i agree with you , only thing i find desirable in modern cameras is IBIS , works with manual lenses , and better video . Doesnt have to be 4K , i am fine with 1440p , because to process 4K that i really dont need for im not a video maker , im a family shooter , 1440p is fine , even Full HD of my 6D is totally fine but it has no IBIS , if it had i would not look for a body at all , on the other hand i dont want to get rid of my 5D , don't want to get rid of my 6D , i want Nikon d700 or d500 , and even as it is now , i have a table full of lenses and bodies , 5D and 6D not being the only ones i have G1x , 550d , 600d and similar . Its literally hard and expensive to get lenses for all of them , but all of them have something to offer . G1x when im just around , and having something decent enough to take a picture , and so on . I am in need of a special cabinet where i can put my lenses and bodies , really no joke , because of dust , for now i have something like it where i use a towel on shelf and i put stuff there , but that is full , my living room table is so filled with cameras that my 15 month baby is taking pictures no joke , even knos how to use tilting screen , i have Canon Sx130IS for her for it is light , she struggles even with G1x , but knows how to turn it on aim it and shoot . Im really amazed by it , but it shows you my ordeal , i would like 1 camera and 1 lens to rule them all , but its just not going to happen . What is your daily driver , i didnt try Fuji or Nikon , i think i will go for D700 or D600 and just a nifty 50 i use that 50% of time and its cheap , so to get me started . maybe i like nikon more .
Retired on to Olympus Em1 mk iii. Plus most of the lenses . Travel - non sus . Commercial quality- and published . I did Pentax MF plus others , L Lens Cannon , but feel comfortable with Olympus
Sony producing "funky" colors is an underestimation. I had one back in 2008 I think (don't even remember the model) and coming from Canon I just hated the oversaturated colors coming out of it. Regarding the Fuji X-Pro 1, would you consider this a good street photography camera?
HAHA! yes the colours were funky for sure. I only ever used my a7 for landscape where it didnt matter quite as much but i expect it would have been a pain for portraits. The fuji would be good for street photography but depends on your style, it has to be the slowest clunkiest camera of all time but i love it. Its not going to be good for anything where you are reacting really quickly but if you are more of a sit and wait type or take your time its good.
@@MartinCastein Yeah, I actually used the Sony for portraits and the models kinda looked like clowns 😅 The Fuji sounds abt right for my approach. It's just that I like to shoot in shady places and my basically new 5d mk ii (which was quite a hustle to find) I probably wouldn't hand over not even at gunpoint. Thanks again Martin!
Hey Martin, I really enjoyed this video on classic cameras and your comparison to classic cars. Can you impart some of your classic wisdom my way? I shoot film mostly and I’m looking for a dslr alternative. I shoot seascapes and portraits mostly with a 135mm lens. Usually in black and white. But would like the ability to make colour work in the future. I also have glass from lots of different 35mm systems that I’m hoping can adapt. I also would like the ability to make large gallery sized prints. Without too much time required in post production. Is there a classic that you could recommend for my type of shooting? I’m leaning towards the 5D classic or 5D mark ii because of the colours and rendering and the ability to adapt lenses. Any suggestions? Thank you!
i would perhaps push you towards a 6d mark 1. You get more modern features with that and the colour from it is up there with the mark 1 and 2. You need to check if your lenses can all be adapted though.
This was posted on another D700 video by a user named Nikos Zochios so just copying and pasting FYI: The D700 has the best colour accuracy and hue discrimination than any other Nikon camera. The D700 sensor NC81338L (CMOS) has been designed by Nikon and has been manufactured by "Matsushita" There are some factors that separate the D700 sensor from any other Nikon camera sensor. About D700 colours: What makes the D700 colours so special (including excellent skin tones) is its unique CFA together with a unique algorithm applied to its sensor. (different than the D3 and D3s ones) After the D700, Nikon altered CFA filters in order to boost high ISO performance and fit a bigger number of mpx in the same size sensor. But this required making the filter less discriminating. The colour discrimination of the specific CFA allows the separation as a unique shade of any single basic colour. Modern cameras' lighter CFAs simply cluster similar shades of a single colour. So we are coming now to the most important of all the factors which is called "Tonal gain" This is the D700's sensor pixel area (Photosite):71.70µm2 and this is-a an example- the D850 sensor pixel area:18.88µm2 That means that the D700 sensor has a 279% larger pixel area. So, let's see why this makes the difference in dimensionality and depth we see on many D700 shots. Light is a signal. This represents the tonality (colours, contrasts, details) of the subject. Its strength is defined by shutter speed and aperture. Pixel area (Photosite) is an antenna that receives the signal so it affects how much light per pixel can be gathered. The larger it is, the more light can be collected by a single pixel. BUT, The size of the photosite defines its native signal gain as well. For a camera to record the maximum amount of micro-contrast and depth of a good lens, it requires low photosite density for higher native gain. Tonal gain is NOT a dynamic range. The higher the native gain, the bigger is the gap between the peak of the gain and the noise floor over the same signal.- Photosites exist at various densities within the size of the camera sensor. Higher megapixel sensors have a higher density and lower native gain. The ISO defines the applied gain on the photosite so that it can receive a weaker signal. Increasing the gain raises the noise floor. The Analog to Digital Converter (A/D converter) converts the gained signal into digital information. The quality of the conversion is influenced by Bit Depth. The Signal to Noise Ratio firmware (SNR) separates the signal (the detail) from the noise (the noise) right before making the RAW file. If the converted gain is low, it will have a harder time figuring out the difference, therefore removing more signals. So the quality of the TONAL GAIN matters greatly in final image-making. The current ideal photosite density is 12mp for the size of a full-frame sensor (Nikon D700 - 8.5 microns is ideal)
I have a Canon 1D MkIII, I bought it for the 24-70 2.8 that came with it. When for the fun of it ,I took it out with the lens to check it out, I was astounded at how the files look ever so much like Fuji colour slide film files. A lot of people remark this and the 1DsMark II and III are “classic film look cameras”. I’ve yet to try the 5D but I have the 6D and it is a wonderful low light instrument.
One other thing to consider. When these classics came out, the manufacturers knew that to sell them to pro photographers, the output have to be familiar in quality to film in order to be accepted. Since then, we’ve become accustomed to the “digital look” rather than the “Silver/transparency look” and take that as the norm. But if you’ve shot film for 20 plus years in all sorts of formats, you still crave the film look.
5d classic for sure. 6D mark 1 makes my list. Those two are winners. I also enjoy the Sigma SD Quattro (just don't set it above ISO 100). And then there is the Sony A7RII--it has odd but lovely colors and a very particular image quality which I find attractive but hard to describe. good video as usual.
"Cameras have gone way way past what we need..." That sentence beautifully encapsulates how lucky and spoiled we are to have so many choices of tools to pursue this artform. Subscribed.
I still have Canon 5D classic from 2006. From the business investment perspective, it paid itself off many, many times over. I had a client from 2009 who contacted me recently and asked for some additional photos. He said "I want the same look and feel we did originally 13 years ago". I showed up with 5D classic and 24-70L Mark I. The photoshoot went absolutely flawlessly.
I love the D700. And also the ones which had those primitive 6 mp Sony CCD sensors like the D100, D50 etc... They're very limited in their use but if you have enough light and colors, with good glass they make magic. I think those sensors are classic.
In case of CCD sensor, Nikon did the D100, D70/s along with D200, which was the last CCD body for Nikon. D300 was a CMOS sensor. I bought the D70 when they came out in 2004. Shortly thereafter I made a business trip to Monterey on a twin prop plane. I had a seating by the window with an excellent view of the spinning propeller so I started taking pictures of it at different camera settings. At 1/8000s the propeller blades were tack sharp using 18-70DX lens. At slower speeds the prop blades were not disfigured curvature wise as would be the case w/ CMOS sensors. Color wise I love it to this day, however I wish I had invested in better single focal glass instead of a couple of low end zooms.
I loved your video Martin, thanks for the time in putting this content together. I still have my old Canon 1D mkiii which I use side by side with a 5D classic and I still cannot get over how fast the 1D autofocus is with USM lenses with middle point, focus and recompose. The colours it renders have a slightly "cooler" look to what i get from the 5D but definately in the same style. The 1D is the only camera I've had experience with an apsh sensor, but in good light its output RAW files are unlike anything else I've used. Ive used it for countless corporate events, portraits and product shots and providing you use it knowing its limitations, it still delivers paid results even in 2022. I've had my 1D since 2011 as a secondhand purchase, it now has close to 400k clicks and is showing no signs of quitting (saying that there is always a back up body closeby). I'm ripping my hair out trying to get the same "look" from my recently purchased RP, there are so many improvements in technology, but there is just no soul in these new mirrorless bodies:)
Great discussion! I think the Canon 5dsr falls into this category. I had a Canon 6d several years ago, and the 5dsr has the look of the 6d with more megapixels. I have a Sony a7riv, and it is an amazing technological achievement, with dynamic range that will knock your socks off, AF that is incredible, IBIS, etc, however, (to your point) I am never quite happy with how the files look. I bought a used 5dsr for a relatively small amount of money, and I absolutely love it. The dynamic range is crap next to the Sony, high iso can’t match the Sony, no eye AF on the Canon, ease of use goes to the Sony, and I could go on and on. On paper, the Sony is absolutely superior - until you look at the files. I love the files coming out of this Canon to the point that I am seriously considering selling the Sony and lenses. Crazy!
The Sigma dp 1,2 and 3 Merrill's are my really camera;s with unique sensors. A lot of not nice things included. I surprice everey time I see the results, so much details. Better then the camera;s you buy today. I own the 6D mark as well, great camera.
