Best setup under £1000 for food photos

A

AL8756

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3
Edit My Images
Yes
Evening all,

My first post here so hello all!

I currently own the Panasonic Fz1000 which is great but I mostly use it for food photos in poorly lit restaurants (I run a food/lifestyle blog), occasional natural portraits in and outdoors, and then occasional landscape / scenic travel shots out and about.

I rarely use the full zoom, and I find the low light performance and depth of field not ideal for food/portraits. It's also rather heavy and bulky.

Does anyone have any good recommendations, up to say £1000 for a suitable set up that will meet my needs? I'm assuming some sort of DSLR or mirrorless, plus perhaps a 50mm prime and 1/2 other lenses? Happy to consider older, used models if that helps.

Many thanks in advance
Adam
 
I suppose it depends on how big the food / plate is and the shot you're going for but I find 50mm a bit restrictive for food sometimes, you may want to think about a macro lens or at least a lens that'll focus quite close or allow you to fill the frame a bit more.

Others will be along with other things to think about.
 
Last edited:
Since this is for a blog huge files aren't needed. I would suggest an older FF body like a Nikon D700 and a macro lens like the Tamron 90mm VC or Nikon 105mm VR (I'm assuming lighting and tripod setup are not part of the plan). I would also suggest a Canon alternative, but I'm not as familiar with that system.
 
As suggested by Steven a couple of posts up, a second hand D700 with a 90mm Tamron (or 105mm Sigma) and a 50mm f/1.8 (both macro lenses are f/2.8) should come in well under a grand.
 
Personally, assuming taking your own lighting isn't an option I would take a m43 camera with good IBIS.

FF is all well and good but coupled with a f/1.8 prime means your depth of field will be too shallow to be usable and it will be big and bulky. A m43 camera and f/1.8 prime will give you more depth of field and the IBIS will allow you to keep the ISO down (as the food won't be moving), it will also be almost pocketable.

Also, as an afterthought, the 4:3 ratio of m43 will probably work better with food too.
 
Thanks for the great advice so far guys. I can't post links but if you Google "Food Photography", I'm looking at recreating the more natural images, probably more of the close up side on and occasional flat lay / 45 degree, rather than any of the super stylised art shots.

I like the idea of a M43 if the image quality is high enough, mostly so I don't intrude quite so much on everyone else's dinner. I had briefly looked at the Sony A6000 but people suggested quality wouldn't match the Fz1000.
 
If you are taking photos in a restaurant of the food without permission, and then publishing them for commercial gain (ie the advertising revenue from your blog) then you are potentially breaching the Chef's copyright.
 
AL8756 said:
Thanks for the great advice so far guys. I can't post links but if you Google "Food Photography", I'm looking at recreating the more natural images, probably more of the close up side on and occasional flat lay / 45 degree, rather than any of the super stylised art shots.

I like the idea of a M43 if the image quality is high enough, mostly so I don't intrude quite so much on everyone else's dinner. I had briefly looked at the Sony A6000 but people suggested quality wouldn't match the Fz1000.
Click to expand...

If you're looking at MFT / mirrorless and as close up photography is on the menu (haha see what I did there... sorry...) maybe you can think about going for a manual macro lens? I use an old film era Sigma 50mm f2.8 macro and I'm happy with the results. Old film era macro lenses can be found at reasonable prices. On a MFT camera a 50mm lens gives the equivalent field of view of a 100mm lens on a 35mm FF camera and a 50mm macro on MFT or even an APS-C camera would allow you to back off a bit or focus closely.

Regarding the Sony A6000 and FZ100, the Sony is an APS-C camera and the Panasonic FZ has a much smaller sensor so for ultimate image quality I'd expect the Sony to eat the Panasonics lunch. Sorry again :D
 
Last edited:
DemiLion said:
If you are taking photos in a restaurant of the food without permission, and then publishing them for commercial gain (ie the advertising revenue from your blog) then you are potentially breaching the Chef's copyright.
Click to expand...
Thanks DemiLion. I'm definitely ok with these ones. Often I am invited or they are at least aware that I am there, but I also don't have any advertising on my blog. It is purely to promote the local region and the fabulous businesses /attractions on offer.
 
