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

[eoren1]

I realize threads like this can devolve quickly but looking for advice from other Canon users.

Background: Been shooting a dSLR since Canon 350D that I bought 12 years ago. Moved to the 50D (had tried out Nikon at that point but muscle memory was all backwards). Now on 5DmkIII that I bought when it came out. Lenses: 17-40/4, 24-105/4, 70-200/4, 35/2 IS (edit: corrected), 100/2
Shoot landscapes/seascapes and sell prints. Self published book of images in its second printing. Haven't spent a dime since the MkIII so have enough saved to pay for new camera/lenses.
Also shoot 10 and 12 year old kids playing sports - indoor basketball, dance as well as lacrosse, soccer

With the Sony a7Riii specs now official, I have to admit to being very intrigued - especially with their 24-105 which is my workhorse lens.

Things I wish I had with my Canon are a bigger sensor with more DR (I print 20x30+ not infrequently and have to enlarge in software before sending to the lab). I briefly considered the 5DS R but FPS was way too low for kids sports. My 5D mk III is barely able to catch decisive moments in faster sports.

Other benefits (on paper) of the Sony - eye focus (awesome if it works reliably), better AF than the mkIII, lighter weight (1 lb less with the 24-105 respectively).

I love my Canon 35/2 IS (edit: corrected) and have favored a lighter kit as you can see above and am happy with the lenses overall.

The Sony 12-24 lens and the 100-400 get impressive reviews and, with the new 24-105, would greatly increase my range.

I frankly don't see much development along these lines in the Canon and, as noted above, have been with them for over a decade. I would not pre-order a Sony and will absolutely wait for real world reviews

Really appreciate your thoughts on this. Hope this is an appropriate thread to start.

E

Sony specs if haven't seen them:
Innovative Full-frame Mirrorless Model Offers 42.4 MP High-Resolution, 10 fps Continuous Shooting, Fast and Precise AF Performance in a Compact Body

35mm Full-Frame 42.4 MP Back-Illuminated Exmor R™ CMOS Image Sensor with Evolved Image Processing
Continuous Shooting at up to 10 fps with either Silent Shooting or Mechanical Shutter and full Auto Focus/Auto Exposure tracking
399 phase-detection AF points covering 68% of image area, 425 contrast AF points and approximately 2 times more effective Eye AF
5-axis optical in-body image stabilization with a 5.5 step shutter speed advantage
High Resolution 4K Movie Shooting with full pixel readout and no pixel binning
Completely redesigned for professionals, including upgraded Auto Focus, Dual SD Card Slots, Extended Battery Life, SuperSpeed USB (USB 3.1 Gen 1) USB Type-C™ Terminal and more
Compact, Lightweight body at only 23 oz

 

[Maximilian]

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

 

[Don Haines]

Here's the problem with camera bodies..... none of them are perfect. Each seems to have some advantage of the others ( and this is not just Canon, it is across all manufacturers) and there is always the promise of something a bit better if you switch to "X".... And yes, "X" does some things better, but camera "Y" does other things better, and camera "Z": does a different set of things better.

That gives no definitive answer and results in a lot of fanboys LOUDLY attacking everyone else's decision without considering that those decisions were made with a different set of criteria.

If I were to give any advice to someone like you with a semi-current camera and a reasonable set of lenses, it would be to stick with whatever system that you have. Upgrading with each new body is expensive and the returns are minimal, it is usually best to skip models. If you feel that you must upgrade, consider investing in lenses.... they will make far more difference than upgrading bodies....

 

[traveller]

How much money have you got? How much do you make from your prints & books? How many more sales would a high resolution camera enable you to make?

Weigh this up against your transition costs: go to KEH/MPB and see how much they sell your bodies/lenses for used, assume you would get a maximum of 75% of this price on a trade-in deal. Add up your liquidated asset value and take this away from the price of whatever kit you want as a replacement.

I won't lie and tell you that I've never done this exercise myself, it's just that every time I do it seems that I come out with a huge dent in my wallet or lens collection. So far I have stuck, you may decide differently.

 

[eoren1]

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

Those are my two concerns

UI/ergonomics - gave up on the Nikon in 5 minutes when I couldn't figure out how to focus and the guy at Ritz couldn't either. That and the fact that all functions are 180 degree different (knob rotations, lens changes). Very curious if anyone here has played with the a7R series to compare.

Service - I'm a member of CPS but haven't actually needed to use any service in at least 1 and possibly 2 years now. The 5DmkIII feels pretty much bulletproof. I'm at nearly 150,000 actuations and haven't had the lockups or other issues that I've read about with the Sonys.

 

[eoren1]

Here's the problem with camera bodies..... none of them are perfect. Each seems to have some advantage of the others ( and this is not just Canon, it is across all manufacturers) and there is always the promise of something a bit better if you switch to "X".... And yes, "X" does some things better, but camera "Y" does other things better, and camera "Z": does a different set of things better.

That gives no definitive answer and results in a lot of fanboys LOUDLY attacking everyone else's decision without considering that those decisions were made with a different set of criteria.

If I were to give any advice to someone like you with a semi-current camera and a reasonable set of lenses, it would be to stick with whatever system that you have. Upgrading with each new body is expensive and the returns are minimal, it is usually best to skip models. If you feel that you must upgrade, consider investing in lenses.... they will make far more difference than upgrading bodies....

Completely agree with you Don - none are perfect. And I've only bought a new camera when I hit the limitation of my current one. That happened with the 50D when I pushed it beyond its abilities and found myself limited by banding, noise, etc.

