Camera/lens choice for Western Caribbean cruise

[joshgates]

With four months to go before my first cruise, I've been doing my usual compulsive planning to figure out what to pack and bring on a trip with me and I keep going around in circles with my camera/lens choices. While I'm not new to photography, I am very new to cruising so figured I'd see what some more experienced opinions might be.

 

I've essentially narrowed it down to two choices for setups, each one with one camera and two prime lenses.

 

1: Fuji X-Pro 2 with a 35mm f/1.4 and a 12mm f/2 (50mm and 18mm equivalent)

Pros: Small, lightweight, smaller file size to deal with if I load them onto an iPad during the trip, wider aperture for low light, just plain fun to use

Cons: There's a decided difference in look/overall IQ favoring the GFX, but only really apparent in large prints.

 

2: Fuji GFX 50S with a 63mm f/2.8 and a 23mm f/4 (50mm and 18mm equivalent)

Pros: IQ, love the 4:3 aspect, better high ISO performance (offset in a lot of ways by the wider aperture of the other lenses)

Cons: Bigger, heavier

 

A few other things:

Flying into New Orleans and I'm only planning to take a carry on plus personal bag

With either setup, I'd leave the portrait lenses at home (traveling solo and it's doubtful I'll be doing many portraits)

Not taking any studio lighting or a tripod which may negate the benefits of the GFX

 

With all that in mind, I'm leaning towards the X Pro 2 setup but welcome any input from more seasoned travelers.

[havoc315]

I completely and totally agree with your choices of focal lengths:

 

http://enthusiastphotoblog.com/2018/01/25/the-two-lens-travel-solution/

 

Yes, I'd go with the X-Pro 2 setup. Consider bringing a small tripod. On a Caribbean cruise you don't typically shoot too much low light. All your post stops will be during the day, they will be outdoors. Aboard the ship, there will be some fairly low light shooting, but with fast prime lenses, you'll be fine with aps-c. You'll appreciate the portability of the smaller system and you should still be able to get high quality large prints. (Just depends *how* large).

[joshgates]

I completely and totally agree with your choices of focal lengths:

 

http://enthusiastphotoblog.com/2018/01/25/the-two-lens-travel-solution/

 

Yes, I'd go with the X-Pro 2 setup. Consider bringing a small tripod. On a Caribbean cruise you don't typically shoot too much low light. All your post stops will be during the day, they will be outdoors. Aboard the ship, there will be some fairly low light shooting, but with fast prime lenses, you'll be fine with aps-c. You'll appreciate the portability of the smaller system and you should still be able to get high quality large prints. (Just depends *how* large).

 

Oh, thanks for that link! Pretty much what I was thinking but they articulated it really well. I'll look into some travel tripods too, just in case, my current ones are a little large/heavy to take.

[pierces]

Unless you already own a lot of Fuji equipment or are a big fan of the retro look, you may want to consider the Sony A6500. Much smaller with stellar autofocus and the Samyang/Rokinon 12mm f/2 you mentioned would benefit from in-body stabilization.

 

To each their own but my experience with the performance of the APS-C Alphas has been very satisfying and it seems that a lot of people don't realize just how small they are.

 

Just my 2¢…

 

 

Dave

[zackiedawg]

For some cruises to some much more exotic and scenic locales, I might consider bringing my greatest cameras and lenses, and the medium format and large sensors might be worth the weight and bulk...but for a W. Caribbean, I just can't foresee the additional bulk and weight being worthwhile, and a good APS-C sensor will do fine even for nice large prints. I think the X-Pro would be the way to go, and the two primes you mention would be good for wide and scenic and fast. The only thing I'd possibly add, if you have it available, would be a kit or travel zoom lens. There may just be times when the zoom is much more convenient, especially on crowded islands and busy spots where you can choose to just bring the camera body with attached lens, and not bother with a bag at all - a wide to standard prime may be a bit limiting when you happen to see something interesting just a bit farther out, but don't have the reach. If you at least have the kit lens, that puts you out to 50mm or so on a crop sensor - even better if you have something like the 18-135mm. I love good, fast, sharp primes, but on a cruise, I think a kit or travel zoom is still an ultra-convenient thing to have, especially when wanting to travel really light and stripped down.

