Camera upgrade ponderings
Discussion
I find myself in a position of being invested in two camera ecosystems with a variety of lenses accumulated over the years (mostly second-hand) and a mild dilemma of where to go next... first world problems I know! It might be a while before I upgrade anyway, so plenty of time to think about it.
Time to bounce some ideas off the PH photog community for your thoughts... prepare for an essay, I'm probably greatly overthinking it all!
Nikon gear:
D7200 body (APS-C)
Tokina 12-24mm f4 (DX)
Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 (DX)
Nikon 18-140mm AF-S (DX)
Nikon 28mm f2.8 AF-D
Nikon 50mm f1.8 AF-D
Nikon 70-300mm AF-S VR
Sigma EX 100-300mm f4
Sigma EX 150mm f2.8 macro
Tamron 150-600mm (G1)
Fuji gear
XT3 body
14mm f2.8
18-55mm f2.8-4
23mm f2
18-135mm f3.5-5.6 (thinking about selling this one regardless as I barely use it)
50-230mm f4.5-6.7
These days I mostly use the Nikon for motorsport (rallying) and wildlife (though its still a capable all-rounder), and the Fuji for landscapes, hiking trips and all-round walkabout stuff.
I bought the Fuji for something lighter and more compact to carry when hiking etc, but found I really enjoy using their control system with physical dials and aperture ring etc.
Image quality is pretty even between them IMO, but the Nikon AF is significantly better at tracking fast moving objects (and longer lenses for Fuji are expensive and harder to find second hand).
I had been thinking about a second-hand D500 to upgrade from the D7200 - I realise image quality won't be significantly if any better (maybe a bit less noise but also a tad less detail), but the improved AF tracking and burst rate would be nice as a primarily motorsport/wildlife camera, and the extra size/weight wouldn't matter with the smaller lighter Fuji doing other duties.
But the progress of Nikon's recent Z series updates have me considering moving fully back into Nikon, selling the Fuji gear and going full-frame with a Zf or Z5ii (which should be a nice step up in image quality). I like the idea of the Zf having manual control dials like the Fuji, but practicality swings me toward the Z5ii for better ergonomics (and it is cheaper for the same performance).
I could use some of my Nikon lenses with a Z and the FTZ adapter - but the DX lenses wouldn't be much use, the AF-D lenses won't autofocus, and I'm not sure if my third-party lenses will work properly and autofocus with the FTZ. Which would be a shame because the Sigma 100-300 f4 is my favourite and most used lens for motorsport and the Tamron 150-600 my most used lens for wildlife, replacing those could be costly.
D500s still hold fairly strong value second hand, which is money that could be saved towards a Z body - the last few D500s I've seen sell here have been around NZ$1000-1200 depending on shutter count, and a new Z5ii is NZ$3150 RRP - I expect there will be some discounts from that too once it isn't so new, but also have to factor in the cost of FTZ adapter, extra batteries as it won't compete with DSLR battery life, and probably one or two new lenses which would only be partly offset by selling old lenses.
If any of you have used both, is a D500 really far enough ahead of the D7200 to justify that cost and putting off a bigger upgrade?
Also, any experience comparing their AF tracking with recent Z-bodies?
I'm leaning towards it being better to save my pennies toward a Z5ii, hang onto the D7200 and wait and see if I still want to use a DX DSLR for motorsport/wildlife once I have a Z in my paws.
But open to other suggestions and reality checks etc! Any helpful thoughts?
Time to bounce some ideas off the PH photog community for your thoughts... prepare for an essay, I'm probably greatly overthinking it all!
Nikon gear:
D7200 body (APS-C)
Tokina 12-24mm f4 (DX)
Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 (DX)
Nikon 18-140mm AF-S (DX)
Nikon 28mm f2.8 AF-D
Nikon 50mm f1.8 AF-D
Nikon 70-300mm AF-S VR
Sigma EX 100-300mm f4
Sigma EX 150mm f2.8 macro
Tamron 150-600mm (G1)
Fuji gear
XT3 body
14mm f2.8
18-55mm f2.8-4
23mm f2
18-135mm f3.5-5.6 (thinking about selling this one regardless as I barely use it)
50-230mm f4.5-6.7
These days I mostly use the Nikon for motorsport (rallying) and wildlife (though its still a capable all-rounder), and the Fuji for landscapes, hiking trips and all-round walkabout stuff.
