Hi Adam. I found your video quite encouraging. I shoot with an 'old' (if indeed you can call 2008, 'old') Nikon D90, and it has served me well for quite a while. Although I've never actually printed anything bigger than an 8 by 6 photo, I think I'd now have the confidence to do it, even though it's only a 12.3mp camera. Cheers.
It’s quite good that a few of you pro photogs are going down this track at the moment , Gary Gough and his Canon 350 series comes to mind as a balance to the endless new camera reviews. I think most of us are interested in seeing what is new but cameras are very much into the territory of diminishing returns these day in terms of image quality , they tend to come into their own with as you say, usability, speed, image stabilisation, video, AF and touch screens. Every now and then I take my (2004) Canon 20D off the shelf for fun and to be honest even as an 8mm pixel camera it can still turn out images of the same great quality I remember from almost 20 years ago. That its batteries are still operational is amazing. I current use the R5 which of course is a world away from the postage sized LCD on the 20D and of course I don’t need the Sony Handy Cam from back in 2004 anymore but really I agree entirely older cameras are just as capable of turning out great images as todays pro cameras are of turning out garbage.
Actually an important video Adam. Well done. Also an unexpected aside - a good advert for Canon's build quality on their cameras. That sucker survived drowning! Kudos Canon!
Great content and really enjoyed it. Totally agree. Having higher model and better camera makes it easier in terms of ergonomics, toucscreen, focus stacking on the camera,etc. but not necessarily would give your better photographs or make you better photographer. I have Nikon d7500 which is enthusiast level 21 megapixel camera. At some point i was caught on this never ending gear acquisition thingy and I was researching for better cameras , filters, etc. but later realised it would be better to focus on composition, lighting and traveling, being in the right place at the right time. Since then I improved much more.
Anyone saying it’s just the camera simply doesn’t have the experience to understand photography, post production, etc. So many factors weight in greater than the sensor.
100%. And many of the world’s greatest images were shot with rudimentary equipment and lenses that, by today’s standards, would be considered ‘budget’.
Lens over camera. For you fans that want a cheap and sharp system, pickup the Samyang /Rokinon 16mm f2. Manual lens with L level sharpness. It is an crop sensor lens.
I work about 80% with analog camera's. From cheap Holga to Mamiya. The camera does not make the shot, you do. Use the limitations instead of fight them.
I know the struggle. I'm trying to get some decent pictures out of my 1945 Mercury II half-frame. I'm getting there, but it's a steep learning curve but, omg...isn't analogue photography amazing? especially if you develop at home. I would love the world to feel this thrill, I used to shoot digital all the time, but now, I'm 100% analogue :-)
I really appreciate the time you spend on challenging assumptions (in this and other videos) and that you're prepared to ask deeper questions of photography and us as photographers. Thank you.
when you look at the work of some the great photographers who have went before us, then it's clear their achievement wasn't solely related to the camera of its time so I can't see why anyone would base their argument that the great camera makes you a great photographer, as there are a number of variables that also need to be taken into consideration. Loved the mono Adam, the paper choice really made the image pop
Adam I still use my old Pentax 6 megapixel DSLR' s from 2005 & 2006 they take good pictures that I improve with modern photo editing software that makes all the difference in making t,he photos look like I remember how the scene looked to me when I took the picture
I made a very similar comment to your review video of this camera - It's gratifying to see good results since I'm shooting a T8i (850D) right now. Other than 4K video, a rear dial and a few other minor changes, my understanding is the two are little different, actually. Lens-wise, I use old(er) Sigma 17-70 and a Canon EF 70-300 IS USM zooms. Neither the camera nor the lenses are top shelf (obviously) but with care and judicious processing, good images can be obtained. Now it's just up to me to get them!! LOL
Great video, again. Thank you. I've gone from a 500D to an 80D (which I still use for wildlife) and had the opportunity to buy an ancient 5D mark 1 last year, for a tiny amount of money and have never been happier with my photography. Sure it doesn't have the resolution of the 80D or the speed for birds, it's old, ponderous and you can't even get Canon batteries for it anymore, but I'm printing more with it and absolutely love my ancient camera.
This video will have a special place in my heart as this is the camera I shoot with. I do not have enough money to upgrade to a full frame system but I do love to think that my inspiration uses the camera and makes astounding images with that. It inspires me doubly.
For any budding new photographers watching this, I shot hundreds of published images for magazines with a Ricoh XR-P, and later, a Nikon FE2. Just like a great writer doesn’t need a Mac Pro to weave a great story, you don’t need a fancy camera kit to create amazing images. As Adam amply demonstrates in this video, if you focus on subject, composition, lighting, and the exposure triangle, and you can make magic for just a few hundred quid/dollars. It’s taken me 40 years of shooting to buy my ‘dream’ camera kit. Just get outside and enjoy your art. You will only get better. 👍
Thanks for sharing your experience with great results...yes as a hobbyist & a pensioner I can't afford expensive gear...I generally purchase s/h cameras & lenses so I enjoyed your video & understand your comments... cheers from Australia 😀
As always, Adam, a great video. I've had a 10-18 for about three years and find it sharp, with great colour rendition, firstly on a 50D, then an 80D and now on my new R6 (with an adapter) and it has given me "wallworthy" photos on almost every occasion. Yes, it's mostly plastic and feels a bit cheap, but as they say, it gives bang for your buck. I'm glad I have it.