[pierces]

I misread that the OP was in the market for a kit.

 

That being the case, the X-Pro 2 gets my vote as well. After many trips to the W.Caribbean, I agree with Justin that it just isn't a place to haul out the big guns.

 

Second the motion for a good travel zoom.

 

Maybe if you were doing a documentary on Mayan cultural remnants in the deep Yucatan and were getting paid a lot....

 

:)

 

 

Dave

[Loonbeam]

I third a travel zoom. While I don't zoom much in the caribbean, sometimes you just need a little extra reach if something comes up.

[havoc315]

Unless you already own a lot of Fuji equipment or are a big fan of the retro look, you may want to consider the Sony A6500. Much smaller with stellar autofocus and the Samyang/Rokinon 12mm f/2 you mentioned would benefit from in-body stabilization.

 

To each their own but my experience with the performance of the APS-C Alphas has been very satisfying and it seems that a lot of people don't realize just how small they are.

 

Just my 2¢…

 

 

Dave

 

Honestly, unless you’re looking for sports level performance, the x-pro2 is the better aps-c camera. Just a slightly more ergonomic camera, hybrid vf.

[pierces]

Honestly, unless you’re looking for sports level performance, the x-pro2 is the better aps-c camera. Just a slightly more ergonomic camera, hybrid vf.

 

All the "better" features are mainly preferences. Many dials, retro loveability, semi-optical viewfinder with Passable EVF performance. A much larger body with moderately good specs.

 

What you are saying is that unless you want a compact travel camera with better focusing, High ISO, burst speed and buffer, the Fuji is a better APS-C camera.

 

I get it. Knobs and dials are cool. It looks like a film camera from the Golden Age. Bigger is better.

 

 

Yet with all the hatred towards Sony's menus, lack of touch screen small buttons, too small for big hands and myriad other failings, the A6000 still managed to become the largest selling single model ILC ever with the other A6x00s following along. Why? performance and value. It's what drew me to them and what keeps me going back.

 

Preferences. Everybody has them.

 

I mean that. Preferences are powerful. Really. Look how many Jaguar owners bought and loved their cars through the Lucas Electrical years and even before the British discovered that electricity flows from negative to positive and that oil was a liquid. BMW has one of the highest maintenance rates in the industry but it is the "Ultimate Driving Machine".

 

I have said many times. I'm a Fan of Sony. Not a Fanboy. I see the quibbles and niggles and have mastered the menus. There is bad with the good. The good wins for me. It's the aggressive innovation and continuous improvement that keeps me, not the color of the logo on the neck strap.

 

:)

 

Dave

[havoc315]

All the "better" features are mainly preferences. Many dials, retro loveability, semi-optical viewfinder with Passable EVF performance. A much larger body with moderately good specs.

 

What you are saying is that unless you want a compact travel camera with better focusing, High ISO, burst speed and buffer, the Fuji is a better APS-C camera.

 

I get it. Knobs and dials are cool. It looks like a film camera from the Golden Age. Bigger is better.

 

 

 

Yet with all the hatred towards Sony's menus, lack of touch screen small buttons, too small for big hands and myriad other failings, the A6000 still managed to become the largest selling single model ILC ever with the other A6x00s following along. Why? performance and value. It's what drew me to them and what keeps me going back.

 

Preferences. Everybody has them.

 

I mean that. Preferences are powerful. Really. Look how many Jaguar owners bought and loved their cars through the Lucas Electrical years and even before the British discovered that electricity flows from negative to positive and that oil was a liquid. BMW has one of the highest maintenance rates in the industry but it is the "Ultimate Driving Machine".

 

I have said many times. I'm a Fan of Sony. Not a Fanboy. I see the quibbles and niggles and have mastered the menus. There is bad with the good. The good wins for me. It's the aggressive innovation and continuous improvement that keeps me, not the color of the logo on the neck strap.

 

:)

 

Dave

 

I don’t think anyone can accuse me of being anti-Sony....

 

Just different advantages to different systems. For a true enthusiast photographer, I think the Fuji is a better option.