I bought the Fuji for something lighter and more compact to carry when hiking etc, but found I really enjoy using their control system with physical dials and aperture ring etc.
Image quality is pretty even between them IMO, but the Nikon AF is significantly better at tracking fast moving objects (and longer lenses for Fuji are expensive and harder to find second hand).
I had been thinking about a second-hand D500 to upgrade from the D7200 - I realise image quality won't be significantly if any better (maybe a bit less noise but also a tad less detail), but the improved AF tracking and burst rate would be nice as a primarily motorsport/wildlife camera, and the extra size/weight wouldn't matter with the smaller lighter Fuji doing other duties.
But the progress of Nikon's recent Z series updates have me considering moving fully back into Nikon, selling the Fuji gear and going full-frame with a Zf or Z5ii (which should be a nice step up in image quality). I like the idea of the Zf having manual control dials like the Fuji, but practicality swings me toward the Z5ii for better ergonomics (and it is cheaper for the same performance).
I could use some of my Nikon lenses with a Z and the FTZ adapter - but the DX lenses wouldn't be much use, the AF-D lenses won't autofocus, and I'm not sure if my third-party lenses will work properly and autofocus with the FTZ. Which would be a shame because the Sigma 100-300 f4 is my favourite and most used lens for motorsport and the Tamron 150-600 my most used lens for wildlife, replacing those could be costly.
D500s still hold fairly strong value second hand, which is money that could be saved towards a Z body - the last few D500s I've seen sell here have been around NZ$1000-1200 depending on shutter count, and a new Z5ii is NZ$3150 RRP - I expect there will be some discounts from that too once it isn't so new, but also have to factor in the cost of FTZ adapter, extra batteries as it won't compete with DSLR battery life, and probably one or two new lenses which would only be partly offset by selling old lenses.
If any of you have used both, is a D500 really far enough ahead of the D7200 to justify that cost and putting off a bigger upgrade?
Also, any experience comparing their AF tracking with recent Z-bodies?
I'm leaning towards it being better to save my pennies toward a Z5ii, hang onto the D7200 and wait and see if I still want to use a DX DSLR for motorsport/wildlife once I have a Z in my paws.
But open to other suggestions and reality checks etc! Any helpful thoughts?
I’m a Canon mirrorless user, so bear that in mind… 
You’ve lots of duplication of focal lengths in your Nikon lenses. My first thoughts would to decide which two or three Z lenses would I need to buy to make full use of a Z5ii. Come up with a price for those items. Then, how much could you get selling or part exchanging all your current Nikon gear. Can you justify the extra expense to change to mirrorless?
For me, with my Canon R3, there’s absolutely no competition, mirrorless trounces dSLR in almost every way. Even battery life is no where near as bad as we were all told.
The idea has been planted in your mind, and all that’s happening now is that your dSLR gear is at risk of depreciating, and you don’t have the ‘better’ system yet.
I’ve three RF lenses, and one EF with adapter. The EF is a 16-35mm f4 that isn’t used very often. The three RFs are getting used quite heavily.
Just do it!
You’ve lots of duplication of focal lengths in your Nikon lenses. My first thoughts would to decide which two or three Z lenses would I need to buy to make full use of a Z5ii. Come up with a price for those items. Then, how much could you get selling or part exchanging all your current Nikon gear. Can you justify the extra expense to change to mirrorless?
For me, with my Canon R3, there’s absolutely no competition, mirrorless trounces dSLR in almost every way. Even battery life is no where near as bad as we were all told.
The idea has been planted in your mind, and all that’s happening now is that your dSLR gear is at risk of depreciating, and you don’t have the ‘better’ system yet.
I’ve three RF lenses, and one EF with adapter. The EF is a 16-35mm f4 that isn’t used very often. The three RFs are getting used quite heavily.
Just do it!
