Panasonic GH3 for photography (in 2024).

In my last post I discussed my recent purchase of the Lumix GH3 for shooting video. This will be its main purpose - in conjunction with my Lumix S5 - to supply video and photos for a Real Estate firm. But it will also act as a back-up of sorts, if anything should happen (please no, touch wood) to the S5 while on a shoot. So the IQ (image quality) needs to be 'good enough' to take over photo duty if required (again, please no....!).

Of course whenever you get any new gear, you need to test it out - right?! Nobody in their right mind would take a newly acquired piece of equipment and try it out for the first time on a shoot - least of all an actual paid gig! No - I thought not.

With this in mind, I loaded up my Lowepro backpack with my Lumix S5 and S 20-60mm f/3.5-5.6 attached, and the Lumix GH3 with the G 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 Power OIS, and headed out the door this past weekend (as I write this).

It had been a while since I had been to Dorothy Falls at Kaniere, so that was my destination. I got up at stupid-o'clock on Saturday morning so I could get to the falls around dawn. Turned out this was a little too early, so I wandered down to Lake Kaniere to see if I could capture a few sunrise photos.

As you can see from the image on the right, reducing the exposure to retain highlight detail in the sky (very important with digital sensors) has meant that the landscape itself is underexposed. Looking at this image back home on the computer, I didn't hold out much hope of getting any detail or definition in the trees around the lake, especially since this is from a micro four thirds sensor. 

Lake Kaniere Dawn.  Lumix GH3 with Lumix G 12-60mm Power OIS. f/8 @ 1/50th, ISO 200

Having owned, and used, 16MP Olympus micro four thirds cameras for many years, I shouldn't have been so pessimistic. I've written myself, on several occasions in this very blog, that the ability to extract information from the micro four thirds sensor is actually quite staggering. Micro four thirds sensors are capable of capturing excellent dynamic range - the GH3 itself is capable of around 12.5 stops of dynamic range. 

In comparison, the S5's 24MP sensor is rated by DXO of 14.5 stops. Two stops is certainly significant, but this is a considerably newer - full frame - sensor. 12.5 stops on the GH3 is very, very respectable, and allows it to create images like the one above. What's more, the detail pulled out of the shadows is very clean and noise-free at the cameras native ISO of 200. A very good result indeed.

Dorothy Falls. Lumix GH3 with G 12-60mm. f/8 @ 1/3rd sec, ISO 200 + Polariser

I would have liked to have spent a bit more time exploring Lake Kaniere, but I was being swarmed and eaten alive by the (in)famous west coast sand fly. They like the taste of me unfortunately, and as soon as I set up my tripod I was surrounded by the little biting monsters! I took this as my que to head back to Dorothy Falls where, given the slightly cooler temperatures of the surrounding bush, the sand flies were thankfully (mostly) absent.

This allowed me to take my time, and take two shots of the same subject - one with the GH3 and one with the S5 - for 'comparisons' sake.

I've already discussed the dynamic range capabilities of both cameras, and this can be seen in the 100% crops above. The S5 retains detail in even the brightest areas of the waterfall, whereas the GH3 doesn't quite manage it. On both exposures I was very careful not to 'clip' the highlights, but the GH3 sensor just isn't capable of  retaining the extreme highlight detail. The full frame image is also very slightly 'crisper' than the micro four thirds one - again not surprising given the size and age advantage of the newer S5 full-frame sensor.

And yet, there's not a massive difference between the two - certainly not as much as some would have you believe there should be. I would take the S5's full-frame sensor over the GH3's micro four thirds - of course I would. But if you told me I had to use the 16MP GH3 from now on, it certainly wouldn't hold me back from making amazing images. And as a back-up to my S5, it'll do just fine.