 

The main advantages of the Sony are faster burst rate, deeper buffer, and maybe better tracking AF.

 

The Fuji isn’t just more dials — though the extra dials are indeed an advantage for enthusiasts.

 

Fuji has far superior aps-c designed lenses than Sony (Sony saves their best lenses for full frame... meaning you have to use unnecessarily large lenses)

 

Fuji has a 1/8000 mechanical shutter and 1/32000 electronic shutter, far superior to the Sony. A 1/250 synth speed, superior to the Sony (If you’re an enthusiast doing serious flash photography)

 

Though debatable, many prefer the IQ and low light performance of the x-Tran sensor over the CMOS sensors.

 

While the Sony af system is a bit better, it’s harder to actually move your af point. Making the Sony the better system for totally automated focus— but making the Fuji better to actually use for getting precise manually selected AF point.

 

Dual card slots are handy as well.

 

11fps, deep buffer — nice features for sports shooters. But many non sports shooters literally never use anything but single shot modes. And the deep buffer is meaningless in single shot modes.

 

Thus... my personal recommendations:

Sports shooters— get yourself a Nikon d500, fast, great ergonomics, great IQ, great lens choices for sports.

If you’re a sports shooter who really loves mirrorless, then the Sony A6500.

 

If you’re basically a point and shooter but want an ILC camera, then my top recommendations are the Sony a6____ models and Canon M50.

 

If you’re a non-action enthusiast looking to stick with aps-c, my recommendation is the Fuji cameras.

 

Funny thing —- other than the d500 for sports, no other aps-c dslr would be a top recommendation.

[pierces]

Funny thing —- other than the d500 for sports, no other aps-c dslr would be a top recommendation.

 

D500 in a fanny pack.

 

There's a travel option.

 

:)

 

Dave

[havoc315]

D500 in a fanny pack.

 

There's a travel option.

 

:)

 

Dave

 

Lol. But as you say... different cameras for different purposes. Not much sports shooting on most cruises.

[pierces]

Lol. But as you say... different cameras for different purposes. Not much sports shooting on most cruises.

 

I shoot on cruises.

 

Whales, birds, otters, seals.

 

I shoot at home too.

 

Grandchildren, grandchild sports, rabid granddaughter.

 

Occasional video. Quality 4K is a bonus.

 

I shoot full-frame and APS-C. Same mount. Tele[photo on APS-C gets 1.5x bonus. Wide aperture on Full-frame gets bokeh.

 

APS-C camera is tiny.

 

I shoot ISO 100 sometimes. :)

 

1/32000 shutter...Above 1/4000 is a technical achievement but of little practical value. Besides, I seldom shoot neutrinos in a cloud chamber or on the surface of the sun.

 

DMF half-press - recompose. Way faster than fiddling with focus point.

 

Dials for enthusiasts. I would consider myself as least in that category and I find the dials on the Sonys quite sufficient. Again, preferences. ISO - right press, spin dial. EV - down press spin dial. In camera HDR, DRO, AWB, Peaking, Fn menu. If you can't adapt to controls, no amount of "enthusiasm" will help you. If you switched to Sony for the superior performance and the menus aren't what you are used to...boo-freakin'-hoo.:D

 

I get the impression that an "Enthusiast" is someone who needs analog controls to relate to the film cameras they grew up with and any of these new-fangled contraptions just ain't a real camera. Good news for them. Extachrome 100 re-release is on the horizon! ;)

 

I have stated my preferences and the reasons for them. If another camera is "better" in someone's opinion I have no issue with that. It is likely that their camera is "inferior" in my opinion so the Universe will remain in balance.

 

What really matters with any camera is what you do with it. Great shots are great shots. Shooting for fun is fun. Equipment matters to a point and usually for specific situations but crap shots with a $12k rig are just as possible as great shots with a phone. That's just how it is.

 

"I got a dial!"

"I got ISO 52000"!

"My logo is better!"

 

All Irrelevant.

 

Take pictures. Have fun.

 

Dave

[havoc315]

I shoot on cruises.

 

Whales, birds, otters, seals.

 

I shoot at home too.

 

Grandchildren, grandchild sports, rabid granddaughter.