I really liked that 10-18mm when I had my Canon system :-) Oddly, I also have a ZV-1 now for vlogging. But yeah, gear does matter, but not so much that you can't take awesome photos with nearly any camera.
I’ve still got the 800D and 10-18 (as well as 18-55 and 55-250). It does the job for me so can’t really justify upgrading yet. If it breaks I might get the R7 so I can still use my lenses with the adaptor.
Oh yes! Recently, i n a moment of photographic crisis, I removed the dust from my old EOS 600D giving it a EF-S 24mm 2.8 bought used. Starting over from another perspective. Not the camera but the eye and sensitivity of the photographer are important. Great video and beautiful photos.
I am using this camera for a couple of years as may main body. One thing i figured out with any photographer that uses pro level cameras is the misunderstanding of the hardware of “cheaper” cameras. The 800D uses the Canon’s latest 24mp sensor, bypassed only by the 90D’s 32mp. The dynamic range is better than the 80D, a way more expensive camera back then. Also, the fact that it’s APSC doesn’t mean bad or cheap… you see, the same size sensors powers all the Fuji cameras (except the medium format). The only facts that made 800D cheaper are the build quality (obviously) and the lack of pro related controls such as second screen and another selection wheel. The other common misunderstanding is the usage of bad lenses, like the 10-18mm on your video. I have no problem to use a cheap lens but if you want to test the power of a camera, at least make sure the glass is not limiting. With that said, I can share my experiences. I am using basically prime lenses with 800D, the (underrated) EF-S 24mm 2.8 STM, a ZEISS Planar 1.4/50, and an EF 35mm f1.4L. My only zoom is the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 G2. Almost all of them expensive and great glasses. The image quality of 800D with any of these lenses is stellar. I shot landscapes and street photography without any complaint. As for dynamic range, I am ok on -2 EV on shadows but I bracket as you said just to be sure for more difficult situations… in any case, the dynamic range is better than my old 5D mk2 in any case. But if you have a kit lens or a cheaper one you probably end up unsatisfied. In the beginning I had the kit lens and the ef-s 10-18: though in good light the images was ok, I had the same problem almost every single time! The edge sharpness. Even by lens correction on Lightroom for distortion and vignetting the loss of image sharpness was there… so, my advice, keep the “cheap” camera, buy good glass!
I'm always impressed by the output of my old used 12mp Canon 5D classic (2008 vintage, sold just before the 5DMK2 came out, I found the old receipt from the original purchaser in the box). It came with an even older 28mm f2.8 that seems to live on well beyond what should be expected. Just because it's old and outdated doesn't mean it stopped being good! Without pixel peeping I can't really see a difference between that and my RP, even with my best lenses. I really do enjoy using it . Thanks for a fun video!
Nice video. And dit shows that it’s the skills of the photographer that make the image! I especially like the square photo, would love to see that printed on the wall.
In the second shot you said you used the polariser to increase the reflections a bit. As I understand it the polariser works best with the sun at 90 degrees and not at all with the sun directly in front or behind. I'm interested to know what effect it had in that second shot.
Hi Adam. Thank you for this. I bought my Canon 800D just over 2 years ago it was part of a bundle deal, I have got some great shots with it and find it very versatile: landscape, wild life and birds, sports and even some macro photography. The biggest difference I found was when I got some better lenses. I will probably upgrade at some point more because the newer cameras have better auto focusing and high shutter speed so better for wildlife and sports but for now I have been very happy and learnt a lot.
This is an important video, the results from your Canon 800D are, to me, amazing, I shoot with a 700D (much underrated) and a Sony Cybershot F828 and Sony Cybershot R1. I can hear a lot of 'wow realies' out there. The Sony cameras are now ancient in comparison, but they have zeiss glass, I'm perfectly happy with the results from these two Cybershots. My Canon 700D coupled with a battery grip, is a snappy performer, the 700Ds ergonomics are perfect for me. Older cameras can still deliver, as you've just proved Adam.
Great images Adam! That camera is only 2 or 3 clicks nicer than my T6 and I am rather pleased with the image quality of it. Thanks for sharing! Keep up the great work!
This. Idea explain why I still like and shoot with my D5300 Nikon… it’s been traveling with me for quite sometime including France…”Paris, Normandy, Toulon…. As well as Valencia, Barcelona…. As well as Italy…Rome …I still need to revisit all my photos from there and start finding those gems to print …;)
Super vlog. I have always said its not the camera that takes the photo, ith the person behind the camera that takes the photo. I loved the Black & White of the 2 rocks, I agree the square shot was the one for me.