Dorothy Falls Cascade. Lumix S5 with S 20-60mm. f/8 @ 1/2sec, ISO 200

Having just said that, I will admit to preferring to using the S5 over the GH3. For a start, the viewfinder on the GH3 leaves a lot to be desired. It's a little blurry around the edges for us glass-wearers, which makes composition a little tricky. Fortunately, when shooting video, I'll only be using the LCD screen which is perfectly fine to compose from. This was also the case for most of the morning while the GH3 was on a tripod. But take it off the tripod, use the viewfinder to compose and the picture taking experience is diminished somewhat.

I also prefer the weight, heft, and overall handling of the S5. The GH3 isn't bad in this respect, but the S5 is better (IMHO). The GH3 with battery grip weighs about the same as the S5 body. Add a lens to both of them and the weight is similar enough to not be a factor. But the S5 certainly feels better in my hand. That being said, the GH3 is probably the most comfortable micro four thirds camera I've ever used. Far better than the angular and retro inspired Olympus offerings like the OMD EM-5 and EM-1.

Cloud Cover. Panasonic Lumix GH3 with G 12-60mm f3.5-5.6 OIS. f/7.1 @ 1/800th, ISO 200

As someone who has had a lot of experience shooting micro four thirds - especially with Olympus - the Olympus vs Panasonic question is an interesting one. I can see why Olympus embraced their heritage with the retro OM look to their cameras, as much as I can see how it made sense for Panasonic to pursue a more traditional DSLR style to their cameras.

Personally, even though I like the look of the Olympus cameras, I do prefer the Panasonic's DSLR style ergonomics and handling. BUT.... I think that Olympus make the better cameras in terms of functions, engineering and technology. Especially when it comes to the Panasonic's Achilles heal - auto focus. Not that Panasonic's contrast-based autofocus is unusable. For stills photography it's actually very good. But video - well that's another story. Needless to say, I think I'll be using a lot of manual focusing with the GH3. And that's absolutely fine.

Dorothy Falls, Kaniere. Lumix GH3 with G 12-60mm. f/8 @ 1/2sec, ISO 200. + Polariser

Is the 16MP Panasonic GH3 micro four thirds camera a twelve year old obsolete dinosaur that should be dismissed in 2024? No - of course not! In fact, it would be an amazing camera to give to someone who wants to learn photography and grow in their hobby. With great ergonomics, a very capable image sensor, and very good IQ - not to mention excellent video features (if you are happy to focus manually) - the GH3 was Panasonic's flagship camera when it was released in 2012. It was an amazing camera then, and it's a fantastic camera now. Not state-of-the-art, granted. But you're not paying state-of-the-art prices. And yet what you get for your money is above and beyond what you should expect at this price point. Cheap as chips, but oh-so capable. I reckon the GH3 will make a perfect video camera, and an ideal back-up for my S5.

Time to rethink things a little...

Ok, so I got Covid...

Millie. Sony a57 with SAL18250

I'm just coming out of the worst of it now, and feel sufficiently 'human' enough to be able to sit down and write this. But it's taken over a week.

I won't say it's the worst I've ever felt in my life - I've been worse. And I guess being triple-vaccinated against it helped (at least I hope it did). But still, it wasn't great.

How did I get it? Well, the adorable little bundle of fluff pictured opposite had 'something' to do with it. And BTW - she might look adorable, but don't let that fool you. My wife and I are deciding whether she is the devil's spawn or not at the moment!

Anyway, since we do now have her, we had to fence our back section so she could roam around. A builder friend (hi Ian) said he would come over last weekend and give me a hand building one - and long story-short, Ian had Covid. And passed it on to me...

So while I was convalescing and feeling sorry for myself, it gave me time to mull over my last few posts. It also gave me time to rethink my current kit - in light of those posts - and the possible ramifications going forwards. Whatever that means...?

I'm rambling. I'm delirious. I'm recovering from Covid. Let me see if I can make something coherent out of all this head-space mess - shall we?