 

Occasional video. Quality 4K is a bonus.

 

I shoot full-frame and APS-C. Same mount. Tele[photo on APS-C gets 1.5x bonus. Wide aperture on Full-frame gets bokeh.

 

APS-C camera is tiny.

 

I shoot ISO 100 sometimes. :)

 

1/32000 shutter...Above 1/4000 is a technical achievement but of little practical value. Besides, I seldom shoot neutrinos in a cloud chamber or on the surface of the sun.

 

DMF half-press - recompose. Way faster than fiddling with focus point.

 

Dials for enthusiasts. I would consider myself as least in that category and I find the dials on the Sonys quite sufficient. Again, preferences. ISO - right press, spin dial. EV - down press spin dial. In camera HDR, DRO, AWB, Peaking, Fn menu. If you can't adapt to controls, no amount of "enthusiasm" will help you. If you switched to Sony for the superior performance and the menus aren't what you are used to...boo-freakin'-hoo.:D

 

I get the impression that an "Enthusiast" is someone who needs analog controls to relate to the film cameras they grew up with and any of these new-fangled contraptions just ain't a real camera. Good news for them. Extachrome 100 re-release is on the horizon! ;)

 

I have stated my preferences and the reasons for them. If another camera is "better" in someone's opinion I have no issue with that. It is likely that their camera is "inferior" in my opinion so the Universe will remain in balance.

 

What really matters with any camera is what you do with it. Great shots are great shots. Shooting for fun is fun. Equipment matters to a point and usually for specific situations but crap shots with a $12k rig are just as possible as great shots with a phone. That's just how it is.

 

"I got a dial!"

"I got ISO 52000"!

"My logo is better!"

 

All Irrelevant.

 

Take pictures. Have fun.

 

Dave

 

I wrote a long reply and it didn't post for some reason, lol. Guess I wasn't meant to reply.

I'll just make a few quick points instead:

Definitely not doubting that you're an enthusiast and a great photographer, but enthusiast photographers have different needs.

It's not about nostalgia for buttons and controls: It's about being able to confidently and quickly take over manual control over the camera. Some enthusiasts still rely more on automation, others want to be able to still quickly take manual control over every aspect of the process without menu diving.

The big benefit of Fuji is that they have designed their own system around aps-c. Meaning they have lenses optimized for aps-c that you just can't get in any other system. If you want to shoot at the equivalent of 85mm f/1.8, a classic portrait length and DOF, you can't do it on a Sony aps-c camera. But Fuji has their fantastic 56mm F/1.2. (closest Sony is the 50mm F/1.4, which is slower, shorter and double the weight).

And that goes to the value of 1/8000 shutter speed -- If you're shooting at f 1.2 in bright daylight, you truly need that 1/8000 shutter speed.

Of course, the reverse is also true -- a Fuji user doesn't get an upgrade path to full frame. But if you know you never want to go FF, if you want to stick to the smaller format of aps-c, but still want all the capabilities and lens quality that Sony/Nikon/Canon save for their FF cameras, then Fuji is the best system.

[zackiedawg]

The main advantages of the Sony are faster burst rate, deeper buffer, and maybe better tracking AF.

 

It's pretty well established that the A6xxx series is one of the best tracking focus/continuous focus performances in APS-C, not just mirrorless...the Fujis have gotten much better, and are 'close' to good tracking, but still generally below the D500, Sony A6xxx, and Canon 7DII.

 

That's not to say the Fuji is not capable - I was able to shoot moving subjects even back with my A300 or NEX-5N...it's just that it's not among the very top for dedicated sports/action use. Look for examples of action/sports/motion captured with Sony A6xxx cameras vs Fuji mirrorless, and you'll see significantly more examples with the Sonys.

