Been with Canon for 12 years - wait or jump ship?

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,973
502
Maximilian said:
Short answer seeing your lens lineup: stay with Canon.

If you really feel tempted by the Sony specs go get one rented for a few days, try to get used to the UI and ergonomics and if it fits well, then spend the money on Sony.

Pray that you'll never get in need to contact their service ;)
+1. Not renting before migrating to an entirely different camera platform is like moving to another country without having spent a day there.

Say it 10 times: try before you buy.

Hand fit / hand comfort with big lenses attached alone may be a dealbreaker for you.

- A
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,973
502
eoren1 said:
I love my Canon 35/1.4 IS and have favored a lighter kit as you can see above and am happy with the lenses overall.
Either you have a time machine to use a lens that does not exist, or that's a typo.

If it's the former, please go back to the future and get me a 50 f/nooneknows IS USM, thanks. ;)

- A
 

greger

7D
Jan 1, 2013
259
1
I think you are going to regret jumping ship to Sony. If you put your Canon gear in a box in the back of your closet, you can pull it out and use it if and when Sony fails to satisfy your needs. You would only lose money on the Sony gear and not the Canon gear too. Obviously the 5 D IV didn’t fit your needs. As someone else suggested maybe 1D X ll is your next Camera. You should use the gear you have and see what Canon releases in 2018 or when your 5D lll finally packs it in.
 

dak723

EOS 6D MK II
Oct 26, 2013
1,141
434
As others have mentioned, if you can rent one it will help you decide. I tried the Sony A7 and A7 II a couple years ago with the intent of selling my 6D. With very limited experience with these cameras before I returned them, I found:

Very poor ergonomics. Very uncomfortable to hold and the opposite direction for focus and zoom on their lenses was a real negative.

While obviously personal taste. Canon's color is better than Sony's.

The difference in DR was not noticeable in any daytime shots I took. Plus, the Canon tonal curves were much more to my liking. Again, personal taste.

I couldn't afford any of the higher end lenses and the kit lenses (while not cheap) were very poor. It might have been the result of the small flange distance which made image quality poor anywhere away from the center of the image.

In the end, I returned both Sony cameras. There was not one thing that I about them that I liked more than Canon.

Of course, that was a different model, but the ergonomics, flange distance, lenses, etc are all the same.
 

eoren1

EOS M50
dak723 said:
As others have mentioned, if you can rent one it will help you decide. I tried the Sony A7 and A7 II a couple years ago with the intent of selling my 6D. With very limited experience with these cameras before I returned them, I found:

Very poor ergonomics. Very uncomfortable to hold and the opposite direction for focus and zoom on their lenses was a real negative.

While obviously personal taste. Canon's color is better than Sony's.

The difference in DR was not noticeable in any daytime shots I took. Plus, the Canon tonal curves were much more to my liking. Again, personal taste.

I couldn't afford any of the higher end lenses and the kit lenses (while not cheap) were very poor. It might have been the result of the small flange distance which made image quality poor anywhere away from the center of the image.

In the end, I returned both Sony cameras. There was not one thing that I about them that I liked more than Canon.

Of course, that was a different model, but the ergonomics, flange distance, lenses, etc are all the same.
Thanks - interesting to hear about zoom and focus being 'backwards'.

Didn't even think of Best Buy as mentioned above and have one near my work so will visit tomorrow or Friday and see how it the a7Rii feels in-hand.
 
I use Sony cameras a lot for work and I will say the menu system is enough of a reason for most people to not switch over because it is absolutely miserable. Also the AF system on their cameras for fast action sports is not accurate in the least from my experience. Like others have said, rent and try it. But don't get caught up on the specs on paper. If you need more resolution, wait a year for the new 5DsR and pick up that or the original model.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,973
502
kingrobertii said:
I use Sony cameras a lot for work and I will say the menu system is enough of a reason for most people to not switch over because it is absolutely miserable. Also the AF system on their cameras for fast action sports is not accurate in the least from my experience. Like others have said, rent and try it. But don't get caught up on the specs on paper. If you need more resolution, wait a year for the new 5DsR and pick up that or the original model.
Also, if horsepower specs (MP, FPS, 4K) and sensor quality are indeed the primary reason you'd want to switch (i.e. more than being smaller, ditching the mirror, adapting the lenses, etc.) and you're prepared to eat the pain/cost/time to do that, I'd get a D850 ten times out of ten over an A7/A9:

Equivalent detail, throughput and (likely) sensor quality
FX >> FE for lenses (in options, cost, not being saddled with Sony's focus by wire GM nonsense, etc.)
Still has an OVF
Nikon photography ergonomics/controls DNA >> Sony photography ergonomics/controls DNA

Just saying. I wouldn't leave Canon for another mount, but if I did, the D850 would be my first choice.

- A
 

jayphotoworks

EOS 80D
Aug 11, 2016
191
57
Just like to chime in here. I migrated to an A7R2/A9 combination this year coming from a Panasonic GH/MFT ecosystem since 2013. I ended up also migrating all of my MFT lenses to FE as well in the process to take advantage of the specific AF features like 20fps, Eye-AF, etc.

I'm not sure many people here have used an A9, and they might be basing their comparisons based on the A7R2 era. But I've shot a few weddings on this camera and the AF is exceptionally fast and like the reviews say, it is reactive because it doesn't have to be predictive with absolutely no blackout. You can't fully grasp that until you've either rented or owned it and shot with one on the job.

The battery system and power management are significantly better than the A7R2. I've shot 2x4K weddings with 2 batteries total over 11 hours with power remaining and I'm sure if I was doing stills only 1 battery could last an entire day. The A7R2 needed 6 battery swaps. The A9 also has a custom menu option and also a custom recall which I absolutely enjoyed using on Canon bodies previously. It also has separate drive and af dials, a touchscreen for af and a joystick controller. It also does dual 4K backup recordings across both memory cards. The A7R3 will gain a lot of these improvements for sure.

Some competitor's do eventually catch up, so it's always great to keep an open mind and consider your alternatives.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,619
2,105
jayphotoworks said:
...the AF is exceptionally fast and like the reviews say, it is reactive because it doesn't have to be predictive with absolutely no blackout. You can't fully grasp that...
So you're saying the a9 has absolutely no shutter lag? Even though Imaging Resource measured it at over 200 ms? Or are you saying that moving subjects don't move over the course of 2/10 of a second? You're right, I can't fully grasp that.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,973
502
neuroanatomist said:
jayphotoworks said:
...the AF is exceptionally fast and like the reviews say, it is reactive because it doesn't have to be predictive with absolutely no blackout. You can't fully grasp that...
So you're saying the a9 has absolutely no shutter lag? Even though Imaging Resource measured it at over 200 ms? Or are you saying that moving subjects don't move over the course of 2/10 of a second? You're right, I can't fully grasp that.
+1.

On this front: OVF/SLR 1, EVF/Mirrorless 0.

Tapping into a live sensor read and running a chain of shots without blackout is potentially a great upside, but missing decisive moments is a big takeaway.

- A
 

eoren1

EOS M50
jayphotoworks said:
Just like to chime in here. I migrated to an A7R2/A9 combination this year coming from a Panasonic GH/MFT ecosystem since 2013. I ended up also migrating all of my MFT lenses to FE as well in the process to take advantage of the specific AF features like 20fps, Eye-AF, etc.

I'm not sure many people here have used an A9, and they might be basing their comparisons based on the A7R2 era. But I've shot a few weddings on this camera and the AF is exceptionally fast and like the reviews say, it is reactive because it doesn't have to be predictive with absolutely no blackout. You can't fully grasp that until you've either rented or owned it and shot with one on the job.

The battery system and power management are significantly better than the A7R2. I've shot 2x4K weddings with 2 batteries total over 11 hours with power remaining and I'm sure if I was doing stills only 1 battery could last an entire day. The A7R2 needed 6 battery swaps. The A9 also has a custom menu option and also a custom recall which I absolutely enjoyed using on Canon bodies previously. It also has separate drive and af dials, a touchscreen for af and a joystick controller. It also does dual 4K backup recordings across both memory cards. The A7R3 will gain a lot of these improvements for sure.

Some competitor's do eventually catch up, so it's always great to keep an open mind and consider your alternatives.
Thanks Jay - great info.

I make money off landscapes where the increased megapixels would be nice, DR boost appreciated and the pixel shift potentially helpful.

However, I enjoy shooting my kids at least as much and eye AF, faster fps to catch action, no blackout should definitely increase keepers/favorites.

Someone mentioned Canon color and I had heard that before - that Canon produces much nicer skin tones. I use LR to process and wonder if you have seen a difference with the Sony A9 in shooting weddings.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,190
1,769
Canada
There really isn't that much difference in something shot with a 30Mpixel or a 40Mpixel camera.... at least if you stick with the 35mm format....

If you really want a LOT of resolution for landscape pictures, have you considered medium format? Think 16 bit colour depth (not 14 like Conon/Nikon/Sony) and real 15 bit DR...... and up to 100Mpixels.....
 

eoren1

EOS M50
Don Haines said:
There really isn't that much difference in something shot with a 30Mpixel or a 40Mpixel camera.... at least if you stick with the 35mm format....

If you really want a LOT of resolution for landscape pictures, have you considered medium format? Think 16 bit colour depth (not 14 like Conon/Nikon/Sony) and real 15 bit DR...... and up to 100Mpixels.....
The 5DmkIII is 22 MP. Resolution is 5760 wide so at 300ppi/dpi, max native print is 19" on long end. I've definitely printed bigger (40x60) with use of software programs such as Perfect Resize. The Sony at 42MP would print 26" long at 300 dpi/ppi. Not a huge difference but I would likely end up being able to print 95-99% of my stuff shot with that camera without having to resize and worry about added artifacts.

As for MF, it would be wonderful but also useless for shooting kids and I don't want to run two systems.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,973
502
eoren1 said:
As for MF, it would be wonderful but also useless for shooting kids
You beat me to it. Unless you want to stop down and range focus, shooting kids in unscripted situations takes a proper AF system. MF can crush certain types of photography, but I'd imagine this isn't one of them unless you have a ton of patience and don't mind missing a lot of great moments.

- A
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,190
1,769
Canada
eoren1 said:
Don Haines said:
There really isn't that much difference in something shot with a 30Mpixel or a 40Mpixel camera.... at least if you stick with the 35mm format....

If you really want a LOT of resolution for landscape pictures, have you considered medium format? Think 16 bit colour depth (not 14 like Conon/Nikon/Sony) and real 15 bit DR...... and up to 100Mpixels.....
The 5DmkIII is 22 MP. Resolution is 5760 wide so at 300ppi/dpi, max native print is 19" on long end. I've definitely printed bigger (40x60) with use of software programs such as Perfect Resize. The Sony at 42MP would print 26" long at 300 dpi/ppi. Not a huge difference but I would likely end up being able to print 95-99% of my stuff shot with that camera without having to resize and worry about added artifacts.

As for MF, it would be wonderful but also useless for shooting kids and I don't want to run two systems.
Have you tried flash photography on the kids? It gets you more light to work with.....
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,973
502
Don Haines said:
Have you tried flash photography on the kids? It gets you more light to work with.....
For dedicated portraits, sure, but for just hanging out, travel, candids and so on, the flash overshadows the moment, makes it about me, etc. and I almost never use it.

- A
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,190
1,769
Canada
ahsanford said:
Don Haines said:
Have you tried flash photography on the kids? It gets you more light to work with.....
For dedicated portraits, sure, but for just hanging out, travel, candids and so on, the flash overshadows the moment, makes it about me, etc. and I almost never use it.

- A
I find that I can get it to work well indoors where I can bounce off walls or ceilings, but outdoors (at least for me) it makes everything look harsh and staged..... I tried it at the bird feeders, and my only accomplishment there was that I now know how to scare birds away from the feeders :(
 

Jopa

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 11, 2015
1,056
0
There is no point to jump ship unless you're changing format. For example going full MF. Your lenses would render perfectly fine image to any FF sensor. A good thing about Sony is you can have it as a "digital back" for your Canon lenses if you aren't satisfied with DR or some other random things. 5dsr2 is coming next year anyway...
 

jayphotoworks

EOS 80D
Aug 11, 2016
191
57
neuroanatomist said:
jayphotoworks said:
...the AF is exceptionally fast and like the reviews say, it is reactive because it doesn't have to be predictive with absolutely no blackout. You can't fully grasp that...
So you're saying the a9 has absolutely no shutter lag? Even though Imaging Resource measured it at over 200 ms? Or are you saying that moving subjects don't move over the course of 2/10 of a second? You're right, I can't fully grasp that.
I wasn't talking about the shutter lag, I was talking about the viewfinder blackout. There is none on the A9. On any OVF DSLR, there is the constant movement of the mirror. 60ms on the 1DX series and 125ms on the 5D series.