First - my continuing thoughts around full frame. I had assumed, now that I am using (and enjoying) the Sony system, that I would 'upgrade' to a full frame Sony mirrorless. Something like the a7ii. These can be found fairly regularly now for around $1400NZ on the second hand market. Sony are the king of full-frame mirrorless and dominate that space with the a7 line, so it was a natural decision to make. Well done me 😄

And then I tried one. And I wasn't blown-away using one. In fact, just the opposite really. Enter the first roadblock. Yet, undeterred, the 'research' continued.

Then I realised that, for not much more $$, I might even be able to get a brand new mirrorless full-frame camera! Something like the Canon EOS RP that retails for $1985.00NZ body-only. Even these are beginning to appear on the used market, which means even more savings can be had. 

Notice, however, how the above price is for 'body-only'. Getting a decent lens for the Canon R system, even second hand, is not a cheap prospect. Even the 50mm f1.8 RF lens is over $400NZ new. So maybe 'new' isn't the way to go?

And maybe mirrorless isn't the way to go full-frame either?

Both Canon and Nikon have been producing full-frame DSLR's for over ten years now. Plenty of time for the second-hand market to see its fair share of full frame offerings. In Canon there is the famous 5D line of cameras, as well as the 6D (Mk 1 and II). 5D Mk 3's and 6D Mk1's can be found online for even less than a Sony a7ii body. They even often include a lens, a grip, and spare batteries! 

The same is true with Nikon - where D600s, D700s and D800s are regularly turning up on TradeMe. Especially now that their owners are switching to the new mirrorless systems.

So yes, there's a plethora of great full-frame DSLR's to choose from now. In fact you could argue that it's the perfect time to be 'getting into' a full frame system.

But then... THEN... maddeningly, annoyingly, frustratingly, there is a part of my brain that says "Why bother? Why go full frame at all? What's really so bad with APS-C?" (Or micro four thirds for that matter).

What's so bad, for example, with a Fujifilm XT-2, with grip, and Fujinon 18-55mm XF lens - available on auction here in New Zealand as I write this, for only $875.00! Yes please! I'll have some of that!

That would be an incredible mirrorless kit, at a fraction of the full frame price. And I have to say, I'm sorely tempted! Because lets face it, there's nothing bad with APS-C. Especially for what I do, what I need it to do, and what I might want it to do in the future. And the Fujifilm system is an amazing eco-system to get into. Much better, it could (easily) be argued, than the now defunct Sony A-mount system I find myself a part of. Why, oh why (part of my brain bemoans) am I still not shooting Fujifilm? The XT-2 with grip looks right up my alley!

And then... THEN... strangely, weirdly, uncontrollably, I go on to TradeMe (our internet auction site here in NZ) and add a Sony flash and leather grip to my existing a57 kit! At the same time that I have put the Sony SAL75300 and Sony SAL18250 lenses online to sell! 

Because there is another part of my brain (how many parts do I actually have!?) that keeps saying to me "Be content with what you have. There's nothing wrong with the images you're getting out of the a57. Use what you've got and stop looking elsewhere!"

And I would agree with that part of my brain. It is, after all, the same part that convinced me to get the a57 in the first place. And yes, on many levels, the a57 (or at least the Sony SLT system) is my 'ideal' system. I love the feeling of an SLR style body. It just feels so right in the hand. Tick for the a57. I also love an evf, and seeing all my information, histogram and changes through the viewfinder while I compose the image. Another tick for the a57. I love an articulating screen and a good live-view implementation when I'm shooting landscapes. Tick again. In fact, it's the only system that ticks all these boxes - apart, maybe, from the Panasonic micro four thirds cameras that are designed to feel like a DSLR.

Why, then, have I put two lenses up for sale? Well, it was an easy decision getting rid of the 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 - it's just not a great lens. I got it for birding and extreme telephoto images, but based on my testing of this lens, it's not likely that I will ever use it. It's just never sharp enough (for me). Selling the 18-250mm was a tougher decision, since it's actually a decent performer up to 100mm, and a great travel lens. But I also have those focal lengths covered with other (better) lenses, so really I'm just giving up the convenience factor. And with the money I hope to get from selling them both, I might look at getting a Sony 70-300mm f/4-5.6 G SSM to replace the SAL75300? Should be a much better lens.

