-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Going on Safari - but which camera XS-1 or Nikon D700?
- Thread starter 2nd degree
- Start date
-
- Tags
- nikon d700
papillon_65
Forum Pro
CollBaxter
Forum Pro
I disagree on the IQ point. When you are traveling thousands of miles at great expense for a limited period of time you want the best images you can get. Memories fade with time and all you are left with are the images. One of the differences of true wildlife photography to other types is you take the shoots when you get them as you can't come back tomorrow to recreate the scene.
Those people spent days getting one or two good shots. Ansel Adams did the same. He then spent days in the dark room getting the picture he wanted.
Pros do it as a job and have the time to sit and wait for the right image at the right time. As to the equipment I think they would love it. The best thing about digital for me is that I don't have to shoot film any more.
.
papillon_65
Forum Pro
Well to me the best images I can get are the best quality images, this is not linked to the pixel peeping endeavour of "image quality". A camera such as the X-S1 can print excellent images to A3 size. Better than that it can enable me to go from 24mm to 600mm in the twist of lens. This means I can shoot instinctively and freely at anything I see. No missed opportunities, no scrabbling around in a bag to change lenses, no fumbling with another camera. This gives me the best chance of quality images as opposed to "image quality". This is what's most important to me, because in my experience no non-photographer ever looks at an image and says "it's nice but you should have used a D700" or "great shot but resolution could be better". They just see a picture and either it works or it doesn't and those are the people I listen to because they aren't biased by the gear that was used.
Those people spent days getting one or two good shots. Ansel Adams did the same. He then spent days in the dark room getting the picture he wanted.
Pros do it as a job and have the time to sit and wait for the right image at the right time. As to the equipment I think they would love it. The best thing about digital for me is that I don't have to shoot film any more.
Last edited:
Dédéjr
Forum Enthusiast
yes indeed i was being polite but oh well, I shall say it for a third time your plane pictures still prove nothing.
Anway no matter, if you cannot take a bit of honest criticism well that shows me a lot about you. Sad really.
Anway no matter, if you cannot take a bit of honest criticism well that shows me a lot about you. Sad really.
2nd degree
Well-known member
- Messages
- 167
- Reaction score
- 73
It's a point we can debate until the end of time. I suppose what I'm trying to say is that an something like an iPhone can produce wonderful images in the right hands. We all know that in an ideal world it's probably not the best tool for the job though. I agree I'd be a fool not to take the latest gear available to me on the trip I'm going on but I would make the most of whatever I took.
There was something to be said for creating an image in a darkroom though - I miss it, but I wouldn't go back to it either. The convenience of digital is too strong to deny. I do find it sad how quick today's cameras suddenly become old technology once the next XXMP camera is released though as we all become obsessed by IQ at the pixel level.Those people spent days getting one or two good shots. Ansel Adams did the same. He then spent days in the dark room getting the picture he wanted.
Pros do it as a job and have the time to sit and wait for the right image at the right time. As to the equipment I think they would love it. The best thing about digital for me is that I don't have to shoot film any more.
2nd degree
Well-known member
- Messages
- 167
- Reaction score
- 73
I shoot two with two cameras when I shoot weddings using a Black Rapid double strap, I doubt I miss many shots with that set up, it's very efficient. Everytime I use the Nikon 70-200mm lens, it blows me away, even when coupled with the 1.7TC, nothing compares to it on a FF sensor.
However life is about compromise, and this is why I started the thread. I was willing to consider compromising as I agree with what most of what you say above. It's got a great focal length and the IQ would be more than fit for purpose at the sizes I'm likely to print at, it probably would be a more convenient package.
The D800 route makes sense for me though as it will be ideal camera for weddings and some of the other freelance magazine stuff I do. (It's not my full time profession, but it may become so one day).
Those people spent days getting one or two good shots. Ansel Adams did the same. He then spent days in the dark room getting the picture he wanted.
Pros do it as a job and have the time to sit and wait for the right image at the right time. As to the equipment I think they would love it. The best thing about digital for me is that I don't have to shoot film any more.