Such a good insight. Specs & features vs. image quality/feel. My recent experience - I just traded in my Nikon D500 for a D4. I’m a sports photographer and the D500 had everything I needed…apart from image quality. The images were just soft and mushy and I just didn’t like them when it came to editing and sending to clients. So I found a low shutter count D4 and I’m very happy. I also have a D700 and the hype around the quality of files from that camera is real. So I agree - I can work around having fewer features and specs if I love the image quality. At the end of the day, that’s all that matters. But let’s keep it quiet - it means we can pick up the great cameras cheap on the used market while everyone else is chasing the bodies with the great new features 90% of which they will never actually use!
yeah i think the D4 is probably right up there too just havent had much experience with it but what ive seen looks excellent, im glad you found whats right for you!
@@MartinCastein have you have had a chance to do anymore shooting with a D4 ? Interested to hear your thoughts as I think it will be right down your alley
@@marte1153 no im afraid not, im looking into the z9 at the moment because of its video + photo features. The d4 i think is one of their best ever though.
I own quite a lot soulful old camera's and my absolute top 3 is: 1. Fujifilm x-pro1, 2. Nikon D200, 3. Canon 5D Classic. Other cameras I own and really like are: - Canon 6D Mark I - Fujifilm S5 Pro - Olympus E-1 & E-300 - Fujifilm X-T1
The Fuji X-Pro1 punches way way above its weight and I adore it. That sensor is insanely good. I love my Leica M9 also, and that CCD sensor just delivers a quality a really really like. But more than that, it’s the feel and use of both cameras that make them enjoyable for me. No bells or whistles, just turn on and shoot.
100% correct on the XPro1 or even XE1 (both have xtrans1 sensor) or how about the Leica M8 with it's CCD sensor? Or any Fuji camera with an old adapted manual lens (Helios/Takumar)?
The Sigma Foveon Merrill and Quattro cameras are absolute classics. The colors and details out of those cameras are just mind boggling, especially printed large. I also quite like the rendering of the Olympus 16MP sensors they started using in the E-M5 - my favorite camera in that range are the E-P5 and E-PM2. That sensor and processing engine is in so many Olympus Micro Four Thirds cameras. So underrated. The colors are very nice.
Love my Sigma DP1 Merrill. The image quality is unmatched. Unfortunately I don't use it as much as I'd like because the Sigma processing software is such a headache to use.
I am on my 3rd D700. I made the transition to digital from the F4s. I bought my first D700 and used it for News. Then retired and had a break. I started again with another d700, and through lack of time, sold it. Now I am starting again with another D700. I have come home.
Altho not really a classic, but I find canon 5dm4 renders portraits really nice. It’s hard to describe the render, like it is soft on the skin and the transition from blur to focus is linear and not drastic. I got sony a7iii but it looks too digital, too “hard” on the highlights and even with a vintage 1.2 lens adapted to it, it looks forced. it just cant match the canon’s organically soft looking render. For some reason, i keep using the canon dslr for portraits and it’s almost hard to replace it with a mirrorless , just for the render
EyE’m on the same wavelength, which is why I shoot with Fujifilm (a pair of X-E2s, my favorite Fuji model & sensor) for APS-C , aSony A7II for my Full Frame Legacy Lens shooting (I have a fairly substantial collection of mostly m42 screw mount Takumar glsss, amongst others), and just now getting into micro 4/3 with an Olympus E-P3 (in the Mail as I speak). I do believe you missed a classic DSLR from the era of which you offered your picks, that being the one I recently picked up for the very reasons you’ve touted, that being the Pentax 200D, the last of the CCD Pentax’s, incorporating the 10 megapixel sensor the Canon 5D and others had at the time (from what I’ve heard). Same sensor as the 10D, but in a body I prefer.
Canon 5d mark ii with canon 300mm f4 & 135mm f2 does amazing. The color and detail is just awesome! And the overall rendering or the photos are so good. Also the 6d is great as well.
Personally I think the Canon 5Ds and 5DsR have unique and beautiful output. It's sort of like the best of the older canon colors (1Ds series, 5D classic/5Dii) and the newer in terms of accuracy of the auto WB with plenty of dynamic range (actually better than the 5Diii and slightly less than the 5Div). I have two of these and use them more than any other camera I have including the new R series body I have. Maybe my favorite digital camera ever.
