I have been a canon shooter for 15 years, loving every camera and used most of their lenses. But at the moment I think canon is a disaster and have been heading in a totally wrong direction for a while. Their cameras seams way overpriced and way underperform what their competitors offer. But what bothers me the most is that canon seems to have a pretty arrogant attitude towards market/ customers. It seems like they more and more are leaving out a lot of functions/ opportunities that they could easily implement to try and push people to buying more expensive cameras. I own the 6d mk1 and was eagerly awaiting the 6d2, which in my opinion is a complete disaster. Im not saying I need 4k and that the dynamic range needs to be excellent etc etc, but why would I spend that much money on such a camera? What about the resale value after 3- 4 years? No second memory card slot? Serious? A camera that costs around 2,000 dollars should perform much better and be sure to have a good resale value. I could go on for ages about what I think canon is doing wrong and why I want to ditch them, but I am going to stop here. And yes, its all about the photographer, go out and take pictures in stead of worrying about gear, spend money on lessons etc, etc...
It makes sense for me to sell most of my canon gear, buy a fuji xt-2 with some prime glass, for general use/ landscapes/ portrait etc, and keep only the canon gear used for architecture (6d, 17mm TS, 16-35f4, etc) and use it for mostly that. I then want to figurere out a way to eventually switch to nikon for architecturecture, and everything else (when the bank and my wife allows)...
What I am curious about is how does it work with cameras like the d810/850 for architecture photography? If you are composing images stacks of flashed images together? Do you get unmanageable file sizes, or do you simply set the resolution to say 20 MPX?
Sorry I had to spill my guts about canon, its a result of trustration after feeling i have put thousands of dollars on the "wrong horse". I would really like to hear about peoples experience with using cameras like the d810/850 for architecture, especially when it comes to practical use like file sizes and resolution., also how does the wi-fi solution work?.
Any help and tips would be much appreciated!
- Frustrated Canon shooter.
I use Both (Nikon & Canon) for Architecture but you're right about file size; stitching panos with my 810 did my halfway decent computer in.
Hi Trond,
I own the D800E, D810 and now the D850.
I can tell you that about size of images don't have any problem handling this files, unless you have a very old computer with a HardDrive that is lower than 7200rpm, I edit my files on Lightroom and Capture ONE, with a DELL Precision 7710 with SSD Samsung 960 1TB, this help to process files faster and I store later all on a G-DRIVE external conected via USB3.0
I shoot full resolution with 14bit and no have issue, and I delivery the files to clients at 4800px at 300dpi with no Problem when client need full size I give them, you have better DR on the files if you go with 14bits at full at lossless compression.
I recently shoot wedding, party, golf event, and my Architecture and I just love this D850.
I have old lenses from nikon of my dad and grandpa and awesome quality.
Sorry to tell but you better are with another brand btw I love the Canon 85mm f1.2 more than that No thank you.
I use Canon for architecture and have thought about switching to either Sony or Canon. What is important to me is my 17TS-E which has no comparable lens in the other camps. (The new Nikon 19 TS is very good but not as wide and is $3k.).
While I am tempted by the promise of great DR and quality I live in the real world where those characteristics do not really come into play.
I light my interiors, thus DR is controlled in camera. As for exteriors, in daylight I can manage shadow and at night I light.
In the range that my Canon definitely falls apart the Sony and Nikon do better. But in a side by side test with a Sony A7RII the results were unconvincing. In only the most extreme shadow recovery did the Sony do better. But that file was still an unusable file for pro work.
So yes, Nikon and Sony do better in shadow recovery. But in the range that they are superior we are looking at files that were so poorly exposed or lit to start with that we can't seriously consider them( the files) for pro work. Architectural photography is not like a wedding with a definitive moment that one needs when the flash did not fire.It is slow careful work that endeavors to get everything right in camera rather than fixing in post.
Nikon and Sony are great cameras and with Nikon you get a great line of lenses. But for me, I was able to buy a 5DsR used for far less than new and can show my clients frantic detail if the job calls for it. It also works well with all my old Canon lenses. (which still don't suck). ;)
Thanks for interesting perspectives guys! If I was using my camera only for architecture the Choice would be simple, just stick With canon because of their great glass, then upgrade my camera eventually (when they relase something far better than the 6d2). For now I will buy a Fuji xt-2 With prime lenses for most photography and use the 6d only for architecture and a bit of landscape. Would be interesting to try the d850 for architecture though, if it Works well With file size etc and I can live without the 17mm TS, then it would satisfy most needs.
But what about wi- fi Connectivity, how does it work on the d850? Stable/ easy? Good range? Is it possible to trigger and adjust multiple flashes from the camera?