So no, I haven't given up on my a57, or the Sony SLT a-mount system  - just yet at least. And I may not give up on it at all? Full frame might remain just a philosophical thought - for the time being 😆 I really am going crazy....

The Lure of Full Frame cameras

Oh dear.

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.

I think I might be falling for an old flame!? One that I thought I had finished with years ago. And one that, in this very blog, I vowed and declared I didn't care about anymore.

But I bumped into her recently, and we've kinda reacquainted. I've started seeing her off-and-on again. And I have to admit that it's been thrilling. I'm enjoying it. More than I maybe would like to admit. And now I can't stop thinking about her. And dreaming... and hoping....

Ok, so if you've read the title of this blog post, you'll know where this is going. I have recently switched systems (as is my want) over to the Sony SLT range - more specifically the Sony SLT a57. The decision to move to Sony was largely due to the fact that I have some very nice Minolta glass, and the full-frame Sony a99 'on-loan'. So a very full and comprehensive kit was just begging to be made. 

I've had the a99 for probably a year now, and never really explored its capabilities. For a few reasons. First, I had my main kit - the Olympus OM-D E-M1 micro four thirds system that I was enjoying using, so the Sony just sat in my cupboard, unloved. Second, I had actually lost interest in photography over this last year for various reasons (covid lockdowns being prime among them). And third, I had talked myself into this 'smaller is better' frame of mind that had disregarded full frame as an option in my workflow. Yeah, I know...

When I decided to leave the micro four thirds platform and go to the Sony SLT system, of course I dusted off the Sony a99 so I could start getting used to the Sony eco-system. I had used it briefly about a year ago, when Sony unofficially discontinued their A-Mount line. I wrote a memorial for the system, and used the a99 at Coal Creek Falls (you can read that post here). I loved using the camera for that brief period, and even suggested in later posts that I was sorely tempted to look at full-frame again. But then 'reality' took over, and micro four thirds consumed my attention.

But that was then... 

Rapahoe Beach poles. Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm f/3.5 G. f/11 @ 1 sec, ISO 50

My first time using the Sony a99 in a 'serious' landscape shoot rocked my world and blew my mind. No - really! Very few cameras have managed to do this to me over the course of my 35+ years in this hobby/profession - and I've used a lot of cameras.

The 24 megapixel full frame sensor in the Sony a99, shot at ISO50, creates beautiful files that are sharp and contrasty, with a nice 'pop' to them, and yet they also have a very filmic quality. They actually remind me of the files I got from the Fuji X-trans sensors, but better!

As can be seen from the image on the right, the RAW file was deliberately underexposed to retain information in the highlights. I figured that I could recover 'some' detail in the shadows later in post, but if I had to let some areas remain black I would.

I was amazed at not only how much detail I could pull out of the shadows with the full frame sensor, but how clean the shadow areas were afterwards. With micro four thirds, or even APS-C, I would expect to have to do some noise-reduction cleanup afterwards. But not with the ISO 50 files on the a99. Even after cranking the shadow recovery up to 100%, the shadow areas that remained were super-clean! And yes, I'm impressed. And yes, if that's one of the benefits of shooting with full-frame sensors, then count me in!

Motukiekie Beach, Low tide. Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm f/3.5 G. f/11 @ 2.5 secs, ISO 50

My next outing with the a99 - to Motukeikie Beach - pushed the sensor in the a99 even further. Both the highlights and shadows needed full-recovery to get the image above. And once again, I'm super-impressed with the final result.

There's no way I thought I was going to recover all the shadow detail in this file - let alone do it 'cleanly'. And yet the 24MP sensor on the a99 has done just that - with flying colours!

