My landscape kit - you don't need all that camera equipment!

[@rhiwderinraytube]

Glad I don’t have to haul all that heavy gear around! I use micro 4/3 and can carry all the equivalent in a little messenger bag or small rucksack.

[@AndyCrawfordPhotos]

Smaller kit is not necessarily a lacking kit, right? Thanks for chiming in!

[@jimrinaldi8357]

Great video, Andy. I came across it by accident and I'm glad I did. I really like your plain, matter-of-fact manner. You carry less than some other landscape photographers I follow but it meets 95% of your needs. No need to bring a lot else, "just in case." Weight is an issue for me too. I have not checked out your online gallery yet but will do so, and I subscribed so I can see whatever else you have to share with us. Thanks for the great job.

[@AndyCrawfordPhotos]

Glad you enjoyed the vid and hope it helps. I honestly think my small kit takes care of everything but long-range shots - but, man, when I add a 70-200mm to the bag I can feel the added weight.

[@arjenveldt8305]

When it comes to image quality I'd prefer my D850 over the Z9. A Z72 might even be the better option over the Z9 when it come to image quality. But the Z9 will survive any weather I guess. The Z 24-120 f4 is much better then the F mount version. And dust and water sealed. Also the Z14 - 30 f4 is a pretty decent lens and it does take filters. I really like the overall view of doing more with less. If I where to shoot landscape I'd probably just bring the 19 mm PC and the 45 mm PC.

[@AndyCrawfordPhotos]

Thanks for your thoughts. Yeah, I'll probably stick with the D850 for now - from a cost and quality standpoint. I mean, the D850 is a beast for landscape photography. But I'm going to upgrade from the 24-120 f/4 to the 24-70 f/2.8. :-)

[@davidellis9956]

Hi Andy, great video, always interesting to see another photographers views on this subject. What goes in my landscape bag is really governed by how long/difficult the walk to the location is. The D850 is always the first item in the bag. I take a wide zoom, either the tamron 15-30 or the Nikon 16-35. The Tamron is the better lens but is 2.7lb opposed to 1.5lb Nikon. Medium zoom, like you, is the Nikon 24-120 f/4 and long zoom is the Tamron 70-210 f4 which is significantly lighter and more compact compared to the f/2.8 versions. I use Lee SW150 filters which are pretty bulky and heavy so if i want to travel light i have a bunch of screw in filter to pack instead. If I want to travel really light I drop the 70-210 out and have some really lightweight magnetic filters for the 24-120 and 16-35. And I have a couple of sizes of backpack and carbon fibre tripods to choose from. So its a real mix and match set up. Question. Going out with the 24-120 and a 14mm prime do you ever miss having the wider part of the range between 14 and 24mm? Thats a focal lenth range i use a lot and would certainly miss it.

[@AndyCrawfordPhotos]

David, I have a 16-28 that is a pretty good lens, but I don't use it much any more mainly because 1) I really don't miss that range too much because I can always crop in if I need to after using the 14mm and 2) the 16-28 has very noticeable distortion at 16mm. That Sigma 14mm Art has almost no distortion - it's really remarkable. But that's not to say I couldn't benefit from the rage between 14 and 24. But as with anything in life, I've just learned to work around it. :-) Thanks for your comment!

[@rickymcc9072]

