Jump to content

New Camera Tips


Recommended Posts

We have gone through several point-and - shoot cameras after I stopped using my Nikon D70 ( too heavy). They have produced poor quality/slightly blurred pictures. I'd like to get a light weight SLR or good point and shoot with good lens distance. Any suggestions? Thanks so much for any information. Cruisy Susy

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The D70 is a 20 year old model.

  • To clarify.... what lenses do you have? The newer Nikon DSLR's may be able to support it.
  • The D7%00 series may be closest to a D70 replacement... especially if you have a lot of D-series lenses.
  • for something smaller.... check out the mirrorless cameras and lenses. If you plan to keep a mirrorless camera powered on for a long time. Battery life to run the screens is a big difference compared to DSLR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went through a serious (camera) weight loss a few years ago when I retired my DSLR and went to Sony mirrorless. Here's a link to my recent post about the A6300 after a year of shooting with it.

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showpost.php?p=52840961&postcount=91

 

Half the weight and equal or better quality and performance than DSLRs in its price range. You can even use your Nikon lenses on it with one of the many adapters available.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The D70 is a 20 year old model.

  • To clarify.... what lenses do you have? The newer Nikon DSLR's may be able to support it.
  • The D7%00 series may be closest to a D70 replacement... especially if you have a lot of D-series lenses.
  • for something smaller.... check out the mirrorless cameras and lenses. If you plan to keep a mirrorless camera powered on for a long time. Battery life to run the screens is a big difference compared to DSLR.

 

You might need to be a little more clear...the D7000-D7200 yes...but from the "outrage" onto photo message boards, the new D7500 won't work properly with some of the older lenses. I have a couple D lenses that I love and that outrage over the D7500 is sort of out of control at this point. but just want to make sure this little tidbit is known. not sure if it even applies to the op or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use my DLSR most of the time but also wanted something that I could carry (around ship) in my pocket. I went through a number of P&S cameras and most did not work well in low light and had blurred pictures. I have a bridge camera that works well but does not fit in my pocket. I have a Samsung WB350f which does a better job than most of the other pocket cameras. It is great in daylight and OK in low light with the flash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, most good SLRs are heavier for a reason... There are a lot of good interchangables out there (the sony A6x00s) are great except for one thing - no lenses longer than 300mm, there are lots in the lower range, but it does about 75 percent what my D500 does at 30 percent the size and weight).

 

The P900 is a decent point a shoot with insane lens distance, but not very small (and its very hard to stabilize at full extension). I actually considered it as a portable range piece but it violates my personal rule all my cameras must shoot RAW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have several Nikon lenses, than looking for an updated Nikon body is one option to consider. New bodies would have generally higher performance, and lots of features on their checklists. Are any of your existing lenses stabilized? [Nikon calls this 'VR' for 'vibration reduction']. Stabilization can reduce blur from your motion during long exposures.

 

If you are starting from scratch, you may want to look at some of the 'micro four thirds' cameras from Panasonic or Olympus. These are much smaller than comparable SLR camera bodies and lenses. All the Olympus, and recent Panasonic, cameras have in-body image stabilization. I recently purchased an Olympus OMD M10 Mk2 with the 'kit' lens [14-42R, and a kit level Olympus Zoom lens [40-150R]. The combo gives me a focal length range equivalent to 35mm 28-85 and 80-300 lenses in a lightweight package. There is an alternate 'pancake' kit lens that provides a pocketable camera option [for fairly big pockets ;-) ]

 

Another option is the 'bridge' camera - the P900 is fairly popular, and may be found in many 'big box' stores. I would recommend looking at the Panasonic FZ series cameras, in particular the FZ-300. [There are also some much larger FZ cameras, like my FZ-50 or the current FZ-1000 and FZ-2500 - these have larger sensors, and much larger lenses making them comparable in size to SLR cameras]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...but it does about 75 percent what my D500 does at 30 percent the size and weight...

 

Probably closer to 90%... +25% for 3x the focus points, higher resolution, no micro-adjusting needed for lenses and faster continuous shooting with -10% for no touch-screen, no dual memory slots, and no USB 3.0. I would give the D500 extra credit for its excellent sensor but since it's made by Sony, I have to call it a tie. Oh, and you forgot to mention 50% of the price!

 

;)

 

To Cruisy Susy:

 

Obviously, this is offered up as a tongue-in-cheek reminder that most modern interchangeable lens cameras surpass the needs of 99% of the people who buy them. All the major manufacturers make excellent cameras and ultimately the choice boils down to personal preference. I chose the Alphas for the compact size and their ability to do what I need them to do. Others will prefer the larger DSLR body or even the logo on the strap (I've actually been told by a red logo owner that they have never heard of a BlackRapid camera :) ). Whatever camera is ultimately chosen, the important thing is that it gets used. The best camera is the one you will use and the picture you take will always be better than the one you didn't.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The P900 is a decent point a shoot with insane lens distance, but not very small (and its very hard to stabilize at full extension). I actually considered it as a portable range piece but it violates my personal rule all my cameras must shoot RAW.