What have we come to when 800d is considered "old camera"... What about something really old, something like 350d? Or even more challenging antique 1/1.7'' ccd compact?
Yes yes yes. You can get perfectly good quality photos from old gear. It was possible once with these cameras and that doesn't cease when the manufacturers release something newer. I wonder if the likes of Constable, Turner or any of the other great landscape artists ever thought "Jeez, these old brushes are crap compared to the latest ones. Must upgrade!!"., Thanks for the video and your efforts Adam.
You can take world class images with any camera. My first DSLR was a 10 megapixel Canon Rebel Xs, and I've got pictures in my archives I took with that camera that are just as stunning as the ones I take with my current camera, a 5D Mark II.
I was woundering if I get a cheap camera would I take good pics with it compared with the other excellent expensive ones... I needed this really Thanks a lot
Nice one Adam, great video and unlike some others that have done similar 'lets try old' reviews you also used a budget lens which hasn't always received glowing praise 😉 but with good results. As an APS-C enthusiast on a budget I don't own L glass, I do have the 10-18 as I don't take a lot of wide shots but wanted the option. If you know a lenses sweet spots and limitations you can get pleasing results, as you proved. Improve your skill set before your gear.
Hello Adam, nice video and the printed photos look really good. It's not the camera that composes the pictures, the camera just records the scene projected on the sensor. And any reasonable modern digital camera can do that with enough resolution and dynamic range for good prints. As long as you see the camera (and the lenses) as tools to achieve your creative vision, the gear doesn't get in the way and you know when you need new gear to create photographs that are outside the limits of your current gear. I have a full spectrum converted 600D to shoot infrared images with a Sigma 18-200mm zoom, which is not a high end lens either. But the lens has no IR hotspot and it's overall a nice combination with great focal range coverage that allows me to create photographs I'm really proud of. And I happily print my images even up to A2. That requires a fair bit of sharpening to enhance the 18MP images and the less than perfect lens but in the end nobody can tell. For a trip to some the cathedrals of France I bought a used 5D Mark IV with used 8-15mm and an 16-35mm lenses to really show the gothic architecture in all its splendor. My main camera at the time was an 80D APS-C camera which was a bit limiting for that purpose. The 5D has a better low light and high ISO performance and with the full frame sensor a greater field of view. I wouldn't have bought the 5D for normal landscape photographs and I still use the 80D for macro photography because of the higher depth of view and long focal range shoots for better reach with the crop factor. They really are tools and depending on your creative vision, you might want to have some specialized tool to realize it.
I would like to see a side-by-side comparison between this camera and your usual one. As you said though, you’d be hard pressed to know unless you saw a comparison. Nice work!
I recently bought a Mamiya C330 to try medium format in a more economical way compared to a GFX or Hasselblad digital system. The camera is almost as old as me, but still takes excellent images. It is still a better camera then I am a photographer.
I think becoming proficient in the use of Photoshop and Lightroom put camera body’s on a even playing field. However, I still believe good glass and an eye for composition is the key to wall worthy photos.
I received a tee shirt for my birthday from my lady friend with these words on it, "Cameras don't take photographs, photographers do." My 14 year old 14 megapixel camera makes beautiful wall hangable 11x14s and 8x10s.
Hi Adam, what printer and paper do you use please? Would like to try that instead of getting them done as photos 📸....and as always enjoy the youtube...cheers
I wouldn’t go for a printer like Adam’s, it will cost you a fortune. I have an A4 printer and an A3 printer, each bought for less than £200. I use moderately priced printing paper and the results are good and I frame them and display them in my home. Some friends have seen them and blagged copies which they have framed too. You don’t have to spend a fortune to get good results.
There's a lot of people I see talk down even on the EOS R because it uses an older sensor and it's not too of the line. But it's a solid camera and I've compared it to some R5 shots in hand and they are actually comparable. It's down to good shooting and good lenses. I've used a Canon T7i and have shot some lovely high res shots and it was solid and can see people using a 80D or 90D and killing it.
I love this video, but I don’t consider the 800D to be a cheap old camera. It was a flagship not that long ago. I would like to see a video with a Nikon D7000 or a Canon 5D mark 2 or even a Nikon D3300.
Behind on your videos Adam so sorry! I used to use the 10-18mm lens with a Canon 80D and was always surprised you disliked it so much. In terms of vfm I think it was right up there. Composition wins out over MP (up to a point) - it's just how large the image is blown up to.
