Will you change camera manufacturer for lighter weight camera?

2»

Comments

  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,059Member
    They are not ILCs.
  • paulrpaulr Posts: 1,176Member
    Davey The P900 just feels a better camera and has the 24-2000mm range, however the B700 has RAW and 4k Video plus it has 20mp against 16mp of the P900 If its lightness the B700 wins. Both have there own virtues.
    Camera, Lens and Tripod and a few other Bits
  • DaveyJDaveyJ Posts: 885Member
    Thanks paulr! I personally am from a large and medium format background and detest RAW so that is no virtue. JPEG fine large though requires being close to,the right exposure, etc!
    I am going to check out both cameras on Nikon USA. I was hoping to get a DL 18-50 Nikon 4/3rds camera but that has disappeared after the launch. I would do better with one of the ones you are using I think.
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,172Member
    edited December 2016
    had a play with the a900.. (same sensor as the b700) was great for a p&s. still I am now thinking maybe the 1 inch sensor is the lowest I am willing to accept. so I am really l am waiting for the DL to arrive.
    Post edited by heartyfisher on
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • BabaGanoushBabaGanoush Posts: 252Member
    I've been shooting Panasonic and Sony mirrorless for several years now in addition to Nikon (D800 and now D7200). Mirrorless kits definitely have their place. I find them enjoyable to use and very much like the convenience of having a touch screen. When Sony releases the A7r III/A9 next year, I will pick one up, no matter the price. I've always stayed away from Olympus MFT because of concerns I've had over the lack of quality and consistency in the construction of Oly camera bodies (Oly lenses are better than good), but previews of the E-M1 II suggest this will be an outstanding camera, so I may reconsider my position on Olympus.
  • DaveyJDaveyJ Posts: 885Member
    I agree on the Nikon DL as being the minimum sensor size that I am interested in!
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,059Member
    DX is as small as I would like to go for a convenience camera that is an upgrade to a camera phone, which is strictly for documentary purposes. For a serious camera, FX is as small as I want to go.
  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    @DaveyJ CX (same as DL) is a sweet spot in terms of lens design, weight, and IQ for portability. Can you do better? Sure. But it's one stop below DX so, it's the same tradeoff as DX is to FX.
  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    edited December 2016
    Here's a good sensor size comparison. You can see how much smaller the iPhone sensor is than even the CX/1" let alone DX/APS-C...

    Post edited by Ironheart on
  • DaveyJDaveyJ Posts: 885Member
    Ironheart: Good Chart! Not to scale, but good for comparison!
  • DaveyJDaveyJ Posts: 885Member
    This also (to me) makes me wonder when a Nikon DL would come in a DX sensor size. When I very recently ran some Cool Pix tests to see if I could use them more......for my purely subjective standpoint, I came away feeling DX is pretty close to my minimum. The large and medium format background is kicking in. My latest hangup......tossing around the next purchase between D3400 versus the unknown"......keeps coming back as either D3400 DX or D7200 (I have a few) or maybe a D750? The D750 though out in say Yellowstone National Park could be a good way to get trampled! Yes that means a 1.4 or 1.5 magnification factor could work for or against you!
    .
  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    edited December 2016
    To Scale: (on a 100dpi monitor at least)
    Post edited by Ironheart on
Sign In or Register to comment.