Advice on new Camera

belgiantrotter

Hi smugmuggers,

Hoping to get some tips from people with experience. I know there is ton of information on the web and I have read countless reviews
Here is my situation
Hobbyist Photographer not a Pro
owning Nikon D7000
3 DX lenses (tokina wide, nikon 70-300, sigma 24-70)
2 FX (50 mm 1.4, sigma 150-600)

very happy with my gear but i'd like to buy something more light/mobile when I do not have the luxury to take all my gear with me. (have a young son and he is now responsible for all other gear I need to carry)

so obviously i have looked in detail to the Sony A7 series.
- finally getting a full frame would be nice (especially at the price of the a7 currently!!)
- I feel getting the Nikon d750 does not solve my weight issue and is a bit sporty for my budget
- way lighter
- still having option to switch a few lenses between cameras using adapter if needed


other alternatives are the sony a6000 but I feel i might get frustrated by it as too limited in setup/features

if the sony makes sense, the next question is which one a7, a7ii or a7r. (i feel the a7r is not needed)
a7 is very appealing price wise (some more money to buy a good overall zoom lens) + have option to use my nikon 50 mm
a7ii is more expensive... gets body focus...


tips/personal experice are welcome ! :thumb

thanks

belgiantrotter

mhhh did some further research... even though I can use some of my nikon lenses... I have to manual focus and no exif data is exchanged...
can someone confirm this...

another deal i found that looks attractive is this one:
Sony A6000 Black + 16-70mm ZA Carl Zeiss

that might be a good option too to limit size/weight at reasonable price... not full frame though...

ziggy53

A Full-Frame (FF) body from anyone will generally require FF lenses. FF lenses of the same image quality and light-gathering capability are still going to be heavier than crop/DX lenses, because it takes more glass and supporting structure to house a FF lens.

I have a Sony a6000 and several lenses, which I purchased specifically for a travel kit. It is about half the weight of my Nikon D7100 DX kit, with slower (smaller aperture) Sony E-mount lenses and a few, carefully selected primes, just to save weight. My reasoning is that for simpler travels outdoor daylight shooting does not require fast lenses and I still have a small flash in the kit for indoor shooting. I do give up some background/foreground separation and faster shutter speeds due to the slower aperture lenses, but overall I am pleased with the results.

You don't mention which of your current lenses are AF-D lenses, which require an in-body AF motor, but I can confirm that those AF-D lenses would never AF using an adapter on a Sony mirrorless body.

For AF-S lenses (which have the AF motor in the lens), you might consider one of the smaller Nikon bodies to save a bit of weight. The Nikon D3300 has a really nice imager and weighs quite a bit less than your current D7000 body. You do give up the better AF system of the D7000, but the D3300 is still fine for most of what you might want to do.

Then just build a lens kit of just the essential lenses from your current kit of lenses, realizing that any AF-D lenses will not autofocus, of course. But just picking the most-used lenses saves you weight again, as well as not risking some lenses to loss, theft and damage.

---

So, my recommendation to you is a Nikon D3300 purchase plus cherry-picking from your current lens kit, and/or adding a couple of lenses with AF-S, and you can build a very nice travel kit which can add to the functionality of your current kit without replacing everything while still saving weight and space.

NikonsandVstroms

Another idea just to throw it out there is instead of replacing your gear what if you got something smaller to augment your main setup? Since you wouldn't be trying to replace your DSLR you could go even smaller and lighter, and while you would give up some performance you'd be able to take the camera/kit to even more places while still having the D7000/Nikon lenses when you need your best possible image quality.

I did this years ago with an Olympus E-620 and 4 lenses which were a fraction of the size and weight of my Nikon setup. And today if you mostly use a standard zoom range there are advanced point and shoots going up to 4/3 sensor sizes with bright lenses, and then if telephoto is key there are all sorts of mirrorless cameras out there.

Mitchell

Isn't a D7000 with your 50mm lens light and mobile?

