Full move from Canon to Sony

Hey guys

Im having a hard time to decide so im once more askingg for help here.

The situation:
You see the Canon gear i have and also have a fuji x100s from street and candid, just everyday shooting. Then i got the Sony A7r and am so satisfied with it! I bought the sony 16-35 which is sharper and has IS than the 16-35Lii from canon which i sold due to the purchase of the sony equivalent. No regrets at all. Then i got myself the voigtländer 40mm 1.4 and it does what i used the 50L for, in a much smaller package.. I just love the sizes of the Sony A7 series paired with small MF lenses and it is almost more important to me than AF as i learned over time how to use Mf on the Sony and that i should take my time for photographs. However, im lusting after a sony A7s which would take the place of my 6D (high ISO) and my Fuji x100s (everyday shooting, street and candid, life documentation style). So i would sell both cameras for the sony.

I already sold the 16-35 which was not needed anymore and the 135L which i didnt used at all, maybe twice or 3 times in the 2 years i own it. Its sharp but 135mm is too long for my taste..

So i still have the 24TSEii , 50L and the 70-300L.
Thinking of selling the 50L since the 40mm voigtländer does that really good and selling also the 70-300L which i love also but use too less. Its rather big and heavy but the main problem is that i find my shots with it good, but nothing that could beat what i get when i use my favorite lenses like 16-35, 24 tiltshift or 50L/CV40.

Then to replace the 135L i think ill getting the 90mm macro from sony which sells in a few months/weeks. Would also fulfill my long want of a macro and would have a doubble puprose with portraits.

So i sold 16-35 and 135 got 1800$. Selling 50L would bring 1200$ or so and the 70-300 another 1000. 800 for the fuji x100s plus accessories. Edit: forgot to add the 6D which would bring me another 1000$ i think..

Makes 5800$ out of my sales. Getting the 90 macro (1200$) and the sony a7s (2100$) would leave me at a plus of 2500$ which is good for a nice compact kit which would contain of my landscaping tools:
Sony A7r, 16-35 sony, 24mm TSEii, 90 macro for more reach
Compact kit for travelling:
Sony A7r/A7s, 16-35, CV40, maybe 90 macro
And a creative and portrait/human lineup:
Sony A7s/r, CV40 and 90 macro
Street and everyday shooting (what i used the fuji for):
A7s CV40

I also like the idea of travelling with a A7r with the 16-35 attached and the A7s with the CV40 attached. No lens changes and still lighter i guess than using a 6D with a 50L and the canon 16-35...

Also i would benefit for night landscapes with milkyway or stars shots from the A7s.

It would make my kit so compact and so nice for everything i shoot but these changes are so big and i actually like the 6D. It was my first FF camera and i learned most from shooting with it.. Also the 50L. Loveed that thing but having a lighter, smaller and good enough for me CV40 i dont think it would get a lot of use...

Should i do the step?

PS: prices are current prices here in switzerland..

It doesn't sound like you really need any of the advantages (AF, OVF, long lenses, speedlight support, etc.) that DSLRs offer over mirrorless. I'd have no qualms about switching if I were in your shoes.

raptor3x wrote in post #17464961
It doesn't sound like you really need any of the advantages (AF, OVF, long lenses, speedlight support, etc.) that DSLRs offer over mirrorless. I'd have no qualms about switching if I were in your shoes.

Ohh now as you mention i have a 600exrt which i dont use at all too! That and a gary fong lightsphere would make another 600$

Yeah youre right and i think it might be the best think to happen for me. But somehow i fear that i miss a DSLR and all the good things it brings with it..

Looking forward to more opinions.

about the only thing frustrating with the sony system is a long lens. I love having a long lens with me for landscapes and general use really. A 70-300L would be borderline perfect, but I would like to get that in a native mount.

aside from that I could definitely live with native E stuff.

I do still have moments, where it seems like DSLR's are the best thing since sliced bread, however, those moments quickly fade. That 70-200F2.8ii can focus like crazy under low light, however, I can probably get the same shots with manual focus..... Event type photography isnt exactly hard to do. Since you dont care for stuff greater than 100, that's a fairly easy decision.

I would stick with one body rather than two though. I find that with a fastish prime, I constantly shooting ISO 6400 or less, which the A7r manages.

Charlie wrote in post #17465047
about the only thing frustrating with the sony system is a long lens. I love having a long lens with me for landscapes and general use really. A 70-300L would be borderline perfect, but I would like to get that in a native mount.

aside from that I could definitely live with native E stuff.

I do still have moments, where it seems like DSLR's are the best thing since sliced bread, however, those moments quickly fade. That 70-200F2.8ii can focus like crazy under low light, however, I can probably get the same shots with manual focus..... Event type photography isnt exactly hard to do. Since you dont care for stuff greater than 100, that's a fairly easy decision.

I would stick with one body rather than two though. I find that with a fastish prime, I constantly shooting ISO 6400 or less, which the A7r manages.

Thanks for your input!

And yeah long lens is frustrating on a mirrorless. Because they are big anyways as the lenses need theyre focal length and if you add a big aperture. Almost non existent in a mirrorless mount, or very expensive..

