Paging Photo-mags: Legit Ski camera recs?

[east or bust]

Lots of good pointers in this thread so far. IMO the two biggest take aways are:

Best camera is the one you have with you..
Shooting interesting stuff with a shit camera will yield better results than boring photos with a $$$ camera..

That said...

The RX100 series are an outstanding, and truly pocketable option. It's my go to when not skiing with a pack. I have an older version with the 24-70mm zoom range, which is somewhat limiting but great for environmental style photos like auvgeek posted. EVF is nice. Tracking is more than adequate for me and the buffer usually isn't an issue. That said, forget about using it with gloves on and I wouldn't feel comfortable taking it out in storm conditions. I've never printed anything taken with it so can't comment on that front.

If you're set on interchangeable lens cameras, while I don't think going FF is necessarily a godsend, I'm not sure what benefit an A6x00 series camera provides here. Marginally better than a high end P&S while taking up nearly as much space in a pack as a FF mirrorless setup (seriously, with that 18-135 lens it's no longer a compact option). Sony has undoubtedly been the front runner in FF mirrorless tech for the last couple years which will make finding a used body a more budget friendly option. But don't discount Canon or Nikon cause they're catching up fast (think investing in good glass). I'd almost be hesitant buying an older Sony at this point because I think we are going to see some huge tech increases in consumer FF mirrorless in the next year or two.

ETA: I've begun to reevaluate the notion of not buying new bodies, sure you need to spend the money once to buy top of the line, then you can sell when the next best body comes out and only take a marginal monetary hit. That is not to say you shouldn't already be investing in good quality glass.

[adrenalated]

If you're set on interchangeable lens cameras, while I don't think going FF is necessarily a godsend, I'm not sure what benefit an A6x00 series camera provides here. Marginally better than a high end P&S while taking up nearly as much space in a pack as a FF mirrorless setup (seriously, with that 18-135 lens it's no longer a compact option).

Totally agreed that the a6x00 with the 18-135 is not a compact option, but it's still more compact than a FF. Depends on how you're carrying it, too. If it's going in a pack, probably not a big deal to just bring a FF. I carry it in a holster bag on my chest, and mounted there, the crop camera is for sure noticeably smaller and more comfortable to carry than a FF would be. Same story if you use a CaptureClip to mount to a shoulder strap.

[LeeLau]

The RX100 series ....That said, forget about using it with gloves on and I wouldn't feel comfortable taking it out in storm conditions. I've never printed anything taken with it so can't comment on that front.

This printed 11x14 reasonably well https://www.instagram.com/p/B8O-fQilxkh/. Any bigger though and it looked poor. Also taken with gloves on. That said I've used it for years and am reasonably ok with dealing with the truly Hello Kitty nature of the Sony UI.

[lowsparkco]

Not to threadjack too horribly....

Anyone have any tips for buying used glass?

[lowsparkco]

Went with B&H for a couple new lenses. If anyone is curious I'll give some feedback o once they arrive.

[Tailwind]

It’s good.

They take returns without question on used gear too.

Went with B&H for a couple new lenses. If anyone is curious I'll give some feedback o once they arrive.

[Tailwind]

You also need to define... are you taking pictures of people in a space or people skiing.

Getting active shots requires different gear than shots of people touring uphill... or a skier in a landscape shot.

I think for a lot of documenting people outside an rx100 is ideal... for great pictures of people skiing a Dedicated telephoto and camera with fast autofocus are what you need.

I have a a7iii and telephoto and it’s pretty ideal... but heavy. I’ve just decided I like taking pictures and I’m okay with the weight. Looking at the 100-400mm from Sony as my next lens...

Also last bit:
Peak Design Clips are worth every penny.

[auvgeek]

You also need to define... are you taking pictures of people in a space or people skiing.

Getting active shots requires different gear than shots of people touring uphill... or a skier in a landscape shot.

I think for a lot of documenting people outside an rx100 is ideal... for great pictures of people skiing a Dedicated telephoto and camera with fast autofocus are what you need.