As Ansel Adams once said: “The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it.” and I think you showed that here. I did find the vignette on the sun star image a bit heavy and distracting but to each their own. The conditions weren't the best but good camera-ship and a creative eye won out in the end, the age of the equipment was irrelevant 🙏 🙏🙏
The real question: can a battered, old, and cheap photographer take good photos? The answer is no, if he's either unable to reach locations or won't pay for travel. 😉 More seriously, I did replace my 5D Mark IV with an R5, but not because of image quality. More about less weight, faster FPS for birding, video, etc. But the 5DM4 took a lot of great photos that still hang on my wall today.
For my next camera, I have a couple of specific features I am looking for but I am in no hurry to buy a new camera. My next major purchases will be concentrating on specific lenses.
This might hurt your chances of getting a camera sponsor. They want to sell the 200 MP, 400 fps, nuclear-powered new model, with the coffee maker attachment.
A couple youtubers I watch have switched to old 7D cameras another guy dug out an old 40D. Old cameras mean nothing, it's what the photographer can do with it.
Canon cameras, even older like the 1300d which I had and even more so the G7 X original version. Not only did I win one, which then is what got me into photography but it got battered all the time. It was the camera that I always had on me, then I dropped it, well, it actually fell out of my pocket, only about a foot high, but then I drove over it with my rather big and heavy mobility scooter. The screen was smashed, the flash, well that completely came away but I pushed it back in, used my panel pin hammer to get the metal as near to it should be as I could and……..it worked immediately. I then had my accident where I lost everything bar my 50mm and now use a Fuji XT3 thanks to my insurance company, which I may well be changing
How can a camera like your Canon ever be more reliable after what you've done to her, and still shoot stills like this that no one could ever tell apart from a high-end camera?! You see videos like this more often now. Why? I think it has slowly pixelated out. Good thing. Finally, it's all about taking photos again. Thanks for the video.
I have seen professional well-known photographer takes amazing shot with a kids camera and I seen people with extreme expensive equipment can't even take a non blurry photo. In my home country we have a saying " you take what you have" personally I think the best equipment you have is the one in your hand
Almost all digital cameras are getting cheap with age. Except Leica :) The question of good photos depends what is good for particular individual. Do picturesque landscapes benefit from latest and greatest gear? I would think so. I'm just not into landscapes. Does documentary, reportage and street needs latest and greatest gear? This what I'm into. And as viewer and also as photog, I'm 100% sure it is irrelevant. In this photography content is the main factor. Assuming photog is good one and knows how to handle exposures :) If you know what you are doing, just like for landscapes, even AF is not so much needed.
Why not go out with a Brownie 127 and say its not the camera it's the person behind it that makes the decision of what to take! We know you can take great images and sometimes I can't see the point of wasting your talents on blogs like these.
I imagine it is to inspire those who don’t have buckets of money to spend. You can print a decent image to A3 or even larger from a 5 megapixel compact camera. I have done it and framed them for my home. The point Adam is making is, that it is the photographer and their vision that matters most, not the camera necessarily and we don’t have to upgrade just because the manufacturers have brought out something new, or even that one of our favourite TH-cam photographers has gone megapixel mad.
Battered, old cheap cameras cannot take good photos. Neither can brand new, state of the art cameras. Because *cameras don’t take photos, photographers take photos*. I do a few different gear-prone hobbies, but photographers are the WORST when it comes to being anxious and judgmental about gear. One of the best photos I’ve ever taken (good enough to hang over my mantle for a couple of years) was shot on a Motorola Razr phone at 320x240 pixels. But you’ll never learn to be a good photographer by reviewing barrel distortion test patterns on the internet, wondering where to spend the next thousand dollars.
Hi Adam. I found your video quite encouraging. I shoot with an 'old' (if indeed you can call 2008, 'old') Nikon D90, and it has served me well for quite a while. Although I've never actually printed anything bigger than an 8 by 6 photo, I think I'd now have the confidence to do it, even though it's only a 12.3mp camera. Cheers.
It’s quite good that a few of you pro photogs are going down this track at the moment , Gary Gough and his Canon 350 series comes to mind as a balance to the endless new camera reviews. I think most of us are interested in seeing what is new but cameras are very much into the territory of diminishing returns these day in terms of image quality , they tend to come into their own with as you say, usability, speed, image stabilisation, video, AF and touch screens. Every now and then I take my (2004) Canon 20D off the shelf for fun and to be honest even as an 8mm pixel camera it can still turn out images of the same great quality I remember from almost 20 years ago. That its batteries are still operational is amazing. I current use the R5 which of course is a world away from the postage sized LCD on the 20D and of course I don’t need the Sony Handy Cam from back in 2004 anymore but really I agree entirely older cameras are just as capable of turning out great images as todays pro cameras are of turning out garbage.
Actually an important video Adam. Well done. Also an unexpected aside - a good advert for Canon's build quality on their cameras. That sucker survived drowning! Kudos Canon!
