DSLR to confused

After a series of unfortunate events, I've been more or less forced to ditch the my 60D. I have an entire system built around it, but it's now too heavy and cumbersome to be carrying around like I once did. This started hours of research on where to go. The downside is that I can't get any hands on a camera for a while. Hopefully my reasoning can help get me going in the right direction.

MFT: I really like the size and weight, but the aspect ratio and crop factor bother me. 300mm is still 300mm at the end of the day, there's no magical magnification turning it into a 600mm lens. Also I've read that high ISO is slightly worse than my 60D. Images also lack the contrast and depth of APS-C. Premium build quality that I loved a few months ago.

Fuji: Excellent image quality, but no IBIS and no weather sealing until the X-T2. Not sure if the RAW issues are solved yet. Lenses are a bit pricey, but excellent after sale support and are very good. I learned photography on a Fuji compact, so I am a fan of theirs.

Sony: Very good IQ, but the crop sensor line looks to be on borrowed time. Battery life issues and menus are confusing. Sony seems to be pushing FE, and that does not solve the size and weight issue. Flat shutter release causes ergonomic issues. Everything else is really, really good.

Canon/Nikon: Home. Compact DSLRs are about the same size as the high end mirrorless offerings as well as similar in weight. Build quality is worryingly bad, even up to the prosumer models. Materials have started to feel continuously cheaper. Still no 100% viewfinder on lightweight models. Issues with video recording compared to lots of other cameras out there. Makes up for everything with good color science, excellent customer service, large lens selection, better grips, battery grips, and superb battery life.

I'd love to hear some opinions before I head into the local pro shop and talk to their people about it when I'm finally physically able to. Or feel free to tell me I've gone mad and to stop being so analytical .

Side note: I do read all replies and am thankful for them.

Hey,

Firstly, sorry to hear about your unfortunate turn of events. At least gear research is good for taking ones mind off of things, and giving something to look forward to. I hope it can be soon that you're out taking pictures again.

I can't claim to have experience with all of the brands or lines mentioned but I do own a Fuji camera and a couple of lenses. I've got no particular loyalty to them though, and it must be said that over time I have ended up using my DSLR more and the Fuji a lot less, but I did use it almost exclusively for a while.

All this to say that I honestly think they could be a good option for someone really needing to ship some weight from their camera setup. They have a good selection of lightweight, compact lenses native to the X-mount. The (35mm equivalent) 23mm f/2 rather than the f/1.4 for example is a good weight saver. A similar option exists for 50mm equivalent. The crop factor is about the same as your 60D actually. An X-Pro body weighs in at under 500g (kiss me I'm metric?) and their kit lens - which is meant to be a good lens - comes in at just under 200g so we're looking at 700g total. The f/2 primes are about the same weight and that's a basic kit covered. A lightweight telephoto might be where the plan hits a stumbling block but I don't know how important the telephoto end is for you. For ultimate portability the 27mm pancake lens is so small that when mounted the camera still goes in my jacket pocket.

I have always found a lot of what people say about the colour and the detail in the files to be true. I haven't had any raw issues either. The build quality on most of their cameras seems better than consumer DSLRs to me but the X-Pro and X-T are aimed at a prosumer market. It may not have weather sealing but I haven't felt the need to protect my X-Pro too much ... and if I did then it's so easy to stash away being nice and small. It is an older body now though, the X-Pro1 that I have, and it does show. I haven't looked at their newer bodies (if I'm not looking to buy I try not to look too much at what's out there) but a lot of users seem very happy.

Honestly, I think they're a good option. Others with more experience of other systems may be able to provide similar testimony though. Best of luck.

The X-Pro2 has weather sealing, as do some of their new lenses. I'm currently looking at that camera now as a lightweight alternative to my 5D2.

Lumix G3, older camera but still a good shooter. Very small and light weight, and affordabe. I cant think of anything else off the top of my head..

Andrew

For your stated interests, I would focus on the Fuji system vs. micro 4:3.

Fuji - more money, better performance, a bit bigger and heavier.

Micro 4:3 - Really hits most of your wants, is the IQ good enough?

I agree on your other assessments. Sony is clearly headed upscale and FF, they want to sell the A7/A9 and FF glass. And yup, the compact dSLRs are almost as small as the Fuji gear, but the Fuji gear is nicer than the low end dSLR stuff.

I could hardly see quality in Sony and Fuji offerings, not just Canonikon DSLRs. In terms of "build quality". This is one of the reasons why people are overpaying for Leica brand.
Sometimes it seems to be the only reason...
https://www.bhphotovid​eo.com …rless_digital_c​amera.html
"Minimal, unibody design is built from a single, solid piece of aluminum alloy that has been assembled and polished by hand in Germany."

MrWho wrote in post #18540086
... I've been more or less forced to ditch the my 60D. I have an entire system built around it, but it's now too heavy and cumbersome to be carrying around like I once did.

If it were me I'd get an EOS SL-1 (actually I have one) and use my existing system with it. SL-1 is only 14 oz inc. battery and card, good IQ, OVF and touch screen. Or EOS SL-2, 16 oz, very good IQ, OVF, tilty-flippy touchscreen. 24 mm and 40 mm pancakes are 4.4 and 4.6 oz respectively, 10-18 mm STM is 8.5 oz, 55-250 mm STM is 13.2 oz. Pretty light system.

