONDERFUL for using cameras on a tripod - you get to magnify the image 10x to check for critical focus, etc. Swivel screens are handy for those who want to put their cameras very high or very low on or off tripod. If your viewpoint will be 1 ft off the ground, it is easier to squat a little bit and look at a tilted screen than to to flop down on your belly and peer through the viewfinder.
3. You will want to get a nice tripod and head and an L bracket for your camera. Pick up a wired (or wireless) cable release/ intervalometer, while you are at it.
4. You will want to get a comfortable carriage system for the camera - lots of options. I am a big fan of the Cotton Carrier vest system, which can handle an SLR with up to a 400mm f/5.6 lens (my birding lens) and still leave both hands free for any scrambling and balancing needed. Plus, the vest system can be worn with (underneath) any backpack. This might be overkill for some cameras, some terrains, and for those who are not needing to drag along their tent, bag, food, etc for a several days trip. A "fanny pack" aka "Lumbar pack" is another option for the day hiker, as are hunters'/fishers'/photographers' vests (lots of pockets) and belt systems where you hang your lens bag, water bottle, etc off a sturdy belt. Some large format photographers use carpenters' aprons to hold small accessories and film holders. Have a favorite backpack already, but want a protective insert for camera and lens? You can get neoprene protective wraps for the camera, lenses can fit in a fishing reel case (foam dividers), etc. Make sure, whatever your camera carriage system is, that you have some provision for carrying maps, rain gear, lunch, water, sunscreen, extra pair socks, the good old Scouting "10 essentials".
5. You will want to get a circular polarizer filter, which will intensify color by removing excess reflection. (Circular is the filter type, not the filter shape - old film era polarizers, which are "linear polarizers", don't work for modern autofocusing and modern sensors). Later, you may want to get an ultra-dense neutral density filter (9 to 10 stops: OD 2.7 to 3.0), which allows one to make very long exposures to a. smooth out water b. get rid of milling crowds c. show movement of clouds d. any other effect that you can get with a 30 sec or longer exposure. Some people will get into graduated neutral density filters - check out the Lee Filters site to see how these are used.
-
This has been alluded to in a previous post, but whatever camera and lens(es) that you get, don't forget a good support system. A good tripod and tripod head (ballhead is preferable) will make a huge difference. Megapixels and fancy glass don't mean squat if the image is blurry from camera movement or slight mis-focus.
I've got a 10 year old set of Gitzo carbon fiber legs that has lasted through 4 generations of digital cameras and will soldier on to the foreseeable future. My current ballhead comes from Really Right Stuff.
Don't cheap out on the support gear, a good kit will last for many years.
Paul
-
If I learned anything in my life and professional career so far, it is that it is not the ultimate choice you made that matters, it is the commitment to that choice that makes it or breaks it. So, whatever you choose, stick to it, learn its bad and good sides, and how to manage them to your advantage.
And above all, go out and shoot.
Touché!!
Mike.
-
Perhaps I misunderstood eyan's question, because most of those Really Right Stuff ballheads would cost more than the camera+lens models eyan listed (Nikon d5100).
Possibly. If the OP is interested, I would be happy to discuss less-expensive alternatives.
Paul
-
A good tripod and tripod head (ballhead is preferable) will make a huge difference.
I do not recommend a ballhead for landscapes and panos. A proper pan/tilt head is preferable especially for stitching.
-
What's important for landscape photography: large SUV or even better, a truck (after all, Ansel Adams used one, comes handy as an elevated platform to place your $1000 tripod and $500 ball head). A small plane, or helicopter, preferably with removable doors, wouldn't hurt either.
-
Like you eyan, I live in northern UK (aka southern Scotland).
What has changed a bit since the days of film is the ability (or the ability to afford) to take many photographs and see immediately what you have captured without waiting for the prints to arrive back at the local chemist shop. That really does change how you arrange your photographic workflow. That, in turn, might affect how you look at the question of equipment.
My main cameras each have 36Mp sensors. Sometimes I wish they had double that - not because I need huge resolution most of the time; I rarely print larger than A3+, but because modern photo processing is data processing pure and simple. It follows, therefore, that the more data you have available, the greater your creative options can be.
It is difficult to be prescriptive but, in general landscape photography terms, I possibly average 4 hours of travel, 2 hours camera work at the location and 10 minutes processing on the PC. But that 10 minutes processing probably contributes considerably more to the finished print than the other 6 hours. (It's also the 10 minutes I dislike most!! - I am an old fashioned camera man at heart but, as I say, a lot has changed in the past 60 years.)
So, above all, have fun with your photography and be sure to join your local Camera Club - you will learn far more in the friendly atmosphere of a club than from all the internet chatrooms and books in the world.
