Adding a Mirrorless, Maybe a switch.

AlanU wrote in post #17843925
Huh? There was complaints how the Sony A7R backfocused often enough to ruffle some feathers. There's a reason why many high RES junkies are drooling over the A7R mk2 with the better phase detection AF system.

I had the original a7r for a while and found it much more accurate than any DSLR I've ever used for single shot shooting. Contrast detect is slow and terrible at tracking, but the technology by nature is much mroe accurate than phase detect.

OP:

If you need the AF tracking capabilities of the 7D with your Canon lenses, no mirrlress bodies will come close to what you're used to. The a7rII and the a6000 do a very good job with NATIVE Sony lenses, but the a6000 cannot do phase detect with adapted lesnes, and the a7rII's tracking is limited with adapted lenses. The a7rII's AF system is very robust and in many ways outperforms DSLRs, but many of the features that make the a7rII's AF system great do not work with adapted lenses.

Your point about the size of a DSLR being a detriment to actually going out and shooting is a legitimate one though. The big key for mirrorless for me is that it encourages me to shoot more, and its hard to put a price on the value of that.

Yeah, its nice to hear confirmation that tracking isnt quite there on the Mirrorless stuff yet tho, Theres only so much one can do in a store (I had issues with people moving slightly it seemed, if they stayed relatively still, then it was fine, but this i also felt was partially down to a camera i did not know)

Thankfully, as i stated, this is more for stuff thats NOT moving. and I'm actually OK with needing to tweak focus if i have to, Heck i have to do that sometimes on the 7D, No AF system is perfect after all

I mean part of my idea would be the mirrorless doing shorter than telephoto work, the Sony a6000 + 16-70 and 24 for example replacing my 7D + 15-85 and 28mm, I feel the a6000 would be better if i went that route, Albeit, thats more expensive (m4/3 lacks a 24-105 type of lens, besides the 12-50, but thats f/6.3...Not exactly good unfortunately) Might trade off my basically new Tokina 11-16 if i went that route

Then id have the 7D + 50mm f/1.4, 70-200 and 100L, add a 150-600 to the lineup as well. Maybe down the line add a 16-35 f/4L IS and a 5D of some form.

KenjiS wrote in post #17844120
Yeah, its nice to hear confirmation that tracking isnt quite there on the Mirrorless stuff yet tho, Theres only so much one can do in a store (I had issues with people moving slightly it seemed, if they stayed relatively still, then it was fine, but this i also felt was partially down to a camera i did not know)

Thankfully, as i stated, this is more for stuff thats NOT moving. and I'm actually OK with needing to tweak focus if i have to, Heck i have to do that sometimes on the 7D, No AF system is perfect after all

I mean part of my idea would be the mirrorless doing shorter than telephoto work, the Sony a6000 + 16-70 and 24 for example replacing my 7D + 15-85 and 28mm, I feel the a6000 would be better if i went that route, Albeit, thats more expensive (m4/3 lacks a 24-105 type of lens, besides the 12-50, but thats f/6.3...Not exactly good unfortunately) Might trade off my basically new Tokina 11-16 if i went that route

Then id have the 7D + 50mm f/1.4, 70-200 and 100L, add a 150-600 to the lineup as well. Maybe down the line add a 16-35 f/4L IS and a 5D of some form.

thats not completely true, tracking is fine and will outperform many DSLR with native lenses. adapted lenses is a different story.

But I would say adapted lenses and tracking is not bad, not the best but not bad.

KenjiS wrote in post #17844120
Yeah, its nice to hear confirmation that tracking isnt quite there on the Mirrorless stuff yet tho, Theres only so much one can do in a store (I had issues with people moving slightly it seemed, if they stayed relatively still, then it was fine, but this i also felt was partially down to a camera i did not know)

Thankfully, as i stated, this is more for stuff thats NOT moving. and I'm actually OK with needing to tweak focus if i have to, Heck i have to do that sometimes on the 7D, No AF system is perfect after all

I mean part of my idea would be the mirrorless doing shorter than telephoto work, the Sony a6000 + 16-70 and 24 for example replacing my 7D + 15-85 and 28mm, I feel the a6000 would be better if i went that route, Albeit, thats more expensive (m4/3 lacks a 24-105 type of lens, besides the 12-50, but thats f/6.3...Not exactly good unfortunately) Might trade off my basically new Tokina 11-16 if i went that route

Then id have the 7D + 50mm f/1.4, 70-200 and 100L, add a 150-600 to the lineup as well. Maybe down the line add a 16-35 f/4L IS and a 5D of some form.

