@amatula15 wrote:
Hi Trevor,
Good points!
I publish now on social media but am hoping to expand on that (photo contests, web site perhaps, and the like) so I don't pick a camera based on where I am publishing (since I am constantly thinking improvement and expansion).
However, now I am thinking ahead actually in my own selection, EOS RP vs EOS R (lighrweight). I am a landscape photographer and the dynamic range difference seems to be significant (can get 14 on the R at ISO 800) but not sure if that is important (images I have seen do not seem to indicate that). I know if I am exposing correctly and/or am patient in post-editing (do not like to be there) then whatever camera I can work through dynamic range issues....
To any newbie I woudl say go to a store, handlle cameras, see how they feel and talk to a store clerk on their needs and goals and budgets.
Cheers, Annie
So, obviously you are making an effort to say that you are experienced, and that's fine. However, when I asked the question about what you will produce your answer did not address whether you will be producing large, hardcopy images. That is far more demanding on a camera and lens than producing for digital display. I will assume from your answer that you are producing purely digital images - which is fine, but it gives you more choice flexibility than you might have considered, something I addressed in a private message to you. I recommend checking out the Wildlife Photographer of the Year website, arguably one of the most prestigious competitions in the photography calendar, and look at the gear that has been used. There are some amazing images there taken with relatively humble equipment.
The other thing that you are doing, and needs to be addressed, is focusing on the body rather than the glass - which is a trap you may regret. Dynamic range and small size in the body is certainly important, but you say you want to shoot wildlife, landscapes and a wide range of other subjects, yet keep the camera small and light enough to carry if you go hiking. That is where the glass comes in...
If you do not have a large commitment to earlier technology, then the new Canon R-series holds a lot of promise. However, most of the lenses so far released for that mount are a) heavy and b) very expensive. Since you gave us no idea of budget - a fundementally important factor - it is hard for anyone to address that. Lens size and weight are factors we can address.
These days, outside small, pancake units, lenses provide the majority of cost, bulk and weight in a camera system. Futhermore, bodies are replaced with some frequency as the electronics change, but lenses have a much longer life-span, and thus represent a much more signifcant investment.
If you want superior L glass with the maximum range but miminum number of lenses then I see three possibilities:
1) Go for the classic "Holy Trinity" of lenses - in this case the EF-R 15-35, 24-70, 70-200 but that takes you only to 200mm and depending on the wildlife you are shooting that is not likley to be a long enough reach. Cost for these, according to the Canon website would be: $2,200+ 2,200+ 2,600. So that lot would set you back $7,000 for the glass alone. I don't live in the US, so I don't know if tax is added to that.
2) Another combination: (optional 15-35), 24-105, 100-500 That one holds more promise at the long end but the cost, weight and bulk will be massive - so not good if weight is a factor. Both of these first options will cost ($2,200) $1,100 +2,700, a minimum investment of $3,800 - not including the optional unit.
3) The RF 24-240mm - this lens will still be short on the telephoto end but as a starter it offers a chance for you to be able to carry a single, relatively light unit into the field and represents a much cheaper investment. This lens is an interesting unit. It displays massive masking (as if you had the lens hood on wrong) on the corners at 24mm and all sorts of other defects in RAW, but the JPGs are actually very good, and if you put the RAW images into Photoshop or Lightroom and use lens correction the images suddenly come right. Cost $700. I suggest checking out some reviews like the one by Justin Abott:
REVIEW
Lastly, you had a massive and very wide-ranging list of wants for application. What I would suggest is following this process, tried and trusted, for making purchases by businesses.
• Establish Your Criteria
• Define benefits you want, rank them in priority - Identify them as critical, want, would be nice
• Research for Products
• Find products that have features the match your benefits list
• Compare and Filter
• Compare the features with your benefits list
• Remove any that don’t match your “must have” criteria
• Reduce the list to 2-3.
• Evaluate
• Try out the gear with a hands-on evaluation
• Make your purchase
Frankly, I would suggest renting the gear you will think you want to invest in, it is the best way of getting solid experience without commitment, especially considering the investment you are considering. I would also consider the EOS R6. It offers way more capability than the bodies you identified.
cheers, TREVOR
The mark of good photographer is less what they hold in their hand, it's more what they hold in their head;
"All the variety, all the charm, all the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow", Leo Tolstoy;
"Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase" Percy W. Harris
However the store clerk may be as uninformed as you. They may only know the "talking" points but hand s om is always the best go.
