Which system to go for? Dilemma

lindsay

lindsay

Admin
Messages
8,060
Name
Lindsay
Edit My Images
Yes
Although this isn't a pressing question, I feel it will become so. I want to set myself up with a comprehensive outfit within the next 6-8 months, to suit my interests (photographically) of landscapes, wildlife (birds and European animals, not safari type fauna), possibly macro. I am a definite amateur with no delusions of ability but a desire to improve over time and produce nice large prints for the walls of my home. I am willing to go in any direction, equipment-wise, no major preferences. I anticipate some if not most current kit will be sold to go towards the new stuff. I do wonder whether I already have the beginnings of what I want, but I don't know what to build on:

1. Nikon D300 with 18-200mm kit zoom; wife has a D5100 with 18-55 and 70-210; I also have an old F5 film camera
2. Canon Eos5 QD film camera with 28mm, 50mm and 85mm prime EF lenses
3. Olympus E-M10 with kit 14-42 and 40-150mm lenses
4. I'm keen on the Pentax K1-ii but that's a completely new direction

The Oly was bought recently just as a way of properly trying the form factor of M43, and I like it a lot but maybe a little small in my hands; I really like the Nikon cameras but if I were to upgrade it would be body and lenses, so a start from scratch effectively. The Canon outfit was put together specifically for film work but could maybe provide good glass for a new digital outfit too?

So I'm looking for opinions please. I keep changing my mind. I also don't want to go too expensive (cue Olympus) but at the same time I want good. I feel I'd get more and better for my budget (£3-5k max) going Olympus or Pentax than Nikon,, but where does Canon fit in that scale? So many possibilities!
 
I think to start with, I'd be making a rough list of what lenses would be required for the jobs you want to do & pricing them all..... Your wildlife lens is probably going to be the most expensive of the bunch.

I had the 28/1.8, 50/1.4 & 85/1.8 EF lenses a few years ago. I thought they were all good performers on a 5D2. Pick a body up, 6D? or something, macro lens would be a few hundred & then the long wildlife lens. Even a 24-105L for general landscape are pretty cheap now.

I don't know if Nikon have similar....?
 
Lee thanks for your input.,
My Canon EF lenses are the 50/1.4, 85/1.8 and a 28/2.8. On that basis, if starting with those, I'd look to go for a wider w/a lens and the 150-600 Sigma for wildlife probably. But adding those and a good Canon full-frame body is one option, but I'm interested to get opinions as to whether that is a recommended direction of travel, or might another brand be more cost-effective/more highly recommended? Clearly FF would in most cases be "better" than M43; I'd say weight is not an issue for me, but I'm not keen on the boat-anchor size of the old top film cameras like the F5 and Eos5, or even my D300, size-wise - something in between feels better.

I feel a bit like you've prompted me to answer my own question actually - I think I need to try on a 6D or similar for size/style/operability. But still very interested in other opinions.
 
Sorry. I answered based on my experience only :) Olympus etc are foreign to me so didn't feel it fair to comment.

Also, I find 28mm wide enough for landscape - I actually take the majority of my stuff longer than 28mm aside from the odd stitched panorama when needed.
 
Have you handled a Canon digital body? IMO, they feel/function significantly differently than similar Nikons and I'm not very fond of the Canon menu system... but I'm biased; I have many years using the Nikon system. If it were me, I would probably stay with/expand the Nikon APS setup (and your wife could share). I would probably sell off the Canon lenses and buy used for the Nikons. Currently, Nikon sensors have a pretty significant edge over the Canon equivalents (that could change at anytime, and the 80D is pretty close).

But my best suggestion is to get a feel for the different options and get the one that seems easier/more logical for you to use.
 
Noted Steven, in fact Mrs P has agreed to let me go to a proper camera shop in Northampton tomorrow where I shall have a grope of a 6Dii and the Pentax K1-ii, plus I think the Nikon D500 or D750 are the other options.
I shall regardless put together the costings for all options for comparison.

This may seem daft and a bit charitable, but I plan to buy whatever I choose in the way of a body new, and do so from an independent retailer, not HDEW etc.
 
IMO there is no point having both Nikon and Canon: both are (D)SLR form factors with all the advantages and disadvantages that this entails. I would strategically choose for one or the other. As pointed out before Nikon sensors seem to have the upper hand at the moment.