LTZ470
Forum Pro
Polite?...sadly you have never shot anything enough to know the difference...You have never used the equipment and you are telling someone it won't work? How do you know? Why would you think one cannot shoot a Safari with a OMD and a 100-300?
I politely asked you to show me your photos of Airshows that you have taken, so that we can confirm you actually know what you are talking about...
You must be a used car salesman?
Don't mind someone pi$$ing on my leg...it just gets frustrating when they tell you it is only rain....
Still waiting on your Airshow Photos so we can compare....lol...guess I'll be here for awhile though...
Dédéjr
Forum Enthusiast
Except I never did say you could never shoot a safari with a omd. I said your post proved nothing and it really really does not sorry if you think it does.
Anyway going round in circles here so bye bye
Anyway going round in circles here so bye bye
LTZ470
Forum Pro
Oh but you insinuated it...your not getting off that cheap...
and those photos do prove that an EM5 and a 100-300 can shoot a Safari, sorry but you do not have a clue about what m43 w/ 100-300 lens can or cannot do...I've done plenty with them...
If I tell you that the Moon is made out of Cheese, you get some Crackers, and bring a little wine, I like Haute Medoc preferably...
All from m43 100-300 Panny Lens...most at 300mm (600mm EFL)...last one of the Bumble Bee at 600mm off fluid ball & tripod at 15ft...
--
--Really there is a God...and He loves you..
FlickR Photostream:
www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...
Last edited:
CollBaxter
Forum Pro
papillon_65 wrote:
Well to me the best images I can get are the best quality images, this is not linked to the pixel peeping endeavour of "image quality". A camera such as the X-S1 can print excellent images to A3 size. Better than that it can enable me to go from 24mm to 600mm in the twist of lens. This means I can shoot instinctively and freely at anything I see. No missed opportunities, no scrabbling around in a bag to change lenses, no fumbling with another camera. This gives me the best chance of quality images as opposed to "image quality". This is what's most important to me, because in my experience no non-photographer ever looks at an image and says "it's nice but you should have used a D700" or "great shot but resolution could be better". They just see a picture and either it works or it doesn't and those are the people I listen to because they aren't biased by the gear that was used.
Those people spent days getting one or two good shots. Ansel Adams did the same. He then spent days in the dark room getting the picture he wanted.
Pros do it as a job and have the time to sit and wait for the right image at the right time. As to the equipment I think they would love it. The best thing about digital for me is that I don't have to shoot film any more.
papillon_65
Forum Pro
CollBaxter wrote:
papillon_65 wrote:
Well to me the best images I can get are the best quality images, this is not linked to the pixel peeping endeavour of "image quality". A camera such as the X-S1 can print excellent images to A3 size. Better than that it can enable me to go from 24mm to 600mm in the twist of lens. This means I can shoot instinctively and freely at anything I see. No missed opportunities, no scrabbling around in a bag to change lenses, no fumbling with another camera. This gives me the best chance of quality images as opposed to "image quality". This is what's most important to me, because in my experience no non-photographer ever looks at an image and says "it's nice but you should have used a D700" or "great shot but resolution could be better". They just see a picture and either it works or it doesn't and those are the people I listen to because they aren't biased by the gear that was used.
Those people spent days getting one or two good shots. Ansel Adams did the same. He then spent days in the dark room getting the picture he wanted.
Pros do it as a job and have the time to sit and wait for the right image at the right time. As to the equipment I think they would love it. The best thing about digital for me is that I don't have to shoot film any more.
