Beloved 1D Mark III to Sony A7RII

I currently have my faithful 1D Mark III, Canon 70-200/2.8 II, 24-70/2.8, and Samyang 14/2.8.

My camera still looks new, gets around 8000 shots per charge, but I think it's time to change it up and the new 5D Mark IV looks nice, but the crippled, almost unusable 4K video is a no-go for me despite wanting to shoot mainly stills (but still want the 4K option). Also the A7RII is much cheaper as the 5D now costs as much here in Canada as my 1D cost when it was released.

Anybody gone this route? Thoughts? I know battery life is an issue as I can shoot shows where I need about 8000 photos in a day.

How much is the body + the Metabones adapter you will need to run those Canon lenses?

You know what, the A7R II isn't as "cheap" as I had once thought. I guess the price is about $1000 cdn less than the 5D MkIV though, but havent researched the metabones. I was thinking of selling all my lenses and going native for things like eye focus with the sony lenses. But wow, the sony 70-200 is $1000 more than the Canon.

Switching is not cheap. Although I'd love to give a new brand a whirl I'm scared at the investment needed since I have so my Canon gear.

Have you considered a 1Dx?

I made the switch from the 5DIII and have been really happy with the move. Adapted lenses have so-so AF performance, but good enough for most uses. The ability to adapt lenses does help you smooth the transition out though, as it allows you to transition over time. For lenses that you use in less AF critical type photography, adapted lenses are fine. The a7rII's AF system, while good, is not 1D caliber in terms of tracking so be sure you're OK with that. AF accuracy is much better than a DSLR though, so it might be a worthwhile trade-off depending on what you shoot. Eye focus is the best thing to happen to portrait photography in a very long time.

The battery life isn't a big deal and I regularly shoot long events on my a7rII. It takes 5 seconds to swap a battery out.

Edit: swing by this thread if you have specific questions...most of us came from Canon

https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=18193735

drisley wrote in post #18193134
I currently have my faithful 1D Mark III, Canon 70-200/2.8 II, 24-70/2.8, and Samyang 14/2.8.

My camera still looks new, gets around 8000 shots per charge, but I think it's time to change it up and the new 5D Mark IV looks nice, but the crippled, almost unusable 4K video is a no-go for me despite wanting to shoot mainly stills (but still want the 4K option). Also the A7RII is much cheaper as the 5D now costs as much here in Canada as my 1D cost when it was released.

Anybody gone this route? Thoughts? I know battery life is an issue as I can shoot shows where I need about 8000 photos in a day.

What do you usually shoot?

The A7rii is certainly an great camera with great new lenses that have been introduced steadily over the past year. If you are shooting an extreme volume of photos (8000!!!) as you mentioned, then I see an upgrade to a 1DX series in your future. The shutter life and battery life, when shooting THAT many pics, is something Sony just can't give you.

I don't think any mirrorless camera will totally replace a DSLR. I used to keep a Leica M system and an SLR like Nikon, or eventually for me, the Leica R system. I was never a huge 35mm fan (but somehow got 5 bodies and eventually 15 lenses for the jobs that needed that format), and I don't see that digital has changed these primary uses very much. I'd suggest keeping both systems for a while and gradually making the move complete if you so desire. Personally, I would just plan on keeping both systems. Maybe you don't need complete lens overlaps if you can figure out what purpose you would have for each camera. I think the Sony would be very nice for street photography with lenses in the 24 to 50 mm range, and a full frame DSL for all the other commercial gigs, landscape, etc. (being whatever you purchased the 1D for).

Going from a 1D series to a Sony is a huge jump. I think the obvious move would be to the 5D series; if you had a 5D series and wanted things smaller/lighter, then yes, the Sony makes sense. Unless you no longer need the focusing speed, build quality, weather-sealing, battery life, and all the other reasons you bought the 1D for, then get whatever excites you.

Using adapters on EF lenses is expensive and bulky. I would plan on selling your Canon lenses and just buying the native Sony glass.

