Nikon D5500

[uk_dave&gill]

Following on from my original two threads (the first asking for advice on which camera to buy, and then after deciding on a Canon 750D or Nikon D5500,the second seeking advice on where to buy) here's a new thread about the Nikon D5500 I actually bought!

Well, overall I love it! Very nice camera, easy to operate, nice and compact/light and producing great images

However, there's a but, and it could get into my head.... The main reason for getting a new DSLR to replace our older Canon 750D was for the variable angle touchscreen, allowing us to get nice low down shots without having to physically get on the floor. The theory was we could bend over, angle the screen to get the composition, and finally touch the screen to take the photo. To do this, you have to use "Liveview" which previews the image on the screen, but unfortunately, it introduces horrendous shutter lag Retrospectively this is obvious: The shutter is held open to allow the image to hit the sensor and therefore has to close before it re-opens to take the photo! It does this regardless of shooting from the screen or the usual shutter release button (see here)

Now the obvious answer is to use the camera with Liveview off but then this kind of defeats the purpose of buying it. 99% of our photos are of dogs: with Liveview on they have wandered out of shot before the photo is taken, and with it off, well, we might as well use our old Canon

So now I am thinking along the lines of selling the Nikon on (nothing wrong with it, just not necessarily ideal for our needs) and trying something else. Would a Bridge Camera be better? Perhaps a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300?

Any musings appreciated!

[FLYING BANANA]

I have the Nikon D5000 and love it to bits. The flash stopped working but didn't use flash much anyway. I bought a Tamron 10-25mm wide angle lens. Spends most of it's time on the camera.

[Rocket]

I use a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. These do not have that problem. I do not have a touch screen on mine although some do. So I flip the screen up, bend my knees and look down on the screen and then press the shutter button (could use a remote). Bridge cameras are generally mirrorless in design. They do not have optical viewfinders (or mirrors which have to be lifted for live view) so getting a modern mirrorless camera with a good electronic viewfinder and refresh rate (not much lag) can be important.

Bridge cameras (have one fixed lens) and interchangeable lens mirrorless cameras shoot in a permanent live view for want of a better way of putting it. They then display the view either on the back panel or into an electronic viewfinder (if it has one). Being designed to shoot this way they don't suffer from the mirror and shutter problems of your Nikon in live view.

I'll not go back to DSLR's for the type of shooting I do. Both systems have pros and cons and both systems can take great pics.



You can spend £3000 (or much more) on a mirrorless these days of course you can also buy cheap ones. http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-s...mt0aavrm8p8haq

Or More !!!! https://www.parkcameras.com/p/L01547...uD4aApE08P8HAQ
Or even more !!!!http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-h..._iiaanvj8p8haq

[uk_dave&gill]

Originally Posted by Rocket

Bridge cameras (have one fixed lens) and interchangeable lens mirrorless cameras shoot in a permanent live view for want of a better way of putting it. They then display the view either on the back panel or into an electronic viewfinder (if it has one). Being designed to shoot this way they don't suffer from the mirror and shutter problems of your Nikon in live view.

So speed and quality can go hand in hand then?

[clf]

Originally Posted by uk_dave&gill

So speed and quality can go hand in hand then?

a bridge camera (with the exception of just a few) are essentially compact cameras with extra zoom lenses. You will be disappointed with the results if you are disappointed with the speeds of the Nikon in live view. even though they are designed to be used as a live view, they rely on contrast detection for focus using smaller apertures on smaller light gathering sensors. In general, your Nikon (and most compact system cameras, though Nikon J series use a smaller one) will have a imaging sensor that is roughly 6 times larger than that of a compact/bridge camera. Couple this with a wider aperture with your lens compared with the bridge (as a guide, f2.8 on a bridge lens, will approximate 2.8 on an SLR lens) . Then you have the physically larger and separate metering system on the SLR, allowing it to gather light quicker.

When using the live view on the SLR, it uses a similar contrast detection for focus, but because of the larger components mentioned above, it does it quicker, however, it opens shutter, measures the light, displaying the view, focuses using contrast, it then has to drop the mirror (some dont drop the mirror) close the shutter and open it again. Some compact system cameras, close the shutter (which I never understood why) as it takes a shot. To me they should just freeze the image electronically as you press the shutter.

[Rocket]

Originally Posted by uk_dave&gill

So speed and quality can go hand in hand then?

Yes but not with cheaper/older model. The newer ones have phase detection built into the sensor, these types of camera can acquire focus as fast or faster as most DSLR but maybe not quite as good in REALLY low light or VERY fast subjects.