Tony1963 said:
I m a Canon mirrorless user, so bear that in mind
You ve lots of duplication of focal lengths in your Nikon lenses. My first thoughts would to decide which two or three Z lenses would I need to buy to make full use of a Z5ii. Come up with a price for those items. Then, how much could you get selling or part exchanging all your current Nikon gear. Can you justify the extra expense to change to mirrorless?
For me, with my Canon R3, there s absolutely no competition, mirrorless trounces dSLR in almost every way. Even battery life is no where near as bad as we were all told.
The idea has been planted in your mind, and all that s happening now is that your dSLR gear is at risk of depreciating, and you don t have the better system yet.
I ve three RF lenses, and one EF with adapter. The EF is a 16-35mm f4 that isn t used very often. The three RFs are getting used quite heavily.
Just do it!
I agree.You ve lots of duplication of focal lengths in your Nikon lenses. My first thoughts would to decide which two or three Z lenses would I need to buy to make full use of a Z5ii. Come up with a price for those items. Then, how much could you get selling or part exchanging all your current Nikon gear. Can you justify the extra expense to change to mirrorless?
For me, with my Canon R3, there s absolutely no competition, mirrorless trounces dSLR in almost every way. Even battery life is no where near as bad as we were all told.
The idea has been planted in your mind, and all that s happening now is that your dSLR gear is at risk of depreciating, and you don t have the better system yet.
I ve three RF lenses, and one EF with adapter. The EF is a 16-35mm f4 that isn t used very often. The three RFs are getting used quite heavily.
Just do it!
I had 'spare' lenses as my wife reckoned, or duplicate focal length ranges as I thought of them. I sold off the ones I hardly used. I got/get the occasional 'If only I had my . . .' but there's always a simple work-around. The offer for one of my cameras was a bit derisory, so I have three all but identical bodies.
I bought a tripod (you can never have too many), a geared head, lighting, backpack, walking boots, an additional bit for my cage, and bits pieces.
Cheers - you are right that there is a fair bit of overlap in focal lengths, though not quite so much overlap in actual usage. But there are a few I could easily enough do without.
I don't regard mirrorless as being fundamentally better than DSLR (at least with the ones I've used, nothing current), just pros and cons for different uses - but I'm well aware that practically all the development investment is going in that direction and DSLRs will soon get left behind (if they even keep making any).
Good thoughts about pricing up a new lens selection, Z lenses aren't cheap and there aren't as many on the second hand market yet. Though being able to easily use Nikon F mount lenses with the FTZ adapter helps with that.
If I stagger the changeover (keeping the D7200 for long lens action for a start), an initial lens selection for me to get started with a Z system would probably just be:
- All-rounder zoom, perhaps the 24-120 f4 which has exceptional reviews.
- Something wide and fast (probably prime rather than zoom), maybe the 20mm f1.8 or a third party equivalent.
- Perhaps a more compact prime in the 30-50mm range for when I want to travel lighter, I enjoy the simplicity of the 23mm f2 (35mm FF equivalent) on the Fuji.
I'm confident the 70-300VR will play nicely with an FTZ adapter, and that will give me time to test how well FTZ works with my third party lenses before deciding what to do in that department.
So I don't think I need to sell everything and make a whole system jump all at once.
I don't regard mirrorless as being fundamentally better than DSLR (at least with the ones I've used, nothing current), just pros and cons for different uses - but I'm well aware that practically all the development investment is going in that direction and DSLRs will soon get left behind (if they even keep making any).
Good thoughts about pricing up a new lens selection, Z lenses aren't cheap and there aren't as many on the second hand market yet. Though being able to easily use Nikon F mount lenses with the FTZ adapter helps with that.
If I stagger the changeover (keeping the D7200 for long lens action for a start), an initial lens selection for me to get started with a Z system would probably just be:
- All-rounder zoom, perhaps the 24-120 f4 which has exceptional reviews.
- Something wide and fast (probably prime rather than zoom), maybe the 20mm f1.8 or a third party equivalent.
- Perhaps a more compact prime in the 30-50mm range for when I want to travel lighter, I enjoy the simplicity of the 23mm f2 (35mm FF equivalent) on the Fuji.
I'm confident the 70-300VR will play nicely with an FTZ adapter, and that will give me time to test how well FTZ works with my third party lenses before deciding what to do in that department.
