Though I believe Steve's camera of choice is a Sony.
What's the brand of your main wildlife photography camera?
- Thread starter Tiago C
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
Alistair
Well-known member
Those are all great options. Maybe a ZF and 180-600 could be added to that list from left field!?
O
Well-known member
You raise a interesting point.
The one thing with Steve is i can trust what he says about Nikon and Sony because he actually owns most of the gear he uses hands on personally in the field of wild life photography, also using three systems maybe overload ?
When i have looked into things he has said i have found his findings to be in the coal face spot on, consistently but in a fully practical way.
He also focuses on getting the very best out of what you have with tutorials and techniques, to me that's where 90% of your results come from.
As my girlfriend always says its better to do a few things spectacularly well than try to do a lot of things all so round, its how well you use what you have that counts.
Maybe in the future time permitting the Canon gear may come into play, but unlike Peta Pixel who has a whole team of staff, there is only one Steve.
I wouldn't worry about all the other gear as Sony Canon Nikon are 80-90% of the market and with Sony and Nikon making up a nice slice.
There are hundreds of reviewers all chasing the popular rankings, not a lot focus or combine it with the art of photography technique.
Only an opinion
Last edited:
O
Well-known member
My choice at the moment is Nikon because i have had the brand of tools for a long time.What's the brand of your main camera?
I feel that there aren't many Panasonic shooters (like me) in these forums
I am in a position where i have largely unloaded expensive gear and run with a basic Nikon kit of 14-24 to 200-500mm D850 Z9, i rent any special items when needed.
I feel 2024 2025 will possibly see a brand switch for me as new technology is about to explode as well as become a whole lot more expensive, also the game may be driven more by glass than bodies. I don't want to wait for Nikon's lag times in design catch up.
I tend to focus more on photography technique and skill sets than just new gear, if you can get almost the same results with what ever you use i feel that's the real asset.
Only an opinion
Last edited:
I wasn't into Nikon in the film days. I had Leica, Pentax but mostly Bronica and 4x5. The first Digital Nikon I ever shot was a 256K from Kodak that wasn't very good and had to be tethered to a Mac. When I lost all my film equipment I went to Steve Myrick who I found out was going out of business at the time. Internet sales and the lack of manufacturer support doomed a store that serve some of the greatest photographers. Steve was a gentleman and told me to buy the D810, online, which I did. I was impressed! Since then I haven't seen grass any greener than Nikon's. There is better equipment but not at Nikon's price and the direction they have gone with glass and features suites me.
Yup your right no surprise at all. When I discovered @Steve and Back Country Gallery and then the forum it was all Nikon. The Steve and Rose added Sony A1 and for a while Canon. I remember when he dropped Canon when he decided 3 brands were more than he wanted to deal withSteve has reviewed and given advice on Nikon for about a zillion years, now. It's no surprise that the majority here on his site are Nikon shooters.
I switched to Nikon from the Canon Rebel DSLR I "borrowed" from my wife when I first started into photography.
The first photography instructor I had was either a large format film guy or a Nikon DSLR guy at the time and he touted $ into lenses over bodies back then. When the D300s came out he got one and highly recommended it for wildlife and I go one just before going to Alaska on a photography trip with him. Then along came the Nikon D4s and he got it and came back from his first shoot saying "this thing sees in the dark" and over all is amazing and the first time I am saying dollars for body first and then the glass.
My next instructor was a Nikon guy. He loved the D500 and D850. He owns a couple of camera stores and is a full line Nikon, Sony and Canon dealer. He did not recommend going mirrorless for wildlife until the Z9 came along with the first couple of firmware updates and then he was all in
When @Steve and some other people I knew got tired of waiting for Nikon to catch up and went to the Sony A1 I almost went with them and then my instructor camera dealer friend who had not been a mirrorless fan moved from D500 and D850 to the Z9 and so did I.
So from the D300s through the D4s, D500, D850 and D6 and now Z9 I have been in the Nikon ecosystem with instructors that "spoke" Nikon.
I have friends who I have mentored in bird photography who do amazing work with Sony, Canon and OM.
