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

 
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,733 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 7000
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Post edited 4 months ago by mystik610.
     
Feb 23, 2018 18:53 |  #91

JeffreyG wrote in post #18570722 (external link)
I've actually had good luck with the 50L on my Canon bodies. To me, it isn't in the league of 'excellent' like the latest (24-70II, 70-200II, 100-400II) for focus but I have even shot sports with the 50L on a 5D3 and been happy.

Within the usual caveats for Sony adapted (decent light, not extreme action) the 50L nails it. The 85L II also nails it, except I get lockup and no-go periodically. I use the MC-11.

The MC-11 with the Sigma 120-300/2.8 Sport seems pretty good. But it's winter, so hard to really test. One thing I really use my Sigma 120-300 for is shooting batters from the outfield fence (with a 2X TC) and since I do this all pre-focused on the 5D3 using the LCD, I really want to try it with the Sony.
thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by JeffreyG in
./showthread.php?p=185​70722&i=i33644134
forum: Camera Vs. Camera

My issues with the 50L were more due to focus shift and microfocus issues when shooting portraits at fast aperture. Loved the look of the lens, but man was it frustrating to use.

Interested in hearing more of your thoughts with the Sigma 120-300 and MC-11. I have a casual need for super telephoto stuff...mostly my kids sports, and don't want to spend 100-400 GM money.


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)
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,349 posts
Gallery: 39 photos
Likes: 459
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Feb 23, 2018 19:01 |  #92

mystik610 wrote in post #18570762 (external link)
My issues with the 50L were more due to focus shift and microfocus issues when shooting portraits at fast aperture. Loved the look of the lens, but man was it frustrating to use.

Interested in hearing more of your thoughts with the Sigma 120-300 and MC-11. I have a casual need for super telephoto stuff...mostly my kids sports, and don't want to spend 100-400 GM money.

Well, softball tryouts for varsity (kid 2) are coming up in March, and games start in April. Assuming kid 2 makes varsity this year, I'll try the A7rIII with the 120-300 and let you know how it works.

Anything ahead of that is contrived (IMO) and not much of a test. I know what I need to shoot and how, and I know exactly what the gear will do.

FYI, this is the kind of stuff I shoot with the 50L where the AF is fine. It isn't hardcore tracking motion, but not easy either. Daughter #2 coming off the board.


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


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,733 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 7000
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
     
Feb 23, 2018 21:16 |  #93

JeffreyG wrote in post #18570769 (external link)
Well, softball tryouts for varsity (kid 2) are coming up in March, and games start in April. Assuming kid 2 makes varsity this year, I'll try the A7rIII with the 120-300 and let you know how it works.

Anything ahead of that is contrived (IMO) and not much of a test. I know what I need to shoot and how, and I know exactly what the gear will do.

FYI, this is the kind of stuff I shoot with the 50L where the AF is fine. It isn't hardcore tracking motion, but not easy either. Daughter #2 coming off the board.

thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by JeffreyG in
./showthread.php?p=185​70769&i=i182232714
forum: Camera Vs. Camera

Killer shot!


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
mdvaden
Goldmember
Avatar
2,220 posts
Gallery: 21 photos
Likes: 541
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
     
Apr 11, 2018 21:31 |  #94

I forgot if I posted in this thread. if not, I have a Canon M5 which the OP referred to.

Most of my photos are forest. The color looks very nice and is comparable to my 5DS in that regard. What I don't like is the small body, and learned that I don't like the EVF near as much as optical. The menu is superb, and the camera functions very nice.

My thoughts about mirrorless is I like it for an add-on, but don't find it to be a dramatic advancement for an overall shooting experience. The SMALL factor is not an improvement for me for a pro camera.


vadenphotography.com (external link) . . . and . . . Coast Redwoods Main Page (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,733 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 7000
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Post edited 2 months ago by mystik610.
     
Apr 12, 2018 05:56 |  #95

mdvaden wrote in post #18604988 (external link)
I forgot if I posted in this thread. if not, I have a Canon M5 which the OP referred to.

Most of my photos are forest. The color looks very nice and is comparable to my 5DS in that regard. What I don't like is the small body, and learned that I don't like the EVF near as much as optical. The menu is superb, and the camera functions very nice.

My thoughts about mirrorless is I like it for an add-on, but don't find it to be a dramatic advancement for an overall shooting experience. The SMALL factor is not an improvement for me for a pro camera.

It depends on what you shoot. The microfocus accuracy of mirrorless AF systems is very useful for professional portraits where you're shooting at fast aperture. Exposure preview via the EVF is useful for gauging the ambient exposure and what the metering system is doing in the field for things like posed outdoor portraiture, and weddings....it eliminates the need to gimp. Eye-AF is tremendously useful of any kind of portraiture, as it not only ensures that each of your photos is critically focused on the eyes, but it also greatly improves the work-flow when going through a series of posed shots as it eliminates the need to toggle focus points between poses.