-
Hi guys - many thanks for all the advice, it's much appreciated, and some great points of view. I think the general consensus is that I should be good with whatever I decide on, i.e. despite the research, most decent up to date entry level cameras will do what I need for now, I think I will take a trip to a shop and give them all a go before buying to see what I feel most comfortable with, and decide that way. As I mention, I'm still new to the digital world, so I think I will be hard pressed to make a wrong choice with what's available for what I need it to do.
Once the cash is in hand, I will likely be going for one of the following - Nikon D3200 (24MP), Nikon D5100 (swivel screen), Canon 100D (small and light), or Pentax K-50 (a little more expensive due to weatherproofing, depending on how saucy I feel when it comes to buying!) - all seem to have good reviews, positive and negatives for each one, but essentially all good entry level cameras. Then allowing budget for a polariser, a good a tripod as I can afford, bag, possibly some ND filters, and lightroom. I've investigated the mirrorless scene, but feel I will be spending just as much money on kit as I would do with the above SLRs. If I really take to it, then I can start saving for lenses in the future.
I plan to do most around the Yorkshire Dales and Lake District in the UK - I'm sure I can find plenty of enthusiasts / fellow photographers to help get me going around there. I've also seen some pros in the area do workshops, which I think would be invaluable before venturing out on my own.
-
Sounds like a great plan. Good luck.
-
Not to complicate things more, but....
Properly implemented live view is WONDERFUL for using cameras on a tripod - you get to magnify the image 10x to check for critical focus, etc. Swivel screens are handy for those who want to put their cameras very high or very low on or off tripod.
Excellent advice.
-
This has been alluded to in a previous post, but whatever camera and lens(es) that you get, don't forget a good support system. A good tripod and tripod head (ballhead is preferable) will make a huge difference. Megapixels and fancy glass don't mean squat if the image is blurry from camera movement or slight mis-focus.
More excellent advice, though there are cheaper solutions than RRS.
-
Don't forget the support system for the brains behind the camera: YOUR FEET. Good shoes, good socks, multiple pairs of socks if walking far. If you are comfortable, your mind will be more focused on the photography, and you will be more inclined to go the extra (literal) distance.
-
The most important things for me are:
1) Weather protection. Most landscape pictures are really weather pictures. If you can't stay out there, you can't shoot.
2) Pixels. Landscape pictures need to be printed large. The more pixels the better and the better the pixels the better.
3) Lens. The bestest, contrastiest, sharpest lens I can find. All the better to feed those pixels.
3) Access. If you're missing the "be there" part of "f8 and be there", it's all moot. A van camper or an RV improves timely access dramatically.
-
1-If you're dead set on landscape as your field-of-interest , you don't really need autofocus. Mirrorless, via an adapter, will give you the option of a greater selection of lenses. Nikon lenses can be used on a Canon but not Canon on a Nikon - on a mirrorless you can you use either as well as many others ( Zeiss, Contax, Leica etc ) Also you won't need the f1.4 speed beasts. An f2 will be substantially more economical for no loss of quality when you're shooting at f4 - f8
There's ALOT of truth in that statement. Don't overlook what Manoli is trying to tell you.
Don't forget the support system for the brains behind the camera: YOUR FEET. Good shoes, good socks, multiple pairs of socks if walking far. If you are comfortable, your mind will be more focused on the photography, and you will be more inclined to go the extra (literal) distance.
And this as well, which makes a lightweight mirrorless setup a benefit.
-
I wish I had all the money I spent on tripods back before I bought Gitzo. I have a set of Gitzo tripod legs from 1984. They are still as good today as they were then. You can't say that about many things. They are expensive, but they will serve you well for many years to come. If you stay with landscape photography you will be pleased to have spent the money. I have four Gitzo tripods in different weights for different specific uses, including a set of legs I bought from a member of this forum through the "For Sale" section.
-
Thanks for sharing your opinions, getting so much information.
studio photography workshop (http://thurtell.com/studio-photography-workshop/)
-
I think one of the most important thing is the background.
-
Hi all; first post here. I am planning on taking up landscape photography seriously this year. I live close to some beautiful areas in the north UK, and always wish I had proper gear when out and about - I do a lot of walking and hiking. I'm not a complete beginner, but it probably has been around 15 years since I used anything but a point and shoot.
So I'm planning my first DSLR purchase (last SLR I used was in the film days so lots has changed), along with tripod, ND filters etc, coming in at entry level first so I can get myself up and running. After many hours of research, it seems that nobody can give clear 'one is better than another' advice, as everyone has different opinions and brand loyalties, and most conclude after much argument that its personal preference as to which camera you end up with. Plus, the 'what camera' question has been asked a billion times.
So I thought I would ask the question in a slightly different way and hopefully get some real world opinions, as opposed to another 'what's the best camera' question - for you, what features on a DSLR are most important to you for landscape photography?
