Critique my Canon/Sony Plan

Today, I have a Canon system that I've built up from 2006 to now. I have four kids, and I shoot our extensive canoe / kayak trips around the Great Lakes, and I shoot a lot of sports. I also shoot a lot of other normal family stuff. My eldest two kids are both 3-sport varsity athletes, but one is now in college the the second is a junior. The younger two kids are simply not the same kind of athletes. More band, theater, etc.

What I have: 5D3, 24-70 II, 24-105, 70-200/2.8 IS II, 100-400 II, 24L II, 50L, 85L II, Sigma 120-300/2.8 Sport. Also three flashes and triggers.

I'm looking to add a Sony A7rIII, 28/2, and 55/1.8. I'm also thinking about adding the 21mm convertor for the 28mm lens. What appeals to me here is a super high performance, but smaller, kit set up for 21-28-55 focal lengths, plus the ability to use my EOS lenses. I look at the performance vs. size of that kit, and it appeals to me.

For sports, while it lasts, I'll keep shooting the 5D3. After that, I might move to Sony native long glass. The Sony 100-400 would probably cover my needs, I won't need a 70-200/2.8 anymore.

So in the near term I'd look like this:
5D3 + A7rIII
21 convertor
Sony 28/2
Sony 55/1.8
Canon 85L II
Canon 24-70 II
Canon 70-200/2.8
Canon 100-400L II
Sigma 120-300/Sport

I know the opinions on the Sigma and Metabones adaptors go back and forth. The Sigma is $150 less. Opinions?

Anyone try a Sigma 120-300 with an A7RIII?

Other comments?

My plans for flash work are kind of up in the air, but for now I think I'll just use the Canon.

Godox do triggers etc that will allow Canon and Sony flash talk to each other, might be worth looking out if you have some Canon flashes. The 55 is a wonderful lens, though I only use it on the original A7, not felt much desire to change, the Sony 85 1.8 is supposed to be very good, pondering dropping for one. I have not used a mount adaptor thing is it worth searching each lens as a combo with them?

JeffreyG wrote in post #18541825
Today, I have a Canon system that I've built up from 2006 to now. I have four kids, and I shoot our extensive canoe / kayak trips around the Great Lakes, and I shoot a lot of sports. I also shoot a lot of other normal family stuff. My eldest two kids are both 3-sport varsity athletes, but one is now in college the the second is a junior. The younger two kids are simply not the same kind of athletes. More band, theater, etc.

What I have: 5D3, 24-70 II, 24-105, 70-200/2.8 IS II, 100-400 II, 24L II, 50L, 85L II, Sigma 120-300/2.8 Sport. Also three flashes and triggers.

I'm looking to add a Sony A7rIII, 28/2, and 55/1.8. I'm also thinking about adding the 21mm convertor for the 28mm lens. What appeals to me here is a super high performance, but smaller, kit set up for 21-28-55 focal lengths, plus the ability to use my EOS lenses. I look at the performance vs. size of that kit, and it appeals to me.

For sports, while it lasts, I'll keep shooting the 5D3. After that, I might move to Sony native long glass. The Sony 100-400 would probably cover my needs, I won't need a 70-200/2.8 anymore.

So in the near term I'd look like this:
5D3 + A7rIII
21 convertor
Sony 28/2
Sony 55/1.8
Canon 85L II
Canon 24-70 II
Canon 70-200/2.8
Canon 100-400L II
Sigma 120-300/Sport

I know the opinions on the Sigma and Metabones adaptors go back and forth. The Sigma is $150 less. Opinions?

Anyone try a Sigma 120-300 with an A7RIII?

Other comments?

My plans for flash work are kind of up in the air, but for now I think I'll just use the Canon.

The 55 1.8 is really a great lens, and I miss having one. I swapped out my 50A for it when I came from Canon, and it was a very even trade. Sacrificing some DOF for major weight savings was well worth it for me. Fast focusing and very clean images.

The 28/2 was a beloved lens on the Sony forum for a few years, but it seems many of on the board graduated to the Batis 25 or 18, Loxia 21 or Sony 12-24. From what I saw, the 28/2 delivered the goods and the WA attachment worked very well. I went with an adapted 24/2 SSM so I could also use it on my a77ii at the time, and that's a fine lens in its own right. Some were adapting the Sigma 24 for a time. Lots of choices, and it seems the 28/2 with the WA accessory is a reasonable one. Also reasonable, just keep that 24Lii and use it!

Metabones will give your 50L and 85Lii new life, so tough call on whether or not you need the FE 55 TBH. Maybe try out the 50L for a bit before making a decision? Eye AF may shock you with those lenses.