If not, consider just using the camera on your smart phone (assuming you have one). I've abandoned my quest for quality, lightweight gear to offset my heavy Nikon gear. If I don't feel like lugging around a full DSLR, I'm satisfied using my iphone.

cab.in.boston

Unless those are lenses with which I'm completely unfamiliar (or you meant 55-300 and/or 17-70), your 70-300 and 24-70 are both (heavy) FX lenses. Therefore you could save some weight by simply keeping the DSLR and replacing one or more of your lenses with a smaller/lighter DX-format lenses such as the Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 (16 oz vs. 1.74 lb on the 24-70) or make your "light" kit something like the 35/1.8 DX prime and maybe an 85/1.8 prime. If you want lightweight and good quality, you're going to be sacrificing something, with the 17-70 you'd give up a stop of aperture at 70 vs. the 24-70, in my two prime suggestion you'd sacrifice focal length coverage. Alternatively, similar to Mitchell's suggestion (which is essentially what I've been doing... either I carry my whole kit, or I use my iPhone as a "good enough" walkaround), you could pick up a Fuji X100T. Then your walkaround camera is light and pocketable, but again you'd be going to a single focal length. As ziggy points out, if you go FX with one of the Sony A7 series, then the body might be smaller/lighter, but your lenses are going to be just as heavy as they'd be with a DSLR system. Plus the battery life is much worse, so you'll want to carry more spare batteries, etc, etc.

belgiantrotter

all fairly good points!!! I really want to like the sony a6000 and a7 series because they are so small and pack a punch i guess
@ziggy53, would be interested to see what lenses you own for your a6000. ideally a very good all rounders again to reduce weight


you are both absolutely right on the Nikon Front...
FYI: I have the Nikon 50 mm f/1.4G and Nikon 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR (the more expensive one) all working well on DX (and FX) I also have a Sigma 150-500 too
the only DX lens I have is my wide angle Tokina and an all rounder sigma 17-70

I also gave up already on the idea to use my lenses on sony even with the adapter... it could work but not having AF makes me nervous...


I like the idea of a cheaper lighter Nikon D3300 (or even D5500) but for me to buy a cheaper body of Nikon whereas I have been wanting to buy a FX body of Nikon (the D750 for instance) for a long time seems crazy and silly...
hard choices

as for the iphone comment, valid too but phones are just too slow (especially with small kids) and in low light the noise is terrible...
according to other reviews/tips i read online: buying something like Fuji X100T or Panasonic Lumix LX1000. Something my wife could use too
I'm just afraid i will get frustrated not being able to play with it enough

thanks for all the comments

cab.in.boston

A friend recently sold off all his Nikon gear and went to the Fuji X-E2 plus a few of their nice primes. He can carry his whole kit in a very small shoulder bag, and he's not giving up all that much in the performance. Not as good as FX in low light, but way better than a phone, plus with the APS-C format, you can make up some of the FX advantage by using their larger aperture primes like the 56/1.2 (roughly equivalent to 85/1.8 on FX). So that's a possibility as well. Definitely lighter than a Nikon DX kit, but still a nice and complete system. I haven't really checked out the A6000, but it's my general impression that Sony's lens selection isn't nearly as complete as Fuji's. Maybe I"m wrong. If you're drooling over the A7, I've certainly seen great reviews and high quality images from those cameras, but as I understand it, not only do they chew through batteries, but the focus still isn't as fast as DSLR (important with young children, I know all too well), and again, the lenses aren't going to be much, if at all, lighter than DSLR FX.

You're right: hard choices. Each system has its pros and cons, and unfortunately there isn't that one magic option that lets you have FX-quality (especially in low light), fast focus, lightweight/portable... Personally when I want to go light but want more than my phone, I am usually happy with just my D300 and the 35/1.8. Limiting in focal range, but I'm very pleased with that lens, and I'm making the conscious choice to not carry the whole kit, so I am okay with the sacrifice.

denisegoldberg

belgiantrotter wrote: »

as for the iphone comment, valid too but phones are just too slow (especially with small kids) and in low light the noise is terrible...
according to other reviews/tips i read online: buying something like Fuji X100T or Panasonic Lumix LX1000. Something my wife could use too
I'm just afraid i will get frustrated not being able to play with it enough

I faced the same decision recently. I'd stopped using a P&S camera - even one with manual settings - quite a while ago because I wasn't happy with the photos. I'm quite happy with my Canon 7D and lenses but there are times when I want something smaller and lighter. I bought a Fuji X-T1 early in August and I'm very happy with it. My first impressions review is at first impressions :: Fuji X-T1. I've tagged the photos from my first few outings with a keyword, click "fuji xt1 1st look" to see a sampling.