 

Fuji has far superior aps-c designed lenses than Sony (Sony saves their best lenses for full frame... meaning you have to use unnecessarily large lenses)

 

However, dedicated APS-C lenses at long focal lengths and fast apertures save very little to nothing at all in weight and size. Look at Fuji's 100-400mm lens next to Sony's 100-400mm lens. The Sony is full-frame, yet actually a touch lighter and almost identical size. Nothing saved with APS-C there. Fuji's APS-C lens lineup is larger than Sony's APS-C lineup, because it's all Fuji has - but once the lenses get up to focal lengths beyond 50mm, there's little to no advantage in APS-C anymore - the lower end FE lenses which are quite good are almost the same size as Fuji's APS-C lenses. And both are very much more expensive than Canon & Nikon's DSLR range of lenses - budget photographers really shouldn't be considering Fuji or Sony...you'll get much more buying power with your wallet in the Canon and Nikon entry-level DSLR range.

 

Fuji has a 1/8000 mechanical shutter and 1/32000 electronic shutter, far superior to the Sony.

 

True. That is one nice advantage.

 

While the Sony af system is a bit better, it’s harder to actually move your af point. Making the Sony the better system for totally automated focus— but making the Fuji better to actually use for getting precise manually selected AF point.

 

Depends on types of shooting you do. I'd figure many photographers do not move their focus point at all - I know I rarely do. Unless I'm shooting on a tripod, or shooting with an incredibly fast aperture closeup where DOF is critical, I can shoot in AF-S, and leave the point on center in Spot focus mode for almost anything I shoot that's not moving. When shooting moving things in AF-C, you need the tracking, so you set to wide or zone as needed.

 

 

The biggest issue with recommending cameras to people is that our own preferences and biases will color the recommendation, including with things that can't always be transferred to another person - things like ergonomics which are highly personal, menu preferences that usually come from past experience with a particular menu style, dials/buttons layout which is also personal or adapted to what that person has been used to, and lens preferences/recommendations that have more to do with what that person will be shooting. Saying one camera has better ergonomics *period* is impossible...it may be better 'to you'. Saying one system has better lens selection is also misleading, as it only means the lens selection may be better 'to you'. Someone who doesn't use primes much vs someone who only wants to use primes, someone who shoots almost all wide to standard focal lengths vs someone who shoots a lot of telephoto work...those will affect whether one lens collection is superior, equal, or inferior to another.

 

Personally, I like Fuji mirrorless cameras. I also like Sony mirrorless cameras. I'm not too keen on most of Canon's lines, and I like Nikon's DSLR bodies. I've also always sort of liked the funky Pentax DSLR line, even knowing they're a bit behind pretty much all other manufacturers in focus tech. I never found anything special about the design/style of Leicas. I don't much like Olympus bodies - either the soap-bar styles or the bulky mini-DSLRs...I don't like the compact Panasonics either, but their larger M4:3 bodies fit my hand pretty well. At the moment, I shoot with the A6300 because it fits me best, with the combination of its particular ergonomics, size, lenses, performance, and familiarity.

[pierces]

It's not about nostalgia for buttons and controls: It's about being able to confidently and quickly take over manual control over the camera. Some enthusiasts still rely more on automation, others want to be able to still quickly take manual control over every aspect of the process without menu diving.

 

My "enthusiast" comment was somewhat tongue in cheek. Whenever a camera body is bristling with knobs and buttons like an '80s pro film camera, the review usually touts the benefit to "enthusiasts". The lack of additional dials, buttons and top-of-body LCD panels has always been listed in the "negatives" by "enthusiastic" reviewers and I never understood why. I guess if you "enthusiastically" only shoot RAW format in Manual mode like a "real" photographer, the buttons, dials and visual confirmation of settings are a good thing. ;)

 

A-Mode, Auto-ISO, AEL Lock and rapid access to focusing modes are what I use 99% of the time, so I guess I'm the kind of photographer who likes the P&S, non-professional nature of Sony ILCs. Most people don't just shoot primes. Most people don't just shoot manual. Most people don't dive the menu for every other shot. Most people don't have a pro-level budget. So, when I "enthusiastically" endorse the Sony cameras, I do so honestly because as a zoom-using, semi-automatic, non-professional "enthusiast", I probably represent a fair percentage of photographers moving up the equipment ladder and they have been the best fit for me.

 

 

 

Logos and labels. People invest so much time determining what is the one "best" thing for everyone. It always comes down to the best camera being the one you will actually use. Because the picture you take will always be better than the one you didn't.