Hi Andy, everyone is different and I believe it's a case of using what's right for you. I was a 28+ year Nikon shooter with a lot of heavy kit going back to F4 and F5 back in film days. I'm not sure an otherwise excellent D9 will do much for you with landscapes in mind. Maybe you might want to look at lighter kit? I do landscapes but I'm more of a generalist- love portraits, sport and dabble in creative and street. Also I'm now developing a serious interest in video/cinematography (although I'm still on the 'nursery slopes' with that. I saw Nikon's 'Z- mount hype' back in 2018 and was seriously considering mirrorless options but was underwhelmed by initial Z6 and Z7 launch, not to mention the limited choices for native glass, so switched to Sony ( well transitioned as it took about 6 months rather than being a simple 'switch). It was a huge cost, so not undertaken lightly, but for me I know it was a sensible move. It may well not be for you, and I can understand that. I'm probably just going to sound like a Sony fanboy, but I honestly try to be objective. IMO Nikon ergonomics easily beat Sony, possibly Nikon also wins with rugged build, durability, maybe cost and, for me anyway, an emotional connection. In pretty much everything else Sony is ahead, leading on innovation and going from strength to strength. It's pretty darned expensive, a lot lighter the newer glass is smaller lighter and often 'best in class' especially in GM mkii guise - i.e. h'trinity 24-70 GM f2.8 and 70-200 GM f2.8. I used to own 15+ Nikkor lenses. Now I have a similar number of Sony lenses and IMO they are almost all smaller, sharper albeit typically more expensive than the Nikkor equivalents. Arguably Sony currently have both Canon and Nikon 'whipped' when it comes to choices for wide angles too (primes, zooms and 3rd party options). That said, being objective, glass for any main eco system (Nikon, Canon or Sony) is more than good enough for any professional use and it's only 'nerdy pixel peepers' that obsess about resolution quality. Choices and relative heft are easier for most to appreciate. Bottom line.... use what you like, but try to keep an open mind. I used to pack and shoot Sony alongside my extensive Nikon kit. Then I decided to go 'all in' and sold several Nikon bodies and circa 15 Nikkor lenses. Yet I kept my F3 and F5 with a fully manual 135mm and 50mm as nostalgia 'bookshelf ornaments'. As I said I still have an emotional response to Nikon kit even though I know I made the best decision for me, to shoot on Sony kit. I also sold my (in its day, lovely) Mamiya RZ7, several Mamiya Zeico lenses, Bronica 645 kit and a few other bits. Once I 'saw the light', transition stated getting pretty expensive. So staying with what you know, like and works for you is a good strategy for most folk. So, finally.... I'd recommend you bear in mind the real cost- benefit arguments before ditching your D850 for a D9. If, like me, you are 'mad enough' to consider alternatives outside Nikon then you could do a lot worse than reviewing Fuji or Sony offerings.

[@AndyCrawfordPhotos]

I can't argue any of this with you, Ricky. And, after I shot this vid, I really started digging in on the Z9 - and realized it's really more of a sports body. It would be amazing in the work I do with Bassmaster shooting on-the-water action - but am I going to take a $5,600 body on the water? Probably not, when my $1,500 D500 does everything Bassmaster needs. So I thought I would just move to the Z7II, but recently realized some of the issues I'm concerned with actually are related to the 24-120 f/4. So I'm going to upgrade to a Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 and put off transitioning to mirrorless unless I continue to have concerns with the D850 after adding the new lens. After all, the D850 is an amazing landscape camera, and I'm not one to chase the newest, flashiest trends. My goal is to create amazing landscape photos - and the D850 is a beast at accomplishing that. We'll see what happens when I finally am forced to move to mirrorless. I'm so far down the Nikon rabbit hole, and shoot a LOT of action, so it'll be hard for me to move to another platform and start all over. And the Nikon equipment is rock solid and durable. But I never say never. :-)

[@rickymcc8624]

@@AndyCrawfordPhotos Hi Andy, yes I can understand that staying with Nikon probably makes great sense for you. For landscape work your D850 is more than good enough. Arguably you don't need a 24-70 f2.8 over your 24-120 f4, but the f2.8 is IMO a better lens. Depending on what else you want to shoot and how fast (also personal preference) then one or more primes to augment your 24-120 might be an even better option? Only you really know the answer to that. With regard to the 24-120 f4 I was honestly underwhelmed by the optical quality of mine. After switching to Sony I found my 24-105mm f4 in Sony G form significantly better. That's not an option you will have, but I'd expect Nikon's 24-70 f2.8 to be much better lens, albeit heftier and more expensive. IMO one also has to ask when a lens is 'good enough' in real world use rather than obsessing about absolute (ie pixel peeping) tech quality. For sports and speed I always found my D500 was excellent. You won't easily better that with Nikon mirrorless short of a Z9 body. But, importantly, you will only ever get great Z9 performance with native mirrorless glass. Adapting your current F-mount lenses will 'cripple' fast AF performance on a Z9. Once I tried a Sony a9 for sports use (with fast linear motor Sony GM glass) I realised that fast sports performance beyond a Nikon D500 with fast F-mount glass was perfectly possible. Even better on a Sony A1, but I don't yet have that body. Same will be true (from what I read) on premium Canon kit. What I'm trying to say (probably badly) is the only real way to get top flite sports performance with Nikon is to use Z9 with dedicated Z-mount sports glass. Unless you want to spend significantly ($000's) then staying with your D850 / D500 would be a good option. It's a moot point whether a 'top of range' Canon R3, Sony a1 or NikonZ9 is best? We usually sense what's right for us. All are expensive and pretty good (more than adequate for most real world use cases). Personally I chose to jump ship to Sony and have no regrets. But it cost me £000's (I'm in the UK). Nikon or Canon eco system strategies are equally valid and ultimately each of us, deep deep down, probably knows what's right for us. It's a personal choice we make based on a whole heap of reasons (circumstances, budget, beliefs and emotional judgement).

