billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
Deanie1113 wrote:
Hi! My first post here. I have just returned my Sony RX 10 III. I just haven't found the camera I am looking for. Maybe you all can help. Here's what's important to me: Lightweight, excellent IQ, ability to capture birds close or far without losing feather detail, able to autofocus quickly for birds in flight, able to shoot in RAW. What I don't care about: video. Budget under $2,000. Suggestions? I already own a Nikon D5500 with an 18-140 lens, not good for birding. And a Canon SX60, which hunts continuously for a bird in a tree. Thanks!
Hi! My first post here. I have just returned my ... (
show quote)
Sony A6500 for $1,298, then either the 55-210 for $348 or the 18-200 at $748. A better lens just over your budget would be the 70-300 at $1098 or the 24-270 at $898. Good luck and keep on shooting until the end.
The D500 with the 200-500 lens, from what I know, should be a great combination to shoot birds but I do not believe you will be happy with the weight.
You seem to need a mirrorless camera which is smaller, lighter and the majority of them have a good assortment of lenses but I am no completely sure their AF will do the right job. I know some of them have improved AF but till now their AF has not been very good for wildlife photography.
Welcome to the club.
You have had many good suggestions.
I believe you will not get all specs you require. You will have to suffer something. I think the 200-500mm lens would be worth trying with your camera. Just rent the lens.
As far as weight is concerned are you going trekking? What kind of birds are you after? I would use your overnight case with wheels or buy one with bigger wheels,take a tripod and a large bean bag ( for the camera and lens).
I think it would be difficult for anyone to tick all your boxes.
For me? IQ over weight.
She might have received a bad copy. But the Sony I bought fits my needs and is small and light. The Sony a6500 (24mp) and coupled with a medium telephoto would be just over the budget, but would be only 3 lbs.
Deanie1113 wrote:
For real! It's image quality was terrible -- very, very noisy. Much worse than my Canon SX 60, though I controls, buttons, and autofocus was great.
This sounds like auto ISO was on which would result in noise when in low light. Alternatively, you may have inadvertently fixed the ISO at a high level. I really doubt it was the quality of the camera which is known to be excellent.
Take a look at the Sony a6300 auto focus
Have you thought of using a mirror lens ? As they give great results on distance shots and are also light weight.
I would say the Canon SX40, SX50, and SX60 set on the proper settings works great. I have not had any problems taking pictures of birds and other species. photosbybones.com
Wingpilot wrote:
It sounds like you just returned the camera that fits your requirements.
Agree... perhaps problem is more in technique or inadvertent settings?
Deanie1113 wrote:
Hi! My first post here. I have just returned my Sony RX 10 III. I just haven't found the camera I am looking for. Maybe you all can help. Here's what's important to me: Lightweight, excellent IQ, ability to capture birds close or far without losing feather detail, able to autofocus quickly for birds in flight, able to shoot in RAW. What I don't care about: video. Budget under $2,000. Suggestions? I already own a Nikon D5500 with an 18-140 lens, not good for birding. And a Canon SX60, which hunts continuously for a bird in a tree. Thanks!
Hi! My first post here. I have just returned my ... (
show quote)
How about a different lens? B&H has this lens for $1,799.00. Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Lens for Nikon F. Well within your "Budget".
Nikon D500 with Bryan Peterson's Understanding Exposure.
I say get a Canon T3I! Save over a more expensive model and take the extra cash and go on a trip to RMNP or Smoky Mountains (in October.) Fly Southwest (if needed) where TWO bags fly FREE! Maybe get a Sigma 18-250 and you'll be set for life! Canon site sells a lot of great refurbs!
Nikon makes a light weight lens - 300 mm f4 - weighs in at 26 ounces and costs 2000.00. Could add an extender for more reach. Could use your present Nikon camera. I don't think there would be any problem with image quality.
At least you would be able to carry it :)
I use a Panasonic GX8 with the Panasonic Leica 100-400 mm lens. It is a slow lens so I shoot it wide open almost always. Image quality is good, weight is manageable, focus is fairly fast. Does it compare to a 600 mm prime lens. No, but...
Panasonic also is releasing or just released an upgraded version of their 100-300 mm lens that is about 20 ounces- good reviews- I haven't tried it.
I also use a Pentax K-3 ll with 300 mm lens for sitting birds- image is excellent and focus fine as long as the bird is not flying.
The other possibility- a 70-300 mm to go on your Nikon. Some of the lenses in that focal length have very good IQ and are light enough to hike with.
Good luck on your quest.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.