Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS General Gear Talk Changing Camera Brands 
Thread started 30 Dec 2015 (Wednesday) 22:26
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Adding a Mirrorless, Maybe a switch.

 
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,248 posts
Gallery: 29 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 7747
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Post edited over 2 years ago by mystik610. (4 edits in all)
     
Jan 25, 2016 13:41 |  #121

OP I've been following this thread for a while, but have lost sight of what exactly you're trying to shoot with the compact set-up you're trying to acquire?

When it comes to photography equipment physics always apply and there will always be a sliding scale with size on one end of the spectrum, performance on the other. If you want a smaller body, chances are you'll have to accept some compromises to get there and to be OK with that. Making those compromises is better than having only your 7D as option, and simply not shooting because its not practical to bring it out all the time. There's a huge opportunity cost if you're not shooting, and that's bigger than any compromises you'd be making on whatever camera you choose.

Up until very recently, the value proposition of mirrorless cameras hasn't been the technical stuff.....AF has traditionally sucked on these things, handling and ergonomics inevitably takes a hit when you have a smaller body, and the lenses, while often optically good, tend to favor size over max aperture. If you look for these faults, you will find them. All of that said, the reason people love mirrorless cameras is because of the fun factor involved with shooting on one.. Having a smaller more accessible camera brings an enjoyment back to photography that was lost as cameras and lenses got bigger and bigger. If this smaller camera you're seeking is for personal use, than the sheer enjoyment of shooting with the camera should take priority over anything else.

My suggestion is to stop 'testing' these cameras you're buying and returning and to really shoot with them, and really integrate them into your day. The compromises will always be there, but sometimes that's where you as a photographer are behooved to work around them to get the photos you want. There's something refreshing about having a minimalistic prime set-up and still being able to produce great photos. In fact, there's some growth involved when you can't hide behind the capabilities of your camera and are forced to grow as a photographer to make it happen. i.e., being forced to use manual focus on the original a7r made me more critical about focus whether using AF or not.

Last point: Mirrorless cameras are turning a corner where they are starting to meet or beat the performance of their DSLR counter-parts, and going mirrorless is less of a compromise than it used to be. But be prepared to spend some money, as DSLR-caliber performance commands DSLR-caliber money. I ran a dual system kit with the a7r and the 5DIII for close to two years b/c there wasn't a mirrorless camera out there that could cover the duties of both. The a7rII changed the story completely and my 5DIII is long-gone...partly because I don't need the 5DIII anymore, and partly because I needed to sell the 5DIII to rationalize the cost of the a7rII.

In summary: Accept compromises if you want a smaller kit. Dealing with those compromises is better than not shooting at all. You can have DSLR caliber performance in a mirrorless body,but be open to spending DSLR money to get there.


focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀII - RX1ʀII - α7ʀIII
Zeiss Loxia 21 - Canon 24-70 2.8LII - Sony/Zeiss 35 f1.4 ZA - Sony 50 1.8 - Sony 85GM - Sigma 135 f1.8 ART

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,212 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Likes: 2074
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
Post edited over 2 years ago by KenjiS.
     
Jan 25, 2016 13:56 |  #122

Seriously how many times do i need to repeat. I tried an adapter. I did not like it, I did not like how it felt, I did not like how it worked. I did not like the combination. It threw out most of the size advantage on the Sony. I have a Sigma 50mm f/1.4, Why would i buy a 50mm f/1.8 STM? Its a nice lens but my Sigma is faster, sharper and probubly has nicer Bokeh and contrast. I have ZERO interest in adapting lenses. Even the Sigma 50 felt bulky and awkward on an A7, and thats nowhere near something like the 70-400 or 150-600

To reiterate, I see zero reasons to run a bunch of non-native lenses on the Sony, as that throws out one of the bigger arguements for the Sony, namely the weight savings, which are already eroded if we talk an A7II over the A7. If i stick an adapter on for Canon or Nikon glass its increasing the depth of the Sony considerably due to the register distance of the lenses, Throwing out the size arguement. I found using a lens on an adapter a bulky affair that screamed compromise every moment I used it. I'm not spending over a grand on a compromise. On top of THAT entire thing consider you're still using contrast detect AF, and even trying to focus on people leisurely strolling in a store the Sony failed versus the 6d or d610