[@AndyCrawfordPhotos]

@@rickymcc8624 , all good points. I actually just stepped up to the 24-70 because what I thought was some nagging issues with the body ended up being caused by the 24-120 (figured that out by shooting with the D850 plus a new Nikon 70-200 f/2.8). Did a couple of test shots in the backyard and really think it'll be a good move. Already planning my next trip to really put it to the test. Yeah, I'll probably stick with the D850 until I'm forced to move. I'm not as concerned with the sports work I do: The D500s do the job I need done, and my client is very happy with the images. And for landscapes, I'm not sure what I gain by spending more money moving to a mirrorless.

[@LandscapePhotography]

nice content Bro , success 👍👍👍

[@AndyCrawfordPhotos]

Glad you like it. Thanks!

[@jaredboazphoto]

Great video, Andy! found you on Vero. I try to only take two lenses with me as well. I have a 24-105 and a 100-500, although I just purchased a 70-200 for a lighter weight option. So we will see how that works out. Enjoyed the review, I'll take a look at the rest of your channel!

[@AndyCrawfordPhotos]

Thanks for checking it out, Jared! Hope it helps - holler if you need anything. See you on Vero! :-)

[@nevvanclarke9225]

I am still using a Nikon D850 for landscape photography. I would be cautious about going to the Z9 for a couple of reasons it’s very similar in megapixels so it’s not going to have a massive leap in image quality from the D8 50 now I know megapixels aren’t everything. And the weight of the Z9, is also very similar to the D8 50. Yes the lenses are probably lighter but they are also very expensive. It’s funny because I’ve owned the D8 50 now for probably four years and I’m still finding things that I didn’t know about this camera that it can do…. I would argue. Are you going to see a huge jump in image quality to the Z9 maybe a fraction but it’s hard to see I also think with editing software now that there is so much we can use in post that upgrading. The camera is not always the best option and I often say to people what software are you using and how well can you use that software I also sell a large amount of prints to customers and I’ve shot exclusively with the Nikon D850 and I used to lanes is pretty much. The Tamron, 15-30 g2…. The other lanes are use is the 70-200 FL lands and dad is 90% of my work on those two lenses. But I agree with you also that the kid is heavy so recently I purchased a completely different camera and now I have two systems are heavy system which I use for when I don’t have to go far which is my Nikon D850. But I also have a Fuji XT5 with a 13 mm lens and it is fantastic. I’ve also added some other prime lenses is that I can use…. You have not tried the camera on 15-30. It is exquisite. You must check it out. It is a beast of a lens probably weighs more than the camera, but it is fantastic on the Nikon D850 ….And I keep saying of people, there is no major advantage for landscape photography in using mirrorless camera’s…. The Tamron, 15-30, has no distortion, and is a very versatile lens and is a 2.8. The only downside to the lens is the cost of the filters is expensive, but man. Oh, man, it produces exquisite images.for me Nisi filters ….no colour cast and distortion. I love this system because they are also easy to keep clean. The last part of my kit is I upgraded to a lighter tripod. Yep, I’m using the Ulanzi tripod …. and while it’s light, it is very stable. And again going to a lighter kit knocking a kilo off. Your backpack is huge. The other thing I would say to landscape photography as is who want to hike is get yourself a really good backpack that sits on your hips. Get the bigger one that has the one strap around you, so it hugs, your body and you will not notice the extra weight. I am an experienced hiker and have hike many major trails and add the key to. It is a good backpack and Photography. Backpacks for years were poorly designed. Thankfully there are a couple of good brands around now that actually fit your body so you can That extra heavy lens

[@TheJoshuaborden]

I moved from the 850 to the z9 and have zero complaints whatsoever.

[@nevvanclarke9225]

@@TheJoshuaborden but it’s limited in image improvement….but it does make things easier

[@AndyCrawfordPhotos]

Sorry: Just seeing your note: I have moved to the Z9 since making this vid, and I absolutely love it. It does add some weight and bulk to my backpack, but the Z9 is a beast. I talked about the Z9 in this vid, if you care to check it out: kzbin.info/www/bejne/o5iagqShqciigs0

[@AndyCrawfordPhotos]

I would agree with that assessment @TheJoshuaborden: I've moved to the Z9 since making this video, and I absolutely love it. Are my images better? I think they are, but I think it's because that's because I've really worked hard to improve technique and post processing. As you say, the Z9 makes some things easier - but it doesn't make images better in and of itself.