Mr. C based on your experience, which camera out of the D600 & D700 would you recommend for hobby/family & friends photography? I do have the D3s for sports photography so I'm already happy with the lower MP output of older nikons
While I do own, use and love the D810, I reluctantly agree. Though you can get equally beautiful images, at higher resolution, but you have to play with the calibration in light room more to get as satisfying of a look. Its not as an intuitive fix. I think its something to do with the hue and saturation of the greens and yellows interacting with other colours and throwing everything off and making it look more "digital". I do think it's a colour thing and not rendering though, because black and white images are super easy to process. Rendering seems to have far more to do with the lens than the sensor relative to colour. The D700 for me is quality. I do love everything about that camera. From the sound and cIunk of the shutter to the colours. It might be because it was my first pro bodied full frame digital camera so has sentimental value, but it's hard to deny the quality. I have played with a 5D classic and enjoyed the colours, but I have never owned one or used it on a proper shoot to hold a strong enough opinion on it. But I have seen many beautiful pictures taken from others using it. I would add a fuji X-E1 to the classic list. Its the same original X trans sensor and processing that's in the X-Pro 1. I think the only other camera that used that sensor maybe the x70 or XM1 which nobody purchased. The Xtrans ii images found with the XT1, X-E2 and X100S are also great but probably not the classic status you're referring to.
I shoot a Nikon D500 for wildlife but most of the time when I'm out I'm using a D750. Not so old/classic, but my favorite lens on their is the Voigtlander 40mm f2. Not only the results, but the feeling of taking shots with it is just ... I can't explain it. It's very compact too. The latest tech is not always the best experience.
Funny at my son’s wedding I was using a D3 and the photographer was using a D2. The bridesmaids were wearing what I would call Cadbury purple but all came out royal blue. Clearly the sensor, probably the same, colour shifted. I colour corrected mine in photoshop but to my disgust the pro did not or provide me with the files so I could do it. Things like that grate on a bride having to point out the dresses were not that colour. Otherwise I loved my D3s although teamed with the old 300mm prime at air shows it was a better work out than any gym session.
This is kind of funny. I think I'm falling down the rabbit-hole on digital camera sensors. And I watched a couple of your vids on the 6D and the 5Dc. But what's really funny is that I first started becoming interested in people's thoughts on older cameras because I bought a Fujifilm XE1 about five or six years ago which has been my main camera. And guess what sensor it has? Xtrans 1 - same as the Xpro 1. Now it's probably even more of a pain to use than the Xpro 1, but I can't doubt the results (part of my thing was that I've never enjoyed editing and I wanted to try the all jpeg workflow which I've been enjoying). It also kind of killed my film shooting as both the experience, the workflow - shooting slides at least - and the results are close enough. Anyway, so then my old man goes mirrorless and gives me his old... Nikon D600. So I'm rather delighted that you highlighted these two sensors which are my main cameras currently. I guess my question is: how much is this wildly subjective? Can we ever pin down a particular camera more than to say that lots of people love the results? A lot of the young folks are _wild_ about the early CCD sensors. To me they're still rubbish. Not filmic at all - which is why I used film for anything serious until 2006. Blown out highlights. Awful muddy skin tones. I saw a vid of someone saying the Nikon D100 has the best sensor of all time and I'm like, you must be joking. It was ghastly. But then... eye of the beholder, right? So finally, my recommendation: at the end of 2005 the Nikon D200 came out. And I used it a lot and finally could trust a digital camera to not make me regret not shooting on film. That's got a great look, IMO (between base and 800ISO of course). I could really make that look like film - which was and is till to some extent a priority. And it handled great. Just the pokey viewfinder was unpleasant. That _is_ a CCD sensor that looks amazing but it captured nuanced skin tones and didn't give a sharp cutoff to bone white highlights.
I really like the Olympus OMD E-M5 the Panasonic Lumix GH2 is not bad also it has a Panasonic sensor. I believe the GH3 is when Panasonic started using Sony sensors.
I own a D850 D610 and D7100. I use the D7100 only for private stuff... but proffesionally a find myself more often than not using the 610 and keeping the 850 as a 2nd canera. I just like the output of the d610 that much more. I really dont see a reason to go mirrorless any time soon
Hello Martin, I really like your portraits and the colours play a bit role in why I like them. I love my R8 camera, but I don't love the skin tones I get from it (shooting RAW). Because of that, I've been tempted to get a 6D. But I'm considering a cheaper option: If I get a colour checker passport (e.g. Calibrite ColorChecker Passport), and used that to create colour profiles for my camera+lenses, would those profiles give me much better colours in Lightroom? I realise creating those profiles take some effort (ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-fLQTSQBd2jc.html). Having done that, do you imagine the colour improvements I'd get would be comparable to the colour improvements I'd get from using a 6D instead? (I understand the colours and rendering wouldn't be the same as the 6D; but would it be a comparable _improvement_ in the colours, or not at all on the same scale?). Thanks a lot, JF
I smell a lack of crop sensored bodies. The first digital body I had was Canon 350D. It wasn't in any way exciting, the middle of the road budget body with an 8Mpix sensor that is basically hopeless above ISO 400. And I shot with it on and off for 10 years, and that includes before I got serious about photography. Then I got myself a 7D. And yes, life got much easier with all the improvements of that body but the files are just not the same. Yes they are definitely more flexible but the color just wasn't there. Right now I am pretty happy with my Fuji X-E3 but I also recently bought a Canon 5D mkII for a steal. And man. I'm not going to take that brick with me everywhere, but I can basically shoot JPEG only and be happy with the output of the 16 yo camera. That is the sentence I thought I'll never say.