Great content and really enjoyed it. Totally agree. Having higher model and better camera makes it easier in terms of ergonomics, toucscreen, focus stacking on the camera,etc. but not necessarily would give your better photographs or make you better photographer. I have Nikon d7500 which is enthusiast level 21 megapixel camera. At some point i was caught on this never ending gear acquisition thingy and I was researching for better cameras , filters, etc. but later realised it would be better to focus on composition, lighting and traveling, being in the right place at the right time. Since then I improved much more.
Anyone saying it’s just the camera simply doesn’t have the experience to understand photography, post production, etc. So many factors weight in greater than the sensor.
100%. And many of the world’s greatest images were shot with rudimentary equipment and lenses that, by today’s standards, would be considered ‘budget’.
Lens over camera. For you fans that want a cheap and sharp system, pickup the Samyang /Rokinon 16mm f2. Manual lens with L level sharpness. It is an crop sensor lens.
I work about 80% with analog camera's. From cheap Holga to Mamiya. The camera does not make the shot, you do. Use the limitations instead of fight them.
I know the struggle. I'm trying to get some decent pictures out of my 1945 Mercury II half-frame. I'm getting there, but it's a steep learning curve but, omg...isn't analogue photography amazing? especially if you develop at home. I would love the world to feel this thrill, I used to shoot digital all the time, but now, I'm 100% analogue :-)
I really appreciate the time you spend on challenging assumptions (in this and other videos) and that you're prepared to ask deeper questions of photography and us as photographers. Thank you.
Thanks Geoff. Really appreciate that. Feels especially important at the moment to move the conversation to something more meaningful.
when you look at the work of some the great photographers who have went before us, then it's clear their achievement wasn't solely related to the camera of its time so I can't see why anyone would base their argument that the great camera makes you a great photographer, as there are a number of variables that also need to be taken into consideration. Loved the mono Adam, the paper choice really made the image pop
Thanks Jim. with the sun reflecting off the screen I could barely see it at the scene. the colour wasn’t working but was chuffed once I went mono.
Adam
I still use my old Pentax 6 megapixel DSLR' s from 2005 & 2006 they take good pictures that I improve with modern photo editing software that makes all the difference in making t,he photos look like I remember how the scene looked to me when I took the picture
I made a very similar comment to your review video of this camera - It's gratifying to see good results since I'm shooting a T8i (850D) right now. Other than 4K video, a rear dial and a few other minor changes, my understanding is the two are little different, actually. Lens-wise, I use old(er) Sigma 17-70 and a Canon EF 70-300 IS USM zooms. Neither the camera nor the lenses are top shelf (obviously) but with care and judicious processing, good images can be obtained. Now it's just up to me to get them!! LOL
Great video, again. Thank you. I've gone from a 500D to an 80D (which I still use for wildlife) and had the opportunity to buy an ancient 5D mark 1 last year, for a tiny amount of money and have never been happier with my photography. Sure it doesn't have the resolution of the 80D or the speed for birds, it's old, ponderous and you can't even get Canon batteries for it anymore, but I'm printing more with it and absolutely love my ancient camera.
Nice one Adam. Great watch. Lovely pics.
Thank you kindly
Outstanding video, as always, Adam. Boy, that wind!!!
This video will have a special place in my heart as this is the camera I shoot with. I do not have enough money to upgrade to a full frame system but I do love to think that my inspiration uses the camera and makes astounding images with that. It inspires me doubly.
For any budding new photographers watching this, I shot hundreds of published images for magazines with a Ricoh XR-P, and later, a Nikon FE2. Just like a great writer doesn’t need a Mac Pro to weave a great story, you don’t need a fancy camera kit to create amazing images. As Adam amply demonstrates in this video, if you focus on subject, composition, lighting, and the exposure triangle, and you can make magic for just a few hundred quid/dollars. It’s taken me 40 years of shooting to buy my ‘dream’ camera kit. Just get outside and enjoy your art. You will only get better. 👍
Thanks for sharing your experience with great results...yes as a hobbyist & a pensioner I can't afford expensive gear...I generally purchase s/h cameras & lenses so I enjoyed your video & understand your comments... cheers from Australia 😀
As always, Adam, a great video. I've had a 10-18 for about three years and find it sharp, with great colour rendition, firstly on a 50D, then an 80D and now on my new R6 (with an adapter) and it has given me "wallworthy" photos on almost every occasion. Yes, it's mostly plastic and feels a bit cheap, but as they say, it gives bang for your buck. I'm glad I have it.
Ha exactly. Bang for your buck on all those STM lenses is off the charts.
I really liked that 10-18mm when I had my Canon system :-) Oddly, I also have a ZV-1 now for vlogging. But yeah, gear does matter, but not so much that you can't take awesome photos with nearly any camera.
I’ve still got the 800D and 10-18 (as well as 18-55 and 55-250). It does the job for me so can’t really justify upgrading yet. If it breaks I might get the R7 so I can still use my lenses with the adaptor.
It’s hard to break the 800d and 10-18 combo. I’ve tried really hard.
