Who Uses What ?

She should have said "Next!"

Canon 6D, FujiFilm x100t

i use a canon 5dmk3 with a tamron 28-300vc lens.


i'm not sure why it would matter canon or nikon - i wouldn't want to lend my lenses out anyway.

---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

I use my artist's eye and an iPhone ;)

Mike,

maybe that guy was thinking the same way. He was looking for somebody into photography, but also wanted that person to use different system so he could not share the lenses :)

I use my 30 years old brushes with my dollar store xacto knife.

Not taking photos at all lately but our gear is Sony. Nex5, Nex 6, Sony A77 and the Sony A7R full frame.

It all depends how much you have already invested. Canon is an excellent brand and if you have a lot of lenses it would make sense just to stick with the brand.
If you are planing on going the Nikon route. Some of their cameras use Sony Senors so might as well go with a Sony camera and take advantage of the old Minolta lenses which you can pick up for a very affordable price and are in my opinion one of the best lenses out there.

A lot of good choice out there but It is the photographer, not the camera, that is the instrument.

Sharon,

Really depends on budget. Full frame sensor or the APS-C sensor you have now,on your Canon T2i. Staying with the Canon Rebel/EOS system will allow you to use what ever lenses you now have and from looking at your images, seem better than fine. Here's a good place to start:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0450645720/consumer-dslr-camera-roundup-2014

This compares 7 cameras, in the same price/performance level. The new-ish Canon T5i/700D body is really a great camera and will blow you away compared to your "old" Canon. I wouldn't get into a new system, learning curve,lenses,etc. unless there is a reason, bulk,weight,etc.

If the budget is there, then I would look at Canon's Full frame sensor cameras,which will probably require you to upgrade lenses, so that's another concern. The physical size of the full sensor cameras may also be another concern,especially when carrying around the larger lenses.

For what we do for images here on FAA, any new Canon Rebel is fine. If you are a Pro, then a professional system is needed. I'm not one to suggest others spend money, if it isn't needed.

I've got an older Canon, 1Ds MKIII, and that is fine, but I could still create the same images I do now, with the smaller APS-C cameras and one day may switch,

Rich

The most important question when buying new photography gear is to ask yourself how your current gear is limiting you. If you know the answer to that question, then you have an idea of what to focus on to buy.

That said I shoot a 5dmkIII and a 17-40 F4 L most of the time for my work on here.

The question you have to ask yourself is why do you want to upgrade? What is it that your current camera body isn't doing that you are looking for?

Do you have EF lenses, or EF-S lenses? If you have EF lenses, consider upgrading to a full frame camera like a 6D or 5D Mark III. If you have EF-S lenses or lenses made for an APS-C sensor then you have to look for another body that has the same size sensor. This is because of how the lens fits. Putting an EF-S lens on a full framed Canon will damage the mirror. That said if you need an APS-C camera you could consider an EOS 7D Mark II or a 70D. As Rich said your budget is going to determine what you can buy.

EDIT: As I was typing Thomas pretty much asked the same question!

@ Rich.. thank you... ! I'll take "better than fine" ! ;) I was looking at the T5i. A couple years back my friend got the T3i and really liked it. Love the feedback.. thanks ! I have EFS lens on now. Thanks for that info !! I would definitely want to be compatible. Its a fairly new lens too.

Canon 60D here. Leave enough room in your budget for good lenses.

In my opinion, going from a t2i to a t5i don't give you any meaningful raise in image quality, The performance of the sensors are actually very close.

You'll get some more gadgets, and some more features, but the photos will be very similar.

I use Nikon. I used to date a Nikon user. Now I l know better and date only Canon and Sony users. But I prefer women with iphones over droids and other brands.

I am still using my my Nikon D300. It has never needed repair and has used only about 2/3s its estimated shutter life. My Nikon lenses are 50mm, 80-400 and 16-85. I also have a Tokina 100mm macro lens.

I shoot a lot now with my iphone 6+, but very little is for fine art or even for stock. But it does help me promote myself. That said I may start uploading some of my iphone work soon.

Sony a77 & a77m2, Tamron 70-200 & 150-600.

@ Bradford ! WINK! That was cute !

I hesitate to say, but I am still a dinosaur.

Digital photographers will know what I mean.

Sharon, it also depends on whether you want a crop sensor or full frame camera. I do a lot of telephoto photography so I prefer to use a crop sensor for long shots. I went from a T4i to a 7d Mark II. It is a bit heavier but it's way more responsive, fires in bursts to catch action and it produces better quality images. I also like landscape photography, so I bought a 6d with a wide angle kit lens,. The 6d is an entry-level full frame camera but I've been very pleased with it. Another reason I use 2 cameras is that I don't want to be bothered with swapping out lenses when I'm hiking, nor do I want to introduce dirt into the camera body. The downside is the weight of hiking with 2 cameras with lenses attached but I've gotten used to it so that's not a big deal.

