Wildlife and Scenic Photography Equipment Recommendations

[ashley84]

Hi, I am to photography. For a very long time I have wanted to learn the art of wildlife and scenic photography. What advice do you have on equipment? I am starting from scratch any tips on what equipment I need and tips of capturing beauty of this earth, I would really appreciate any advice or where would be a good place to start. -Thank you-

[March411]

With all due respect calling Canon DSLR equipment that is still sold actively through the Canon portal being called a legacy system may not be an accurate depiction of the line.

By definition a legacy system is any software/hardware that is no longer receiving updates, support or maintenance from their developer. The 5D Mark VI I mentioned received a firmware update mid-2023. Canon continues to offer a four year CarePak on DSLR systems and EF lenses sold through their portal. Are you stating that they will no longer honor these CarePaks? Unless there is something I do not know Canon continues to support the DSLR through the sales and their after sales support through the CarePak warranty.

While I would agree with you that improvements have been made in the R series with respect to in body stabilization, the sensors and AF the DSLR camera remains a viable option. For those looking pursue their interest in photography they are still a sustainable choice. Given the fact that they are reliable, produce excellent results and have a vast amount of lenses available new, used and through third parties speaks volumes. The current R series as you have already noted in another post is challenged with third party availability and the production and availability of the RF lenses is somewhat limited. Nothing through third parties.

While I can appreciate your enthusiasm for the R series and mirrorless solution, DSLR still has a strong presence in the professional industry.

Having spent time in the industry for over 45 years using Canon equipment as my primary small format camera and as a photo journalist, commercial (both small, medium and large format) and sports photographer I can state with a degree of confidence that the latest and greatest doesn’t always reflect the industries direction as it pertains to practical practice. It is driven more by enthusiasts that have the available financial resources to upgrade with disposable income. Not everyone has that luxury.

Legacy system

A legacy system is any outdated hardware or software that is still in use. Legacy systems include hardware, software applications, file formats and programming languages.

• They no longer receive updates, support or maintenance from their developers or designers.
• They are no longer available for purchase or depend on obsolete technology to run and maintain.
• The system requires professionals with complex, largely outdated technology skill sets to maintain or repair. 
• Repairs take too long compared with new systems.
• Maintenance costs become too excessive to continue.
• They are prone to security vulnerabilities and cannot be updated to meet modern standards.

Canon Q2 2022 financial meeting, Canon execs stated that they believe the camera market has bottomed out. Canon now predicts camera market growth to begin again. This news is excellent after so many years of uncertainty. The execs also noted that they believe DSLRs will be a viable tool for photographers for many more years. While Canon might not release any new DSLRs, they will continue to make DSLRs, like the EOS 1DX III, as long as there is demand.

As of today Canon has discontinued the M series camera and approximately 30 EF lenses.

[rs-eos]

Semantics aside, I would not invest in DSLR equipment at this point, especially so if starting out new.

Even if they are not strictly "legacy" now, they will be in a very short time (e.g. as such cameras get closer to the 10 year mark).  Note that 10 years is not an absolute; it could be shorter.

The only exception is that if one already has DSLR equipment and employ workflows that are very specific to them.  Backup bodies could be purchased (though will be more and more the case requiring the used market).

As with other industries, it will behoove photographers, especially those that will work say for another 5 or more years, to take a strong look at the future.

[March411]

rs-eos, my objective is truly not to create conflict but to be objective. What I posted is not semantics it is fact. While the little M series and around 30 EF lenses have been discontinued it is still supported and therefore not a legacy system. The Canon DSLR system continues to be 30% of Canons market share. Speculation of the DSLR becoming end of life within 10 years or less is exactly that.....speculation.

Canon executives have stated Canon that DSLRs aren't dead yet, they still account for a third of the entire camera market, with as many as 1.8 million digital DSLRs being sold last year. Additionally, as noted above the execs also noted that they believe DSLRs will be a viable tool for photographers for many more years. While Canon might not release any new DSLRs, they will continue to make DSLRs, like the EOS 1DX III, as long as there is demand.

Do we all know for certain their statements are accurate, nothing in life is 100%. That being said stating that they will become end of life at this point is not accurate based on the Canon executive teams statement regarding DSLR's. It is purely speculation.

The reason I posted this is that I believe in accuracy. Also, that knowledgeable individuals have a responsibility to assist people within their stated budget or desires/request. One standard does not fit all!

I joined the community this year, I have been reading for many years, every day, multiple times. I noticed that at times the person requesting assistance, well their request is inflated, not within the original request. Given the depth of available systems there is always a good solution to fit their budget and desires but may fall out of the newest technology. Third party solutions which have value and reduced expense are really part of the conversation but would greatly benefit the person requesting assistance. This post is a perfect example.