Oh yes! Recently, i n a moment of photographic crisis, I removed the dust from my old EOS 600D giving it a EF-S 24mm 2.8 bought used. Starting over from another perspective. Not the camera but the eye and sensitivity of the photographer are important. Great video and beautiful photos.
Thanks mate
Great video! Thanks man
I am using this camera for a couple of years as may main body. One thing i figured out with any photographer that uses pro level cameras is the misunderstanding of the hardware of “cheaper” cameras. The 800D uses the Canon’s latest 24mp sensor, bypassed only by the 90D’s 32mp. The dynamic range is better than the 80D, a way more expensive camera back then. Also, the fact that it’s APSC doesn’t mean bad or cheap… you see, the same size sensors powers all the Fuji cameras (except the medium format). The only facts that made 800D cheaper are the build quality (obviously) and the lack of pro related controls such as second screen and another selection wheel. The other common misunderstanding is the usage of bad lenses, like the 10-18mm on your video. I have no problem to use a cheap lens but if you want to test the power of a camera, at least make sure the glass is not limiting.
With that said, I can share my experiences. I am using basically prime lenses with 800D, the (underrated) EF-S 24mm 2.8 STM, a ZEISS Planar 1.4/50, and an EF 35mm f1.4L. My only zoom is the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 G2. Almost all of them expensive and great glasses. The image quality of 800D with any of these lenses is stellar. I shot landscapes and street photography without any complaint. As for dynamic range, I am ok on -2 EV on shadows but I bracket as you said just to be sure for more difficult situations… in any case, the dynamic range is better than my old 5D mk2 in any case. But if you have a kit lens or a cheaper one you probably end up unsatisfied. In the beginning I had the kit lens and the ef-s 10-18: though in good light the images was ok, I had the same problem almost every single time! The edge sharpness. Even by lens correction on Lightroom for distortion and vignetting the loss of image sharpness was there… so, my advice, keep the “cheap” camera, buy good glass!
I'm always impressed by the output of my old used 12mp Canon 5D classic (2008 vintage, sold just before the 5DMK2 came out, I found the old receipt from the original purchaser in the box). It came with an even older 28mm f2.8 that seems to live on well beyond what should be expected. Just because it's old and outdated doesn't mean it stopped being good! Without pixel peeping I can't really see a difference between that and my RP, even with my best lenses. I really do enjoy using it . Thanks for a fun video!
Nice video. And dit shows that it’s the skills of the photographer that make the image! I especially like the square photo, would love to see that printed on the wall.
In the second shot you said you used the polariser to increase the reflections a bit. As I understand it the polariser works best with the sun at 90 degrees and not at all with the sun directly in front or behind. I'm interested to know what effect it had in that second shot.
Hi Adam. Thank you for this. I bought my Canon 800D just over 2 years ago it was part of a bundle deal, I have got some great shots with it and find it very versatile: landscape, wild life and birds, sports and even some macro photography. The biggest difference I found was when I got some better lenses. I will probably upgrade at some point more because the newer cameras have better auto focusing and high shutter speed so better for wildlife and sports but for now I have been very happy and learnt a lot.
This is an important video, the results from your Canon 800D are, to me, amazing, I shoot with a 700D (much underrated) and a Sony Cybershot F828 and Sony Cybershot R1. I can hear a lot of 'wow realies' out there. The Sony cameras are now ancient in comparison, but they have zeiss glass, I'm perfectly happy with the results from these two Cybershots. My Canon 700D coupled with a battery grip, is a snappy performer, the 700Ds ergonomics are perfect for me. Older cameras can still deliver, as you've just proved Adam.
Great images Adam! That camera is only 2 or 3 clicks nicer than my T6 and I am rather pleased with the image quality of it. Thanks for sharing! Keep up the great work!
This. Idea explain why I still like and shoot with my D5300 Nikon… it’s been traveling with me for quite sometime including France…”Paris, Normandy, Toulon…. As well as Valencia, Barcelona…. As well as Italy…Rome …I still need to revisit all my photos from there and start finding those gems to print …;)
Brilliant Video, and as always, your work inspires to just get out there :)
Thanks Charlie. glad you enjoyed it
Comes down to having a great eye and a decent piece of glass.
Super vlog. I have always said its not the camera that takes the photo, ith the person behind the camera that takes the photo. I loved the Black & White of the 2 rocks, I agree the square shot was the one for me.
What have we come to when 800d is considered "old camera"... What about something really old, something like 350d? Or even more challenging antique 1/1.7'' ccd compact?
I thought the same thing, the 800D came out in 2017. Last week someone on TH-cam described a camera that came out in 2020 (Lumix S5) as "old".
Yes yes yes. You can get perfectly good quality photos from old gear. It was possible once with these cameras and that doesn't cease when the manufacturers release something newer. I wonder if the likes of Constable, Turner or any of the other great landscape artists ever thought "Jeez, these old brushes are crap compared to the latest ones. Must upgrade!!"., Thanks for the video and your efforts Adam.
