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 Camera Vs. Camera 
Thread started 20 Feb 2018 (Tuesday) 15:05
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Switching to Mirrorless

 
DeCeccoNET
Senior Member
Avatar
708 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Eastchester, New York
Post edited 3 months ago by DeCeccoNET.
     
Feb 20, 2018 15:05 |  #1

I've come to the conclusion that I only want to photograph my (growing) family, and find myself it more scenarios than not that I can't manage "dadding" and my 70D/lenses. I've been looking at different systems and testing where available - and believe mirrorless is the best fit for me, and would appreciate any insight re: complementing with EOS-M and the EF adapter as needed vs switching brands entirely.

If I stay with Canon - I'd likely gravitate to an EOS-M5 (for the build-in EVF), and a 22mm pancake to walk around, and throw on an ef adapter/my 100L for when i want to take a portrait or have some macro fun. I'd like to add a zoom to the mix, but i prefer to shoot indoors/natural light and am concerned with the lack of any other fast eos-m glass.

If I switch brands outright, I'm eyeing the Fuji X-E3 with 18-55 and 80mm macro and possibly their 27mm pancake for when i want very pocket able. But obviously the cost of switching adds up fast. I also looked at the X100F - but prefer having focal length options. I really like the manual controls too.

I really wanted to like the Sony A6300 - but I may have had a defective copy, or was too turned off by the power zoom kit lens. I tried it with the 35 1.8 as i didn't have access to their pancake, and it was a little bulkier than I'd of cared for with that system. I really enjoyed playing with their 90mm macro though.

I'm also a little nervous of buyers remorse, as the Sony and Canon offerings seem to have been out for a while, so who knows if they are due for a refresh...

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
-John


Sold all my gear to support starting a family... who inspired me to re-focus on photography again.
70D, EF-S 24 2.8, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 100 2.8L Macro

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Jarvis ­ Creative ­ Studios
Goldmember
Avatar
2,337 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 700
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Houston, Texas
Post edited 3 months ago by Jarvis Creative Studios.
     
Feb 20, 2018 15:56 |  #2

You are aware that both the Canon M5 and the Sony a6300 are not the latest versions of these cameras correct? The Canon M6 was released in April 2017 and the Sony a6500 was released in May 2016. Knowing Sony's timeline, the a6500 may be due for a replacement soon, but as of now the a6500 is still one of the most capable aps-c mirrorless cameras out, and has class leading autofocus.

Now I will address the switch, as I did a full system switch (DSLR to mirrorless) recently. Let's start with the myths of switching to mirrorless:

1. Myth: Switching to mirrorless automatically makes your kit lighter and smaller. Truth: Switching to mirrorless only makes your camera body smaller. Especially when using an adapter for your DSLR lenses. Having large heavy lenses on a smaller body may actually be a downside, as the balance has become very front heavy which isn't good on your hands / wrists. Adding an adapter makes the system even larger and heavier. Using a Sony 24-70 f2.8 lens on my Sony mirrorless is no smaller (and barely lighter) than shooting my old 5D3 and Canon 24-70 2.8. The Sony lens is larger than the Canon so the size remains the same. *You can significantly make your kit lighter an smaller by switching to a micro 4/3 mirrorless system (with native lenses for that system), or using specific "crop lenses" on your crop mirrorless system. But this would require buying all new lenses which would be the same as a complete system switch, which you said you didn't want.*

2. Myth: When using an EVF, you "see what you get before you take the shot". Truth: While having an EVF will give you a baseline of your exposure, it's far from a "what you see is what you get" situation. Your EVF is showing a processed version of the RAW file you are capturing. And based on the brightness of your EVF, exposure value, etc. you could be thinking you're getting an exposure that is not reality. Just like on a DSLR, trusting your histogram and knowing how a camera behaves relative to your metering modes is the way to ensure proper exposure.

3. Myth: Battery life sucks on mirrorless. Truth: Many people associate mirrorless with Sony, but in reality there are so many other mirrorless brands out there. While it's true that up until the release of the a9 Sony's batteries were pitiful, other cameras like Panasonic and Olympus have fantastic battery life.

After being strictly mirrorless for over 6 months now, I'm very happy with the switch (Canon 5D3 to Sony a9/a6500). The main things I miss from Canon are the build quality and the skin tones. Even though I bought the $4500 Sony a9, the build quality still is not as good as the 5D3 was. I also am worried that the Sony isn't going to hold it's value as well as Canon gear does. I've already seen a few a9's being sold for $3500 used about 8 months after it was released. That would be the equivalent of the 1DX Mark ii selling for about $4500, which is about what it goes for used now, almost 2 years after release.


