I would love to hear what Gene51 has to say.
His explanations are usually so "tack sharp" and understandable.
Gene?
Please?
Thanks,
BJW

Been shooting high school ice hockey for about 3 seasons now. That's how I got started in photography. What great experience. I started emailing good shots to the coach and school administration. Coach puts them up on TeamSnap and school uses it in their publications. Good shots of the players I send to the parents, they love it. (No charge).
Have gotten so much great experience, that they made me the team's official photographer and gave me a gift: An official team jacket with the label "PHOTOGRAPHER" on it. Parents even think my shots are so good of their kids, that they want me to shoot for their private parties (no thanks).
I have only one hard and fast rule: Stay out of the locker rooms. Take no photos there. One more rule: whatever solo shots you take of players off the ice, court, or field, make sure to send it to the parents first with an endearing note to them: "thought you might like to have this great shot of John or Jimmy or Sue or whoever. You should be very proud of him/her..." etc.

BTW: To shoot sports I use a Nikon D500 and a Tamron 70-200. Be prepared to make the investment if you want quality shots.

Good luck, Have fun.

BJW

I started out with LR Classic and used it for about a year. The one most frustrating part of that experience for me was the LR catalog system. I then had some travel planned and after considering other on the road back up options, I decided to try LR CC (cloud) on an iPad Pro. That offered a way for me to back up my daily memory cards while on the road and start editing immediately. I found that while LR CC does not (yet) offer all of the features of LR Classic, it does offer me everything I need. It also eliminated the frustrations I had with the catalogue system. Now, I have abandoned LR Classic on my MacBook Pro entirely and use only LR CC on my iPad. It not only gives me all the editing tools I need, but with greater convenience and ease of use. I know a lot of us don't trust the cloud yet and feel more comfortable with saving our images on external hard drives. I did too. But, having used the cloud (Dropbox, Google Drive, etc.) since it was "born" I have come to trust it and rely on it in my legal practice and personal life. My non-photography world is rapidly migrating to the cloud. We now have, essentially, paperless offices, in what was a paper laden industry. If my world outside photography has grown to trust the cloud so much, I figure I can too. And if the LR Creative cloud goes "poof" and disappears taking all my images with it, well, I've got everything backed up on other clouds, such as DropBox, Photos, Google Drive, Evernote and Instagram. Like it or not, the cloud is here and external hard drives attached to desk top or lap top computers are becoming history. Like the DSLR vs. mirrorless trend. I'd rather keep up with the technology race. I'm OK with that, but it may not suit everyone. And I'm OK with that too. BTW: I notice that Adobe seems to be adding more and more features to LR CC so that it is virtually the same as LR Classic.

Bottom line: Like many things in photography, the preference for one over the other is a matter of subjective, personal preference. Whatever floats your boat...

Best,

BJW

Does this mean that they are cutting Olympus out of the partnership they have with Panasonic/Lumix and Leica MFT lenses?

I have the very same issues with my cherished D500 and its lenses—they get heavier and bulkier.as I get older. One of its greatest assets though is its seemingly endless and limitless buffer, especially when I shoot ice hockey and other action shots.

I’ve tried several mirrorless, but haven’t found as good a buffer. Maybe the Sony A9 but the lenses are pretty heavy.

I’ve tried the Lumix G9. Not as small or as light as I’d like but not bad. I used a Lumix 35-100mm f/2.8 lens and got excellent results for fast sports photography. With its MFT sensor with a 2x crop factor, I had the equivalent of my heavy Tamron 70-200 that I use with my D500. Buffer not bad but not as good as the D500.

A step down from the G9 is The Lumix G85 which is smaller and also very good. With the 35-100 f/2.8 lense it’s pretty light and compact. Buffer not bad.

In comparison to the complicated and encyclopedic Sony menu system, the Lumix menu is a breeze.

I think the answer to the weight and bulk issue is not only mirrorless but micro four third sensor as well—which will give you a much smaller body.That way you will get the benefit of the smaller, lighter and more compact lenses too. BTW Lumix and Olympus lenses are interchangeable and both have image stabilization.

