Christmas gifts for a photographer

[theMoreDisneytheBetter]

My son has loved photography his whole life and is hard to shop for, so I’m temped to buy him something camera-related for Christmas. I think he has 2 obvious needs, but he has been reticent (I floated both ideas past him).

1. He has been experimenting with sports photography. Unfortunately most of the pictures that he took were out of focus, and I’m not sure how much was user error (he said he was messing around with the settings) vs. an inferior setup. I think he was shooting on his Nikon 5600 with a Tamrom 18-400 lens (f/stop goes down to the 5s or 6s). I can’t afford some of the ridiculous lenses, but I could probably swing a used Tamron 70-200 f/2.8. He has the 20something-70 version of it and it’s one of his best lenses, but he really likes to be able to zoom (which is why he was using his beloved 18-400). He played around with astrophotography this summer and also struggled a bit.

2. He is going to the USVI with his Scout troop this year, and he is the troop’s historian this year so he needs to take pictures. Every year before he leaves for summer camp I always say that I need to upgrade the junky point and shoot camera he brings (he isn’t allowed to bring his phone). He “inherited” an indestructible waterproof camera from his uncle, and just doesn’t work that well. I thought about buying him a waterproof camera like the Nikon Coolpix W300 or the Olympus TG 6, though a lot of people online suggest a GoPro instead. He said that a waterproof bag for his phone should be good enough.

What do you think? I’m going to buy pretty much everything on his (very short) list, but it just doesn’t feel like it’s quite “enough."

 

[KVH]

My son has loved photography his whole life and is hard to shop for, so I’m temped to buy him something camera-related for Christmas. I think he has 2 obvious needs, but he has been reticent (I floated both ideas past him).

1. He has been experimenting with sports photography. Unfortunately most of the pictures that he took were out of focus, and I’m not sure how much was user error (he said he was messing around with the settings) vs. an inferior setup. I think he was shooting on his Nikon 5600 with a Tamrom 18-400 lens (f/stop goes down to the 5s or 6s). I can’t afford some of the ridiculous lenses, but I could probably swing a used Tamron 70-200 f/2.8. He has the 20something-70 version of it and it’s one of his best lenses, but he really likes to be able to zoom (which is why he was using his beloved 18-400). He played around with astrophotography this summer and also struggled a bit.

2. He is going to the USVI with his Scout troop this year, and he is the troop’s historian this year so he needs to take pictures. Every year before he leaves for summer camp I always say that I need to upgrade the junky point and shoot camera he brings (he isn’t allowed to bring his phone). He “inherited” an indestructible waterproof camera from his uncle, and just doesn’t work that well. I thought about buying him a waterproof camera like the Nikon Coolpix W300 or the Olympus TG 6, though a lot of people online suggest a GoPro instead. He said that a waterproof bag for his phone should be good enough.

What do you think? I’m going to buy pretty much everything on his (very short) list, but it just doesn’t feel like it’s quite “enough."

The one issue with non-OEM 70-200/2.8 lenses will be focus speed. For moving sports, that'll be a challenge. If you go the pre-focus route and wait for action to come, you can make it work. Face it, sometimes AF is as much of a pain as it is a blessing. And you'll still spend $500+ for a decent unit used.

The USVI trip is where I'd sink money. Might not ever go there again. The Olympus is a great camera and, as long as he practices and familiarizes before the trip, it is capable of great shots above and below the water. Feeling confident with the settings will save time and frustration while on the trip and let him focus on getting the shot.

Extra cards too!!

 

[jec6613]

The one issue with non-OEM 70-200/2.8 lenses will be focus speed. For moving sports, that'll be a challenge. If you go the pre-focus route and wait for action to come, you can make it work. Face it, sometimes AF is as much of a pain as it is a blessing. And you'll still spend $500+ for a decent unit used.

For anybody reading this in the future, the biggest issue with sports isn't really the lens in this case, it's the body. The D5600 has the Nikon 39 point AF sensor, which while it has some advantages (it's great in the Df with fast primes, for instance) it's too slow to start with, and the D5600 has too much mirror down time and too simple of a metering sensor for it to track moving subjects very well. A D7500, or even better the D500, solves the problem better than an 80-400 or 70-200 f/2.8 does. I found this part out through trial and error and lots of money, unfortunately. The other issue you'll run into with a 70-200 f/2.8 on a D5600 is that it's a really unmanageable combo unless you get the absolute latest version with the weight nearer the mount, it's just too much lens on too small of a body.

In the meantime, re-assigning the AE-L/AF-L button on the back to be AF-ON and practicing back button focus techniques will go a long way to helping focus. It let me use a D5200 (same AF system as the D5600) in the Galapagos some years ago and get a ton of in focus images with a modest aperture 70-300mm, the only thing that would fit in the weight restrictions at the time.

That said, I wouldn't be purchasing a DSLR anymore unless I had a very specific need and a lot of lenses for them. The Z50 kit with 50-250mm will handily outperform in tracking, AF performance, and sharpness compared to the Tamron he already has, and Nikon has been knocking it out of the park with their new Z lenses. I actually prefer a DSLR in many (if not most) cases, but the performance of the Z-mount lenses is so good that the mirrorless come out much more than the DSLRs anymore.