Need to purchase a new camera and lenses.
jmcgloth wrote:
Okay, I'm going to suggest Nikon:
Nikon D810
Sigma 150 - 600 mm Sport lens
I would think that the D4s would be a better choice for wildlife photos where higher iso may be necessary to afford short shutter times.
sr71
Loc: In Col. Juan Seguin Land
SharpShooter wrote:
BB, if the Oly glass is as top shelf as you say, SELL it and get the Canon 7dmkll(as has been suggested!) and the 100-400ll and a 1.4x.
For an inexpensive camera, it has all pro features.
OR, you can waste ALL your MONEY renting gear until you've proven to youself that the Canon 7ll is what you should have gotten in the first place! :lol: :lol:
SS
Mate there is no "IF" Oly glass is TOP Shelf....
for buglinbilly: Olympus is bringing out the their 300mm F2.8 for their micro 4/3 combined with an EM1 for the new EM5 mkII (coming in Feb) you will have an equivalent view of a 600mm lens, and not as heavy as others....
sr71
Loc: In Col. Juan Seguin Land
Your Photo's are very good. Do some online research here is one for you to take a look at and the gear he uses...
http://www.moosepeterson.com/blog/about/whats-in-mooses-camera-bag/mooses-wildlife-gear/buglinbilly wrote:
Again I thank each of you for your input.
I do understand that if you use Nikon you most likely will steer me that way. And if you use Canon that's the way you would hope I go. I get all of that. But I have used neither and so for me its good to hear what others opinions are. I am hoping in the end to choose what will best fit my needs.
Being totally honest, I have shot with Nikon users and Canon users who were better photographers than I am by far. But shooting side by side, under good lighting conditions, I think my images are sharper and clearer than theirs in most cases. But change the lighting conditions to where I have to move to a higher ISO and their images far surpass mine.
And I can see them shoot and capture very decent images, in lower light and in action shots where all I can get is blur. So I miss so much and so many neat things. So I want to try to get this right this time, thus my questions.
And to clarify a few things I do have the OM-D and the adapter. So my present lenses work on it but I am not as satisfied with the images as I was lead to believe they would be. The camera does have some neat features but I am looking for better quality than I have been able to achieve from that camera.
I also don't intend to sell my Zukio glass. I know I would only get a fraction of what I paid for it and its such great glass I feel I can still use it and hopefully down the line Olympus or Panasonic will come out with a camera that renders great images on which I can use those lenses.
I have the a 50-200 Zukio and its a sweet lens. Quite small considering the great images I able to get with it. I also have the prime 90-250 lens and it too renders great images and I love that glass. And I have the 300 prime, with which I took the photos I posted on my first post. Its an unbelievable piece of glass. I doubt I can ever get as good of lens as that. Again its sad that Olympus quit making top end DSLRs. I also have the 1.4 extender and a few of the prime smaller Zukio lenses. Like I say I think I will keep most of those and just hope.
I was ask how close I was when I took those shots I posted and if they were cropped. On the mule deer I was about 60 yards and the same with the elk. On the owl it was taken from about 25 yards, high in a tree.
I would like to ask both the Nikon camp and the Canon camp about the very best glass that is offered, in your opinions, for my desired wildlife shots. Which of the two cameras offer the best images in low light, high ISO shooting, considering I have their prime lenses?
I made my living as a real estate broker and owned apartments most of my life. In the past week I sold my very last unit, which I owed clear and which had been a great investment for many years, so I will take a chunk of those funds to hopefully purchase the RIGHT equipment. Although money is always an issue, I know I will have spend plenty, as I want the best and so in that sense money won't stop me from getting what I need to get to fill my needs.
Again I thank each and everyone of you for time and thoughts on my post. It is very much appreciated. I will continue reading and thinking about what each of you post, so please keep giving your input as it is very important to me and I am thankful for it.
And thank to those who commented on the photos I posted at the beginning of this post. Here are a few other photos from my old worn out Olympus equipment. BB
Again I thank each of you for your input. br br I... (
show quote)
Personally I think anyone who can post pictures such as the ones you have just done, doesn't need advice on equipment. It seems like you know what you are doing.
Leon S wrote:
Personally I think anyone who can post pictures such as the ones you have just done, doesn't need advice on equipment. It seems like you know what you are doing.
I totally agree Leon. They are super.
If low light is a primary concern, which I would agree for wildlife, I would give the edge to Nikon and Sony. Down side to Sony is array of lenses. Upside to Nikon is they use Sony sensors. There may be a valid argument that Canon glass has the edge, but last year or two, some of the third party lenses are making a name for themselves, so I think the playing field is being leveled for the consumer, sometimes with a lower cost. Gorgeous shots. Thanks for sharing.