So I don't think I need to sell everything and make a whole system jump all at once.
Just about to leave for the office so this will be brief, apologies in advance.
I had a 7200 and loved it, until I got my hands on the Z series. Big jump in usability and quality for my photography. Picked up Z6 second hand with FTZ and my lenses worked fine (notably Sigma 150-600). Autofocus was slow but picked up in software update. Only real issue was dust spots on sensor due to no curtain when changing lens. Fixed in edit but more time consuming than it should have been.
Upgraded to Z8 in March and picked up 24-120 F4. Man, that lens is sharp. My 85 1.8 is my go-to though. Love the reach, bokeh and reliability of it.
Don’t think you’ll go too far wrong with the 7200, but the Z range could reinvigorate and more third party lenses are coming. The Tamron 135 1.8 looks very well priced from Cotswold Cameras
I had a 7200 and loved it, until I got my hands on the Z series. Big jump in usability and quality for my photography. Picked up Z6 second hand with FTZ and my lenses worked fine (notably Sigma 150-600). Autofocus was slow but picked up in software update. Only real issue was dust spots on sensor due to no curtain when changing lens. Fixed in edit but more time consuming than it should have been.
Upgraded to Z8 in March and picked up 24-120 F4. Man, that lens is sharp. My 85 1.8 is my go-to though. Love the reach, bokeh and reliability of it.
Don’t think you’ll go too far wrong with the 7200, but the Z range could reinvigorate and more third party lenses are coming. The Tamron 135 1.8 looks very well priced from Cotswold Cameras
I think twice in the last thirty years I’ve kept the old camera after buying a new one ‘just in case’.
I’ve learned my lesson. The old body would just sit in a bag, unused.
I don’t know about the Nikon Z lenses, but the Canon RF zooms are in some cases making decent primes unnecessary.
Isn’t it lovely to be faced with options!
I’ve learned my lesson. The old body would just sit in a bag, unused.
I don’t know about the Nikon Z lenses, but the Canon RF zooms are in some cases making decent primes unnecessary.
Isn’t it lovely to be faced with options!
GravelBen said:
Fuji gear
XT3 body
14mm f2.8
18-55mm f2.8-4
23mm f2
18-135mm f3.5-5.6 (thinking about selling this one regardless as I barely use it)
50-230mm f4.5-6.7
These days I mostly use the Nikon for motorsport (rallying) and wildlife (though its still a capable all-rounder), and the Fuji for landscapes, hiking trips and all-round walkabout stuff.
I bought the Fuji for something lighter and more compact to carry when hiking etc, but found I really enjoy using their control system with physical dials and aperture ring etc.
I don't know much about the Nikon system so I'll stick to Fuji - as it's your lightweight system would selling the XT3, 18-135 and 50-230 and buying a second hand X-T50 make sense? It will be a chunk smaller than the X-T3 and will be a bigger gap in size/bulk than your Nikon.XT3 body
14mm f2.8
18-55mm f2.8-4
23mm f2
18-135mm f3.5-5.6 (thinking about selling this one regardless as I barely use it)
50-230mm f4.5-6.7
These days I mostly use the Nikon for motorsport (rallying) and wildlife (though its still a capable all-rounder), and the Fuji for landscapes, hiking trips and all-round walkabout stuff.
I bought the Fuji for something lighter and more compact to carry when hiking etc, but found I really enjoy using their control system with physical dials and aperture ring etc.
I'm a Fuji guy, including for motorsport. It seems mad to have 2 systems on the go, it annoys me enough that my Fuji cameras have different batteries, let alone having multiple lenses.
I stuck with Fuji, having come from Canon full frame, because the lenses were smaller, even though I am using some big Fuji lenses, like the 50-140 f2.8, which is way smaller than my old Canon 70-200 f2.8.
I don't really know the Nikon range, but the Zf looks good, but you would probably want to pair it with something else for motorsport.
I stuck with Fuji, having come from Canon full frame, because the lenses were smaller, even though I am using some big Fuji lenses, like the 50-140 f2.8, which is way smaller than my old Canon 70-200 f2.8.