One of the better rendering I had, was with a leaf aptus, it’s a mf digital back with a 20mpx CCD sensor pairing with a phase one df… it’s very finicky to use, slow and all but the color rendition and the light falloff was so beautiful 🤩 got it for 1250€ one year ago with a Schneider 80mm LS (leaf shutter so synchro flash up to 1/1600s 😀) who need a full frame 😂 (but I own the d700 and the 5D plus too many others…)
I had an xpro 1 for a while, paid peanuts for it before the world when crazy with fuji prices. It's a great camera to hold but I found the focus peaking to be poor and wanted to shoot manual lenses with it. The AF was also poor compared to my XT2 so ultimately sold it. Nice files but similar to my XT2 and just painful to achieve. I've bought and sold loads of bodies since and stayed with a D700, GRD1 and the XT2 which suit all my needs
Yes raw is not raw the name is deceiving. Raw is, your eyes? There is comutation and creation algorith in raw. It means less assumptions then jpeg? Or more accurately no codecs applied such as jpg jpg2000 png bmp etc, its important to remember this that a camera will have a "vanilla" codec applied when diong raw which is it's innate immutable signature.
I bought a Canon 6D (Mk 1) about 10 years ago, and have loved it! I've looked and been tempted by Canon's newer, more modern offerings like the R6, with their amazing focusing systems and whatnot, but... I'm very used to using my puny, single central focusing point (usually with back button focus) on the 6D, and it generally works great, and I love the output from the camera for reasons that are hard to put my finger on exactly. Another "classic" camera I would nominate from an even more bygone era would be the camera I purchased back in 2007 that got me started and set me on the path to buying the 6D. This was the old Canon Rebel XTi. This camera is primitive as all hell by modern standards, but there's something about the picture quality it puts out that really works to my eye. Your video got me wondering whether it might just be the "big pixel" thing that I like. The XTi is only a ~10 megapixel camera on an APS-C sized sensor, so... yeah, maybe it's that coupled with Canon's vintage color science? Not sure, but you can buy Rebel XTi's on eBay for under $100 these days, and as long as you're prepared to put your back into working it, you can get terrific shots from these things.
I’m wondering if it’s not the image processor more than the sensor. For instance, I love my 400D and my 5D Classic similarly because the images feel the same, they have the same image processor.
Hi there .. I would like to ask .. which camera would be better for fine art photography,.. (in a studio),..many say go with nikon but canon colors ,..they have something special..,.. and ,..is there a way to know beforehand if a camera sensor has a low pass filer ? Thaks
Finally someone who appreciates photography for what it is and not so technically in to what camera has this or that at the end of the day is the final product that talks by itself
What an awesome and refreshing view on cameras. I loved both my Nikon d600 and d800 but I totally agree about the files. I'd take the d600 any day. Have a great day mate 🖖
What's interesting with this (like with film stocks) is how subjective this is. I had a the Fuji X-M1 (with X-Pro1) sensor. I get why people like them (the color rendering is unique), but later I used the X-T20 and X-Pro2 and I absolutely love the output. In terms of noise it seems to maybe have some in common with the Nikons you mention, but also I found the tonal graduations, rendering to be gorgous. The colors too, though they are far more subtle than the X-Pro2 sensor. I've eventually upgraded to X-Pro3 and I do like it generally, but the X-Pro2 for simply had way better rendering ovreall. I've learned to treat the files in Capture One to get something close to what I want (only using noise reduction on color helps) but so far I haven't managed to get images that look as good as X-Pro2 did to me. I wish more photographers talked about this, because I feel like so many camera makers focus way too much on features and not enough on *rendering*. So thanks for bringing light to that!
Just found this, after watch many of your videos, and especially like your classic cameras, me as a newbie D300, then D7000 - D300 started acting badly, now looking at the D750 simply for the flippy screen. Keep the videos going.
Some of the best pictures I have are from an old Canon Powershot Pro 1 bridge camera. The combination of that CCD sensor and the L series lens produced some very good results. At only 8 megapixels.
I have the 5d, and 5d2, and agree with your assessment on the classic and it is a superb camera. Out of all the modern cameras from Sony, Nikon, and even Fuji, I used, I think the Fuji S5pro produces the most pleasing portraits and skin tones aka film like.
My favorite is my Z9 from Nikon - i really like the colors and details… i coma from D200 - D800 - D850 - Z7 - Z7 II - but the Z9 is really a lovely beast….