The first photography instructor I had was either a large format film guy or a Nikon DSLR guy at the time and he touted $ into lenses over bodies back then. When the D300s came out he got one and highly recommended it for wildlife and I go one just before going to Alaska on a photography trip with him. Then along came the Nikon D4s and he got it and came back from his first shoot saying "this thing sees in the dark" and over all is amazing and the first time I am saying dollars for body first and then the glass.
My next instructor was a Nikon guy. He loved the D500 and D850. He owns a couple of camera stores and is a full line Nikon, Sony and Canon dealer. He did not recommend going mirrorless for wildlife until the Z9 came along with the first couple of firmware updates and then he was all in
When @Steve and some other people I knew got tired of waiting for Nikon to catch up and went to the Sony A1 I almost went with them and then my instructor camera dealer friend who had not been a mirrorless fan moved from D500 and D850 to the Z9 and so did I.
So from the D300s through the D4s, D500, D850 and D6 and now Z9 I have been in the Nikon ecosystem with instructors that "spoke" Nikon.
I have friends who I have mentored in bird photography who do amazing work with Sony, Canon and OM.
Nikon has been in my professional life for as long as I shot mainly due to its dominance in the lens department with the introduction of the Ai-S for the work I do. I use everything now, all brands, but the Z9 has become my go-to. Excited about the Zf.
O
Well-known member
Agree i think Sony and Nikon is more than enough.Yup your right no surprise at all. When I discovered @Steve and Back Country Gallery and then the forum it was all Nikon. The Steve and Rose added Sony A1 and for a while Canon. I remember when he dropped Canon when he decided 3 brands were more than he wanted to deal with
I do feel there are going to be some real tech shake ups looking forward, you will need you game face on to hang in there in 2024 2025.
I am impressed however where Canon is going looking ahead.
Only an opinion
Last edited:
Agreed on second point.
On your first point the site owner also published Sony videos and ebooks, Sony sells significantly more camera than Nikon, and yet on this site Nikon shooters based on the poll outnumber Sony by close to 10 to 1.
John Navitsky
Well-known member
inertia
Tiago C
Well-known member
Hi Juliette,
The X-T5 sounds like a great choice...
I haven't used the Sigma 100-400 DG DN (just the previous DSLR model). One of the main main questions for me would be about autofocus reliability. If you can, test it, and keep in mind that Sigma releases firmware improvements quite frequently.
What I have found with the X-S20 (which uses the same processor as the X-T5) is that AF depends quite a bit on the camera settings (tracking sensitivity etc).
More to consider - Sigma's max aperture is f6.3 vs f5.6 on the Fujifilm 100-400 (that we own) but it's slightly lighter than the Fujifilm. Also cheaper and with better external build quality based on what I know from having owned many modern Sigma telephoto lenses.
AnnetteJane
Well-known member
I shoot Nikon but my biggest reason was that my husband was already shooting Nikon and the reasoning was we could share lenses and he could help me with the learning curve. The problem with all that is I am NOT sharing my 500 5.6 pf lens. Pretty much need to double up on a favorite lens anyhow.
O
Well-known member
Makes a lot of sense.
The 500 PF seems to really be an extremely loved lens, many of my mates who use the Z9 Z8 D850 D6 Z7II all just don't want to let it go.
There is always going to be different newer supposedly improved, but gee its a good lens especially when you love it for what it does for you.
One of my mates a full on birder has a his 500 PF permanently on his Z9, then he uses the Z8 for all other lenses.
Only an opinion
I Shoot mainly Nikon for wildlife. I have the Z 9 and Z8. From time to time I use my medium format camera, the Mamiya DM33 for still subjects. This camera has an amazing dynamic range. I use it a lot for macro and landscape.
I would love to own a Leica. I am looking now at the lLeica Q 3, which I found for B&W is the perfect camera
I would love to own a Leica. I am looking now at the lLeica Q 3, which I found for B&W is the perfect camera
O
Well-known member
Its clear you love your photography which is great and enviable.
Despite the graphs and lab reports the reality for myself is that MF and some Leica even with Ziess glass systems adds some very unique results.
I love 12 MP in a DSLR for B&W especially when i use a classic Ziess lens.
My absolute preference is for Film over any digital medium, i love the old Rollei Flex especially when used and developed properly. It slows me down and makes me more a photographer than just a document-er. Printing large 1 to 2 meter images is awesome.
