One question we get a lot at DPReview is, 'What's the best portrait kit?' This week, Chris and Jordan recommend their favorite camera and lens combos for shooting portraits. Whether you have champagne tastes or a beer budget, there's a great kit for you.
I literally *just* got back into portrait and wedding photography, and went with Sony. As much as I still love Nikon overall, and would invest in Canon RF if I had the $$$ to be a bokeh snob, I can't deny how vast the range of options is on the E-mount.
On my own list of lenses to own, for both weddings and portraits:
Roki-Yang 45 1.8 (I dislike ~50mm, but love having at least one lens that weighs "nothing" for general candid work)
Sigma 85 1.4 DN
As soon as Tamron/Sigma/Roki-Yang "figure out" autofocus on RF and Z, the playing field will be almost perfectly level, and cameras like the Nikon Z5 and maybe a Canon EOS R mk2 (with dual SD cards?) will be good competitors to a Sony A7 IV. But, for now, Sony is just owning the entire range, and it's almost entirely because of third parties.
Because, believe it or not, those "cheap" lenses are pretty amazing!
Also, they afford the user (in this case, a portrait photographer) access to two or three very important things that are a lot harder to come by on smaller sensors: shallow depth, incredible face/eye autofocus, and dynamic range. Oh, and IBIS and dual card slots are pretty commonplace, too. (Sony A7III / A7C, Nikon Z5, Panasonic S5...)
Plus, for portrait photographers who also do weddings, some workdays are 12-14+ hour-long jobs. Ever photograph a Hindu wedding? When the wedding reception is in full swing at hour 15 or 16, your wrist will LOVE that you have an ultra-lightweight Tamron 17-28 or Roki-Yang 24mm f/1.8 at your disposal.
Don't get me wrong, of course. A professional should always invest as much money as they can in whichever lens is their bread-and-butter. Get yourself a Sigma DN f/1.4 Art prime, or a Sony GM prime, ...and then "fill in the gaps" with Tamron/Sigma/Roki-Yang...
@Astro Nope, 100% nope I bought 2 3rd party lenses and never again, the maximum aperture is just for marketing BS, 1.4 is washed out, flat, and soft, with level of contrass even less than smartphone camera, they are great at f2 - 2.8 ster
If I'm going to use at that aperture, why don't use decent f2 or 1.8 in the first place? smaller, and cheaper and got stabilization, nikon 50 and canon 85 f2 can even do macro :/
anoter 3rd party i bought the 150-600 that got good review from youtubegrapher and photoblogger, but turned out horrible until f8, the 500 to 600 range is softer than cropping an 100-400 lens open wide at f5.6, the Stabilization lower my keep rate, then why don't i get 100-400 in the first place? Lighter, sharper and faster
I'm sorry to hear that you've had those bad experiences! Some third-party lenses are definitely not as bright as others, and some also are simply not as sharp. The specific lenses I mentioned above are simply quite excellent, and more than good enough for both the hobby and paid work I do.
I'm just making the above statements based on my personal experience. ~15 years as a full-time portrait & wedding photographer, as well as ~10 years doing paid gear reviews. I don't know what the credibility is of any of the other reviews you may have read, though.
To be blunt, you bought 2 3rd-party lenses that didn't work out for you, but I've tested/reviewed literally hundreds of them.
By the way, I have also tested/reviewed the alternatives you mentioned, plus others. Would you rather do professional work with a Fuji 50mm f/1.0 on an XT-4, or a Sigma 85mm f/1.4 on a Sony? I know my own personal answer to that question, which I am sure you can guess... ;-)
I think it depends on which 3rd party lenses you buy. There is no doubt Sigma have some excellent products now. I have the Sigma 14mm 1.4 art and it's a sunning lens - not cheap but still very good value. I have just been using the Sigma 100-600 contemporary - that is cheap! And remarkable quality. To get better from a from a "Canon" lens you literally have to put a zero on the end of the price. That said, Sigma and Tamaron have produced some rubbish in the past - but hey, don't buy those ones, but from their better range. Even a pro doing who is doing quite well, still needs to consider the economics of spending huge amounts of money to get a performance or handling tweak that their clients will never be able to see.