I don't really know the Nikon range, but the Zf looks good, but you would probably want to pair it with something else for motorsport.
Tony1963 said:
I think twice in the last thirty years I ve kept the old camera after buying a new one just in case .
I ve learned my lesson. The old body would just sit in a bag, unused.
I don t know about the Nikon Z lenses, but the Canon RF zooms are in some cases making decent primes unnecessary.
Isn t it lovely to be faced with options!
I think it depends if its a straight upgrade replacement, or something for a different use - in my current case both the D7200 and XT3 still get plenty of use as they do different jobs, but quite possible that one camera could replace both. The D7200 replaced a D7000, which replaced a D80, which replaced a D50... I didn't keep the old ones with those upgrades!I ve learned my lesson. The old body would just sit in a bag, unused.
I don t know about the Nikon Z lenses, but the Canon RF zooms are in some cases making decent primes unnecessary.
Isn t it lovely to be faced with options!
Some zooms are excellent I agree, but generally smaller aperture and cost a chunk more than an equivalent quality prime.
Yes its nice to have options! And time to think about them without rushing a decision.
JonnyWhitters said:
Just about to leave for the office so this will be brief, apologies in advance.
I had a 7200 and loved it, until I got my hands on the Z series. Big jump in usability and quality for my photography. Picked up Z6 second hand with FTZ and my lenses worked fine (notably Sigma 150-600). Autofocus was slow but picked up in software update. Only real issue was dust spots on sensor due to no curtain when changing lens. Fixed in edit but more time consuming than it should have been.
Upgraded to Z8 in March and picked up 24-120 F4. Man, that lens is sharp. My 85 1.8 is my go-to though. Love the reach, bokeh and reliability of it.
Don t think you ll go too far wrong with the 7200, but the Z range could reinvigorate and more third party lenses are coming. The Tamron 135 1.8 looks very well priced from Cotswold Cameras
Thanks, good feedback - the only one so far who has actually used the specific cameras to compare! I had a 7200 and loved it, until I got my hands on the Z series. Big jump in usability and quality for my photography. Picked up Z6 second hand with FTZ and my lenses worked fine (notably Sigma 150-600). Autofocus was slow but picked up in software update. Only real issue was dust spots on sensor due to no curtain when changing lens. Fixed in edit but more time consuming than it should have been.
Upgraded to Z8 in March and picked up 24-120 F4. Man, that lens is sharp. My 85 1.8 is my go-to though. Love the reach, bokeh and reliability of it.
Don t think you ll go too far wrong with the 7200, but the Z range could reinvigorate and more third party lenses are coming. The Tamron 135 1.8 looks very well priced from Cotswold Cameras
As far as AF goes (and especially tracking) it seems from reviews etc that the first gen Z bodies struggled (relatively, they may well be better than my Fuji), Z6ii/7ii made a small improvement, then the Zf/Z5ii are a huge leap forward and the Z6iii/Z8/Z9 are a step better again.
Realistically if I buy new it will probably be a Z5ii as the value/performance ratio seems unbeatable, but I'll keep an eye on second hand deals and be open to other models there - might find some added value if someone is selling with FTZ and/or a decent lens included.
Edited by GravelBen on Wednesday 4th June 03:52
MesoForm said:
I don't know much about the Nikon system so I'll stick to Fuji - as it's your lightweight system would selling the XT3, 18-135 and 50-230 and buying a second hand X-T50 make sense? It will be a chunk smaller than the X-T3 and will be a bigger gap in size/bulk than your Nikon.
To be honest I think anything smaller than the X-T3 I might find too small and fiddly for my taste in handling/ergonomics, plus the X-T50 is only 100g lighter anyway (the same as an X-T1 funny enough, which I had before the X-T3) and lacks the weather sealing of the X-T3 and Nikons. It's all a compromise one way or another!I'd also like to go to a full frame sensor when I upgrade, after having APSC cameras for years it seems like a good next step in my photographical journey - so as much as I enjoy the Fuji system, going full frame would take me in a different direction.
Tony1963 said:
I m a Canon mirrorless user, so bear that in mind
...
