Portrait and Landscape photographer based in London. I make gear reviews as well as photography tutorials and vlogs about my landscape photography and portrait photography including lighting and compositions tips and tricks.
Under rated gear. The d600/d610 dxo score on the sensor is 94, just one point short of the Z7 and R6. So a solid DSLR with up to date sensor performance for £400. Having examined the second hand market, it’s the best value out there. For the money nothing comes close.
During some unexpected free time around spring of 2020, I mated a lens from a 110 year old Kodak folder to my Z6. It is beautiful. Not overly done character like a wide open Helios, just incredible subject/ background separation. I firmly believe we need more low element count lenses.
Spot on. This is one of the reason I shoot the 200mm f2 on my mirrorless body. There is just something about the rendering - and it's easy to identify - and my photography "friends" all see it. The type of image can not be replaced by sharper more contrasty lenses. Nor can the dimensionality - which as you know - a lens will have or not have. For me, it's one of the reasons I love taking photos.
Hopefully Nikon have ignored the anoraks when they delivered this lens. Just as Nurburgring lap time comparisons ruined car reviews, brick-wall tests of lenses are meaningless. Like you, I want a 35mm with creamy bokeh and vignetting with smooth gradation.
Such a lens that you describe already exists to a large extent in the form of the NIKKOR Z DX 24mm f/1.7. In APS-C use you get a field of view of 36mm in full frame analogy. In addition to being light, characterful and small, this lens is also dirt cheap. So anyone who has a Zfc, Z50 or Z30 cannot ignore this lens.
Would it be fair to consider this an "upgraded" version of the 40mm f/2 lens? It's great to see more budget friendly Nikon lenses added to their lineup. Still hoping for a 35mm f/1.2 or similar big baller lens to be introduced later.
This is how an experienced professional photographer absolutely breaks the mould to our benefit. Well done Chief! We as consumer spec stuff, you use it in the real world.
Wow, as a 40yr old photos for fun guy that started on film, you have the best honest photography channel on RU-vid! Don't know why you don't have 1m+ subs.. I'm learning heaps and really enjoying photography again thanks to you... you've relit my passion for it... I can't wait to start on your masterclass's
You have given words to what some of us were thinking in our hearts but were not able to express ... Even the Nikon 35mm 1.4G with its CA and flare is one of my fav ... same reason I like the Fuji 35mm 1.4 ... lenses that exude some kind of characters that can not be measured by brick walls and pixel peeping ... 🎉🎉🎉
I heard of this lens for the first time yesterday in a email form LCE. My first reaction was 'That's a surprise: this new Z version is about the same price as some people are still asking for the F Mount 35mm f1.4 used. Interesting times. I'm still a DSLR guy currently (it's bargain time in the used DSLR market - so I'm happy to buy & try all those bodies I've always been curious about.)
I hope we get what you are saying. I saw a couple people already questioning why this lens was being made instead of the 1.2 version and it left me baffled. I am excited for this lens.
The few available yt videos show that the lens is almost as sharp as the S f/1.8. And it’s about 25% lower price. It’s an interesting product. Some say that it is made by tamron.
I still like the AF-S 35mm f1.4 G very much. I still like to use it on my D3 and D4s. As far as I have heard the Nikkor Z 35mm 1.4 has a better image quality for a much lower price. So this is a good direction that Nikon is heading to.
I realized that some lenses are so sharp and "perfect" that I don't actually use them much. I felt this way about the Leica Q3. A few days ago, I added a mist filter to soften the image. Now, it has that "dreamy" quality that transports you.
This will mean more options for the 35mm Nikon shooter, and cheaper prices as well. I would be interested to hear about it's build quality. I think this is a good move.