The 100-400GM is the sharpest of its ilk on the market. The bird shots some of the guys in the Sony forum have posted are pretty insane, although I know it is possible you had more sports in mind.

Nothing wrong with keeping the trusty 5D3/70-200Lii combo. The cost of the Sony 70-200GM is steep, but the native performance probably wouldn't disappoint you from what I've seen (but never shot). Having shot with the Canon 70-200Lii, it is easy to see why it is hard to part with--it is outstanding in every regard! I don't have any experience with the 24-70 lenses of any make, but again, tough to go wrong keeping that Canon for the time being.

The Sigma 100-300 2.8 is a lens Sony has no answer for right now, and that is a shame.

Great lakes, four kids, kayaking and else family pictures. Sports. Sound very familiar .
Keep you Canon gear with lenses of your choice for low light and sports. For kayaking get Go Pro.

Sony... isn't 55 1.8 the worst nifty-fifty lens ever made and most overpriced f1.8 lens you could find?
Another problem with Sony lenses, they doesn't seems to be balanced in size with the camera body. Folks ending up adding camera grip and then where is the point and difference from Canon DSLRs?

I would suggest to try most current Olympus OM-D offerings. Small, good IQ (including high ISO) and cute lenses.

kf095 wrote in post #18543233
Great lakes, four kids, kayaking and else family pictures. Sports. Sound very familiar .
Keep you Canon gear with lenses of your choice for low light and sports. For kayaking get Go Pro.

Sony... isn't 55 1.8 the worst nifty-fifty lens ever made and most overpriced f1.8 lens you could find?
Another problem with Sony lenses, they doesn't seems to be balanced in size with the camera body. Folks ending up adding camera grip and then where is the point and difference from Canon DSLRs?

I would suggest to try most current Olympus OM-D offerings. Small, good IQ (including high ISO) and cute lenses.

I believe that's the Sony 50mm f1.8. The 55mm is supposed to be amazing, but the 50mm is their budget model and apparently horrific.

As for Olympus OM-D, I'd also suggest looking at that. If you don't need super shallow depth of field, M43 is an awesome choice. The lenses are really small (with a few exceptions) and they're really good. The weather sealing of Olympus (namely the E-M1 and E-M1 mark ii) surpassed both Nikon and Sony in a recent test, and I've seen a couple of people post about taking it in the kayak, and some have posted photos of it absolutely soaked without any problems at all.

Having a Canon and Olympus setup would be really nice IMO. The Canon could come out for low light and shallow depth of field, and the Olympus could be the daily carrier and even sports.

kf095 wrote in post #18543233
Sony... isn't 55 1.8 the worst nifty-fifty lens ever made and most overpriced f1.8 lens you could find?

That's not a typical opinion on the 55/1.8 ZA. Are you perhaps confusing it with the FE 50/1.8?

The difference is in the adaptability of the focus system for everything other than sports.

I suspect your goals with mirrorless and mine are different. What I want from the Sony system is one of the best 35mm format sensors available, mated to a really interesting focus system that uses the actual sensor to focus and which can do things (eye AF, etc.) better than a dSLR.

I'm not looking for a small system to run side by side with my large dSLR. I'm looking to transition to a different system, one that will probably meet all my needs in a few years as I back out of the one thing it is only 90% good at - sports.

The Sony is attractive because I can spend two years running a mixed system while I slowly try out various lenses and see how they work vs. my Canon lenses.

As for size, what I want from the Sony is a system that can sometimes act as a small kit - when I pick up just the little lenses like the 28/2 and 55/1.8 for instance.

I tried using a micro 4:3 system alongside my EOS at one point for my 'small' gear. I always wound up grabbing the EOS because most of the time I needed 'small' I also needed the things the Canon could do (focus in the dark, shoot in the dark, etc.)

mickeyb105 wrote in post #18542218
The 28/2 was a beloved lens on the Sony forum for a few years, but it seems many of on the board graduated to the Batis 25 or 18, Loxia 21 or Sony 12-24. From what I saw, the 28/2 delivered the goods and the WA attachment worked very well. I went with an adapted 24/2 SSM so I could also use it on my a77ii at the time, and that's a fine lens in its own right. Some were adapting the Sigma 24 for a time. Lots of choices, and it seems the 28/2 with the WA accessory is a reasonable one. Also reasonable, just keep that 24Lii and use it!

I'll probably try the 28/2 anyway - it's about 1/3 the price of the 25/2 and small. I'm trying to use the two primes with the Sony as a 'portable' kit for when it isn't mated to my huge EOS zooms, and the 25/2 is pretty much as big as a 24L II or similar.

