aniMal
Well-known
For me it goes without saying that my M8 is the most important for me, I just love it handling like a film M and having sensible menus.
There is a time for using Evil SLRs though... Running through Nikon D200/300 at work, and then a D90 for video, I have ended up with selling all - and good riddance!
The problem is mostly that I hate all the menus, and also the handling is not perfect. I have some old Nikon glass and an FM2, and the sensible thing would be getting a D700 for tele, fast work and low light. But part of me feel that the sensible option here is not the best, and that I will probably end up with selling it as well.
I have taken a keen interest in the Sony 900, I feel that it handles better and gives great value for the money. I would be getting focus running the same way as my Leica, and I could even consider selling my film 6x7 gear as it would give the same resolution really.
Then there is Olympus and Pentax of course, with small bodies that would fit good in a bag besides the M8.
Anybody recognizing the dilemma? Things like the focus and aperture direction is just soooo hardwired in my system...
There is a time for using Evil SLRs though... Running through Nikon D200/300 at work, and then a D90 for video, I have ended up with selling all - and good riddance!
The problem is mostly that I hate all the menus, and also the handling is not perfect. I have some old Nikon glass and an FM2, and the sensible thing would be getting a D700 for tele, fast work and low light. But part of me feel that the sensible option here is not the best, and that I will probably end up with selling it as well.
I have taken a keen interest in the Sony 900, I feel that it handles better and gives great value for the money. I would be getting focus running the same way as my Leica, and I could even consider selling my film 6x7 gear as it would give the same resolution really.
Then there is Olympus and Pentax of course, with small bodies that would fit good in a bag besides the M8.
Anybody recognizing the dilemma? Things like the focus and aperture direction is just soooo hardwired in my system...
gavinlg
Veteran
The a900 is cheap and if you like the body you should give it a go. The zeiss lenses available with it are pretty amazing. It also takes old minolta glass which is great optically and cheap as chips on ebay.
thinkfloyd
Flippy Nose
The new Pentax k-x is small and unobtrusive. Specs are loaded and the cheapest fully spec'ed camera these days (read: video). High ISO performance is looking good based on samples and reviews. Pair them with the limited pancake primes, the 35 macro and 70/2.4 are good two starting lenses. One walkaround/macro, the other short tele. This setup can fit with your M8 setup in a medium sized camera bag 
Tom Diaz
Well-known
Any of the Panasonic m4/3 cameras.
I like the G1 'cause I don't care about video and do like an EVF built in. Takes the Leica lenses and has great lenses of its own. The question is whether you need a DSLR for professional work and whether your clients insist on something only a bigger monster can provide but that somehow the M8 cannot provide. The M8 produces files as good as any DSLR could produce a couple of years ago, so I question the practical value of some client saying they aren't good enough.
Tom
Mephiloco
Well-known
Olympus SLR's are pretty good for low light. They offer better zooms than the others (24-70mm equivalent, f2.0) and several other zooms that are 2.0, opposed to nikon, canon, etc's 2.8. Olympus also has great image quality, and great customer service. Oh, and the E3 is weather sealed.
swoop
Well-known
I want an e-620. But Apple Aperture doesn't support its RAW files. It may eventually. But I'd rather not gamble on the wait. o I've been leaning toward an Olympus E-30.
I currently own a Panasonic DMC-L1. Along with 3 4/3rds lenses. So It's an easier decision for me. What I like about 4/3rds is that it's perfect for tele work with the 2x crop.. Which is one of the few reasons I'd use an SLR.
I currently own a Panasonic DMC-L1. Along with 3 4/3rds lenses. So It's an easier decision for me. What I like about 4/3rds is that it's perfect for tele work with the 2x crop.. Which is one of the few reasons I'd use an SLR.
Tom Diaz
Well-known
Very true. I had a Leica Digilux 3 until just a couple of days ago, for reasons like that.
Just as true of a Panasonic G1 or other m4/3 camera, except that they are more up to date designs and smaller and lighter.
Tom
hausen
Well-known
I am waiting for Oly Ep-2 rumoured to be out before Christmas and should have EVF and if similar size to ep-1 will fit easily in my bag with my M8 and three WA lenes.
250swb
Well-known
I would have thought m4/3, probably via the Panasonic route would be the first choice. The cameras take your Leica lenses (with an adapter), Olympus and Panasonic lenses are themselves top class, and the overall image IQ is top notch. If you got the GH1 it would give you very usable video as well. In practical terms I'd say you could carry a 'normal' Leica outfit with lenses, plus a G1/GH1 with a telephoto lens, possibly even a standard zoom, and it would all still all come out weighing less than a Canon, Nikon, or Sony DSLR with attendant lenses. Focus ring direction isn't a problem as it can be customised either way.Steve
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
The more interesting question is why that version seems wrong. I'm not trying to coax you towards the Nikon, but towards getting to pinpoint your problem.
With most digital SLRs focus and aperture direction is largely irrelevant, however, because you usually set neither on the lens. Minolta AF and Sony lenses are no exception, all autofocus and they don't have aperture rings at all (the old manual-focus Minolta MD lenses won't work). On a Nikon it'd be the same with new lenses (not with your old ones, but if you'd get a Sony, those old lenses wouldn't work anyway).
On an online forum this kind of question will often turn into a largely useless thread where people suggest $THEIR_FAVOURITE_CAMERA because of $THEIR_FAVOURITE_REASON. Instead, try to be more precise in what bothers you, and the answers are likely to be more helpful.
Other people's reasons or interests may not coincide with yours. For example, you say you want something for tele and low-light. The m4/3 suggestion that has been coming a number of times may not be all that good, because the tele selection is limited, there are few fast lenses, and the inevitable suggestion to use your manual-focus, stop-down-aperture M glass may not be ideal for the "fast work" you cite as an area of interest. And so on. Get to pinpoint your own interests so that you you won't be purchasing stuff out of GAS because some random guys on the Internet said so.
Last edited:
aniMal
Well-known
Hehe, of course I know that people will be pushing their own choices here... But on the other hand, I find getting advice from people who know something about rangefinders to be worthwhile, Leica will always be the basis of my kit anyway.
Nikon is fine technically, but somehow the ergonomics have never fitted with my own system - and I have had a range of Nikons from the mid nineties onwards. Cannot really pinpoint it more precisely, but I know that it is the same with the current line. Strange, as I have it all programmed into myself after wearing out a D200, but still it feels slow and counter-intuitive. The direction of focus and aperture rings is important, as the only allure with Nikon for me is the possibility of carrying a bag with some primes, a D700 and an FM2...
Coming back to the other replies, it does get me thinking about 4/3rds again... I think the micro systems would be to slow and hard focussing, but the Olympus range is very interesting... Getting started in that direction, I could then add a micro 4/3 body at a later point, would make the whole setup very flexible!
Thanks everbody, I will keep on processing this until I really know what to go for... I find it useful asking around here!
Olympus is an intere
Nikon is fine technically, but somehow the ergonomics have never fitted with my own system - and I have had a range of Nikons from the mid nineties onwards. Cannot really pinpoint it more precisely, but I know that it is the same with the current line. Strange, as I have it all programmed into myself after wearing out a D200, but still it feels slow and counter-intuitive. The direction of focus and aperture rings is important, as the only allure with Nikon for me is the possibility of carrying a bag with some primes, a D700 and an FM2...
Coming back to the other replies, it does get me thinking about 4/3rds again... I think the micro systems would be to slow and hard focussing, but the Olympus range is very interesting... Getting started in that direction, I could then add a micro 4/3 body at a later point, would make the whole setup very flexible!
Thanks everbody, I will keep on processing this until I really know what to go for... I find it useful asking around here!