Thank you for the replies! I'll be checking out all the models mentioned, it's good to read so many positives.

If you want a light weight camera Fuji's X-T20 only weighs 383g including card and battery, that's about 1/2 the weight of your 60D. Same sensor and brain as the X-T2 but not weather sealed and a smaller viewfinder.

But you should also consider the weight of the lenses you need as Fuji's are often made out of metal so can add a little weight. Having said that the 35 f/2 lens is only 170 g where as their 16mm f/1.4 is 375g. You can have a light kit if you want it, the F/2 lenses are quite light and all but the 18mm are weather resistant. The 27mm f/2.8 is only 78g. Hope you get to go out shooting soon.

Sorry to hear that you have to get rid of your Canon setup! Last year I sold off my Canon 7D and the rest of my Canon system because carrying it got to be too much. I bought into the Olympus m43 system and I am incredibly happy with it! The E-M1 is an amazing camera, and I completely prefer it over my 7D. The IBIS in it works better than any IS lens I had on Canon, the silent shutter is super cool and you can shoot up to 11fps with it, focus peaking, 81 af points, and obviously, it's much smaller and lighter. The aspect ration was annoying at first, but I changed it in camera to 3:2 which automatically crops it when importing it into Lightroom. You do lose about half of a megapixel though.

As for the crop factor, all of the m43 lenses take that into consideration. 25mm lenses to replace 50mm on FF, 17/17.5mm lenses to replace 35mm, 42.5mm to replace 85mm. They have pretty much everything covered. The bigger problem with the crop factor is that you'll have double the depth of field you would on full frame. So an f2.8 lens will give you the depth of field of f5.6 on a full frame. There are ways around this, but they're expensive, or manual focus. I have the Mitakon 25mm f0.95 which gives me the full frame equivalent of 50mm f1.9, however it is manual focus. If you crave really shallow depth of field, m43 is not a good choice.

MrWho wrote in post #18540086
Build quality is worryingly bad

kf095 wrote in post #18540355
I could hardly see quality in Sony and Fuji offerings, not just Canonikon DSLRs. In terms of "build quality". ..

I'm curious why folks are so concerned about build quality. Have you guys ever worn a body or lens out? Is it a pride of ownership issue?

I have an SL1 and 77D and think their build quality is just fine.

Archibald wrote in post #18554920
I'm curious why folks are so concerned about build quality. Have you guys ever worn a body or lens out? Is it a pride of ownership issue?

I have an SL1 and 77D and think their build quality is just fine.

It does give peace of mind having some sort of metal chassis like the 7D or 5D series. But that being said, my Canon T3i got hit directly on the side with a skateboard and aside from a few scuffs, it worked just fine.

The X-PRO2 has a magnesium alloy body and the dials are milled aluminium.
I've had the X-PRO2 covered in fine sand, shot inside an ice cave for hours, got it soaked by rain, covered in snow and shot in the burning sun. Never has it faltered.
Tell me again about the build quality you don't see?

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18555001
The X-PRO2 has a magnesium alloy body and the dials are milled aluminium.
I've had the X-PRO2 covered in fine sand, shot inside an ice cave for hours, got it soaked by rain, covered in snow and shot in the burning sun. Never has it faltered.
Tell me again about the build quality you don't see?

Obviously too much build quality, since it did not fail.

Archibald wrote in post #18554920
I'm curious why folks are so concerned about build quality. Have you guys ever worn a body or lens out? Is it a pride of ownership issue?

I have an SL1 and 77D and think their build quality is just fine.

.
If you could spend just one outing in the field with me, I think you would understand why build quality is important.

My 50D is now almost unusable because after getting knocked around for so many years its buttons barely work anymore. . There's so much grit and stuff worked in behind the buttons and dials that they can barely be turned any more. . The shutter button - it takes a near-herculean strength just to get it to go down far enough to take a picture.

My 5D barely works either, but its problems are more electronic in nature, not so much physical. . I think that constantly having it out in rain and snow has finally caught up with it. . Some of the modes don't work, and you have to hold buttons down and implement weird menu options just to "trick it into" focusing and taking a picture.

Also, the mounts wear out from taking lenses off and putting them on so much. . I have to send the bodies and lenses in to Canon every few years to have new mounts installed because after so much use the metal wears out and the lenses are loose when mounted on the camera. . Sometimes this is so bad that the contacts don't work and it won't autofocus and the Image Stabilization gets weird because power to the lens is cut off abruptly when trying to shoot. . This isn't just the mount screws coming loose - it is the metal of the mount itself wearing so thin that there is sloppy play between the lens and the body.

And another thing with the lenses is that the zooming mechanism and the tripod collar gets all sticky and hard to turn because of the lenses getting knocked around and dirt and grit getting down in there inside of the parts that rotate.

And the catch that keeps the battery in the camera - the "battery door", if you will - breaks from being opened and closed so many times, and then the camera won't work until I get a new one. . This isn't a problem with 1 series bodies because the battery catch is on the battery itself, and when it breaks then I just use one of the other batteries.

So I guess that yeah, build quality is very important because the two cameras that have fallen apart on me are the ones that aren't one series bodies, and the two one series bodies that I have had, they have seen much more use, and yet they remain perfectly functional when treated the same way and when used in the same conditions.


.