Been with Canon for 12 years - wait or jump ship?
- Thread starter eoren1
- Start date
aceflibble said:
I think Canon will definitely release a new FF mirrorless camera in 2018, but the real question is whether they will deliver such a product with a new mount.
If it is a new Canon mount, it will be essentially a system swap more or less. You will still need to re-acquire all of your existing EF lenses for the new mount if you want to benefit from the improved performance they will provide. If Canon releases an adapter to use EF lenses on this new mount, it will come with speed and compatibility compromises similar to Sony's A mount to E mount adapters. Native E mount lenses will generally outperform adapted A lenses or support additional AF points and functionality, etc. In addition, given the current trend of mirrorless systems including all of Canon new STM and Nano USM lenses, they will all be focus-by-wire design.
But will the move to a mirrorless system really bring about a dramatic change to your work regardless if you are switching systems to a new Canon product or the competition? I felt mirrorless brought about a huge change to my work because I also wanted to be able to shoot film and video, but if I were only working with stills, I'm not sure I would have made the switch at all.
aceflibble said:
I find renting is expensive. Up here north of the US border, current rental costs for a modern camera body ranges from $185 to $250 a day. If your cash-flow allows it and you can wait, it is usually better to buy it used if you can tolerate the risk with the second hand market. I'm not sure you can really come to grips with operating a new camera system in 1-2 days. You probably want to put it through its paces for at least a week if not more. If it really doesn't suit your needs, you can re-sell.
For me, a 2 month old C200 came up for sale locally along with a 24-105 II. The owner was moving to a Red Raven, so I picked up his camera complete with original invoice for 70% of list price which I could easily re-sell. I took it out with me in the field for 1-2 projects and I liked it enough to consider keeping it permanently. The price-point I was able to pick it up really made the difference because I would not have considered this camera at its MSRP.
Upvote
0
aceflibble said:
Best advice I've seen on here in a long time.
Renting all the high end stuff isn't cheap - but it's a LOT cheaper than switching systems, and a lot cheaper than making mistakes in upgrades.
The grass isn't always greener ....
Typically, a specific piece of gear really needs to have something revolutionary to justify a switch. Or, a user really has to know what they want for their workflow and can really make use of a specific feature.
Otherwise, for IQ - there's tons of studio shot comparisons out there no need to rent. You will find little practical difference in reality.
Upvote
0
AlanF said:
[sarcasm]Surely he does.....[/sarcasm]
You can have a camera system optimized for small size, or you can have a system optimized for performance, but you are not going to get both......
You could make a tiny body FF mirrorless camera with a shorter lens flange, but where is the real estate required to mount controls?
You could make a tiny body FF mirrorless camera with a shorter lens flange, but you would pi** off the existing lens owners...
You could make a tiny body FF mirrorless camera with a shorter lens flange, but bending the light sharper plays hell with chromatic aberration....
You could make a tiny body FF mirrorless camera with a shorter lens flange, but if the goal is to make things small, you are never going to be able to touch the "M" system....
Just my opinion, but when Canon comes out with a mirrorless FF camera, it will be a normal sized body with the ergonomics that we all know and love, and it will take normal EF lenses
Upvote
0
AlanF said:
Why do we have to look to Sony for adaptor letdowns? We have this information for EF already, don't we?
Can someone speak to native EF use on an full EF mount SLR using DPAF in LiveView vs. adaptored EF use on an EOS-M? Shouldn't that set a baseline bar of expectation for a FF mirrorless offering in a thin mount?
What's the verdict? Is it identical speed/accuracy/consistency? Is it slower/less accurate/less consistent? How much?
- A
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:
I use EF lenses with an adapter on an M5 and have no complaints. The focus consistency is remarkable, and the speed seems OK. Don Haines did not explain why there should be speed or compatibility problems. .
Upvote
0
Don Haines said:
I would love if Canon's FF mirrorless were 80D or 6D2 sized with all that extra space used for better heat dissipation on a faster processor, support for an internal m. 2, or optional second battery.
I'm would only consider it if it yielded a higher BIF keeper rate though. Plus, the EVF would have to be very pleasant to use. I think the M5 isn't terrible, but it needs to be a couple of steps up from that.