Olympus is an intere
Richard Marks
Rexel
The nice thing about the Sony alpha is that the image stabilisation is built into the body. This means any lens gets image stabilisation. So old minolta AF lenses would also have this. The viewfinder is very bright. The resolution on the Sony is superb and I have seen some brilliant images with the Zeiss glass (its probably more or less contax designs i suspect). It is pricey for the good lenses. If there is an issue I tihnk the Sony is less competative at higher ISO's. If you must have a DSLR then surely it has to be a D700 OR EOS 5dii. The D700 of course works superbly with old AIS lenses and the big thing is they are cheep to buy as there are lots of them around. Canon does not have this option. The other really great thing on the D700 is the ITTL flash. It is really very sophisticated. I have a D700 and an FM2 in the bottom of my bag but to be honest the FM2 does not see a lot of action (shameful I know). The lens which i think is a real standout Nikon is the 14-24. I have not used an ultra wide angle this sharp and distortion free before. Its a joy to use.
Best wishes
Richard
aniMal
Well-known
I agree on almost all you say. After having a walk today with my M8 + M7, I realized I need more time to decide, really. Had a thought about spending some weeks with the very basic kit of M7 + 50mm and B/W film. And somehow that felt most alluring!
I find that I have done the best buys and decisions after doing a lot of research, and then taking a looong step backwards for a while. Then, if I still need an ESLR, I will be more able to choose the right one.
I find that I have done the best buys and decisions after doing a lot of research, and then taking a looong step backwards for a while. Then, if I still need an ESLR, I will be more able to choose the right one.
multivitamins
Member
You may want to test the new k-7. However, it is not as fast as the canikons in lowlight but .... the pancakes and FA* and DA* lenses.... good glass...
aniMal
Well-known
I have kind of decided what to upgrade now - myself!!!
It came to a grinding halt, there are just too many features to compare... The Sony 900 looks great, but as far as I can see it is actually hard to get optics for it that resolves 24.5 megapixels...
Also I got really fed up with the whole business, and started thinking... I can do absolutely what I want in terms of photography for the rest of the year, so I have started what I used to do when I had the time for it. And that is carrying an M with a 50 and some BW film around all day... This is really about updating myself - getting back to the ability I used to have before. Seeing light in BW, how it falls and folds - and looking for motifs and patterns that can be worthwhile catching. Hopefully I can get as confident and fast as I used to be some years ago too.
Today I also arranged for sharing Nikon gear with one of my workmates, I will simply leave my stuff at the studio for common use. Then I can borrow his D200 if I should happen to get an odd job where I need an ESLR.
Quite likely I will end up with a D700, but if I am lucky I hopefully can stretch it until next spring, and wait for a D700x...
Often cutting away the drag is the best upgrading!
It came to a grinding halt, there are just too many features to compare... The Sony 900 looks great, but as far as I can see it is actually hard to get optics for it that resolves 24.5 megapixels...
Also I got really fed up with the whole business, and started thinking... I can do absolutely what I want in terms of photography for the rest of the year, so I have started what I used to do when I had the time for it. And that is carrying an M with a 50 and some BW film around all day... This is really about updating myself - getting back to the ability I used to have before. Seeing light in BW, how it falls and folds - and looking for motifs and patterns that can be worthwhile catching. Hopefully I can get as confident and fast as I used to be some years ago too.
Today I also arranged for sharing Nikon gear with one of my workmates, I will simply leave my stuff at the studio for common use. Then I can borrow his D200 if I should happen to get an odd job where I need an ESLR.
Quite likely I will end up with a D700, but if I am lucky I hopefully can stretch it until next spring, and wait for a D700x...
Often cutting away the drag is the best upgrading!
Merkin
For the Weekend
You mentioned disliking complicated menu systems. I am not gonna lie, the D700 does have a complicated menu system, but it does have a couple of things going for it.