Only an opinion
I had a large format 4x5 ... packed it around Alaska once ... images very nice but not any nicer in my opinion than D850 or Z9, others did not agree, but I sold more prints from D500, D4S, D850 etc. than I ever did with the 4x5. A very valid argument could be made that landscape, old buildings etc. not my forte so of course I sold more other stuff
I do not aggressively sell anymore but I hung 39 images on The Art Wall last evening at a large non profit regional medical center where part of the proceeds go to support the hospital volunteer auxiliary. One landscape and one wildlife (elephants) image sold this morning one D500 and one D850.
I did not like the dark room others love it and the process. And as I got deeper and deeper into citizen science stuff with birds ... a 4x5 did not really fit that run and gun need
So I traded it on several days for my wife and I at wonderful lodge on the Idaho/Canada border where were photographing wildlife .. lots of birds So bottom line more my interest and passions than whether film or digital for me
John Navitsky
Well-known member
fulltimewanderer
Well-known member
First camera was a Nikon 8008, most recent was a Nikon Z9 all Nikons between. But really brand doesn’t really matter. It’s all about getting out in nature and enjoying life. Friend of mine was and still is a Canon shooter we had some really great times shooting (he moved to Texas). Never once did we have a discussion on which brand is best, we just enjoyed each other and being out shooting. Enjoy the moment with whatever you shoot.
O
Well-known member
Yes i agree, enjoying what we do is what matters.
I don't necessarily just see one brand better than the other, in most cases for me its just different tools do different jobs that often can create a different effect.
Some people get somewhat completely different results even when sharing the same tools on the same day.
With digital i mostly shoot JPEG fine and adjust the sharpness contrast saturation etc in the camera to suite that subject making me different to some one else.
I also like to shoot in kelvin at times at 7500 to 9000 depending on the subject and lighting.
For me it also has lot to do with the viewers interpretation of what they see, in cases i see digital more as a flat medium more dimensionless , Film has a little more dimension and pop often brought out further from the glass ie: beautifully with character, for me it also has to do a lot with how a printing is done, again all depending on the film, subject, and light.
Printing at home on an Epsom or Canon is perfectly fine, the smooth paper quality finish doesn't compare to say 300 GSM water colour fine art rag paper from Archer or Hammermill paper that simply transforms the subject matter dimension depth 3D POP especially when the film blacks are black and the greys are grey, whites are nice...............
Is film better than digital............. Yes or No..............neither, there just different, again depending on who and what is behind the viewfinder.
Only an opinion
Last edited:
Another poll might explore how many of us use more than one camera system. I am a Nikon/OM-Olympus guy. I have a plethora of Nikon lenses dating back to 1968, so I am pretty entrenched in that ecosystem. But when I travel long distance (e.g., by air) I use my M43 gear now, as it is sooooo much easier to transport. And I confess that as I age (gracefully, I hope), using a 600mm f4 rig in the field is more and more a chore.
Yes, dealing with two camera systems is a bit extravagant, and at the very least one has to keep switching back and forth between cameras with different controls and menus, which can cause some cognitive friction. OTOH, I know one bird photographer who uses Canon, Sony, Nikon, AND Fuji gear.
Yes, dealing with two camera systems is a bit extravagant, and at the very least one has to keep switching back and forth between cameras with different controls and menus, which can cause some cognitive friction
. OTOH, I know one bird photographer who uses Canon, Sony, Nikon, AND Fuji gear.
As far as a second camera is concerned, my second camera is usually an Apple iPhone. The image quality is good, and it's always with me. But as others have mentioned, ergonomics matter and I find the small screen and buttons are not particularly friendly for precise framing and editing.
I've been shooting Nikon for nearly 25 years - including my last film camera. Over a longer period, I have used Olympus, Fuji, Minolta/Sony, and Zeiss. With more than 20 Nikon lenses, it's hard to justify a system change.
And I've been using Microsoft Windows for 30 years.
I've been shooting Nikon for nearly 25 years - including my last film camera. Over a longer period, I have used Olympus, Fuji, Minolta/Sony, and Zeiss. With more than 20 Nikon lenses, it's hard to justify a system change.
And I've been using Microsoft Windows for 30 years.
- Status