The a99 is also a fantastic camera to use out in the field. It has the best articulating screen I've ever used - no contest. Not even close.

It's solid and weather-sealed without being a brick, has dual card slots, and a plethora of on-camera buttons that make changing settings an absolute breeze.

Yeah, ok, I'm gushing. It's embarrassing. But it's also almost hard not to. I think this might just be my perfect landscape camera - of all time! Wow!

My 'new' Sony a57 has a lot to live up to. And of course, it doesn't. Not even close. Not that it doesn't also take some great images. Because it does. And the sensor is also pretty pliable - for a 16MP APS-C sensor. But it's not a patch on the mighty a99 - poor wee thing.

So I'm getting an a99 - right? I mean, I've just said it's my perfect landscape camera. What am I waiting for?

There are three reasons I won't be getting the Sony a99 anytime soon. Price, price and... price. Even on the used market here in NZ, an a99 body goes for a ridiculous amount of money. Around $3000NZ. And you can double that for a used a99ii! That's just stupid money. Even for my most favouritist camera😢 (and yes, I made that word up).

So no, I won't be getting one anytime soon. Or probably ever! "But what about the one you've got on-loan"? I hear you say. Jolly good question. I'm glad you asked. Two things about that give me considerable pause. First, the a99 I have on-loan is 'on-loan'. Obviously. I'm not going to create a system around a camera that doesn't even belong to me. And second, it's had a pretty hard life. The command wheel has fallen off and it's permanently stuck on Aperture Priority (fortunately), and the control dials are a little sticky and 'unresponsive'. They work, but not consistently. Lord only knows what the shutter count on the camera is? I shudder to think. If this was my 'main' camera, these things alone would drive me nuts. Even if it turns out that I can keep the a99 as my forever camera, I'd be looking for a 'better' unit. And I simply can't afford the asking price. I guess that's it for full frame then?

Not so fast there buddy. All, perhaps, is not lost. Full-frame cameras - both DLSR and mirrorless, have been around for quite a while now. Long enough so that the earlier models are appearing regularly on the used market - for 'reasonable' prices.

Cameras like the Sony a7ii and a7Rii - 24MP and 42MP respectively - are coming up regularly for around the $1400 to $1800 range. Which, while still not 'cheap', is a little more affordable than a used a99. And I'm betting that image-wise the quality from the a7ii's 24MP sensor will be as good, if not better, than the a99's. No - handling won't be quite the same. The a7ii only has one card slot, is probably half the weight and size of the a99, and doesn't have the same articulation on its LCD screen. And apparently the battery life on the earlier A7 range is abysmal. But I could live with all that. Ultimately it's the IQ that matters most.

So yes, I've been looking up information on the Sony a7ii range, keeping my eye out, and dreaming that one may be in my future. And then, just to mix things up a bit, there's the 'dark horse' in the race....

My desire for full-frame digital began in about 2008, when I got the original full-frame DLSR, the Canon 5D. It too was an eye-watering price for a camera when it was first released. I waited three years for it to come down from eye-watering to just plain ridiculous before I jumped in and got one. I was shooting weddings with a 30D at the time, and moving to the full frame 5D was a huge jump in quality.

The Canon 5D was another one of those 'wow' moment cameras for me, although I ended up having something of a love-hate relationship with it.

Even though I used to shoot 'professionally' I've always looked after my gear. There's never a scratch on them (unless I purchased them pre-scratched 😆) and I'm not the sort of photographer who throws my gear around because they are 'just tools'. Yes, they are tools. But they also happen to be very expensive tools. So I look after them. Imagine, then, my surprise when my pristine 5D just stopped working one morning before a wedding! Failed logic board (apparently). I was gutted. And a bit burnt from the experience.