Have a read on my model which is 2 or 3 years old now. It has same size sensor as your Nikon.(I am not saying get one of these but it shows what is out there) http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk...ha-6000-review

As I said before, all cameras have pros and cons but this type will allow you to use a tilt screen low to the ground. It will also acquire focus quickly and fire fast using the screen or the viewfinder. That Nikon is a fine camera but you have found one of the cons of that model. If you want to take pics of your dogs using the rear screen low down there are other options than a DSLR.

Edit: if you set mine to continuous it will fire 11 frames a second for low down dog shots using rear screen. That will give you 24mp RAW images as good and in most cases better than a DSLR.

[clf]

Originally Posted by uk_dave&gill

Following on from my original two threads (the first asking for advice on which camera to buy, and then after deciding on a Canon 750D or Nikon D5500,the second seeking advice on where to buy) here's a new thread about the Nikon D5500 I actually bought!

Well, overall I love it! Very nice camera, easy to operate, nice and compact/light and producing great images

However, there's a but, and it could get into my head.... The main reason for getting a new DSLR to replace our older Canon 750D was for the variable angle touchscreen, allowing us to get nice low down shots without having to physically get on the floor. The theory was we could bend over, angle the screen to get the composition, and finally touch the screen to take the photo. To do this, you have to use "Liveview" which previews the image on the screen, but unfortunately, it introduces horrendous shutter lag Retrospectively this is obvious: The shutter is held open to allow the image to hit the sensor and therefore has to close before it re-opens to take the photo! It does this regardless of shooting from the screen or the usual shutter release button (see here)

Now the obvious answer is to use the camera with Liveview off but then this kind of defeats the purpose of buying it. 99% of our photos are of dogs: with Liveview on they have wandered out of shot before the photo is taken, and with it off, well, we might as well use our old Canon

So now I am thinking along the lines of selling the Nikon on (nothing wrong with it, just not necessarily ideal for our needs) and trying something else. Would a Bridge Camera be better? Perhaps a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300?

Any musings appreciated!

Lag will be at least as pronounced as the Nikon in good light and worse in low light.

Learn to anticipate the shutter lag, additionally, pre focus the camera to the area you want to take the shot (generally when posing dogs etc, you know roughly where they will pass) then switch it to manual focus.

Likewise, when using the viewfinder, follow the dog (panning) with the shutter half pressed, keeping it half pressed, and still following the dog, then follow through with pressing the button when you want the shot.

The alternative is a compact system type camera. They will be faster (Panasonic and Sony models used to be the fastest of these type, not sure now though)

For speed, and continuous shooting, I would recommend working around the live view though, you will get more and better results.

[uk_dave&gill]

Originally Posted by clf

The alternative is a compact system type camera. They will be faster (Panasonic and Sony models used to be the fastest of these type, not sure now though)

I do wonder if compact might, after all, be best for us, as probably got the speed as well as portability. If I could find one for about the same price (or less of course) than the Nikon with good quality results......

[Gate Keeper]

Originally Posted by clf

Lag will be at least as pronounced as the Nikon in good light and worse in low light.

Learn to anticipate the shutter lag, additionally, pre focus the camera to the area you want to take the shot (generally when posing dogs etc, you know roughly where they will pass) then switch it to manual focus.

Likewise, when using the viewfinder, follow the dog (panning) with the shutter half pressed, keeping it half pressed, and still following the dog, then follow through with pressing the button when you want the shot.

The alternative is a compact system type camera. They will be faster (Panasonic and Sony models used to be the fastest of these type, not sure now though)

For speed, and continuous shooting, I would recommend working around the live view though, you will get more and better results.

Excellent advice Alan for working around the problem. I'd be looking at getting to know the Nikon better and practicing the camera set up for the shot with ISO, aperture, white balance and shutter speeds adjustments, then taking several practice shots to get the desired image result.

The mirrorless cameras clearly have advantages over the DSLR range. They are lighter. I have seen excellent images produced by Teflon and Rocket in their posts. The mirrorless also have cons. For example take the Sony A6000

http://jacquesgaines.com/10-cons-abo...ng-sony-a6000/

I have considered getting a mirrorless cam as a no 3, for use in wildlife photography, but find the available lenses for long distance are too restrictive in comparison to the hundreds available for a DSLR. I expect in the course of time, more lenses will be produced for consumer and professional use

[Nick Greg]

I have an Olympus OMD EM5 Mark 2. Great compact camera lots of lens choices and a confusing but in time, after some learning, fantastic customisable menu system. Don't knock em for not being full frame by the way. Unless you want wall sized prints they are perfect. Easy to carry and lenses are compact also. When I go on hols etc I simply do not want to be lugging around a huge lump of a camera. Fits the bill perfectly