I think the Sonnar is stunning, I love the contrast, I can see flowers looking very lovely with it. Again, Its NOT just the price. Its not the fact its f/1.8 (People said im "stupid" because i paid $800 for the 15-85 because its variable aperture and not f/2.8 blah blah blah until i demonstrated what a fantastic lens it is) in fact that lens is one of the very few reasons I'd still consider a Sony, Because its a very nice lens.But basically its the only Sony lens I'd legitimately want in my kit. Sure, maybe the 16-35, but im not a wide shooter really, I end at about 24mm 90% of the time for "wide", Im a telephoto person, and thats where Sony simply has nothing. The Sony 90mm Macro is nice, but no better than my 100L, my 100L has proven itself in the many years ive owned it and worked well, I see no big benefit to the Sony Macro, so its a poor purchase.

The equation that INCLUDES price and capability, IF, and only IF Sony offered a 24-105 and 70-400 type of lens for the A7 I would definitely give it a lot more consideration, but alas, they do not. Sigma Tamron Tokina et all are not making lenses for mirrorless really as of yet. Not sure why, Again, if there was a Sigma 24-105 or 150-600 in E mount, Fantastic. The Sony would get more consideration then.

Stop saying "if you're on a budget" Im really not, i can do what I like, the issue is that for that kind of cash I fully expect the camera to do everything the 7D does and more. I simply question too much on the Sony's capabilities for me to feel comfortable dropping that kind of money on it. Image quality is NOT everything. Also im fine spending the money if i felt there was a point, instead i feel Im dropping the money on the Sony for... What exactly? Great sensor sure, but its useless to me without the lenses I need.

I dont get why it feels you are so hostile about me needing to buy the Sony. It wont work for me, I played with it extensively, including with a converter, I get the controls, I get the advantages, but its specific advantages dont outweigh its downsides to me, Id genuinely rather have a D610 or any full frame SLR to the A7. Simple as that. I gave so much thought to the A7 it wasnt funny, But obviously because i deem it just doesnt work for my shooting im obviously just being cheap, No matter how you cut it, even if i convert a 50mm STM, im still spending at least as much if not more than the D610, which is a much better option for me.

Again, I already fixed the "small light" camera addition to my lineup by buying another GX7 since it was a good deal. Anything i buy now is firmly in the "Upgrade my 7D" camp.

Prices are full retail because when i pull up BH/Adorama/Amazon if theres nothing used I'd get then i figure it will be new, I prefer buying with a return policy and a small warranty, Probubly due to the entire real world thing. I find a camera hurts my hand, kills my wrist, cuts into my eyesocket and etc and i buy from some random person i have zero recourse except sell it again, likely losing money in the process. If it dies in a week after i bought it from a private seller im up a certain river. Also once im past a certain price threshold im much less likely to do used.

I'm sorry if im getting nasty but im in pain and repeating the same argument over and over is getting irritating


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,212 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Likes: 2074
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
Post edited over 2 years ago by KenjiS. (2 edits in all)
     
Jan 25, 2016 14:12 |  #123

mystik610 wrote in post #17872260 (external link)
In summary: Accept compromises if you want a smaller kit. Dealing with those compromises is better than not shooting at all. You can have DSLR caliber performance in a mirrorless body,but be open to spending DSLR money to get there.

Yeah it was more the first Mirrorless kits i tried cost too much for me to accept their compromises and looking back on it i knee jerked on the GX7 way too fast, albeit the viewfinder was atrocious, i literally could not see anything in it. the OM-D on the other hand really was a massive fail, the IQ was way worse than the GX7 for me, I am still unsure, but i believe the stabilizer was to blame. The GX7 had a nice crisp output, even at ISO3200, the OM-D was mushy most of the time. And the AF on the OM-D was in some ways worse than the GX7 and much harder to override. Plus the screen and viewfinder i found lied, Things looked epic, even the image previews zoomed in, stuff looked correctly focused.. Then id get home and NOTHING was in focus. The OM-D just wasnt for me. Like of the 350 images i shot, Most were thrown out because blur (Despite exceeding the reciprocal rule repeatedly, something i rarely have problems with on the 7D) or misfocus, Of the keepers, many were soft, mushy, not very detailed, lacking punch/contrast. The GX7 had a higher hit rate and the end results were much meatier, more stunning.

Essentially, i spent near a grand on the first GX7 combo and well over a grand on the OMD, I felt less willing to make a compromise for that cost. Again, Not on a budget, I just dont waste money. Id have been much happier with either if we were talking $500.