First, most of the menu items are things you just need to go through in the first week, set to your liking, and leave them there permanently. Yes, those first couple days do really suck out loud when you are trying to make heads and tails of so many options. The advantage is that you can set it up to operate exactly like you want, even to the point of telling the camera which way you want things to move depending on the direction you turn the scroll wheels, i.e. when adjusting EV, you can set it up so that +EV is achieved from turning the wheel to the left or to the right.
The second advantage is that you can create a custom menu bank which has a dedicated button right under the DOF preview button. You can program that bank with whatever menu choices you want, from anywhere in the menu, and the one you set at the top of the list pops up by default (I use ISO auto-control on/off as my main choice, but I also have picture mode, battery life, multiple exposure control, and a couple of other things in my programmable menu.
Since I did these two things, I have never had to go more than one layer deep in the menus in the middle of a shoot, and most of the time I never have to go in the menus.
Also, if you want low light, the D700 is pretty much the king (at least for the next 24 to 48 hours, when the D3s, which can go all the way up to ISO 102400, gets announced).
First, most of the menu items are things you just need to go through in the first week, set to your liking, and leave them there permanently. Yes, those first couple days do really suck out loud when you are trying to make heads and tails of so many options. The advantage is that you can set it up to operate exactly like you want, even to the point of telling the camera which way you want things to move depending on the direction you turn the scroll wheels, i.e. when adjusting EV, you can set it up so that +EV is achieved from turning the wheel to the left or to the right.
The second advantage is that you can create a custom menu bank which has a dedicated button right under the DOF preview button. You can program that bank with whatever menu choices you want, from anywhere in the menu, and the one you set at the top of the list pops up by default (I use ISO auto-control on/off as my main choice, but I also have picture mode, battery life, multiple exposure control, and a couple of other things in my programmable menu.
Since I did these two things, I have never had to go more than one layer deep in the menus in the middle of a shoot, and most of the time I never have to go in the menus.
Also, if you want low light, the D700 is pretty much the king (at least for the next 24 to 48 hours, when the D3s, which can go all the way up to ISO 102400, gets announced).
PatrickT
New Rangefinder User
What about a used 5D? No video though. But you can use all of your old MF Nikkors on it with an adapter. I use mine almost exclusively with MF lenses (Olympus and Nikon) and love it. I never use any menus either (aside from formatting the card). Shoot RAW. The files from it are really really great.
aniMal
Well-known
I see that two weeks or so has passed since I started this thread, and in the meantime I have gone from just forgetting it all and putting my Leicas to use, to now again looking for some kind of dSLR.
Obviously the D700 would be a good choice, but then it is wiser to wait until the D800 comes, then buying a used D700 or the D800 itself. That would then be a long time investment in full frame and low light capabilities.
I do not really need to get an expensive dSLR right now, the money jobs will probably not be coming in for real for at least half a year from now. But, for my personal work I kind of need something for that period of time.
So, what I kind of stumbled upon is the Sigma SD14... A real outsider, but with sensor technology that I found very interesting when it was launched with the SD9. And now that I have read up on it, and seen both pictures on flickr and very interesting user reviews, then I find it so interesting that I will go have a look at it tomorrow.
The things that attract me towards an SD14 are the following:
1. Totally different technology, which renders colours in a superb way. And colour rendition is one of the main things I like with my M8m, and one of the things I did find lacking on the Nikon D200/300.
2. Very reasonable price, probably because it is a niche product that has not had an upgrade as expected. I can have an SD14 and a 18-50 2.8 macro for $1100, I think that seems a good buy.
3. Long term investment. Even though I might need a Nikon or such with much higher resolution later on, the colour rendition on the SD14 is so totally different, and so accurate, that I could see myself using it for years almost like a colour meter. Also for product shoots or use for web, I can see that it would probably spare me a lot of work on colours to get it right.