That is my mantra as a professional photographer. A working pro doesn't necessarily need an entire bag full of flagship-grade, top-shelf lenses, but they do owe it to themselves and to their clients to invest a fair amount into the one or two lenses that will really define their style as an artist. For some portrait or wedding pros, that's a 70-200mm f/2.8, or for others, it's a flagship-grade 85mm or 105mm or 135mm prime. Other, more candid, natural styles of portrait/wedding photography might incline you to invest as much as you can in a good 35mm or 50mm prime, or maybe a 24-70mm f/2.8.
Personally, I'm a fan of 35mm and 85mm, so I'd probably eventually decide between the new Sony 35 1.4 GM and the Sigma "Art" equivalent, ...and the Sigma 85 1.4 Art. (The new mirrorless DN version is indeed excellent; I've already done an extensive review.)
I remember when third-party optics were almost all terrible junk. Today, things are very different!
Super fun video and useful, too! I went with a Nikon Z5 over the Sony A7C. Quite a bit cheaper but also bigger. I also prefer the image quality and color treatment over Sony. Thanks!
For the under $5000 you would still have room to add the 105mm f2.8 macro which is also not a bad option for portraits and still under budget even with the 85mm in the kit.
Chris said why at the beginning of the video: zooms are a great portrait option worth considering, but he prefers primes for portraits, so that’s what they focused on.
Portrait IMO requires a range of lenses. that is if one does not want to consider portraits headshots.
Sony a1 Sigma 35mm 1.2 Sony 50mm 1.2 Sony 100mm stm sony 135mm 1.8
The Sony a1 will handle from static to the most dynamic portraits It has the sped to capture the perfect swish of hair as the hair blows randomly around your posed subjects face.
Add a Tiffen Promist set from 1/8 to 1 and some wonderful natural light
The icing on the cake is the best EVF and EVF-optics you could ask for.
Save your money, no post editing can beat strobe and flash play in portrait, and you don't need high fps for portrait anyway, portrait is not demanding genre when it comes to camera body, even APSC will do just fine
Get cheapest fullframe body and greatest lens, for same amount of money for single A1 body, one can get eos RP (999 USD) with 28-70 f2 (indoor portrait) or 70-200 f2.8 if into outdoor to skip headache of swapping lenses for greater creativity on the fly and skip hauling multiple lenses (both at about 3000 usd)
Still got 2000 + dollars leftover cash for decent flash and strobes, build your own studio / hire someone if you're into outdoor/ upgrade your workstation/ a short vacation for a little break
2K limit: Nikon Z5 with 85/1.8s. OK, that does go over budget by under $100 but there are almost always sales events or discount coupons or official Nikon refurbs. Or the 50/1.8s is just as superb and would take it under budget by a hundred bucks. Just chew a breath mint and put on a deodorant, and take the photo a step closer to your model.
Very surprised that the Z5 and those fantastic f/1.8 primes didn't get a mention. Then again, the Panasonic S5 and Sigma's primes are pretty sweet. And Rokinon/Samyang f/1.8 primes on a Sony are just so dirt-cheap, although they're not nearly the same quality, they're still a good value if you can take good care of your gear.
I'd still rather have a Z5 and a couple 1.8 S primes, though. Just love the Nikon ergonomics; one of the few cameras that still feels "right" in the mirrorless era.
Good segment. Like the thoughts. Portrait shoots should also include off camera lighting. I use Odin triggers and receivers for my RP and M6Ii. And 4 speedlights and magmod system. So the $ are more to bring light into the equation. For non-flash I'm finding the $1300 M6II + M32 F 1.4 wide open incredible -- FF equivalent of 50 F2.2 and the cropping power of the 32 mpxl sensor. And the $1450 RP + RF 85 F2 IS is my go to portrait combo. I use DXO PL4 Elite and photoshop to process my photos. My 60 inch umbrella's with a pair of 550 Speedlight's on bracket inside the umbrella with odin receivers and triggers works well for me. Please keep running segments like this -- very interesting!