I find myself going back to older equipment for that look. I just picked up a Aja Cion used for a steal and it baffles me how this camera didn’t last. Low dynamic range aside its skin tone rendition is rather unique
i wonder if some cameras just pick up a bad reputation or something for one feature that didnt turn out well and then that sticks, not sure but get that kind of a feeling. Thanks for the comment :)
I still love the look from my 10mp Pentax K10d with its ccd sensor. It doesn't have the greatest dynamic range but when the light is right for our there is a richness to it that cmos sensors can't quite capture.
@@MartinCastein You absolutely should! K100D is rocking 6mpx and K10D 10mpx Kodak sensors with very nice color science. I love my photos from K10D, and it works with old PK lenses, especially well with the ones that have A setting and contacts :)
A very underrated and often overlooked camera is the Pentax 645z. Compared to the newer Fuji GFX series it’s a dream. I’ve always found those cameras to be slow to auto focus and the colors are cold. The Pentax and the lovely glass puts out a beautiful warm rendering especially for portraits. As it’s a DSLR body I find the focusing similar to my old Nikon DSLRs.
Agreed on the D700, one of the few I wish I still had. Probably my favorite digital camera to use and my favorite output is my Fuji X100F; just gorgeous files and a joy to carry and shoot. The original and the S were a little wonky, but Fuji nailed the F. It's certainly not a pro workhorse, but for travel or family stuff or a fun backup on assignment work it's hard to beat.
Great video! I use D850 and Z6II for wedding and other paid photo sessions. Really like them but I never use them for my own work. I like cameras that has a more unique output. My absolute favorite is the Leica M8, the rendering and colours are stunning. Sigma Sd quattro h, foveon sensors always has that special look. Olympus E-1. And a few days ago I purchased a Pentax 645d. Is the handling better on the Fujifilm gfx 50s, witch I also have, compared the the 645? Absolutely but the feeling of the Kodak medium format ccd is way more special. As you see, my favourite cameras all has a Kodak ccd or a foveon. Nothing for high iso or sports...thats were my Nikons come in handy😊
In the right light at low ISO - I love the files from the Nikon D2X and D2Xs. And what a wonderful pro body to use. All the accessible buttons and controls at your fingertips.
Believe it or not i really like the grain & picture richness of the Nikon D 100 & the Nikon D 50 single layer ccd sensor, i have a wide collection of classic Nikon D series cameras including the D 600 & the D 610 , i use my camera collection for photographic art , i also prefer the older Nikkor AF lens's as they are very sharp with little or no vignetting nor chromatic aberration , i also don't mind the noisy af motors in the older Nikkor lenses as i do not shoot video , I do have a huge collection of the newer Nikon lenses , however they suffer from vignetting and chromatic aberration , though the newer lenses are faster & are more functional in terms today's photography, i think ?. The older film camera lenses had to be perfect hence no post production whereas the sacrifice of barrel distortion problems on newer lenses along with vignetting & chromatic aberration camera lens manufactures know these issues can be corrected in post . I've found very little difference in quality really between the older & newer Nikon lenses in terms of price . I tend to use the far cheaper older Nikkor lenses , all my hugely expensive Nikon lenses tend to stay in their cases , i suppose i purchased them to try & fit into the professional photography world more then anything . Rounding everything up , it's great to have a collection of old & older Nikon D series cameras as in the D 50 to the D 610 , i haven't found any need to purchase any newer cameras , anything after the D 610 i don't think anyone will know the difference really , i guess shooting sports or wild life would be fair play to the newer faster cameras & i guess their lighter , but that about it .
very interesting comment, i agree with yout about the older nikon lenses too. For sure the newer cameras dont offer a great deal more if you dont do video. But who needs them anyway when we have these other cameras we can use.
In terms of classic I’m a Nikon hard core user so I can only comment about Nikon cameras. So classic for me is Nikon D3, D3s(personal favourite) then D700, D4s. The D600 was my first full frame camera body and I did use it for the weddings and landscape only. But since I tried D3s, D4s and D700 I never pick up D600 again for my wedding work. I just love those 12mpx sensors in D3s and D700 and 16mpx from D4s. The output is amazing. Then I completed my collection with D850, D5. They are great but I wouldn’t call them classic. So I still shooting weddings with D3s, D700 and D4s.
I feel lens choice has a bit to do with image look. Having said that I sometimes will pick up my D200 with it's 10Mp CCD sensor and AF-D lenses or my Fuji X-E1 and it's 16Mp original X-Trans sensor with the original XF35mm f1.4. Both [more so the D200] will have the closest to a filmic look and dimension in a classic digital medium. Something about older low megapixel sensors and lenses that has a certain character that we don't see in newer higher Mp sensors and ultra-sharp optics. The drawbacks are it's slow focusing and DR compared to 2022 sensors but the whole purpose is the methodical capture of an image. I don't look to burst shoot anything when I pick up those cameras.