You can take world class images with any camera. My first DSLR was a 10 megapixel Canon Rebel Xs, and I've got pictures in my archives I took with that camera that are just as stunning as the ones I take with my current camera, a 5D Mark II.
Great video, my first dslr was the canon 200d and I used to get some great shots with it😀
I was woundering if I get a cheap camera would I take good pics with it compared with the other excellent expensive ones... I needed this really
Thanks a lot
If you are an experienced Photog shooting wildlife or sports then yes, gear matters. Shooting landscapes are a little different
Your hard work is appreciated
Nice one Adam, great video and unlike some others that have done similar 'lets try old' reviews you also used a budget lens which hasn't always received glowing praise 😉 but with good results. As an APS-C enthusiast on a budget I don't own L glass, I do have the 10-18 as I don't take a lot of wide shots but wanted the option. If you know a lenses sweet spots and limitations you can get pleasing results, as you proved.
Improve your skill set before your gear.
Hello Adam, nice video and the printed photos look really good. It's not the camera that composes the pictures, the camera just records the scene projected on the sensor. And any reasonable modern digital camera can do that with enough resolution and dynamic range for good prints. As long as you see the camera (and the lenses) as tools to achieve your creative vision, the gear doesn't get in the way and you know when you need new gear to create photographs that are outside the limits of your current gear.
I have a full spectrum converted 600D to shoot infrared images with a Sigma 18-200mm zoom, which is not a high end lens either. But the lens has no IR hotspot and it's overall a nice combination with great focal range coverage that allows me to create photographs I'm really proud of. And I happily print my images even up to A2. That requires a fair bit of sharpening to enhance the 18MP images and the less than perfect lens but in the end nobody can tell.
For a trip to some the cathedrals of France I bought a used 5D Mark IV with used 8-15mm and an 16-35mm lenses to really show the gothic architecture in all its splendor. My main camera at the time was an 80D APS-C camera which was a bit limiting for that purpose. The 5D has a better low light and high ISO performance and with the full frame sensor a greater field of view. I wouldn't have bought the 5D for normal landscape photographs and I still use the 80D for macro photography because of the higher depth of view and long focal range shoots for better reach with the crop factor.
They really are tools and depending on your creative vision, you might want to have some specialized tool to realize it.
I would like to see a side-by-side comparison between this camera and your usual one.
As you said though, you’d be hard pressed to know unless you saw a comparison. Nice work!
I recently bought a Mamiya C330 to try medium format in a more economical way compared to a GFX or Hasselblad digital system. The camera is almost as old as me, but still takes excellent images. It is still a better camera then I am a photographer.
I think becoming proficient in the use of Photoshop and Lightroom put camera body’s on a even playing field. However, I still believe good glass and an eye for composition is the key to wall worthy photos.
I have always used SanDisc cards. Now I have bought Lexar 2000x for my new Sony a7iv. I hope they will work for a long time without any problem.
You bet they can. I still have my 6.3mp EOS 300D from 2003 and my 5D(1) from 2006. They've both taken a pounding but still take pleasing images.
Can i get that book in digital format?
It’s really a book designed to be held and seen in person. The images look way better. Ships all over the world.
I received a tee shirt for my birthday from my lady friend with these words on it, "Cameras don't take photographs, photographers do." My 14 year old 14 megapixel camera makes beautiful wall hangable 11x14s and 8x10s.
And I agree… no matter how old the kit, it’s the photographer who makes the image, not the camera.
Hi Adam, what printer and paper do you use please? Would like to try that instead of getting them done as photos 📸....and as always enjoy the youtube...cheers
I wouldn’t go for a printer like Adam’s, it will cost you a fortune. I have an A4 printer and an A3 printer, each bought for less than £200. I use moderately priced printing paper and the results are good and I frame them and display them in my home. Some friends have seen them and blagged copies which they have framed too. You don’t have to spend a fortune to get good results.
@@petercollins7848 thanks Peter, what brand do you have? And i am in Australia...thanks again 🌿
It is not the size or number of megapixels, but, how you use them.
Really awesome video bro ,
It takes a battered, old, cheap photographer like me to do it!….🤣😂😘📸
There's a lot of people I see talk down even on the EOS R because it uses an older sensor and it's not too of the line. But it's a solid camera and I've compared it to some R5 shots in hand and they are actually comparable. It's down to good shooting and good lenses. I've used a Canon T7i and have shot some lovely high res shots and it was solid and can see people using a 80D or 90D and killing it.
I love this video, but I don’t consider the 800D to be a cheap old camera. It was a flagship not that long ago. I would like to see a video with a Nikon D7000 or a Canon 5D mark 2 or even a Nikon D3300.