For sure I'm keeping the 85L II for now. The kinds of things I shoot at 85mm are typically not moving, and not where I need portable anyway.

Everyone says adapted long lenses don't work well on the Sony, so I thing the 120-300 might stay mostly on the 5D3. It would be cool if it worked even reasonably well, I think the lens is a bargain in a lot of respects and certainly not something offered elsewhere.

Lousy 55mm instead of normal 50? It reminds me dirt cheap but good on rendering Industar-61 55 2.8 L/D lenses.
http://www.kenrockwell​.com/tech/industar/55m​m-f28.htm

This is what I was talking about. I had A7 cameras in the shipping cart twice. BH had good deals on it in 2017. I like small size of the camera. Very tempting. But made it back empty twice because native Sony AF lenses are not something which makes me eager to buy A7 series camera.
But I'm glad what OP calls Sony FF sensor as something great. Great if it will works for OP! It just not my part of the story again due to the lenses. I'm rangefinder guy and where are too many reports how poor is Sony FF sensor performance is with those type of lenses.

it's a well thought out kit, only few things I would change

1. 55 -> 50 f1.8, get the less expensive version, it's not bad at all. On previous bodies like the original A7's or before firmware update, the AF was a little laggy and pulses a bit. Not an issue with the R2 or R3 cameras. Save a bundle of money, and it's actually lighter too. IQ is fairly good and pretty uniform across the field. Honestly, being a 50L for many years, that extra 5 put me out of my comfort zone and it drove me nuts. You can get an FE 35 f2.8 with the savings or even the SY 35 f2.8. I think it's a good idea to try the ultra small lenses as well. If you carry a bag, then it makes little difference, but with the smallest belt clippable bags like the Lowepro ILC 50 or similar, only an ultra small kit would fit. It's really liberating carrying something that requires no neck/shoulder bag/strap.

2. Metabones.... get a used metabones IV-T. Reason? Sigma adapter + sigma lens can get pretty bad. I havent tried it on my R3, but did for my R2. Problem with the sigma MC 11 is that there's a single mode (native mimmick), and they specify that it doesnt work in AF-C. Metabones has a PDAF only mode AND native mimmick. On top of that, Metabones seems to push firmware updates more often, and very meaningful updates.

be warned that the R3 learning curve is HUGE, the options are vast.

kf095 wrote in post #18543665
Lousy 55mm instead of normal 50? It reminds me dirt cheap but good on rendering Industar-61 55 2.8 L/D lenses.
http://www.kenrockwell​.com/tech/industar/55m​m-f28.htm

This is what I was talking about. I had A7 cameras in the shipping cart twice. BH had good deals on it in 2017. I like small size of the camera. Very tempting. But made it back empty twice because native Sony AF lenses are not something which makes me eager to buy A7 series camera.
But I'm glad what OP calls Sony FF sensor as something great. Great if it will works for OP! It just not my part of the story again due to the lenses. I'm rangefinder guy and where are too many reports how poor is Sony FF sensor performance is with those type of lenses.

On the R3, native lenses are about as good as pure MF lenses when it comes to MF ability, it's improved a lot over the years. I shoot them interchangeably, but once you get accustomed to eye AF.... you dont want anything else.

That 28/2 is a good lens, like I said, and with the adapter that's a great option to have. The FE55/a7riii footprint is small and light with amazing IQ, fast AF.

For what it is worth, MedicineMan4040 adapts a 400 f4 DO to his Sony bodies for birding.

Jeffrey. I made a similar switch last year. I'm a professional photographer who does photography as my full time job. I went from a Canon 5DIII, 24-70 2.8 II, 70-200 2.8 IS II, and other lenses, to a Sony a9 kit. I'm not going into a ton of detail about the confusion, heartache, expenses, etc. here, as that would take a long time (and as MickeyB knows, I've poured my heart and soul out about this topic other places on this forum). But if you have any questions and / or would like to know my experiences, feel free to shoot me a PM.

Sounds like a solid plan Jeffrey. I'll second Charlie's comments on the FE 501.8 vs fe55 1.8. The Sony thrifty fifty holds its own against the fe55. The upside to the fe55 is the rendering...theres definitely merit to the Zeiss colors and micro contrast.... But the 50 1.8 is really sharp, and noticeably smaller.

Just for reference, the Sony crop sensor in mirrorless is not dead or dying. Yes their focus is on FF but there are no plans on killing off the crop.

DagoImaging wrote in post #18545070
Just for reference, the Sony crop sensor in mirrorless is not dead or dying. Yes their focus is on FF but there are no plans on killing off the crop.

...it is the A-mount body/lens destiny which is questionable