I was still paying it off, and couldn't really afford to get it fixed (it was about 3 months out of warranty). So I used my backup 30D for the wedding, and then promptly changed to Nikon (the amazing D300). It wasn't until the next wedding season that I managed to get the 5D fixed, and then I ended up going for a swim with it in a river! Never a good idea. One completely dead 5D!

I haven't had a 5D, or a full frame camera, since. But now that they are up to the Mark IV, and Canon have announced that there won't be a Mark V, older bodies have started coming down in price. People are switching to the mirrorless R system, and DSLR's are becoming 'old' tech (and therefore cheaper). You can pick up a 5D MkIII for about the same price as a Sony a7ii. They are, of course, very different shooting experiences. But for someone who grew up with Canon (first film and then DLSR), a move 'back' to the 5D system actually has quite a lot of appeal.

Of course, all of this is simply a 'what if' mental exercise. I still don't actually have the money to make it happen. BUT... (isn't there always a but) I certainly am not counting it out for the future. I have been booked to shoot a wedding this time next year (March 2023), and who knows? I'm doing it on the 'cheap' for somebody I know - but I might just make enough to get back into the world of full frame?

I know I've said ad-nauseam on this blog that you (I) don't need 24 megapixels. Or full frame. Or even APS-C. Especially if, like me, you only print occasionally - and even then, not very large. And indeed, you don't. And I stick by that unequivocally. I still maintain that for 'general' photography, 24MP (and full frame) is overkill.

But (there it is again), what shooting recently with the a99 has shown me, in relation to full frame, is the superior performance that it does bring to the table when post-processing. And how beautifully clean the images are at low ISO's. When dealing with pixels and light-gathering information, we've all known for a long time that bigger equals better. Bigger photosites that is. Which is why a 16MP camera can sometimes produce 'cleaner' images, with less noise, than a 24Megapixel camera. Because their photosites are bigger (sensor size being equal).

I have always introduced myself as a landscape photographer - first and foremost. And as a landscape photographer, I'm often dealing with extremes. Of weather, of light, and of the sensor's dynamic range. It's a constant struggle to fit what you see in front of you, into the camera's range of information. HDR photography was invented for this very reason. And if cameras really are just tools, and if you should always choose the right tool for the job, then as a landscape photography maybe I'm just coming to the realisation that larger, full-frame sensors, really might be the best tool for my job!? Better late than never I guess? 

Nikon D300 wins - this time...

Every year around winter time, I sit back and take stock of my photography gear. Literally. I do a kind of a stock-take, making a list of what I have, and what I use (or more importantly - don't use). I do this for a couple of reasons. First, I'm a bit of a gear horde and love to collect all sorts of cameras and systems I discover throughout the year. And second, I have a very small office space in which to keep all this gear. So an annual stock-take (and clear out) is part of my photography routine.

I decided this time around that I was going to sell off some of my film gear I wasn't using. Especially the 35mm stuff. When I shoot film (and I regularly do), I prefer to shoot my medium format Bronica over 35mm. So a lot of 35mm film equipment was sitting around not being used. Decision number one; sell some 35mm film gear.

Having done that, I then began to ponder over the digital gear I'm currently using (which I also seem to do every year). I don't shoot professionally any more, apart form the occasional wedding for friends. So my gear 'needs' (not wants) have changed over the years. In the last two posts, I've written about the Olympus Pen EP3, and how I still prefer to use a dedicated camera system for photos. But I also suggested that this was a very close thing, and that my iPhone could very easily replace the Pen in the near future. Especially if I can get some money together to upgrade to an iPhone 6s Plus or maybe even iPhone 7.

Anyone who has ever followed any of my ramblings on this blog will also know that I'm not wedded to any particular system. Quite the opposite. As a photography educator, I actually like the fact that I use almost all the systems. So that when I have someone turn up on a workshop with a specific issue, I can usually help them navigate menus and buttons particular to their camera. It does, however, mean that I'm changing systems a lot.

