MattK

I agree with Tony above. Do you need the extra reach of 400mm. Many nature photographers tend to like wildlife or may eventually get into wildlife and the 100-400mm will serve you better. I personally don't see much of a reason to get a f/2.8 lens if you're taking photos of landscapes and will never shoot it at f/2.8. At that point, you're spending a lot of money on a feature you won't use. Hope that helps!

It sound a little greedy but I like making money, so paid wins all day for me 🙂 That money then gives me the freedom to pursue other things and activities that I enjoy more.

I’m with @devofields above. If you can get the a1 do it. If that’s not in the budget, the a9 series will give you a great frame rate and auto focus. Plus, you typically don’t need huge megapixels so it fits in perfect. And the 70-200 and 200-600 are two of my favorite lenses.

My ballhead… Flexshooter Pro. Takes the place of a gimbal for wildlife photography, and a ballhead for landscapes.

I’m not saying it won’t happen, but generally when a new camera or software is released, you don’t typically see companies do much with older versions. The r4 came out almost 4 years ago (which is a LONG time in the camera world), so I wouldn’t hold my breath. But I hope I’m wrong and they issue a great firmware update as I have one too 🙂

Very cool Tony. I always hear about a 50mm being a great “portrait” lens. But if it’s not a full length or at least waist up portrait, it looks like it stretches a person’s face. To me, your longer focal length photos of him look more natural and face less stretched which is interesting to be able to compare. Thanks!

For me, my business was about 80% online teaching and 20% in person. Covid forced me to 100% online and honestly, it solidified my business that way. Made me realize that the in person stuff was taking away from me really putting full effort online. Post covid, the business is now 100% online.

Welcome! Sounds like you’re going to be in a great spot for photos at the Grand Canyon. Looking forward to seeing what you have to share!

Glad to have you aboard and thanks for sharing some photos! Great work!

Definitely agree with everything Don said. 70-200mm all the way!

Thanks Don. I can’t wait. 8 days and 6 courses. It’s going to be a lot of fun. What a great experience to be able to play the Old course with your kids. Mine are in college now and we play when they’re home. Looking forward to getting to bring them some places as time goes on.

Black and White has a certain feel to a photo that lends itself to certain genres. Nature and wildlife are in color and those colors are beautiful. For me, I’d just never want to take that beauty away.

I’m heading to Ireland for a Golf Trip in august but will bring the camera along as well 😉 Really looking forward to that one!

I’ve used the 2.0x on the 70-200 GM II and the 200-600mm and in both cases the photos were soft and auto focus lagged a little more than I wanted. I did some tests where I used the 2x and then some where I cropped instead, and the cropped photos were always better.

I have no problem putting teleconverters on, but I’d consider not using a 2X with the 70-200 or the 200-600mm. The auto focus and quality loss just wasn’t worth it. I tried on both of those lenses and decided that cropping produced better results. Now, I’ll put a 1.4X on a 600mm all day long and the results look great.

Hands down get the 200-600mm. I have the 600mm and it’s fast to focus but you’re talking milliseconds. It’s not any sharper, and you get a stop or so of added light with the 600mm. If money is no object, get the 600mm. But I often post photos taken with the 200-600mm and people think they were taken with the 600mm. It’s a great, light and versatile lens.

I think it’s great and a few years ago I would have been excited. But I’ve learned something for my bird and wildlife photography that I can never get close enough. 600mm stills doesn’t get me there 🙂 But for sports and some other areas I can definitely see it and I’m glad they’re making one.

Nice photos. I agree on the a9. The first time I held it, there was a big smile on my face. I couldn’t believe the auto focus and keeper rate! Thanks for sharing.

First off, Reddit is full of people like that. Heck the internet is full of them and it doesn’t have anything to do with photography. Every single industry has it. I’m part of golf groups and I’m amazed at some of the things people say to others. Chances are that person who wrote that mean comment to you is most likely not a good photographer either. Almost without question when I see a mean comment, I look at a portfolio and realize why they’re mean - they’re just not good and angry about it. Like you said, the internet professionals which translates to “not a professional”. Next, I’ll throw a very different opinion out there about topic title “if photography is an art why…”. I personally don’t see photography as an art - I see it as a craft. One like painting a house, carpentry, etc… And like any craft, some of it is good and some of it is bad. And, again, like any craft tastes differ. Some people like the way one person painted their house and the colors they chose and the trim. And other people do not. But I don’t believe photography is some mythical act, that we can do and not be bad at because we can just say “Well, it speaks to me so it must be good”. Saying there are no bad photos doesn’t really help anyone. There are bad photos and I’d rather see people constructively be told that and hopefully be helped to take better ones. Anyway, my best advice would be to try to develop a group of people you trust and that WANT to see you get better - not everyone in those online groups wants you to get better. Develop that group (which can take some time), and reach out to them when you share a photo and ask for a critique. But I would never post a photo to a group of people I don’t know, and ask for advice. Giving a critique is a skill - and 90% of people in those groups don’t possess that skill, so be very picky about who you ask. Hope that helps 🙂