Nawty said:
Personally, assuming taking your own lighting isn't an option I would take a m43 camera with good IBIS.

FF is all well and good but coupled with a f/1.8 prime means your depth of field will be too shallow to be usable and it will be big and bulky. A m43 camera and f/1.8 prime will give you more depth of field and the IBIS will allow you to keep the ISO down (as the food won't be moving), it will also be almost pocketable.

Also, as an afterthought, the 4:3 ratio of m43 will probably work better with food too.
Click to expand...
For this kind of stuff I'll take low light capability (large sensor/large pixels) over more DOF at max aperture... you can always stop down to increase the DOF (at which point the "total light" advantage goes away, but not the light/pixel).
 
Last edited:
sk66 said:
For this kind of stuff I'll take low light capability (large sensor/large pixels) over more DOF at max aperture... you can always stop down to increase the DOF (at which point the "total light" advantage goes away, but not the light/pixel).
Click to expand...


When I compare my old D700 shots to a modern m43 there really isn’t that much in it in terms of high iso or exposure latitude/DR.

D700 low iso shots are cleaner in sky’s etc but for things like food I doubt there is much in it.

I find a lot of the magic is in the memory :)

And given the OP has stated their bridge camera is a bit big I figure a D700 would be waaaay too big.
 
Nawty said:
And given the OP has stated their bridge camera is a bit big I figure a D700 would be waaaay too big.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that comment combined w/ "assuming DSLR" kind of threw me. But the low light performance and DOF complaints swayed it for me... and I doub't the DOF complaint was about not having enough being a 25/2.8 lens and 1" sensor.
But then again, a lot would use a cellphone with a pocket tripod for this application (food blog)...
 
Nawty said:
When I compare my old D700 shots to a modern m43 there really isn’t that much in it in terms of high iso or exposure latitude/DR.

D700 low iso shots are cleaner in sky’s etc but for things like food I doubt there is much in it.

I find a lot of the magic is in the memory :)

And given the OP has stated their bridge camera is a bit big I figure a D700 would be waaaay too big.
Click to expand...

Are you sure ?

DXO sensor tests have a huge gulf of difference between them.

2017 modern expensive 4/3 Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 score : 807

Nikon D700 : 2303.

I think what is happening is the 4/3 cameras have clever way to mask it well at the cost of detail etc
 
You could also use a Fuji X-T20 (£670 new from Panamoz) and a re-furbished 23mm F2 lens from the Fuji UK store (£320).
This gives you an APS C sensor in a small form factor.
A 23mm 1.4 lens gives you better low light capability but they are more expensive.
You could always use a small flash if necessary.
Buying used body and lens seems sensible whatever you choose.
 
AL8756 said:
Thanks for the great advice so far guys. I can't post links but if you Google "Food Photography", I'm looking at recreating the more natural images, probably more of the close up side on and occasional flat lay / 45 degree, rather than any of the super stylised art shots.

I like the idea of a M43 if the image quality is high enough, mostly so I don't intrude quite so much on everyone else's dinner. I had briefly looked at the Sony A6000 but people suggested quality wouldn't match the Fz1000.
Click to expand...


I would suggest an A6000 or A6300 (500/800) if you can stretch to it, paired up with the Sony 30cm macro lens(£199), this will easily surpass what you are getting from the FZ1000 and maybe add a Sigma 19mm 2.8 which is just over £100
 
GTG said:
Are you sure ?

DXO sensor tests have a huge gulf of difference between them.

2017 modern expensive 4/3 Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 score : 807

Nikon D700 : 2303.