Just buy both, keep both for a while until you have some real-life, first-hand experience.

mcluckie wrote in post #18194199
I don't think any mirrorless camera will totally replace a DSLR. I used to keep a Leica M system and an SLR like Nikon, or eventually for me, the Leica R system. I was never a huge 35mm fan (but somehow got 5 bodies and eventually 15 lenses for the jobs that needed that format), and I don't see that digital has changed these primary uses very much. I'd suggest keeping both systems for a while and gradually making the move complete if you so desire. Personally, I would just plan on keeping both systems. Maybe you don't need complete lens overlaps if you can figure out what purpose you would have for each camera. I think the Sony would be very nice for street photography with lenses in the 24 to 50 mm range, and a full frame DSL for all the other commercial gigs, landscape, etc. (being whatever you purchased the 1D for).

Going from a 1D series to a Sony is a huge jump. I think the obvious move would be to the 5D series; if you had a 5D series and wanted things smaller/lighter, then yes, the Sony makes sense. Unless you no longer need the focusing speed, build quality, weather-sealing, battery life, and all the other reasons you bought the 1D for, then get whatever excites you.

Using adapters on EF lenses is expensive and bulky. I would plan on selling your Canon lenses and just buying the native Sony glass.

Just buy both, keep both for a while until you have some real-life, first-hand experience.

Very sensible post. Speaks well to the importance of getting the tool that you need without being influenced by fads, trends and Internet banter. Whenever possible try before you buy.

mcluckie wrote in post #18194199
I don't think any mirrorless camera will totally replace a DSLR. I used to keep a Leica M system and an SLR like Nikon, or eventually for me, the Leica R system. I was never a huge 35mm fan (but somehow got 5 bodies and eventually 15 lenses for the jobs that needed that format), and I don't see that digital has changed these primary uses very much. I'd suggest keeping both systems for a while and gradually making the move complete if you so desire. Personally, I would just plan on keeping both systems. Maybe you don't need complete lens overlaps if you can figure out what purpose you would have for each camera. I think the Sony would be very nice for street photography with lenses in the 24 to 50 mm range, and a full frame DSL for all the other commercial gigs, landscape, etc. (being whatever you purchased the 1D for).

Going from a 1D series to a Sony is a huge jump. I think the obvious move would be to the 5D series; if you had a 5D series and wanted things smaller/lighter, then yes, the Sony makes sense. Unless you no longer need the focusing speed, build quality, weather-sealing, battery life, and all the other reasons you bought the 1D for, then get whatever excites you.

Using adapters on EF lenses is expensive and bulky. I would plan on selling your Canon lenses and just buying the native Sony glass.

Just buy both, keep both for a while until you have some real-life, first-hand experience.

The Leica M system is very different from the a7rII, as the a7rII can do many of the things a DSLR can, whereas this is not the case with a rangefinder system like the Leica M.

Best advice is to simply try the a7 system for a couple of weeks and see if its a fit or not. Anecdotally speaking, most of us who shoot on the Sony a7 system did not intend for it to be our primarily systems at the on-set. But what usually ends up happening is that when running dual system set-up, the DSLR ends up sitting on the shelffor months and is eventually sold off.

Also there are big upsides to mirrorless cameras than size along. The lenses I use on my a7rII for paid work are not at all smaller than their DSLR equivalents, but the accuracy of the AF system (no microfocus nightmares) and things like eye focus are big reasons for me to use the a7rII over a DSLR.

I've got a small jones for an M5 for easy access to my EF lenses, but the crop factor makes my adapted Zeiss 15 a 24mm. That's a huge 24. I like the M5 quite a bit more than the M3, but I think overall I'd be better off with a 5D and my 25ZE. Or obviously the M 11-22, and thats the way I will go in a few months if there is no full frame version coming from Canon.

The world of camera's with 1080 to 4k video does open up options. However what I find is any video footage really needs to be massaged in some form of post processing. The canon L lenses will rattle as it auto focuses and will be caught on any external rode mic on the camera bodies hotshoe. Using external mics on a boom or remotely locating mic is more ideal if your sticking with L lenses. Canon STM lenses are decent but still not L lens quality and zooms are variable aperture.

I did a quick nasty relocation of my rode mic for my 80D. This was simpler than adding audio in post using a tascam or zoom mic. Rode mic does a very good job in sound quality from a 3.5mm jack.

Photo from AlanU's gallery.
Image hosted by forum (827729)

AlanU wrote in post #18204161
The world of camera's with 1080 to 4k video does open up options. However what I find is any video footage really needs to be massaged in some form of post processing. The canon L lenses will rattle as it auto focuses and will be caught on any external rode mic on the camera bodies hotshoe. Using external mics on a boom or remotely locating mic is more ideal if your sticking with L lenses. Canon STM lenses are decent but still not L lens quality and zooms are variable aperture.

