See what happens when you let an LF landscape photographer loose with a digital camera…
Ready for anything - except for anything that moves 
D850 is indeed not the best for moving subjetcs, but it anyway can grab some very good photographs of them.
For the rest, indeed there are lot of errors.
That’s why he/she is a landscape photographer 
By the way, do you know the two french photographers Yves Marchand and Romain Meffre. They use mostly LF camera’s, I don’t know analogue or digital. I’ve seen an exhibition of Ruines of Detroit. Huge prints on dibond. And I just purchased the book Movie Theaters. Pictures of abandoned theaters.
George
I personally wouldn’t say that. I have taken pictures of dogs in full action with the D850, for example.
D850 is good. This is what I use for birds in flights or other action shots (I still use dslr).
But AF system is less efficient than mirrorless ones (since the release of the Z9 for Nikon) or D5/6.
And it has of course no IBIS.
But it is efficient enough to get very good results in most cases.
And it still has the best IQ around 50 Mp sensor of Nikon I think (anyway the one with (little) more dynamic range - compare to Z9/8/(6III?)) - even if some other are very good too.
The idea behind this thread was to discuss what it takes to use my D850 as a landscape camera, in the same, or similar, way to using an LF film camera. Not a general discussion of everything else it can do.
I wish you had added “in my opinion”, but so be it. Nothing is ever “the best”, and the most important thing has nothing to do with the camera.
As to this post, what I see is a way for Joanna to photograph her favorite kinds of photography (LF) without going broke buying expensive LF film. With the addition of a lens that tilts and shifts, she could likely match the LF image with everything under her control. For $1,000 or so, most of us can do so, but I don’t think many of us could master her use of a fully adjustable lens. But in her words “ready for anything” that huge zoom can accomplish things very few other lenses can match.
There never has been, and never will be, a “best” camera, unless/until we specify “best at what”. From what I’ve read, lenses almost always require “corrections”, which can be eliminated with highly expensive less adjustable lenses (or corrected in software later). One can easily lear which lenses need which corrections on-line - but to get the “best” lenses, expect to pay many thousands of $$$ more than for compromise lenses. Everything is always a compromise, for most of us.
I get the implied humor.
By posting, do you really wish to discuss alternate setups? If so, what image capture setting do you desire, and why did you choose this equipment to meet that goal?
Actually, the set-up makes sense to me. Seems like a good way to pre-frame the shot and be prepared for the moment of best light while letting the photographer pace or shelter while waiting.
When doing a careful landscape my desire would to get a stable, well framed shot at the lowest shutter speed, iso, and ideal aperture for desired DOF. Haven’t done much with my newer camera, but used to desire f10 for high DOF, base iso, and 1/100sec or better.
So, a solid tripod with leveling system and remote shutter release would be essential. Depending on lighting and glare, filters might be appropriate, as would be the Hoodman. The battery grip just stays on the camera.
The 24-300mm lens seems unusual for a landscape, but it might be the “lens you have” and results are good enough.
The choice of filters and the bellows hood seems more nostalgia for the LF days. Wouldn’t good thread-on filters and a standard hood be easier, more robust, and transportable? I tend to hike to a location, so portability is a factor.
Additionally, the automobile is essential too. A photographer should be patient, prepared early, and wait for the best light. In instances where the weather was cold or breezy a wireless remote screen and trigger might be nice. The photographer could stay sheltered in the automobile or portable tent/shelter. One could tether to a cell phone for example.
What’s missing? I don’t see your coffee or other essential drink of choice.
Perhaps that’s tea and biscuits in your part of the world 
I always talk “in my opinion”. I can’t talk for other people. However, what you have pointed out is a fact, not an opinion :
D850 is not the best action camera. But it can anyway handle this well.
But here I was talking about camera; not the people behind it … (I forgot that you never talk about cameras … 
).
And is the rest of your post “in your opinion”, or did you forget to mention this ? 
Sorry about the drift. End of it.
To me it looks like a camera with maximal attributes.
George
In my opinion, there is no “best” action camera. The best camera for anything is whatever you are holding in your hands. The “camera” is a stupid box with batteries and software and mechanical controls. It’s what the person can do with it that is most important.
Of course, the above is just one person’s opinion, and others may prefer a certain brand of camera over all else, or a certain type of mechanical/electronic controls. And of course, whatever is said to be “the best” today will change tomorrow.
And if I wasn’t so addicted to seeing a “real”, “optical” view in my viewfinder, I would love to try a Nikon Z9, but it ain’t gonna happen. Perhaps the planned Nikon D880, but that too is unlikely. The Nikon Z8 has the same viewfinder as the Z9, but I prefer the optical viewfinder in a DSLR. The digital viewfinders “feel” like a video game to me, but I’m also happy with the standard viewfinders that came on rangefinder cameras, including the Leica M series. Obviously, others have different priorities.