Im still figuring out if i should sell the 6D and fuji though.

But i still think having an A7s and an A7r both with a lens on perfect combination IMHO. And no lens swap is a big pro to me. Having the 40 on the A7s is great for low light i guess there will be nothing not possible when its dark at 1.4. The A7r with 16-35 on me and when i need lowlight or portraits/street candid the A7s with the CV40. How cool is that!

If you are happy with your own gear then go for a switch

For me, I still love dslr because their ergononic are so much better than any mirrorless. I can change the aperture/iso/af point etc without moving my eye from viewfinder
Also I would prefer Fuji because their body and lenses mostly lighter than Sony

I own a 5DIII and 1DX and also A7II and did own the A7R. When the 5DSR was announced I thought I should prepare to sell my A7R because I bought it originally as my landscape camera to use with Canon glass. Specifically with my Zeiss ZE 21mm and Canon TS-E 24mm II. I sold it because after I placed the 5DSR pre-order and figured I would get that or get the new A7R-II if Sony announced that. I feared massive price erosion on the A7R.

I originally had two systems. My Canons and a Fuji setup for travel since it was so much lighter and they had great lenses. Taking two large Canon's on a plane with limited carry-on became more challenging for me since I live in a place where the first leg of my flights is usually a small regional jet. All large backs must be gate checked usually.

Fast forward (sorry I'm jumping around) to when I first bought my A7R as a compliment to my Canon's. It 36 Mpixel sensor gave me the improved resolution I was looking for even though the camera has some quirks. The price point was great so I stopped lusting over an D800e. Over time I bought a few of Sony's lenses to try with it and then thought I would try the A7 as well. For me I always use my cameras with a grip so I bought the grips for the A7 and A7R which solves some problems using larger adapted lenses and battery issues. Since I also use a grip on my 5DIII the Sony's were still smaller and lighter.

Well when the A7-II came out I switch out the A7 for it and have to admit its a really nice general use camera. The IBIS and the high quality EVF made are really nice feature. Would I use it for events or sports, no. But it convinced me that I could use it an the Canon's and give up the Fuji kit. Its not as small as the Fuji, and you don't at the moment have as large a selection of smalls, fast, high quality primes but Sony and Zeiss are working to fix this.

So when I look at the different things I do the Sony's are smaller and travel well. I can put a 16-35 f4, 24-70 f/4, 70-200 f/4, along with the excellent FE 55mm f/1.8, and Zeiss Loxia 35mm f/2, and gripped A7II and A7R in a little less space than than the the Canon equivalent with just the one 5DIII. For the Canon I typically pack the bag, not with f/4 but with f/2.8 which are great lenses but it is quite a bit heavier and I can only take one body. I'm fortunate that I can own both systems and take advantage of the strengths of each.

If I could only afford one for me Canon is still my choice but If Sony does answer the 5DSr with a A7R-II or an A9 it will be interesting. Will shooting with 50 Mpixels slow you down enough where AF speed is not as important? For landscapes I think that AF is not as critical. On my 5DIII I used Live-View a lot and the Sony's EVF is a nice to have.

If the A7R-II or A9 is 50 Mpixels the decision maybe easier to use the Canon. Personally I can be happy with 36 Mpixels. Not quite as good but more flexible unless your really need more. For me the largest I currently print is 17 x 22 and not 24 x 36. With 36 Mpixels that's hovers around 300 pixels/in. 50 Mpixels would give me about 400 pixels/in. If you print larger then 50 Mpixels only get you about 240 pixels/in. Now I didn't talk at all about the 5DIV since I really have no idea what it will be. For general shooting the 5DIII does everything I want. Will the 5DIV be faster, more pixels, more DR. Just don't know.

Thanks for your input.

It just is that i dont spend like 3 or 4000$ for a 5DS/R just to have fast AF and a mirror instead of a mirrorless which costs under 2000$, is much smaller and so on. I dont need super fast AF and the weight, size and cost savings, in addition better DR (A7r) and better ISO performance (A7s) are more important to me.

I just got myself the A7s and will have the CV40mm 1.4 attached to it and the A7r with the 16-35 from sony attached, which does 95% of what i shoot and this is my point. I think ill go that route as, tought i love my 6D i still find no use anymore for it. The A7r can do what it cant and the A7s is better in lowlight so im covered on so many levels. And having to almost identical bodies with two lenses on i dont need to switch lenses for 95% of the time too then... Thats what i think is veeeery cool.

So im going to sell the Fuji x100s and the 70-300L to get myself the 90mm macro which comes out from sony, get myself a new TV with the cash and still would have:

6D + 24 TSEii + 50L + 40mm pancake
A7r and A7s + 16-35mm Sony + 90mm Sony and the CV40

And if i really see use for the 6D ill keep it, just because i love the 50L on it, losing no money even after getting a new TV.
If i dont use it i sell the 6D too, then i dont have much use for the 50L which goes also. After that i should be on a plus of 1800$ so the whole changes brought me 1800$ more than i had which is great considering that i then have a setup which is lighter, much smaller and more specialised to what i shoot and weights as much as a 6D with 2 lenses would have weighted...

I decided my route now, but i will keep you guys posted here if youre interested