Not sure what your budget is, but I didn't have the money to pay cash for either camera so I used Bill Me Later through PayPal and that gave me 6 months to pay them off interest free. Perfect solution for me since I just divided the cost by 6 and sent that amount every month without feeling like my piggy bank was taking a big hit. Whatever camera you decide to buy, I highly recommend that you go to both Adorama and B&H to see what freebies they offer with the camera. The price may be nearly identical at both places but you may get more value at one vs. the other.

Sharon,

If you can find a T5i camera and I think both Sam's and Costco sell both cameras and camera kits, that's a good deal. If on the other hand, if you want the best Canon EOS Rebel camera, the new T6s is the way to go!

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-760d-rebel-t6s

I would look for a body only T6s and then go create! Eventually, you may choose to go to a full frame, but as I mentioned, for stuff here, not needed, since I've seen an image sold, 40" x 60" from an iPhone...............

So for about $800 or less, get the best Canon sensor and with your existing lenses, no need to invest for a few years, if at all!

Rich

There's more than print dimensions to consider. Image quality is an issue. I'm not saying that images from cheap cameras don't sell here or that better cameras can't produce crappier images if not used correctly. But don't we all want to produce the best images we can within the limits of our equipment and expertise?

This is a bit off-topic but I want to add that I had looked into upgrading to a T5i or waiting for the T6s but I was leery of that line because the AV button on my T4i began to malfunction, causing the speed to change rather than the aperture. Fouled up many action shots that could have been killer. The camera was barely out of warranty when it went south and I didn't want to put out $ for repairs or buy another camera from that line that may have the same defect.

hi Sharon - something to consider. How invested in the Canon system are you? IE a body and a kit lens or . . . multiple high end prime and zoom lenses.
Not that it matters but I shoot with a Nikon and once I got into it, it made sense to stay there. Simply because the body might need to be upgraded but you can still keep your stock of lenses, rather than doing a complete turnaround. Of course yeah if you go Nikon from Canon you can sell or sometimes trade in the lenses but it would be obviously at a loss. Canon or Nikon, despite this being a bit of debate, frankly i would think if you are into Canon, unless you are just there with a kit lens and low end body, stay there.
Now Scott Kelby who is sort of a god re photo instruction and education recently went from Nikon to Canon but i have a suspicion that this was a business decision (sponsorship and advertising) rather than one system vs the other. Anyhow keep in mind how invested you are in terms of your existing gear.
Crop vs full censor is another issue. And like one of the earlier replies I use a Nikon D300, and my lenses go back to when i was shooting film (with Nikons).
good luck - i won't comment on the various Canon bodies because I know the Nikon line but not the Canons.

Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fuji....they all make great stuff, unless you are pixel peeping and expect the bleeding edge of image quality, it honestly doesn't matter. Pick a system you like, fits you well, and you understand.

Again, what is holding you back with your t2i? my best selling photo here was taken with a t2i!

Upgrading bodies in a lot of respects is like trading cars, sure its a little nicer, it has a few less miles and is less likely to break down, might even go a bit faster, but for the most part you are going to get to the exact same place regardless. Its a tool, lots of different hammers can pound a nail.

Now, if you want to see a REAL difference in IQ....step up to quality (expensive) glass. Your money is so much better spent there its not even funny, in my opinion at least.

I still sell a lot from my old Panasonic G3 micro four thirds outfit. The REAL difference is finding intriguing subjects and creating compelling compositions.

.....

Side note: someone like Scott Kelly is sponsored by various camera manufacturers.

First, where are the Pentaxians? They are usually in these threads in droves this far into it. (BTW, Pentax also makes a nice camera.)

Thomas is spot on here though. Upgrading just to upgrade is likely a waste of money unless the new camera does something the old one does not and you NEED that something.

I think the best bang for the buck there is is the Canon 5D (Original) and a Canon 50f1.8. (Nikon D700s may be the same but I don't know Nikon used pricing.)

I just upgraded to a 6D with three lenses right now, the 17-40L, a Rikonan 24 f1.4 and of course the 50 f1.8. I will say why and what that did over the original 5D and why I NEEDED it later and explain why it was better for me than a 5D MkIII.

Oh and just because one artist can enlarge things or sell 60 inch Iphone images that doesn't mean we mere mortals can.

This discussion gets brought up all the time in discussions of photography, I have stopped getting mad about. My belief is the /artist makes the image in their mind, the camera is just a tool to capture it. I choose to upgrade my glass rather then my lens so I am still using my tried and true Canon 50D...