Prices dropped on the GX7 and I picked up another GX7 + 20mm f/1.7 for about $500, along with grabbing the eyecup i read people who had my issue (Of which there were quite a few) found fixed it. If not, For $500 ill shoot on the rear screen. The small camera is literally supposed to be just something that goes everywhere with me, restaurants, coffee shops, food shots, snap shots, still life, etc. My DSLR rig may still be used for some of this too mind you, but this way i always have a GOOD camera. because shooting on a smartphone is extremely difficult for me.

I also attempted to tackle too many issues with 1 purchase, I tried to turn a second camera into an upgrade. I still dont feel mirrorless is quite there to replace everything for me, My passion and what I love shooting most are macros, nature, wildlife, I really do use tracking AF a lot. Maybe something like the A7RII with its 399 point AF would work, but thats a $3000 gamble to me. It also doesnt change the lens system situation. Im fine reevaluating and selling things in a year and a half if that changes. But I look at now, I look at 6 months from now and what I'll be shooting in 3-4 months from now, and I do not see the Sony working for me. I see me taking the Sony out then sighing and putting it back away because I dont have enough reach for a particular situation, or i see myself pulling it out, fumbling trying to manual focus and missing shot after shot and just throwing it in a bag and grabbing my 7D again. I really do need a good solid autofocus system, I cant do manual focus anymore. Not reliably at least

I got ambitious. I admit that, I got caught up in the idea that hey maybe i can get something that works as good as the 7D with just as much capability but its also smaller and lighter.. The systems arent there for me yet, I learned that, But I am content for now adding the GX7 to my kit so i always have a camera in my bag or heck, with the GX7 even in my pocket is a realistic option. As for getting something with better IQ to replace the 7D? I think im sticking with a mirror and the solid Canikon lens choices. The ergonomics also work better for me, if i go somewhere shooting for an extended period of time then an SLR is going to be better on me despite the heavier weight.

Part of the reason for extensive testing was to really understand its limits and nature and evaluate it as replacing the 7D, I wasnt evaluating a supplement anymore, i was evaluating a replacement, Another mistake on my part, After it wouldnt work as a replacement i should have concentrated on evaluating it as a second camera

I'm still very picky and i stand by my earlier comments however. and even as a supplement the OM-D would not have worked


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,248 posts
Gallery: 29 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 7747
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Post edited over 2 years ago by mystik610.
     
Jan 25, 2016 14:33 |  #124

KenjiS wrote in post #17872308 (external link)
Yeah it was more the first Mirrorless kits i tried cost too much for me to accept their compromises and looking back on it i knee jerked on the GX7 way too fast, albeit the viewfinder was atrocious, i literally could not see anything in it. the OM-D on the other hand really was a massive fail, the IQ was way worse than the GX7 for me, I am still unsure, but i believe the stabilizer was to blame. The GX7 had a nice crisp output, even at ISO3200, the OM-D was mushy most of the time. And the AF on the OM-D was in some ways worse than the GX7 and much harder to override. Plus the screen and viewfinder i found lied, Things looked epic, even the image previews zoomed in, stuff looked correctly focused.. Then id get home and NOTHING was in focus. The OM-D just wasnt for me. Like of the 350 images i shot, Most were thrown out because blur (Despite exceeding the reciprocal rule repeatedly, something i rarely have problems with on the 7D) or misfocus, Of the keepers, many were soft, mushy, not very detailed, lacking punch/contrast. The GX7 had a higher hit rate and the end results were much meatier, more stunning.

Essentially, i spent near a grand on the first GX7 combo and well over a grand on the OMD, I felt less willing to make a compromise for that cost. Again, Not on a budget, I just dont waste money. Id have been much happier with either if we were talking $500.

Prices dropped on the GX7 and I picked up another GX7 + 20mm f/1.7 for about $500, along with grabbing the eyecup i read people who had my issue (Of which there were quite a few) found fixed it. If not, For $500 ill shoot on the rear screen. The small camera is literally supposed to be just something that goes everywhere with me, restaurants, coffee shops, food shots, snap shots, still life, etc. My DSLR rig may still be used for some of this too mind you, but this way i always have a GOOD camera. because shooting on a smartphone is extremely difficult for me.

I also attempted to tackle too many issues with 1 purchase, I tried to turn a second camera into an upgrade. I still dont feel mirrorless is quite there to replace everything for me, My passion and what I love shooting most are macros, nature, wildlife, I really do use tracking AF a lot. Maybe something like the A7RII with its 399 point AF would work, but thats a $3000 gamble to me. It also doesnt change the lens system situation. Im fine reevaluating and selling things in a year and a half if that changes. But I look at now, I look at 6 months from now and what I'll be shooting in 3-4 months from now, and I do not see the Sony working for me. I see me taking the Sony out then sighing and putting it back away because I dont have enough reach for a particular situation, or i see myself pulling it out, fumbling trying to manual focus and missing shot after shot and just throwing it in a bag and grabbing my 7D again. I really do need a good solid autofocus system, I cant do manual focus anymore. Not reliably at least

I got ambitious. I admit that, I got caught up in the idea that hey maybe i can get something that works as good as the 7D with just as much capability but its also smaller and lighter.. The systems arent there for me yet, I learned that, But I am content for now adding the GX7 to my kit so i always have a camera in my bag or heck, with the GX7 even in my pocket is a realistic option. As for getting something with better IQ to beat my 7D and replace it? I think im sticking with a mirror and the solid Canikon lens choices.

Sounds like you got it figured out for yourself. Congrats on the GX7. I suspect you'll have a lot of fun with it (and outside of shooting professionally, that's always the point right?)

Even the a7rII isn't primed for sports and wildlife yet, so you made the right choice. I mean its do-able and a lot of people are shootings sports and wildlife on these things....but DSLR's , are least for now, are better suited for sports. As good as the a7rII is, it still has its fair share of compromises, but I ditched my DSLR because :

1. I don't shoot sports/wildlife.
2. I've shot mirrorless for awhile and am comfortable with the proposition of their strengths and weaknesses.

If it weren't for those two factors, I probably wouldn't spend this much on a mirrorless body either.


focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀII - RX1ʀII - α7ʀIII
Zeiss Loxia 21 - Canon 24-70 2.8LII - Sony/Zeiss 35 f1.4 ZA - Sony 50 1.8 - Sony 85GM - Sigma 135 f1.8 ART

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
6,889 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Likes: 810
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Jan 25, 2016 15:01 |  #125

Kenji,

If I was going to do a drastic change (not talking about mirrorless) I'd just jump to Nikon if your willing to do so. This is where "Today" their bodies are performing extremely well compared to many Canon's relatively new offerings.

If you've previously owned or borrowed a Canon 5dmk3 I'd imagine that would make many people pleased in that camera's performance. However I do know I'd rather have a Nikon D810.

If your really diggin' the M43 world I'd highly suggest renting or just buy the 12-35mm zoom. For slow moving, static photos the IQ will easily be on par with your Canon 7d.

I've printed plenty of my M43 files and the quality is fantastic!!

Gear is simply a tool. Buy what you like...or what you can tolerate. I know that my current E-M5 and GH3 are great for certain personal duties but I cannot tolerate them in low light situations where I must present them to clients (plastic skin texture with aggressive noise reduction due to noisy raw files). On the other hand I know if I went Sony it'd be used only with native lenses. With a full frame sensor I know I could deliver "good" shallow dof but with great certainty I'd have full confidence that I can deliver amazing files in low light.

We all have to choice and decisions in the tools we use.

All I know is that I need a sony in my gearbag :) I'm still patiently waiting for the M43 world to produce a jaw dropping sensor at least produce cleaner files beyond ISO 3200.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 35mm f/2 IS | 85 mkII L | | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji X-T2 w/battery booster | 16mm f/1.4 | 56 f/1.2 | 50-140 | TT685
Sony A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | GM16-35 f/2.8 | GM70-200 f/2.8 |Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,212 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Likes: 2074
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
Post edited over 2 years ago by KenjiS.
     
Jan 25, 2016 15:06 |  #126

See thats my point! I love the A7 series, totally its a great camera, if i shot more wide stuff, architechture, landscapes, portraits, Heck, even if i took the birds and wildlife out of it, the A7 would be a great camera..I see its appeal, i even DID come close to ordering it and if i owned one yeah id probubly like it, it just wouldnt cover all of my shooting, and for its price, i felt it should be able to do that

Maybe after more time with the GX7 ill get a GX8 or somesuch, I do admit behind the 150-600 and that the new Leica Vario-Elmarit 100-400 looks pretty suitably epic (And its TINY for all the reach it gives you) and i might even give a lot of consideration to the compact Nikon 300mm f/4E PE or whatever it is (That tiny little 300, i never realized how smol of a lens it was till recently!) Throw a 2x TC on it and i bet its a compact capable bird lens too...