papillon_65
Forum Pro
papillon_65
Forum Pro
Looking at an image at 100% magnification on a low res screen tells you nothing about what the image will look like in print, only printing will do that, and low and behold, images look hugely better in a decent print. I guess if you printed you'd know that.Midwest wrote:
If someone is only going to view on screen or print small prints then I guess pixel-peeping is 'academic' but if they are going for the best possible image quality, something that will stand up to large printing etc. then they'd best have a look at 100% and see just what it is their image quality really is. There is sure nothing wrong with wanting to see how your images look at 100%.DS21 wrote:
You can with the old Fuji's, F10, F11, F30, F31, and even F200, but it is only 6 Mp. But I guess pixel peeping is not looked at favorably in this forum since the X10/X-S1 arrived.You can view this shot at 100% and it is still nice and sharp and 'clean'. You can't view small sensor shots at 100% and have that same ability, not that I've seen.DS21 wrote:
The image quality of the boat picture is on a complete different level (much higher), then the X-S1 gallery you linked to. I don't know who are you kidding here. Lovely subjects, yes, but soft in fine detail and drab in color, and displayed in 2 MP size.papillon_65 wrote:
He may have had an earlier model with the softer lens. My X-S1 would easily match that, no problem whatsoever, in fact it's better at the long end at F5.6 than any consumer telephoto I've used in that range. I suggest you look here, these shots will show you exactly what the X-S1 can do at range. This guy has now changed to a the Nikon D600 and a long telephoto lens but his X-S1 shots, in many cases, look better to my eyes.painterdude wrote:
just one more comment re the XS-1 vs the 700. I just went shooting with a friend who owns that Fuji. We shot exactly the same stuff ..only I was using the relative cheap 70-300VR on my DSLR. In close the XS-1 does okay ..but the 70-300 more than matched it ...and completely creamed the XS-1 when wound out to its softest 300mm. This was hand held and shot as the boat was moving away. I cannot post what my friend shot but I can assure you it was way softer than this. If you are on Safari what you need is a sharp lens at full zoom. From what I have seen and I could be wrong, the XS-1 does not perform even as well as a consumer grade zoom on a DSLR. Yes this DSLR is a smokin good one ,..but its huge pixel count pushes lenses to the limit and makes getting sharp shots more challenging. Here's my 300 mm shot for what its worth.
--
http://skylightvistas.weebly.com/index.html
--
For the person who is good with a hammer, everything in life tends to look like a nail.....
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/
--
You don't TAKE a photo, you MAKE a photo.
--
You don't TAKE a photo, you MAKE a photo.
--
For the person who is good with a hammer, everything in life tends to look like a nail.....
Tony
Bandar Bola Piala Dunia 2018
Mainaman merupakan agen judi online terpercaya, agen bola online sbobet, agen casino online terpercaya dan agen judi resmi piala dunia 2018
the-random-photographer.blogspot.com
G
Gaijin Tourist
Guest
This post just kills me.
I'm a happy XS-1 owner. Yet I'd be the first to admit that a FF Nikon with the remarkable 70-200 2.8 (any version, all remarkable) is way more capable, a pro standard. And the OM/D is a runaway best seller, again, better spec'd than an XS-1. This is as it should be: You can't compare a $600 consumer bridge cam against a professional standard, and a new smaller sensor system camera: If you could, Fujifilm would have certainly stolen a march on high tech !
But on the right day, when I get everything right, it's not bad:
XS-1 hand-held.
Northern Cardinal, rainy day feed, XS-1.
Squirrel at the bird feeder, XS-1.
XS-1, macro at 135mm equivalent.
Some day I'd be tickled to have a D Nikon and that lens, and I'd love an Om/D. In the meantime, I like my XS-1, even if my safaris are in the back yard !
All the Best,
JW
I'm a happy XS-1 owner. Yet I'd be the first to admit that a FF Nikon with the remarkable 70-200 2.8 (any version, all remarkable) is way more capable, a pro standard. And the OM/D is a runaway best seller, again, better spec'd than an XS-1. This is as it should be: You can't compare a $600 consumer bridge cam against a professional standard, and a new smaller sensor system camera: If you could, Fujifilm would have certainly stolen a march on high tech !
But on the right day, when I get everything right, it's not bad:
XS-1 hand-held.
Northern Cardinal, rainy day feed, XS-1.
Squirrel at the bird feeder, XS-1.
XS-1, macro at 135mm equivalent.
Some day I'd be tickled to have a D Nikon and that lens, and I'd love an Om/D. In the meantime, I like my XS-1, even if my safaris are in the back yard !
All the Best,
JW
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum