Back from the dead... except for the camera

[Fit]

Hi gang,

It's been far too long (cough - years) since I stuck my head in here. CiC was instrumental in fostering my early photographic efforts; I remain so impressed with the quality of photography, comments and community here.

The absence - my cheese/food photo hobby turned into a 6 year detour owning a cheese shop and restaurant. I closed up last summer.
During that time - my photography was 90% iPhone X; worked well for my needs.

My new work is also in food- working for a friend's restaurant leading their media/marketing and events. But shooting there during business is much more difficult. Always very low light, light in the room is very red... no room for a tripod etc. The phone won't cut it and neither does my (now very old) Nikon D90. The D90 especially as just this week it swung off my shoulder and hit the floor. No great loss - it was woefully outdated.

Long story... but I'm now in the market for a new rig. A lot of reading here and there has me pretty enamored with Sony Alpha A7III. I had hands on with it for about 15 minutes- need to decide if I like how it fits my hand. So used the chunky grips on Nikon. Wondering about the Nikon Z6 too- but I think I'm convinced about the Sony. The shopkeeper did recommend I consider the Nikon D750 DSLR - but I think I'd rather be at the front, rather than the trailing edge of the tech with this purchase. Granted, with the 750's price I could also grab 2-3 lenses for versatility.

As an unplanned expense, $2000 is a little steep for the body. But I can make that work. I know Sony glass is $$$ but the newer Nikon FF lenses aren't cheap either.

Open to suggestions based on anybody with similar usage: low light, handheld.... gorilla sort of work. But I will get back into hobby photography this year - later.

Say I get the A7III - I'm also talking myself into starting with just one lens, and a prime at that - the Sony/Zeiss 55mm f1.8... then adding another lens, either a wide prime or maybe the Tamron 28-75 or something similar in that bracket.
That puts me around $3,000 for starters if I go the A7III + 55mm route.

Boy I'm long-winded. Anyway - good to be back here. Looking forward to learning.

Thanks!

[Manfred M]

My wife just upgraded from a D90 to a D7500. That took a fair bit of back and forth of thinking and eliminating options. Unless you also destroyed your lenses, you can save a fair chunk of money by staying with a crop frame Nikon if you have have a fair bit of money invested in lenses for that camera.

I spent some time in a local camera store playing around with the Nikon Z6 and Z7 this week. Focus is still slow when compared to my D810 and the battery life on mirrorless cameras is terrible versus DSLRs. I would suggest I found that the design is still immature and I will wait for at least another generation before looking at a mirrorless Nikon. I have heard the same comment from Canon shooters regarding the new Canon offerings. The other comment I will make about all mirrorless cameras is that while the body is smaller, the lenses for a given focal length are still the same weight as on a DSLR, so the weight savings are only going to work out in your favour if you go to smaller or fewer lenses.

Going from a crop frame to a full frame. Unless you are looking at printing large format images or are looking to use some pro lenses like shift-tilt lenses or you want to shoot with a shallower depth of field and are willing to invest in pro lenses, the additional costs are going to be a big negative.

When it comes to Sony cameras, I know a number of Sony shooters at my photo club. Their cameras seem to be back at Sony for repair work far more often than the other makes. My sample size is around 7 people, so I would not look at this as statistically important, but it is something that is definitely something I would check into if you know any Sony shooters.

[billtils]

My wife just upgraded from a D90 to a D7500. That took a fair bit of back and forth of thinking and eliminating options. Unless you also destroyed your lenses, you can save a fair chunk of money by staying with a crop frame Nikon if you have have a fair bit of money invested in lenses for that camera.

I spent some time in a local camera store playing around with the Nikon Z6 and Z7 this week. Focus is still slow when compared to my D810 and the battery life on mirrorless cameras is terrible versus DSLRs. I would suggest I found that the design is still immature and I will wait for at least another generation before looking at a mirrorless Nikon. I have heard the same comment from Canon shooters regarding the new Canon offerings. The other comment I will make about all mirrorless cameras is that while the body is smaller, the lenses for a given focal length are still the same weight as on a DSLR, so the weight savings are only going to work out in your favour if you go to smaller or fewer lenses.

Going from a crop frame to a full frame. Unless you are looking at printing large format images or are looking to use some pro lenses like shift-tilt lenses or you want to shoot with a shallower depth of field and are willing to invest in pro lenses, the additional costs are going to be a big negative.

When it comes to Sony cameras, I know a number of Sony shooters at my photo club. Their cameras seem to be back at Sony for repair work far more often than the other makes. My sample size is around 7 people, so I would not look at this as statistically important, but it is something that is definitely something I would check into if you know any Sony shooters.

+1 to (most) of that. I'd add that the biggest plus I have found in going to FF from a crop is the low light/high ISO performance but whether or not that matters will depend on what you shoot. There are also non-objective factors - I changed from a crop Nikon (D7100) to FF (D750) because I liked what I saw in results from a couple of friends with Canon 5D3 bodies, and just liked what I was getting from the D750, but don't ask me for any objective proof . I do a lot of birding and got to the stage where the weight of the 150-600mm lens was too much and switched to the amazing and light Nikon 300mmPF but had to choose between changing the body to a D500 crop body or a D810 for the extra pixels to crop in PP. Despite the great feedback from users, going "back" to a crop body has no appeal.

Were it not for my arthritic finger joints and fascination with birds I'd still be a very happy D750 owner - it's what it does, not when it was released that matters.

[rtbaum]

Hi Chris, I've always wondered what had come of you!

I shoot with the D750 and have been quite happy with its performance in dim conditions, such as a restaurant. Paired with a 28mm f1.8 nikkor, I have captured a few nice shots in low light. If you wish to stay with crop, the D500 may want to check out the D500

[rpcrowe]

Welcome back Chris... If I were going to specialize in food photography or basically any type of product photography, I would choose the Canon 6D Mark-2. I know that I have ranted and raved about some of the shortcomings of this camera but, IMO, for food and product photography it is an excellent choice.

This is a great camera to use with live view and the touch focus and shoot with the fully articulating LCD monitor is really super. I use a stylus to point out the exact area where I want to focus. It is fast and easy for shooting focus stacking groups.

Again, if I were to specialize in food/product photography, I would use two lenses, both macro. One lens would be about 90-105mm and the second lens would be about 50-60mm. These two lenses would be all that I needed. I use a Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 (non-L) lens and have used the Canon 50mm f/2.5 lens. In actuality, the 50-60mm lens doesn't need to be a macro, it just needs to be very sharp. A tilt-shift lens would be beneficial but is not at all absolutely necessary.

The "Bite Shot" is a series of very enjoyable YouTube videos on food photography.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHoXFeDmVRc

There are also a multitude of YouTube food photography tricks videos such as this one...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MflT0I7ZPCs&t=30s

[AlwaysOnAuto]

Get the A7iii, adapt your Nikon lenses, get the SZ 55 for it and you'll never look back. The FE 28/2 is a good lens too and not all that pricey to start out with as well.

A7ii+adapted lenses shooter here. Check out the TalkEmount site as well: https://www.talkemount.com/

[Fit]

Hey gang- thanks for the feedback - Hi Randy & Richard - good to see you here

I did spend more time reviewing the 750. I know the 500 is a low-light "monster" but both trail just a little too far in tech for me. While video is secondary, I do want to use it to shoot 4K (I do so now with the iPhoneX, a gimbal and Filmic Pro)
Up-to-date Bluetooth too is important as I'll occasionally be dumping shots straight to my phone or MacAir for quick posting online.

I don't have such an investment in Nikon glass as to be an issue. It's all older and average quality at this point. I know someone who will take it off my hands.

Alan- thanks for the feedback!

[Tri Danimal]

Hey Chris,

I'm an A7iii shooter. I have the A7iii and Tamron 28-75, I LOVE this combo. That being said my images aren't the best for trying to sell you on the lens. I took the below photo this morning, its lightly edited. I have several that Im working on from this past weekends snowshoing adventure with my wife and buddy.

Tamron 28-75 F2.8 without stabilization for $800.

Sony has the below options WITH stabilization:
Zeiss 24-70 f4 for $1200
G Master 24-70 f2.8 for $2200
G 24-105 f4 $1200

For that price tag its an AMAZING bang for your buck when compared to the sony glass in that price range.

Also, I just started using the mc11 adapter for my Sigma 150-600 and it works flawlessly. I would imagine the Nikon adapter would work pretty well as well.

[rpcrowe]

The MC-11 adapter works absolutely best with a small selection of Sigma lenses https://www.sigmaphoto.com/mount-converter-mc-11

However, it will work to one degree or another using various other Sony and Canon lenses.

I have heard great things about the Tamron 28-75mm with Sony mount. I do wonder about the great difference in pricing between the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 for Canon and Nikon bodies and the Tamron 28-75mm with a Sony mount... The Canon mount version runs $400 (USD) from B&H in New York City while the Sony mount version runs $879 from the same place.

My absolute favorite Sony lens is the 85mm f/1.8, especially when used on a camera body that has IBIS. The Focus Hold Button (which I have reassigned to Eye-AF) is really remarkable.

[DanK]

I do wonder about the great difference in pricing between the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 for Canon and Nikon bodies and the Tamron 28-75mm with a Sony mount... The Canon mount version runs $400 (USD) from B&H in New York City while the Sony mount version runs $879 from the same place.

Looks like different lenses to me. $879 gets you the f/2.8 Di III RXD, which they seem to have only for the Sony. $489-499 gets upi tje A09 SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical, which is available for Sony as well as Nikon and Canon.

[Fit]

Thanks Dan and Alan-

I stopped by a store tonight and put my hands on several Sony and Nikon options (including the A7III and the Z6).

A question for those with the A7III - that viewfinder (eyepiece) ??!!?? - it quivers so badly and is blurry. It also lags when you whip around quickly. Is that digitial interference in the store or is that just where the Sony's are at? I haven't read of people complaining about it, but I've tried the A7III, th 7II, the R, the S - all have this eyepiece viewfinder that I found really hard to use. While the Z6 is extremely smooth.

[Fit]

Wondering if this is the issue- not focusing the diopter to my eyesight and the refresh rate?

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61634286

Because what I was seing through the eyepiece was nowhere as good as this video

https://petapixel.com/2018/03/26/a-l...e-sony-a7-iii/

[Fit]

This what I was seeing - except worse- the blur was obviously the EVF out of focu

https://www.dropbox.com/s/1a7daaae0o..._EVF.mov?dl=0#

[Manfred M]

A question for those with the A7III - that viewfinder (eyepiece) ??!!?? - it quivers so badly and is blurry. It also lags when you whip around quickly.

This is called "viewfinder tearing" and is a result of the viewfinder refresh rate not keeping up with camera movement. Move the camera fast enough and any electronic viewfinder is going to exhibit this issue. My Panasonic GX7 was well known for this issue, but frankly, that never prevented me from getting the shot any more than having mirror blackout with a DSLR did. I had a good look at the Nikon Z7 at a local camera store last week and found that the electronic viewfinder was quite good, but compared to what one sees through a DLSR viewfinder, it's not even close. Mirrorless cameras have other issues I would be more concerned about than this. If this bothers you, stick with a DSLR...

When it comes to the video taken through the camera's viewfinder we are getting a combination of the refresh rate of the viewfinder, the frame rate of the camera recording the video as well as any rendering changes when the video was reproduced as well as any potential issues as the video is transmitted. Nicely said, the video you see on your screen does not necessarily bear any resemblance to what the camera viewfinder was doing.

[Fit]

This is called "viewfinder tearing" and is a result of the viewfinder refresh rate not keeping up with camera movement. Move the camera fast enough and any electronic viewfinder is going to exhibit this issue. My Panasonic GX7 was well known for this issue, but frankly, that never prevented me from getting the shot any more than having mirror blackout with a DSLR did. I had a good look at the Nikon Z7 at a local camera store last week and found that the electronic viewfinder was quite good, but compared to what one sees through a DLSR viewfinder, it's not even close. Mirrorless cameras have other issues I would be more concerned about than this. If this bothers you, stick with a DSLR...