For me, with my Canon R3, there s absolutely no competition, mirrorless trounces dSLR in almost every way. Even battery life is no where near as bad as we were all told.
The idea has been planted in your mind, and all that s happening now is that your dSLR gear is at risk of depreciating, and you don t have the better system yet.
I ve three RF lenses, and one EF with adapter. The EF is a 16-35mm f4 that isn t used very often. The three RFs are getting used quite heavily.
Conversely, I'm an R7 user and I'm finding some real niggles with the focusing on it:-...
For me, with my Canon R3, there s absolutely no competition, mirrorless trounces dSLR in almost every way. Even battery life is no where near as bad as we were all told.
The idea has been planted in your mind, and all that s happening now is that your dSLR gear is at risk of depreciating, and you don t have the better system yet.
I ve three RF lenses, and one EF with adapter. The EF is a 16-35mm f4 that isn t used very often. The three RFs are getting used quite heavily.
- The allegedly intellient "subject acquisition" takes a good half-second to lock on (which is s
t for motorsport and birds and not great for airshows), and lock can be broken with fast-moving targets if you don't pan perfectly smoothly (again, birds and fast moving aircraft).- Same system, but with people and a zoom lens it feels like the 'locked' person in the frame is perfectly in-focus but the person next to them is slightly soft. Similar to what a shallow DoF would give you, but happening where the distance difference is so small it can't be a DoF effect. Went to a family wedding the other weekend and am more than a little pissed off with the results.
The rest of the camera is very effective, and the noise suppression is definitely better, but even 2 years in I've found the % of 'keepers' with that body is lower than with the old 7D it replaced or the current 5D-III, and I'm missing some of those 'capture the moment' motorsport shots because of the AF.
Oh, and the cost of the Canon mirrorless kit feels so much less competitive than their old D-SLR & EF kit. Like they've decided to push upmarket but their prices are going first (very similar to EV prices vs ICE-cars, in many ways)
Footnote: Anyone want to buy a lightly used R7?
havoc said:
Conversely, I'm an R7 user and I'm finding some real niggles with the focusing on it:-
- The allegedly intellient "subject acquisition" takes a good half-second to lock on (which is st for motorsport and birds and not great for airshows), and lock can be broken with fast-moving targets if you don't pan perfectly smoothly (again, birds and fast moving aircraft).
- Same system, but with people and a zoom lens it feels like the 'locked' person in the frame is perfectly in-focus but the person next to them is slightly soft. Similar to what a shallow DoF would give you, but happening where the distance difference is so small it can't be a DoF effect. Went to a family wedding the other weekend and am more than a little pissed off with the results.
The rest of the camera is very effective, and the noise suppression is definitely better, but even 2 years in I've found the % of 'keepers' with that body is lower than with the old 7D it replaced or the current 5D-III, and I'm missing some of those 'capture the moment' motorsport shots because of the AF.
Oh, and the cost of the Canon mirrorless kit feels so much less competitive than their old D-SLR & EF kit. Like they've decided to push upmarket but their prices are going first (very similar to EV prices vs ICE-cars, in many ways)
Footnote: Anyone want to buy a lightly used R7?
Assuming you’ve the AF correctly set up, I wonder whether the more budget R7 is too compromised for you after using the 5D3? I went 5D3 to R3 and in at least reasonable conditions I find it difficult to fool the AF at all. Ok, it struggles with a kingfisher heading straight at me and not in a straight line, but otherwise it’s quite astonishing. - The allegedly intellient "subject acquisition" takes a good half-second to lock on (which is s
t for motorsport and birds and not great for airshows), and lock can be broken with fast-moving targets if you don't pan perfectly smoothly (again, birds and fast moving aircraft).- Same system, but with people and a zoom lens it feels like the 'locked' person in the frame is perfectly in-focus but the person next to them is slightly soft. Similar to what a shallow DoF would give you, but happening where the distance difference is so small it can't be a DoF effect. Went to a family wedding the other weekend and am more than a little pissed off with the results.
The rest of the camera is very effective, and the noise suppression is definitely better, but even 2 years in I've found the % of 'keepers' with that body is lower than with the old 7D it replaced or the current 5D-III, and I'm missing some of those 'capture the moment' motorsport shots because of the AF.