Leon S wrote:
Personally I think anyone who can post pictures such as the ones you have just done, doesn't need advice on equipment. It seems like you know what you are doing.
I wish that were the case, but it isn't.
Like I mentioned above in my first post, if I have any strength it is in getting closer to animals than most can do. My passion for 50 years was bowhunting, and I was driven. It taught me patience and persistence and a ton about wildlife and how and why they do the things they do. And now my passion is in wildlife photography. So much of what bowhunting taught me about wildlife I use in now trying to get good, close photos. But it never taught a thing about equipment. So I lack there and I lack in knowing photography like many of you . This I ask these questions.
What I have learned from both, is that if you really want top notch photos, you need good glass and you need to get reasonably close. I have the getting close skills far better than most photographers. I have the funds to purchase good glass. I don't have the needed knowledge about the equipment that many here have.
Again I appreciate all your comments and I thank everyone for their advise and the links they have given me. I am checking all this out.
Keep it coming please. BB
In instances like this I need to be able to shoot with a much faster shutter speed as I miss so much of this kind of stuff.
(
Download)
On birds and animals that are still my equipment is great, but I don't get photos like this when their moving and I want to be able to do that.
(
Download)
(
Download)
Wesso wrote:
I totally agree Leon. They are super.
I'm with Wesso and Leon on the quality of your shots. I only got semi-serious about photography since my retirement 5 years ago. Started with a Canon Rebel XSi (450D) and kit lenses. Been upgrading slowly but surely since. Last year replaced the rebel with a Canon 60D, and last week sold my Tamron 200-500 and got the Canon 100-400L IS II. Haven't had enough time to get used to the new lens yet. When I grow up, I want to take pics as good as yours.
buglinbilly wrote:
I wish that were the case, but it isn't.
Like I mentioned above in my first post, if I have any strength it is in getting closer to animals than most can do. My passion for 50 years was bowhunting, and I was driven. It taught me patience and persistence and a ton about wildlife and how and why they do the things they do. And now my passion is in wildlife photography. So much of what bowhunting taught me about wildlife I use in now trying to get good, close photos. But it never taught a thing about equipment. So I lack there and I lack in knowing photography like many of you . This I ask these questions.
What I have learned from both, is that if you really want top notch photos, you need good glass and you need to get reasonably close. I have the getting close skills far better than most photographers. I have the funds to purchase good glass. I don't have the needed knowledge about the equipment that many here have.
Again I appreciate all your comments and I thank everyone for their advise and the links they have given me. I am checking all this out.
Keep it coming please. BB
I wish that were the case, but it isn't. br br Li... (
show quote)
THE CIRCLE OF LIFE. When I was a young lad, I hunted deer with a high powered rifle. It wasn't a challenge, so I went to a shot gun. The same problem. So I went to a pistol. Still not enough challenge. I then went to a bow. More challenging but by this time, I began to enjoy watching the deer more than shooting them. Then came the camera. Now the real challenge starts. Everything l learned about getting close to my subjects is now further challenged. In the years I was learning how to get close, my legs were tiring. Now the real challenge is not the camera I use, but how do I get around in the field let alone getting up and down. My point is get the best you can while you can take full use of it. You won't regret it as you age.
jmcgloth wrote:
Okay, I'm going to suggest Nikon:
Nikon D810
Sigma 150 - 600 mm Sport lens
The new Nikon 750 has nearly all the advantages of the 810 but is lighter, smaller and less expensive. It can see in the dark just like the 810. I'm sure you already have a heavy duty tripod and can handle heavy glass. The Sigma lens might do it for you, but with either Nikon or Canon you have just about every bit of glass ever made at your service. The Nikon 750 can use every lens made for Nikon since 1959, and with full function, every lens made since 1985.
William I think you must just want us to say how great your pictures are and shame us, well you have, and I'm hear to tell you they are fabulous. Like Tony the Tiger would say They are Grrrreatttt. Keep em coming.
buglinbilly wrote:
On birds and animals that are still my equipment is great, but I don't get photos like this when their moving and I want to be able to do that.
BB
Sounds like you could use the noise free, high ISO, sensor that is in the Nikon 810 / 750. This allows you to use a fast shutter in the fairly subdued light of the forest settings you photograph. The new 750 is quite astonishing in that regard.
CatMarley wrote:
Sounds like you could use the noise free, high ISO, sensor that is in the Nikon 810 / 750. ...
i could say los of nice things about my D810 but "noise free, high ISO, sensor" isn't one of them.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.