Ready to upgrade

[jnish]

So, as much as I still get quite a thrill from taking photos like this:
IMG_3780_1_1 by Jane Nishikawa, on Flickr
I am definitely suffering from lens-envy.  
I am planning to upgrade both camera and lens in the next year.  I would like to plan a budget. I am currently using an entry level canon (T5--no stabilizer!!  DO 70-300)  I see the most beautiful photos on this sight, so I know that you have opinions that are supported by experience.  I would love to know your thoughts about lenses and cameras.  I am an amateur with no plans for pro photography, but I would like to take crisper photos than the one above.  I believe I need both a camera and a lens.  I don't want to take a small step and regret.  I also don't want to get too much power and discover that I can't handle it. All thoughts are appreciated!!!

[Paul O'Toole]

Even on a budget you will give you a nice range of options. Here is my 2 cents in regards to Nikon. If you mainly take bird related photos and nature in general then consider this setup.

Nikon D7200 Body: $1,300.00

Now the lense is the tricky part, there are several good birding lenses with some costing thousands. To shoot for fun and a hobby like I do skip buying the expensive fixed prime lenses and get a good general carry around lense that will work in most situations.

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR $1,800.00

* I have owned lenses that top out at 300mm and have never find they are quite enough for birding. Ended up returning the last one I got.

* If this is still out of your range look at the Sigma & Tamron zooms as they will likely be a tad cheaper but I personally have not used these brands.
There is no one setup that works for eveyone, you have to find what works for you. Once you have a lense you like you will most likely keep that for years and only upgrade the body if you like down the road.

This is my current setup:

NIKON D7200 DIGITAL SLR BODY $1,350.00
NIKON AF-S 80-400MM F/4.5-5.6G ED VR $3000.00 See my flickr site for samples if you like.

[Shortsighted]

Peter O'Toole has recommended some Nikon gear and all of his suggestions are top-notch product.
My feeling is that you are not quite prepared to spend that much money. It's a mighty leap from
what you use now to Mr. O'Toole's kit. The prices he quotes make me dizzy because a few thousand
bucks for me might as well be a few million, because I'm no closer to comprehending one figure than the other.

You do not need to spend that much to get decent pictures. A cropped sensor size is a given. Regardless of
the lens you ultimate decide upon you will need to crop in post. If your sensor is too small then cropping will
define noise you will not be pleased to see. It will also limit your useful ISO capabilities for the same reason.
A cropped sensor DSLR can be had for under a grand (after taxes). Newer entry-level DSLR cameras have 24 mega-pixel sensors.
Whether Canon or Nikon those newer sensors will allow you to crop a lot. I have a Canon T4i (18 megapixels) and I
can crop favourably. Indeed, I need to crop because I'm using a 70-200mm lens (f4) without IS. That lens sells for
maybe $800. So, a new camera with a new sensor is about $800.00 too.

That's not chicken feed, but it is a darn sight cheaper than Mr. O'Toole's wonderful gear. Canon also makes the old
400mm f5.6 prime lens w/o IS. I wish I had one. It is sharp as heck, but needs a fair amount of light at f5.6 and especially
without the benefit of IS to facilitate using lower shutter speeds. Still, the lens cost less than half of the Nikon 80-400mm f 5.6 with VR.

The light weight Canon that I'm using is easy to carry in the field, easy to deploy at short notice, sharp as a tack ... but no IS. I got mine used as a gift.
Indeed, my Canon T4i was also a gift, otherwise I wouldn't be shooting birds. I simply can't afford the gear that most birders would
consider a pre-requisite, but I have not let that stop me. Your best piece of kit is an alarm clock. It will get you up in time to get out
in time, to get to the site in time, to get the sightings to get the shot. With a cheaper, shorter lens you will need to get closer to your
subject. That can be done, but it means you need to try harder and use some ingenuity. Heck, that's half the fun!