EF lenses (full frame) with the addition of an RF adapter will allow people to use those lenses if the move to mirror-less in the future. The bottom line is a a good DSLR body is more readily available and at a reduced expense but rarely recommended because it is "old tech".

And I used the R5, R6 and R8 and can say the the learning curve is a bit tougher than the DSLR systems. For someone looking to start out it should also be a consideration beyond the expense and staying within their budget.         

[Tronhard]

Well, as I feared my use of the word would cause some to rise to counter it, but my point is clear and valid.

The definition used by March 411 is but one definition of the term legacy.  My definition of legacy is as follows: "A legacy system is any piece of technology (including both software and hardware) that lacks modern features that would be available if you were to update that piece of tech."  This quote is from the site Legacy System: Definition, Types and More | OpenLegacy.   It offers a breakdown of examples of legacy in the tech industry. 

Since modern camera systems are far more than their optics: the mass of features such as focusing algorithms, tracking and stabilization are a combination of hardware and software engaged by electronics that are engaged through a camera's firmware is a testament that they are as much computers as optical devices.  So, I think I can argue that by that definition my point is not unreasonable.

There is a marked difference between the users of camera systems.  In a recent DPReviw article Taking Stock of Gear and When to Let Go or Lean In. the writer said "many professional photojournalists are still using DSLRs.".  The key here is professional.  I have worked in the field for over 40 years and for the vast majority of the time, I owned used the same cameras which, up until the DSLR market was established, were a combination of Nikon and Canon film bodies, although I rented, borrowed or was supplied with other gear as requested to fulfil a task.  There is a good reason for this.  Professional cameras represent a significant investment out of a working budget.  They are expensive because, above all, they are built to last - not necessarily have the latest features.  Professionals keep their gear far longer than most non-pro's for as long as it reliably do what is required of them.  I kept my 5DMkIII and IV until last year, along with my two 7D series, and I still retain a 5DsR, but I rarely use it these days as I use MILC gear, but that's just my preference.

However at this time, professionals starting out will consider the viability of engaging in a platform for the future for that very reason: longevity of equipment, support life, and features that will make their life more efficient and effective.  A camera is a tool, no more, no less and it's an investment in the future as well.

In support of my comments about the direction of the market, I recommend reading the following article, based on CIPA-released data: Digital Camera Market Size, Share, Trends - Industry Analysis (mordorintelligence.com)  It clearly states the challenges to the camera market and trends from 2024-29.  I would particularly point to the section Digital Camera Market Trends.

However, our OP is clearly NOT a professional, they are starting out on a photographic journey that may last a short time or a lifetime.  The point is that they do not have the same value set of preference of reliability and commercial viability that a professional has, nor do they have an investment in DSLR equipment and they certainly don't have the budget to buy pro gear.  So, with respect that argument about how pro's behave is not that applicable. 

The consumer and enthusiast market drives the mass of camera sales because they upgrade far more frequently - at the extreme end is those suffering from Gear Acquisition Syndrome (GAS) convinced that the latest features will release their latent photographic talent - yet never satisfied.  If Canon were intending to supply the consumer DSLR market with further gear they would have release cameras well before now instead of retiring models.

I don't disagree that Canon have consistently said that as long as there is a viable market for a product they will continue to support it - support does not necessarily mean making new cameras and lenses which would be a taking design, development and manufacturing resources from their expanding and highly lucrative MILC market.  The DLSR platform, by which I include the on-going development and supply of DSLR bodies and their associated lenses, has not had any hardware development for some time and, in fact, the range has been shrinking, as I mentioned, it has been four years since Canon released ANY DSLR or lens, while the R platform has massively expended.  The M series, particularly the M50II, was popular within some segments of the Asian market and for vloggers but Canon released several replacement bodies and equivalent lenses in the R platform and promptly shut down M platform sales.   Most professionals do not use M-series bodies, they use the very top-end DSLRs my critic selected specifically, but those do not represent the status of the platform as Canon's main market as a whole.

As to the comment that the transition to the new platform will be particularly challenging.  We all get used to a set of features and behaviours within what is essentially our comfort zone: that can pose a challenge as we step outside of our comfort zone to come to grips and learn those new features and behaviours. That tends to happen the longer we have held within that zone without challenging ourselves.  That does not necessarily apply to all - younger people generally have much more flexible comfort zones and are far less likely to find new features challenging.  Certainly, for someone starting out, it's all new anyway.  If we avoided all new things we would not have used computers, driven cars, or uses a lot of domestic appliances.  So, again, it draws a long bow to suggest that one's personal preferences or challenges apply to the others.

This should not have to turn into an argument about semantics, nor should it be about a discussion of the status of professional-grade cameras, it's about finding a long-term solution for a person starting out, a consumer with a limited budget, who wants to engage in two specific areas of recreational photography - wildlife and scenic. 