WEBSITE (external link)
flickr (external link)
Sony HX90V || Sony RX100V || Sony a6500 || Sony a9 || Sony E 10-18mm f/4 OSS || Sony FE 24-70 f/2.8 GM || Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA || Sony Sonnar T* FE 55mm f1.8 ZA || Sony FE 70-200 f/2.8 GM OSS || Godox speedlights and strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Two ­ Hot ­ Shoes
Goldmember
Avatar
2,311 posts
Gallery: 255 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 2125
Joined Apr 2014
Location: Ireland
     
Feb 20, 2018 17:59 |  #3

Hard decision to make. I eventually swapped over fully Fuji in 2016 after shooting Canon for about 10 years, I took a little over one year to make my mind up, shooting the systems side by side. Now fully mirrorless and very happy.

All the lenses I have are made for the Fuji system I shoot, so they are (relatively) small. With the bigger lenses like the 100-400 I just hold the lens in my left hand and operate the camera with my right hand so no real balance issues there, if fact it really frees up your operating hand on the camera and still easy to zoom and focus with he left. Whit the smaller lenses, these are the ones I most use every day, it's no problem with the weight.

The what you see EVF I find is just that, just look at the exposure changing and shoot when you are happy, the output image is exactly as I saw it & properly exposed. If you leave EVF display auto brightness turned on you might run into issues there though. This is really very handy. Fuji show you the colour profile you select in the EVF live if you want it.

Battery life; small battery in the Fuji but I get about 400 shots per battery, I have the camera well set up. Sony seem to have that cracked with the new battery in the A9. I've yet to run into a situation where I miss a shot due to the battery though, including shooting weddings.

Probably the thing I like most about Fuji is their constant improvement through firmware updates, even in the older bodies, they listen and add features and improvements all the time.

Good luck in your decision & try before you buy if you can.


Fuji: X-PRO2, X-T1, X-E2 | 16/1.4, 18/2, 23/1.4, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, 90/2, 16-55/2.8, 10-24/4. AD600BM, TT865F, AL-H198, ThinkTank AS2, Peli1514, Ona Bowery, Matthews Grip
Gear & Discounts (external link)Instagram (external link)Blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
11,948 posts
Gallery: 138 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2756
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Feb 20, 2018 18:40 as a reply to  @ Jarvis Creative Studios's post |  #4

Jared,

That is a very well written post. It's packed with useful information, and, what's more, it comes from your own personal experience.

I think I'll be seeking your advice when I eventually face the same decision that the OP is facing.

--------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

By the way, I am wondering one thing; instead of being an early adopter and paying the full price for a new Sony A9, why didn't you wait a while before buying one, and get it used, for a significant savings?


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
14,584 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 4869
Joined Sep 2007
     
Feb 20, 2018 19:04 |  #5

without even dipping into mirrorless, you can simply pick up a tamron/sigma 17-50 f2.8 along with some form of 60 macro, and save some serious weight.

As is, you're not taking advantage of the small size possibilities you're capable of with your current canon setup. While there arent a whole lot of options, there is the 24 stm, sigma 30, 40 stm, 50 stm, which are all fairly small and light. With mirrorless, there will be a whole lot more options.


Sony A7rii/A7riii - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 35-70, 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8, 24/1.4 - Tamron 28-75 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sporadic
Senior Member
Avatar
559 posts
Gallery: 55 photos
Likes: 140
Joined May 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
     
Feb 20, 2018 19:53 |  #6

Reduction in lens size and weight is not a myth when it comes to Fuji and coming from another crop body. The issue with Canon crops is having to use full frame EF glass for the nice stuff. Fuji glass has the quality and is designed for a crop body. Compare the 35/1.4 offerings from each. I'd recommend testing the waters with a used X-T1 which can be had pretty cheap. Can easily resell it if not happy. I went full Fuji but eventually picked up another used 7D and 300/4 solely for shooting high school soccer.


