Choosing gear - camera, lens etc.

Hardware
21

There maybe some misunderstanding - I hope not. While I am satisfied with the general choice (18-135 for a crop sensor +50mm for portraits) - I am concern about the performance of the 18-135 specifically.

If I am to choose again - I would choose in the same focal lengths as before but I am trying to avoid the soft look of the 18-135. And improve on dynamic range and focusing of the camera.

And this is what it is all about - finding a good balance between camera and lens and paths that people take to reach to the right decision.

22

Thank you - this is what I am trying to find / assess :grinning: https://www.dxomark.com/ has some good perspectives. Yet matching camera and lens (and budget) can be a challenge.

23

Thank you - may I ask how do you assess the lenses before buying? I assume you probably read on some sites to narrow down to few options?

24

Hi @vbs,

First of all: that Canon ā€œnifty-fiftyā€ lens has a very good reputation.

Then: find some photographer on Internet whose work you admire
and wants to ā€œcopyā€/achieve. What hardware does (s)he use?
If you get the same set-up ā€“ then at least you cannot blame the equipment
for not being as skilled :-))

On the other hand: Ansel Adamsā€™ work is considered good.
Would a copy of his hardware make you as skilled?

If not: why?

Have fun!
Claes in Lund, Sweden

25

I was considering renting for a day or two. But the rates are outrageous here. Maybe I just havenā€™t found the right place. Yes - agree on the store option.

The 50mm is a keeper. The 18-135 - I have some doubts about that - very big doubts. Zoom is good but the quality of the lens is ā€œokayā€.

26

I had the 18-55 mm Fuji, which is a well regarded kit lens, but I found it to be too soft and mushy. I usually shoot primes, so YMMV.

2 Likes
27

The final product is a combination of tools and skill. With skill being more important. On the other hand - how can one develop skill without the tool? This is why he used a camera - not a paint brush. And yes - his work is amazing and many (including me) admire it.

Yet - I have seen many very gifted people (in various fields) that were never discovered. And they are very gifted - never the less.

28

Since nobody has mentioned it yet in this thread, I would recommend https://opticallimits.com/ to get a first technical view of potential lenses in question. They test the usual stuff, sharpness/resolution, bokeh, lateral CA, longitudinal CA and write a nice review about the such tested lenses.
These tests have their limit though, sharpness is not everything, microcontrast is hard to measure sample variation is hard to test, how a lens renders is hard to test.

So, another step for me would be to look at groups dedicated to lenses on flickr. There you get a mix of processed and SOOC pics form the lenses you might be intersted in. Browse those groups to get an idea, maybe already there you can spot something that you do not like about the lens. Also browse expensive lenses, Zeiss, Leica, Contax, Hasselblad. Just so you know what a lens can and canā€™t do. I specifically mean high technical quality lenses in the hands of people who donā€™t know how to frame a picture.

In my opinion lenses are more important than sensors if the sensor is good enough. Canon aps-c sensors for a looong time were a bit meh. Sensorsize does matter a bit. An ā€œoldā€ 5DmkIII might still outperform a modern sony aps-c with the right lens (!) and proper exposure. But for that photons-to-photons gives you the right hints. The data over there might reveal that this is not as clear cut, especially if you consider pricing of the involved lenses.

Something with nice tactile feel is more important in the go-out-and-shoot department. I have a fuji X-T1 that is ten times more fun to shoot than my old canon aps-c. Yet I can not shoot sports with it like I can with my Canon.

Cheers

29

Thank you! I was not aware of the site. Also the flicker suggestion is very good! I will explore both of these.
I agree - it is not a clear cut but certainly it helps in decision making.

30

Determine what you want to photograph and look for lenses and camera that best suit it.

I agree. But I also think the opposite is true: the gear you have will influence what you do with it.

For example, I shoot with a FF DSLR and prime lenses. So going out with a camera is a deliberate choice, and I rarely carry a camera ā€œby accidentā€. If I had a mobile phone, and I always had it with me, and it took good photos, Iā€™m sure my portfolio would look very different.

1 Like
31

I think that still falls into the category of what you want to photograph, since a light, carry around camera will lend itself to specific sorts of photography(day to day, travel, street, etc). Most people do those kinds of photography because they bought the kind of gear that would allow them to do it, and not by occasion of already having said gear.

1 Like
32

I like practical comparisons between lenses Iā€™m considering.
Such as Panasonic Leica 15mm f1.7 vs m.Zuiko 17mm f1.8:

1 Like
33

I agree that it makes sense to keep your actual use case firmly at the front of all considerations. If you donā€™t know your use case(s) buy the cheapest old gear you can get your hands on so that you can find out what you need.

