In a quandary

the black fox

the black fox

Suspended / Banned
Messages
17,082
Name
Jeff
Edit My Images
No
As lots will know I have been going a long time and had more than my fair share of cameras and lenses over the years , six years ago I changed to Olympus mirrorless after heart failure and surgery .. due mainly to weight .but now recovered and although older still fairly mobile .. I love my Olympus gear but got an itch that needs scratching , I keep looking at the shots I got with my old Nikon D300s and various lenses 300mm f4 and sigma 150-600 variants .
I know that M/L is the rage these days and fully committed to it but the itch keeps saying scratch me ..what to do ??.
 
Well..........

  • You can always rent some gear to put some salve on the irritation?
  • Or just scratch the itch and buy what makes you happy?

You have clearly been getting some great photographs of the wildlife on 'your patch' so do what you can afford/justify if that will satisfy the craving :)
 
Well, if you go for the D300s etc as mentioned, it shouldn't be a terribly expensive scratch, and you could probably get your money back if it doesn't satisfy?
 
It's a great idea of @Box Brownie's to hire/borrow some gear. It might remind you why you don't want to carry it. I still have my Canon, but no long lens for it, which I slightly regret. I do miss being able to crop in compared to the OM kit.

You get some fantastic bird shots Jeff, but maybe a new toy will bring more joy and life is short. I seem to remember you helping me decide to head off to Botswana whilst I was in good health, and I'm glad you did :D
 
I don't know about you but I'm quite good about kicking these itches down the road, I've been kicking an R3 down the road since I sold my 1DX mii. I do know I will give in at some point though, it's just a matter of when....
 
Hmmm lots to mull over , got more gear than I use at the moment might dig out some old raw files if I still have them accessible and see what I can do with them now , looking back on my Flickr files we have definitely lost some of the magic in the switch to ML ,hard to define but it’s there , anyone remember the old Nikon adverts 12mp is enough .
Might also look at a Canon 1Dmkiii or iv as they were also good . .
This actually started when I checked on the price of a Olympus 150-600 which retails at £2.4 K and that’s far more than pension pot can afford
 
LeeRatters said:
To me, it's all about enjoyment.
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more. I've continued using mostly APS-C DSLRs for my digital photography, simply because I prefer optical viewfinders and the crop sensor keeps the body and lens dimensions manageable. I know I'm in the minority these days, but it's just the way I am. I shoot full-frame mirrorless occasionally, and I can appreciate the various benefits of mirrorless over DSLRs, but I simply don't enjoy the experience as much - and for me, as a hobbyist, that's a very important aspect of the process.

To the OP... if a D300s and specific lenses are what you fancy, go for it. They've depreciated enough by now that you could buy them, use them for a year and - if you decide you no longer want them - move them on for close to what you paid. Any difference could be thought of as extremely cheap rental cost. Really, you've nothing to lose :)
 
Last edited:
I was in a similar position...Heart failure / Pacemaker fitted.
I'd gone over to full Fuji mirrorless system from Nikon dslr's...When Nikon went mirrorless and changed the mount I realised I could sell my Fuji's and get 2x D5's and all the top end lenses I need including the latest 400mm f2.8 for not much extra loot! (Prices had plummeted!) So this is what I did!
I do occaisionally miss the WYSIWYG ellement and the wide spread focus points but I love the set up I now have. (Still have a Fuji X100 VI Because it's such fun to use.)
 
Itch scratched no pockets in a shroud . Did consider going for a d7200 but I got the 300s for just over £100 from Wex it will give me something to play with for now totally different from my om1 and prime lens .
 
the black fox said:
I got the 300s for just over £100 from Wex
Click to expand...
Nice! For that kind of money, you can enjoy playing with it at close to zero risk, and if it doesn't work out, no harm done. Congratulations :)

For what it's worth, whilst I own and use more recent and capable gear, one of my favourite cameras is my Samsung GX-10 (Pentax K10D clone) which is nearly 20 years old, bought for the same kind of money as your D300s, but a few years ago. It only has a 10MP APS-C CCD sensor, and beyond ISO 400 things get really noisy and dynamic range plummets... but in decent light, with reasonable glass, I love what it can do and really like working with the raw files. Coupled with an inexpensive f/2.8 Tamron zoom lens, I get more fun from that combo than any other, when light allows...
 