Personally I added m4/3 to my Canon setup because I wanted something that was smaller and lighter, and also more affordable at the top end of the range - realistically I could never justify the high-end Canon telephoto lenses, let alone carry them around. I did buy the Canon 100-400 at some point and it almost never left the house. I do feel you get decent value for money in the m4/3 world: the 60 f/2.8 macro is excellent and very affordable compared to full-frame alternatives. If you think the E-M10 is too small why not trade it in for an E-M1 MkI? It is slightly bigger, easier to hold and is very affordable on the used market. It will also be a much better "action" camera than the E-M10 with a buffer that is difficult to fill up. CAF is usable although certainly not as good as Nikon/Canon DSLR alternatives; the E-M1II does better here but at a significant price. If you can afford the Olympus PRO lenses they are all excellent. For birds and wildlife there is the Panasonic 100-400 (200-800 FF equivalent) which is really good and hand-holdable.

My Canon gear rarely gets used these days. I'm reluctant to let all of it go because I have a few EOS film cameras as well and intend to keep those. I did sell most of my Canon telephoto's because - for my needs - investing in m4/3 telephotos seemed to make more sense.

Can't really comment on the Pentax K1-ii but as good as it is I would be worried about market share and long-term viability in a market that is shrinking from an overall perspective.
 
Last edited:
When you do get to try in the shop, do try the k1 or k1ii, keep in mind the huge back catalogue of fantastic legacy lenses that will work on the k1.
We'll worth considering.
Some low shutter count k1's available too. Buy used and buy more lenses
 
The first thing I would do is work out what sort of lenses you want (zooms/primes, focal length, aperture etc), and what the cost of each of these are for each system you're considering. For example, you may desire to have a Nikon 600mm f4 but know you will never be able to afford one, yet an Olympus 300mm f4 (600mm eq) might be feasible at some point. Another thing to consider is which system you prefer using, if you prefer the layout of Nikon over Canon and Pentax for example then this should be the route you take. Lastly work out whether you want a larger or smaller system. For example, if you like wildlife and think that you might get a 150-600mm or 200-500mm for Nikon bear in mind these lenses are very big and weigh circa 2kg. You could get the Olympus 75-300mm (150-600mm eq) which is just over 400g.

Once you've considered these factors then hopefully this will give you a clearer idea of which system you want to expand.
 
Thanks for the ideas above. I had a very useful visit to Skears Photographic in Northampton this morning - recommended as a proper camera shop with some good used kit as well as a pleasant atmosphere and very helpful staff; I shall be putting business their way.

My visit allowed me to play with the Pentax K1-ii; I found the ergonomics very good, size and weight perfectly acceptable. But there's no doubt that side by side I preferred the Nikons for their feel, ergonomics and menu system (some familiarity bias here though).
I've ruled out Canon on the basis of the sensor and, never having been a fan of the brand despite having put together a decent film outfit which has been used a bit, I again prefer the Nikon way.
So I've ended up pitching the Nikon FF range vs the Olympus M43 route. However then I see lots of good words about the D500 with the Sigma 150-600 for BIF/wildlife, so it comes down pretty simply to weight and size, because cost-wise there's not a great deal of difference if I compare D500 with various lenses and E-M1ii and various Pro lenses.
I'm putting together a shopping list for each outfit, and I'm going to look for an E-M1 to try out. But I think it's going to be Nikon.
I know this has been a public outpouring - thinking aloud, but the comments above have helped me and I thank those contributors for help in focusing my thoughts.
 
I have owned Canon, Nikon and Fuji systems over the years and my current general purpose system is Fuji which I love for just about everything, but for wildlife, not so much. I was recently looking for an alternative system to use solely for wildlife and pondered the Fuji 100-400 but felt mirrorless didn't suit me for that genre.

Being brand agnostic, I looked at Nikon and Canon equality . Having shot both, I didn't find handling an issue with either system. In each case, just got used to it, as most people do. Handling issues are really only what you're used to IMHO, though others will disagree. For me, the sensor difference in real life isn't an issue and plenty of high profile successful pros use Canon with great results. Also many - probably fewer - wildlife pros use Nikon with great results. Either system is going to do the job.

I agree 100% that its the lenses that matter and I agree you most definitely shout put them first. Decide which ones you want and why then go from there.

Realistically (ie ones I would be able to own and use ) in terms of quality and performance the lenses I wanted all came from Canon and so I went with them. That's just me. We're all different and your priorities are not the same as mine.

EDIT
Hah! Our posts crossed and you've pretty much made up your mind. Enjoy your new kit :)
 
Last edited:
You don't have to go full-frame (says the man with a Sony A7R III). Nikon's D500 is a top-rate camera and the 91% it scored in DPR's review matches the top score of anything else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top