Which DSLR for boating pics?

[Designo]

FWIW, you can pick up Canon 5D MK II's for a fair price since the introduction of the MK III. MK II is still a fine camera although the autofocus is probably as good as on the newer models.

I guess you should have written that the autofocus is NOT as good as the MK III, because it is a big difference in my opinion. I have both, but will soon replace the MK II with another MK III. Not only because it is a better camera in general, but it is a different housing with different handling and having both can be very confusing.

I have also used the Nikon D800 and the end result is pretty equal to the 5D MK III, but the handling is not as good I think. So for those without a handful of Nikon lenses and who would like a good semi-pro camera, the Canon 5D MK III is a very good choice, although still more expensive than cameras with smaller sensors of course.

 

[oceanfroggie]

From the question I gather that you already have Nikon gear so not changing to Canon, etc. but FWIW, you can pick up Canon 5D MK II's for a fair price since the introduction of the MK III. MK II is still a fine camera although the autofocus is probably as good as on the newer models.

On a general note, with the bulk comes robustness which is good on the boating environment. At least in the Canon world, the cheaper ones are plastic and aren't as well protected from spray, etc. Also imho nicest pictures come when there is interesting light (=dark) and that's when the full frame really comes into it's own.

Hi Scubaman. Thanks for reply. Yes I bought a basic Nikon DSLR last spring to test if I wanted to come back to SLR, so not heavily committed or invested into the brand eitherway. I rank Canon and Nikon as equals. The 5D mk 2 did catch my eye and my brother in law has had great success with his, but I feel for my amateur level an APS-C sensor will suit me better than full frame and cost a lot less in glass. I was very drawn to the old nikon D300s for its control ergonomics, but I think newer bodies from all manufacturers seemed to have developed superb low light handling in last 4/5 years (ie low noise at higher ISO and good DR at high ISO), enabling more hand held shots from a boat with long lens in low light. The last time I used SLR was 2004 with film, but I have been blown away by two advances in the past decade, optical image stabilisation in lens and high ISO capability. 24/36 mp doesn't 'blow my skirt up' (if I had one that is or was Scottish) I'd be very happy with 12/16mp but it looks like 20-24 is the new baseline wanted or not.

What camera lens set up did you use for your wonderful waterscape posts?

Ps: It has been suggested to me that APS-C bodies are more manageable with a tele zoom such as 70-300, the Canikon 70-200 f2.8 seem just too big an heavy for use on a boat compared to the smaller plastic zooms.

 

[snooks]

Well you are using a Cannon so I would expect a bit better

Are they all full frame sensors?

P.S. Can you slow that movie down a wee bit, I am getting motion sickness with it

Out of interest where was it shot?

Yup both cameras are full frame, I need it for wide angle interiors

Sorry Can't slow the gif down

That was shot in Plymouth

 

[Groot T]

What is best for a boat shoots?

Cannon

 

[oceanfroggie]

What is best for a boat shoots?

Cannon

Actually I am quite taken by the Canon 70D specs and body ergonomics.

 

[[70521]]

Yup both cameras are full frame, I need it for wide angle interiors

Sorry Can't slow the gif down

That was shot in Plymouth

Thanks Snooks, would that be a Princess Yachts boat out for sea trials?

 

[[70521]]

What is best for a boat shoots?

Cannon

that made me giggle, thanks

 

[snooks]

Thanks Snooks, would that be a Princess Yachts boat out for sea trials?

That was for the MBM test, Which you can read about in the current issue..
or watch the video:

 

[scubaman]

Hi Scubaman. Thanks for reply. Yes I bought a basic Nikon DSLR last spring to test if I wanted to come back to SLR, so not heavily committed or invested into the brand eitherway. I rank Canon and Nikon as equals. The 5D mk 2 did catch my eye and my brother in law has had great success with his, but I feel for my amateur level an APS-C sensor will suit me better than full frame and cost a lot less in glass. I was very drawn to the old nikon D300s for its control ergonomics, but I think newer bodies from all manufacturers seemed to have developed superb low light handling in last 4/5 years (ie low noise at higher ISO and good DR at high ISO), enabling more hand held shots from a boat with long lens in low light. The last time I used SLR was 2004 with film, but I have been blown away by two advances in the past decade, optical image stabilisation in lens and high ISO capability. 24/36 mp doesn't 'blow my skirt up' (if I had one that is or was Scottish) I'd be very happy with 12/16mp but it looks like 20-24 is the new baseline wanted or not.

What camera lens set up did you use for your wonderful waterscape posts?

Ps: It has been suggested to me that APS-C bodies are more manageable with a tele zoom such as 70-300, the Canikon 70-200 f2.8 seem just too big an heavy for use on a boat compared to the smaller plastic zooms.

Arrgh, I just lost half an hour's worth of typing due to an expired token...

In a nutshell, I have the 24-70 mm F2.8, 24-105mm F4 IS and the 70-200 mm f4. I'm going to sell the middle one which I bought with shooting video in mind but I'm going to upgrade the camcorder instead. Good thing is that you get most of your money back on the second hand market. Btw the last one weighs about half of the 70-200m f2.8. It would be nice to have a longer lens too, but the 24 mb chip compensates this a bit by allowing more zooming in afterwards.

Thing is with a dlsr that you most likely end up with a bag full of gear, so the extra weight from a full frame is not such a big deal in that sense.

So many variables to consider and value to find the combo that works best for you. I personally followed my friends advice and went for a good lens and an aps-c body. He was right in his reasoning that a good lens is a good lens and you can always upgrade the body later (which I did in about six months) .

 

[photodog]

Well... I might as well make a few comments.."

fuji x pro 1; just finished a long term trial with one, I am quiet keen to get back to a rangefinder style camera system after AI sold my leicas... And the current deals available are astonishing... The camera produces exceptional images, easily compatible to the canon 5dmk3 up to about 1600 ISO. Build quality is nice, and the lenses seem to be well made, but it's a pita to use as the layout of key controls, in particular the AF managment, is not good.. I found the combo EVF thing to be impossible to get along with , and the preformance of the AF to be dissapointing, with a tendency to back focus... Battery life is rubbish. Turn off the EVF and it's better... Needs diopter correction, and a built in intravoltmeter as there is no mechanical one available. Whilst price is good with the standard lenses... Ergo the 18, 35 and 60... The good lenses like the 14, 23 and new 56 are very expensive..

So I didn't order the system.

The new canon 6d is much improved on the 5dmk2 and would be my preference over the mk2... If you didn't want to buy the mk3 due to price. AF is improved despite not a lot of increase in focus points.

I've had pictures in the back of buses from 8mp cameras, I think the ideal is about 21mp as it give excellent scope for cropping, and very good pano's

There are a lot of myths about optics and the need to spend vastly more for the larger chip cameras, It's true that lenses designed for smaller chips are not going to work, and it's also true that the crappy lower end consumer lenses are not much up to the job.... But there are more reasons for going to a larger chip than just improved image quality, and in particular it's about noise... Far less noise on bigger chip cameras with moderate pixel counts....

There is also a lot of nonsense written about having to spend big bux to get good optics... Don't buy cheap zooms, look for modestly quick fixed lenses... Such as the 85mm 1.8 from canon or nikon... All very modestly priced with excellent preformance... In fact for less than the price of a new canon 80-200 2.8 you can get a whole raft of fixed lenses far better optically than the big zoom.


Or look at some good used ones.. Which are widely available.

I would suggest as a starting lineup for canon snappers get the 28mm f1.8, The 50mm f1.4, and then a good used 70-200 f4. Put it all on a new 6d, and you should get out for £2k easy.

Errr... That's it.

 

[rbcoomer]

Thinking of an SLR upgrade. Wavering between D7100 and D300s both DX. What do the panel use and recommend for use on the boat?

I used to be very keen on photography as a teenager and used to develop all my own film and prints - my sister worked in a professional lab so useful source of supplies and expertise! I took a 20 odd year break when my old SLR mechanism packed up as I was too busy with other things and although I often thought about it I never got around to replacing. In that time, I stuck with compact cameras as I couldn't really afford what I wanted, but last year took the plunge a bought a Nikon D3200 with a selection of lenses to see how I got on. I've been very pleased with the results so far and have experimented quite a bit with low light and action shots - the kind of stuff that I was never really confident enough with in the days of take, develop, refine and retake! I couldn't really justify the costs of top-of-the-range - especially for use in a wet, salty and hostile environment - but have to admit that I've been very impressed with all aspects so far. The 24MP seems like overkill, but depends on intended use for final images.

 

[Designo]

In a nutshell, I have the 24-70 mm F2.8, 24-105mm F4 IS and the 70-200 mm f4. I'm going to sell the middle one...

So many variables to consider and value to find the combo that works best for you.

I have a little different setup, the 16-35mm f/2.8 for interiors and the 70-200mm f/2.8 for exterior (I am talking about shooting boats now), but I have found that my 24-105mm f/4 is the lens I am using most. It is a very good lens for a moderate price I think.

