Jump to content

naija

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    2906
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by naija

  1. whoever got him this contract is a genius
  2. You can read up about Astrophotography and learn a lot online without signing up for anything. I say this as someone that has dropped quite a bit of money over the years on Photography learning stuff. The Exposure Triangle is not very difficult to understand. By and large, the 2 parts you will want to master are Aperture and Shutter Speed. Simplify it by asking yourself 2 questions; what depth of field do you want, i.e, how much do you need to be infocus in your pictures (aperture) and how fast are the objects that you are photographing moving (shutter speed). Instead of shooting Auto, start by shooting Aperture Priority instead, this way you get to focus on one of the variables and learn about it and let the camera decide on the other two. As I mentioned before Astrophotography tends to be technical, and is one where eventually you will need to understand all 3 (aperture, shutter speed and ISO) very well.
  3. If you are thinking of staying with Nikon, in the mirrorless range, for a 1st time starter who will be learning, I'd recommend the Nikon Z5. It is basically the D750 sensor packaged into a mirrorless body. It has In-Body Stabilization. It is 24MP, which is less than the D810, and landscapes tend to be one area where MP can matter to photographers, but unless you are printing big or cropping extensively, it is more than enough for most of us. Lens wise is somewhat more complicated. I'd start off by saying you have to seperate landscapes from astrophotography as the requirements for astrophotography tend to be a more complicated and you really have to dig through reviews and find out how lenses perform with things like coma etc... The 14-24 f/2.8 is great and you can use it on the Nikon Z5 with an adapter, but again that's a big lens. At f/2.8, it should be decent for astrophotography. With landscapes, generally you want almost everything in focus, and you will be shooting at f/8 or smaller. Generally. It is hard to find a modern lens these days that doesn't perform well at those apertures, especially the Nikon S lenses. For you, I would recommend the newly release Nikon 24-120 f/4 S lens. Kinda hard to get a hand on those right now, but as a general all-purpose lens that will perform well for landscapes, city, as a walkabout and travel lens it's what I'd go with. For Canon, body-wise, you have the EOS R and EOS RP which will come in at that price point, but really the Z5 is a better camera. For Sony, there really isn't you can get new at that price point. A mildly used Sony A7iii can probably be had. It has been replaced by the A7iv, but should still work fine.
  4. D810 was released in 2014, I think but might not have been widely available until later
  5. That combination will take excellent pictures and you can assured that it will take years for your skills to catch up to what the camera is capable of. Nikon pro bodies and glass are also quite reliable, and should last a while. That said, you would be buying into aging technology with the company unlikely to continue support in the next few years (forget about keeping it a decade or passing it on). Hobbyist photography is one in which you tend to accumulate gear as time goes, and buying into something that doesn't really offer an upgrade path anymore is chancy. A wide angle zoom is also restrictive, even if all you want to shoot really is landscapes, so understand that at some point you will want to buy another lens or two. It is also rather bulky, and not the first thing that comes to mind when someone says they want a camera and lens combo they can take on trips with them. But price wise, it seems like a good offer (more so on the lens than the camera, because at least that you can adapt to a mirrorless camera). Personally, I would recommend a mirrorless camera at this point. The learning curve is easier with WYSIWYG exposure viewfinders, they are lighter, they offer more reliable upgrade paths. It doesn't have to be a full frame. Each system has its pluses and minuses.
  6. honestly it sounds like you should try the Z9, if it is within your budget. The viewfinder experience has been rated as the best of the 3 huge camera brands. It doesn't have the most resolution, but it appears to be the most consistent staying the same frame rate and resolution regards of what you are doing (shooting, reviewing, playback etc). The battery life is reportedly execllent. The F mount lenses are working just as well (and in some cases better, as you don't need to fine tune AF anymore). It also appears to be in a size you want?
  7. The Z9 did it right. The previous cameras did not. I say that as someone who is pretty much committed to Nikon. The Z6 and Z7, were not up to par with autofocus, especially when placed against Sony and Canon (from the R6 onwards). They were definitely not better than a D750 or D850. They would often refuse to focus on the face, could not keep up with moving subjects. They also had one card slot, which didn't bother me, but for wedding photographers was a big deal. The Z6ii/Z7ii improved slightly on some of those points. The Z9 is what finally feels like a finished product. The weight benefits are not also significant for going to FF mirrorless and again Nikon has not been as aggressive as Canon and Sony in this regard. Their 50mm f/1.2 is the largest of the 3. So also the 70-200mm f/2.8. Ditto the Z9. I think battery life now will not be an issue going forward. Don't look at the CIPA ratings. All the cameras blow those numbers away. People are doing full shoots in a day and coming back with over 50% battery left at the end of the day. The Z9 is too big for me and has more than I need or want. But I am waiting on a true mirrorless D850 with some of the Z9 tech trickled down.
  8. Nikon took about as long as it could to get into mirrorless properly and paid a dear price for it.
  9. well, he's young enough to do it. remains to be seen what happens with the Rams
  10. You are giving Stafford 2 bonus points because of his longevity and position. Sure, voters might do the same, but they are as likely to see past those things and recalibrate. Stafford has 1 Pro Bowl. Eli has 4. Stafford has 1 SB (left his original team to do it), Eli has 2 Super Bowls and was the MVP in both of those, as the underdog in both and in one of those, beat an undefeated team. Stafford filled up the stat sheet quicker, but I don't think in the metrics that count most for HOF honors, that he is on the same level as Eli.
  11. you might want to look at the list of players this year that were 1st ballot and didn't get in and then argue that point again...
  12. this is the NFL not College, diminishing the importance of a bad call that lead to 7 points simply because of when it happened doesn't make sense. betting margins on these games is usually less than 7 points for a reason...
  13. depends on what happens with the Rams. I think they lose Miller and OBJ, and who knows what else. Chiefs are a good bet in the AFC as well as the Titans. Going to be hard for Bengals fans.... they've finally gotten some success but are in division with 2 other teams that generally speaking have good front offices and historically don't stay down for long.
  14. Hermanator seems to be carrying the torch....
  15. did their history start in 1994?
  16. would be funny if McVay retired.
×
×
  • Create New...