Choosing the Right Camera System

[jjj]

Instead of your usual personal attacks and aggressive tone, how about reacting on the content for a change? Nick has himself stated that he prefers the way the D750 feels in his hands, so this isn't about camera handling.

You need to lighten up as I wasn't being aggressive, though I was certainly joking about your usual Nikon worshiping. BTW Nick only later stated that he had warmed to the Nikon, after your post where bizarrely you had a go at him for not caring about image because he prefered a non- Nikon.

I just don't understand his rationale, that disturbs the engineer in me.

You were disturbed because Nick marginally prefered the handling ergonomics [which is is very much a personal thing] of a non-Nikon camera!?!
Lots of people prefer Canons to Nikons.  Others prefer Olympus to Canon and so on....

I guess you do since you seem to share his point of view. Are you able to explain better than him?

Really? You want me to explain someone else's personal preferences re two cameras, which were explained particularly well by Nick anyway. Besides I don't care which camera is bought as long as the owner likes it.

How so? I see tens of people around me who keep buying new cameras but hardly produce any images with them.

Well Nick stated the whole point in upgrading was to increase image quality

....for me it is only the result that matters and full-frame still produces a noticeable improvement in tonality and acuity, especially at high ISO.

and it was Nick that I was talking about, not the people around you. Plus why is the number of photos they produce relevant? Some people take loads of photos, none of which are of any interest to anyone bar themselves. But they enjoy it so that's fine, as is it with those who buy new cameras and take very few images. As long as they are happy no-one else should be bothered.

[Jim Pascoe]

Beginners and intermediate learners come to understand their own needs and wants over time and through experience and I'm trying to bypass this process and anticipate what gear will keep me satisfied for the next few years. Which is what Jim is seeing, I think, and why he is suggesting I take a step back from so much analysis. I have to agree.

Cheers,
Nick

Nick - Yes that is right - you cannot shortcut experience.  As you can see from the Canon/Nikon divide, or even full-frame/APSC/M34 choice, there is no one answer even for very experienced photographers.

Then to cap it all you are asking a very diverse bunch of people advice on buying a new system.  There are some here who can tell you every spec about a camera and lens and even which one produces the sharpest pictures under any set of circumstances.  But they may not actually shoot that much, or may even not be able to make good pictures because they are too obsessed with the gear.  If you use any system extensively and concentrate on making pictures you will get good results - with any system.
Your comment to Bernard above about his nighttime picture was a classic "I love your picture, what gear did you use?".  It's almost irrelevant to the picture making - especially when viewing on the web.  That picture as viewed on my screen could have been taken with almost any camera.  If you love Bernard's pictures - its not the camera that's responsible.

As this is a photography forum I like posting pictures.  Here are two that I like - can anyone tell what camera they were taken with (not looking at the EXIF)!

Jim

[jjj]

Nick - Yes that is right - you cannot shortcut experience.  As you can see from the Canon/Nikon divide, or even full-frame/APSC/M34 choice, there is no one answer even for very experienced photographers.

And they can be even more biased/set in their ways than anyone else. 

Then to cap it all you are asking a very diverse bunch of people advice on buying a new system.  There are some here who can tell you every spec about a camera and lens and even which one produces the sharpest pictures under any set of circumstances.  But they may not actually shoot that much, or may even not be able to make good pictures because they are too obsessed with the gear.

Or is it the other way around? They obsess over gear as they cannot take interesting photos.

If you use any system extensively and concentrate on making pictures you will get good results - with any system.

Absolutely. Though for specialist work, you may need specific equipment. T/S lenses for architecture not all systems have such kit.

Your comment to Bernard above about his nighttime picture was a classic "I love your picture, what gear did you use?".  It's almost irrelevant to the picture making - especially when viewing on the web.  That picture as viewed on my screen could have been taken with almost any camera.  If you love Bernard's pictures - its not the camera that's responsible.

It would be Bernard I hope.   

As this is a photography forum I like posting pictures.  Here are two that I like - can anyone tell what camera they were taken with (not looking at the EXIF)!

Oddly I prefer the top one despite having a strong bias to low imagery, was it taken on a Kodak Instamatic?

[Jim Pascoe]

And they can be even more biased/set in their ways than anyone else. 
Or is it the other way around? They obsess over gear as they cannot take interesting photos.
Absolutely. Though for specialist work, you may need specific equipment. T/S lenses for architecture not all systems have such kit.
It would be Bernard I hope.   
Oddly I prefer the top one despite having a strong bias to low imagery, was it taken on a Kodak Instamatic?

I would add that I am not directly having a go at anyone in this particular thread!  I will wait till a few more people have seen the pictures before revealing the cameras used. They are current-ish quality cameras though. I only included the market-place picture because it is a similar low-light image to Bernard's. And no it was not taken on a Kodak Instamatic you rude man - do you take me for the sort of guy would use such rubbish?

[BernardLanguillier]

I would add that I am not directly having a go at anyone in this particular thread!  I will wait till a few more people have seen the pictures before revealing the cameras used. They are current-ish quality cameras though. I only included the market-place picture because it is a similar low-light image to Bernard's.