I have a 7D, e-m10 and e-m1. The 10 does pretty good with tracking but since it is contrast AF only it can get a little thrown off. I have been able to get some pretty good results using in for cycling since the motion is predicable and mostly constant. Even the dogs in the back yard walking around it can do OK. Big thing I have found is you can't just hammer away at the shutter button like with a DSLR. I get better results using a slower burst and giving it a chance to catch up. As far as S-Af, it is dead on accurate and quick, well as quick and accurate as any DSLR I have owned (AF can always get fooled at times.

To get an idea of the C-AF on a contrast detect only point the camera at a static object. Most times you will see the focus hunt slightly back and forth. That is how it tracks, it detects which way to move based on when it gets focus, it has to check a small range back and forth to make the calculation.

7D

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/okDC​B1

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/wNQh​r7

KenjiS wrote in post #17844120
Yeah, its nice to hear confirmation that tracking isnt quite there on the Mirrorless stuff yet tho, Theres only so much one can do in a store (I had issues with people moving slightly it seemed, if they stayed relatively still, then it was fine, but this i also felt was partially down to a camera i did not know)

Thankfully, as i stated, this is more for stuff thats NOT moving. and I'm actually OK with needing to tweak focus if i have to, Heck i have to do that sometimes on the 7D, No AF system is perfect after all

I mean part of my idea would be the mirrorless doing shorter than telephoto work, the Sony a6000 + 16-70 and 24 for example replacing my 7D + 15-85 and 28mm, I feel the a6000 would be better if i went that route, Albeit, thats more expensive (m4/3 lacks a 24-105 type of lens, besides the 12-50, but thats f/6.3...Not exactly good unfortunately) Might trade off my basically new Tokina 11-16 if i went that route

Then id have the 7D + 50mm f/1.4, 70-200 and 100L, add a 150-600 to the lineup as well. Maybe down the line add a 16-35 f/4L IS and a 5D of some form.

tracking is fine, it's not blazing fast like DSLR's if you do a fast birding sequence, however, with people moving, you'll probably be able to track it.

some crops of tracking, one with a native lens and one with an adapted canon lens. Both large aperture, using wide area, face detect tracking.

KenjiS wrote in post #17844120
Yeah, its nice to hear confirmation that tracking isnt quite there on the Mirrorless stuff yet tho, Theres only so much one can do in a store (I had issues with people moving slightly it seemed, if they stayed relatively still, then it was fine, but this i also felt was partially down to a camera i did not know)

Thankfully, as i stated, this is more for stuff thats NOT moving. and I'm actually OK with needing to tweak focus if i have to, Heck i have to do that sometimes on the 7D, No AF system is perfect after all

I mean part of my idea would be the mirrorless doing shorter than telephoto work, the Sony a6000 + 16-70 and 24 for example replacing my 7D + 15-85 and 28mm, I feel the a6000 would be better if i went that route, Albeit, thats more expensive (m4/3 lacks a 24-105 type of lens, besides the 12-50, but thats f/6.3...Not exactly good unfortunately) Might trade off my basically new Tokina 11-16 if i went that route

Then id have the 7D + 50mm f/1.4, 70-200 and 100L, add a 150-600 to the lineup as well. Maybe down the line add a 16-35 f/4L IS and a 5D of some form.

For clarification, tracking isn't of the same caliber with adapted lenses, but its very good with native lenses. If your intention is to use native sony lenses on an a6000, I double you'll miss your 7D much at all.

mystik610 wrote in post #17843959
I had the original a7r for a while and found it much more accurate than any DSLR I've ever used for single shot shooting. Contrast detect is slow and terrible at tracking, but the technology by nature is much mroe accurate than phase detect.

OP:

If you need the AF tracking capabilities of the 7D with your Canon lenses, no mirrlress bodies will come close to what you're used to. The a7rII and the a6000 do a very good job with NATIVE Sony lenses, but the a6000 cannot do phase detect with adapted lesnes, and the a7rII's tracking is limited with adapted lenses. The a7rII's AF system is very robust and in many ways outperforms DSLRs, but many of the features that make the a7rII's AF system great do not work with adapted lenses.

