First post - big ask...

Mr Badger said:
Yes, a huge chasm between those comparisons; but for someone starting out and/or on a shoestring budget there's probably going be a chasm between them and a used 24-70 2.8 L, so it's all relative. You're right, if the camera is reasonably good then putting a top-notch lens on it can pay dividends. As I said above, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.
Click to expand...

That's been my point, but start by not underestimating someone's budget though, people often want to spend thousands on cameras and hundreds on lenses. A 6d and several really good lenses is cheaper than a 5dIV, but newbies will often convince themselves they need 'the best camera'. I'd rather have a 40d and 17-55 than a 750d and kit lens, the 40d will outperform the newer camera right up till the light disappears, but there's ways round that limitation.

My favourite example of this was a bloke who wanted to set up a product photography studio, he bought a d810 and started asking about suitable lenses, he 'couldn't afford' any of the suggestions, and then he wanted to know how to set up his studio, but had literally no budget for lighting.o_O

His total budget would have got him everything he needed if he'd bought a £500 camera, but he spent all his money on the best camera he could find and was shocked to discover it wouldn't be any use at all. He refused to hear that his best bet was to return the camera, because he was very happy with his purchase of 'the best', he simply couldn't understand what he'd done wrong.
 
Phil V said:
That's been my point, but start by not underestimating someone's budget though, people often want to spend thousands on cameras and hundreds on lenses. A 6d and several really good lenses is cheaper than a 5dIV, but newbies will often convince themselves they need 'the best camera'. I'd rather have a 40d and 17-55 than a 750d and kit lens, the 40d will outperform the newer camera right up till the light disappears, but there's ways round that limitation.

My favourite example of this was a bloke who wanted to set up a product photography studio, he bought a d810 and started asking about suitable lenses, he 'couldn't afford' any of the suggestions, and then he wanted to know how to set up his studio, but had literally no budget for lighting.o_O

His total budget would have got him everything he needed if he'd bought a £500 camera, but he spent all his money on the best camera he could find and was shocked to discover it wouldn't be any use at all. He refused to hear that his best bet was to return the camera, because he was very happy with his purchase of 'the best', he simply couldn't understand what he'd done wrong.
Click to expand...

I suppose most of us made that mistake in some way...I am only beginning to see the light now:D
 
Once again, I think artificial lighting is an area that's improved noticeably over the last 40 or so years. Historically, I'd been very reluctant to use flash, probably as it didn't really suit the type of photography I did (outdoor stuff, and later some gig photography where flash would have drained the atmosphere out of everything on stage, plus flash was frowned upon at most gigs and banned altogether at others anyway). However, when I got my 6D I bought a Speedlite 480 EX II (mainly as it didn't have a built in flash to use if absolutely necessary) and I've been amazed how much better and more natural the results with it have been. Gone are the night and day shadows and contrasty harshness I remember when using flash years ago (even with some of the early swivel head and bounce stuff). Now even the cat's eyes look OK, and not as though it's suffering from a bout of demonic possession!

Most of the photos I really like from history didn't use artificial lighting - probably because it just wasn't practical as much as it not being necessary, so I'm afraid I can't see this amateur/enthusiast buying much lighting kit, however, I would like to learn a bit more about non-studio type flash/fill-in flash use, so if anyone can suggest any good books or YouTube video tutorials then please let me know. Sorry, it seems we've gone a bit off topic here but I hope there's some stuff that's of at least some use to the OP in the last two or three posts. (y)
 
Last edited:
OK - so I've had a little more time to digest this and I think as I said in my first post, I always thought my next move would be full frame.

But having looked at

  1. the expense, and
  2. the actual physical need
I've decided against it. I'm not a pro-photographer (clearly), and I'm not even really what you'd describe as a keen hobbyist. By that I mean I take my camera with me for 'events' - weddings, holidays, parties etc - and with some success. The last wedding I took my camera to, the couple used most of my shots in their book over and above the ones they'd paid for. But these days I rarely, if ever, go out with my camera purely to take pictures.

And while I think I've always preferred the 'feel' of shots directly out of a Nikon (whether this is the camera or the lenses) I think sticking with a crop sensor and switching systems at this time would be too expensive to justify and I'd gain more by selecting a couple of better lenses and improving my technique.

To that end, and given that I said up front I like working with my 30mm lens, I may look to replace the one I have with the 35mm Sigma Art Lens. It does get great reviews and it's an EF mount, so would still fit if I ever do decide to upgrade to Canon FF. The suggestion of the STM Canon 50mm may be a better lens than my current one, but part of the reason I switched to the Sigma was that the 50mm ended up being too close in most situations. So that £100 saving would go towards the 35mm Art Lens.

I've also just looked back over some of the shots I took before I 'upgraded' to the Sigma 18-250. Despite not being able to zoom in as much (or perhaps because of it) I think the shots are better. Certainly that lens doesn't produce anything like as much noise as the Sigma.

So the 18-250 might be the next to go. We're going back to South Africa next year, so I might look to try and pick up something like one of the 70-300 lenses mentioned above.

Thank you all for the comments and for those that took the time to respond.

I did take all my lenses out in the back garden at the weekend and went up and down all the f stops at various focal lengths to see where the drop off point is. What I forgot to do is do the same with ISO. So it might be worth repeating the exercise this weekend, but indoors to get an idea of how bad the noise is and when it creeps in.

Just for the record, here are the prices I was quoted by MPB for my current gear. I forgot to add the flash, but as I've decided I'm sticking with that, it's probably not relevant.

Camera prices.png
 
StewartR said:
It's not clear what you mean here. Does "slow" refer to the time taken to acquire focus, or the ability to track moving subjects? If the former, then I would be looking at upgrading my lenses first - none of them are particularly high quality. If the latter, then it's probably a combination of the lens, the camera and the user, and changing one of those three components may not provide an immediate solution.

Wildly inaccurate focus is usually caused by user error, unless your equipment has been subjected to serious physical abuse.
Click to expand...

This was in particular reference to the nifty fifty. It will often hunt for focus for several seconds before deciding to lock in on something which is clearly way out of focus.
 
ABTog said:
Sell the 18-135 and the 18-250 and get a Canon 70-300 IS (the older version will cost under £200 secondhand, less than you'll get for the other two and it's full frame should you wish to change later)
Click to expand...

So that's this one?

https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/search/?www-product-search=canon+EF+70-300+IS&www-department=all

image.jpg
 
Kell said:
So that's this one?

https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/search/?www-product-search=canon+EF+70-300+IS&www-department=all

image.jpg
Click to expand...
Yup. That one.
There is now a Mk2 version of that lens, but even though it's a little older, it's still a very good lens and has the benefit of being full frame compatible for future proofing.
There is also a Tamron equivalent, 70-300mm f4-5.6 VC USD (VC=Image stabilised and USD is their silent ultra sonic drive AF).
Sadly MPB don't have any stock right now. :https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/used-equi...n-sp-70-300mm-f-4-5-6-di-vc-usd-canon-ef-fit/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top