For this year's summer vacation I wanted something lighter than my Canon 5d Mark II that I brought on earlier trips. With all the new cameras coming out I at first thought about getting the Olympus OM-D but then settled on the Samsung NX20. It was a risky move because nobody seems to like Samsung cameras but for me it had everything I was looking for.
Now that I am back from my vacation I learned a few things:
- I like shooting landscapes/cityscapes way more than anything else.
- More than half of my shots are between 16mm and 30mm (on 1.5 crop).
- Less than five percent are between 100mm and 200mm (on 1.5 crop).
- 16mm (24mm) is not always wide enough.
- I missed a few shots because of slow AF.
- The camera is just too small. I often hit a button by accident.
- My arm is too short for those cheesy together shots (with my wife).
A few months ago I sold my Canon 5D Mark II with the 24-105L kit lens. The whole system is gone because in addition to the kit I only had one lens and one flash. I would have upgraded the 5D2 even if I hadn't moved to a compact system camera. I also knew I would not need to repurchase the lenses I sold because I wanted different focal lengths or aperture. So no big loss there. I am sorry for this long-winded intro but I hope you see where I am coming from.
Now with the above in mind I am looking at the obvious candidates:
- Canon 5D Mark III
- Nikon D800
- Sony A99
I think the Sony is out because I would like to get tilt-shift lense(s). What I don't like about my photos is the extreme perspective distortion especially when shooting the cities I visited. A lens like the TS-E 17 or 24 should help me here.
The Nikon might be a great camera but then I think it might be too slow. Even though I don't shoot sports one of the main reasons for my vacations is to visit my sister's three young kids (one of them is my godson). They can be pretty fast and I missed quite a few interesting shots because my camera was too slow. I am sure the D800 is way faster than my NX20 but maybe still a bit frustrating at times. This year was the first time I printed my photos (from the 5D2) on canvas and photo paper on MDF. However, the largest print size is 24" x 36". I don't think I'd need the 36MP of the D800.
Since I got an unexpected bonus this year I would even consider the following two cameras:
- Cannon 1D X
- Nikon D4
Now these are cameras for sports photography. Are they overkill? Maybe. But then I read a few articles about them as landscape cameras. They also offer a few things for the landscape photographers such as sturdier build quality (which comes in handy especially in cold Canadian winters or on my vacations) or fast shutter speeds for bracketing.
I know it might be strange to go from an NX20 to a 1D X but my summer vacation was meant as an experiment. I think I learned a lot about myself and would like to take my photography more seriously. I got some really nice shots from my NX20 but I do see a difference in quality (even in very good conditions). That's why I want to go back to a DSLR. An advantage of Canon is that I might trade the NX20 for the EOS M and have something small and light in addition to a heaver camera.
Which camera would you recommend? I shoot mostly static objects but I don't want to call myself a landscape photographer because sometimes I shoot fast moving subjects (not only kids, though).
Do you think a pro body such as the 1D X would really offer me something over the other cameras? (I must admit I am somewhat of a gearhead and would love to own a pro body but I also want to be realistic.)
I read the Nikon tilt-shifts are not as good as Canon's. However, is that reason enough not to consider Nikon cameras in my case?
In addition to a tilt-shift lens I would probably get a 24-70mm, which should be a great performer no matter which manufacturer.
Thank you so much for any input.
- Roland
- 