Your point about the size of a DSLR being a detriment to actually going out and shooting is a legitimate one though. The big key for mirrorless for me is that it encourages me to shoot more, and its hard to put a price on the value of that.

I'm not anti "contrast detect". I just find that in real life things move

My experience with M43 mirrorless is that my generation m43 bodies only have contrast detect. Accuracy is simply a sharp image regardless of situation.

I'm wanting to dive into the Alpha series one of these days but knowing me it's gonna be like a kid in a candy store. I'm holding back.........

Kenji,

I think your going to like M43 or fuji for certain types of applications. Plenty of fast native prime lenses with good IQ. If you careless about video I think Fuji or Olympus colours will make you satisfied especially if you compare it to the aging 7D IQ.

For example if you purchased an Olympus OMD EM1 (internally 5 axis stabilized body), oly zuiko 12mm f/2 (24mm equiv), or inexpensive 14mm f/2.5 (28mm), or $ panny 20mm f/1.7mk2 (40mm equiv), $$ 25mm f/1.4 (50mm equiv), Oly 45mm f/1.8 (90mm equiv). you can cover serious ground with excellent fast focusing capabilities. Spend some coin on a panny 12-35mm f/2.8 image stabilized (turn it off with em1) zoom or Oly zuiko 12-40mm f/2.8.

Some of the M43 primes can be spendy but some are incredibly reasonably priced like the 45mm f/1.8 for portrait applications or nice background separation. f/2.8 zooms go for about a grand.

I will always use my canon gear for serious photo shoots but that's my preference. However I'd be game to try to use M43 for professional events photography if I owned an Oly EM1 with hybrid AF.

The point I went M43 was portability as I lugged 3 of my daughters around solo. I didn't want my 5dmk2 or mk3 on my spider holster. I use my m43 with no flash so this is my style I shoot with when I use m43. With canon I will incorporate remote flash and simple bounce flash on body.

Another consideration is to cry hard!!! empty your wallet and at least buy a sony A7 or A7mk2 and 1 prime lens. Push your creativity with simplicity and less gear. At the end of the day it's gonna give you substantially better IQ than a Olympus, Fuji, Sony A6000. Is this a subjective comment.... perhaps but the added shallow dof of a full frame is by far a treat to the eyes in some situations.

Your gonna get hit hard with personal preferences and opinions. I accept a hit on image quality but I compromise with M43 and it meets my expectations for "what it is". Do I want a new fresh Sony Alpha series??? YUP!! I'll have to say even my slightly aging M43 bodies still provide incredible image quality when i print. I want the sony A7rmk2 but for that money I'd rather buy different gear at the moment to enhance different perspectives. Since I own M43 my Oly em-5, Panny GH3, shotgun, stereo mic, 14mm f/2.5, 25 f/1.4, panny 14-45mm variable aperture zoom, panny 12-35 f/2.8 stabilized zoom covers huge ground for family documentation and incredible HD (not 4k) video. For about a 1000 bucks I can buy an UWA and a 20mm f/1.7mk2. That's huge coverage!!

My point?

Either spend $$$$$ and go Sony alpha with no image quality or noise control regrets. Buy into a new fresh platform and spend good $$$$$ money.

Spend less $$$$ compromise with less image quality and more noise. Buy a system with hybrid AF so you dont get annoyed with crappy tracking. Get very respectable photos that will print incredibly well bridging the gap. Since 300 dpi print helps Lesser image quality files look almost equally as good as full frame images on print. You can probably get more variety of lenses possibly cheaper and possibly more variety.

M43 has a huge variety of lenses. If your going with less gear (couple primes) approach maybe a fuji setup will be killer. If the A6000 has enough to satisfy your secondary system go for it because it's inexpensive at the moment. Personal preference is the big determining factor...obviously!!

AlanU wrote in post #17845049
I'm not anti "contrast detect". I just find that in real life things move

My experience with M43 mirrorless is that my generation m43 bodies only have contrast detect. Accuracy is simply a sharp image regardless of situation.


M43 has a huge variety of lenses. If your going with less gear (couple primes) approach maybe a fuji setup will be killer. If the A6000 has enough to satisfy your secondary system go for it because it's inexpensive at the moment. Personal preference is the big determining factor...obviously!!

Not sure why you're so negative towards anything contrast detect. Watch this https://youtu.be/up8K_​xd_iwU (skip to 13 minutes if you don't want to watch the whole thing) The GH4 seems to acquit itself pretty damn well. The G7 & GX8 use the same DFD tech. My GX8 seems to track subjects pretty well coming towards, or away from me.