So with some money from the sale of film bodies, I began to ponder over my current Canon digital gear. I love the ergonomics and handling of my Canon 50D, and the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 is a stellar lens, especially for the price. I have even been buying up a few little bits and pieces over the last few months to add to the kit (some spare batteries and an intervalometer). But I have always been a little unsure about the 15MP sensor that Canon used in the 50D.

Canon released the 50D towards the end of 2008, when the megapixel wars were in full swing. Many of the camera lines were being 'updated' simply with a slightly higher resolution sensor, and companies pushed the limits of the technology so they could be the first to release cameras with more megapixels. With the 15.1MP sensor in the 50D, I think Canon pushed it too far too soon. It's known as a fairly 'noisy' sensor, exhibiting some noise even at ISO 100.

Of course noise is somewhat subjective. Photographer's tolerance levels to noise in an image will vary widely. I actually have a fairly large tolerance for noise in an image. I still shoot film after all. But I do think that Canon pushed the 15.1MP sensor out before it was ready. I may be wrong, but I think the 50D and 500D are the only cameras that use the 15.1MP sensor? That probably says a lot right there!?

So if the Canon 50D isn't for me, then what is? What do I need as a predominantly landscape-based photographer (with the occassional wedding thrown in)? A quick google search for 'best' landscape cameras all came back with the same specification - full frame. This is born out by most of the Youtube landscape photographers I follow. The common theme is either a Canon 5D Mk4 or Nikon D850 (or Sony A7III). All full-frame cameras. And all horrendously expensive! Not only in terms of bodies, but also lenses. That Canon 'L' glass might be nice, but it sure ain't cheap! So that would be a 'no' for going full frame then - right?

Hang on - don't dismiss full frame so quickly just because of price. Full frame has been around for quite a while now, and maybe the bargain of the decade is the Canon 5D Mk1 - the original full frame classic. OK, it's only 12.8 megapixels, as opposed to the 5D Mk4's eye-watering 30.4 megapixels. But I've argued dozens of times on this blog that 12 megapixels is the 'sweet spot' for sensor size IMHO. And the 5D's 12MP's are on a full-frame sensor! So for someone like me, who hardly ever crops their images, 12MP is seriously more than enough. Seriously.

The other good news with the 5D Mk1 is that enough time has passed since its introduction (2005) that it is now an absolute bargain on the secondhand market for a full frame camera. Bodies in good condition can be had for around $450NZ and sometimes even cheaper. That's a fairly achievable entry point for full frame camera goodness! So I started looking around for a 5D body, and even put in a couple of bids on Trademe (NZ's answer to eBay).

Never one to shy away from a complete system change (as mentioned earlier), at the same time as I was looking at Canon 5D bodies on the used market, I also looked in to other options at roughly the same price. The Fuji system has always interested me, so I looked at a couple of XT-1's. Sony has also intrigued with the A7's, but unfortunately even the A7 original goes for more than I was willing to pay. And that's when I saw it. A low-ball auction price for a used, but not abused, Nikon D300.

Me and the Nikon D300 / Canon 5D association go way back. We have history together. Unresolved history.

Long story short, back in 2010 I was using a Nikon D300 system after my Canon 5D (that I was still paying off but was out of warranty) died on me. The information in the viewfinder stopped working and was going to require an electrical circuit board replacement. Wedding season was fast approaching - I had a few weddings already booked - and I needed a new camera. I started my digital journey with the Nikon D70 and had even shot my first wedding season with it. So when I needed a new camera to replace my 5D I decided to try Nikon again, with the D300. I loved that camera, but eventually did manage to get the Canon 5D fixed, so I had a tough decision to make (which I wrote about here).

Long story short (again), I went with the Canon 5D. But it was a decision I rather regretted. Fast-forward eight years, and it looks like it's a decision I can reverse this time around. Having initially convinced myself that I 'needed' a Canon 5D full frame for landscape photography, it was the D300 that was calling the loudest. And that price! It was almost insanely low. So I ended up bidding on the D300, thinking it would go much higher than my bid. But it didn't. I won it for $176.00NZ - body only - with just shy of 30,000 shutter actuations (the D300's shutter is rated for 150,000)! That's just crazy talk!