Upvote
0
I've never used or even picked up a mirrorless camera. I've been using cameras with mirrors for over 45 years and never thought of them having problems that I wanted solved by removing the mirror. (I lock up the mirror if I think there might be a vibration problem.) I like looking through an optical viewfinder. I don't imagine that mirrorless cameras have those.
When I want to travel light, I use my G7X II. I never feel a need for something in between it and a DSLR. So for me, I don't have any interest in the mirrorless camera class other than some curiosity that I might be missing something that others perceive as advantage.
Can any of you suggest some reason that I might someday down the road have some interest in having a mirrorless camera system?
When I want to travel light, I use my G7X II. I never feel a need for something in between it and a DSLR. So for me, I don't have any interest in the mirrorless camera class other than some curiosity that I might be missing something that others perceive as advantage.
Can any of you suggest some reason that I might someday down the road have some interest in having a mirrorless camera system?
Upvote
0
AlanF said:
I was being sarcastic... Unless they REALLY goof up bad, it should make no difference. Some of these comparisons judge one tech level of mirrorless against a different tech level of DSLR and give highly biased results. Given the same tech level, there should be no difference. Note that this assumes a similar lens as well. You can't slap a brand new prime on a mirrored camera and a bargain kit lens on a mirrorless and hope to get a meaningful comparison..... yet review after review does....
Upvote
0
Don - you being sarcastic! As far as I can see, shortening the flange-sensor distance and then adding an adapter for lenses with longer rear element to sensor distance should make little diminution AF speed and accuracy.
Upvote
0
AlanF said:
I don't think it is the connection as such as the need for the lens and the body to talk to each other. I can imagine that Sony developed new algorithms for their E mount lenses and the adapter has to 'translate' the discussion in the same way it does for Canon/Nikon lenses and this will hit performance.
In theory, Canon should be able to overcome that problem but it is within the realms of possibility that maximising AF on mirrorless is different to maximising AF on DSLR which may present a (not insurmountable) problem of translation; and given that all current EF lenses are designed for DSLR early iterations of the body may see a slight hit on AF.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
AlanF said:
One would think there would be no incompatibility with an OEM adapter. But recall...with an EF lens mounted on the EOS M, M2, or M3 via the Canon EF mount adapter, when using AI Servo, the camera would lock focus after the first shot in the burst, instead of continuing to focus between shots as AI Servo should (and does on those bodies with EF-M lenses). So in Canon's own recent history, there's an example of system-intrinsic focus issues with an adapter.
Upvote
0
stevelee said:
I never had much interest in mirrorless. Most of the advantages were things that didn't matter to me and my ways of shooting - things like a much wider coverage of (and more) AF points, having higher FPS and no need to AFMA your lenses. Other features more prevalent in mirrorless are more info in the viewfinder such as focus peaking, zebras, histograms, etc. (although these are possible with overlays in an OVF). The one thing that I found very useful is that you can see your exposure in the EVF - and any changes you make to exposure. I found this one feature so useful that I now own 2 mirrorless cameras and none with an OVF.
Upvote
0
aceflibble said:
Wow Ace,
That was a brilliant post - thank you for your time and effort! (To answer someone else, THIS is why it is worth posting to internet forums).
To answer some of your questions/concerns/thoughts.
1. Lenses
I've considered upgrading my set but prefer the f/4 lineup for the good optics balanced with low weight. I've had the 70-200/2.8 IS in my 'cart' a number of times but never bought it as it is twice the weight of my f/4 version.
I have considered the 100-400 II for better reach with sports but had not pulled the trigger on that due to the concern of potentially switching systems. One of the real benefits of the mirrorless system is shaving weight off the body and ending up with a kit no heavier than I have now.
As for third party lenses, I had the awesome Sigma 30/1.4 years ago on my Canon 50D and it was great but ended up having focus issues later and I found it a pain to deal with Sigma service. I've read about their Art series lenses and been tempted but haven't bought yet.