Behind on your videos Adam so sorry! I used to use the 10-18mm lens with a Canon 80D and was always surprised you disliked it so much. In terms of vfm I think it was right up there. Composition wins out over MP (up to a point) - it's just how large the image is blown up to.
As Ansel Adams once said: “The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it.” and I think you showed that here. I did find the vignette on the sun star image a bit heavy and distracting but to each their own. The conditions weren't the best but good camera-ship and a creative eye won out in the end, the age of the equipment was irrelevant 🙏 🙏🙏
The real question: can a battered, old, and cheap photographer take good photos? The answer is no, if he's either unable to reach locations or won't pay for travel. 😉
More seriously, I did replace my 5D Mark IV with an R5, but not because of image quality. More about less weight, faster FPS for birding, video, etc. But the 5DM4 took a lot of great photos that still hang on my wall today.
The clouds are luxury.
For my next camera, I have a couple of specific features I am looking for but I am in no hurry to buy a new camera. My next major purchases will be concentrating on specific lenses.
This might hurt your chances of getting a camera sponsor. They want to sell the 200 MP, 400 fps, nuclear-powered new model, with the coffee maker attachment.
A couple youtubers I watch have switched to old 7D cameras another guy dug out an old 40D. Old cameras mean nothing, it's what the photographer can do with it.
Canon cameras, even older like the 1300d which I had and even more so the G7 X original version. Not only did I win one, which then is what got me into photography but it got battered all the time. It was the camera that I always had on me, then I dropped it, well, it actually fell out of my pocket, only about a foot high, but then I drove over it with my rather big and heavy mobility scooter. The screen was smashed, the flash, well that completely came away but I pushed it back in, used my panel pin hammer to get the metal as near to it should be as I could and……..it worked immediately.
I then had my accident where I lost everything bar my 50mm and now use a Fuji XT3 thanks to my insurance company, which I may well be changing
How can a camera like your Canon ever be more reliable after what you've done to her, and still shoot stills like this that no one could ever tell apart from a high-end camera?!
You see videos like this more often now. Why? I think it has slowly pixelated out. Good thing. Finally, it's all about taking photos again.
Thanks for the video.
Personally I think it's a sign of the times. No one, including me, is getting excited about a new bit of $5000 gear at the moment.
@@Firstmanphotography Totally agree.
I have seen professional well-known photographer takes amazing shot with a kids camera and I seen people with extreme expensive equipment can't even take a non blurry photo. In my home country we have a saying " you take what you have" personally I think the best equipment you have is the one in your hand
Great video, you should warn people about GAS, gear acquisition syndrome.
Almost all digital cameras are getting cheap with age. Except Leica :) The question of good photos depends what is good for particular individual. Do picturesque landscapes benefit from latest and greatest gear? I would think so. I'm just not into landscapes. Does documentary, reportage and street needs latest and greatest gear? This what I'm into. And as viewer and also as photog, I'm 100% sure it is irrelevant. In this photography content is the main factor. Assuming photog is good one and knows how to handle exposures :) If you know what you are doing, just like for landscapes, even AF is not so much needed.
I steal use Nikon D300.. and I am satisfied.
I paused at 00:33 to think that, yes, I'm sure a battered, old & cheap camera can take good photos. Let's see the result.
how on earth did it survive all that water😂
I don’t know
I like your definition of an old, cheap camera… 😬
I love the cheap camera thing until you put your filters on the front which are worth more than the camera, LOL!!
True. but filters degrade the image quality. they can’t improve what comes before them.
+Location+
One who knows how to create an art through photography can do a great job even with a 20 yrs old digicam..it doesn't matter.
why not?
if one is good enough, he can even draw a photorealistic painting of it, he may not even need a camera.
Why not go out with a Brownie 127 and say its not the camera it's the person behind it that makes the decision of what to take! We know you can take great images and sometimes I can't see the point of wasting your talents on blogs like these.
I imagine it is to inspire those who don’t have buckets of money to spend. You can print a decent image to A3 or even larger from a 5 megapixel compact camera. I have done it and framed them for my home. The point Adam is making is, that it is the photographer and their vision that matters most, not the camera necessarily and we don’t have to upgrade just because the manufacturers have brought out something new, or even that one of our favourite TH-cam photographers has gone megapixel mad.
Battered, old cheap cameras cannot take good photos. Neither can brand new, state of the art cameras. Because *cameras don’t take photos, photographers take photos*. I do a few different gear-prone hobbies, but photographers are the WORST when it comes to being anxious and judgmental about gear. One of the best photos I’ve ever taken (good enough to hang over my mantle for a couple of years) was shot on a Motorola Razr phone at 320x240 pixels. But you’ll never learn to be a good photographer by reviewing barrel distortion test patterns on the internet, wondering where to spend the next thousand dollars.
Someone on FB said I must have a great camera (Sony a1) so I said, yea the best 😂😂😂
Hi Ken , now there’s a great response , I get that as well from time to time. :)