The critical focus weakness of DSLR AF systems was the bane of my existence for years when I shot Canon. I did everything I could to rectify the inherent weakness of DSLR AF systems..spent lots of time obsessing over MFA because I hated when a great shot was ruined because the AF system missed its mark. Non-issue with mirrorless bodies.


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
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
33,283 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3543
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
     
Apr 12, 2018 06:00 |  #96

I don't have the same AF issues with Canon, especially with spot AF being introduced. No problems with portraits, or fast paced action. Eye AF would be nice though.


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,733 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 7000
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Post edited 2 months ago by mystik610. (3 edits in all)
     
Apr 12, 2018 07:08 |  #97

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18605174 (external link)
I don't have the same AF issues with Canon, especially with spot AF being introduced. No problems with portraits, or fast paced action. Eye AF would be nice though.

Hehe this is a well established weakness of dslr af systems. If it weren't, you wouldn't have all of these microfocus threads on this forum and mfa softwares like focal wouldn't exist.

Spot AF doesn't really rectify the microfocus issues. I used spot AF on the 5d3, and even when pointing the AF directly on the eyes, it would miss and focus on things like the cheek. The issue stems from the fact that images sensor and AF sensor are separate, and what the image sensor is seeing and what the AF system is seeing are not consistent. The difference between the two leads to misfocused shots.

But again how much of an issue this is depends on what you shoot. As someone who shoots outdoor portraits at fast aperture a all the time, it was a significant issue for me, and when I shot Canon I had a habit of taking multiple redundant shots as a hedge, knowing that I'd throw out a high percentage of them because the AF system was so inconsistent


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
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
33,283 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3543
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
     
Apr 12, 2018 08:02 as a reply to  @ mystik610's post |  #98

I shoot at f1.2 and f1.4 often, and never have a problem with Canon glass, but did with 3rd party. The newer offerings are quicker and more accurate than in the past as well. Sure there are documented cases, but they are dwarfed by success stories. Also again, for us sports shooters, the A9 seems close, but still not quite there. I am getting ready to sell the 7D2 this spring and try out a MKIII, but ultimately am holding out for an A9II.


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,733 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 7000
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
     
Apr 12, 2018 08:13 |  #99

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18605221 (external link)
I shoot at f1.2 and f1.4 often, and never have a problem with Canon glass, but did with 3rd party. The newer offerings are quicker and more accurate than in the past as well. Sure there are documented cases, but they are dwarfed by success stories. Also again, for us sports shooters, the A9 seems close, but still not quite there. I am getting ready to sell the 7D2 this spring and try out a MKIII, but ultimately am holding out for an A9II.

I had issues with the 85L and 50L back in the day. They actually focus more accurately when adapted to mirrorless bodies.


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
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,349 posts
Gallery: 39 photos
Likes: 459
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Apr 12, 2018 08:26 as a reply to  @ TeamSpeed's post |  #100

I agree that a well MFA'd version of the V2 zooms like the 24-70, 70-200, and 100-400 don't miss much.

My older L primes like the 50L and 85L were sketchier, as were the V1 zooms.

Right now I'm shooting the V2 Canon zooms with 5D3, and then Sony A7r3 with a set of f/1.8 primes and some slow zooms. It's a good mix, capable but also portable when downselected.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
33,283 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3543
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
Post edited 2 months ago by TeamSpeed.
     
Apr 12, 2018 08:48 |  #101

That is why I would like to add Sony to the mix, but not yet replace my Canon gear.

Even the SL2 locks onto the target with phase detect with no issues, I used that as my vacation lightweight body this past week, and the center point (which is the only one I can really use in the old dated 9pt AF system it has) worked very well in low light situations even. I had just a few where focus fell off, and that was due to such low light/contrast more than anything. I am hopeful this is where a small Sony body will be more helpful.

I will say more complicated Canon bodies with a myriad of PDAF options confuses more people than helps. It takes some time to set up all the different priority settings, AF sliders, and CF values to make a PD AF system work as you want it, than an imaging sensor-based contrast and/or phase detect system. As the sensor-based AF systems just get faster and faster, then mirror systems will indeed die off.

IMAGE: https://photos.smugmug.com/Animals/In-the-Wild-Yonder/i-LS8BQBJ/0/8338be85/X2/IMG_0779-X2.jpg

Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,733 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 7000
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
     
Apr 12, 2018 09:09 |  #102

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18605241 (external link)
That is why I would like to add Sony to the mix, but not yet replace my Canon gear.