REPLY

I’ve been hunting for a good pocketable compact too and have shunned the Sony because of the horribly comples menus. Instead, I opted for the Lumix ZS100 because of the Leica lens (2.8 at normal focal length and smaller f stop at 250 mm zoom). Another option is the Lumix LX10 with a 24-72mm faster (1.4) Leica lens.

You might want to check dp review’s comparison of compact cameras for 2018.

I’m delighted to have just stumbled upon this section. And from the Mission statement, it sounds very wothwhile, especially if the snipers and A-holes stay out. Thanks, Ed. I’ve been looking for a forum to help me catch up with my portraiture skills.
Ben

[quote=gretchenk]Hello,
I came from point and shoot and love taking pictures. I enrolled in a photography class in Feb and have been using a borrowed Nikon D3200 with kit lenses on photo taking field trips. But for recent travel I bought a Lumix FZ1000 ...

REPLY

Now that you’re on the verge of taking the deep dive into the wonderfully addictive pursuit of photography, just as I did about 5 years ago, you may conclude that there is no single most excellent camera body for all the genres of photography you want to do. I’ve owned Canon, Nikon, Lumix and Leica; full frame, crop sensor and MFT. They’re all great but for different genres. You don’t need the most excellent camera; it doesn’t exist, IMO.
What I believe is a more important inquiry is the quality of the lens you choose. And that just might be an even more bewildering search. My own favorite is Leica lenses but that’s because of my purely subjective preferences.

The most important investment, I believe, is a basic photography skills course taught by professionals. I started with a very worthwhile online basic digital photography course with NY Institute of Photography NYIP.edu I found that to be the place to start and was money well spent, for knowledge that won’t become obsolete. It helped me cope with the confusion caused by all the hype out there.
Enjoy your voyage into “Photoland”.
Ben

REPLY

LEICA glass is the best I’ve ever used only because it gives me the result I personally seek in my street photography, portraiture, low light and close up images.

I also use Leica glass with my Lumix body for sililarly excellent results at a lower overall cost.

But I love the feel and performance of my Leica Q, —combining both Leica body and glass, but I wouldn’t use it for shooting sports, such as ice hockey—where it can’t hold a candle to my Nikon D500. It’s simply not intended for that genre of photography.

I think the difference is comparable to driving a Mercedes and a Lexus. Both German and Japanese technology are excellent. But they are still different.

One notable difference is the history of Leica Camera which has nothing to do with image quality, but still makes me feel “warm and fuzzy” and good about using their splendid photographic instruments. And for the moral compass of that camera company, I would gratefully spend the extra money. You can read about why here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica_Freedom_Train

Bravo Leica!!!

I have 3 different brand digital cameras for different types of photography. One is a full frame, one a crop sensor and one a M4/3rds.
I find that regardless of brand, i get the best results in low light with my full frame with a fast (f1.7 or faster) wide angle lens (28mm). In body and in lens image stabilization are important too. Pushing the ISO on the full frame to 64,000 is no problem. My favorite brand is the Leica but I hear the Sony A7riii sensor is superb. Good luck.

Bergen County Camera in Westwood NJ is an official “Leica store” and has an extensive used Leica inventory. I’ve dealt with them for both new and used bodies and lenses and am extremely satisfied. They are very knowledgable, professional, reputable and reliable.

I have found that the ability to use zone focusing on your camera lens is one of the most helpful techniques in street photography. This assures that most of your shots will be in acceptable focus while you are shooting quietly and discreetly without the need to look thru the view finder, which usually puts the subject on guard thus ruining the candor of the shot.
I use a Leica Q, which admittedly is pricey, but I hear very good things about Fuji’s XT-2 or 20.

If you don't need the extra income from your photographic assignments, why don't you just tell whomever wants to hire you that you will do it for free, but suggest that anything they would want to pay, they should pay to a charity you both would support?

Keep shooting.

BJW

Great point. (Why do We always overlook the obvious?)

But they predict partly cloudy (and partly sunny) in the high 80’s).

Thanks for the ND/tripod and cable release suggestions.
What about camera and focal length of lens?
My choices are:

Leica Q-28mm f 1.7

Nikon D500- (24-120 f 4.0);(16-80 f2.8) or (70-200 f 2.8)? or

Lumix G85 (MFT) (35-100 f2.8) or (25 f1.4)