If you're concerned about not being able to play with the camera enough you might want to think about something like the X-T1. Of course this means your existing lenses won't work so that's something else you'll need to consider.

You might also be interested in the discussion in the thread in this forum titled D750 or Fuji XT1?.

--- Denise

ziggy53

belgiantrotter wrote: »

... @ziggy53, would be interested to see what lenses you own for your a6000. ideally a very good all rounders again to reduce weight
...

In my Sony a6000 "Travel kit":

Sony E PZ 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OSS E-mount (Power Zoom)
Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS E-mount Zoom
The above are the "kit" zooms typical to use with the a6000 body. They are nice quality, but pretty slow apertures, and the 16-50mm really requires correction for both curvilinear distortion and chroma distortion for best image quality. Those two zooms, plus a close-focus diopter and a simple flash make up a basic kit and it's very light together. It all fits in a medium sized "Holster".

For something more complete, I add:

Sony E 50mm F1.8 OSS E-mount Prime
Excellent image quality, fairly affordable, good in low-light, no appreciable distortions and pretty lightweight. A short telephoto on the a6000, so a good choice for head and head-and-shoulder portraits. Optical stabilization extends low-light freehand use.

Samyang 12mm f/2.0 NCS CS E-mount prime
Manual focus and manual aperture, this lens is a great super-wide landscape lens, but can also do architectural and interior real estate photography. Also good for envoronmental portaiture and wide field astronomical photography. A tripod is generally indicated, since you generally compose, manually focus, set the final aperture and then take the exposure.

Sigma 19mm f/2.8 DN Lens for Sony E-mount prime
A wide-angle lens; autofocus and auto-aperture. One of the Sigma "Art" series lenses, image quality is very nice and the f2.8 is reasonably fast.

Olympus TCON-17C 1.7x Teleconverter Accessory Lens
Added to the 55-210mm kit tele-zoom, this provides tremendous reach without affecting aperture. I don't have an acceptable support for this yet, so my usage is pretty limited. Typical uses (when I get a suitable support system) are wildlife and compressive perspective landscapes. Some folks have even done BIF with this combination.

Another SmugMugger, "kgravett", has some image samples with this combination:
http://kgravett.smugmug.com/Other/Nex-6-w-Sony-55-210mm-w/

---

All of the above, the basic travel kit plus the additional lenses and teleconverter, flash, plus a spare NEX 5N and 18-55mm OSS lens, all fit into an Adorama Slinger "sling" style backpack and it weighs around 9 lbs total. Using the Slinger belt strap puts the weight on your hips and makes a pretty easy carry, but just undo the belt strap and swing the bag around for access in the field.

I should add that the a6000 can do simple subjects up to ISO 3200. After that, the Sony noise reduction scheme, which even affects the RAW/ARW files, starts to heavily impact detail in the lower tones and shadows and usable detail is reduced significantly.

The imager and image processor in the Nikon D3300, by comparison, does a much better job overall IMO, with very natural looking high-ISO grain, which responds nicely to post-production noise reduction when necessary. The D3300 is not perfect, and the single control dial alone might cause you issues, for instance (after owning the D7000).

belgiantrotter wrote: »

... I like the idea of a cheaper lighter Nikon D3300 (or even D5500) but for me to buy a cheaper body of Nikon whereas I have been wanting to buy a FX body of Nikon (the D750 for instance) for a long time seems crazy and silly...
hard choices ...

Purpose oriented tools are not "... crazy and silly ..." if they solve your stated problems. In this case a very small and compact dSLR for travel, coupled with a few lenses to cover your needs without too much overall weight, is a very good solution for your stated goals. Not a perfect solution, of course, and there is some merit to each user's post above wih other recommendations.

Sharing these lenses with the current D7000 and kit, and a future FF/FX body, just lends to system flexibility and other photographic application options.

EphTwoEight

I gave up my D800 for a Fuji XT1 and the XT10 and 5 or lens, and aside from night time sports, I totally don't regret it. Sonys seem fine but back to big lenses if you want them fast, and they aint cheap.