Even the SL2 locks onto the target with phase detect with no issues, I used that as my vacation lightweight body this past week, and the center point (which is the only one I can really use in the old dated 9pt AF system it has) worked very well in low light situations even. I had just a few where focus fell off, and that was due to such low light/contrast more than anything. I am hopeful this is where a small Sony body will be more helpful.

I will say more complicated Canon bodies with a myriad of PDAF options confuses more people than helps. It takes some time to set up all the different priority settings, AF sliders, and CF values to make a PD AF system work as you want it, than an imaging sensor-based contrast and/or phase detect system. As the sensor-based AF systems just get faster and faster, then mirror systems will indeed die off.

QUOTED IMAGE

Critical focus accuracy is not too big of a deal for things like animals….but for portraiture, drawing attention to the eyes is an important part of the composition, and if the eyes are not critically in focus I trash the shot. It’s very frustrating because those focus mishaps have nothing to do with technique, and are simply caused by the weaknesses of an off-sensor PDAF system.

Shooting posed portraits isn’t really too demanding for an AF system….your subject is relatively is still so nothing complex in terms of AF tracking is really needed. In theory, single shot with spot focus placed on the eye should be adequate, but its very inconsistent on DSLR’s.


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
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
11,948 posts
Gallery: 138 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2760
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Apr 12, 2018 09:14 |  #103

mystik610 wrote in post #18605254 (external link)
Critical focus accuracy is not too big of a deal for things like animals….but for portraiture, drawing attention to the eyes is an important part of the composition, and if the eyes are not critically in focus I trash the shot.

.
When shooting wildlife portraiture, it is just as important to achieve critical focus on animals' eyes as it is to do so with human eyes when shooting people portraiture. . Why would you think that in wildlife photography it isn't as important?


.


"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
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
33,283 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3543
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
Post edited 2 months ago by TeamSpeed. (5 edits in all)
     
Apr 12, 2018 09:15 |  #104

mystik610 wrote in post #18605254 (external link)
Critical focus accuracy is not too big of a deal for things like animals….but for portraiture, drawing attention to the eyes is an important part of the composition, and if the eyes are not critically in focus I trash the shot. It’s very frustrating because those focus mishaps have nothing to do with technique, and are simply caused by the weaknesses of an off-sensor PDAF system.

Shooting posed portraits isn’t really too demanding for an AF system….your subject is relatively is still so nothing complex in terms of AF tracking is really needed. In theory, single shot with spot focus placed on the eye should be adequate, but its very inconsistent on DSLR’s.

1) Critical focus is indeed an issue with animals... we are always discussing focus on the eyes, features, etc. Animal portraiture is no different than people, if the eyes aren't in focus, the shots are binned. Nobody wants a shot of a cat where the nose is in focus and the eyes aren't unless you were intentional about that.

2) The bird was not relatively still, birds don't just sit there and don't move. They hop and fidget like little kids, especially with people right around them.

It just feels like you are putting a bit of hyperbole around Canon AF systems due to some bad experiences, given your continued rebuttals to every single point I have brought up). I shoot weddings, portraits, everything, and the newer bodies are quite good, especially mated to the new Canon lenses, and even now 3rd party. This was different about 5 years ago though.

I refuse to drink the "Sony is perfect in everything AF wise, and Canon isn't" Koolaid. I am not fooled that easily, especially given my experience with Canon gear in a myriad of situations. I will have Sony experience here sometime this summer to add to these findings. ;) I am just happy to see that the a7iii, mkiii and a9 are finally up to the task of shooting just about everything I shoot with Canon, so that I have other options to look at now. The bodies are still too small though, and I refuse to buy that sliver of a grip extension from Sony to put a place for my last 2 fingers. The A9II should have a bit more footprint for the handgrip.


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,733 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 7000
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Post edited 2 months ago by mystik610.
     
Apr 12, 2018 09:30 |  #105

I’m admittedly not a wildlife shooter so excuse me for not understanding the intricacies of shooting wildlife =)

But I shot portraits and weddings for years on Canon and am offering up my own personal experience….my latest experience with Canon was the 5DIII, and it was highly inconsistent. No lie, it was such an issue for me that there was a span of about a year and a half where I was running a dual system setup and manually focusing canon glass on the first gen a7r for posed portraits because I found focus peaking to be more reliable than the 5DIII’s AF system. It’s possible that the newer 5D bodies improved in terms of critical focus accuracy…I haven’t seen that they did anything to improve in this regard, but I haven’t shot with these bodies either.

I can say that mirrorless bodies are significantly more consistent in terms of consistently focusing on the eyes, and it has materially improved things for me. Eye-AF is a nice bonus as it simplifies the composition process, but even without eye AF, mirrorless AF systems have been much more consistent than anything I experienced in my Canon days.


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)

5,440 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 TD Images
932 guests, 378 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.