Jim,

Those are 2 night pictures, but the key difference is that there are no highlights where you attempted to keep details. If you have ever been in Japan, you'll know that retaining detail in the lanterns in front of the store is the key challenge here. If takes a very important under-exposure of the whole scene to get the rending shown in my image.

Back the main topic, here are some images captured with the D750 today. You may want to try opening the original files in PS as they are downsized significantly for display here.









Lenses used are 70-200 f4 VR and 400mm f2.8 E FL.

More after the link (some captured with the D810).

Cheers,
Bernard

[Jim Pascoe]

Jim,

Those are 2 night pictures, but the key difference is that there are no highlights where you attempted to keep details. If you have ever been in Japan, you'll know that retaining detail in the lanterns in front of the store is the key challenge here. If takes a very important under-exposure of the whole scene to get the rending shown in my image.

Back the main topic, here are some images captured with the D750 today. You may want to try opening the original files in PS as they are downsized significantly for display here.







[/url]

Lenses used are 70-200 f4 VR and 400mm f2.8 E FL.

More after the link (some captured with the D810).

Cheers,
Bernard

Ah - that's what we like to see - pictures!  Great stuff Bernard!  Now those are the sort I would say a DSLR would have the edge over M43 in my experience.

Jim

[jjj]

Ah - that's what we like to see - pictures!  Great stuff Bernard!  Now those are the sort I would say a DSLR would have the edge over M43 in my experience.

Why is that?

[Jim Pascoe]

Why is that?

I was generalising and mainly referring to the top picture where the rider appears to be moving.  My GH2's were fairly poor at tracking moving subjects approaching quite quickly, and the E-M1 is a bit better.  But if I was going to shoot horses galloping then I would probably grab either the 1Ds3 or my wife's 5D3 and the 70-200mm.  The focus tracking on those is excellent.  But I did say in 'my experience' - could be down to poor technique of course!

Jim

[Nick Walt]

Those are beautiful images, Bernard.

With the right light, ETTR and a good lens (Olympus 75/1.8) it might be possible to get images looking closer to those on the E-M5, E-M10 or E-M1. But it is not the norm. As soon as the sensor gets stressed you can kiss that beautiful depth of colour, tonality and crisp acuity goodbye.

Sohail Karmani gets great results out of his E-M5. However, I don't think he shoots low light much:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/sohailkarmani/15516011268/

He uses mostly primes and I think primes make a much bigger difference to quality on less capable sensors. Not so much on fantastic sensors like that in the D750. Anyone agree?

[jjj]

I was generalising and mainly referring to the top picture where the rider appears to be moving.  My GH2's were fairly poor at tracking moving subjects approaching quite quickly, and the E-M1 is a bit better.  But if I was going to shoot horses galloping then I would probably grab either the 1Ds3 or my wife's 5D3 and the 70-200mm.  The focus tracking on those is excellent.  But I did say in 'my experience' - could be down to poor technique of course!

Plenty of DSLRs with iffy autofocus. 

[allegretto]

I think we have been over this before

the better that sensor the more delta from better glass.

most high quality lenses out-resolve most sensors, so better sensors get more out of any given lens

Those are beautiful images, Bernard.

With the right light, ETTR and a good lens (Olympus 75/1. it might be possible to get images looking closer to those on the E-M5, E-M10 or E-M1. But it is not the norm. As soon as the sensor gets stressed you can kiss that beautiful depth of colour, tonality and crisp acuity goodbye.

Sohail Karmani gets great results out of his E-M5. However, I don't think he shoots low light much:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/sohailkarmani/15516011268/

He uses mostly primes and I think primes make a much bigger difference to quality on less capable sensors. Not so much on fantastic sensors like that in the D750. Anyone agree?

[bcooter]

..........looking closer to those on the E-M5, E-M10 or E-M1. But it is not the norm. ........

I don't have every camera, not a D650 but just about every format.

I do know that the 4/3 cameras don't focus well with tracking except the gh4 (for stills not video) the gh3 (for video not stills), the olympus is part time tracking.

In other words the oly focuses so fast you can shoot single exposures by focus click as long as you do it quickly.

In regards to dr I don't measure them on a chart but I did one series with an 1dx and em-5 (just to see what would happen) and the em-5 held more range than the 1dx, which shocked me.

Also the em-5 picks up more colors than the em1 though they have different sensors.  The em-5 a sony sensor, the em-1 panasonic.

M43 is good until you get to 800 iso but then again I have a different view of how well most cameras work well in advertised high iso.

The ones that go higher seem to loose the ability to pick up specific colors, but I'd bet my opinion on this is pretty rare on an equipment forum that measures most things by high iso and low noise.

IMO

BC

[allegretto]

Not here,  I look at the image first. If you want equipment for Photo-Reproduction then your interests are really somewhere else. This is what causes me to sometimes be mis-understood by guys who choose cameras "by the numbers'

What surprises me is you statement about the DR of Oly vs. 1Dx

What were your parameters?