Fuji X-T1 | X-T2 | 35/1.4 | 10-24 | 18-55 | 55-200 | 50-140 | Rokinon 8/2.8II Fisheye | Rokinon 12/2
7D | 300/4 L IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Strick
Senior Member
Avatar
510 posts
Gallery: 85 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 121
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Katy, TX
     
Feb 20, 2018 20:08 |  #7

I know you didn't mention it in your original post but m4/3 is definitely worth looking at. Size and weight of both lenses and bodies is excellent and you are not giving up quality. With many of the newer options you get pretty decent C-af as well. Their are many body size options to pick from and the lenses range from small, decent IQ inexpensive to reasonably priced, great IQ up to the top of the line superb IQ, high end pro lenses.


www.strickphotography.​com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jarvis ­ Creative ­ Studios
Goldmember
Avatar
2,337 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 700
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Houston, Texas
     
Feb 20, 2018 20:24 |  #8

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18568608 (external link)
Jared,

That is a very well written post. It's packed with useful information, and, what's more, it comes from your own personal experience.

I think I'll be seeking your advice when I eventually face the same decision that the OP is facing.

Thank you Tom. I'd love to help out anyway that I can. Although I'll be the first to admit that I'm no expert. I'm decently familiar with the Sonys, but haven't spent that much time looking into other mirrorless offerings. I've started researching the Olympus OM‑D E‑M1 Mark II after a friend told me he was selling off all his Canon gear for it. That was a significant thing to me as he's my mentor who taught me the basics of shooting wedding photography. The Olympus seems like a nice piece of kit with quite the futuristic (albeit not that practical) features.

--------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18568608 (external link)
By the way, I am wondering one thing; instead of being an early adopter and paying the full price for a new Sony A9, why didn't you wait a while before buying one, and get it used, for a significant savings?
.

That's a good question. The answer is actually quite long and I've discussed it in some of the Sony threads, but I'll give the concise version. I had been a Canon shooter my whole career. I loved Canon and still do. But my 5DIII was getting just a bit slow for the jobs I do and I was missing a lot of shots. The low light performance and AF weren't keeping up as much as I would like, so I started saving up knowing the next Canon 5D would be coming out soon. When the 5DIV came out and I saw that there had been limited improvements over a four year period, and it was not up to par with the other companies, I started looking at switching. I decided on Sony, but they didn't have anything that I needed, so I continued to save up. I thought the a99ii was the camera for me, and I even put in a few orders on it but it was so backordered I gave up. Then the a9 came out. It had dual card slots, joystick, tilty screen. It checked all the boxes. I already had quite a bit saved up so I pulled the trigger. I shot the Sony and Canon side by side for awhile to make sure it was the right camera for me. When I believed it was, I sold off the Canon gear and bought the Sony equivalent.

Although I probably could have saved money, I've only seen 2-3 used for sale since I bought mine. Those that I mentioned going for $3500 in both posts was mentioned that the owners wanted the a7Riii so that probably factored into the price. I'm happy I purchased when I did, and I'm happy I didn't wait for the a7Riii, even though if purchasing now I may choose that one instead.

So to answer your question, I bought when I did because I had enough saved up that I could shoot both systems side by side for awhile to make sure the Sony was right, and Sony had finally come out with a camera that met all my needs and then some. I didn't know what the market would look like months from then, so I just decided to go for it.

I'm by no means a Sony fan boy now though. If Canon proves that they can come back swinging for the fences and can be competitive with something that puts Sony on it's butt, I would happily consider switching back for the improved build and colors. But as of now it doesn't seem like they're interested in doing that.


WEBSITE (external link)
flickr (external link)
Sony HX90V || Sony RX100V || Sony a6500 || Sony a9 || Sony E 10-18mm f/4 OSS || Sony FE 24-70 f/2.8 GM || Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA || Sony Sonnar T* FE 55mm f1.8 ZA || Sony FE 70-200 f/2.8 GM OSS || Godox speedlights and strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DeCeccoNET
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
708 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Eastchester, New York
Post edited 3 months ago by DeCeccoNET.
     
Feb 20, 2018 22:22 as a reply to  @ Jarvis Creative Studios's post |  #9

Thank you all for your insight. My gear history once included a full frame 5dmkII, and several L series primes/zooms until i decided to give up my (expensive) side gigs "hobby" to focus on starting my family. I quickly realized that I was unhappy photographing my newborn with an iPhone, and picked up a 70D and several lenses here and there since, including many of the smaller ones mentioned above.

I love photography, and my children drive me to want to shoot more. For several reasons, I've been unable to manage the logistics of keeping a good camera within reach for key moments/trips, etc. Thats on me - and its frustrating. Today I'm most inspired by the family photojournalism threads.