 

 

Dave

[havoc315]

My "enthusiast" comment was somewhat tongue in cheek. Whenever a camera body is bristling with knobs and buttons like an '80s pro film camera, the review usually touts the benefit to "enthusiasts". The lack of additional dials, buttons and top-of-body LCD panels has always been listed in the "negatives" by "enthusiastic" reviewers and I never understood why. I guess if you "enthusiastically" only shoot RAW format in Manual mode like a "real" photographer, the buttons, dials and visual confirmation of settings are a good thing. ;)

 

A-Mode, Auto-ISO, AEL Lock and rapid access to focusing modes are what I use 99% of the time, so I guess I'm the kind of photographer who likes the P&S, non-professional nature of Sony ILCs. Most people don't just shoot primes. Most people don't just shoot manual. Most people don't dive the menu for every other shot. Most people don't have a pro-level budget. So, when I "enthusiastically" endorse the Sony cameras, I do so honestly because as a zoom-using, semi-automatic, non-professional "enthusiast", I probably represent a fair percentage of photographers moving up the equipment ladder and they have been the best fit for me.

 

 

 

 

Logos and labels. People invest so much time determining what is the one "best" thing for everyone. It always comes down to the best camera being the one you will actually use. Because the picture you take will always be better than the one you didn't.

 

 

Dave

 

We get into the definition of an "enthusiast" which of course can be a pretty wide consuming definition.

 

 

I would say "most" camera owners don't fall into my definition of an enthusiast. Though some people would define an "enthusiast" as anyone who enjoys taking lots of pictures.

To me, an enthusiast is indeed someone who shoots raw, manual, prime lenses or other specialized lenses. (Not necessarily all of the above all of the time, but some combination). More and more, phones are the best choice for non-enthusiasts -- those who want the best possible image SOOC by easily clicking one automated button. Samsung will soon be released a 3-camera phone, so it can actually go from wide angle to telephoto.

 

 

I teach a class entitled "becoming the enthusiast photographer" ---

This is the class description:

 

 

For those who know how to use their cameras but feel they are not getting the results they expected, this course will focus on understanding composition and exposure for the types of situations likely to confront the family photographer. The class will teach how to get out of “auto” mode of your camera so that you can achieve the right settings for the right photograph. Students will complete photographic assignments between classes and present their work for classroom discussion and constructive criticism. To maximize the value of the class, students should have a camera with manual controls, though some of the lessons will even be applicable to iPhone photography. Students should understand the basic operation of their camera including the ability to transfer images to a computer and the internet. The first session will focus on the various tools available to photographers, including types of cameras, lenses and accessories, providing valuable knowledge for anyone considering changing or upgrading their camera gear. In subsequent classes, students will learn to apply those tools to shoot family portraits, take sports photographs of your children, and capture vivid landscapes while on vacation. By the end of the course, students should have a basic understanding of rules of composition, use of light, posing portraits, depth of field, and the exposure triangle including ISO, aperture, and shutter speed.

---

hmmm, as I read it, I see it's outdated. I'll need to update my description before the Spring semester.

[zackiedawg]

I think it's also fair to differentiate enthusiast camera bodies from camera enthusiasts, just as one needs to differentiate between a pro camera body and a pro camera photographer. Fuji certainly designs most of their mid to high end models in a retro-design style meant to hark back to original photographic tools, and therefore have an 'enthusiast' design. Sony's low to mid models are definitely designed to be a modern new approach and not necessarily designed with that film enthusiast's classic and traditional control interface, and even their high-end models attempt to forge a newer direction from the traditional film camera control and design style...so by that merit, many of the bodies wouldn't be given an 'enthusiast' label. However, enthusiasts may still decide to shoot with those non-enthusiast bodies, just as many non-enthusiasts may shoot with the retro-style Fujis having never laid their hands on a film SLR in the past. Simply buying the enthusiast body doesn't make someone an enthusiast, and embracing the modern design or aesthetic does not mean one cannot also be an enthusiast, or even a traditional enthusiast.