Wow, thank you for this! Made me curious about the Fuji SX10 and the Canon RF85mm f2. For now my portrait combo is the Tamron 85mm 1.8 VC SP on my R6. More affordable it's the M6II with the EFM32mm.
I use the R/M combo also $1450 for my RP + RF 85 F2 IS $1300 for my M6II + M 32 F1.4 -- sharp wide open and FF equivalent of 50 F2.2. Both light weight. I put my two Odin triggers --one on each during portrait shoots.
I'll take whatever TTArtisan f/1.4 gets one into the right range - 35mm for µ43, 50 for aps.C bodies. Sure hope their next introduction is a longer one.
I'd only need eye-AF for portraits in an earthquake.
Used EM1.2 + Used Panasonic 42.5/1.7. This can be found easily for under $1000. It's small and light and the lens is sharp wide open. Best of all you have a camera that's great at a lot of other things too.
Sony a7r ii + FE 1.8/85 gives you FF goodness for <$2000, if needed add lenses from the vast E-mount lens selection. If your models cant stand still, the a7R ii might not be the best choice tho. Definetly best IQ for the buck and only surpassed by medium format (relevant difference).
Sony a7r II has eye-AF in continous AF which I really like. Unfortunatly, it is not very reliable. It often fails. At least with the faces I try to photograph.
I think either you can do with manual lenses or you need a very good eye-AF.
The release of this model was done in 2015. So if the sensor is the only thing you care about, it can be an option. For the other components, time has progressed I'd say.
Yeah, pre-mk3 AF on Sony is just not worth the FF image quality. Hobbyists will be repeatedly frustrated, and professionals will be failing their clients.
Just bite the bullet, get an A7C and whatever lens fits your budget, even if it's a Rokinon/Samyang 75mm f/1.8...
This video shows exactly the state of the camera market at the moment. There are lot's of nice bodies at different price points. But lenses ...
With Nikon you have the 85/1.8. Done. Canon has a "cheap" 85mm F2 or huge and expensive F1.2. And a 100mm Macro - for €1500,- 135mm? Any middle ground? If you are happy with Sigmas lineup L mount is actually quite interesting. AF is not everyones cup but for portrait ... I bet it's fine.
There is still a LONG way to go for these companies.
What about so many stunning options, and cheap too, with micro 4/3? What about Canon EF 85 1.8? Samyang 75mm 1.8 etc. There is quite a few great portrait lenses on budget too nowadays.
The canon 85mm f2.0 is just as nice as the Nikon 85mm 1.8. You won't notice much difference in bokeh and the canon offers 0.5x macro (compared to the nikon 0.12x) and 25% lower pricepoint.
There's plenty of middle ground lenses to be found on emount. Canon and Nikon have a ton of work to do if they are not going to allow Tamron and Sigma onto their mirrorless platforms.
Samyang already had AF lenses available for RF but suddenly stopped making them and removed them from their website. Rokinon still have them available though.
Personally I think Tamron and Sigma want an agreement with Canon and Nikon similar to what they have with Sony, in that they get enough information to have near native AF perfomance. I don't see them accepting a situation where their AF is excellent on e-mount but then is inconsistent on RF and Z because it was reverse engineered and some customers complain like what happens at times on the DSLR mounts. Whether Canon and Nikon agree to share their protocols is another matter entirely.
Even If I have a Z7 II, I still use a D750 + AF-D 135 DC for portraiture. Best combination ever to me. AF is a bit clunky, but good enough for portraiture. And I just love the pictures that this lens takes.
Why limit yourself to a single lens? Several of these kits came in under budget, so they could have added a second lens. For example, the Nikon Z7II and 85/1.8. We all know how Chris feels about 35mm lenses, but why not add the 35/.18 or 50/1.8? "Portrait" can be an environmental portrait, or a photo with a different perspective than the classic one. Or get a 135 or longer for portraits of your cat. A 105 macro for portraits of your hamster . . .