I'm not trying to push the RX100 too hard, but I've gotten some good action shots with it and my friends have gotten good shots of me skiing. Not trying to keep posting photos in this thread though, and there's no doubt in my mind that it's not the best choice for action photography.

I've had the debate why go a6x00 instead of A7xx if neither fit in a pocket, and for me, the real answer isn't so much the size, it's weight.

But yeah, an a7iii with that 100-400mm telephoto looks amazing for shooting skiing from a long ways off.

[Timberridge]

Like North, I'm now a Fuji X body guy as I think their lens quality vs. price point is the best in the biz currently and I like the dial controls. You shut yourself out of the aftermarket lens scene (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) though if you go Fuji. All the camera makes mentioned here take stellar pictures with a good lens so once you decide what brand lenses you want to use, get a body they fit on. If you don't buy image stabilized lenses you'll want a body with IS. Mirrorless crop frame bodies are smaller/lighter than full frame and take great pictures and you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference unless you're pixel peeping in Lightroom.

[zion zig zag]

Put me in the Sony A6x00 camp. I'm currently using the 18-135mm lens and it's my favorite yet after using both the 16-50 and the 18-105 Sony's. I'm clipping it to my left shoulder strap with the peak designs clip.

For me, the point and shoot camera is a strange in between, better than the phone I'm already carrying, but not as good as the aps-c sensor. If I feel like the day is worth documenting with possible future prints, I'll carry the a6300, if I just want some shots for the gram then the phone is good enough.

[Tailwind]

Good points. I’ve just gotten used to lugging a big camera.

For touring, I like to try to get a couple of shots of each skier. So range is a pretty big deal. I have the 70-300mm currently which is less expensive and pretty darn good.

I’ve looked at 70-200mm setups but I shoot a lot in the mid-200’s with my current lens.

I'm not trying to push the RX100 too hard, but I've gotten some good action shots with it and my friends have gotten good shots of me skiing. Not trying to keep posting photos in this thread though, and there's no doubt in my mind that it's not the best choice for action photography.

I've had the debate why go a6x00 instead of A7xx if neither fit in a pocket, and for me, the real answer isn't so much the size, it's weight.

But yeah, an a7iii with that 100-400mm telephoto looks amazing for shooting skiing from a long ways off.

[lowsparkco]

[lowsparkco]

[lowsparkco]

Those two pics have lost a lot of resolution due to being saved and downloaded from social media, but they recently resurfaced and they seem like good examples of DSLR shots you're not getting with a P&S.

[tgapp]

Like North, I'm now a Fuji X body guy as I think their lens quality vs. price point is the best in the biz currently and I like the dial controls. You shut yourself out of the aftermarket lens scene (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) though if you go Fuji. All the camera makes mentioned here take stellar pictures with a good lens so once you decide what brand lenses you want to use, get a body they fit on. If you don't buy image stabilized lenses you'll want a body with IS. Mirrorless crop frame bodies are smaller/lighter than full frame and take great pictures and you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference unless you're pixel peeping in Lightroom.

This looks like an interesting choice, can you tell me what body and lense you shoot with most commonly? I've been lusting after a later-gen RX100 for years now, but after reading this thread I'm not so sure.

[Judo Chop!]

FWIW, there's nothing about those shots you couldn't get with something like an RX100

[SkiLyft]

FWIW, there's nothing about those shots you couldn't get with something like an RX100

Or an IPhone 11pro








Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[auvgeek]

Those two pics have lost a lot of resolution due to being saved and downloaded from social media, but they recently resurfaced and they seem like good examples of DSLR shots you're not getting with a P&S.