I pretty much never used tracking AF even when I was using a DSLR, for me it's faster to just use single shot and fire off the shutter as soon as I get a lock, works great for what I shoot and because of how wide the contrast points cover with my a7S I have lots of freedom of where I want my focus to be.

Speedync,

I've shot thousands of photos with my M43 and Canon 5d3, 5d2. If I sift through folders I get numerous photos missing the shot. With my phase detection DSLR it is only my error in misfocus and never my pro lenses or bodies fault. This is not a debate of DSLR vs. M43 or other mirrorless contrast detection bodies I've missed plenty beautiful photos with human emotions due to blurr caused by contrast detection back focusing. I've seldom ever missed money shots with my phase detection gear.

I have many friends in the camera retail sector and they are brutally honest even though they may have some personal loyalties to some brands. I'd be confident to say most highly appreciate phase detection. There's a reason why there is some emphasis on advertisement in hybrid AF for most newer mirrorless bodies. You'll commonly read the disappointments (on paper/forums) that they wished Panasonic added hybrid AF to the fresh new M43 bodies like the GX8.

My GH3 does not have the Panasonic DFD technology for contrast detection. My Olympus OMD EM5 also does not have any special proprietary technology that surpasses typical contrast detection. Lots of newer M43 may or may not have advanced technology either.

Just over 2yrs now I've paid about $1000 for my M43 bodies. As a canon user I'd without a doubt get substantially better AF with a Canon Rebel series T4i or T5i at a much cheaper cost.

For casual use I'll gladly accept contrast detection but for paid event work that's simply not going to stop people from moving quickly. For example a recent wedding I attended a friend's daughter's wedding. The bride/groom strutted very quickly into the church. With no flash the paid photographer(s) certainly wasn't anticipating this unknown "activity" as they shot primes in low light. Nonetheless the photos were BAD!!!!! I'd be 100% certain in those brutal conditions a Panasonic using DFD would have been worst in that low light. As a guest my 5dmk3 at iso 12800 did much better than those paid photographers with 5dmk2 (i also own this camera). If I had my OMD or GH3 in that type of situation where flash is not allowed I would have messed up pivotal moments. As a guest ....it was not my problem but I felt bad that even a phase detection camera struggled but I bet they landed the shots with no back focus.

There is pros/cons to every camera body. This is simply based on what platform you use. I have two different platform for entirely different applications. People were disappointed that the OMD EM-5 Mk2 still used contrast detection. Hybrid AF is a logical step for any manufacturer in the mirrorless world both marketing and actual true benefits of such AF system.

In good light both my M43's I'm pleased for my applications. Just waiting for better higher iso performance and I'm happy. If that doesn't happen soon enough I will without a doubt switch over to Sony alpha series for full frame goodness, excellent noise control and the model I get will have a hybrid AF system.

Did you watch that video I posted? I'm not arguing mirrorless vs DSLR either. It's just that even contrast detect has come a long way in a short time. The GH4 topped that comparison against the phase detect mirrorless. The G7 & GX8 uses the same tech. The GX8 is the first mirrorless I've owned, & with the limited use I've had with it, I'd say it's every bit as good as the 550D I had at continuous AF. Haven't tried any longer FL lenses yet, as I wasn't even sure if I was going to run with mirrorless, just giving it a bit of a test run really, so just bought a basic kit to try. ie a 28, 40 & 50 equivalent prime kit. So far I'm over the moon with it. A couple of shots from when I first got it. Using all 49 AF points, just letting the camera select, as I hadn't even got into any of the settings/menu. This is with a 25 mm lens @ f/2.5, so hardly the right/optimum kit & settings

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/C8NJ​SJ

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/Cg5H​vf

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/BRm3​7W

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/CmGX​f1

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/CKcW​CW

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/CKwT​7P

Speedy,

Just to let you know the crop sensor of X2 with the range of 70-200mm (panny 70-270) will have a huge dof much more than a Nikon full frame.

The Nikon D4s is a full frame so if you compare the dof at that distance of the motorcycles you'll get a much thinner DOF. This would indicate how the full frame is doing a killer job in acquiring focus.

