Sony A9: Is Canon doomed ?

Wilt wrote in post #18693120
Not when a nail gun cannot fit in the available space to drive nails.
Not when a nail gun cannot be operated because you are working where a compressor is not available.
Not when a the purpose of a hammer is NOT to drive nails, but to shape metal manually (like a silversmith might do)
IOW a nail gun is not always the suitable tool!

Wilt just tell what the mirroless can't do which a dSLR can, based on what you shoot.

Lately the more I think about mirrorless and mirrored I just shoot what gives me the render I want.

Look how painterly/cartoon this Fuji image looks. Fitting for what I want. Just so happens I was lugging my Fuji when I was out with my family. This was just enjoying the afternoon.

"Hitting myself on the head with a nail gun, because it feels so good when I stop" doesn't really work.

bobbyz wrote in post #18693116
Good points. All I am saying is that just changing the system doesn't mean we blindingly following a foolishness as some here believe it to be. And as you say "find who you are", quite a few of us are more gear heads that photographers. And I don't think anything wrong with it. I choose not be some famous XYZ person.

I have nothing against gear heads or camera collectors. But I do understand that gear is only part of the deal. I have seen great photographs taken with Holga's. I have seen great photographs taken with 8X10 Deardorff's. I have seen great photographs taken with Canon F-1s, Nikon Fs, Leica M3s and all kinds of digital camera's. But I do know beyond finding equipment that matches the way one sees and works that all the stuff doesn't make one a great photographer. The ability to see and then capture that vision does if you are talking about making great photographs.

bobbyz wrote in post #18693122
Wilt just tell what the mirroless can't do which a dSLR can, based on what you shoot.

The general principle is that something is not possible with one while possible with the other...you respond with a challenge of 'prove it, name one'?! Gimme a break.

As they say: the best camera is the one you have with you. I always have my mobile phone with me.... but truth be told, I only use it for food photographs at a restaurant.

I don't carry around a DSLR with me at all times, though sometimes, I wish I did. I'm always concerned about theft..and overheating issues. I take my gear out to a designated place and shoot away. I can't really afford another smaller travel camera that would be with me all the time. I do have an older G12, but my wife had just adopted it as her own "with me" camera.

Phoenixkh wrote in post #18693139
As they say: the best camera is the one you have with you. I always have my mobile phone with me.... but truth be told, I only use it for food photographs at a restaurant.

I don't carry around a DSLR with me at all times, though sometimes, I wish I did. I'm always concerned about theft..and overheating issues. I take my gear out to a designated place and shoot away. I can't really afford another smaller travel camera that would be with me all the time. I do have an older G12, but my wife had just adopted it as her own "with me" camera.

Beautiful thing about cameras that are small like my Leica M is you can pretty much take them with you most of the time which i do. My travel kit is usually my MM and a 35mm lens.

Wilt wrote in post #18693120
Not when a nail gun cannot fit in the available space to drive nails.
Not when a nail gun cannot be operated because you are working where a compressor is not available.
Not when a the purpose of a hammer is NOT to drive nails, but to shape metal manually (like a silversmith might do)
IOW a nail gun is not always the suitable tool!

airfrogusmc wrote in post #18693146
Beautiful thing about cameras that are small like my Leica M is you can pretty much take them with you most of the time which i do. My travel kit is usually my MM and a 35mm lens.

Yep, same here with my A7R and Sony 35. One of the huge benefits for me shooting the Sony system is you can make it small for travel and yet you can use the bigger Zeiss ZE lenses for landscapes. I don't need two different systems.

Wilt wrote in post #18693138
The general principle is that something is not possible with one while possible with the other...you respond with a challenge of 'prove it, name one'?! Gimme a break.

I am not the one who said hammer vs nail gun. And chill, it is a nice Sunday morning.

Hogloff wrote in post #18693150
Yep, same here with my A7R and Sony 35. One of the huge benefits for me shooting the Sony system is you can make it small for travel and yet you can use the bigger Zeiss ZE lenses for landscapes. I don't need two different systems.

I'll have to agree with you. The thing about Leica is that it seems you can have faster glass in a smaller package.

If I owned the 25mm f/2 Batis I think that is the combo I'd use a lot. I decided on the 24mm f/1.4 ART prime and it does a great job but heavier.

I know as a fact Sony's AF with 25mm batis would be more accurate and faster than majority of all manual focus shooters.

Sure I love my big fat pig Canon 5dmk4!! My friend laughed at me yesterday he said "I knew you were gonna dig Sony" I didn't believe him upon initial purchase of the A7iii but I'll have to say its seriously a great system. I'll incorporate Sony with my Canon setup.

I hear often.....and I do not fly with the "Sony doesn't have a soul, it's just a high tech camera". Man if people believed in that I'm afraid how dramatic they can be in conversation. I don't mind Sony menu's because you get familiar just like anything in life. Customize the camera and your off to the races!!

Camera render is just a different look using different brands. If you like Leica or Fuji or Canon etc....it's about functionality, familiarity, colour science and render. High iso and incredible AF is something that is a feature that you can test in a controlled experiment. Sony is on top of the game in that respect.

Since every photographer shoots different subjects this means camera's are tools to fit their needs. Try Leica for a sports event.....umm that is laughable. Image quality is nothing when you do not have subjects in focus.

Pick your tools........

bobbyz wrote in post #18693153
I am not the one who said hammer vs nail gun. And chill, it is a nice Sunday morning.

No hard feelings. How about the fact that the A9 has no 4Kp60 video?

Have also read that astro photographers may not want to use current mirrorless cameras because of the 'star eater' phenomenon caused by long exposure noise reduction. As soon as you hit 4-seconds (and longer), spacial filtering kicks in, which you see here as a drop in noise (in dB) at the highest frequencies. That means the A7RIII smallest details have noise reduction applied to them, causing similar Star Eater problems that were seen in the a7R II.

I would argue that no auto focus is faster than being prefocused. And no camera automation can beat experience.

Cameras are just tools and for the way I see and what I shoot Leica M is a perfect fit. Leica M is not a one size fits all tool. It is perfect for fast paced up close candid and street work. Also does a great job with environmental and formal portraits.

Wilt wrote in post #18689444
The folks who are crowing about Sony (mirrorless relative to dSLRS) will likely have their time of bellyaching...the Alpha dSLR owners are already bellyaching.

My a99ii does everything I ask it to and more. Just because no more glass is being produced and developed right now doesn't mean the body is rendered useless. With the exception of a 200 f2 and 400 2.8, there is enough really good pre-existing glass out there to shoot right alongside a D850 or 5DIV kit.

Drone on about the translucent mirror at your own perrill, the a99ii can deliver the goods all the way up to ISO 25K.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #18693188
I would argue that no auto focus is faster than being prefocused. And no camera automation can beat experience.

We get sooo dependent upon technology! I distinctly recall covering events with manual focus camera and using Zone Focus methods to be able to snap candid shots very rapidly from waist level, rather than having the camera up to eye level and focusing. And with manual flash in the days before auto photosensor flash or TTL, using similar techniques for setting aperture at different distances.

I distinctly remember prefocusing with my 6D using BBF.