What would it take for you to buy a ML body?

RGF

How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Jul 13, 2012
2,803
30
#1
For me, I need either high MP or high frame rate - landscapes/macro and wildlife.

Until Canon can deliver a ML that can my needs, I'll wait. If they can I will glad consider leaving my dSLR at home and become a ML shooter.
 

3kramd5

EOS 5D Mark IV
Mar 2, 2012
2,658
166
#4
I already have two. What it took was a WYSIWYG EVF.
Which ones? I had a Sony (a7rii) for a couple years, and the viewfinding was not quite WYSIWYG; reviewing photos in the EVF looked better than the live view feed (mostly saturation).
 

Mt Spokane Photography

Spends too much time on this forum
Mar 25, 2011
14,819
265
#6
I find that the EOS R would likely meet my needs, however, its no better than my 5D MK IV, and having to buy new lenses to get a benefit seems like a non starter. I might get one to replace my SL-2 for a small carry around camera and use my EF lenses. In the end, I just decided to wait and see what else appears.
 
Jul 12, 2011
358
3
#7
Good viewfinder, dual card slots, fast processors, large buffers, full manual controls, affordable new lenses, good "feel" and weight, rugged body (not plastic) to start with
 
Likes: bokehmon22

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,166
157
118
#9
On sensor ADC.
50+ MP.
WiFi.
GPS.
Illuminated buttons.
C-Log.
4k 10 bit 4:2:2 clean HDMI output.

I'd happily get a ML body in place of a 5DSr MkII.
 

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D Mark IV
Jan 28, 2015
2,657
271
Irving, Texas
#10
Well, I guess to buy the high end mirrorless and the RF lenses... it would take about $8K to $10K. That's body and an RF 28-70 and whatever is produced in the 70-200 or so range. If the zooms are as good as the EF zooms, then that is all I really would want. I can adapt my 35mm lens and I might want the EF 85mm f/1.4L IS. Seriously, not interested yet.
 
Likes: Michael Clark

pwp

EOS 5D Mark IV
Oct 25, 2010
2,515
7
#15
I find that the EOS R would likely meet my needs, however, its no better than my 5D MK IV, and having to buy new lenses to get a benefit seems like a non starter. I might get one to replace my SL-2 for a small carry around camera and use my EF lenses. In the end, I just decided to wait and see what else appears.
Nice idea as a compact SL2 replacement.

I always saw the EOS R as more of a 6D MkIII rather than the many comparisons made with the 5D MkIV. Single card slot, low FPS, modest buffer, no joystick and so on. I can't wait for the "real" one.

-pw
 
Likes: Michael Clark

Keith_Reeder

No apologies for not suffering fools gladly...
Feb 8, 2014
676
107
58
Blyth, NE England
#17
On sensor ADC.
50+ MP.
WiFi.
GPS.
Illuminated buttons.
C-Log.
4k 10 bit 4:2:2 clean HDMI output..
Isn't that just a general camera wish-list, though?

A little thought experiment: if you had two cameras in front of you with all of those features - one DSLR and one MILC - which would you choose?

If you were to choose the MILC, it can't be because of the features, because they're available in the imaginary DSLR...
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,166
157
118
#18
Isn't that just a general camera wish-list, though?

A little thought experiment: if you had two cameras in front of you with all of those features - one DSLR and one MILC - which would you choose?

If you were to choose the MILC, it can't be because of the features, because they're available in the imaginary DSLR...
Given that choice it would 100% be the MILC assuming it was an RF. For me it is because I could use filters with my TS-E17 and EF11-24, personally that would be reason alone. The fact that I'd get other features the DSLR doesn't have would be icing on the cake, things like truly silent shutter (I know an internationally renowned sports photographer who just switch from Canon to A9's because of that), no viewfinder blackout, etc etc.
 

Keith_Reeder

No apologies for not suffering fools gladly...
Feb 8, 2014
676
107
58
Blyth, NE England
#19
Given that choice it would 100% be the MILC assuming it was an RF. For me it is because I could use filters with my TS-E17 and EF11-24, personally that would be reason alone. The fact that I'd get other features the DSLR doesn't have would be icing on the cake, things like truly silent shutter (I know an internationally renowned sports photographer who just switch from Canon to A9's because of that), no viewfinder blackout, etc etc.
So it's not the feature list per se, just a general wish to move to mirrorless.

Fair enough - just wanted to get that clear.
 
Last edited:

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,166
157
118
#20
So it's not the feature list per se, just a general wish to move to mirrorless.

Fair enough - just wanted to get that clear.
No I am ambivalent regards mirrorless or DSLR, the feature set MILC's offer over DSLR's is not compelling enough for me personally, I'd like a truly silent shutter but 'silent mode' on the DSLR's I have works most of the time. What I really like, and is unique, about the RF is the EF adapters as filters for the TS-E17 and EF11-24 are big and expensive.

I have no desire for MILC in and of themselves, I am interested in them because of the different features they give me over my DSLR's. Give me the choice between MILC and a 5DSr MkII with my list that both give me the ability to easily filter my bulbous lenses and I'd almost certainly take the DSLR.
 
Likes: meywd