I think what is happening is the 4/3 cameras have clever way to mask it well at the cost of detail etc
Click to expand...


No masking if you’re shooting raw unless it’s a Fuji.

Don’t know about DXO and I’m not a major pixel peeper (although I do look) but going back and looking at my D700 images I am generally happy up to iso6400 and on m43 it is more like 3200 and 6400 in brighter scenes.

There might be more surface detail with the D700 but I’d be more inclined to attribute that to lower magnification/better contrast of a larger sensor which happens at all iso.


The D610 I had on the other hand is very clean at 6400.
 
Nawty said:
No masking if you’re shooting raw unless it’s a Fuji.

Don’t know about DXO and I’m not a major pixel peeper (although I do look) but going back and looking at my D700 images I am generally happy up to iso6400 and on m43 it is more like 3200 and 6400 in brighter scenes.

There might be more surface detail with the D700 but I’d be more inclined to attribute that to lower magnification/better contrast of a larger sensor which happens at all iso.


The D610 I had on the other hand is very clean at 6400.
Click to expand...

I suppose it all hangs on what quality we'll accept but after only simple non heroic processing and possibly downsizing for the final picture I find that MFT 16mp camera shots are pretty decent.

I think these are all Panny GX7 or G7 shots and at 1/80 or 1/60 sec maybe f4.

ISO 250 shouldn't be a problem.

1-250.jpg

ISO 1,600 is ok too, IMO.

1-1600.jpg

ISO 3,200 is pushing it for some people but ok for me.

1-3200-1.jpg

How about 6,400. OK for me.

1-6400.jpg

I'll use ISO 10,000 too with only minimal processing, others will get better results if they try harder.

1-10000.jpg

Somewhere on my pc I'll have shots at 25,600 and they're useable with only a little care.
 
Last edited:
If you can shoot from a tripod or other stable support such as a camera clamp on the back of a chair or a table top mini tripod then you don't need low light capability. In fact you've bought yourself the ability to shoot at whatever aperture is best for the DoF etc. you want, without any regard to light.

I've only taken an occasional casual interest in photographing food, but the little experience I've had so far convinced me that what extra I needed, added to my APSC sensor camera, was a 30mm f2.8 macro lens, a big and little tripod, and two small LED panel lights, one of which could be supported on the tripod I wasn't using, the other of which I could hand hold while firing the camera remotely, if using two lights.

If I was trying to snap my food plate in a restaurant without explicit permission and without being obvious I'd choose to sit at a table with good lighting, and simply use my camera with the 30mm macro lens handheld. There would be no need for a wider aperture than f2.8 because at close range anything wider has far too shallow a depth of field for food.
 
AL8756 said:
Evening all,

My first post here so hello all!

I currently own the Panasonic Fz1000 which is great but I mostly use it for food photos in poorly lit restaurants (I run a food/lifestyle blog), occasional natural portraits in and outdoors, and then occasional landscape / scenic travel shots out and about.

I rarely use the full zoom, and I find the low light performance and depth of field not ideal for food/portraits. It's also rather heavy and bulky.

Does anyone have any good recommendations, up to say £1000 for a suitable set up that will meet my needs? I'm assuming some sort of DSLR or mirrorless, plus perhaps a 50mm prime and 1/2 other lenses? Happy to consider older, used models if that helps.

Many thanks in advance
Adam
Click to expand...

It's not about the camera, but the light.

As is most photography TBH, but with a bit of decent light literally any camera would be perfectly capable for a blog.
 
HoppyUK said:
It's not about the camera, but the light.

As is most photography TBH, but with a bit of decent light literally any camera would be perfectly capable for a blog.
Click to expand...
Well yes, with decent light, but the op wants a camera that can be used for amongst other things food pictures possibly taken in lowish light which I'd imagine is a slightly taller order even for a blog assuming the op is going for passable quality which could rule at least some phones and cameras out.

If the op returns we msy know more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top