Two questions for Joanna…
First, I love you “lens shade”!!! Awesome!
Second, do you wear glasses, and if so, does your Hoodman viewfinder eyecup work well with them? I bought one for my Df, but it feels like it keeps my head too far back from the camera. I love the way it blocks out extraneous light.
Come on, be serious ! Action means very fast reaction.
A camera that can find and keep focus on the eye and let the photographer frame his image instead of trying to target the eye with sometime (in low light) only the central most sensitive AF point is really better. A camera which have AF points all over the frame is better than a camera wich only have AF points in the central zone. A camera with a very good stabilisation is better than a camera with poorer stabilisation. And there are many other criteria. This is not an opinion but facts.
Just check : Nikon Z9/8 - Sony A1 and Canon ??? (I don’t follow canon that much, but they might have the best AF system). There are maybe some in other brand that can fully compete with these when it’s about action shooting.
Nikon was late for action, but come back with Z9 expeed7 AF system (now that it has matured).
My old FE2 can’t compete with them when it’s about action shot … neither your old cameras … neither about most other cameras from those brand.
Those are not the most expensive cameras for nothing. And “action” is one of their most obvious asset. Although they are obviously pretty versatile.
What makes a good action camera ?
Just really do action shots or bird in flight shots. If you practice longer enough, you’ll learn that not all cameras are comparable. Absolutly not.
Lot (?) can do the job, but some are really better than other.
Not that I am in the financial league to buy any of the cameras that @JoPoV identifies, but were I to win tonight (perhaps the fact that I can afford lottery tickets is the reason I can’t afford these super bodies; but how could I afford the glass anyway?) then the real action camera for me would have to be the (Sony) A9iii. Given that for my birds in flight (we’re not talking about action cameras for Tai’chi) the shutter speed has to be ± 1/4000s, the more often the shutter is open (120 fps!), the higher the chance (perhaps I should say: the less improbable, as would be the case with the lottery win) of catching the subject at exactly the moment one wants, and still having it sharp. And, of course, with the lottery money in the bank, I could afford to have a new shutter every time it wore out.
Cheers
MM
That list is all the areas where you feel the mirrorless cameras are preferable. Now, to complete your un-biased comparison, what are the ways in which a DSLR would excel, as you compare them?
Indeed, those points are what make a top action camera and mirrorless are now preferable for action than dslr.
But I still keep my dslr.
However, unless viewfinder where do you think dslr is better than mirrorless now ? - (Even viewfinder is debatable now for some cameras : seeing your bokey as it will be recorded, not having black flicking every frame when burst targeting a bird due to mirror closing, seing your image at true output luminosity when shooting in dark places are significant advantages that some viewfinder provide).
You left the most important consideration out:
There are people who feel their connection to what they are photogaphing is best with an optical view, seeing directly with their eyes, not a television view. With a DSLR you see what your eye would see, if you moved the camera out of the way. With a mirrorless, you get to watch a televised recording.
For some people, that is important, for some types of photography.
For other people, likely you, it’s not an issue.
None of the mirrorless cameras I’ve looked through had a viewfinder as nice as an optical viewfinder, where I see the same thing that is happening even if I moved the camera out of the way, and continued to watch.
It’s a connection between the photographer’s eye and the subject being photographed.
(But with my Nikon D780, I’ve got both an optical view and a digital view, so I can watch things either way as I choose.)
Sadly, it no longer looks like Nikon will release the D880, which might also do both, and give even higher resolution.
I suppose this is (one of the) reasons I use a red dot sight for my BIF. Whether one is using a mirrorless or a DSLR it can have a wider field of view than the camera.
There must be a delay in transferring data from the sensor to an Electronic View Finder (EVF in case I have to use the abbreviation again and again) but it is genuinely infinitesimal. The more modern models, too, have almost eliminated any “blackout” between shots in burst mode - the interval equivalent (but shorter) to the mirror travel in a conventional reflex.
The absence of mirror slap is a supposed advantage for some forms of photography, too. It’s such a long time since I read about it I have forgotten which…
All of which said, I agree that your best camera is the one you have in your bag when you see the scene you want to capture.
I see the mirrorless mafia has taken over again.
I was hoping to discuss using a digital SLR for the kind of landscape photography you would normally use an LF camera.
I’m not in the mafia, I’ve got only dslr and I think D850 is one of the most suited camera for landscape because of its dynamic range and resolution and it has more DOF than LF. And I love candy.
Does this put the subject back on track ???
