Camera Body Suggestions?

[Chris W]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have an M240 with vintage M lenses and a Sigma FP with an M lens adapter, also some Sigma L mount lenses.

I really like the FP, but for one task it has let me down, a paid job photographing a live band. The LED lights changed so often and in different strength values, the majority of my shots exhibited very obvious banding.

I bought a Leica SL. There were issues with it and I have returned it for a refund. It shouted Leica, which probably meant I wasn't going to take it on holiday (security reasons). It was bulky. I could never afford the Leica L mount lenses. I've now decided not to buy another.

So if I needed a good quality body with both mechanical and electronic shutters, what are the choices? Budget £1500 to £2500 (max).

Panasonic S5 was mentioned, but it has too many dials and buttons and is as much a video camera as a stills one. I don't need video (I'm happy with the FP).

The camera I sold that I miss the most is the Leica Q. But I wasn't a fan of 28mm and 28mm isn't going to cut it for shooting a live band.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[wda]

What are your objections to your M240? It is less bulky than the SLwhich you dislike.

[Chris W]

It's all manual, which is not ideal when photographing a band that moves around a lot and lighting that changes radically every few seconds.

If it was jazz or classical it would be no problem.

 

[Chris W]

It doesn't have to be Leica, which is why I posted in the 'digital' forum.

[frame-it]

Canon R

1 hour ago, Chris W said:

It doesn't have to be Leica, which is why I posted in the 'digital' forum.

 

[pgk]

One of the Sony cameras should do what you want. Very adaptable and highly competent but they do have a pretty awful User Interface which takes a lot of learning, understading and utilising.

[zeitz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There are autofocus adapters to use M lenses on any of the Canon/Nikon/Sony mirrorless cameras.  But native lenses will work better.  You need go to a camera store and try products from the current camera lineups.

[Chris W]

All good advice. Thanks.

I would like to love the camera system, as well as be able to use it for the particular job as mentioned.

[zeitz]

1 hour ago, Chris W said:

I would like to love the camera system

Any mirrorless camera will take the same pictures these days.  It is the handling and menu structure that will lead you to pick one over the other.  Even though I have small hands, I like big cameras.  I prefer the size, button placement and vertical grip of a Nikon D6 to that of the Nikon Z9.  That is why you need to try them out in a camera store.

[Einst_Stein]

To take advantage of L and M lens and keep the Leica image rendering, your choices are CL (minimum buttons) or TL2(essentially no button). 

Edited September 4, 2022 by Einst_Stein

[Chris W]

I had the CL. It was ok, I traded it in for the SL, but ended up not liking the SL.

I prefer to stay away from crop sensors, mainly due to liking 35mm lens aspect and not owning many wider lenses. 

[wda]

35 minutes ago, Chris W said:

I had the CL. It was ok, I traded it in for the SL, but ended up not liking the SL.

I prefer to stay away from crop sensors, mainly due to liking 35mm lens aspect and not owning many wider lenses. 

The CL has wider options by Leica and Sigma. Unless your end result is very big prints, crop sensors are more than adequate.

[Chris W]

I found the files a little noisy - at 1600 ISO. My FP files looked nicer, but on the main project I need a body for I had banding problems with the electronic shutter.

Also, I own one 28mm M lens, which is not as good as my M 35mm and 50mm lenses. The problem with crop sensors is having to buy new wider lenses to get that same 35mm view.

[wda]

If you're a regular low-light photographer,  I understand. Although I have controlled noise way beyond iso 1600.

[Chris W]

It was a live band, who I might be photographing again.

The darker parts of the image were noisy. It looked like film grain, which was OK. I think they also want some pictures for large posters, which means I'm concerned about the noise and also might need more than 24mp.

[Coffeecup]

On 9/4/2022 at 4:24 PM, Chris W said:

It was a live band, who I might be photographing again.

The darker parts of the image were noisy. It looked like film grain, which was OK. I think they also want some pictures for large posters, which means I'm concerned about the noise and also might need more than 24mp.

I think your only concern is low light performance and fast reliable AF. You self opted for FF and not too large or heavy. 
I’m not sure, but to me that has Sony A7 written all over it. 

[Chris W]

So far yes it might be. It's just annoying to pay a premium for advanced video functions. I wish Sony would offer an A7 with a 40 to 60mp sensor without all the video bells and whistles (extra buttons, extra menus). This is where Leica kind of rules other brands.

Same with Panasonic. Maybe an S1R would be good for what I want, but so much complex mess on the body.

[Coffeecup]

In the end that’s something you can only answer. No one else. For instance I’ve recently stepped in the Leica APSC system without owning any other Leica lenses. I went for Leica for its clean files and how they relate to my Nikon CCD cameras. And for the fact that it’s a stills camera. Third is I always like to choose ‘something else than the rest’ and fourth that I really think small European manufacturers should be supported in an Asian dominated market. 

Downside was the dead end that APSC L-mount currently is. And it’s price ofcourse. I was looking to the Fuji XE4 which is in a lot of things superior to the CL, but not in the photos it produces. And that’s what matters in the end, most of all. 
 

But back on topic. When I’d have to shoot lots of difficult light, I’d go for the option with affordable fast glass (=not Leica) and with ISO invariance (so it doesn’t matter if you underexpose stay base iso, as you can recover everything in post). 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Chris W]

I need more parts of the picture in focus. I shot with the CL at ISO1600 and the f-stop at f5.6 to f8. f1.4 just doesn't cut it for music performance coverage, with so little in focus.

The CL was fine, I fancied a change and found the 1600 ISO files noisy in the darker areas, although the noise pleasantly resembled film grain.

1600 was borderline in this light. Base ISO would have been a complete no go.

 

I also thought more megapixels might help with the band's desire for print ads and posters.

Really the few shots that came out on my Sigma FP were stunning, but 90% of the shots had bad banding.

Edited September 9, 2022 by Chris W