Thomas... I don't understand the question about what is holding me back with the T2i. As far as I can tell.. nothing. I love my T2i, but thought about going up to higher pixels. I looked at the T6 but there were some issues with it initially they were working on. Pretty sure I'm a Canon kinda lady. When I did band photography I liked the night shooting feature on a friends T3. My budget isn't huge so I was just getting a feel for what ya'll thought. Thanks for all the great input. JC... once I'm selling enough to pay my rent.... I can afford a little better upgrade.. so far I just sold 1 tote .. to a friend ! :)

If nothing is holding you back on the t2i, and you love it, save the money and just keep it would be my advice! More megapixels is vastly overrated unless you routinely print over 40-60" wide.

BTW what i mean by holding you back is, what doesn't it do that you wish it would.

My own example, I aspire to get a 5ds, for the added megapixels. It will not make any photo my 5dmkIII won't, but the ability to print at over 80" without enlargement would set me apart at shows.

I upgraded from my t2i to a 5dmkII because it was a crop sensor, and for a lot of L lenses I wanted to use (like the 17-40 F4L), it wouldn't give as wide of a field of view. In addition the full frame sensor of a 5dmkII gave me better low light capabilities as far as ISO noise.

I upgraded from the 5dmkII to the 5dmkIII because I shoot in a lot of environments and subjects where the upgraded focusing system was a huge upgrade for me (think dark wedding dance venues). Landscape wise, my 5dmkII would have taken every single picture my 5dmkIII ever has.

There is a specific reason I upgraded each time, without that specific reason from what I can tell normally you spend a bunch of money and pretty much take the same photos.

Yupp, megapixels are WAY over rated. My original 5D, (12MP) routinely printed larger than my 50D even though the latter had more MP. Most specifically the 50D could get challenging in difficult lighting with noise issues whereas the full frame 5D did not.

Now, I could have stayed with the 5D but needed a few things the 6D had that it didn't and liked a few more.

1. Weather sealing... I shoot in some adverse weather.
2. 7 shot HR capability in a single burst. I had to shoot three, adjust the exposure and do three more in the 5D to get six. No biggie unless there are fast moving clouds, then that reset could cost me the image.
3. High usable ISO for astro photography. That was actually the big one btw.

now it also has a few niceties that were not needed like more MP and wireless remote shooting and knowing the lens so it can correct defects known to it.

The 6D was better for me than the 5DMKIII because it is lighter, I do not need the focus system/points in the new 5 and supposedly the ISO is slightly better in the 6. For a grand more I didn't need or want the 5DMKIII.

I weigh out every single camera/lens/equipment purchase as to whether it will pay for itself in a year. If the answer is yes, then I budget for it.

i'm waiting to see what the mk4 or whatever they are calling it - has. i think in august. but by then my shooting season is slowing down and i can wait a bit till they work the bugs out. if they get rid of that mosaic screen thing and it makes the images cleaner, brighter and sharper - that might be worth it. but i'd have to see. that's another large expense.

i got the mk2 to replace a 20d, going to full frame was worth it.
i got the mk3 to replace the mk2 because i wanted higher cleaner iso. and that was worth it because i can get shots i couldn't have gotten before.

things like wifi, gps etc - doesn't interest me much. and while i'd like 36mp, i don't think it would be a deal breaker because the files would probably be huge.

---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

Proud Pentaxian (K5 IIs) here!

Myself,....Nikon D800E and D7100 ,...after my D300 went of a cliff into the ocean with a 500mm f4 attached.

Don't ask.........

I use a mix of old Nikon manual lenses dating back to the 80's and earlier.

Whatever your comfortable with,...will do the job just fine.

My most important piece of equipment,...my tripod.

Marty Saccone

Nikon and Canon are both ok. ( I use nikon D700, nikon D5200, with a set of 5 different lenses and Fujifilm X100 ).
Your camera is ok . Why do you want to change it ?
If you want to explore new areas in photography it is better to invest in new lenses.
With a new camera you will not see a big difference in your photography but with a special lens you will have a new perspective.
The choice of new gear must depends on what you do want to achive, not on the number of funcy new buttons and spectacular specifications on the new cameras.

Grigorios Moraitis
ArtHellas.com

Scott Kelby says something like "if you want to take more interesting photos, stand in front of more interesting things".

I shot a lot of stock with my consumer Panasonic Lumix G3 Micro Fourth Thirds camera. It was small and lightweight. There was no excuse not to carry it along and it was great for travel. Once the income started to flow I moved up to the full frame 6D to be able to offer larger prints on FAA. But the trade off was a shockingly large camera compared to the Pany. Plus more expensive lenses and less focal point choices. The pany had a touch screen for focal points. Plus the 6D has that noisy flapping mirror.

The best thing about the full frame is the narrow depth of field possible and use of lens like the 17-40.

I'll attest to the waters seal. My 6D has survived some really wet conditions.

Can't let JC Down ... Pentaxian here!! I use a Pentax K-10D, K-r, and Optio Z-10. I sooo want a K5 IIs .... Jane how do you like yours?

