Age versus gear
Sep 8, 2016 12:57:51 #
I have a fairly extensive Nikon setup, D800E, D500, 16-35 f4, 24-120 f4, 70-120 f4, 20-500 5.6 and still have a fair amount of Pentax gear. I am nearing 71 years old. I will retain some of that other gear for that which makes me money, primarily the shorter stuff. But I really don't care for packing this stuff when hiking. I don't like admitting the age thing but, after my recent trip to Alaska I need to face reality. My brother loves his Sony a600. Reviews of others Oly, Panasonic, etc are all good. I do make some money selling wildlife pics with both the Pentax stuff and now the Nikon stuff, not a lot but some.
Sony seems good except the good glass is scary expensive.
I would like to be able to purchase a fairly long lens for birds and wildlife.
Thoughts?
Sony seems good except the good glass is scary expensive.
I would like to be able to purchase a fairly long lens for birds and wildlife.
Thoughts?
Sep 8, 2016 13:13:21 #
alandg46 wrote:
I have a fairly extensive Nikon setup, D800E, D500... (show quote)
I am the same age as you with some serious muscle weakness at times. I am not even close to being a good enough photographer to sell my images. But I do enjoy this hobby.
I also love shooting wildlife, especially birds, both in flight and stationary.
I purchased a Sony a6000 but quickly learned there were no long native emount lenses good for shooting wildlife.
I am now looking at the Nikon d5500. It is very light and has a bigger choice of long lenses available. Some at reasonable prices, and some lighter than others.
I also have a Nikon P610, but it is awful for BIFs and a Canon sx50 that has developed some focusing issues. It did shoot BIFs, but it was not easy.
I also am interested to see what others have to say.
Sep 8, 2016 13:22:44 #
I should add that the D500 and 200-500 Nikon is superlative for birds in flight and tracking. I am willing to give up some, but not all of that capability for more portability. I, also, am willing to give up some low light tracking.
Sep 8, 2016 13:25:15 #
If you are primarily going for bird photos, just take the D800e and the 20~500. I'm a few years behind you, but I also find my photography, carrying a 4x5 and associated equipment, is inspiration enough to exercise and stay in shape. It's an odd inspiration to do so, but pays off on photo trips.
--Bob
--Bob
alandg46 wrote:
I have a fairly extensive Nikon setup, D800E, D500... (show quote)
Sep 8, 2016 13:34:04 #
I do exercise. I walk everyday 4 to 5 miles. I, also, lift weights, but I recognize that on 4 to 5 mile hikes carrying a D800E and a 200-500 Nikon or even a D500 with that lens is becoming a chore.
Sep 8, 2016 13:38:24 #
mas24
Loc: Southern CA
Age vs gear? No arthritis vs gear is mostly the problem. Not so much with age, some handle it better than others.
Sep 8, 2016 13:42:23 #
I should mention, I have some post polio syndrome, which causes my right leg to tire. No amount of exercise will cure that. that is just something I have to live with.
Sep 8, 2016 14:20:05 #
alandg46 wrote:
I have a fairly extensive Nikon setup, D800E, D500... (show quote)
One idea, if you keep the D500 and get some lighter lens for the birds you might keep going for some more years. I am thinking the newest 300 mm Nikon lens, the AF-S NIKKOR
300mm f/4E PF ED VR. That lens weighs less than one third of the 200-500 lens but is about $500 more expensive. You might get a teleconverter with it to get longer reach. But the D500 plus this lens would lighten your birds and wildlife gear about 50% from what you are carrying now. Of course you loose the comfort of zoom lens but you also gain the f4 and a light and compact lens.
Sep 8, 2016 14:26:03 #
JPL wrote:
One idea, if you keep the D500 and get some lighte... (show quote)
Now that is a good idea and doesn't break the bank, nor does it make me move off to a whole different set up.
Sep 8, 2016 15:37:49 #
alandg46 wrote:
Now that is a good idea and doesn't break the bank, nor does it make me move off to a whole different set up.
Well, I am glad you find this a useful idea. Actually I was looking at some reviews about this lens and it seems to be fantastic. There was some VR problem with the lens at certain shutter speeds with a few camera models. But they say that is solved. Anyway the D500 was not one of the cameras related to this problem. I see some people are switching 80-400 lenses, f2.8 300 lenses and more quality glass for this new lens stating that it is sharper and faster focusing than any other Nikon lens that covers 300 mm.
Sep 8, 2016 15:47:37 #
Best part of this, is I'm not trying to make a move right now. I can wait.
Sep 8, 2016 18:52:16 #
The Sony rx10M3 should be looked at...superb, relatively small camera (DSLR size) with 600mm reach and $1500 price tag. If you need the 600mm reach I think it is the very best single all around camera available. I have the A6000 and A7RII and they are both fabulous cameras, but as you have noted, lenses are expensive.
Sep 8, 2016 22:07:17 #
If you're into birding...I'd stay put with your Nikon. Mirrorless is good, but when it comes to sports and birding DSLRs are more accurate. Sure you can do it with mirrorless, but if you're getting paid for your images stay put.
Sep 9, 2016 05:29:49 #
good luck in picking doable gear. i'm and my hiking days are over. I do my shooting from a scooter so at times I can take out my heavier equipment.
Sep 9, 2016 05:53:16 #
There aré good adapters that will allow you to use your Nikon glass on a Sony a6000. They work fine. Use one for my Nikon glass, Canon FD, and Minolta MD. It was nice getting reacquainted with my manual lens. Being able show spouse that keeping the old lens around wasn't as crazy as had been suggested, was very satisfying. Manual lens actually work better on the a6000 then they did on the manual cameras.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.