myotis
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 4,503
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- No
As we seem to have moved on to describing working practises...
This is rather long, but I felt the need to explain my equipment rationale, rather than simply listing it.
In the film days, I usually had some combination of 5x4, medium format and 35mm.
35mm was rarely used, and 5x4 was the "go to" for industrial, architectural, and landscape stuff. Medium format was the "go to" for weddings, portraits and events, as well as industrial, architectural (and landscape) when 5x4 wasn't physically practical.
The difference in quality between 5x4, medium format, and 35mm was distinct, and there was a sort of hierarchy of defaulting to 5x4, unless there was a good reason not to use it, and then moving onto medium format.
With digital, I feel there is less need to switch between sensor sizes because of image quality, even if differences still exist. Nor are there the same technical and handling differences between digital cameras affecting camera choice in the way they affected camera choice in the film days.
Apart from minor (but none the less, sometimes important) image quality differences, it makes little practical difference whether you are using a Fuji GFX or an Olympus OM1 (or even an old Nikon 1 V2). I always felt that my old Nikon 1 gear (which I loved) gave image quality very like 35mm film cameras did. I know there are digital cameras that handle distinctly differently (e.g Leica M, Ricoh GRIII, Fuji Xpro etc) but it still isn't like changing from a 5x4 Sinar or Linhof, to a Hasselblad.
Today, my photography falls into three categories, and that is how I mentally divide my kit and decide what I am taking out on any particular day,
Wildlife: Nikon Z8 and a 300mm f4 and 1.4TC with an FTZ. I plan to change the lens combo for either a 400mm or 180-600. Neither of these lenses, although more useful for longer distance work, will be as good as the 300+1.4 combo for dragonflies, so struggling a bit in knowing what to do here.
Landscape: Fuji GFX50s with adapted 35mm and 50mm Zeiss MIlvus Nikon F mount lenses, and a Nikon 105mm F2.8 AIs micro-nikkor. Common sense would suggest I should just use my Z8 for landscape and simplify my equipment choice. But I love the improved tonal and colour gradation I get from the Fuji files over the Z8 files. This is only really noticeable in direct comparisons, but I know it's there, and I am reluctant to give it up.
People and Places: Nikon Zf with 40mm and 26mm lenses. I nearly always use the 40mm, and only change to the 26mm when I absolutely need to. However, once I change to the 26mm, I often stick with it for the rest of the day. The Zf and 40mm live in my messenger bag I carry everywhere. The 26mm sometimes lives here, but there isn't really room for it.
Sub-categories
Opportunistic wildlife: Nikon Z50II with 50-250. I often carry this with my People and Places kit (in a sling bag), Its primary duty is to grab pictures of dragonflies and butterflies for identification when I get home.
Opportunistic landscape, people and places: With my wildlife kit I also carry, in a pouch attached to my rucksack, the Zf and either the 40mm or 26mm for this.
I used to carry the X100s with my wildlife kit, and its size and weight are far more convenient than the Zf, but I currently prefer the ZF. However, I'm thinking of maybe using the Z50II with the 26mm, for this purpose, which would be a good compromise in terms of size and weight between the ZF and X100s.
And that's it. I still fancy other bits of kit, but there isn't much I can't do with what I've got, and as I've said, I hate having kit hanging around that isn't seeing regular use.
This is rather long, but I felt the need to explain my equipment rationale, rather than simply listing it.
In the film days, I usually had some combination of 5x4, medium format and 35mm.
35mm was rarely used, and 5x4 was the "go to" for industrial, architectural, and landscape stuff. Medium format was the "go to" for weddings, portraits and events, as well as industrial, architectural (and landscape) when 5x4 wasn't physically practical.
The difference in quality between 5x4, medium format, and 35mm was distinct, and there was a sort of hierarchy of defaulting to 5x4, unless there was a good reason not to use it, and then moving onto medium format.
With digital, I feel there is less need to switch between sensor sizes because of image quality, even if differences still exist. Nor are there the same technical and handling differences between digital cameras affecting camera choice in the way they affected camera choice in the film days.
Apart from minor (but none the less, sometimes important) image quality differences, it makes little practical difference whether you are using a Fuji GFX or an Olympus OM1 (or even an old Nikon 1 V2). I always felt that my old Nikon 1 gear (which I loved) gave image quality very like 35mm film cameras did. I know there are digital cameras that handle distinctly differently (e.g Leica M, Ricoh GRIII, Fuji Xpro etc) but it still isn't like changing from a 5x4 Sinar or Linhof, to a Hasselblad.
Today, my photography falls into three categories, and that is how I mentally divide my kit and decide what I am taking out on any particular day,
Wildlife: Nikon Z8 and a 300mm f4 and 1.4TC with an FTZ. I plan to change the lens combo for either a 400mm or 180-600. Neither of these lenses, although more useful for longer distance work, will be as good as the 300+1.4 combo for dragonflies, so struggling a bit in knowing what to do here.
Landscape: Fuji GFX50s with adapted 35mm and 50mm Zeiss MIlvus Nikon F mount lenses, and a Nikon 105mm F2.8 AIs micro-nikkor. Common sense would suggest I should just use my Z8 for landscape and simplify my equipment choice. But I love the improved tonal and colour gradation I get from the Fuji files over the Z8 files. This is only really noticeable in direct comparisons, but I know it's there, and I am reluctant to give it up.
People and Places: Nikon Zf with 40mm and 26mm lenses. I nearly always use the 40mm, and only change to the 26mm when I absolutely need to. However, once I change to the 26mm, I often stick with it for the rest of the day. The Zf and 40mm live in my messenger bag I carry everywhere. The 26mm sometimes lives here, but there isn't really room for it.
Sub-categories
Opportunistic wildlife: Nikon Z50II with 50-250. I often carry this with my People and Places kit (in a sling bag), Its primary duty is to grab pictures of dragonflies and butterflies for identification when I get home.
Opportunistic landscape, people and places: With my wildlife kit I also carry, in a pouch attached to my rucksack, the Zf and either the 40mm or 26mm for this.
I used to carry the X100s with my wildlife kit, and its size and weight are far more convenient than the Zf, but I currently prefer the ZF. However, I'm thinking of maybe using the Z50II with the 26mm, for this purpose, which would be a good compromise in terms of size and weight between the ZF and X100s.
And that's it. I still fancy other bits of kit, but there isn't much I can't do with what I've got, and as I've said, I hate having kit hanging around that isn't seeing regular use.
otherwise it's a arhhhh and reminds me of the four Yorkshire men's sketch 
So 500mm could be easy tocarry for a day...
I just wish I had purchased it years ago when the price was less eye-watering!