Last edited:
I don't think it does any harm scratching the occasional itch. It's a bit of fun and keeps things fresh.
 
Oh and got a Tamron 70-300 VC lens for the same price . Looks like the change to ML has brought some changes to the marketplace, if it doesn’t pee me off to much might upgrade later this year
 
Last edited:
This sounds like the way some Canon people talk about the original 5D.

My advice is to wake up, realise that this could very likely be a backward step IQ wise and also possibly in bulk and weight. Have a look around at something else that could give you an interest, buy a nice watch, take a holiday... or even buy a nice new MFT lens.

Good luck but my advice is to forget the idea of going back to an old DSLR and all the issues they have. I'd only do that with a gun to my head.
 
the black fox said:
Hmmm lots to mull over , got more gear than I use at the moment might dig out some old raw files if I still have them accessible and see what I can do with them now , looking back on my Flickr files we have definitely lost some of the magic in the switch to ML ,hard to define but it’s there , anyone remember the old Nikon adverts 12mp is enough .
Might also look at a Canon 1Dmkiii or iv as they were also good . .
This actually started when I checked on the price of a Olympus 150-600 which retails at £2.4 K and that’s far more than pension pot can afford
Click to expand...
Are you referring to "magic" in terms of M43 mirrorless or all Mirrorless. Is it image quality that is driving the nostalgia rather than yearning for the old days of simpler technology and and optical viewfinders

I've had five m43 bodies ( the latest being an EM1 mk III) used alongside a Nikon D500 and Nikon D750, and sharp as they were, the M43 files were more difficult to process and, when compared, never really matched the tonal and colour gradation that the Nikon files gave. After 18 months with the EM1 mk III, I traded in almost all my kit for a Nikon Z8. A decision I'm very pleased with.

I've also now just got a Fuji GFX 50s that I'm using with a dumb adapter and my Nikon F mount manual focus lenses, and even though the Z8 and Z lenses are giving bitingly sharp results, the slightly larger Fuji files,have an obvious advantage in tonal and colour gradation over the Z8.

I've found that pixel peeping can often hide or minimise these differences between sensor sizes, but if you look at the "whole" picture, especially a print, as sensors get physically bigger, the prints take on a different feel (magic?)when you look at them.

As an aside, and I've posted this before, the final part of making my decision to buy the Z8, was comparing the Nikon "long lens" lineup weights, sizes and prices and realising that the size and weight differences between Nikon and Olympus weren't as big as I had assumed. That isn't a general comparison but only for the comparative lenses that interested me.

e.g. compare the Nikon Z50II plus a 400mm f4.5 vs an Olympus OM1 and a 300mm f4 Or the Oly 150-600 and the Nikon 180-600 ( I realise that even on APS 600 on the Oly is effectively that much longer), but they both provide long zooms for their respective systems. I am also assuming that we will see a Nikon Z70 (or something like that) with a higher wildlife spec than th Z50.Z50II.
 
myotis said:
I've had five m43 bodies ( the latest being an EM1 mk III) used alongside a Nikon D500 and Nikon D750, and sharp as they were, the M43 files were more difficult to process and, when compared, never really matched the tonal and colour gradation that the Nikon files gave. After 18 months with the EM1 mk III, I traded in almost all my kit for a Nikon Z8. A decision I'm very pleased with.

I've also now just got a Fuji GFX 50s that I'm using with a dumb adapter and my Nikon F mount manual focus lenses, and even though the Z8 and Z lenses are giving bitingly sharp results, the slightly larger Fuji files,have an obvious advantage in tonal and colour gradation over the Z8.

I've found that pixel peeping can often hide or minimise these differences between sensor sizes, but if you look at the "whole" picture, especially a print, as sensors get physically bigger, the prints take on a different feel (magic?)when you look at them.
Click to expand...

There is a lot to this, and something that IMO is overlooked a lot by our community. The colour rendering of different sensors and more importantly different optics is not to be under-estimated. In my processing workflow, I prefer the minimum amount of edit, but I also like consistency, and I've often found that 3rd part glass has shifted the colour rendering (and tonal differences) and requires a different method of processing to obtain similar results to native glass. The same (obviously) applies with different camera systems and sensor sizes.