 

I am definitely an enthusiast - I have been shooting film cameras since the late 70s, know and understand exposure, often enjoy shooting with full-manual lenses, though I break one of your rules in that I rarely shoot RAW unless I absolutely need to, as I prefer and actually find it more 'enthusiast' to work only the camera's settings and controls to get my result, rather than boosting or creating it on a computer. Yet I very much love the design, controls, style, and performance of the slim Sony APS-C e-mount bodies with their nice protruding grip and highly customizable button layout. I find I can function faster, and adjust settings on the fly faster, than I could if I needed to manipulate a series of different dials. I also prefer that I can set up memory banks with crucial control settings that can't be done on the Fuji bodies with their dials. I find the Sony A6xxx bodies to feel very much like a rangefinder camera when you slap a manual focus lens on them - the focus and aperture controls move to the lens, and the shutter, ISO, and EV on the camera, so everything one could need to manipulate can be done quickly.

 

The same comments often come up when there are discussions of 'pro' camera bodies - and so many forum members jump on the idea that only pro cameras can be used by pros, and anyone using a pro-body can somehow be considered a pro. Of course, we all know there are some terribly underskilled people shooting with pro bodies, and some astounding photographers shooting professional work on entry-level bodies. The camera is but a tool, and it's the wielder of the tool who makes the photo.

[pierces]

We get into the definition of an "enthusiast" which of course can be a pretty wide consuming definition.

 

To me, an enthusiast is indeed someone who shoots raw, manual, prime lenses or other specialized lenses. (Not necessarily all of the above all of the time, but some combination).

 

I would add to the definition something to the effect that an enthusiast is someone with advanced knowledge of the technical aspects of photography and how to apply them to image creation and processing.

 

That would cover all-RAW, all-manual, all-prime purists and those who are 95% zoom-using, semi-automatic, JPEG shooters by choice.

 

;)

Dave

[havoc315]

I would add to the definition something to the effect that an enthusiast is someone with advanced knowledge of the technical aspects of photography and how to apply them to image creation and processing.

 

That would cover all-RAW, all-manual, all-prime purists and those who are

zoom-using, semi-automatic, 95%-JPEG shooters by choice.

Dave

 

lol, agreed. And I didn't mean to limit "enthusiast" to technical aspects....

 

If I were to broaden it, an enthusiast has some understanding and makes some use of:

-Non-fully automatic settings (including shifting focus modes, the various PASM modes, etc)

-RAW

-Lenses beyond the kit normal and kit telephoto

-Understand manipulation of Depth of field

-Understand "rules" of composition

-Some use/understanding of editing, whether RAW or JPEG. (When I teach my class, I get oohs and ahhs with the most basic editing of cropping and increasing some contrast -- it's shocking how many people never considered doing any post-processing at all)

-Understanding quality and use of light, artificial and natural (an enthusiast isn't like to use a pop-up flash too often).

 

Now, an enthusiast doesn't have to check every single box on this list. You're not the only jpeg shooting enthusiast. But an enthusiast has at least some level of familiarity with these elements and uses at least some of them. There are of course pros and serious enthusiasts who have chosen to shoot jpeg. There are serious enthusiasts who can't afford lenses beyond the basic kit lenses. etc, etc.

 

I find when most of the reviews, etc, discuss "enthusiast" -- they are referring to extremely advanced/non-professional users.

[havoc315]

 

I am definitely an enthusiast - I have been shooting film cameras since the late 70s, know and understand exposure, often enjoy shooting with full-manual lenses, though I break one of your rules in that I rarely shoot RAW unless I absolutely need to,

 

You are most definitely an enthusiast. I didn't say every enthusiast shoots raw -- it's just one of the possible tools that starts to differentiate enthusiasts from ordinary picture takers.

 

Shooting full frame is another criteria, though I'm starting to see some true non-enthusiasts buying full frame. And lots of true enthusiasts, including birders such as yourself, sticking to aps-c.

 

Personally, I always prefer dedicated dials and buttons. I love having a thumbstick to move my AF point.

One thing I *hate* about the Sony A6300 is moving the AF point -- Have to start clicking the Control pad. But the control pad also controls other functions. So I want to move the focus point down, and suddenly I'm changing the ISO instead! I want to change the ISO, and instead I'm changing the focus point!

 

With seperate controls, dials, buttons.. once my muscle memory is learned, I can quickly and easily change everything without lifting my eye off the viewfinder.

 

And an example of manually moving the focus point:

 

untitled (56 of 63) by Adam Brown, on Flickr

 

Shot at F1.6 -- So very narrow DOF. Shooting eye-af or face detect, the boxes were bouncing around to the wrong people. Focus and re-compose before every shot would have slowed down the shooting and been less accurate. Instead, thumbstick let me quickly move the focus point to the face of mother and baby, and quickly move to other faces as I chose.

 

So all those buttons, controls and dials.... serve important purposes beyond a "retro look." Now, Justin, for your type of shooting -- birding -- I suspect some version of center-lock-on focus works very well with Sony.

 

I'd love to see Sony give aps-c shooters a choice between the small sleek rangefinder body and a bigger "enthusiast" dslr-style body.

 

Anyway... speaking of Sony, seems I've been invited to their "Be Alpha" kick off event on Sunday... should I go? Getting to the edge of Brooklyn is a PITA.

[pierces]

lol, agreed. And I didn't mean to limit "enthusiast" to technical aspects....

 

If I were to broaden it, an enthusiast has some understanding and makes some use of:

-Non-fully automatic settings (including shifting focus modes, the various PASM modes, etc)

-RAW

-Lenses beyond the kit normal and kit telephoto

-Understand manipulation of Depth of field

-Understand "rules" of composition

-Some use/understanding of editing, whether RAW or JPEG. (When I teach my class, I get oohs and ahhs with the most basic editing of cropping and increasing some contrast -- it's shocking how many people never considered doing any post-processing at all)

-Understanding quality and use of light, artificial and natural (an enthusiast isn't like to use a pop-up flash too often).

 

Now, an enthusiast doesn't have to check every single box on this list. You're not the only jpeg shooting enthusiast. But an enthusiast has at least some level of familiarity with these elements and uses at least some of them. There are of course pros and serious enthusiasts who have chosen to shoot jpeg. There are serious enthusiasts who can't afford lenses beyond the basic kit lenses. etc, etc.

 

I find when most of the reviews, etc, discuss "enthusiast" -- they are referring to extremely advanced/non-professional users.

 

Now there you go!

 

An "enthusiast" badge really needs to be earned. Like Justin said, you can't get into the club just by buying the right camera. All of the time and effort spent learning the ins and outs of focusing what I see in my head onto some sort of receptive media using one form of mechanical aid or another has to count for something. :)

 

Knowing how to do or use something doesn't mean you have to. I have worked with ex-SEALs who didn't resolve every workplace issue with firepower, explosives or other lethal force (though it may have sometimes been warranted). I have manual lenses that I use regularly, but not as often as the zooms. I use Manual mode, but only rarely...when needed. I have manipulated RAW since the early '00s and have gotten quite adept at it...when needed. I really, really dislike flash but have and use flash attachments and studio strobes...when needed. Probably 95% of the time I use A-Mode with is associated companion automations to facilitate my preference to control depth of field while shooting. Could I use all manual settings to do the same? Sure. Why don't I? Because it is easier and lets me pay more attention to having fun with my camera. Which I do. Enthusiastically.

 

Is "Enthusiast" even the right label?

 

I vote for "Photomeister"!

 

:D

 

Dave

[pierces]

And an example of manually moving the focus point:

Prior to Eye-AF, I always used center square, lock, recompose since prior to that I had no choice with a DSLR and just got used to it. :)

 

Anyway... speaking of Sony, seems I've been invited to their "Be Alpha" kick off event on Sunday... should I go? Getting to the edge of Brooklyn is a PITA.

 

Sure!

 

Please report on any tidbits!

 

"Be Alpha". Hmmm.

 

Maybe the answer to "Enthusiast" needs a more wolf-like approach.

 

"Alpha Photographer"! ;p

 

 

 

Dave

[framer]

I'm finding this thread... hmmmm LOL...

 

 

framer

[pierces]

I'm finding this thread... hmmmm LOL...

 

 

framer

 

 

You must take life seriously in order to survive and prosper, but you should never, ever let life take you seriously!

 

;)

 

 

Dave