I think itā€™s important to like using the gear so size, build, looks and handling are important to me.

35

I think I should underscore ā€œfirmlyā€ :grinning:

36

Thank you!
I didnā€™t know about this site.

37

Thereā€™s several other comments here that are probably enough for you, with links to good reviews sites that I also didnā€™t know before.

Anyway I wanted to add something else, hopefully itā€™s not added noise and you may find it useful.

I have tested lots of system just because Iā€™m a gearhead and like to play with tools. I started as a Nikon guy and surely I must have said something like ā€œIā€™ll never buy Canonā€ over the years. And now guess what, I have a Nikon DSLR (D810) and a Canon mirrorless (EOS R).
I have also extensively used m43 and Fuji cameras; Iā€™m not rich by any means, but I simply bought everything second hand, and I have never, ever bought the very expensive glass like the white Canon zooms or the f1.2 beasts etc.

Due to the kind of photo that I like to take, the 50mm has always been a constant on all these systems; itā€™s a generic, boring lens that does not impart anything special to the photos and I like that, it forces me to be a bit more creative. Additionally this is a cheap lens to make and there isnā€™t really much difference between a generic 50/1.8 and a 50/1.2; the better optical qualities are not worth in my view the extra cost, bulk and portability. Also, I keep reminding myself how Galen Rowell preferred consumer-grade equipment rather than pro lenses because of weight and size (and in fact one of the lenses that are very dear to me is the Nikon 70-150 f/3.5 E-lens that Rowell used so effectively in some of his most outstanding photographs).

Therefore my personal approach is to go for lenses first, then cameras. And since all the systems have more than one 50mm option, this is easy, I can choose between all kind of systems really. So thatā€™s what Iā€™ve done, hopping from Nikon (D)SLRs to m43 cameras to Fuji and Canons, always looking for the perfect combination of reliability, portability and effectiveness.

Iā€™ve never been bothered by the qualities of the sensor underneath, as getting good light and making interesting composition are the most important factors for my photographs (not staged, not studio, natural light); so I have now photos that Iā€™m very proud of that have been taken with a Fuji X-Pro1, Olympus EM1, Nikon D600, Canon RP etc, there is nothing that makes me say oh I wish Iā€™d have had a Sony 7RRR with its 80Mp BSICMOS instead because I could have pulled an extra stop from the shadowsā€¦ this is totally irrelevant for me.

One last thing, regarding the examples you showed us; keep in mind that I was blown away the first time I tried to take photos with artificial light (simple speedlight with very basic modifiers); the extra crispness and clarity of photos taken in controlled situation is simply incredible for those of us that are usually relying on natural light (Iā€™m talking obviously about portraits). Perhaps that would explain why you were also impressed by photos taken with the same lens you have; anything, any lens would shine a much brighter light, so to speak, if using speedlights or strobes.

4 Likes
38

Thank you!
Yes - there are many good sites mentioned here. And I am visiting all of them. Certainly appreciate the input from all who replied.

The links didnā€™t quite work (I was hoping to include direct to pictures links). For some reason I am fascinated by the details. And I realize they most likely wonā€™t be visible on print.

My best pictures are done with the 50mm and a few of them are wide open. There are times when the shadows did not work as I expected (or hoped) with the 18-135. In theory - some mistakes could have been corrected (if I was carrying a speedlight for example).

What you are pointing to - the speedlight / strobe effect - I was not aware of. What I mean - I did notice difference when there is sufficient light and especially with properly added speedlight for me. But I did not know about the dependency.

Never had good experience with used equipment (and I tried - not photographic one). To some extend I envy people who are able to utilize it. This is one of the reasons why end up using my equipment for a much longer time.

Once again - thank you for the input!

39

Super jealous of that. I was tossing around a similar idea here, but it didnā€™t go over that well with the fam.

40

Iā€™m sure you will make it happen. My wife and I turn 60 this year so we wanted to celebrate. We had a cycling trip from Amsterdam to Brussels and Brugge cancelled by Covid last year and we really wanted to go back to Europe but the war has really impacted me. The thought of being on vacation while others have their entire lives ripped from them is at the moment too hard to comprehend.

So we decided just to stay in Canada. We have been out west and seen many parts of BC and Alberta so we thought we should go in the opposite direction this time :slight_smile:

41

I hear ya on the war.

For Canadians, Canada has the advantage of being accessible without flying, which is a gong show right now.