I shot with a Nikon D750 , I upgraded from a Nikon D5200 back in late 2017. I mostly shoot cityscapes , trains , some nature , historical buildings and food.
It came with the 24-120mm F4 kit lens which was my default lens for a year
Tamron 35mm F1.8 VC - used for walking around when I don’t want to carry the 24-120mm
Nikon 20mm F2.8D , it was my first used lens purchase , I used it for tight cityscape & nature photography. The lens was knocked out of commission when I accidently dropped it on a concrete floor at a restuarant.
Samyang 85mm F1.4 , Orignal I purchased this for portrait photography but I never really got into that so I mainly use it for general photography , walking around…and long exposure night photography.
Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6G , I use this lens for birds , planes , if i’m shooting from an observation deck or on a boat
Tamron 17-35mm F2.8-4 Di OSD , I got this lens to replace the broken 20mm lens ,Its ok but it tends to blowout highlights easily which might be due to the small scratch I discovered on the rear element.
Irix 11mm F4 , I’ll admit this was abit of a gas purchase , its a pain to use this lens though under the right conditions its a blessing. Its a very sharp lens and I got it on Sale for 50% off. A few months ago despite being less than 2 yrs old with very little usage the Lens cap cracked & I had to order a replacement which took 5 weeks to arrive. I might sell this lens aswell.
Ronkinon 20mm F1.8 , I miss the 20mm focal length and rather then order a used Nikon 20mm F2.8D which does have some mustash distortion I decided buy the Ronkinon 20mm. So far I love it , its tack sharp , focus is smooth , and its light.
My main subject matter is wildlife, and especially birds. Hence when I wanted to go beyond my entry level Nikon D3300 I stayed with an APS-C crop and went with a D7200. That was a deliberate choice over the D7500 which was already available by then, due to the 7200’s more robust construction and the dual card slots, not available on 7500.
Sigma 150-600mm f/1.5-6.3 is my main glass of choice - but yes, the bulk and the heft are issues, especially with a back injury.
Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 is my other main lens - for a long time I resisted the compromises of the so-called “holiday” super-zoom.
A kit 18-55 does give better quality results (I have 2 of these), but only in that range.
I got a Samyang 14mm f/ 2.8 which I have used for some astrophotography, when I’ve had the opportunity for dark skies, which isn’t often.
More recently, I sought advice primarily in this forum for a pocket-sized camera to keep in the car, and have been very pleased with: a second-hand Olympus OM-D EM-10 (MFT). IBIS is not as swish as later models, but still not bad.
Just a very slim M.Zuiko 14-42 mm f/3.5-5.6 lens to this point in time.
I have destroyed my first TG5 by splashing it with water when the charging cover was open. The charging port has no water resistance and depends on the cover solely for protection. I destroyed my second TG 5 by diving to 11.6m and it flooded despite the waterproof rating to 15M. Despite the camera being out of Warranty Olympus Australia replaced it free of charge so kudos to them. I since have bought an underwater housing for diving with my TG6.
Not indestructible, but still a reasonable choice for a tough camera that shoots RAW files. The lens has woeful distortion but these are well handled in software. The out of camera jpgs are very soft so I would suggest editing much sharper and more details pictures from the raw file is the way to go.
And since we are talking about tough, my Canon R7 fitted with the 18-150mm kit lens survived a sand storm in the Sahara Desert with stupid me taking pictures of the amazing experience. But I am not recommending testing your luck on this if you own a R7 and find yourself in a sandstorm.
Thanks very much for the info. So you still need to be a bit careful with it, and the image quality is so-so.
Considering the body is the same size as a GRIII, the sensor is much smaller. I wish they could have put a 1" in there so the image quality could be a bit of a step up from a smartphone.
Yes, the TG-5 has two little doors covering the battery, USB, memory card, etc. Unless you shut them both fully and lock the little latches, then if you get it wet or submerged then you will be screwed.
I have attached a few photos from the Ireland trip shot with the TG-5. I shot these as raw and then exported as jpgs, which you see here. I left them at 2000px so you can pixel peep if you like.
In Ireland, the weight of the D7200 was starting to bother me, so one day in Dublin, I just grabbed the TG-5. We were going to see the Book of Kells (amazing!!!) and they don’t allow cameras in there anyway, so I figured the D7200 was better left in the hotel that day.
Compared to a newish cellphone, I’m not sure you’d gain much–given that many cellphones shoot raw these days. Part of the reason I bought the Nokia XR-20 is because it is reportedly very tough, water-resistant, and submersible (to maybe 2M). Now that this phone would be considered incredibly old, I would think you could pick up a good deal on one if you wanted to go that route. I think you would want to shoot raw, because jpg results are mixed (some are really good, a small minority absolutely suck). Also the XR-20 has no (worthwhile) zoom and no comparable macro mode.