I don't have every camera, not a D650 but just about every format.

I do know that the 4/3 cameras don't focus well with tracking except the gh4 (for stills not video) the gh3 (for video not stills), the olympus is part time tracking.

In other words the oly focuses so fast you can shoot single exposures by focus click as long as you do it quickly.

In regards to dr I don't measure them on a chart but I did one series with an 1dx and em-5 (just to see what would happen) and the em-5 held more range than the 1dx, which shocked me.

Also the em-5 picks up more colors than the em1 though they have different sensors.  The em-5 a sony sensor, the em-1 panasonic.

M43 is good until you get to 800 iso but then again I have a different view of how well most cameras work well in advertised high iso.

The ones that go higher seem to loose the ability to pick up specific colors, but I'd bet my opinion on this is pretty rare on an equipment forum that measures most things by high iso and low noise.

IMO

BC

[BernardLanguillier]

I was generalising and mainly referring to the top picture where the rider appears to be moving.  My GH2's were fairly poor at tracking moving subjects approaching quite quickly, and the E-M1 is a bit better.  But if I was going to shoot horses galloping then I would probably grab either the 1Ds3 or my wife's 5D3 and the 70-200mm.  The focus tracking on those is excellent.  But I did say in 'my experience' - could be down to poor technique of course!

The first one (and many others on Flickr) was challenging technically for 3 reasons:
- focus: these horses move as fast as they can (meaning about 15-20 m/sec), and the horse itself can interfere with the rider. The field of view was obstucted in parts to the left (these events get incredibly crowded) which prevented me from adding TC to the 400mm f2.8 to increase the distance,
- timing: there was only a 5-6m space with good light through trees, through which the running horses went in about 0.25-0.3 sec, you need 6 img/sec to be sure to get it right,
- Exposure: there was about 2.5 stop difference btwn the location with good light and what was there 5m left, and light was fluctuating because of the play of clouds.

Cheers,
Bernard

[BernardLanguillier]

What surprises me is you statement about the DR of Oly vs. 1Dx

What were your parameters?

DxO seems to agree: http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-versus-Canon-EOS-1Dx___909_753

Cheers,
Bernard

[Nick Walt]

I've wondered if the E-M5 has a better sensor than the E-M1 because of the need for the E-M1 to generate a dark frame exposure (long exposure noise reduction) to mask out the excessive hot noise from its sensor. Whereas the E-M5 doesn't have that need.

[allegretto]

So glad you can find some data. but that's at base ISO. I don't know why really smart engineering types post non-contextual data unless it's agenda driven. For me at least the camera is a very dynamic tool. One data point.... really? Reduce as complex a system as a modern sensor and chip-set to a single number...? Does that make you comfortable? That's Consumer's Reports kind of gibberish

No one says the 1Dx is a good base ISO camera. Much more bang and fewer bucks (and kg) in other cameras if the lights are up. Like your fine Nikon 750's and 800's or several others

But if DR is really your thing, and you don't shoot everything at 200-400 ISO, perhaps you should consider a more nuanced test, as here;

http://sensorgen.info

Now the range comes into view and it's easy to see that in low light the A7s, D4s, D4 and 1Dx have a distinct advantage. Which is where they will get used for many of us.

Actually I look at more than DR but it seems a place where the Nikon folks like to dwell. As you can see the A7s is among the best of the best as well in this regard... the 1Dx being rather good too...!

I don't understand why the bashing goes on. There is no "Perfect" camera. Just different tools depending upon the job at hand and the artist's desires.

DxO seems to agree: http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-versus-Canon-EOS-1Dx___909_753

Cheers,
Bernard

[BernardLanguillier]

So glad you can find some data. but that's at base ISO. I don't know why really smart engineering types post non-contextual data unless it's agenda driven. For me at least the camera is a very dynamic tool. One data point.... really? Reduce as complex a system as a modern sensor and chip-set to a single number...? Does that make you comfortable. That's Consumer's Reports kind of gibberish

No one says the 1Dx is a good base ISO camera. Much more bang and fewer bucks (and kg) in other cameras if the lights are up. Like your fine Nikon 750's and 800's or several others

Allegretto,

DxO has DR curves showing DR as a function of ISO. I don't see what is lacking nuance about their results.

The 1Dx clearly leaves the Olympus in the dust at higher ISOs.

Actually I look at more than DR but it seems a place where the Nikon folks like to dwell. As you can see the A7s is among the best of the best as well in this regard... the 1Dx being rather good too...!

Certainly. This isn't a Canon vs Nikon discussion as far as I am concerned.

Cheers,
Bernard

[NancyP]

Bernard, those are very interesting images of the archers on horseback. I had not thought that Japan might have an active "war re-enacter" hobbyist or sporting community. Now there's a challenge, shooting accurately from horseback.

[BernardLanguillier]

Bernard, those are very interesting images of the archers on horseback. I had not thought that Japan might have an active "war re-enacter" hobbyist or sporting community.

Nancy,

Thanks.

Yabusame is tradition dating backing back the 8th century...

Cheers,
Bernard