When it comes to the video taken through the camera's viewfinder we are getting a combination of the refresh rate of the viewfinder, the frame rate of the camera recording the video as well as any rendering changes when the video was reproduced as well as any potential issues as the video is transmitted. Nicely said, the video you see on your screen does not necessarily bear any resemblance to what the camera viewfinder was doing.

Thanks Manfred- I get that (video of an electronic screen). Suffice it to say, the "tearing" I witnessed was worse than the impression that photo leaves

[Manfred M]

Thanks Manfred- I get that (video of an electronic screen). Suffice it to say, the "tearing" I witnessed was worse than the impression that photo leaves

The tearing is what you really see. The photo freezes the motion and cannot accurately represent what is happening in the viewfinder.

[rpcrowe]

I set my crop sensor Sony A6500 to a refresh rate of 120 FPS which decreases lag in the viewfinder. This will also decrease battery life but, since I only shoot stills with the camera, I have no problems with battery life. However, I always carry a couple of spare batteries.

I "think" that the A7iii has a refresh rate of 240 FPS which would certainly give even less lag. Apparently, the EVF of the A7iii is far superior to that of the A6500...

You need to focus in the EVF using the diopter wheel next to the viewfinder. Here is a personal gripe about diopter wheels... I have been shooting DSLR cameras since the Canon 10D was introduced eons ago and I have never once inadvertently switched the mode to a mode that I didn't want. I wonder how many people have had a problem of moving the mode dial erroneously. However, both Canon and Sony (very likely other brands also) have put mode locks on the dial.

OTOH, I and many other people frequently bump the diopter dial. This happens so often that many instruction guides will advise always checking that diopter focus. Yet there is no sort of lock for the diopter dial.

I also switch off the view shot image selection since that slows me down and sometimes confuses my old brain.

[Tri Danimal]

I have heard great things about the Tamron 28-75mm with Sony mount. I do wonder about the great difference in pricing between the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 for Canon and Nikon bodies and the Tamron 28-75mm with a Sony mount... The Canon mount version runs $400 (USD) from B&H in New York City while the Sony mount version runs $879 from the same place.

I can't comment on Nikon or Canon, but I do know that Sony charges third parties fee for using the E-Mount technology, I'm sure the third party passes that fee oto the customer in som capacity. I love my Tamron 28-75 so much that I ahve already committed to buying the 15-35 and 70-200 range lenses when Tamron finally releases them. there arerumors that tamron is working on them in 2019.

Richard, If we ever are at the same event I will gladly loan you my Tamron 28-75 to try out for a bit.

[rpcrowe]

I can't comment on Nikon or Canon, but I do know that Sony charges third parties fee for using the E-Mount technology, I'm sure the third party passes that fee oto the customer in som capacity. I love my Tamron 28-75 so much that I ahve already committed to buying the 15-35 and 70-200 range lenses when Tamron finally releases them. there arerumors that tamron is working on them in 2019.

Richard, If we ever are at the same event I will gladly loan you my Tamron 28-75 to try out for a bit.

https://www.talkemount.com/threads/d...28-75mm.18886/
I don't know how to link specifically to the video shown in the talkemount.com thread but, the video is quite interesting in that it shows the Eye-AF and Face Detect focusing capability of the Tamron 28-75mm...It is the 5th posting in the thread by a poster named BDBIT...

[Fit]

https://www.talkemount.com/threads/d...28-75mm.18886/
I don't know how to link specifically to the video shown in the talkemount.com thread but, the video is quite interesting in that it shows the Eye-AF and Face Detect focusing capability of the Tamron 28-75mm...It is the 5th posting in the thread by a poster named BDBIT...

I had seen that- this post

https://www.talkemount.com/threads/d...6/#post-155984

I can confirm that the AF bug was fixed. I was quite interested in the Tamron - may still get it eventually. Price did go up about $100 and it's often sold out.

It apparently struggles more than some in very low light (at least the AF - manual it can still be sharp). But I think I'll start with the Sony ZA 55mm now that I've had more time to put my hands on the camera and lens.

Follow up on the EVF- it was indeed me not knowing that I needed to adjust the diopter.