Just to show a boat, this one was about 500 meters away when I used the 70-200 with a 2x extender at 400 mm. The camera was the 5D MKIII and the picture can cover a wall and still look good. I used to sail on this boat around 1970 and have not seen it since, so when she suddenly appeared outside my window, I was happy to have the big camera near and shot through a triple glass window with still a good quality outcome...

 

[[2068]]

Hmm, it's interesting that everyone sees the same website and the same reviews, but ends up with different "stuff".
I'm not saying that I got it right, but I ended up choosing APS format, as I prefer the extra zoom for the size of body/lens.
(EOS 70D, EF 35mm f/2 IS, EFS 15-85mm IS, EF 70-300mm IS)

 

[Keith-i]

One important advantage to full frame is getting decent control on depth of field. Something APS just can't achieve it.

 

[[2068]]

One important advantage to full frame is getting decent control on depth of field. Something APS just can't achieve it.

I have enough trouble getting anything in focus, let alone trying to make it deliberately blurry.
Also, the OP wanted something to take pictures of boats with ... not expired candles?

 

[scubaman]

I have a little different setup, the 16-35mm f/2.8 for interiors and the 70-200mm f/2.8 for exterior (I am talking about shooting boats now), but I have found that my 24-105mm f/4 is the lens I am using most. It is a very good lens for a moderate price I think.

I agree the 24-105 is a very good all round lens but in my case it overlaps with the 28-70 f2.8, which I prefer due to it being faster and my subjective feeling is that it gives slightly better results. I can also easily see that even on a full frame body, a wider angle lens than 24 mm is needed for interior shots.

 

[photodog]

I agree the 24-105 is a very good all round lens but in my case it overlaps with the 28-70 f2.8, which I prefer due to it being faster and my subjective feeling is that it gives slightly better results. I can also easily see that even on a full frame body, a wider angle lens than 24 mm is needed for interior shots.

With the newest cameras,, the 5dmk 3 and 6d (I think) they have built the lens profile thing into the OS.... And it has meant a big improvement in the preformance from the camera of some lenses....

In particular the 20mm f2.8.

I have had the 16-35 l mk1 which was terrible on the 1ds mk2 and 5dmk 2, As well the 17-40 which was better, and a Leitz 21mm which was best, But I have now gone back to the canon 20mm f2.8.

I am looking at getting shot now of the 17-40 as I have a surplus of wide lenses... (17-40, 20, 28, 35, and 24-70....)

The real problem with canon is that they do not do a good fixed 20 or 21 in L at say f2.... Carrying the 17-40, 24-70 and the 70-200 is just too much.

 

[oceanfroggie]

Hmm, it's interesting that everyone sees the same website and the same reviews, but ends up with different "stuff".
I'm not saying that I got it right, but I ended up choosing APS format, as I prefer the extra zoom for the size of body/lens.
(EOS 70D, EF 35mm f/2 IS, EFS 15-85mm IS, EF 70-300mm IS)

Thanks for post. How do you find the 70-300 to use on the boat? Presume its f3.5/5.6 range.

 

[[2068]]

Thanks for post. How do you find the 70-300 to use on the boat? Presume its f3.5/5.6 range.

Purists will call it a "slow" lens, but I don't often go boating in the gloom, so it works well for me, as you can never have enough zoom on the water.

Just for info, an EOS 70D body weighs 755g, 20mp sensor, 7fps, a snazzy new autofocus system for video, and DIGIC 5+ that makes it hard to overload the buffer
http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/Digital_SLR/EOS_70D/index.aspx

(taken with previous EOS 60D, 70-300 lens)

 

[oceanfroggie]

Purists will call it a "slow" lens, but I don't often go boating in the gloom, so it works well for me, as you can never have enough zoom on the water.

Just for info, an EOS 70D body weighs 755g, 20mp sensor, 7fps, a snazzy new autofocus system for video, and DIGIC 5+ that makes it hard to overload the buffer
http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/Digital_SLR/EOS_70D/index.aspx

Thanks FP and guys. It seems quite a few are using full frame bodies. I'm leaning towards APS-C sized DSLR bodies for their lower weight and compactness. Also most lenses for APS-C seem to be half the weight and size of full frame lenses and give greater zoom reach on a smaller body. Having done a little more research I'm now leaning between a 70D and D7100, but it looks like the D7100 may get an update in next three months. I'm in no hurry once I am sorted out by end of may. I was very taken by both Canon and Nikon's 70-200mm f2.8 offerings but the things weigh a ton and are very large for hand held use on a boat. Slower 70-300mm may be a good compromise once I get moderate to decent light. I think I'll rent a few camera bodies pre buy to be sure. For me the physical feel and control ergonomics are nearly more important than just image quality.