Anyway, reasonably good in daylight if you are not planning to print huge…
That’s right, OM System cameras have had in-camera focus stacking for quite some time now, and it seems like a really useful feature.
Panasonic only introduced it last month with a firmware update for a few of their full-frame cameras. I haven’t seen yet how well it works in practice.
I’ve been shooting with Panasonic Lumix cameras for quite a while now, so I’ve grown pretty used to and attached to them.
I’ve used the G3 (my first mirrorless camera), the GX7, and the GX9. I also had the LX10/LX15, which was a fantastic camera, unfortunately, the lens is now full of dust after I carried it in my pocket during a holiday.
I personally prefer the Panasonic design over the more retro look of OM System, but it’s definitely an option.
Even so I shoot mostly landscapes, I decided once to go for APS-C for two reasons: It is cheaper and at that time I made the decision (that was before my current camera) it was much smaller and lighter. This was important for me, because I did longer hikes.
Nowadays, I’m waiting for the Sony A7V and will then switch to mirrorless and fullframe. Why? The difference between fullframe and APS-C is not that big anymore regarding weight and size.
Fullframe is more fitting to landscape and I’m in an age now, that I can spend more money on a camera but unfortunately less time on long hiking trips (because my knees limit the length nowadays).
Why will I switch to Sony? Because Canon has still not opened FF up to third party manufacturers and I have to give up my lenses anyway.
So my future setup will probably be:
Sony A7V
Sigma A 14-24mm F2.8
Sigma A 24-70mm F2.8
Sony FE 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6
Why all zoom lenses. Well that’s not yet set in stone, at least not for the ultra-wide-angle lens, but usually I prefer to have the flexibility.
APS-C
Build and image quality
Range of lenses
User interface
Cameras:
Currently the X-H1 (sort of semi-retired but I like it too much to sell it) and the X-H2S
Lenses:
XF10-24 (mark 1) mainly for historic buildings, some landscapes.
XF16-55 (mark 1) standard zoom; heavy but excellent.
XF55-200 sharp, nice bokeh.
Xf 70-300 sharp, faster focus than the 55-200. I might sell the 55-200.
XF150-600 for birding. Sharp.
Not a huge difference at the wider end (if we ignore the hood on the Sony), but an increasing difference as you get to longer focal lengths.
Note that I’m in no way trying to change you mind (I did it for my own curiosity as much as anything). You should absolutely go with where your heart is. And of course, this is just size/weight comparison, and ignores all the other pros/cons.
The Sigma 17-70 isn’t mine but there is no 17-70 Contemporary to choose. The size should be similar anyway.
I don’t like Fuji, don’t ask me why. A friend of me is using Fuji. I tested two of them for a few days. A X-T3 and a X-T5. I couldn’t get warm with the ergonomics and the UX and the viewfinders. If I would stay on APS-C I probably would rather wait for an Canon EOS R7 II.
Wow, really not much difference at all with those lenses, you’re right!
Fuji certainly isn’t for everyone. I think they make some of the nicest looking cameras, but I still prefer the feel of my old Canon 600D in the hand.
But I do like the smaller lenses. Each time I wonder about going full frame, I’m always put off by the extra bulk, which is something I’m constantly trying to reduce as a handheld shooter with increasing back/neck problems.
I do animal photography, but I also plan to do human subjects. At the moment, I have Tamrom 18-400mm which is pretty good if I keep my lens clean. In addition, 75-300mm Canon lens, 50 mm F/1.4, and a unused lens.
Well they all weigh a bit more aside from the Tokina 11-20. But if I would go just for size and weight, I could switch as well to the Sigma Contemporary series. Still great lenses but a good part lighter and somewhat smaller. The tele zoom isn’t the important one it stays quite often at home.
You are right when it comes to the look of the camera. But a camera is a tool for me, and it should simply work.
for having a blog, always a fan of those — and the blog name is a nice one as well
Nice to see you’ve been in the Netherlands as well; I never got along with Rotterdam, finding it a bit too new and somewhat soulless. I mean, there’s a reason it’s like that, but I was too used to The Hague and surroundings, where I grew up, and Delft, where my dad used to live later on.
I’m thinking I might have to give Rotterdam another go, maybe I can appreciate it more after I’ve mellowed out a bit myself.
Thank you. I loved Delft, beautiful small city. We only scratched the surface of Rotterdam, and will be going back in the next year or so. I have a good friend who is from there, and he will help advise on my itinerary. I thought it was a beautiful city and loved the way transportation was planned there. Since we live in a rural, touristy area lacking in many amenities, we enjoy the experience of a bustling European city.
for having a blog, always a fan of those — and the blog name is a nice one as well 