Coming from a Canon world- would the Fuji body series roughly equate to a xD XXD and Rebel for the T-2 / T-120 & XE-3 ? Any of those with an XF 27 seem to be much more pocketable than my 70D with ef-s 24mm ever was, and the 18-55 2.8-4 seems to be a well reviewed compact lens. The 80mm macro is as close of a match to my beloved 100L thats natively available - and i believe I'd be very happy with this combo until they start playing sports, when i'd likely invest in a zoom with more reach.

For the Sony, the A6500 didn't seem to offer enough that would justify the price difference for my needs - I'm not interested in the video features. The 90mm macro was very fun to use on the A6300 - but I believe my intended lens combinations would be a bulkier pacakage.

I'm aware that the EOS-M6 is the newest of the Canon offerings. Coupled with a 22mm - any are very pocketable, but since looking at mirrorless I've been surprised at how few photographers seem to use those bodies (with EF adapters) as needed. The rest of the EOS-M lenses don't seem as attractive to the Fuji or Sony offerings.


Sold all my gear to support starting a family... who inspired me to re-focus on photography again.
70D, EF-S 24 2.8, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 100 2.8L Macro

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jarvis ­ Creative ­ Studios
Goldmember
Avatar
2,337 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 700
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Houston, Texas
     
Feb 20, 2018 23:19 |  #10

DeCeccoNET wrote in post #18568739 (external link)
Coming from a Canon world- would the Fuji body series roughly equate to a xD XXD and Rebel for the T-2 / T-120 & XE-3 ? Any of those with an XF 27 seem to be much more pocketable than my 70D with ef-s 24mm ever was, and the 18-55 2.8-4 seems to be a well reviewed compact lens. The 80mm macro is as close of a match to my beloved 100L thats natively available - and i believe I'd be very happy with this combo until they start playing sports, when i'd likely invest in a zoom with more reach.

It's hard to compare anything about mirrorless to a DSLR except for the sensor sizes. And even that only works with medium format, full frame, and aps-c. To my knowledge there are no micro 4/3 cameras with mirrors. The mirrorless world is completely different. Most mirrorless cameras are smaller, but not all (check out the Panasonic GH5 series). The XE-3 is an aps-c body but I don't really think you could compare it to a Canon, as it's lacking all of the back buttons in favor of a touch screen. I personally look at the XE-3 as a typical hipster camera: form over function. I admittedly don't know that much about Fuji, but a few of my collegues have switched to the X-T2 and seem to love it. It will have a bit chunkier body more functionality with the controls than the XE-3.

DeCeccoNET wrote in post #18568739 (external link)
I'm aware that the EOS-M6 is the newest of the Canon offerings. Coupled with a 22mm - any are very pocketable, but since looking at mirrorless I've been surprised at how few photographers seem to use those bodies (with EF adapters) as needed. The rest of the EOS-M lenses don't seem as attractive to the Fuji or Sony offerings.

You keep bringing up the term "pocketable" which makes me think size is the biggest thing you're concerned with. No interchangeable lens camera will be truly pocketable, as my Sony RX100V isn't even very pocketable unless you're using a jacket pocket. The smallest of all the cameras discussed was the Sony a6300 / 6500. Take a look at the 16-50 f3.5-5.6, 16 f2.8, 20 f2.8, 35 f1.8, 55mm 1.8. They might surprise you with how small of a kit it is.


WEBSITE (external link)
flickr (external link)
Sony HX90V || Sony RX100V || Sony a6500 || Sony a9 || Sony E 10-18mm f/4 OSS || Sony FE 24-70 f/2.8 GM || Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA || Sony Sonnar T* FE 55mm f1.8 ZA || Sony FE 70-200 f/2.8 GM OSS || Godox speedlights and strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
14,584 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 4869
Joined Sep 2007
     
Feb 20, 2018 23:45 |  #11

you can consider working backwards, find a bag that you think you would carry with you EVERYWHERE. I find with with the Lowepro ILC-50, I can literally carry that thing everywhere, it simply clips on my belt and off I go.