 

The insane lens distance intrigued me. I played with a demo a bit and it weighed a ton (figuratively).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

75 percent for me because of the total lack of native long lenses and less low light performance. But those are more specific to my needs...

 

You are right about the price point, on sale could be as much as 65% less.

 

 

Probably closer to 90%... +25% for 3x the focus points, higher resolution, no micro-adjusting needed for lenses and faster continuous shooting with -10% for no touch-screen, no dual memory slots, and no USB 3.0. I would give the D500 extra credit for its excellent sensor but since it's made by Sony, I have to call it a tie. Oh, and you forgot to mention 50% of the price!

 

;)

 

To Cruisy Susy:

 

Obviously, this is offered up as a tongue-in-cheek reminder that most modern interchangeable lens cameras surpass the needs of 99% of the people who buy them. All the major manufacturers make excellent cameras and ultimately the choice boils down to personal preference. I chose the Alphas for the compact size and their ability to do what I need them to do. Others will prefer the larger DSLR body or even the logo on the strap (I've actually been told by a red logo owner that they have never heard of a BlackRapid camera :) ). Whatever camera is ultimately chosen, the important thing is that it gets used. The best camera is the one you will use and the picture you take will always be better than the one you didn't.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh its heavy, but compared to my D500 with a Tamron 150-600 on it to get the same range? It's a feather. The P900 would never be my goto camera, for reasons noted, but for someone who just needs something versatile and doesn't want interchangeable lenses? It's not a bad piece of kit.

 

 

 

 

The insane lens distance intrigued me. I played with a demo a bit and it weighed a ton (figuratively).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh its heavy, but compared to my D500 with a Tamron 150-600 on it to get the same range? It's a feather. The P900 would never be my goto camera, for reasons noted, but for someone who just needs something versatile and doesn't want interchangeable lenses? It's not a bad piece of kit.

 

I agree. If I was starting from scratch, it would be something I would look at. It weighed a lot more than my Canon SX-40, which I could be convinced to replace with something that had a longer zoom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have gone through several point-and - shoot cameras after I stopped using my Nikon D70 ( too heavy). They have produced poor quality/slightly blurred pictures. I'd like to get a light weight SLR or good point and shoot with good lens distance. Any suggestions? Thanks so much for any information. Cruisy Susy

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

The D7200 and D7500 are the newest iterations of the top consumer aps-c dSLR made by Nikon. Unfortunately, they are even heavier than the Nikon D70.

If you're heavily invested in Nikon lenses, which doesn't seem to be the case, then it is wise to stick to Nikon. If you have a deep investment in Nikon "G" class lenses, you can go with the Nikon D3400 or Nikon D5600... They are the lower end Nikons, but they will greatly surpass the capabilities of the much older D70. They are a fair bit lighter than the D70.

 

To go even lighter while maintaining top quality, the mirrorless cameras are a good recommendation. It is true that the battery life isn't as good with mirrorless --- but not the end of the world. Actually, battery life would be pretty similar to the Nikon D70, with a camera like the Sony A6000 or A6300.

 

All those cameras will have virtually identical image quality -- the Nikon D3400, D5600, D7200, Sony A6000 or A6300.

The A6000 and A6300 will be lighter, will use a much larger view finder, but it is a high quality EVF as opposed to OVF. The A6000 focus may be a tiny bit slower at some times, but will be faster than the Nikons in some situations. The A6300 will generally be much faster all around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your suggestions...I'm taking notes and will look at mirror less cameras and see about using old lenses on a Nikon SLR..I'm afraid I'm a bit "out of you peoples' league " and appreciate you took the time to help. I'll let you know what I decide on..Cruisy Susy

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, most good SLRs are heavier for a reason... There are a lot of good interchangables out there (the sony A6x00s) are great except for one thing - no lenses longer than 300mm, there are lots in the lower range, but it does about 75 percent what my D500 does at 30 percent the size and weight).

 

The P900 is a decent point a shoot with insane lens distance, but not very small (and its very hard to stabilize at full extension). I actually considered it as a portable range piece but it violates my personal rule all my cameras must shoot RAW.

 

Actually... for the a6300... you now mean no lenses longer than 400mm. And except for serious birders, wildlife photographers, who spend tens of thousands on lenses... your regular consumers are never buying lenses over 400mm. (I do professional work with Nikon and I don't own a lens longer than 300mm)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't seen a 400mm for the Sony a series without an adapter.. Which lens (because I would be very interested in that for an upcoming trip!)

 

Actually... for the a6300... you now mean no lenses longer than 400mm. And except for serious birders, wildlife photographers, who spend tens of thousands on lenses... your regular consumers are never buying lenses over 400mm. (I do professional work with Nikon and I don't own a lens longer than 300mm)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The D70 is a 20 year old model.

 


  •  
  • To clarify.... what lenses do you have? The newer Nikon DSLR's may be able to support it.
     
  • The D7%00 series may be closest to a D70 replacement... especially if you have a lot of D-series lenses.
     
  • for something smaller.... check out the mirrorless cameras and lenses. If you plan to keep a mirrorless camera powered on for a long time. Battery life to run the screens is a big difference compared to DSLR.
     

 

 

Not quite 20 years. It came out in January 2004. I had one as my first DSLR.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't seen a 400mm for the Sony a series without an adapter.. Which lens (because I would be very interested in that for an upcoming trip!)

 

Sony just released the 100-400 G-Master lens for native E-Mount. Jury is out on serious testing but initial impressions indicate very fast and sharp, especially fast on the new A9.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is sweet but I have to say the price point puts it a little bit out of the target market for the A6x line....

 

It's a full frame too...

 

Oooh, but the weight is so low....

 

Sony just released the 100-400 G-Master lens for native E-Mount. Jury is out on serious testing but initial impressions indicate very fast and sharp, especially fast on the new A9.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, most good SLRs are heavier for a reason... There are a lot of good interchangables out there (the sony A6x00s) are great except for one thing - no lenses longer than 300mm, there are lots in the lower range, but it does about 75 percent what my D500 does at 30 percent the size and weight).

 

The P900 is a decent point a shoot with insane lens distance, but not very small (and its very hard to stabilize at full extension). I actually considered it as a portable range piece but it violates my personal rule all my cameras must shoot RAW.

Actually the beauty of the Sony Mirrorless, is use of older lens like the ones the poster has, Sony just announced a native 70- 400 lens and with the crop factor brings it under 600mm. Win win in my book

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to correct wmjivey. The Sony A6x00 has an APS-C sensor. It is a fantastic camera, with some excellent lenses. Much smaller than full frame, but nevertheless high quality. I'd be concerned about using older lenses, or those from a different manufacturer. They will work, but you are likely to lose some functionality, e.g. Autofocus or metering.

I'm a Nikon fan.

For a smaller camera, how about a used LUMIX G series? Or used anything? My second, evening, camera is a LUMIX LX100. That has a fixed lens, with just 3.8x zoom, but has a 2/3 sensor, and very high quality.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a smaller camera, how about a used LUMIX G series?

 

Which G-series? Most of the Panasonic interchangeable-lens cameras are significantly larger than the A6x00 series despite having the much smaller Micro 4/3 sensor.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which G-series? Most of the Panasonic interchangeable-lens cameras are significantly larger than the A6x00 series despite having the much smaller Micro 4/3 sensor.

 

Dave

 

Many of the MFT cameras are taller due to a viewfinder / pop up flash hump [for an example compare the Olympus OMD 10.2 vs the Sony A6300 at this link to camerasize.com, short link

]

 

I also did a comparison of the Panasonic Gx and GHx bodies - and they are much larger than my OM10. The Panasonic with a comparable form factor [viewfinder in the corner, no pop up flash] would be their G85 series - much smaller than the Sony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many of the MFT cameras are taller due to a viewfinder / pop up flash hump [for an example compare the Olympus OMD 10.2 vs the Sony A6300 at this link to camerasize.com, short link

 

]

 

I also did a comparison of the Panasonic Gx and GHx bodies - and they are much larger than my OM10. The Panasonic with a comparable form factor [viewfinder in the corner, no pop up flash] would be their G85 series - much smaller than the Sony.

 

The link you posted for the G85 was for the entry-level GX850 which doesn't have a viewfinder. The G85 is much larger. If you meant the GX85, it is still a bit larger and heavier than the A6x00 cameras.

 

Tough to keep track. Too darn many cameras out there!

 

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For 100-400 G Master just announced, see my note about price point.... And it looks like the 70-400 is $2200 retail.

 

 

I can still go to 900mm on my Nikon with the Tamron for about $1200 and a back brace.

 

Bear in mind, I love my a6000, but it doesn't match up with the D500 (nor should it be expected to). The full alpha series comes dang close though but the weight is not that far off anymore. The LENS weight is far less, that has to be said.

 

For most people looking at a 6x000 mirrorless one of the attractions is the lower price point as well as size and there are still no long lenses in the moderate price range...

 

 

 

 

Actually the beauty of the Sony Mirrorless, is use of older lens like the ones the poster has, Sony just announced a native 70- 400 lens and with the crop factor brings it under 600mm. Win win in my book
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...