Reco for High MP body and lenses for landscapes?

[RGF]

Hi

I am considering buying a high MP body for landscapes. Right now Canon does not a high MP body (5DM3 is 22 MP), not quite high MP.

As i see it, there are 2 high MP 35mm bodies - Nikon D800 and Sony alpha A7R. I think both use the same sensory though there is a difference in cost - the nikon is 3300 vs 2300 for the Sony.

I think it will be easier to attach a canon lens (such as the 17mm T/S) to the Alpha as well as attach the Nikon 14-24 to the Alpha (is this true) than the Canon 17mm T/S to the Nikon. Is this true?

Other lens to consider? With the Nikon 14-24 is there any reason to use the Canon 14mm?

Other thoughts are welcome.

Thanks

 

[candc]

http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/01/review-sony-a7r-with-canon-glass/

that thread is on a fred miranda review using canon lenses on an a7r for landscapes.

 

[RGF]

http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/01/review-sony-a7r-with-canon-glass/

that thread is on a fred miranda review using canon lenses on an a7r for landscapes.

thanks I saw that article. that is why I am considering the Sony A7R. Which is the better way to go? Waiting for Canon may be a long time and if a body comes out it will be expensive.

Is there a good review of Nikon lens on the Alpha A7R?

 

[candc]

i don't have any experience with the nikon lens but i would expect the output of that lens on the a7r to be in line with what you get with the d800 as they share the same sensor.

i don't have any of the canon ts lenses but from what i have seen they are all really good if you know how to use them. if you already have a canon body and some canon lenses then i would add the a7r to your kit. if canon comes out with a high mp body then you are still setup with the lenses.

 

[Sporgon]

Hi

I am considering buying a high MP body for landscapes. Right now Canon does not a high MP body (5DM3 is 22 MP), not quite high MP.

Other thoughts are welcome.

Thanks

I'd look at this a different way; 22 mp is high mp. I know it's not in sympathy with your question but I'll explain.

A 36 mp FF sensor is still FF, that is the actual recorded image is the same size. True higher mp result in more theoretical resolution, put in practice this will depend on the viewing size and the lenses used. For instance it has been shown that the 24-70 II on 5Diii results in more resolution than the equivalent lens on a D800. OK so you could put the Canon lens on the A7r but you still have a recorded image of the same size at capture. The lack of AA filter is a red herring as after sharpening you'll finish with the same detail from a viewing point of view.

At Building Panoramics I stitch frames which result in images of about 50 to 100 mp depending on the camera and frames uses. I inevitably have to dump resolution to achieve the best viewing resolution of say a 1m wide picture. What is interesting is that on the occasion when I have used an 18mp aps camera and stitched the resulting image does not have quite the same depth as that produced from a 12mp FF camera despite the fact that single frames from the 18mp crop camera clearly have more resolution.

In my opinion the moral of the story is that if you want to go beyond 22mp you really need a larger format. When I produce a panoramic stitch it's overall capture area is larger than most current dMF systems.

Higher mp does give more scope for cropping but with landscape this isn't really relevant.

 

[privatebydesign]

What size are you expecting to print to? Why can't you stitch? After all almost all high mp landscape photographers do, even if they shoot medium format or D800E.

I am not saying go Canon, or anything else, what I am saying is to answer questions like this you need to work from a known point. If you say, I need to print to 36" X 24" at native 300dpi with moving subjects then you have a baseline of equipment that can fulfill the task. If you say, I need x stops of dynamic range and I can't bracket then you have another point of reference. Spending big money on high IQ is an exercise in futility and diminishing bank balances, set yourself a target and work to that.

P.S. Regarding high IQ, nothing trumps sensor size, nothing.

 

[Dylan777]

I recently purchased A7r + Zeiss fe 55mm as a travel camera. I'm not DR guy, but I have to admit the a7r is AWESOME - with RAW, highlight and shadow become my fav. Very easy to work it. Not to mention better DR than Canon(pls forgive for saying that), especially when you are landscape shooter.

It's light weight and small. The flip screen will help in landscape shooting. It takes Canon and others party lenses.

I like the idea keeping this system compact, so I'm thinking getting Sony 10-18mm f4 OSS. It's APS-C lens. I google around and found many A7r owners are happy with this lens: http://briansmith.com/sony-a7r-10-18-e-mount-lens

Sony/Zeiss will release FE UWA for this system 2014/2015.

 

[sdsr]

http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/01/review-sony-a7r-with-canon-glass/

that thread is on a fred miranda review using canon lenses on an a7r for landscapes.

thanks I saw that article. that is why I am considering the Sony A7R. Which is the better way to go? Waiting for Canon may be a long time and if a body comes out it will be expensive.

It seems you can't readily attach Canon lenses to Nikon bodies, for the reasons given here:

http://photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00Uw1k

So if you're deciding between a Sony or Nikon body, the answer seems pretty clear - get the Sony, which also gives you the usual advantages of mirrorless bodies & EVFs.