Fun video. Addressees a bunch of questions I keep getting from a big variety of people. My sweat spot since last year is really the Nikon Z system and for portraits the 85mm (although I also love the 50mm). See https://www.portrait-popup.com/index/G0000feEMLLzs8NI/thumbs All shot with that. And while I have the Hasselblad options, shooting people often becomes easier with quick responsive cameras, therefor the Z7 or Z7II both punching way above their 35mm siblings (to me). Cheers, DP reviews guys.
I am surprised they skipped this lens. I would actually pair it with the GFX 100s for the "ultimate" portrait setup - sacrifice the convenience of the native 110/2 for that extra stop of goodness. (I use it with the GFX 50R and the CDAF is still acceptable even if the bulk really isn't).
Now if you would please do a video doing similar general idea with non-mirrorless and used equipment. I know this likely may not happen, but what the hay. Thanks.
I started out with a second hand D700, 50/1.8 and an Elinchrom D-Lite one kit with two lights and soft boxes. Incredible value for money. Would be about $1000 today.
I am quite certain both Chris and Jordan understand all the different issues of Light. But I am also quite certain this article has nothing to do with that. Never expect that to stop commenters from suggesting otherwise.
Well beneath $1,000: Pre-owned Sony A7 II with any old manual-focus 85mm f/2 (1.8, 1.7) – or, even cheaper, 135mm f/2.8. Doesn't really matter much which brand (Canon, Minolta, Nikon, Pentax, whatever).
Another option is one of the very affordable older Micro Four Thirds bodies like the original E-M10, plus the Sigma 56mm f/1.4. An excellent lens on MFT, too, with beautiful bokeh.
Right now, personally, I either use an E-M1 II with that same Sigma – or an A7 II with an old Minolta MD 135mm f/2 for ultra-shallow depth of field.
Or for AF a used A7 (II?) with a Younguo 85/1.8. Amazing portrait lens for the price. I also use an old manual Minolta 135/2.8 on my GFX... the lens cost just $14 and the results (when not shooting into backlight) are stunning.
I was just about to make a similar point...buy a new or used Canon 7D MKII, a new Canon nifty thrifty plastic fantastic 50mm 1.8 for about 100€, and a superb inexpensive new Godox TT 685 flash for 100€. I would like to see a image quality comparison from the mentioned kits in the video to our cheap alternative...my bet, you would hardly see any difference.
And screaming from the sidelines is the Viltrox 56mm f1.4 for Fuji X mount, a superb autofocus portrait lens, built like a tank and bargain basement pricing. Oh! I forgot, DPreview are allergic to Viltrox. Silly me!
You really could've posted a LIST of the gear mentioned in the video, no?!
I mean, I don't have ads on Youtube, but it feels like you really want those extra dollars from people who are forced to sit through annoying ads just to be disappointed that they don't see the gear they would recommend themselves...
My 2 cents: - Buy a used DSLR with large AF area (D810 for example, but even my ancient Canon 1Ds III works fine for portraits) for 500 or so bucks. - Buy a used portrait lens (Canon 85/1.2L II, Sigma 85/1.4, Nikon 85/1.4, etc.) - get a few Meking light stands - Get a couple Yongnuo 560 flashes (manual) with a 560 wireless trigger (100yards range, can program flashes in groups, etc.) - Get a couple Selens umbrella softboxes and white umbrellas.
I've used a setup like this for so many years. 2000 bucks, 4 light setup, awesome results.
Or Godox tt600 and Godox X2T transmitter — no need to fiddle with external receivers and there batteries than. Tt600 costs 60 € and has built in receiver plus supports HSS with a proper transmitter. Buy 3 flashes + transmitter + softboxes and umbrellas. U will get fantastic portraits with any camera regardless
The Yongnuo 560 has had an internal radio receiver built-in for 10 years now. The 560 transmitter on the camera can control each single 560 flash individually.