Marty- ouch, ouch, ouch... I can't imagine what it felt like when that happened to your D300...

As for me, I went full frame by upgrading to a Nikon D610 from the D7000. I wanted the improved low light performance of the full frame sensor. I'll agree with everyone else- unless there is something your current body can't do, new glass is a much better investment.

I learned a lot.. thank you all. Think I'll stay where I'm at !

Funny things you learn about human nature Matt,...

After it happened and I finished mumbling a few adjectives,...

I looked behind me,...to see if anyone saw my misfortune,...felt pretty small at that moment.

cannon T2i 18.0 megs large fine file size of 5184 x 3456 that is a fantastic size to work with giving you some great options 34 x 34 square ect. do you like the focus/ feel.i was using a older olympus my favorite camera ever for feel/focus would change back not even thinking about it based on the newer nikon i am using now .will a new camera help you shoot/see better or just make you feel better and do not get me wrong i golf so a new club is great ... but !

Best of luck with the one you have, Sharon. I agree with Marty. My best equipment is my tripod (Ravelli) and a 3x viewfinder clip on to cope with vision needs. I use a Nikon 3200 with added Nikkor lenses (35mm, 40 mm, 50 mm plus kit lenses), 500 mm Opteka mirror lenses and a couple of others for the fun of it. They are only as good as my steadiness, experience and eye are.

Best regards,
Aliceann Carlton

I've been sorely tempted by the new Lumix point and shoot that has 30x optical zoom - and they've REDUCED the pixels to 12 MP. It'd be easier on my computer storage, less to carry, etc. etc. Thing is, the cameras I have work fine and I'd rather spend the money on a mini vacation somewhere.

I use a Fuji XE-1 and a Canon S-95. Used Nikons in the past. Frankly, I got tired of lugging around the bigger Nikon and have started selling ALL my Nikon lenses on eBay.

As many have said, camera is just a tool. It's what you do with it. Remember, every great picture taken in the past was likely taken with a camera less sophisticated than the one you own.

** Mary Lee Dereske

A couple of you have mentioned the 17-40L. I currently use only the 24-105L for landscapes on a full body. Do you think the 17-40 is a better quality lens or do you prefer it just because of the wider angle?

My 17-40 is a stitch sharper than my 24-105. It deals with light into the lens (flare) more pleasingly than my 24-105, and 17mm-24mm, while doesn't sound like a lot, is a MUCH wider field of view. That said, I toss on the 105 pretty often too for the extra reach, and I have a 24-70 2.8 L too for if I need extra light.

If I had to own just one for landscape work I would own the 17-40 F4, I could probably get rid of my 24-105 because I have a 70-200 2.8 if I want the extra reach, but I like and use the lens enough that I keep it. Its an excellent lens for walking about the 17-40 if I just take it, I never have enough reach.

*shrug* they all have their places where they excel I spose.

Nice thread. I'm in the process of "downsizing" to a MFT - as in Mirrorless AND Micro Four Thirds. Last fall a scored a great eBay deal to give the small MFT a try. I like the results but need an eye-level viewfinder - and read good reports about the Olympus e-M10 with a new version EVF. So I ordered a body two weeks ago - and am falling in love with it. I'm still using the two "kit zooms" that I got with the used deal (which also included an OLY underwater housing) - for about $250.

I like Ed Fielding's approach with MFT and find, as he does, that it is light, easy to carry and therefore more likely to be with me.

I shot an airshow over the weekend and discovered I really, really like this camera. So now I'm looking at some quality glass for my outdoor scenes and nature stuff. Here's a sample from Saturday. This is at 16MP.



And here's one from my used ("explore MFT") camera at 12MP.



And another with the new body at 16MP.





---------------
~ Bill
~ US Pictures .com

OK - forgot... Downsizing from what? From Nikon DX. It will be sad to give up my Sigma 10-20 zoom. But I'm sure I'll find something to replace it.


---------------
~ Bill
~ US Pictures .com

Still using my Nikon D300 but dreaming of a Nikon D800 :-)

JC, you mention Astrophotography but I'm not sure I've ever seen any you've done and would love to.

You haven't yet and won't until I actually know what I am doing, have the right weather AND the right subjects

Generally, I am playing with it a little now mostly using a long dark road. It is not all the scenic but is close to my house and relatively dark. Good practice.

The weather here won't really work for commercial grade astro work until the late fall. So much humidity and haze in the sky even at night limits the viability during summer. I do have trips and places picked for the late fall/winter though.

Never shot a 24-105 so I cannot comment on that. My next lens is a 70-200 f2.8 for the reach. (Non IS btw)

I use a Nikon D3200 with a dx 55-200 AFS lens. Works great....not to big. Fits in the hand well...nice megapixels and the colors are spot on.