Also Alan, the 12-35 is one of the two other lenses i will maybe grab for the GX7, The other being the 45mm Macro-Elmarit, i can easily throw all of that in my bag, no big deal all the time and happily carry it all with me.

in the next few months I am predicting i will have a Nikon body beside my 7D, There will be overlap for a bit. Next acquisitions would be a D600/610, 50mm f/1.4, 60mm Micro-Nikkor, Wildlife telephoto of some kind, as i get with the D610 id probubly start selling off a 7D piece at a time to get a equal replacement, Not sure about my 100L, Probubly the 105 VR would make most sense, but then again I might change it up and go for the Sigma 150 instead, Theres lots of good choice for a macro lens after all.


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
6,889 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Likes: 810
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Jan 25, 2016 21:12 |  #127

Are you going to sell off all of your canon gear? I'm jealous :)

I'd love to dive into all Nikon gear but it's too much $$$$for me to dump all of my Canon gear to buy all Nikon.

My eldest 9yrs old daughter is using my Oly E-M5 at the moment for our family outings. I highly doubt I'd ever sell any of my M43 gear at this moment in time. I really dig the smaller form factor.

This is where Canon will hopefully advance in their Cmos sensor and hopefully the M43 will ramp up the tech in their Cmos sensor. The Lens lineup in the Canon gear is fantastic and I'll have to say the M43 line is awesome too!!

The 12-35mm is truly a great lens that seems to maximize the IQ in the M43. Sure primes do a killer job but for versatility in documenting in good light. I've absolutely loved the 12mm range at f/2.8 wideopen with the panny lens.

Next on my short list is the Sony though..... IQ in both good and bad light is more in my comfort zone.

We are pretty lucky these days in the selection of camera gear!!!!

Enjoy your newly acquired M43 gear. It does allow more shooting opportunities so this is a huge bonus!!!


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 35mm f/2 IS | 85 mkII L | | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji X-T2 w/battery booster | 16mm f/1.4 | 56 f/1.2 | 50-140 | TT685
Sony A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | GM16-35 f/2.8 | GM70-200 f/2.8 |Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
speedync
Goldmember
1,236 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 198
Joined May 2011
Location: Geelong, Australia
Post edited over 2 years ago by speedync.
     
Jan 26, 2016 02:21 |  #128

KenjiS wrote in post #17872287 (external link)
Stop saying "if you're on a budget" Im really not, i can do what I like, the issue is that for that kind of cash I fully expect the camera to do everything the 7D does and more. I simply question too much on the Sony's capabilities for me to feel comfortable dropping that kind of money on it. Image quality is NOT everything. Also im fine spending the money if i felt there was a point, instead i feel Im dropping the money on the Sony for... What exactly? Great sensor sure, but its useless to me without the lenses I need.

I think you've got to take full responsibility for that. People keep giving helpful replies, & you continue to reply "I don't want to spend that much" More than once. To a normal person, this suggests there are indeed budget restraints. Especially when you go & buy a camera you already tested & returned, just because you found it cheaper somewhere.

I dont get why it feels you are so hostile about me needing to buy the Sony.

I don't think people are getting hostile. Perhaps a little frustrated after going to the trouble of writing replies, giving suggestions, only to see things seemingly going round & round & round in circles. There's more than one person who's seeing it like that, going by the replies. Perhaps when you have more of an idea of what you actually want, then maybe ask for some suggestions as to which particular system may be better for you.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Strick
Senior Member
Avatar
519 posts
Gallery: 85 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 130
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Katy, TX
     
Jan 26, 2016 08:13 |  #129

I have to admit I have followed this thread from the beginning but I am very lost. The OP wants to shoot macro and wildlife but then keeps talking about an A7 and 55mm. Also if you have an idea to replace a 7D, the top level aps-c sensor canon, why look at entry level mirrorless.

I also find it hard to believe that the IBIS didn't work for you on a e-m10 unless it was either not on or not functioning properly. Foe that type of photography the 10 is actually more than capable of producing results close to the 7D.


www.strickphotography.​com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,212 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Likes: 2074
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
Post edited over 2 years ago by KenjiS. (2 edits in all)
     
Jan 26, 2016 14:45 |  #130

Strick wrote in post #17873415 (external link)
I have to admit I have followed this thread from the beginning but I am very lost. The OP wants to shoot macro and wildlife but then keeps talking about an A7 and 55mm. Also if you have an idea to replace a 7D, the top level aps-c sensor canon, why look at entry level mirrorless.