No HSS, though, afaik. (Never tried it, never needed it)
For just about 2000$ (796$ z85 1.8 + 1200$ Z 5) you can buy much better portrait setup, than Fuji X-S10. Not to mention that for photography (not for video) Nikon Z5 i much better camera than X-S10. Having said the above why Fuji is suggested?!
Z5 is a Great deal. Very nice camera, best budget option. From other point of view I would not say that‘s it better than SX10. About the same — 1.2/1.4 lenses on APS-C are same as 1.8 on FF.
Probably they went for XS10 to have some APS-C option in a round
ELISAM the category is called "Best portrait kit under $2000". The key world is portrait! You can match focal length of the X-S10 + 56 1.2 and Z5 + 85 1.8 S, but Z5 will have betted dynamic range and Color Depth. Having said that I would expect more impartiality from professionals. Why you cannot understand that?
Nevermess -- Z5 is really good and it wins in specs. Though that would not mean immediately that it's better. E.g. I have lot of cameras with 2 memory slots and never use 2 slots myself. Or bigger screen means basically bigger body -- can be both plus or minus, it depends on one needs. I think they both very comparable and for me it will be more about lens selection and general user experience Fuji or Nikon provides.
BTW, I had the 135mm DC on digital and it wasn’t fun (uncorrectable back focus and wide-open sharpness not up to today’s standards). Even for portraits, I’d much rather use Sigma’s 135 1.8.
No need to spend $1000 for camera/lens to shoot portraits. First - buy used. Second - learn how to produce best possible results with it. Follow these two and you can get the job done for less than half of that.
Hmmm... When I read "portrait kits" I thought 'lighting!'. Isn't it all about the lighting? ...and the subject too, of course. I mean, you can capture an epic portrait with an Instamatic if you have the lighting right.
I guess that's what the remaining $1,200 in the budget of the $5,000 choice is for... :P I'm horrible at using even a single flash but yeah the thought occurred to me too.
Too many different assumptions as what is portrait. Fast lens and bokeh are great for natural light portraits. But in studio setting, when there is plenty of controlled light, camera sensor and lens don't matter as much. I can't recall shooting lenses wide open or using high ISO when shooting indoors with strobes.
Can't argue with any of those choices, the 56/1.4 might just be the best all around short tele for both M4/3 and APS-C, and the Nikon Z 85/1.8 S looks like one of the better mirrorless 85s. Hard to argue with the Fuji X-S10 or the Sigma 85/1.4 DN either at their respective price points...
For FF on a budget with E or L mount I'd give a honorable mention to the little $300 Samyang 75/1.8, it's super tiny and has nicer rendering than Sony's 85/1.8 IMO (while still being as sharp or shaper), I think some of SY's f1.8s (specially the earlier ones) have flown under the radar but that one might just be the best value of the five they've made.
Heck, it might even be a good APS-C option if you want something longer than an 85mm equivalent but not quite as long as 135mm, pretty much the same as the 56/1.4 on M4/3, ~112mm equivalent can be kinda nice when you want some extra compression or reach without going overboard.
Nothing remotely interesting to me until we got to the $5000 price point, and that's for a "kit" that consists of a body and just one prime lens. This is why I'm not really part of the photography market anymore and probably won't be anytime soon—everything is just insanely expensive. It's a wonderful hobby, but I don't have dentist money. I can have so much more fun for five grand that buying into a camera system is probably just never going to happen.
Hmmm…I can’t afford an interesting car like a Ferrari or Lamborghini so I don’t drive. Oh wait…there’s lots of great cars at reasonable prices. Same with cameras.
As someone whose other hobby is owning and working on a first generation Miata (a common low-budget entry point for enthusiast sports cars) I beg to differ. Getting yourself set up with a nice kit of photography equipment is much more expensive than owning, driving, maintaining, and modifying an interesting car. The bottom of the market for photography equipment is boring, and all I can think about is what's missing. The bottom of the market for automotive enthusiasts is full of all kinds of great stuff, and all I can think about is how much fun I'm having.