Lens choice matters a huge amount too, but wanted to keep the topics separate. in this instance im thinking along the lines of same lens on each camera from each manufacturer. Wanted to highlight that the cameras really do render different files themselves in quite different ways. I remember people loving the d200 you mentioned there and the x-e1 had the same output as the xpro1 so thats the same basically. There really does seem to be something to the low megapixel count on sensors, i agree!
Bit late to the table , but I also love the output of my D610 and I use colour checker to make profiles in LR , the files can be pushed like no other and still look natural. Another camera I don’t see mention is the baby brother of the D700 , the D300S and also D90 . The colours and tonality especially jpegs are wonderful and punchy on both of these I never felt the need for editing, however I could use the D2x mode III profile which came from D2 (obviously 😅) and had nicer greens and red tones imo compared to standard or vivid modes , the reds looked red and not more orange etc , the green hues were lovely , the 12 mp sensors had great tonality etc . Going back to the D600/610 , because it had the expeed III processor also in D4/D4S , DF , for me was the last processor to produce more organic colours and output from Nikon , the D7200 with expeed 4 had a horrible waxy look (same look as D750, but they fixed that in the D7500/D500 with expeed 5. I also have a mint canon 40D like new with only 2700 shots and the images from that are lovely as long as the light is good enough , but it doesn’t handle to well in high contrast scenes as the highlights get blown to easy. You can’t pull shadow detail back like you can with d600 etc 😄 Love your channel and videos , keep them coming 😊
yeah they're real workhorses. one camera I never need to worry about over/under exposing. the range of control in post is crazy for the time it was made
I would add this camera although it’s rather old. The Fujifilm FinePix S2 Pro was announced on January 30th 2002, it had . An almost-APS-size SuperCCD sensor of 6.2 million. Also vastly improved is the choice of Nikon body on which the camera is based. The S2 Pro is based on Nikon's much improved N80 (F80) body which uses Nikon AF-D, AF-S and VR lenses. Loved the color rendering of the Super CCD sensor. It still in use today as I gave this old timer to my daughter.
@@MartinCasteinFujis SuperCCD sensors was had a different color layout. If I recall correctly the green sensing parts of the CCD was bigger than the other colours, supposedly leading to better tone graduation (as green contains a lot of luminosity). In the late oughts I remember the confirmation photographer for my sister swore by the Fuji S series since they rendered faces and skin better than anything else. Interestingly the idea of using more of the sensor for green I think is something Fuji still do (but with more green points instead of bigger ones) in all their modern X-trans sensors.
Nikon d70s, 6mp CCD Sensor, with 35mm f1.8 wonderful colours, weak AA filter, Very simple operation. Canon 30d 8mp also very nice , similar output to 5d mk1. Also older pro nikon body's d2x, d2hs. Dated but still capable of stunning photos. Sony A900 DSLR worthy of a mention too, shutter sounds like a Gatling gun though. Regards Dan.
5D classic all day long.. feels good and sounds good when the shutter goes off.. proper camera.. love your stuff.. keep up the great content.. I’d be interested in what your thoughts are around editing.. cheers mate!
I think Lightroom and all of that is so good that you can resurrect any image… those images you showed in the video seemed to me to be subtle and maybe not so much messed about with.. how do you approach it?
Hi John, it varies a lot, sometimes i edit a lot sometimes a little, it really just depends what look im going for but i think its important to be able to edit well. I think its very much for me that i have an image in mind of how i want the picture to look and then work towards that.
I heard a lot of people highly prising the Nikon DF and the Leica M8. Unfortunately I never tried either so I cannot comment. To me is either the Canon D450 (the sky colour is fantastic!), the RP (very similar to the 5Dmkll) for skin and the Olympus Pen F for general use I bought and sold a Fuji X100v: to me the output is too digital and over sharpened and the colours unnatural and cold, I would add that an image is the product of a camera body and a lenses: I cannot find the same colour vibrance I get from my old Zuiko 50 f1.8 and 28 f2.8 on modern lenses on the same camera body.
@@MartinCastein Olympus in general, has very pleasent colours, perfect for landscapes as it renders green and blue with a natural tone without compromising on skin tones and warm colour. Panasonic for example always tints skin with an ugly sand tone, a bit like Sony. Unfortunately above 6400 ISO (may be even 3200) green and red dots creep in an detail smudges, a bit like in the 5Dmkll, but the ability to recover highlights is fantastic, so better to overexpose then underexpose, while the sensor is almost perfectly ISO invariant. The killer feature of the Pen F is the colour control wheel and the monochrome settings which allows you to dynamically set any tone at will with ease. Old reviews should be ignored: the current firmware (last one) completely transformed the old camera. There is something in the latest X-Trans sensor that disturbed me: too over sharpened, too cold and the skin looks too red, whatever setting I chose. There is something unnatural to me in the latest fuji colours and after 2 years I gave up and sold the camera.
