Best for landscape . . .
Jan 12, 2018 14:14:46 #
Walk around kits: D5500 w/Tamron 18-270 , 2lb 2.7oz . . . D500 w/Tamron 18-400 , 3lb 10.3Oz . . .
Although the D5500 is lighter, I prefer to carry the D500 because of it's faster focus, frame rate, low light capability, etc etc.
Thinking about putting my 11-16mm or 40mm on the D5500 and just using it for landscape and long exposure . . . Will the 24mp of the D5500 give me better IQ?? I really love the D500, but it seems most of it's advantages are lost when doing landscape or slow shutter speeds.
I know someone will say to get a D750 or D850 for best landscapes, but I already know that, and it's not in the cards for now . . . So please just advise which combo between the D5500 and D500 would give best quality. . . Thanks for your inputs . . .
Although the D5500 is lighter, I prefer to carry the D500 because of it's faster focus, frame rate, low light capability, etc etc.
Thinking about putting my 11-16mm or 40mm on the D5500 and just using it for landscape and long exposure . . . Will the 24mp of the D5500 give me better IQ?? I really love the D500, but it seems most of it's advantages are lost when doing landscape or slow shutter speeds.
I know someone will say to get a D750 or D850 for best landscapes, but I already know that, and it's not in the cards for now . . . So please just advise which combo between the D5500 and D500 would give best quality. . . Thanks for your inputs . . .
Jan 12, 2018 14:56:14 #
It's more about the lenses than the camera when it comes to quality....
Jan 12, 2018 15:41:29 #
AK Grandpa wrote:
Walk around kits: D5500 w/Tamron 18-270 , 2lb 2.7o... (show quote)
I routinely use an 85mm or longer on D800 or D810 for most landscape work. To my eye, slight compression is more pleasing than the "extended" look of wide and ultra-wide lenses. If I need a wider view I just do a pano and I can have it as wide and tall as I want.
Jan 13, 2018 07:55:36 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
AK Grandpa wrote:
Walk around kits: D5500 w/Tamron 18-270 , 2lb 2.7o... (show quote)
Landscape photography is much more about seeing than equipment. Good landscape photography stresses composition rules. Exposure and time of day is also important. You need to work on these things first. IMHO, neither lenses will do the job cause the 27mm at the wide end is not wide enough for me, but for a start it will work. You really need to work on composition and exposure and waiting until the best time of day for your shot. If you don't consider these things, it won't matter what lens you use.
Jan 13, 2018 08:56:50 #
tcthome
Loc: NJ
Do a comparison with the same lens , both cameras on a tripod with exact same lens ( distance ) settings & decide for yourself which is better.
Jan 13, 2018 09:46:08 #
Image quality in my humble opinion depends more on the lens and photographic technique than on the number of megapixels. 24 megapixels are a lot of pixels. My D610 has 24 megapixels and my D7000 has only 17. If I use the same lens, same aperture, same exposure and same distance to subject I CANNOT see a difference in quality.
Even using a mediocre lens, not easily found today, it is the photographer's technique what determines quality.
Even using a mediocre lens, not easily found today, it is the photographer's technique what determines quality.
Jan 13, 2018 09:54:48 #
You can also think about shooting multiple shots and stitching together the shots as a Panorama. This can allow you to shoot with longer focal lengths in a portrait orientation too. You can also do multi row panos but that is more complicated. The downside is you would likely need a tripod and a pano head setup especially if you get into multi row panos. A powerful computer for PP is also needed...
As for what you have I would go with the best lens and the best DR body. Im not a Nikon shooter so I won't judge these items you have.
Best,
Todd Ferguson
As for what you have I would go with the best lens and the best DR body. Im not a Nikon shooter so I won't judge these items you have.
Best,
Todd Ferguson
Jan 13, 2018 10:01:11 #
camerapapi wrote:
Image quality in my humble opinion depends more on the lens and photographic technique than on the number of megapixels. 24 megapixels are a lot of pixels. My D610 has 24 megapixels and my D7000 has only 17. If I use the same lens, same aperture, same exposure and same distance to subject I CANNOT see a difference in quality.
Even using a mediocre lens, not easily found today, it is the photographer's technique what determines quality.
Even using a mediocre lens, not easily found today, it is the photographer's technique what determines quality.
More megapixels come in handy when there is a need to crop.
That need is not so relevant in Landscape photography.
Jan 13, 2018 14:25:09 #
camerapapi wrote:
Image quality in my humble opinion depends more on the lens and photographic technique than on the number of megapixels. 24 megapixels are a lot of pixels.
I have lots of landscape photos taken in my pre-aware days, and I can ditto this statement for sure. Many of the photos were well-taken for subject, but lousy shares because of various elements like lighting, composition, etc. I am going to take a trip to Moab, Utah next spring and, as soon as the weather clears at home, hopefully before that, what is most needed for me are not new lenses but practice, practice, practice. I have a 50 mm. prime lens, which is often recommended for landscapes because of its sharpness and true depth of focus. Others have mentioned 85 mm for the same reason. Telephotos get you farther, but often flatten the DOF. I just acquired a 55-250 Canon lens just so I can get closer to rocks and bison, but I suspect my better pics will come from my nifty 50.
So get out there and shoot with whatever lenses you're going to use before you travel, even if it's just within your own block. Get friendly with that lens.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.