Oh, and the cost of the Canon mirrorless kit feels so much less competitive than their old D-SLR & EF kit. Like they've decided to push upmarket but their prices are going first (very similar to EV prices vs ICE-cars, in many ways)
Footnote: Anyone want to buy a lightly used R7?
Tony1963 said:
Assuming you ve the AF correctly set up, I wonder whether the more budget R7 is too compromised for you after using the 5D3? I went 5D3 to R3 and in at least reasonable conditions I find it difficult to fool the AF at all. Ok, it struggles with a kingfisher heading straight at me and not in a straight line, but otherwise it s quite astonishing.
AF - I'm not sure what else I could do, unless there's another menu I'm missing somewhere and the camera is now more computer than camera. In which case is it really progress if you have to change 20 different settings?Budget - possibly, but my two comparison points are 5D-III and 7D-I, both of which are >>10 years older than the R7, design-wise. If Canon can't fit better AF hardware to a (near) entry-level mirrorless than they fitted to two mid-range D-SLRs 10 years prior, then they're taking the piss.
havoc said:
AF - I'm not sure what else I could do, unless there's another menu I'm missing somewhere and the camera is now more computer than camera. In which case is it really progress if you have to change 20 different settings?
Budget - possibly, but my two comparison points are 5D-III and 7D-I, both of which are >>10 years older than the R7, design-wise. If Canon can't fit better AF hardware to a (near) entry-level mirrorless than they fitted to two mid-range D-SLRs 10 years prior, then they're taking the piss.
I’m being kind! I’ve never handled an R7 as I prefer the larger bodied cameras. If you’ve exhausted the youtube and forum avenues, I don’t know what to suggest. Budget - possibly, but my two comparison points are 5D-III and 7D-I, both of which are >>10 years older than the R7, design-wise. If Canon can't fit better AF hardware to a (near) entry-level mirrorless than they fitted to two mid-range D-SLRs 10 years prior, then they're taking the piss.
An old friend of mine, keen photographer since the 1950s, was on the verge of throwing his 90D in the bin as the AF never ever nailed it with any moving objects. After many months of frustration, someone asked about one of his settings and… tadaaa, all sorted, Pete can smile again.
Out of interest, which lenses are you using? Same as with the 5D3?
toohuge said:
@havoc
Your focus issues sound lens related rather than camera. If the subject is sharp but the rest are oof, it's likely your lens is decentred if that bad. Good as mirrorless cameras are, they can't change physics
Thanks.Your focus issues sound lens related rather than camera. If the subject is sharp but the rest are oof, it's likely your lens is decentred if that bad. Good as mirrorless cameras are, they can't change physics
It's been fine (and probably my most reliable lens) for ages, but I guess it could have taken a knock.
Short of sending it off, any ideas how I can check?
havoc said:
Thanks.
It's been fine (and probably my most reliable lens) for ages, but I guess it could have taken a knock.
Short of sending it off, any ideas how I can check?
Good article here:It's been fine (and probably my most reliable lens) for ages, but I guess it could have taken a knock.
Short of sending it off, any ideas how I can check?
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/05/testing-f...
What lens is it? It's not the canon 24-70 or 28-70 2.8 is it? The guides and wheels in the lens mechanism are plastic and wear over time. This can degrade the image as the lens starts to wobble and flop about
Slightly less technical than that, I took photos of a brick wall (repeating pattern) and compared the sharpness across the frame. Another test is to take have camera on a tripod, focus on an object in the centre of the frame, and lock off focus, then place the same object in each corner of the frame and compare the results.
The above test showed that my camera needed to go back to Fuji for calibration.
Actually, thinking about sending kit back to Fuji reminds me of an often ignored factor for consideration when choosing a camera - what support is like in your home market. Fuji are great in the UK, but I’ve heard bad things about Nikon recently.
The above test showed that my camera needed to go back to Fuji for calibration.
Actually, thinking about sending kit back to Fuji reminds me of an often ignored factor for consideration when choosing a camera - what support is like in your home market. Fuji are great in the UK, but I’ve heard bad things about Nikon recently.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff