If just 1camera is enough?

Cynthia lou wrote in post #19515371
After trying to find a camera that will suffice to my interest in shooting, it appears to me that an SLR with one lens will be the best way.
From landscape to sports and portrait.

I have both Sony and canon. I’ve chosen to keep the canon 6D with the 70-200 2.8 IS.
I will be selling my a6000 white body with the 85mm 1.8 and 24-70 f/4 in the summer sometime. They work best in my black/white street shots. Thanks folks

Landscape
Sports
Portrait
Street

Four different photography genres that call for different camera and lens setups.

Landscape... what will you be doing with the images? Large prints? If so, a high megapixel large sensor camera like Fuji's 100MP would be ideal. But maybe not very practical. Staying within the Canon ecosystem, either the 5DS/5DS-R (50MP) or the R5 mirrorless (45MP) would be a good choice, with the right lenses. The R5 also can shoot sports, but the 5DS/5DS-R would be a poor choice for that. Both cameras would be good for portraiture, but neither would be my choice for street photography where a small, inconspicuous camera is usually preferred.

For sports there is some advantage to using an APS-C camera. The "teleconverter effect" of the smaller sensor allows much smaller, lighter less expensive lenses to be used. My 300mm f/4 lens costs under $1500 and weighs less than 3 lb. and "acts like 500mm" would on full frame. I can hand hold that lens all day long. In comparison, my 500mm f/4 lens cost over $9000, weighs over 7 lb. and is not hand holdable for more than a few minutes. Another example, your 70-200mm f/2.8 on an APS-C camera will act almost like a much bigger, heavier, more expensive 300mm f/2.8 would on full frame. So while the image quality and low light shooting capabilities of a bigger sensor might be nice to have, if we want the same "reach" with a full frame camera, we have to haul around much bigger, heavier, more expensive lenses!

It might be possible to use a full frame camera in crop mode, to get the same effect. But to do so you need a high megapixel FF camera. An APS-C crop is roughly 40% of full frame. So a 45MP or 50MP camera will be reduced to approx. 18MP or 20MP APS-C. That's not bad (Canon 7D Mark II is 20MP. All current Nikon APS-C are 21MP). However, lower MP full frame camera simply lose too much with a crop... a 30MP camera like 5D Mk IV would end up around 12MP, while a 26MP 6D will be reduced to only about 10MP. (Note: The APS-C crop might be done in camera... or possibly better, in post processing. Doing the latter allows the shooter more control over the final crop.)

For sports and other action photography (wildlife, birding) it is also desirable for a camera to have a fast frame rate and a high performance AF system. The 5DS/5DS-R cameras are relatively slow shooters at only 5 frames/sec. Not good, though it's AF system is up to the task (as good as any DSLR). The R5 would be a much better choice, with 12 frames/sec mechanical shutter (20 frames/sec electronic shutter, but that risks rolling shutter effects). The R5 also has a much more advanced AF system, with face and even eye recognition, as well as highly reliable tracking capabilities across almost the entire image area.

BUT, even better for sports might be Canon 90D DSLR or Canon R7 mirrorless. These APS-C cameras both have fast frame rates, plenty of pixels (30.5MP), and highly capable AF systems. Between the two, the R7 mirrorless is the more advanced, with an AF system comparable to or even better than the R5's. It also has 50% faster frame rate with it's mechanical shutter. Its in-body image stabilization (IBIS) and some other features would also be useful.

While a full frame camera might be preferable for landscape, the 30.5MP sensors in these two APS-C is more resolution than a lot of full frame cameras offer. For street photography, all these cameras... 90D, R7, R5 and 5D Mark IV... are pretty similar in size and weight. However, the lenses for the two APS-C cameras can be much smaller. There are even "pancakes" such as the RF 16mm or EF-S 24mm and EF 40mm that can make them almost "pocketable" (umm, you'll need big pockets :sm16.

A possible drawback to both the APS-C cameras... for some reason Canon didn't design them for use with a battery grip and doesn't offer a grip for either the 90D or the R7. This is unfortunate for sports shooters like me who use grips during long shooting sessions to help avoid having to pause to change batteries at inconvenient times. There are likely to be 3rd party grips for them, though they don't interface as fully with the camera as an OEM grip would. There ARE grips available for both the R5 and 5DIV. (Note: I deliberately chose cameras with removable battery grips, so that I could lighten my load when I wanted, such as when taking a hike with my gear. I appreciate, but don't use the "pro" bodies with built in grip, like the 1DX series and R3.)

Weighing all the options in the Canon ecosystem right now, it were me wanting one camera to do landscape, sports, portrait and street photography... my choice would be the R7. It's not "perfect" for all those purposes... but to me it's better than the alternatives. The lenses used upon it are another very important factor. I would NEVER limit myself to just one lens. The whole point of an interchangeable lens camera is ability to adapt it for different purposes... telephoto for sports, wide angle for landscapes, one or two large aperture primes for portraiture, and one or more very compact lenses for street photography.

What I actually do is have different lenses AND different cameras for different purposes: a pair of 7D Mark II for sports, an older full frame for the occasional architecture/landscape​/seascape, and a very compact mirrorless with a few lenses for street photography. I'm prepared to do portraits and macro with any of them. I never take all the gear out on a shoot. I select what I'll need for that day's work or play. Sometimes when there are multiple possibilities, I'll put some extra stuff in the car... just in case.

Cynthia lou wrote in post #19516194
Folks
I appreciate your responses and adding knowledge to several ways to try and decide. From the M series to the RP to the small sl3.
Grateful for your knowledge.
As to what I shoot today has changed drastically. All kids are gone and retirement has put a dent on travel like we use to.
Wildlife is out.
I’m sticking to street photography (black/white)mostly….s​ome wide angle photography.
Thanks

Thanks for the clarification. You had stated "sports" earlier and it would be nearly impossible to recommend a 1-camera-1-lens setup to accomplish everything and still be lightweight.

Have you considered a Fuji system like this: https://www.bhphotovid​eo.com …rrorless_camera​_with.html
I've not tried it but seems likely to fulfill your requirements (street, B&W, some wide angle, light weight).


FWIW, I have a Canon EF-S 18-200mm lens that I bought specifically as a do-everything travel/street lens. I never use it as the compromises are just too great - too heavy/awkward to carry mounted all the time, IQ is not very good, AF and IS is just mediocre. You will have to make compromises and you will need to choose what is and isn't a deal killer for you.

Not knowing your budget, expectations, usages (personal, web, sale, etc.), and specific weight requirements, we're all just guessing here.

It can become overwhelming…..
Things cost more and fiancés are not like they use to be….
Used camera places are expensive suddenly since the covic madness
Trading with them is discouraging especially if they low ball a person for what one wants to trade.
Perhaps after a while trading with members can be an option?
Great insight folks
Grateful

I drag around more than one camera only when the pictures I want to take require different lenses in quick succession. No time to change, to just grab the other one.

Since you mentioned B&W Street photography. I've tried with some success with my M50 and the kit lens coupled with with my es18-135 and find its covered most of the bases for street. Good wide angle and nice reach when you need it plus its not too heavy or obtrusive. Sometimes I use a 24mm fixed and have had success there too.
M50 has 1.6 crop sensor so you have plenty of resolution to work with plus an evf which is nice making the change from dslr a little easier. I personally have not mastered the size of the camera even with a small rig cage ,small buttons nor the touch screen coming over from my 7DII.

Good luck with your choice

AginKajun wrote in post #19518329
Since you mentioned B&W Street photography. I've tried with some success with my M50 and the kit lens coupled with with my es18-135 and find its covered most of the bases for street. Good wide angle and nice reach when you need it plus its not too heavy or obtrusive. Sometimes I use a 24mm fixed and have had success there too.
M50 has 1.6 crop sensor so you have plenty of resolution to work with plus an evf which is nice making the change from dslr a little easier. I personally have not mastered the size of the camera even with a small rig cage ,small buttons nor the touch screen coming over from my 7DII.

Good luck with your choice

Hosted photo: posted by AginKajun in
./showthread.php?p=195​18329&i=i32582861
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Hosted photo: posted by AginKajun in
./showthread.php?p=195​18329&i=i95894876
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Have you considered the speedbooster and wide EF lenses? It is a great option to check out for street and landscape shooting.

Not yet, I'm still fighting with the switch to touch screen and my big fingers on little buttons that are in different places than my 7D or 5d. I only briefly read a little about speedboosters.

AginKajun wrote in post #19518329
Since you mentioned B&W Street photography. I've tried with some success with my M50 and the kit lens coupled with with my es18-135 and find its covered most of the bases for street. Good wide angle and nice reach when you need it plus its not too heavy or obtrusive. Sometimes I use a 24mm fixed and have had success there too.
M50 has 1.6 crop sensor so you have plenty of resolution to work with plus an evf which is nice making the change from dslr a little easier. I personally have not mastered the size of the camera even with a small rig cage ,small buttons nor the touch screen coming over from my 7DII.

I owned a M50, along with a few EF-M lenses, until recently. It was my small, light weight travel kit, which it excelled at. I recently sold the entire kit, though, and bought a R10, which is only slightly bigger than the M50, but with better ergonomics (closer to your old 7D2, which I also used to own). Plus, the auto focus system is major step up over the M50. The R10 will do double duty for me -- both as a light weight travel body (also bought the RF-S 18-150mm lens) and as a replacement for the 7D2 that I used for wildlife. It works great with both the RF 100-400 and RF 800mm f/11 lenses.

Canon is phasing out the M series, which is part of why I made the move -- I also needed a solution to replace my old 7D2. They have been discontinuing their EF-M lenses, and it's unlikely they will make another M series body. The RF and RF-S lenses and bodies are Canon's long term solution. The M50 is still a very nice camera, though, as long as you recognize it's an abandoned system.

I have thought about selling my M50, but the EFM lenses I have don't exist either in size or function or budget in the EF/RF space. I have a couple of Samyang lenses which are spectacular. I wish the RF mount could somehow use the EFM lenses too, then it would be a no-brainer of a decision to go to the R50.

I am very happy with my EFM setup and am covered from 12mm through 250mm, all in a tiny kit size. If I had to replace my M lenses, the kit dimensions would nearly double, and forget about budget.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #19520521
I have thought about selling my M50, but the EFM lenses I have don't exist either in size or function or budget in the EF/RF space. I have a couple of Samyang lenses which are spectacular. I wish the RF mount could somehow use the EFM lenses too, then it would be a no-brainer of a decision to go to the R50.

I am very happy with my EFM setup and am covered from 12mm through 250mm, all in a tiny kit size. If I had to replace my M lenses, the kit dimensions would nearly double, and forget about budget.

It definitely depends on the lenses you use. In my case, I only had three EF-M lenses -- 18-150mm, 11-22mm and 22mm f/2 pancake. I bought the RF-S version of the 18-150mm with the R10, and Canon is sure to release a UWA lens similar to the 11-22 in the RF-S mount (I don't shoot much UWA with this body, so I can wait). The 22mm f/2 pancake replacement will take some experimentation for me. I own a RF 16mm f/2.8 that I use as my UWA solution for the full frame EOS R. I will try that first and hope it's not too wide. Canon does make a EF-S 24mm f/2.8 pancake I could use with an adapter, but hopefully there will eventually be a native RF-S pancake option if the 16mm proves to be too wide.

I really liked my M50 setup, too, but thought it was time to move to a more tightly integrated kit in my case. I have sold off just about all my EF lenses, and the RF and EF-M mounts are completely incompatible. The R10 will replace two bodies I previously owned -- the M50 and 7D2 -- allowing me to get my kit down to two bodies from three. I should also reduce my lens count from about a dozen down to 7 or 8 lenses, with just about all of the RF versions being smaller and/or lighter than the EF equivalents I used to own.

I will likely move at some point, but it will be tough to get rid of the 12mm f2 and 50 1.2 lenses I have. The only other dedicated EFM lens I have is the 15-45 kit lens, and don't care about that one.