2. Autofocus with the 5D3
Not sure what to tell you. I've read about the AF settings at length and currently use Case 4 with Tracking at 0, Accel/Decel at +1 and AF pt auto switching at 0. Use AF-On to focus and shoot with shutter button. The Canon nails focus maybe 80-85% of the time? (guesstimate). It's pulled off my kid and grabbed another in soccer even without a tight grouping of players. Happened with basketball as well. Frustrating when it does. At max frame rate, I've felt that it missed the 'in between' shots on more than one occasion. I'm a disciplined shooter and think I have good technique but may be wrong.
3. Nikon 850
I tried switching to Nikon before I bought the 50D and found that literally everything was backwards (putting on lens, every dial/switch). It was frustrating and I gave up after 5 minutes. Don't see myself doing that now and thought the Sony was a bit more 'Canon-like' from that standpoint when I briefly handled it at Best Buy.
4. Medium Format
I get the appeal and understand the potential improvements (at least equal to the jump from 50D to 5D3) but am not interested in a second system plus second set of lenses
5. Waiting
This is probably what I'll end up doing. For good or bad, I chose Canon as my system 12 years ago and am probably 'stuck' with them now. I get that the differences may not be as huge as they seem on paper (and in fact I just read a report that the a7rIII has no appreciable DR improvement over the a7rII). In 12 months it's possible that Canon produces a successor to the 5DS that improves fps and DR to bring it on par with Nikon/Sony (though I've been waiting/watching for some real sensor improvement from Canon - haven't we all?). As good as their lenses are, it amazes me that they've shown so little innovation on that front.
I guess what I'm left wondering is if the 5D3 shutter failed tomorrow (I'm at 150,000 actuations), would I really be okay with getting a 5D4 or 5DS for the same price as the Sony a7rIII. Or would it then be worth looking at the system swap...
Thanks again for the thorough post. It really is appreciated.
E
Upvote
0
It's not even as if Canon were trying to disguise things. It is bringing out new lens after new lens in full EF mount ... and the kind of expensive specialist glass that is not going to appeal to the kind of photographer who will happily accept all the compromises that go with using an adapter.
Canon will develop FF mirrorless in EF-mount together with a new range of wide-to-standard lenses that recess into the newly vacant mirror box. Couple with the new lenses, these bodies will return almost all of the weight and most of the size advantages of Sony's E-mount for travel and landscape photographers ... but they will have huge ergonomic advantages over Sony's horribly cramped format and they will pair properly with long telephotos. And every EF-mount lens ever made (not to mention very EF-S lens) will continue to work perfectly with Canon's new mirrorless bodies without adaptation.
Upvote
0
dak723 said:
Thanks for the response. That suggests that if some of that is of interest to me, I can see it on the live view screen of my DSLR, though maybe not everything. So far I haven't felt limited by the AF point coverage of the 6D2, though that is a common point of criticism. I guess I'm used to focusing manually through the viewfinder in unusual circumstances, and I don't recall ever wanting to focus on something way up in the corner of the frame. And if I did, I know how to press down the shutter button halfway and reframe.
But, yes, I can see how those features could be of interest for some folks, if not for me right now.
Upvote
0
stevelee said:
Those comments imply the point of mirrorless is to (a) be smaller and/or (b) perform at a lower level than a proper FF SLR.
When you consider that an EVF-based rig gives you...
- Handheld liveview with the camera held up to your eye -- not held 12" away like an iPad
- Proper MF focus-assist without needing to buy a 1-series rig to get manual focusing screens
- Amplify light in dark rooms, allowing MF peaking use of AF lenses in really dark places
- No mirror slap for 100% of your shooting in realtime -- not just for MLU tripod work
- Max burst rate no longer constrained by mirrorbox design -- potentially very high fps burst rates in low/mid-level FF bodies
...one could climb over the first-glance size appeal and see that mirrorless is not solely about being smaller or less functionality. In some cases, it mirrorless actually do more than an SLR.
I still principally shoot with an SLR and my other camera is a mirrorless one from Apple. :
So I'm no mirrorless fanboy -- but I look forward to the day that I can get mirrorless advantages with my EF lenses in FF with a Canon first party AF camera.- A
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Anonymous
- EOS R