Hi. I don’t think you’re going to get many answers to this question because I don’t think we really know how to answer it. There isn’t anything any of us can say about becoming an ambassador, because I don’t think anyone actually set out to become one. But here are some thoughts… - Post photos, and tag #SonyAlpha. Sony will see them and if they are outstanding maybe some one will take notice. But there are tens of thousands of great photographers out there. Great doesn’t cut it anymore. You’ve got to be exceptional, unique, and have something (besides just photos) to offer. - Write about your experiences on your website or other places online. Develop an audience and be ready to back that up with statistics. Having an audience for the brand to want to invest in you is an important part. Good luck!

Hey Caroline! That’s a tough one. I have it, but I much prefer the 200-600mm for bird photography. It’s easier to carry around, hold and versatile. I don’t care for putting a TC on it so 600mm is as far as that one is going to go and it does the trick for most of what I shoot. Plenty fast shutter speeds and with noise reduction software so good these days I don’t worry much about high ISO. That said, there are times where I want more reach. That’s when I put the 600mm with the 1.4 TC on. If I think I need the 840mm and/or I’m going to be in lower light, then I’ll use it. But the 200-600mm is just amazing and the AF is really fast, ISO on the A1 is great so I don’t have a noise issue, and people often see the blurry backgrounds and think I shot with the 600 f/4 when I shot with the 200-600. If you could sell the 400 and get the 600 then I’d go for it. But not sure I would invest in it. Hope that helps! Feel free to call or text if you have any questions about it.

I thought I'd share an exercise I try to do every year around this time and that's gather my favorite photos of 2022. I know that some social platforms do this for you, but I honesty don't post to social media very often so it typically doesn't have all of my photos or even a large collection of my best ones. One of the reasons I like to do this is because it forces me to go through my photo library from the past year and find things. Photos I may have forgotten about or just not had the time to fully go through. I forces me to clean things up and most important... delete A LOT of photos that just don't need to be there. And finally, it's a good recap of what I did well and maybe where I could use some work. Anyway here's a link to mine if you're interested: https://mattk.com/my-favorite-photos-of-2022/ Even if you don't post them anywhere, I still think it's a good exercise to at least gather them in a common and easy-to-get-to place. Thanks!

I would say that the medium in which you show it off should dictate how much. And don’t let the ISO level in camera dictated it because every shot is different. 6400 ISO in a dark shadowy photo will show up and look worse than a photo in brighter light where you maybe needed a higher shutter speed so the ISO crept higher. If I’m printing I don’t worry about it too much. Printing inherently smooths noise and viewing distances mean most people wouldn’t be able to see it anyway. If you’re posting a wider view on social media, you don’t need much noise reduction because people can’t zoom in (even though you can while editing). For me, I post a lot of wildlife photos where I like to crop in. While cropping doesn’t change the amount of noise in a photo, it has the appearance of pixel peeping because you’re showing a zoomed in version of the photo. In those cases, noise is an issue and I’ll use Topaz DeNoise on it (which I love by the way and find it actually enhances detail in most cases). Hope that helps!

Pretty simple one here… just get out and shoot more. I usually try to get out once a week. If I skip one, then it’s easy to skip 2 and it gets worse from there. Just need to pick a day and say I’m getting up early that day each week to go shoot.

Such a great lesson and point. Not everything is a winner and sometimes you need those ones that fall flat to help you with the next idea. And as you pointed out, even if the project you had in mind as a whole didn’t come together, there is almost always something in there that’s a takeaway from it. I’ve always thought the sign of a good content creator isn’t some one who constantly makes amazing content every single time (nobody does this by the way). But more about some one who could find the content around them, and translate it to the audience. It’s not some mythical force… As you demonstrated, it’s work. Sometimes it happens perfectly and some times it doesn’t. And the more you work at it the better you get. Thanks for sharing!