I kind of think of this the same way that Roger Hicks has written about investing in different types of camera gear, not pouring all the money into the same type of gear over and over. I find just the prospect of learning to know a totally different sensor technology worth while, and I will surely learn a lot just by getting into it.
So, it seems I will be getting one on monday. Anybody here got experience with Foveon colours? Or opinions on it?
Obviously the D700 would be a good choice, but then it is wiser to wait until the D800 comes, then buying a used D700 or the D800 itself. That would then be a long time investment in full frame and low light capabilities.
I do not really need to get an expensive dSLR right now, the money jobs will probably not be coming in for real for at least half a year from now. But, for my personal work I kind of need something for that period of time.
So, what I kind of stumbled upon is the Sigma SD14... A real outsider, but with sensor technology that I found very interesting when it was launched with the SD9. And now that I have read up on it, and seen both pictures on flickr and very interesting user reviews, then I find it so interesting that I will go have a look at it tomorrow.
The things that attract me towards an SD14 are the following:
1. Totally different technology, which renders colours in a superb way. And colour rendition is one of the main things I like with my M8m, and one of the things I did find lacking on the Nikon D200/300.
2. Very reasonable price, probably because it is a niche product that has not had an upgrade as expected. I can have an SD14 and a 18-50 2.8 macro for $1100, I think that seems a good buy.
3. Long term investment. Even though I might need a Nikon or such with much higher resolution later on, the colour rendition on the SD14 is so totally different, and so accurate, that I could see myself using it for years almost like a colour meter. Also for product shoots or use for web, I can see that it would probably spare me a lot of work on colours to get it right.
I kind of think of this the same way that Roger Hicks has written about investing in different types of camera gear, not pouring all the money into the same type of gear over and over. I find just the prospect of learning to know a totally different sensor technology worth while, and I will surely learn a lot just by getting into it.
So, it seems I will be getting one on monday. Anybody here got experience with Foveon colours? Or opinions on it?
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Hm. Does a different sensor in a DSLR qualify as a different "type of gear"?
In the film age you'd get different colour rendition by choosing a different film; does picking a different film make a different type of gear?
I'm not sure whether you'll find the Sigma "different enough"; in the end it's just another crop factor digital SLR with a lens mount that isn't compatible with anything. If you want a different type of camera, get a 4x5".
Otherwise you could think about a Fuji S5 or something as well, different sensor technology and colour rendition, and at least it's compatible with the lenses you already have.
aniMal
Well-known
Well, part of the reasoning is that I have started shooting 4x5! The 70 years or so that film manufacturers have put into getting positive film to render colours in a way that looks "real", is not something to discard easily in my opinion. I get a totally different feeling from my scanned positives than digital, although the M8 comes close to what I find natural.
What I can see from the Foveon technology when I browse pictures on flickr, is that it has a way of rendering colours that I just have to check out! It really seems to be different, and I can just imagine that having twin shots of a scene with 4x5 or medium format film together with a SD14, will give make for some interesting work in photoshop.
A Fuji S5 is a great camera in terms of tonality, but the colour technology is still the same as any other SLR.
The more I get into this, the more I find that the sensors themselves are responsible for so much in terms of colour, and that this is very much neglected in tests and general use.
I will just have to test it and see - and anyway I feel that this way of thinking about gear gives me much more in terms of learning and working with colours than following the herd on the latest release etc...
What I can see from the Foveon technology when I browse pictures on flickr, is that it has a way of rendering colours that I just have to check out! It really seems to be different, and I can just imagine that having twin shots of a scene with 4x5 or medium format film together with a SD14, will give make for some interesting work in photoshop.
A Fuji S5 is a great camera in terms of tonality, but the colour technology is still the same as any other SLR.
The more I get into this, the more I find that the sensors themselves are responsible for so much in terms of colour, and that this is very much neglected in tests and general use.
I will just have to test it and see - and anyway I feel that this way of thinking about gear gives me much more in terms of learning and working with colours than following the herd on the latest release etc...