Having a fast moving motorcycle is a good test. However the photo's the sky and motorcycle the contrast between the two is huge so there will be very little confusion to the contrast detection. Now you know why the panasonic performed extremely well. The panasonic DFD technology has a huge canvas of "out of focus" so the GH4 has a silly easy way to acquire focus. The very bright ambient light also helps the motorcycle as it hits the tree line so you still have alot of contrast. If this test was performed in a dark, dreary rainy cloudy day in the late afternoon this test would be "very interesting"to see how contrast detect would work. I bet the DFD panasonic system would still do well as long as the camera can get enough light.

The 2nd "best" was the phase/contrast hybrid detection AF in the Sony A6000. 3rd was the hybrid AF of the olympus EM1. The fuji has always been a last of the bunch when it comes to AF so that was an obvious placement of the camera.

Using a M43 with contrast detection and wide angle 14mm f/2.5 I've used both gh3 and em5. I will take my "casual" camera to bbq's at the park or areas where there is alot of people. This is rich with contrast everywhere in the frame. I can take a photo and have my subject OOF and have the background in focus. This is even more apparent when I am using a shallow dof in a mess of contrast by my subject. The more and more I thnk about this I will very likely upgrade to a fresh technology M43.

OP, if your diving into casual usage of the M43 I'd look at the panny bodies that have DFD technology or the aging but current Olympus EM1. Panny bodies do not typically have internal body stabilization while Olympus markets the M43 with body stabilization.

I thnk these discussions should really help Kenji in his research.

They do! Thanks to everyone for the discussion

So anyways, the person that was picking it as a surprise for me ended up getting me the Panasonic GX7 and 20mm f/1.7, the GX7 was being cleared out at a VERY nice price. They decided to look outside of what i mentioned even. They also said i can pick another lens to go with it, they just were sticking to exactly what i asked for.. My gut wants the Leica 45mm Macro..

The bad news is it does need to be exchanged. They ordered it Body-only, and they sent me a kit, that was opened, thats sticky, and that has the caps and everything for the 14-42 lens i did not receive (WTF?) Also no body cap on the camera. So something is off (Yes reputable dealer, just probubly a big mistake on their part)

They gave me a long list of WHY they picked the GX7 over the competition, Namely the fact it has a 1/8000 shutter, magnesium build and they just did NOT like the E-M10 II lol, It also does have an in-body stabilizer. They also considered a deal at Crutchfield, which was the E-M5, the battery grip, 17mm f/1.8 pro lens for $500 but it was sold out for obvious reasons (I mean, you're basically getting a free E-M5..)

Keeping the 20mm f/1.7, it looks super in silver in reality by the way, if i cant get a replacement GX7 ill probubly get the E-M10 II

Couple of quick points, one of which I was unaware of. The 20 mm 1.7 does not support CAF. The GX7 does not have DFD. Not the best choice for moving subjects, I'm afraid. The G7 is a step ahead with DFD, the GX8 has DFD, magnesium body, weather sealing, auto e shutter, 1/8000 ss &an EVF that is simply the best I've ever looked through. Way better than the G7 & much better than the A6000 and also the vaunted Fuji XT1 that everyone seems to rave about. I tried them all back to back before I bought the GX8. I do NOT miss the OVF of my 6D (which I still own) one little bit.

AlanU wrote in post #17846707
Speedy,

Just to let you know the crop sensor of X2 with the range of 70-200mm (panny 70-270) will have a huge dof much more than a Nikon full frame.

The Nikon D4s is a full frame so if you compare the dof at that distance of the motorcycles you'll get a much thinner DOF. This would indicate how the full frame is doing a killer job in acquiring focus.

I thnk these discussions should really help Kenji in his research.

Absolutely. Like I wrote, I'm not here to argue one way or the other. I have a 6D as well, so no bias either way. I just find it astonishing that the "cheap" mirrorless gets as close as it does to the top of the pile DSLR.
I got my GX8 at an absolute bargain price. Shop here had a 3 day sale, & I picked mine up for $770 complete with the bonus 25 mm f/1.7 A lovely little lens imo. I can also claim back the tax, so makes it a ridiculous price. I also got the 20 1.7 mk2 and found an unused 14 2.5 for under $200. I've mimicked my favorite 6D body and lenses combo for about 1200 bucks. Can't go wrong. At a fraction of the weight.

One interesting thing that I've found, is that the actual dof is not as huge as some make out. If you look closely, the actual area of critical focus is much the same, but because the rolloff is more gradual, & the oof background a bit less blurry, it looks deeper.