I have addressed those points directly based on their needs and budget, not my preferences and certainly with no bias.  My comments are based on the realities of the situation and the expressed needs of the client.  Perhaps we could concentrate on that rather than just defending our own preferences and biases.

[March411]

Trevor, I agree with much of what you said and it's a shame that you frame what I consider to be an intellectual conversation as an argument. And making the statement that "My comments are based on the realities of the situation and the expressed needs of the client. Perhaps we could concentrate on that rather than just defending our own preferences and biases". This comment only furthers my point about not taking a broader approach to assisting the client within their conveyed means, I view it as a passive aggressive criticism.

As it pertains to Legacy, Canon has released the statement that while Canon might not release any new DSLRs, they will continue to make DSLRs, like the EOS 1DX III, as long as there is demand. By their statement the product line and support will remain in production as long as their is demand, hence the definition Legacy does not apply. Again not an argument but a perspective based on the fact of Canon communication.

I have no bias, the Canon mirror-less systems are cutting edge and offer many improvements as I noted earlier in the conversation.  

Options are key and providing those options to clients is essential, remaining within the budget should also be a fundamental consideration. We should be taking into account the peripherals needed beyond the body and lenses and when making recommendations assist them down a complete path. Not one that will require additional expense after their purchase, items required but outside their conveyed budget. 

[Tronhard]

I am providing, in a collegial manner, counters to your points.  I have listed each of the main points you made and provided counterpoints in a reasoned manner with references.  If you find those counter points to be 'passive aggressive' that is regrettable, but it is your choice.  I have not made a personal attack on you, which I abhor but have been subject to myself, I would never do that.  This is about point and counter point and the validity of those points and is a reasoned debate. 

Like you, I find that threads expand to go in directions that are outside the purview of the needs of the client and simply muddy the waters and I feel that this was going in that direction with the more intellectual discussion of the value of older platforms, hence my comment about focus. To put it another way, is that direction really helping the OP find a simple, affordable and long term solution to their question.  With respect, I would contend not - it's arguably complicating the issue.

Like you, I certainly do not support up-selling to push people past their budget.  That is one of the first points in the document I shared with the OP at the start of this thread: Considerations for Buying Camera Gear 

The suggestions I have made to the client are to the point, specifically explained to link features with benefits and value.  If the client had an investment in older gear I would, as always, get them to consider the question of keeping with that platform as a viable proposition, based on how they use the gear.  That is not the case here.  They have apparently no investment and thus no tie to the DSLR platform.  Then the benefits of the MILC platform become clear from a technical, operational and investment perspective

[March411]

Trevor, I have read the information you've posted in this community for a very long time. You have a vast amount of knowledge and that is respected!

I do believe that the conversation is germane, the OP posted their inquiry with a budget. Having  completed some very detailed research myself for an additional body there is very little chance of the OP purchasing a MILC system with peripherals for $3000, new or used/refurbished. The R body alone (R5-R8) will be between $1500 - $2500.  Adding a lens with the desired reach (if EF an adapter), cards, filters, tripod, bag or backpack and a few extra batteries will put him well over budget.

Conversely something like the 90D, full warranty and the peripherals noted above, their budget is obtainable. No it's not the latest and greatest but a viable option, a proven system, a large sensor (32MP), adaptable to many different types of lens and at the clients desired budget.

We can agree to disagree and no disrespect was intended, I was simply offering a different path. 

[rs-eos]

I have to completely disagree with this assertion.  For a $3,000 budget, there are so many potential solutions in the R-series line.  Why do you think that it's a "very little chance of the OP purchasing a MILC system" with such a budget?

This back and forth is kinda reminding me of the posts regarding pushing an M-series camera in the here and now.  That ship has sailed.

It sounds like you're completely happy with your gear (DSLRs).  Great!  So am I.  But the best advice we can give to folks new to interchangable lens cameras is to point them to what will be far better for them for the longer term.

[March411]

I specifically noted the R5 - R8 in my post Ricky but you are correct there are lessor MILC available. My point is that the DSLR ship hasn't sailed and still a viable option that will produce outstanding images at a reduced cost and currently between third party and Canon EF lenses more options.

And for what it's worth, those little M series cameras still take beautiful images.

 

[Tronhard]

Funnily enough, I still have two M5 units and three EF-M lenses and, yes, they still make great images, but again that's not the point for our situation.

Ricky and I are looking at how much value the OP will get not just now, but in the future from their investment if they wish to grow their gear as they develop their own style.   The DSLR platform is still capable of producing beautiful images - I have always maintained that if a camera or lens produces great images, it will continue to do the same as long as it is not damaged.  However, that is not our point, it's about value for money from a future investment point of view.