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go figure out how to stop the top nuts on my rear shocks from working themselves loose again.
I mean, this is the thing: internal-combustion cars were essentially perfected decades ago. Sure there have been advancements, but even so there are numerous options going back as far as the 1980s that have all the capability and character you could ever want and more—whether your interest is rock crawling, racing, or whatever. A lot of us find supercars and ultra-luxury cars boring at this point, since it's been so long since the differences have been actually meaningful and anyway those things spend most of their time tucked away in garages as "investments," rarely being driven even by their owners.
By contrast, cameras are both improving rapidly year to year and also simultaneously lagging behind the smartphones we all already have in many important areas. Even the very best and most expensive models are missing features that I would use every day if they were there. Nobody has ever made a perfect camera, and if you want something that makes carrying a whole backpack full of crap around with you feel worthwhile, you're going to be spending more than I've put into my Miata (including the purchase price) right off the bat. It's different for professionals of course, but as a hobbyist? Unless you have F-you money, the value for money just isn't there.
Plus, with cars you have *a car*. Something you can drive around, go places in, and have fun with. With photography, unless you want to support a several-hundred-dollars-a-month printing habit, what are you even going to do with the images?
So in essence you’re saying photography is all about the gear. I beg to differ. I can definitely l, for less money than you’re Miata buy a photo kit that will allow me to make photos that will hold their own with expensive gear…I’m currently working on a project using a beat up Leica lllf and a couple of Litra LED’s…total worth about $1500. Your mind is where the photos take shape…if you can’t make it happen without spending gobs of money…stick to working on your Miata
I think the 60/2.8 is discontinued, tho it was indeed an awesome value, the 56/1.4 is pricier but it's not any larger and it's just as excellent...
I'm still partial to a combo of the little 42.5/1.7 + the 75/1.8, just because I get a lot of use out of both the very short near-macro MFD of the former and the extra reach of the latter. I think the Oly was actually a Sigma design, so for my money they've made all the best M4/3 tele primes >50mm & <200mm. :P
I use both of those a lot on my GX850, it's very inconspicuous. Very often I'm actually using them right alongside my FF gear, there's basically no modern FF AF 135mm <600g AFAIK (and I'm only aware of one 135/2.8 at 600g, rest tend to be 800g+).
The Oly 45/1.8 is my go to portrait lens. A diminutive lens at a reasonable price. There is the 45/1.2 PRO but it's nearly 4X the price. One would want to be doing a lot of large high end portraits to justify that.
Get any kit you like, remeber lighting, but, in my humble opinion, learn how to communicate to and control the talent. It will make more difference than f/1.2 lens. YMMV
The Sony a7CR is a high-resolution addition to the company's compact full-frame a7C series. So what did we make of it and where does it leave the a7 IV that it sits just above?
Lomography's LomoChrome '92 is designed to mimic the look of classic drugstore film that used to fill family photo albums. As we discovered, to shoot with it is to embrace the unexpected, from strange color shifts to odd textures and oversized grain.
The LowePro PhotoSport Outdoor is a camera pack for photographers who also need a well-designed daypack for hiking and other outdoor use. If that sounds like you, the PhotoSport Outdoor may be a great choice, but as with any hybrid product, there are a few tradeoffs.
The Sony a7C II refreshes the compact full-frame with a 33MP sensor, the addition of a front control dial, a dedicated 'AI' processor, 10-bit 4K/60p video and more. It's a definite improvement, but it helps if you value its compact form.
Why is the Peak Design Everyday Backpack so widely used? A snazzy design? Exceptional utility? A combination of both? After testing one, it's clear why this bag deserves every accolade it's received.
If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.
What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best.
What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out.
Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.
Plenty of amazing cameras, lenses, accessories and other products came through our doors in 2023. After careful consideration, healthy debate, and a few heated arguments, we're proud to announce the winners of the 2023 DPReview Awards!