@@MartinCastein small caveat: it's safer to pair cameras and lenses from the same manufacturer: Some feature on Panasonic lenses may be disabled on Olympus bodies, like aperture wheels, stabilization or even in camera CA reduction, while AF performances can be slightly reduced. My recommendations are the 25mm 1.8, and the 40 1.8 for portrait to stay on budget. The kit lens are not particularly good.
Hi Martin, great video on classic sensors and their unique rendering. I too love the rendering and color palette of the Canon 5D classic and Fujifilm X-Pro1 cameras. As a portrait and sometime wedding photographer I've been using the Nikon Z6 camera with the Nikon 24-70 f/4 Z lens and Nikon 58mm f/1.4 F lens. The color rendition and rendering of skin tones are simply beautiful. I love the vintage Canon file as well as the new Nikon Z6 files. Thanks so much for the stimulating content.
Hello Martin, congrats on the channel and for the classic camera videos! They are great! In a world where everyone moves to the latest and greatest cameras and lenses I prefer classic cameras such as Canon 1DX and 6D Mark 1. I have bought Canon 5D Mark II in 2017 when I have started to work as a pro wedding photographer and used the camera for many years, then in 2019 I have bought the Canon 1DX (first version). But here I wanted to talk about the Canon 6D Mark I, this is a camera I own for several month only, I have found one with 12.000 shutter count with full box and it just works and focuses great with the central focusing point. There colors I find it very great and classic and being a camera from 2012 it doesn't matter for me it is basically brand new and I will use it side by side with my 1DX. If there was a day where I wouldn't want to bring the 1DX with me to a professional photo project I would definitely bring the 6D Mark 1 with me and I could guarantee that my clients would not see the difference with this camera from 2012. Of course you have to have experience with photography to obtain good images with any camera especially with an older one that has limitations. The camera that I have also owned first when starting professionally and starting with Canon was the 5D Mark II, I also loved the raw files and the color palette out of it, unfortunately it started to have severe back focus after 150.000 shutter counts and it wasn't ever truly repaired at Canon Professional Service,I don't know really why, I have bought another 5D Mark II last year but kept it for a few months and sold it this year because of the severe back focus and I didn't want to invest in repairing it anymore. If you are using good glass and your classic camera is working great such as Canon 6D mark I, Canon 5D Mark II, Canon 5D classic, Canon 1DX then you don't need to invest in a new body, but that is subjective, I am coming from film photography and in my honest opinion a good classic sensor and good lenses are a best option and investment, you can save allot of money and don't be tempted to get Gear Acquisition Syndrome. My current line-up of lenses are Canon 24mm 1.4L MkII, Canon 35mm 1.4L MKII, Canon 85mm 1.4L IS, Canon 100mm f/2.8L macro, Canon 135mm f/2L, Canon 70-200 f/L USM and Canon 400mm f/5.6L USM. It took allot of years and searching and finding the best price for these lenses second hand but they pragmatically help my business as a wedding photographer and as also for selling printed and stock art. Do my eyes shine when I see a new Canon R6 or R5 on our local photography shop? Yes it does, but for the foreseeable 5-7 years future I would not sell my 6D or my 1Dx and even after upgrading to mirrorless I would not change my EOS L lenses -> these lenses are just perfect. Cheers and Happy Christmas!
Thank you for this, its always interesting to read other peoples photography gear journeys like this and I agree with you. I think the latest cameras come into their own though as soon as you want to add some video into what you are doing but other than that im not seeing anyone do anything that hasnt been done before,. though they might be having an easier time doing it i suppose but they are really paying for that.
@@MartinCastein Hello Martin, you are right, good point on this, the newer Canon cameras have good video quality, so if you are thinking of doing good video work then you need a Canon 6D Mark II, 5D Mark IV or the EOS R cameras which are great for video work. Me personally I am a photographer and I doing short videos for personal use and I am happy with the video from my 6D and 1DX.
They have to keep spoon feeding us something new and sparkly to maintain sales and this has continued since the advent of digital technology. In the old days, we bought something like a canon AE1 or an Olympus OM1 and a bunch of lenses...that was it!! They all took 35mm film and performed relatively the same! The skill was down to knowing the camera and " seeing" the photograph!
Hi Martin , love the channel, do you ever use a copact camera, i have the Canon RP, after your videos, and a canon 5D Mark 3, but wanted something compact to put in my pocket for holidays with my grandchildren, it dosnt need to be full frame
my experrience, canon 5d classic, fujifilm pro S5, nikon d700, nikon d200, canon 1d mark 1, canon 1ds mark 1, fujifilm xt-1, canon 5d mark ii, canon 1ds mark ii....so far all of them form me awesome classic simple machines with superb colours and sensors!! My favourite: Canon 5d classic and 1ds mark 1 in colour by far!!!
I have to ask but have you any thoughts on the old Fujifilm FinePix S2 Pro with the odd 6mp to 12mp sensor processor, because that was a big thing at the time.