Mirrorless cameras with electronic viewfinders are the immediate future, so take that into consideration too. Just don't spend a lot of money you
may not have. Build up to it gradually. Tamron and Sigma is not too expensive but these lenses are heavy, push-pull and slow (f6.3). The glass is good
but not great. A Canon 400mm f5.6 prime cropped to 600mm was sharper than a Tamron 150-600mm shooting full out. The Canon prime is faster, but no IS,
but lighter, no push-pull and can be carried effortlessly.

The work put into the project by the photographer is far more important than the gear. Always was ... always will be. Make sure your gear is rugged,
reasonable well-sealed, has proven sharp optical quality with coatings and is not the cost of a used car. Remember, you are not making money with your gear,
it is sucking money out of you.

Shortsighted

[Paul O'Toole]

Great post and a load of good solid info. I failed to mention that before buying the gear I have I tried using a point and shoot with a long zoom built in. Totally different route but it did last me for a few years and I was able to get some pretty darn good shots. They don't tend to do well in darker lighting conditions but one model that could work is the PANASONIC DMC-FZ1000 BLACK 20MP 16X 4K 3" $1000 and your done. Just a thought. If it is not what you need or don't like it just return it. You may have a Henrys store you can go to and check it out. Ours in Kingston closed last year

Link is from Henrys in Ontario online:

https://www.henrys.com/86313-PANASONIC-DMC-FZ1000-BLACK-20MP-16X-4K-3-.aspx

[Shortsighted]

The esteemed Peter O'Toole makes another good point. The Panasonic kit is all in one.
But remember, there is no magic bullet. No miracle kit that defies the laws of physics.
No option that rises above the level of all other options.
No ... well, you get the picture, no pun intended.
The Panasonic has a 1" sensor (big enough) but at 20 megapixels those pixies are very
small indeed. Small means poorer ISO performance, and poorer shadow detail and
reduced dynamic range overall (like a fast photographic film vs a slow film) and a corollery
of that - there will be highlight blow-out. Even with my T4i I will generally shoot into a
terrestrial background at 0.67 stops shifted to the left (under-exposed) to help deter
highlight blow-out. There are digital software management tools but they are no more magic
than the camera for all seasons, like tires for all seasons. I wouldn't stake my life on it.

Mr. O'Toole's point I feel is that you may not yet be committed to bird photography for the
long haul. You are still developing skills, working out technique and that all-in-one bridge
camera my get you there. More costly kit may come later. Technology changes rapidly.
I did a year with a Canon G9 and a 2X TC. Getting the Canon T4i with a sensor a dozen times
bigger was a huge improvement even though I was only using the kit lens for a year (18-135mm).
Very fine lens but it's not Canon L-series glass, which helped me another increment.
Baby steps.

Shortsighted

[jnish]

Paul and Shortsighted,
I really appreciate the thoughtful responses from both of you.  Yes, my next stop is Henry's, but I am grateful for your insights as I begin my research into the next step in my photography experience.  I'm leaning toward one big step, rather than many small steps, but perhaps a couple of steps is the happy medium.  You both have posted beautiful photos on this forum, so I know that your opinions are based on experience.  Many thanks--I will probably ask a few more questions here before I purchase!!

[Paul O'Toole]

Here was my progession in photography:

(1) Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ4 4MP Digital Camera with 12x Image Stabilized Optical Zoom - purchased used, had it for 3 years until I dropped it

(2) Nikon D50 - Used with a 80-400vr lense new from 2006 until 2015, got a lot of life out of that setup.

(3) Current setup: Nikon D7200 new with the updated 80-400vr new purchased 2 years ago.

This image of a pair of Atlantic Puffins was taken with my current setup during a July trip to NFLD this past summer.

[Shortsighted]

Another excellent point by way of example.
If you find it likely that you too will get to travel like Mr. O'Toole and get a chance to
see and photograph something as exotic and ... let's face it, magnificent as a Puffin, then
you will want top-notch gear. Reliable, rugged, and with outstanding glass. If you can afford
it, sure go for it. I don't wish to deter you or hold you back from your dream gear. Just keep
reminding yourself that your brain and dedication is the main ingredient toward better and
more compelling photographs, not the gear. The gear just makes the process a little easier.
If you are not likely to travel beyond your local park (like me), or no farther afield than the
GTA area then being equipped like a pro might be over-compensation.
Rule-of-thumb: Once you get use great gear you never want to go back to lesser gear.
It's just a question of how much it is worth to you. It's your money. You just don't need
to spend 5 grand to take bird pictures. It's as much fun with lesser gear and you don't have
to worry about it should something catastrophic happen to it.

Shortsighted

[MEGHAN]

I think before anyone offers you their opinion on what you "should" buy I think we need to find out the answer to the most important question...
What is your budget? You stated you would like to plan a budget.
What price point are you thinking of?
Another question is one lens or more. If you are looking for multiple lenses that makes a difference in what you will be able to pick up for your budget.
A few have suggest anywhere from $1000 to $5000. Big difference. So the same is said if your budget is $10000 or even more.
If anyone wanted my opinion I would say avoid the baby steps. Go big or go home. Choose your budget, you'll probably go over no matter what it is, and research and ask what is the top gear you can get for that money. If you slowly upgrade the quality of your gear you are just wasting time and money, money you could have spent on what you actually want and time learning the ins and outs of new gear every year.  Purchase what works for you, learn it, master it and you will not regret spending the money.

Meghan

[jnish]

Paul--That is a stunning photograph!!!!  Thank you for sharing it!!!

Meghan--You have certainly zeroed in on the key point.  I am approaching retirement ( 1 - 2 years) and would like to make the purchase while I am still working.  I put the question out there to get a feeling for how much I should think about budgeting, and I am currently thinking 5000ish all in, camera and lens.  I would like to purchase a stronger zoom than my current 70-300.  In the longer term, I also wish to pick up a nice macro lens, but I am not including this in my current budget.  My first passion was definitely macro, but the bird and wildlife facination has become a big part of my photography experience.  The reason my family gave me my current camera as a gift is because I was spending a lot of time with my micro-camera taking close up pictures of stinging creatures in my native plants garden.  Any time spent wandering the local forests is exceptionally relaxing, and has become a necessary part of my life!

Bald-faced Hornet by Jane Nishikawa, on Flickr

Tachinid Fly by Jane Nishikawa, on Flickr

[Shortsighted]

I must apologize for leading you astray by the content of my earlier advice concerning your desire to upgrade from your present kit. I often form a mental picture based on just a little preliminary info and in this case my assessment was way off base. I imagined that you were much younger and that by mentioning a budget you were using code for not having much to spend, something which I can commiserate with.
If you are near retirement age then I can fully imagine that you are in no way amenable to progressing in baby steps as might have traction for someone thirty years younger. Having upwards of $5,000 to spend on a new DSLR and a telephoto lens longer than 300mm certainly places your situation in a new light. To me, having that much to spend is entirely beyond my ken. I was just concerned that you might be a young gear head that believes gear is the answer to everything. I trust most still feel that way and maybe they are right. However, not having semi-pro gear does not negate the pursuit. If you cannot afford to go big, then there is no need for you to go home, even though home is where the heart is and that’s a good thing.
Like Peter O’Toole declared, a Nikon D7000(2) and either the 80-400mm lens, or the newer (cheaper) zoom that stretches to 500mm is right up your alley (cost-wise). If Canon has your attention then the 7D and the 100-400mm (2nd generation) zoom will also pull its weight. Well actually, you’ll be pulling its weight around and a noticeable bit of weight it will be compared to what you are used to.
Anyway, once again I’m sorry to have wasted your time through my misinterpretation of your actual goal.  I wish you well in your pursuit of new gear and look forward to your photos with that kit, including your appraisal of same as you learn to master it. Hopefully I’ll still be contributing to this BB, and assuming of course that I can still claim any credibility by that time.