Here are some shots with the RX100 that seem similar to me as what you posted above. Unless you're putting a >200 mm zoom on and shooting from the valley floor, I think you get nearly the same quality out of the RX100 as the a6x00. That's my personal opinion as someone who currently owns both and isn't particularly adept at photography. And these weren't edited in lightroom or anything fancy.

kevino took this one of me skiing


Also, lesson learned playing photog: don't make turns in the nice pow that you want to look un tracked in the shot.




edit, someone beat me to it. I don't think you're getting these shots with an iPhone, but maybe I'm wrong
edit2: the iPhone photos look pretty good. My experience with phones is they don't have the zoom capability -- you get grainy photos when you zoom in. But one of the best photos of me skiing was taken with an iPhone 7 so ...

[lowsparkco]

They look better bigger, they're real sharp in full resolution.Those were shot at 300 mm. I know the P&S tech has improved dramatically, and admittedly I have not messed around with the new ones. I think I'll scoop up a RX100, so thanks for the recommendation. This thread has cost me a grand

[Timberridge]

This looks like an interesting choice, can you tell me what body and lense you shoot with most commonly? I've been lusting after a later-gen RX100 for years now, but after reading this thread I'm not so sure.

I use the XT3 body and the Fujinon 50-140mm lens when I'm taking ski photos. 50-140 in APS-C is equivalent to 70-210 in FF. Both lens and body are weather sealed and I've gotten both fairly wet out in the snow and had no issues so far.

This setup is nowhere near as compact as a RX100 though so I'm guessing you're looking to step up to interchangeable lens in APS-C size? In which case XT3 is more comparable to the Sony 6500-6600 cameras.

IMO if you plan to shoot in Auto most of the time I think you will be happy with less complex, fixed lens/P&S cameras from any major brand (I do think phones have almost caught up with this group of cameras though.) You really have to be honest with yourself on this point, because if you buy more camera than you need there's a learning curve of frustration for a while. If you stick with it, you'll eventually have the a-ha moment and you'll never look back. It's a bit like skiing.

Go to a photo hosting site like Flickr and search on various camera model images (RX100, etc) or in the case of interchangeable lens cameras, get an idea what kind of pictures a particular lens takes. Then go to a camera store and play around with the various bodies and lenses before buying.

Here's a link to the Fujinon 50-140 lens page for example...https://www.flickr.com/groups/fujinon_xf50-140mm/pool/

[brown9]

For a photo jong with a Nikon d5500 what do folks like for a non kit lens upgrade to shoot ski action?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[lowsparkco]

For a photo jong with a Nikon d5500 what do folks like for a non kit lens upgrade to shoot ski action?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

The 18-300 VR lens is a good choice. They bill it as their ultimate "walking around" lens. The max aperture is a little small at f/3.5. Experts say that shouldn't matter if you're not shooting inside, but mine seemed to stall and miss the AF adjustments in overcast conditions.

I just ordered the 80-400 VR f/4.5, so I'll know in the next few weeks how that works out.

[Timberridge]

I think the 200mm focal length is the sweet spot for hand held single or two person action ski photos depending how much background you want. I used to own Nikon and the 18-300 did everything. For me, hand holding at the long end is a bit more miss than hit, but having that extra focal length is handy if you can stabilize the camera on something.

Edit: I see low recommended it above as well. I wouldn't use it to shoot basketball in a HS gym, but outdoors I never had much of an issue.

[lowsparkco]

BTW, I made that comment earlier about how bad the kit lenses are....

Starting going through my old stuff and realized that when I upgraded to the D7100 body I didn't buy the kit. So, the kit lenses I was referring to are from the D40 body circa 2007. Evidently they did start upgrading the lenses in the kits. The 55-200 f/4 that came with my D40 wouldn't be a bad place to start if it had the VR tech. If money was no object I'd have the 70-200 f/2.8, too. Mostly for the bigger aperture. I shot whitewater rafting and kayaking with that 18-300 VR professionally for years and I do recommend it.

[Bite Me]

I went from a Nikon something with a bag full of lenses that was always a PITA to move around to the RX100 II, IV, and now VI. 24fps burst, 30-200 lens RAW capability, optical viewfinder AND, it fits in my pocket.





Uncropped from 30 rows back.