Next, find a camera that fits that case. If it cant fit, it'll likely stay home!

if you work backwards like that, you set limitations on what is acceptable or not. For me, that's my personal limitation. ANything I can fit in that bag is fair game. With indicisive moments where I dont even feel like taking photos, that's what I take along. It's light and friendly, and I can carry it all day no issues. I have both hands free and takes up no space.

find yourself a destination bag and work from there.

general ideas to keep bulk down:

wider focal lengths

lack of EVF

pancake lenses


Sony A7rii/A7riii - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 35-70, 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8, 24/1.4 - Tamron 28-75 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
11,948 posts
Gallery: 138 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2756
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Feb 20, 2018 23:48 |  #12

Jarvis Creative Studios wrote in post #18568682 (external link)
But my 5DIII was getting just a bit slow for the jobs I do and I was missing a lot of shots. The low light performance and AF weren't keeping up as much as I would like, so I started saving up knowing the next Canon 5D would be coming out soon.

I am so glad to see you say that. . So many people on forums say things like, "people took amazing photos when all we had was film", or, "photographers have been creating spectacular photos for years with digital Rebels".

I am so sick of reading comments like that. . For many of us, our goal is not just to take an amazing photo from time to time. . Rather, our goal is to be able to take an excellent photo every single time that we want to, under all kinds of conditions, in all kinds of challenging light, and with all kinds of subject matter. . We need gear that will be able to capture a near-perfect photo darn near every single time that we click that shutter, no matter what. . The newer technology helps us come closer to accomplishing that goal than the older technology.

.

Jarvis Creative Studios wrote in post #18568682 (external link)
I thought the a99ii was the camera for me, and I even put in a few orders on it but it was so backordered I gave up.

It's funny that you mention the a99ii. . About a year ago, I also thought that that would be the perfect camera for me. . But when I looked into it seriously, I began to fear that Sony was likely to all but abandon the native A-mount lenses for it.

For someone like me, who shoots a lot at long focal lengths and needs a wide array of available supertelephoto lenses. Sony just doesn't offer much in the A-mount. . In fact, the 500 f4 is all they have, inasmuch as supertelephotos is concerned ..... and it's a whopping $13,000. . What is that all about???? . Freakin' stupid, is what it is.

I thought the A-mount 70-400mm zoom would be awesome, because it covers such a greater range than the Canon 100-400mm. . But then when I read up on it, I found that it suffers a real loss of resolving power when wide open at the long end of its range. . And from an optical standpoint, it just doesn't compare favorably to the Canon 100-400 v2, at any focal length or at any aperture.

Add to this the fact that Sony does not seem interested in developing a lot of new lenses for the A-mount, and I began to realize that the a99ii would end up being little better than a paperweight if I couldn't get a wide array of native lenses for it. . Sometimes I get the impression that Sony is more interested in making electronics than they are in making optics, which does not bode well for a wildlife photographer who depends on very long focal lengths.

I apologize to the OP of this thread for wandering so far from his original topic, but when I saw your statement about the a99ii, that really resonated with me, and I couldn't help but to respond to that because I was thinking the same way myself at one time.

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jarvis ­ Creative ­ Studios
Goldmember
Avatar
2,337 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 700
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Houston, Texas
     
Feb 21, 2018 00:08 |  #13

sporadic wrote in post #18568662 (external link)
Reduction in lens size and weight is not a myth when it comes to Fuji and coming from another crop body. The issue with Canon crops is having to use full frame EF glass for the nice stuff. Fuji glass has the quality and is designed for a crop body. Compare the 35/1.4 offerings from each. I'd recommend testing the waters with a used X-T1 which can be had pretty cheap. Can easily resell it if not happy. I went full Fuji but eventually picked up another used 7D and 300/4 solely for shooting high school soccer.

You're correct. Buying Fuji mirrorless and the lenses designed for that system would save weight and size. Same as switching to the Canon EOS M lineup would save you size and weight. However the OP stated he did not want to buy into a new system, however buying a different body style and lenses is buying into a new system, even if it's the same brand. There will be minimal savings if you only buy a mirrorless camera body but use all your full sized DSLR lenses adapted.


WEBSITE (external link)
flickr (external link)
Sony HX90V || Sony RX100V || Sony a6500 || Sony a9 || Sony E 10-18mm f/4 OSS || Sony FE 24-70 f/2.8 GM || Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA || Sony Sonnar T* FE 55mm f1.8 ZA || Sony FE 70-200 f/2.8 GM OSS || Godox speedlights and strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jarvis ­ Creative ­ Studios
Goldmember
Avatar
2,337 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 700
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Houston, Texas
     
Feb 21, 2018 00:19 |  #14

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18568764 (external link)
I am so glad to see you say that. . So many people on forums say things like, "people took amazing photos when all we had was film", or, "photographers have been creating spectacular photos for years with digital Rebels".

I am so sick of reading comments like that. . For many of us, our goal is not just to take an amazing photo from time to time. . Rather, our goal is to be able to take an excellent photo every single time that we want to, under all kinds of conditions, in all kinds of challenging light, and with all kinds of subject matter. . We need gear that will be able to capture a near-perfect photo darn near every single time that we click that shutter, no matter what. . The newer technology helps us come closer to accomplishing that goal than the older technology.

.

It's funny that you mention the a99ii. . About a year ago, I also thought that that would be the perfect camera for me. . But when I looked into it seriously, I began to fear that Sony was likely to all but abandon the native A-mount lenses for it.

For someone like me, who shoots a lot at long focal lengths and needs a wide array of available supertelephoto lenses. Sony just doesn't offer much in the A-mount. . In fact, the 500 f4 is all they have, inasmuch as supertelephotos is concerned ..... and it's a whopping $13,000. . What is that all about???? . Freakin' stupid, is what it is.

I thought the A-mount 70-400mm zoom would be awesome, because it covers such a greater range than the Canon 100-400mm. . But then when I read up on it, I found that it suffers a real loss of resolving power when wide open at the long end of its range. . And from an optical standpoint, it just doesn't compare favorably to the Canon 100-400 v2, at any focal length or at any aperture.

Add to this the fact that Sony does not seem interested in developing a lot of new lenses for the A-mount, and I began to realize that the a99ii would end up being little better than a paperweight if I couldn't get a wide array of native lenses for it. . Sometimes I get the impression that Sony is more interested in making electronics than they are in making optics, which does not bode well for a wildlife photographer who depends on very long focal lengths.

I apologize to the OP of this thread for wandering so far from his original topic, but when I saw your statement about the a99ii, that really resonated with me, and I couldn't help but to respond to that because I was thinking the same way myself at one time.

.

I was in the same boat as you on the a99ii. When other photographers who knew I was planning on buying one asked why I abandoned it, my response was, "Didn't want to be the guy who bought the GTO right before Pontiac shut down the company." The a99ii was awesome no doubt, but I think Sony made it more of a science project than a serious camera. Just take a look at the screen. Pardon me, but WTF is that? It's cool that it can flip around and do all that crazy stuff, but it's a bit impractical. I also didn't watch or read a single review that didn't say there were issues with the joystick (that it didn't work in a certain direction for some reason). It's still a cool upgrade if you were already deep invested in A mount, but I would be kicking myself right now had I made that switch.

On another A mount note, why is the 70-200 G2 still selling for $3000? That's insanity!


WEBSITE (external link)
flickr (external link)
Sony HX90V || Sony RX100V || Sony a6500 || Sony a9 || Sony E 10-18mm f/4 OSS || Sony FE 24-70 f/2.8 GM || Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA || Sony Sonnar T* FE 55mm f1.8 ZA || Sony FE 70-200 f/2.8 GM OSS || Godox speedlights and strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lyndön
Goldmember
2,001 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 129
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Knoxville, TN
     
Feb 21, 2018 01:13 |  #15

I went through this same decision a while back and ended up with Olympus, since being small and light was a big factor for me. I originally bought a second hand E-M10 II and it’s barely larger than many point and shoots if you add the collapsible 14-42EZ or one of Oly’s excellent and truly small primes. I could fit a whole kit with 4 lenses and a flash in my daughter’s lunchbox, lol. Image quality is very good, the only thing holding it back is the C-AF is only decent. S-AF is blindingly fast and having IBIS is great.

After loving my relatively cheap experiment with the E-M10 II (and my wife “borrowing” it permanently) I decided to see if I could replace my Canon kit with the higher end Oly gear. Now I’m shooting with the E-M1 II and f/2.8 PRO 14-40 & 40-150 zooms, in addition to my small primes and it’s nothing short of amazing. I wouldn’t say that the C-AF is quite as good as the top end Canons yet, but it’s no slouch. The build is great, it’s highly weather sealed, extremely fast, and just a darn good camera. I can’t quite bring myself to sell off my Canon gear yet, but it’s getting passed over more and more as I reach for the Oly.


GEAR LIST

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

5,218 views & 77 likes for this thread
Switching to Mirrorless
FORUMS General Gear Talk Camera Vs. Camera 
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 afrostone
755 guests, 252 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

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.