I did a quick nasty relocation of my rode mic for my 80D. This was simpler than adding audio in post using a tascam or zoom mic. Rode mic does a very good job in sound quality from a 3.5mm jack.

Gallery photo (hosted):
posted by AlanU originally in forum: Fuji Digital Cameras

Drisley you've been spoiled with the battery capacity of the 1D series. This is where you get spoiled and take things for granted.

Even a Sony A6500 will be in the 1900CDN range!!! The A6300 is $1350CDN. However the image quality of the newer crop sony's are impressive. If you've tested an A6300 you'll notice a huge improvement in high iso capabilities of the sony crop sensor over the 1dmk3.

The tough thing is that you'd like 4k video capabilities. If your stationary with no AF required or slow moving subjects you can use pretty much use any 4k capable camera. I wish taking video was that simple though

If you do go the mirrorless route I think you'll need to have a pocket full of batteries to keep up with the amount of photos you shoot.

I guess IQ will be the determining factor in selecting a camera as well......

I'm really curious in what you'll be buying. If I was willing to jump on board with a new camera system I'd be debating about a lot of things. The fuji X-T2 with 16-55 f/2.8 and 50-140 f/2.8 would be on my list. Shoot the 4k video with a fuji film simulation preset and have pleasant video straight out of camera.

If I kept with Canon the 5dmk4's 4k would not be ideal. However your stills would look killer with your current glass. $4500 CDN is a hard pill to swallow!!!

I appreciate my 5d3 and my 80D is my 1080 video rig and can be used as a spare body. That was my "logical" decision for wanting decent video with the DPAF 80D. I can have 1/2 hr clips and fill up a 128gb card with no overheating.

It's really hard to get 1 system to do everything you want while meeting every criteria you have on your preference list

for some reason, canon DSLR's pick up globs of noise in video, whether it's IS or focus, however, the Sony A7rii hardly picks up any of the noise, and most the time, I shoot without the mic because it's good enough (have the rode from canon days, which is excellent).

the focus speed on video really depends on user. I dont find the slowish rack to be an issue or distracting (hybrid CDAF/PDAF).... it should be that way for normal stuff.

it can be configured



as for overheating, I havent had it overheat, and this user: https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=rNOTfLJoz1c says it would overheat @ 107 degree weather for 36 minutes of recording.... 36 minutes of life in 107 degree weather is pretty darn harsh! That's probably why I dont know a single person that's overheated their camera, just not typical to shoot like that. The A6500 is even more resistant to overheating, but of course, it's always a possibility if you leave your camera in direct sunlight.

awesome info.

I never really knew how expensive the A7 series are.

I still haven't bit the bullet on this yet. I finally got to play with a Sony (A7 II) at the local camera store, and it's really a fun, great looking camera! The images didn't blow me away as much as I expected, though I suspect the A7R II will be even better. I tried it with a 28/2.0 and focus seemed quite fast though back focused on the face I was capturing, every time for some reason.

The 5D MkIV felt very Canon like but they didn't have one to test, only one in a box.

I am still so confused, what I would love is a bit of all the new cameras put into one, basically none have everything nailed down.

A7R II, great tech, fun, small, but bad battery life, probably too slow and small buffer for what I do, no mRaw or sRaw, only 60FPS max at 1080p. Acceptable price.
5D IV, great Canon build, fantastic LCD, almost perfect image quality and size for stills, but video modes are lacking (really want high speed for 1080p). Battery life good, though not 1D-like, much better than any of the mirrorless. Price is a negative. I have Canon glass.

A6500, fantastic buffer and AF, great video options, but not full frame, not the best in low light, bad LCD
GH8, apparently ALMOST the perfect camera if it had been full frame and had better noise control, perhaps better battery than the Sonys.

I think a GH8 with a full frame Canon sensor would almost be THE camera.

After paying $4200 brand new for a 1D III when it was released, I'm having a hard time paying just as much now for the 5D (without a grip), a semi-pro camera not being completely satisfied. I keep wondering if a Sony A7R III is just around the corner with a lot of the new A6500 abilities in a full frame camera.