The Sony a7CR is a high-resolution addition to the company's compact full-frame a7C series. So what did we make of it and where does it leave the a7 IV that it sits just above?
Lomography's LomoChrome '92 is designed to mimic the look of classic drugstore film that used to fill family photo albums. As we discovered, to shoot with it is to embrace the unexpected, from strange color shifts to odd textures and oversized grain.
Sony's gridline update adds up to four customizable grids to which users can add color codes and apply transparency masks. It also raises questions about the future of cameras and what it means for feature updates.
At last, people who don’t want to pay a premium for Apple’s Pro models can capture high-resolution 24MP and 48MP photos using the iPhone 15 and iPhone 15 Plus. Is the lack of a dedicated telephoto lens or the ability to capture Raw images worth the savings for photographers?
Kodak's Super 8 Camera is a hybrid of old and new: it shoots movies using Super 8 motion picture film but incorporates digital elements like a flip-out LCD screen and audio capture. Eight years after we first saw the camera at CES 2016, Kodak is finally bringing it to market.
In this supplement to his recently completed 10-part series on landscape photography, photographer Erez Marom explores how the compositional skills developed for capturing landscapes can be extended to other areas of photography.
If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.
Sony, the Associated Press and 'Photo Mechanic' maker Camera Bits have run a month-long field-test to evaluate capture authentication and a subsequent workflow.
A color-accurate monitor is an essential piece of the digital creator's toolkit. In this guide, we'll go over everything you need to know about how color calibration actually works so you can understand the process and improve your workflow.
What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best.
It's that time of year again: When people get up way too early to rush out to big box stores and climb over each other to buy $99 TVs. We've saved you the trip, highlighting the best photo-related deals that can be ordered from the comfort of your own home.
The LowePro PhotoSport Outdoor is a camera pack for photographers who also need a well-designed daypack for hiking and other outdoor use. If that sounds like you, the PhotoSport Outdoor may be a great choice, but as with any hybrid product, there are a few tradeoffs.
Sigma's latest 70-200mm F2.8 offering promises to blend solid build, reasonably light weight and impressive image quality into a relatively affordable package. See how it stacks up in our initial impressions.
The Sony a9 III is heralded as a revolutionary camera, but is all the hype warranted? DPReview's Richard Butler and Dale Baskin break down what's actually new and worth paying attention to.
What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out.
DJI's Air 3 and Mini 4 Pro are two of the most popular drones on the market, but there are important differences between the two. In this article, we'll help figure out which of these two popular drones is right for you.
The Sony a7C II refreshes the compact full-frame with a 33MP sensor, the addition of a front control dial, a dedicated 'AI' processor, 10-bit 4K/60p video and more. It's a definite improvement, but it helps if you value its compact form.
Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.
The iPhone 15 Pro allows users to capture 48MP photos in HEIF or JPEG format in addition to Raw files, while new lens coatings claim to cut down lens flare. How do the cameras in Apple's latest flagship look in everyday circumstances? Check out our gallery to find out.
Global shutters, that can read all their pixels at exactly the same moment have been the valued by videographers for some time, but this approach has benefits for photographers, too.
We had an opportunity to shoot a pre-production a9 III camera with global shutter following Sony's announcement this week. This gallery includes images captured with the new 300mm F2.8 GM OSS telephoto lens and some high-speed flash photos.
The Sony a9 III is a ground-breaking full-frame mirrorless camera that brings global shutter to deliver unforeseen high-speed capture, flash sync and capabilities not seen before. We delve a little further into the a9III to find out what makes it tick.
The "Big Four" Fashion Weeks – New York, London, Milan and Paris - have wrapped for 2023 but it's never too early to start planning for next season. If shooting Fashion Week is on your bucket list, read on. We'll tell you what opportunities are available for photographers and provide some tips to get you started.
Sony has announced the a9 III: the first full-frame camera to use a global shutter sensor. This gives it the ability to shoot at up to 120 fps with flash sync up to 1/80,000 sec and zero rolling shutter.
Comments