IMO it is best to find a system(s) that you are comfortable working with, and progress from there.

woof woof said:
This sounds like the way some Canon people talk about the original 5D.
Click to expand...

This is down to the rendering of the image, its very different to subsequent generations of Canon's, and was 'engineered' by Canon to make the transistion form film an easier step for professional photographers.

@the black fox - don't forget that as @myotis says modern lenses are bitingly sharp - this 'can' make images appear much more digital - pleasing to some but not others.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
There is a lot to this, and something that IMO is overlooked a lot by our community. The colour rendering of different sensors and more importantly different optics is not to be under-estimated. In my processing workflow, I prefer the minimum amount of edit, but I also like consistency, and I've often found that 3rd part glass has shifted the colour rendering (and tonal differences) and requires a different method of processing to obtain similar results to native glass. The same (obviously) applies with different camera systems and sensor sizes.

IMO it is best to find a system(s) that you are comfortable working with, and progress from there.



This is down to the rendering of the image, its very different to subsequent generations of Canon's, and was 'engineered' by Canon to make the transistion form film an easier step for professional photographers.

@the black fox - don't forget that as @myotis says modern lenses are bitingly sharp - this 'can' make images appear much more digital - pleasing to some but not others.
Click to expand...
I cannot recall the exact discussions 'back in the day' but there was some debate(?) about the tonal & contrast differences between European (primarily Zeiss from both East & West German companies and Japanese lenses.

So yes personal taste and perceptions are sort of key to ones photographic choices

FWIW I really liked my Canon 5D3 but the weight of gear became a burden so switched to mFT for that reason plus that DxO Photolab4 at that time rendered the raw files beautifully.....and still continues to do so in the newer/newest versions.
 
Box Brownie said:
FWIW I really liked my Canon 5D3 but the weight of gear became a burden so switched to mFT for that reason plus that DxO Photolab4 at that time rendered the raw files beautifully.....and still continues to do so in the newer/newest versions.
Click to expand...

Software makes a huge difference, I ahve extensively used DXO PureRAW, but am using it less on some camera systems as the images can become too sharp!!! But is absolutely brilliant at recovering noisy images.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
There is a lot to this, and something that IMO is overlooked a lot by our community. The colour rendering of different sensors and more importantly different optics is not to be under-estimated. In my processing workflow, I prefer the minimum amount of edit, but I also like consistency, and I've often found that 3rd part glass has shifted the colour rendering (and tonal differences) and requires a different method of processing to obtain similar results to native glass. The same (obviously) applies with different camera systems and sensor sizes.
Click to expand...
I wasn't meaning colour rendering, at least not in the way I think of colour rendering but yes this can be an issue, and yes it's linked.

I am very specifically meaning "gradation: from one colour or tone to another. For example if you look at an area of green grass or blue water and the transition from the darker areas to the lighter areas, as you go up in sensor size that transition becomes smoother and more nuanced. I suspect it's partly to do with resolution ie the number of photosites per unit area, but the size of the photosites is also important.

You don't necessarily notice it, until you start trying to work out why picture A looks nicer than picture B, And although various factors can affect this difference, the most important one seems to be sensor size.
Mr Perceptive said:
IMO it is best to find a system(s) that you are comfortable working with, and progress from there.
Click to expand...
This is still the most important thing for most people, unless you have a clearly identified reason to go for one system over another.
Mr Perceptive said:
This is down to the rendering of the image, its very different to subsequent generations of Canon's, and was 'engineered' by Canon to make the transistion form film an easier step for professional photographers.

@the black fox - don't forget that as @myotis says modern lenses are bitingly sharp - this 'can' make images appear much more digital - pleasing to some but not others.
Click to expand...
The Nikon f1.2 and f1.8 lenses are modern digital lenses, but their f1.4 lenses are designed to give a more traditional rendering on digital. I'm aware of several people who (after testing) replaced their f1.8 lenses with the newer f1.4 lenses just to get the "improved" rendering.
 
Let’s put this straight , I am not selling my om1 or 300mm f4 Olympus and will continue to use it as my go to rig , but I also have a e.m1x body that is barely used . Plus a few lenses that don’t know what sunlight looks like . These will probably go the way of the bay .
The new Nikon gear cost me just over £200 for camera and 70-300 lens so even if I use it when the fancy takes me it’s no big deal .as Graham suggests there is a subtle difference in colour rendering between different makes,models and sensors .. and I also enjoy PP and modern NR and other improvements may be the key .. nothing ventured nothing gained and I doubt I will lose much if I decide to sell on again ..
I don’t smoke ,or drink due to health issues so it’s something to waste a few bob on and will give the tribe summat to fight over when I go
 
You're moving up a sensor size so I'd expect you'd see some improvements and DSLR gear can certainly offer a lot of bang for your buck these days, even decent FF bodies can be had fairly cheap for what they can do..
 
the black fox said:
Let’s put this straight , I am not selling my om1 or 300mm f4 Olympus and will continue to use it as my go to rig , but I also have a e.m1x body that is barely used . Plus a few lenses that don’t know what sunlight looks like . These will probably go the way of the bay .
The new Nikon gear cost me just over £200 for camera and 70-300 lens so even if I use it when the fancy takes me it’s no big deal .as Graham suggests there is a subtle difference in colour rendering between different makes,models and sensors .. and I also enjoy PP and modern NR and other improvements may be the key .. nothing ventured nothing gained and I doubt I will lose much if I decide to sell on again ..
I don’t smoke ,or drink due to health issues so it’s something to waste a few bob on and will give the tribe summat to fight over when I go
Click to expand...
In terms of wildlife, in spite of what I said in my post, Olympus is still hard to beat.

In terms of Nikon I've always had a yearning for a D700, just to try it out and see if the sensor is as special as many people say it is.
 
the black fox said:
Itch scratched no pockets in a shroud .
Click to expand...

So true! It's YOUR money while you're alive so enjoy it while you can. Let "the tribe" fight over the kit when it's time!
 
myotis said:
In terms of wildlife, in spite of what I said in my post, Olympus is still hard to beat.

In terms of Nikon I've always had a yearning for a D700, just to try it out and see if the sensor is as special as many people say it is.
Click to expand...
Thing is Graham I have used and owned a myriad of cameras and lenses over the years including this one so have a extensive sample library to look back on , there were a few to choose from including a d7200 and a d3s both of which I’ve also owned ,from Canon my choice would have been a 1Dmkiii had about 5 of them all told or a 1Dmkiv but the last three were ruled out on weight . The d7200 nearly scraped in but they were 3 or 4 times the price . The one I bought cost all of £109 delivered and comes with a Wex 6 months warranty as well . Just a passing fad or boyz toyz time will tell but let’s wait and see .
I still stand by my original p.o.v on this in the transition to ultra sharp ultra fast M/L we have lost something in the translation
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nod
You seem to be basing a very wide and varied technology on Olympus micro 4/3 cameras, all I've list in transitioning to ultra fast mirrorless is solid chunk of cash and admittedly some flash capability I keep an old D750 for. It's the worth the money to me to get an incredibly capable camera that can easily get any shot I want, I adore using it.
 
I've shot Sony mirrorless with the A7 range for a good 10 years now. Full frame Canon 5D2 before that. imo the mirrorless Sony kit is much better (it should be, much newer!) and much nicer to use, for my uses. I don't think anything would get me back with a DSLR tbh

I paid just over £2000 in 2010 for a 5D2 & 24-105L | It cost around £2400 for the 35GM (2021) and A7Riii (2023) And I know which I'd rather have ;) By a long way!!

I have the X100f for when I want super small & lightweight and easy to use in a film like way. I have the Yashica FX3 for when I want to be fully analogue :)

As I said earlier, it's all about the fun, enjoyment & something that can get you outside having fun :)
 
the black fox said:
Thing is Graham I have used and owned a myriad of cameras and lenses over the years including this one so have a extensive sample library to look back on , there were a few to choose from including a d7200 and a d3s both of which I’ve also owned ,from Canon my choice would have been a 1Dmkiii had about 5 of them all told or a 1Dmkiv but the last three were ruled out on weight . The d7200 nearly scraped in but they were 3 or 4 times the price . The one I bought cost all of £109 delivered and comes with a Wex 6 months warranty as well . Just a passing fad or boyz toyz time will tell but let’s wait and see .
I still stand by my original p.o.v on this in the transition to ultra sharp ultra fast M/L we have lost something in the translation
Click to expand...
I didn't pick up from your OP that this was the issue (in bold), which is why I asked a couple of times what was driving the desire to go back to a DSLR.

I agree with you, but not sure if it's a characteristic of mirrorless, as such, but more to do with the developments that have paralleled mirrorless ie very high resolution sensors, no anti-aliasing filters, clinically sharp lenses, and AI denoising/sharpening tools that give spectacular, but rather digital results.
 
Well hopefully we shall see what that modern PP technology does with older dslr files and if it doesn’t give the results expected I’ve not lost much ,the camera can be resold without losing to much value and the lens can be adapted for manual use on my MFT bodies
 
the black fox said:
Well hopefully we shall see what that modern PP technology does with older dslr files and if it doesn’t give the results expected I’ve not lost much ,the camera can be resold without losing to much value and the lens can be adapted for manual use on my MFT bodies
Click to expand...
My personal experience having used DSLRs and mirrorless together, but primarily DSLRs, until 11 months ago, is that processing software regardless of camera, needs seriously dialed back on contrast, saturation and sharpness to give pleasing results.

I've been using C1, DXO PL, Lightroom and some version of Topaz tools, for nearly 20 years now, and they are all the same: C1 maybe less so. But tastes obviously vary
 
myotis said:
In terms of wildlife, in spite of what I said in my post, Olympus is still hard to beat.

In terms of Nikon I've always had a yearning for a D700, just to try it out and see if the sensor is as special as many people say it is.
Click to expand...

Yes, yes it is.

The one camera I regret selling.
 
Maybe this happens to us all, especially if you have thousands of images on your computer .......... you look back and see what you consider as your good, even great shots and then discover which camera/lens it was taken with ........ so it's more to do with the opportunity, luck, timing and of course what's behind the camera ............. but good camera gear and long quality Nikon glass does make the job possible especially with birds and wildlife
 
Jeff I admire your ability to master from one system to another and get the results you get. I've had to stick with one make and my understanding is still about one notch above basic . . . after only about 40 years!
 
arthurpolly said:
Jeff I admire your ability to master from one system to another and get the results you get. I've had to stick with one make and my understanding is still about one notch above basic . . . after only about 40 years!
Click to expand...
agreed art . hope your keeping well old m8.. pop in when your passing we need a day out together again
 
Well camera arrived ,good overall condition ,just fa tiny bit of paint wear on an edge , set it up in menu as far as my memory goes ,charged the battery,formatted a SD card .. fitted my small rig strap .. just waiting on the lens arriving tomorrow .. ..
Bought a spare battery with it but Wex sent the wrong one quick phone call and the correct ones arriving tomorrow and bin the other one . Excellent service from Wex as usual .
It’s a bit like making contact with a old friend
 
Looking forward to seeing how you get on. I always reminisce over my last Nikon a D7000. Always tempted to pick one up for about double what you've spent on a D300. There's something about a camera that seems simpler in operating terms that appeals to me.
 
ian-83 said:
Looking forward to seeing how you get on. I always reminisce over my last Nikon a D7000. Always tempted to pick one up for about double what you've spent on a D300. There's something about a camera that seems simpler in operating terms that appeals to me.
Click to expand...
The D7200 is the better model out of the range , had a 7000 go tits up ,then two consecutive 7100 broke after a months use fully refunded at the time and ended up with a 7200 and a D3s . Then heart failure threw its towel into the equation. Plenty of good canon options about as well .i will see how this pans out and might buy a long lens for it if 300mm proves restraining.
I think it’s the challenge of getting it right under constraints that appeals to me after a few years of unlimited I.s.o , 20 to 50 fps ,and Birds Eye I.d on the Olympus it’s starting to be just point at the bird and you’ve nailed it type of hobby . Hope you understand my drift on this
 
Enjoy the new tool/toy!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top