I used the M50 for a season due to its form factor and although it did its job for the purpose of light and nimble I opted for the a6600 to replace it and found the end product to be twice as what I expected, the dynamic range and color profiles were far superior and it is a monster for stills. Plus the APSC glass was significantly cheaper than the alternatives and actually had more usability for focal length and f stops.
I see. Canon is about to kill off the M series rumors say. For me it is either cell phone or full frame. But I do a lot of wildlife photography, so there is a need for long lenses. Canon's new super zoom RF 24-240 looks like a nice one-lens travel setup.
Would not doubt it, they sorta shot themselves in the foot by not allowing a mix of their consumer and pro level mirrorless systems like the EF and EF-S, if there were a way to grow into the system I'm sure it would have done better. It's a pretty kickass little camera, I love it with the 20mm pancake lens. It's also the "trail bike" of cameras, what most people really should be using, but somehow they're convinced they need pro-level gear to take a snap-shot of their kid at soccer practice. Buying into the M system means they can't easily transition into anything pro later on the way they could with the Rebel.
I looked hard at the M series when I wanted to go mirrorless. But action and wildlife were not its strength. But for lifestyle, street and travel photography I think it is a great option. There is an adaptor for mounting EF lenses on the M body.
That is some fancy stuff!
The guy I got my lens off went to a Canon Mirrorless something, people I know that have moved on from DSLRs seem to be going to Sony.
When I moved from Nikon F to Nikon Z, I looked at all of the other brands and almost switched to Sony. Their AF is better than anyone else's right now unless you pony up for one of the big pro bodies. At the end of the day, the thing that kept me in the Nikon camp was almost exclusively the small/light PF (phase fresnal) telephotos. For traveling and hiking, there's just nothing close to it in any of the other brands.
I'll have to look at the Nikons, I have only ever used one Nikon camera and I loved it, it was so intuitive to use.
petapixel.com
partial to this...although when the electronics shit the bed....you have a paper weight...and the 30mm lens seperately runs about 4500...if you can find one
Different cameras meter slightly differently. I can't imagine shooting with bracketing on all the time, seems like an unnecessary increase in files you need to edit.
Nah, I shoot in jpg and the only editing I do is cropping, editing is not for me.
i like the linhof 6x12 and 6x17 panorama cameras....I don't see real cameras on that OP list such as Deardorff or Linhof, this thread is invalid.
Thanks for the info, may be why the later ones swapped to a larger knob with a rubber insert.
Why are you so hung up on dynamic range? Mirrorless cameras are so much better on all accounts IMO. Better AF, higher ISO performance, higher FPS, silent shooting, no shutter shock, IBIS (some), etc....
I am hung up on dynamic range because it's the thing I need the most when I do photography work. Most of the time, I document stainless or aluminium sculptures with lots of reflections, oftentimes in the city in front of buildings with windows reflecting light, and I often can't control at which moment I go take the picture, so simetimes the sky is blue, sometimes it's white. Lots of dark areas and super bright areas together. Also, photogrammetry needs the best dynamic range to capture all details in holes and shiny surfaces, and that's another of my "main" side-gigs.
In an ideal world, I would like a full frame with a few good primes, but it's not worth it for the amount of work I do now. I woulnd't be able to recoup the costs of that equipment with my contracts (it's a side gig) and I don't do any photography for fun anymore.
OK, that makes sense. Maybe exposure bracketing is something for you then?I am hung up on dynamic range because it's the thing I need the most when I do photography work. Most of the time, I document stainless or aluminium sculptures with lots of reflections, oftentimes in the city in front of buildings with windows reflecting light, and I often can't control at which moment I go take the picture, so simetimes the sky is blue, sometimes it's white. Lots of dark areas and super bright areas together. Also, photogrammetry needs the best dynamic range to capture all details in holes and shiny surfaces, and that's another of my "main" side-gigs.
More resolution would always be better, but my main concern is dynamic range since I don't do any big prints. Most of the time the pictures are destined for web use, but it's always nice to be as future-proof as we can. I'm always shooting at the lowest iso setting and use a tripod when needed, but I never go past ISO100. Also, I'm only using a wide angle prime lens, currently a 24mm EF-S 2.8 and 40mm EF 2.8. So one for APS-C only and one compatible with both. Ideally, I'd get a new 24mm or 35mm for a full-frame body. I will keep my T3i for other
I've been shooting pictures since the late 90's and studied in visual arts, so I know how to operate pretty much all kinds of cameras, but I don't want to invest that much in the equipment because I spend too much on bikes
You brought some great points to consider, thanks @iRider !
www.dpreview.com
Canon R8 is reduced to 1299 from 1499 ATM and I expect some Black Friday sales. Maybe an opportunity?
well it's a constant f4 through the zoom, much easier for video. I have a 200-6000 and I really cant live without the focal length. I would rather have too much than not enough. life is short, buy the lens, lol
That's what my partner is telling me, too. Which is funny, because she'll hesitate in the grocery store over whether to spend $3 on a bag of chips.