The D300 is a joy to use, and hits my 12 megapixel sweet spot perfectly (at 12.3MP). No, it's not full frame, but I'm not anti APS-C sensors. In fact, I prefer the 1.5x crop of the Nikon sensors over the 1.6x of the Canon. It's just that teeny bit wider. ISO range is comparable to the 5D, as is noise even though it's a smaller sensor.

Of course it hasn't arrived yet, so I'll have to reserve judgment on overall condition til then. But it has only had one owner in its 11 years, so on average he's only taken around 2700 images per year with the camera. That's not heavy use in anyone's language.

Since it was sold body-only, and since it was such a bargain (we'll see), I also had enough money from my film camera sales to buy a general, all-purpose lens. I went straight back to Trademe to find one of my favourite lenses of all time - the Nikkor AF-S DX 18-70mm f3.5-4.5 IF ED!

This is the lens that first came out with the D70. I guess you could call it a D70 'kit' lens? But this ain't no kit lens in the traditional run-of-the-mill 18-55mm kit lens cheapo plastic sense of the definition. This 18-70mm is a cut above. Both optically and in build quality. It has a metal mount, weather sealing, an excellent focal range (27-105mm equivalent), and is fairly 'fast' at f3.5-4.5. It has ED glass, silent and quick internal focusing, and excellent image quality (albeit with a little vignetting apparent wide open at the 18mm end). It ain't perfect, but I love this lens. I snapped one up as soon as I found a decent 'Buy Now' price ($150NZ with free shipping).

Now that I had decided to dive back into the Nikon system, it was full steam ahead with selling my Canon 50D gear. As I write this I have already sold a few items and have just a few more to go. This has facilitated my second (and third) lens purchase(s). Next on the list of 'must-haves' after the Nikkor 18-70mm was a fast prime - the Nikkor 50mm f1.8D. Nikon's version of the nifty fifty (although better built than Canon's version of this lens).

The 50mm prime is often the first lens purchase for someone looking to improve their images on a budget. The fast f1.8 aperture is ideal for low-light, and gives buttery-smooth background bokeh. A great cheap portrait option on APS-C cameras, since the 50mm focal length crops to a mid-telephoto 75mm f1.8 field of view. It may not get a lot of use, but since it's so small and light, it's no big deal to carry it with you on the off chance you may need a small, fast prime lens.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again - I'm not a big telephoto shooter. As a landscape photographer, wide-angle is more important to me (initially at least). So of course my third (and final) lens purchase (for a while at least) needed to be a wide angle landscape lens.

Enter the Tokina SD 11-16mm f2.8 IF DX AT-X Pro. On an APS-C camera like the D300 (which the lens was designed for) it equates to about a 16-24mm full-frame lens. Plenty wide enough. And fast for a wide angle with a constant f2.8 aperture. Looks to me like a perfect astro lens, and I can't wait!

I've been wanting to do some astro photography for a very long time, but have never had the right lens for it. I get the feeling that this has now changed! Tokina even advertises this lens on its website as an astro lens. Wide, fast and sharp! And that's according to the reviews I've read online. I'm a big fan of Tokina lenses on Nikon cameras. They are all very well built, with excellent image quality, and they often produce lenses that sit outside the 'normal' focal ranges of all the other brands. I think I recall reading somewhere that Tokina was started by two ex Nikon engineers who left Nikon because they weren't being allowed to design unusual focal length zooms. That's a story for another time maybe? A review of the 11-16mm f2.8 Tokina will definitely follow once I've had time to play with it.

So there you have it. My switch back - this time around - to the Nikon D300. It should be here any day now. I'll let you know what I think of the actual body once I have it in my hot little hands. Exciting!