I.e., do I go Pentax k30/50 for weather sealing, Canon 100d/t5i for size and weight, Nikon d3200 for pixel count, Nikon d5100 for swivel screen and good low light performance........ The list goes on but interested to hear general thoughts, it's such a minefield out there. I don't plan to do any portraits or video etc, just landscape as this is my passion. Unfortunately budget won't stretch to a camera and new lenses just yet, so will be stuck with DSLR and kit lens for now, but lens availability for the future could play a part in my decision.
Cheers for any comments!
None of the features on a DSLR is of the slightest importance in landscape photography. Get a Leica M Typ 240 and a few Leica lenses.
http://en.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/About-the-M-System (http://en.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/About-the-M-System)
You're thinking "features" matter. They don't. Quality alone matters. To the best of my knowledge, rocks don't move.
-
Of course they do!
I was not talking about avalanches, of course.
-
I was not talking about avalanches, of course.
That is only but one of the many ways......
Peter
-
Everyone has provided some great feedback but I want to add my two cents since I was in your shoes recently. I spent so much time researching gear, reading reviews and living in forums, I had no time to go out and shoot. Slobodan nailed it on the head....I suffered from chronic "Analysis Paralysis" and GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome). It started with the camera, then the lenses, tripods and filters...it never ended. Every time I bought a piece of gear I expected my images to improve...but they never did. Once I broke out of that vicious circle and focused solely on shooting, my photos started to rapidly improve. Don't get me wrong, good gear is important but it is like cooking a fine meal, you need pots, pans and a stove to cook but you are the chef, not the stove.
My lessons learned are as follows:
- Buy the best lens you can afford. Since you are into landscapes, I would look for a wide angle (10-20mm or 17-40 on full frame) and don't worry about it not being a constant f2.8. You will rarely shoot wide open so why spend the money. Just find a lens that is the sharpest between f8-f16.
- If you can afford it, look for a used full frame camera, it really does make a difference. I bought a used 5d MkII for less then a new 70D. But if this is still out of your range, look for the best used crop sensor but try and stay in the enthusist range sine the entry level slrs seem to exclude features like mirror lockup and back button focus options.
- Don't be taken in by the special effects cameras have to offer (In camera HDR, filters etc), they are only applied to jpg and you will be shooting in RAW.
- Buy the BEST tripod you can afford, nothing ruins an image faster than a wobbly tripod.
- Buy a wired remote...you are going to be standing beside the camera anyways.
- For filters, buy a good circular polarizer and leave it a that for now. Learn to use it well and when not to use it. Learn to bracket and blend in post first, this way in the field you can focus on composition. When you are ready, only buy good filters and go with slid in systems like Lee or HiTech.
- For software take a look at the Photographers bundle from Adobe...it is $9.99USD per month and gives you Lightroom and Photoshop.
- Most importantly, get out and make photos, process them to the way YOU like them, and print them and hang them on your wall. Why hide your art on your computer where no one will see them.
Happy Shooting
-
Hi all; first post here. I am planning on taking up landscape photography seriously this year. I live close to some beautiful areas in the north UK, and always wish I had proper gear when out and about - I do a lot of walking and hiking. I'm not a complete beginner, but it probably has been around 15 years since I used anything but a point and shoot.
So I'm planning my first DSLR purchase (last SLR I used was in the film days so lots has changed), along with tripod, ND filters etc, coming in at entry level first so I can get myself up and running. After many hours of research, it seems that nobody can give clear 'one is better than another' advice, as everyone has different opinions and brand loyalties, and most conclude after much argument that its personal preference as to which camera you end up with. Plus, the 'what camera' question has been asked a billion times.
So I thought I would ask the question in a slightly different way and hopefully get some real world opinions, as opposed to another 'what's the best camera' question - for you, what features on a DSLR are most important to you for landscape photography?
I.e., do I go Pentax k30/50 for weather sealing, Canon 100d/t5i for size and weight, Nikon d3200 for pixel count, Nikon d5100 for swivel screen and good low light performance........ The list goes on but interested to hear general thoughts, it's such a minefield out there. I don't plan to do any portraits or video etc, just landscape as this is my passion. Unfortunately budget won't stretch to a camera and new lenses just yet, so will be stuck with DSLR and kit lens for now, but lens availability for the future could play a part in my decision.
Cheers for any comments!
You'll need an Ansel Adams tripod-hole locator. Be sure to place the legs of your tripod in the very same holes that were made by AA. That way your photos will take on the qualities that made his "great".
-
Is that the best you have to offer?
It's a joke, son...
-
Or you could immerse yourself in a place like the Ansel Adams Wilderness. Actually spend time in your landscape - don't just drive through. There is plenty of magic left in these wild places.