So true! I’ve shot Nikon since the 90’s on film. I’ve gone through a great many camera bodies since my first Nikon DSLR in 2004. In the early days of digital, I noticed massive upgrades between camera releases. Then in 2012 I bought the Nikon D800. Since then, I’ve noticed only incremental hardly noticeable improvements in image quality. I bought a D850 in 2018 for the improved features that made my life easier. A year later I picked up a Z6, and began a migration to mirrorless, mainly because I am interested in exploring video. I kept and continued shooting with the D850 until this year, and finally moved to the Z8. The z8 image quality is no better than the D850, but the feature advancements make my life easier and overall I prefer Z lenses to F mount. As you shared, the glow of owning new gear wears off fast. But if the new camera makes your experience easier and more pleasurable, it may be worth the upgrade
Martin - I’m a long time Olympus user but recently got a mint D600 with about 2700 actuations to play with. I was actually surprised at how accurate the focus was given all of the bad press to its poor focusing. I also purchased a Mint D750 about a week later and was surprised that the D600 matched or bested the D750 in focusing - ESPECIALLY with the 50mm 1.8 G lens that came with the deal. It focused very poorly on the D750 and perfectly in the D600. I ran a lens fine tune with the D750 and 50mm 1.8G and got acceptable results with a +20 setting on the lens.
yes this was similar to my findings, the problem is people like to run away with ideas about how things work and blow them out of proportion, so people repeat things about cameras they havent actually used even, and so the reputation sticks. I never had any issues with the d600 focus, i found it to be very good and could beat my 5diii in lowlight at times too.
@@MartinCastein Thanks for replying, I've never own those systems and I can't afford them anyway. The owners of those systems claim that the shooting experience is unique (e.g. Leica experience) and that's why I wonder if that experience is really much different from using other more affordable systems (e.g. Canon, Nikon)
@@allee2445 nah, its whatever you convince yourself of or like really. find what you like and shoot that, nothing is so amazingly different to shoot, its just a camera.
Yeah, love your videos about older DSLR. I´m using a 6D since years for family and stills. Bought used and now about 120.000 shoots + videos. Very study camera, small and lightweight with a lot of picture quality. The 6D haven´t much features, but the basics are nearly perfect. Center point AF ist strong, handles also difficult situations like shooting thru sunglasses with sun in the back of the model. The outer AF works fine, also for nailing eyebrows. With magiclantern also near to feature list of modern cameras, also as a nice video camera (with manuell focus peaking). Users have to learn good working scenarios for the AF, sometimes it´s hunting a lot. That´s the main point against modern mirrorless.
Hey Martin, excellent job as always. Completely agree about setting a budget and staying within it (and making a selection of a new body based mostly on need - we all get a bit of GAS now and then). That said, while the AF speed, accuracy, and video features are the main differences between the newer bodies and older DSLRs, there are other features that two years later are still making me feel good about moving up to mirrorless. First off, I realize your experience let you judge exposure without using much help, but the biggest improvement in my moving to mirrorless (WYSIWYG) was exposure. I rarely have photos now that are not exposed the way I want them to be. While I could say that is because I'm better now, I believe that it is mostly the move to seeing what I am shooting and thinking about it up front (before I shoot). Other features that I still marvel at 2 years later (with using the newer body) is my old f-mount glass focuses faster and more accurately with the newer body. Subject detection helps when I need to work quickly. The buttons are significantly more programmable, so that in the field, I can make changes without taking my eye away from the EVF, and much faster than on the DSLRs. Shooting silently (as a sports/wildlife guy) is also very helpful. There are many subtle things that have let me focus on composition, watching backgrounds, etc that have truly helped my photography. I hope your message helps those looking for guidance.
@@MartinCastein I do not own an 85mm lens yet, but I've been looking as well. I purchase many of my lenses used, and I wasn't doing much portrait work (but that is changing) - so my used portrait go to lenses wee the 105mm f/1.4 and 24-70 or 70-200. I picked up a used (and heavy) 200mm f/2 - mostly for low light sports - and love the rendering of that lens, but can't recommend it for anyone with sanity. I'll be interested in your choice of 85mm. I briefly used the 85mm 1.8 for a day, but found it had more CA than I wanted to deal with as a new photographer. Keep all the good stuff coming. I really enjoy your perspective!
This is a refreshing take. Marketing works because it gets people on an emotional level. People see the thing they don’t have and think “That’s it, that’s the thing that will make all the difference!” It takes a lot of maturity and understanding of why one does photography and what their real needs are when making decisions on gear. A number of years ago I “downgraded” my kit to a smaller camera system. That decision was based on the idea that what I had was far in excess of what I needed, was taking up valuable space and weighing me down. So I was happy with the newfound portability of my smaller kit, but I would still lust for new gear every so often. My way of fighting it is to look at reviews and research for a few days, fill my head with all of the competing noise, then shut it all off and take a week or two with a piece of kit that I don’t use often. I make it a point to use that lens, or that flash, or whatever in everything I do for a while. It focuses me on solving creative problems, it tends to make me forget about the actual gear, thus making me realise what I have is perfectly adequate.
Years ago (around the beginning of digital cameras), John Dvorak of PC Magazine did a column on his day of shooting carrying two digital cameras - different manufacturers and different "size" cameras. He wrote of how he was accustomed to selecting a film for the qualities of the film, but this time he had no different film and only different cameras. And said "The camera is the film." For example, two chrome films, a Kodak chrome or Fuji chrome, made a big difference in the same camera.
spot on as always Martin. The only thing I have to add concerning consistency of style across cameras is editing. I did a shoot last week with two cameras, one was a camera and lens I bought off ebay for $80, the other was a 6D with an L lens. Straight out of camera, you could tell which shots were on the "crappy" camera and which was the better one. After my post processing workflow, they are basically identical.
I've always assumed that matrix metering simply added up all the pixels in a scene and averaged them but after looking into it a bit more it's a bit more complex than that. It typically divides the frame into several zones then analyses each zone for brightness., colour, contrast and sometimes focus distance then compares the data to a database of typical scene patterns then uses that info to determine the exposure. It usually gives more weight to the centre of the frame and the area where the camera is focusing. So it makes sense what you were saying about different cameras interpreting scenes slightly differently.
OMG, this is how my wife and I shoot! For event shooting she is fantastic. I set her camera on Auto and she is just snapping away while I’m in full manual and getting frustrated cause someone is turning towards or away from a light source or moving so I have to bump up my shutter speed. I love portraits and headshots cause I’m in full control, lighting and posing plus my camera in full manual. I’m going to try this exercise and see how it helps. I love taking pics but I wish I was better at catching the moment.
Fantastic video! I’ve been a Nikon shooter for over 30 years, starting with film and now using mirrorless. When people see me with my camera and the pics I take, they ask which Nikon should they get if they’re starting off. I tell them don’t just look at Nikon, look at all of them. Go to a camera store and hold them, see which one feels best in your hands. Look through a view finder, take a few shots and start with a good starter kit with a zoom. The top 3 or 4 camera makers all have great cameras. Each have their own little quirks, strengths and weaknesses. The idea is if you are excited about your camera you’ll be happier and want to take your camera instead of using an iPhone.
Having amazing 3D tracking, facial recognition and 20 fps is great but isn't that much needed for general photography. I can have the same fun with an old dslr as I can with a 2mpx point and shoot. For most of us, photography is a hobby and I think it's supposed to be fun. Shoot for yourself, because you love it, not because you're trying to impress someone on oversaturated social media platforms. Print your best work in either a book or to hang on the wall, share it with friends and family. Much love ❤
Good life learning lesson ( I learned it years ago, the hard way ) The lesson is ( I'm summarizing Martin ) but is to keep your credit cards at home in a safe!!! Nothing wrong with that old D610 for you portrait photographer's, The D810 is still a highly capable landscape and slower wildlife shooting..The D500 will still kill it on BIF, and I use mine for landscapes on occasion and it works actually very well...But you could always buy a good used D850, it will do everything. Well I say everything, Martin would know 1000× what I would on portraiture..
hahahah i dont know about that! yeah those cameras for sure are basically the same as the new ones honestly in terms of image i think the d800 is actually marginally better than the z8 even. figure that out
@MartinCastein my little brother shoots weddings with a D610 and all D series glass..His clients love the look of the non super computer, modern cameras..I think that's a lot of the loved D800 story..
@@bassangler73 i shot most of the wedding i did on the d600 cameras, they are perfect for it really. just the right size/weight/performance/price balance for weddings and the skin tones on it are excellent too.