Of course, as others have pointed out, whether you'll find the A7r gives you better results depends on how you use/view the results and what your criteria are - the extra resolution and dynamic range may or may not make a difference to you; and bear in mind that while you will almost certainly get better center resolution if you attach a Canon lens, that may not be true of corners:

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/12/sony-a7r-a-rising-tide-lifts-all-the-boats

My hunch, after playing with an A7r for a couple of weeks (and an A7 before that), is that Canon lenses (the ones I tried, anyway) yield slightly better results on A7 bodies than they do on a 6D or 5DIII (though of course they're easier to use on the latter), that the difference isn't just a matter of extra resolution (if you like viewing images 1:1 on a good, big monitor, the results certainly have an extra "wow"factor, even if you don't use a tripod), but that the 6D is probably better at high ISOs, at least in terms of noise.

But I've not done anything approaching scientific tests, which is why I say "hunch" (I imagine there are useful A-B comparisons of the same thing shot with the same lens on different bodies on-line or, if not, that there soon will be). If you're in a position to rent, why don't you rent an A7R & metabones Canon-E adapter and find out first-hand if you notice an improvement that's significant to you? (And don't just try it on landscapes, unless that's all you photograph.)

 

[chauncey]

I want to echo those that have gone before me...I have a rather dated 1Ds3 that I use but two lenses...300mmmf/2.8 and a 180 macro, that can routinely, with PP, cough out images like this that are in excess of 30" on a side at 300ppi.





Obliviously, there is some blending that requires Photoshop knowledge.

 

[Sunnystate]

Received my Sony7R yesterday, one word that comes to my mind is AWESOME!
If you are not addicted to Auto operation or don't use it for work, and I mean auto in broad meaning even when is called Aperture Priority or Shutter Priority, they are still Auto modes just with an added little angle.
For person that was using large formats and all kind of manual cameras the horrible difficulties of Sony, like menus or unacceptable position of an release button are just silly. Take a plunge and enjoy the only sensor right now that offers some abilities for people that like to push the envelope. I will post some images when available, still testing with Canon lenses.

 

[Ricku]

Another vote for the A7R. Get the metabones adapter and you are all set!

The A7R is the best thing that happened to Canon users since the 5D2.

It is not just the high resolution, but also the rich deep RAW files it produces. Loads of dynamic range to work with! And no shadow banding.

 

[surapon]

Hi

I am considering buying a high MP body for landscapes. Right now Canon does not a high MP body (5DM3 is 22 MP), not quite high MP.

As i see it, there are 2 high MP 35mm bodies - Nikon D800 and Sony alpha A7R. I think both use the same sensory though there is a difference in cost - the nikon is 3300 vs 2300 for the Sony.

I think it will be easier to attach a canon lens (such as the 17mm T/S) to the Alpha as well as attach the Nikon 14-24 to the Alpha (is this true) than the Canon 17mm T/S to the Nikon. Is this true?

Other lens to consider? With the Nikon 14-24 is there any reason to use the Canon 14mm?

Other thoughts are welcome.

Thanks

Dear Friend RGF.
If you use Canon DSLR----Yes, Use the hard earn money to buy Canon TS-E 24 mm. F/ 3.5 L MK II, and you can shoot Landscape Photos up to 3-4 times of your MP of your camera, by combine the Photos 3 or 4 Photos to 1 Final Photo.

http://www.wesleypicotte.com/landscape-photography-blog/landscape-photography-tips-and-techniques/use-tilt-shift-to-create-high-resolution-images-and-big-prints.

Yes, With my 5D MK II, I can have 60 MP photos with my awesome TS-E 24 mm L MK II.
Good luck
Surapon

 

[RGF]

Thanks for the comments. The driving factor for this question is a trip to the Oregon coast this summer. Of course I'll wait to make purchase, but stitching of water is not an option


Thanks again for the great thoughts

 

[Halfrack]

...but stitching of water is not an option

It's a trade off between money and time - you can do it, but it takes lots of time

Worst case Roger will rent you the bits needed if your pressing need is a single trip.

Otherwise, take a dive off the MF Film board and see what you come up with. The water is fine

 

[wickidwombat]

Hi

I am considering buying a high MP body for landscapes. Right now Canon does not a high MP body (5DM3 is 22 MP), not quite high MP.

As i see it, there are 2 high MP 35mm bodies - Nikon D800 and Sony alpha A7R. I think both use the same sensory though there is a difference in cost - the nikon is 3300 vs 2300 for the Sony.

I think it will be easier to attach a canon lens (such as the 17mm T/S) to the Alpha as well as attach the Nikon 14-24 to the Alpha (is this true) than the Canon 17mm T/S to the Nikon. Is this true?

Other lens to consider? With the Nikon 14-24 is there any reason to use the Canon 14mm?

Other thoughts are welcome.

Thanks

i think the a7r and the canon 17mm TSE would be a pretty hard combo to beat by anything at the moment