I also find it hard to believe that the IBIS didn't work for you on a e-m10 unless it was either not on or not functioning properly. Foe that type of photography the 10 is actually more than capable of producing results close to the 7D.


Basically a full rounded system for me, a one system to rule them all would have to handle a wide range of subjects, Macro and wildlife shooting are the two types of shots i get a lot of enjoyment from and are the areas where i feel Mirrorless' AF would let me down, as i use tracking for both on my 7D. Those areas are also where I've historically had issues on my prior camera (EOS 30D) so I suppose its based on experience.

Maybe I didnt explain some things clearly enough or left out vital parts of my train of thought which lead to some confusion, So let me try to clarify things.

The choice in the A7 and 55mm lens(Likewise the GX7 + 20mm f/1.7, OM-D + 25mm f/1.4) was based upon a gap i have in my current system (Lack of a fast prime in the 35-50mm equivalent neighborhood) the system, if it REPLACED the 7D then yes it needs to excel at macro shooting and wildlife as well. I felt however the best place to start was the capability gap and slowly replace items from there. Thats also the type of lens id use in what i deem my "carry configuration" Which is why I got on the thought of "if Im considering spending a good $700-800 for a 35mm f/1.4 or 24mm f/1.4 Sigma, I wonder if i could get a smaller lighter camera with a similar lens that would be easier to carry around in my bag every place I go" I literally do take the 7D everywhere.. before with the 28mm f/1.8 or 35mm f/2 (old one, Non-IS) sometimes with the 15-85, and at the moment, with the 50mm f/1.4 Sigmalux, the Sigmalux has too narrow of a field of view most of the time which makes shooting at a table difficult. The 15-85 is a bit huge to carry constantly (Albeit awesome) and its a tidge slow which leaves me few isolation options at the 24-35mm settings i tend to use a lot.

Originally the goal was a second camera, Then the money i was spending grew and grew and it got to a point of "Well at this point maybe i should shoot for just replacing the 7D, its old, and a lot of these newer cameras can beat it in terms of IQ" as I said, I was in well over a grand the first two attempts and for that price point the system didnt deliver enough to me as a replacement and keeping it as a second camera felt like a poor investment.

And the OM-D IBIS thing bugs me still, I do know when i turned it off i seemed to do better.. There were other issues, like the Function buttons were in a bad place to operate and fumbly for me, Maybe the EM5II would have been a better choice for me ergonomically. The other issue, the having no feedback and coming home to find out stuff was massively out of focus despite looking correct in the viewfinder and on the rear screen was another issue. And the GX7's focus limitations in some ways were more controllable and such, the OM-D threw up its hands on me a few times in situations i simply felt it should not have, Focused on something in the background off to the right when the focus point was in the mid-left of frame, Focused on something in the foreground at the edge of the frame nowhere near the selected focus point was, refused to focus at macro distances despite focus limiters and overall was a headache.

From my point of view i already elaborated that I didnt want converters and to convert lenses, I even went through the trouble of testing one out and it confirmed that i simply dislike how a converted lens felt on the body, I felt it made the ergonomics wonky and defeated the compact advantage of the A7. I also stated while the A7 is really nice i do doubt its AF Tracking ability from tests in the store. I also started to feel the weight savings when you moved to the "II" Models in the A7 line started to dwindle fast. The lens situation is a key point in this as I could not build my system in native mount lenses. On top of that the price on several must haves for me in their lineup felt priced simply too high compared to what I could get on Canon or Nikon. So it left me either paying near, or more than, $2000 on a second camera that really wont replace my 7D, or attempting to force the square peg of my needs into the round hole of its limitations. For $2000 I felt both options were a poor use of funds.

