I only have a general purpose Olympus bridge SP-590UZ camera that I use every day to photograph insects, landscapes, cars, etc. So far it has proved quite enjoyable, but limited if low luminosity, and not quick enough for live animals pictures.
I want to buy a modern reflex like Canon or Nikon with a proper lens to do macrophotography of butterflies mainly, but also wild animals like waterfowls, deers, and landscapes. What would you recommend ?
My criteria are : - strong equipment that can cope with humidity, dust, etc. - batteries that have a certain autonomy - either a good quality zoom to cope with what I was doing before or 2 lenses to do it - something easy to use, as I do not like to play with sensitive menus that are supposed to be intuitive for young generations, but that don't seems to apply to me ! - price is secondary, but always happy to have a good deal ...
I use a Nikon D7000 with a 105mm VR Nikon Macro lens for photographing insects and I am pleased with my results. Bird and animal photography are a different ball game altogether and you will need one of those extra long zoom lenses for good close up images.
You'll get an equal split for Canon/Nikon, depending on who is writing. Both are good, full-featured systems. I'm not really familiar with Nikon, so my comments will be about Canon.
Since you want the camera for multiple purposes, consider the sensor size. A full-frame sensor (equal in size to a frame of 35mm film) is better if you want wide-angle landscapes, but a reduced sensor has advantages for macro and wildlife. Lenses "pretend" to have a longer focal length with a reduced sensor, giving you more magnification for wildlife; same for macro, which also gives you more camera-to-subject working room, and a slight advantage in greater depth-of-field (given the same aperture) since you're not magnifying the image as much on a reduced sensor.
Canon has various full- and reduced-frame sensor models; many differ because they have faster frame rates, more rugged build, etc. Most have a capture size of 18-22 MP; the difference between those amounts isn't significant. The choice of lenses will be more difficult, since there are many choices. If you want the best image quality, Canon's "L" lineup is typically the best (and most expensive). For a wider lens, the 24-70/2.8 "L" is a great choice, but isn't wide at all on a camera with a reduced sensor. A macro is always good to have; I'd avoid the 50mm (angle of view is too wide and working distance is too small), but the 100 and 180 are both excellent. A superb longer zoom is the 70-200/2.8 "L" (the f/4 version is lighter and less expensive, but not quite as sharp). That isn't long enough for wildlife; for that, you might consider the 400/5.6, or the 100-400 "L" zoom would cover most of the 70-200 + 400 combined. These are heavy and expensive lenses, but vastly better quality than a low-priced consumer zoom.
DSLR cameras are the best as you have a choice of use the right lens for your need and get the best quality pics ( of course you would have to learn first) The only problem is that they are large size, heavy and expensive too. Unless you want to get really into a photography I would not recommend those. I had the same dilemma last year when I wanted to buy my camera. Buy DSLR or compact digital camera . I chose the second option. Nikon and Canon are the best on the market due to their very good lenses. I chose Nikon Coolpix P520 ( their is newer model P530 for sale now as I bought mine one year ago ). It has powerful wide optical zoom 42x for close up of animals and landscape that is very important to have a good zoom ,macro option for detailed flower or dry insect pics. Their is auto option or many manual options if you want to play with it and get better pictures perhaps . Besides you can make full HD movies. Their are two other models available now with 60x and 83x optical zoom. Again it is not professional camera but for me works good enough . Sometimes even this one is too big to walk around , you can not simply put it into your packet but at list you don't need a back pack to carry all optional lenses. Have fun with your shopping en.nikon.ca/Nikon-Products/Compact-Digital-Cameras/index.page
I am very happy of my Canon EOS 5D with 100mm macro objective
I use a Sony 100mm macro lens and love it! Sometimes I just leave it wide open and get some beautiful dreamy effects like this:
They call it 'bokeh', but it only works if your subject is facing you on a flat plane like this butterfly. If the butterfly was at an oblique angle to the camera then part of it would be out of focus due to the wider aperture and diminished depth of field.. I think this one was done at f/2.8.
Here's another example of using the 100mm macro lens wide open. The butterfly is facing flat to the camera and the background is defocused without getting the subject out of focus. This was f/2.8 also I think. It wouldn't work if the subject was 'round'.
After many discussions with friends and hesitations, I finally purchased yesterday a Canon EOS 70D It was sold at a fair price with a zoom 18-135 mm to start playing with in the garden this weekend ...
Then I may go for an additional zoomCanon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM rather than the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM suggested ?
Wollastoni, I will soon be ready for the next photography challenge
Post by deliasfanatic on Mar 26, 2016 13:37:34 GMT
For live specimens, the 100-400 will give you a lot more reach, of course, compared to the 100 macro. It also has very close focus (to about 1:3 life size). It's excellent quality (I have one), but the macro will be a bit sharper. The latter may not be noticeable with handheld shooting.