Advice for Landscape Full Frame

Discussion in 'Photography & Video' started by sanquar, Aug 30, 2020.

  1. sanquar

    sanquar Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    17
    I'm looking for a FF camera to use mainly for landscapes. I would like to pair it with a 16-35 lens or similar. With a view to possibly selling it in future as I have a Canon body elsewhere that I don't have access to.

    I have some Canon glass that I don't have access to for a while so that might come into the equation on the body type if I decided to keep it.

    A new 5DS is going for $1700 at the moment but I'm concerned about the dynamic range, the lack of high ISO and the fixed Live View screen. I'm also concerned it will be difficult to sell in the future.

    I'm considering an A7RII second hand or possibly an A7III new. I have heard A7RII is a bit less polished. The A7III is the good allrounder with great AF albeit with less resolution.

    How does the A7RII AF compare to the A7III?

    Are there any other bodies you would consider and please advise why. Is there any of the 3 that you wouldn't buy?

    What is the going rate for a reasonable used A7RII, A7III and 5DS or 5DSR?
     
  2. Deftone2k

    Deftone2k In the Darkroom

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2002
    Messages:
    15,852
    Location:
    Sydney
    The A9/A73 were the first big steps IMO that Sony made into giving their body/system the full functionality and performance that many of us had been looking for.. for a long time.

    A7r2 is still great, but still stuck a bit behind. AF isnt bad, but comparatively isnt amazing (plenty of YT reviews and comparisons you can watch).

    A73 is a great body for the money, although pricing has gone up this year due to $$$/COVID/Sales/Components etc etc. 24mp is pretty fine for landscapes, although it's an easy step up to the A7r3 (probably what I would consider)

    My Canon glass worked mostly better on A73 when adapted than it did on my 5D4... the let down areas were generally in super low light and shooting longer focal lengths (85mm and longer).

    I personally wouldnt buy camera equipment based on a resale value. Something a bit newer will hold it's own a bit longer until it's a couple of generations behind. A couple of gen's behind (if you look at the 5D MK IV) can mean you can get a decent body for a steal nowadays. 5Ds/5DsR were not all that popular and I think that is reflected in the general market/desire for them.

    TLDR if you arent fussed about considering Sony then I would look at the A7r3 or A73. If you want to stay Canon and want to get something good second hand then I would look at the 5DIV. Basing this all on you having access to a body/lens (but didnt state what they are).
     
  3. herzeg

    herzeg Iron Photographer

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2010
    Messages:
    1,134
    Location:
    Melbourne
    A 5DS is a steal at $1700; that's a lot of landscape camera, especially at base ISO on a tripod...
     
    Deftone2k likes this.
  4. phreeky82

    phreeky82 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2002
    Messages:
    9,696
    Location:
    Qld
    EOS R is 30MP. MP count appears quite important to you, so 30MP may not cut it, however you need to print pretty big (or crop hard) for that to become an issue.
     
  5. Athiril

    Athiril Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Messages:
    4,115
    Location:
    Tsumagoi-Mura, Japan
    There’s a power gap in AF between second and third gen, especially with adapters iirc. Why do you what AF for ultra wide for landscapes though?
     
  6. Deftone2k

    Deftone2k In the Darkroom

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2002
    Messages:
    15,852
    Location:
    Sydney
    Not wrong I must have misread that first time round.. would jump on a 5Ds at $1700 for sure.
     
  7. lonewolf1983

    lonewolf1983 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2002
    Messages:
    4,677
    Location:
    Perth, WA
    ive owned the a7rii and a7iii and the a7rii would be my choice in most situations for landscape work.
    The MP and DR are fantastic.

    A7iii is a far better AF system and general usage camera, but that doesnt matter for landscapes
     
  8. OP
    OP
    sanquar

    sanquar Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    17
    I get your point. But I am just trying to justify spending $3k or there abouts in these times. I was really eyeing off an R5 and I will probably end up down the RF Body path but I certainly can't justify the price of an R5 right now. I have a 100-400L mk 2 and a few other lenses and I will be happy to keep that for RF until I can't hold a camera any more. So the bodies I am considering really aren't the bodies I see myself with long term. Hence thinking I might sell it in 12 to 18 months. Especially if I get back to my 80d.

    The 5DS is physically larger and I was hoping to get back to a smaller body than my current 80D if possible long term.

    Yes, it seems to be. I'm just wondering if it will be over kill for me. But pairing it with a new 16-35 F4, it would be a winner. According to The Digital Picture, the cheaper Tamron 17-35 lens does not play well with the 5DS. I can't think of another lens that might be suitable. I don't like the performance of the 17-40L.

    Not really, but due to situations, I am thinking about really putting some effort into my landscape photography. And the price of the 5DS made me think about more mPx more than anything.

    Although I only mentioned the wide lens, I will not use it for only landscapes, but I will focus on it with an enthusiasm that I have not attempted in the past.

    I should have really mentioned I am not looking for landscapes only - my fault. But I have used the 20-35mm range for street photography in the past. And I may even pick up an 85mm prime for similar.


    I really appreciate all your perspectives.
     
  9. herzeg

    herzeg Iron Photographer

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2010
    Messages:
    1,134
    Location:
    Melbourne
    The Tokina 16-28mm Opera is a marvellous option and quite affordable.
     
  10. OP
    OP
    sanquar

    sanquar Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    17
    Thanks, it does sound good. Shame about the dome front glass.
     
  11. Frozen_Hell

    Frozen_Hell Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2002
    Messages:
    3,018
    Location:
    Cairns
    What are you intending on doing with the photos? Even if you're aiming to print them, 20+ megapixels is more than enough for quite large prints (e.g. A2 size).

    I personally have two prints of my photos hanging on the wall at full A2 size - one of those was shot on a Nikon D700 (12 megapixels) with a 14-24mm lens (very sharp) on a tripod and you'd never know it was only 12 megapixels, even up close. The second shot at full A2 size is from 35mm colour negative film that had a scanned resolution of around 14 megapixels and that was shot on a worse lens (Nikon AF-D 18-35mm) and it stands up fine at that size as well, even up close - also shot on tripod.

    I shoot landscapes as 90+% of what I photograph, and I'm currently shooting with a Fujifilm X-T3, which I went with from a Nikon D850 (45 megapixels) as I wanted to carry less weight. The only thing really the D850 was better at was astro as its high ISO is better than the crop-sensor in the Fuji, but for the rest of my photography its the same quality as I shoot at low ISO typically.

    Good technique and reasonable glass on a tripod means you don't need super high megapixels if you're doing things right. My general leaning these days is buying better quality glass over slightly more megapixels, and a quality tripod to put it all on.
     
  12. OP
    OP
    sanquar

    sanquar Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    17
    Thanks for your feedback. To answer your question, I intend to keep the photos for prosperity at the moment but that may change. I have had printed some of my landscape shots with a crop sensor and a canon 10-22 and wasn't overly impressed. Light gathering and better DR is what I am also concerned with.
     
  13. Frozen_Hell

    Frozen_Hell Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2002
    Messages:
    3,018
    Location:
    Cairns
    If low light and dynamic range are what you're after, full-frame is the best. Even the ability to pull 3-4 stops of stuff out of RAW files is ridiculous on certain cameras - I could certainly do that on the Nikon D850 I had and it did have pretty damn good low-light as well.
     
  14. lithos

    lithos Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2010
    Messages:
    6,532
    Left-field suggestion: Pentax K-1 Mk II, especially if you're gonna be out in inclement weather.
     
  15. Zzapped

    Zzapped Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2001
    Messages:
    12,352
    Location:
    Madora Bay
    A7Riii Great camera and plenty of resolution. Just switched up myself, Havent visited here for a few years now but glad to see the Photo forums still going strong.

    Cheers

    Z
     
  16. OP
    OP
    sanquar

    sanquar Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    17
    I'm sure it is a great body. I have since purchased an EOS R and a 16-35L f4 and it suits my needs.
     
  17. Frozen_Hell

    Frozen_Hell Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2002
    Messages:
    3,018
    Location:
    Cairns
    On this topic, I was looking at the high res full-frame mirrorless options in the last week - and my summary I would say is that Nikon seems lost, Canon seem a bit more solid and Sony are fairly decent. But in terms of pricing, the bodies are all very similar for equivalency but the Sony lenses if you look at the F2.8 zoom series seem a reasonable amount cheaper than Nikon/Canon equivalents without there really being any disparity in terms of lens quality etc.
     
  18. lonewolf1983

    lonewolf1983 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2002
    Messages:
    4,677
    Location:
    Perth, WA
    All have their pro's and con's depending on your use case.
    Glass wise, the Sony's have been around a lot longer so they're running discounts etc, you'll probably also find the canon/nikon versions are also optically better to some degree.
     

Share This Page

Advertisement: