For those who enjoy the travel, the adventure, the cultural differences and have found a common ground to respect the globe and habitants.
Can you see the difference between these nikon vs sigma lenses? Yes. Is it worth $11,000USD more? Mmmmm sure, because it shoots at f/2.8 and the other at f/6
The top Nikon glass is made for sports photographers who need the aperture and reliability. They keep working and won’t complaint. Not to say the Sigma doesn’t, but its not made to withstand the abuse like the Nikons. If it breaks, you can buy 10 more. But you will never be able to shoot at f/4 or f/2.8?
and here we have the Nikon 600mm f/4 FL VR
AF-S G NIKKOR
Nikon D3s and Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary above. This monopod is sturdy and very compact. Just not sure on the locking rings, locks well but doesn’t feel like a manfrotto or sachtler obviously.
I’ve used it to support a Nikon D5 and D3s with a newest Nikon 600mm f/4 FL VR and 400mm f/2.8 VR FL as well. Yes, it supports them without any problems. Baseball, soccer and MotoGP. Still going sturdy.
So… Why older tech? Because right now, you can purchase a D3s for around $1400 USD. It has 9 FPS with constant AF. What other 35mm Full Frame can be purchased at this time for that price?
Fuji XT2 is fast, but the lag on the EVF is cumbersome when doing high speed action. You have to get familiar with it, I couldn’t. Sony cameras? not good for high speed action AF.
There is a market for High End DSLR and thats mostly photo journalists that rely on the impressive AF that these cameras have.
I believe I’m mastering the low noise high ISO at 25600, look at these files and see for yourself, they don’t look as bad as most people have around the web.
I will be making a comparison to a Sony A7sII and Nikon D3s.
Michelin Tires is running a photo contest on Instagram for the next race at Circuit of the Americas in Austin, TX. One of my shots is a finalist. The one image with the most votes wins. May I ask for your vote if you think my shot is worth it?
To go the instagram photo directly in a new window click HERE
Or you can copy and paste the address: https://instagram.com/p/BRq9xqmFU_g/
I was one of those who rushed in 2009 to get an Olympus E-P1 camera. It looked vintage, was small and offered great image quality compared to others in the size category. In fact, the photos were sharper than what I was getting with my Nikon D100. Seems the lenses were sharper than the Nikon lenses I had at the time. Fast forward to 2017 and I am mostly a Leica shooter but many times find myself wanting that portable autofocus system and 5 axis IS. I’ve shot with the EPL1, E-P2, E-P3, E-P5 and two of the Panasonic Lumix cameras such as the GX8 and GX85. As always, if camera manufactures just merged techs and menus to create the ultimate camera, we would probably still want more changes. So, how does a camera from 2009 compares to one in 2017.
As far as highlights, I get almost the same range but when it comes to shadows, I cannot recover more than 20% from the Olympus E-P1 otherwise I get pretty bad noise and almost no detail.
In the real world, there isn’t any technical reason why anyone would not be able to create impressive images with an old $50 USD Olympus E-P1 and a nice Prime Lens. Well, unless is very bright outside and cannot compose your shots by using the LCD.