For simplicity i will use the New street prices for everything in this example. Its too hard to go fishing up specific used copies which might not be available right now

I dont have an issue paying $1000 on the 55mm f/1.8 Sonnar, I do have an issue paying $1000 for the 55 f/1.8 Sonnar, then $1000 for a 24-70 f/4 which is "meh" from what I've read, and not my favorite zoom in that focal range, The closest telephoto is a $1400 70-200 f/4, which is not really the right zoom for me either (And is bright white), The $1000 90mm macro is lovely, but its really not any better than my 100L now is it..Certainly not any smaller or lighter. The 16-35 is fine and priced good enough but im not really a wide angle shooter so this would be way, way down the list of things id buy (My 11-16 has been used not even a dozen times. i just dont do wide angle) I could of course buy the converter and the 70-400 for the wildlife side of things, $350 for the converter, $2200 for the 70-400, $2550. But stop and consider for only a couple hundred more than that I can buy a D610 and the 200-500...And thats JUST a lens, if im being completely fair the Sony combo (A7II, 70-400, A to E converter) is $4250 versus the Nikon at $2900. $1350 difference buys another lens or two.

So in summation, the Sony i would spend more on lenses that would not work as well for me, Really the only two id be completely satisfied with are the 55mm f/1.8 Sonnar and the 90mm macro. I can see the point in the Sonnar, Less so on the 90... Id happily buy the 90 if the rest of the system worked basically, but it wont, so id see no point in picking it up when i already have the very lovely 100L. To me it costs too much to just be "A second camera" as well

To reiterate, i tried a converter and the ergonomics of it felt really wrong to me. Plus I felt i was still throwing away most of the size and weight benefits doing so(Or zero advantage in weight if we're talkin the A7II). It just made less sense to me. The package will be just as deep as an SLR (Due to the register distance) and if im converting over most of my lenses I just feel why not just buy the SLR that goes with them instead. Additionally, as stated, MF for me, even on Sony with peaking and etc would be an absolute last resort, and would likely lead to me not using it if thats what i had to use all the time. I know I really badly want AF, especially good tracking AF. Which is also where the converters will fall flat for me (Except the Sony one due to it basically having one of their pellicile mirror SLRs in there)

Which has brought me back around to the GX7, For about $500 with the lens, i can live and accept its limitations as my carry around camera, for that price it does not NEED to be my 7D or try to replace it for everything. So I think i got my lightweight option taken care of.

Now, if i want to actually upgrade the 7D.. I have quite a lot of choices, and i can take weight out of the equation and prioritize performance/IQ. Thus bringing something like a Nikon D600 or D610 into the option list.

I hope this clears up some of the confusion


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,212 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Likes: 2074
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Jan 27, 2016 16:19 |  #131

And the GX7 came today..and it looks like its going back..

This would be why:

Thats the viewfinder, that "streak" is not present on the rear screen and as can be seen is viewable on the menu... i dont think the viewfinder is dirty :(

Also this is why i buy from stores..


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
speedync
Goldmember
1,236 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 198
Joined May 2011
Location: Geelong, Australia
     
Jan 27, 2016 18:11 |  #132

I'll just leave this here http://www.dpreview.co​m/forums/post/57171625 (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,212 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Likes: 2074
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Jan 27, 2016 19:10 |  #133

speedync wrote in post #17875440 (external link)
I'll just leave this here http://www.dpreview.co​m/forums/post/57171625 (external link)

I'm not sure i can get another GX7 for the same price so now im not sure what im doing :/ The GX8 does sound lovely lol. Sadly I have the 20mm coming tomarrow and i have no way to actually TEST the lens

Shame since the replacement eyecup seemed to have done the trick. But that said, viewfinder was defective.. Kinda disappointed in B&H quality control because that issue is quite obvious...

It also was rapidly flickering on and off and switching back and forth between the rear screen and viewfinder like a strobe lamp. The other GX7 did not exhibit this behavior, and i couldnt tell it to just use one or the other because i couldnt control the menu at all, i managed to get it to stop for long enough to disable the auto switch sensor (Rebooted the camera a few times) but the viewfinder still flickered on and off..


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
speedync
Goldmember
1,236 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 198
Joined May 2011
Location: Geelong, Australia
     
Jan 27, 2016 20:33 as a reply to  @ KenjiS's post |  #134

Shame that the GX8 seems wildly unpopular. And hard to even get a look at before purchase. I'd be more than happy to give you mine to try, if we happened to be in the same area. Lol. Half a world away makes that difficult




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,212 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Likes: 2074
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Jan 29, 2016 01:21 |  #135

I agree

Anyways B&H was pretty awesome on the whole return, Agreed to no-charge next day the replacement so i had it for the weekend.


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

27,743 views & 12 likes for this thread
Adding a Mirrorless, Maybe a switch.
FORUMS General Gear Talk Changing Camera Brands 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is tlhabiwadd
771 guests, 324 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.