I have done well with the 5D so far and did not go for the 5DmkIV (not a big enough change for me), 5DS R (nice resolution bump but at cost of FPS), or a7R II (same concern with nice resolution but poor FPS). I refuse to switch to Nikon simply due to the backwards nature of their knobs, etc and don't think I could adapt.

The a7R III offers the resolution bump of the 5DS R with better FPS and some other (potential) benefits like improved AF, eye AF, nicer screen, etc.

Again, very curious if others have ventured to that camera lineup (a7 series) and found significant differences from the Canon that were a deal breaker.

 

[eoren1]

How much money have you got? How much do you make from your prints & books? How many more sales would a high resolution camera enable you to make?

Weigh this up against your transition costs: go to KEH/MPB and see how much they sell your bodies/lenses for used, assume you would get a maximum of 75% of this price on a trade-in deal. Add up your liquidated asset value and take this away from the price of whatever kit you want as a replacement.

I won't lie and tell you that I've never done this exercise myself, it's just that every time I do it seems that I come out with a huge dent in my wallet or lens collection. So far I have stuck, you may decide differently.

I have 30k in profit put aside from photography print/calendar/book sales. That money is purely for photography expenses (and the coming iPhone X 8) ). I'm lucky in that I do not rely on photography income and can use it to fund itself.

I'm sure I'll take a hit on the lenses but most of mine can probably be sold for at least 50-60% of original value.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Again, very curious if others have ventured to that camera lineup (a7 series) and found significant differences from the Canon that were a deal breaker.

Didn't buy, but did try. For me, the ergonomics were the deal breaker – I tend to use larger lenses (24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8), and they don't play well with a small body like the a7 series.

 

[eoren1]

Again, very curious if others have ventured to that camera lineup (a7 series) and found significant differences from the Canon that were a deal breaker.

Didn't buy, but did try. For me, the ergonomics were the deal breaker – I tend to use larger lenses (24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8), and they don't play well with a small body like the a7 series.

Was it backwards like Nikon in terms of knobs/lens changes? Was it non-intuitive to focus and use the camera?
I tend to use f/4 lenses so wonder if that would differ.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Was it backwards like Nikon in terms of knobs/lens changes? Was it non-intuitive to focus and use the camera?
I tend to use f/4 lenses so wonder if that would differ.

Sony's UI is very kludgy. But I'm sure with time and use, one would become accustomed to it. Same goes for button placements – different, but one would get used to it. What I would not get used to is the smaller size, resulting in closer button placement that gets uncomfortable in use. So, while over time I'd learn to use the buttons by feel (as I do with Canon, currently), time won't make the camera bigger or my hands smaller, and therefore the discomfort during use would remain.

 

[Pookie]

One of the aspects of these types of questions has always intrigued me... why you need to wait or jump?

Reading your bio on your site I would think you could afford buying and trying out any gear you would like. Buy a second camera, any maker you'd like... use it and then decide which you prefer and keep or sell. If this is a passion for you and you enjoy taking photos... why limit yourself to one camera maker.

Speaking as a business owner (I own my portrait studio) and an avid photographer I've come to appreciate having multiple cameras and makers. I've also purchased, used and then decided to sell many systems. I own multiple Canons (for both business and pleasure), Pentax MF, Fujifilm recent offerings (MF, X100S, Xpro-2), Mamiya film, multiple Leicas (M10, 240, M6, M5, M3), and countless other makers and bodies. Each has something to offer and some are kept & used... some are sold.

I consider it renting. I just sold the Fuji GFX 50S, used it for about 6 months and hated it so I sold it. Up to the point of deciding, the plan was to either keep the GFX50S or Pentax 645Z. I sold the GFX for about 90% the original cost and consider this to be one of the cheapest 6 month rentals you could ask for. I'm not saying buy a 100 different camera and take a financial bath. I'm saying if this is really an option you would like to consider, buy a Sony... use it for a few months and then consider which system to keep and either sell one or keep both. Not a huge gamble if you make the decision while there is some value in either system you won't lose much. Especially with Canon gear... I can tell you I've sold many Canon products over the last 20 years and often for the same price or more than I purchased for.

 

[eoren1]

One of the aspects of these types of questions has always intrigued me... why you need to wait or jump?

Reading your bio on your site I would think you could afford buying and trying out any gear you would like. Buy a second camera, any maker you'd like... use it and then decide which you prefer and keep or sell. If this is a passion for you and you enjoy taking photos... why limit yourself to one camera maker.

Speaking as a business owner (I own my portrait studio) and an avid photographer I've come to appreciate having multiple cameras and makers. I've also purchased, used and then decided to sell many systems. I own multiple Canons (for both business and pleasure), Pentax MF, Fujifilm recent offerings (MF, X100S, Xpro-2), Mamiya film, multiple Leicas (M10, 240, M6, M5, M3), and countless other makers and bodies. Each has something to offer and some are kept & used... some are sold.

I consider it renting. I just sold the Fuji GFX 50S, used it for about 6 months and hated it so I sold it. Up to the point of deciding the plan was to either keep wither the GFX50S or Pentax 645Z. I sold the GFX for about 90% the original cost and consider this to be one of the cheapest 6 month rentals you could ask for. I'm not saying buy a 100 different camera and take a financial bath. I'm saying if this is really an option you would like to consider, buy a Sony... use it for a few months and then consider which system to keep and either sell one or keep both. Not a huge gamble if you make the decision while there is some value in either system you won't lose much. Especially with Canon gear... I can tell you I've sold many Canon products over the last 20 years and often for the same price or more than I purchased for.

Good points Pookie and agree about these cameras/lenses tending to hold value. I treat my lenses well and forget that they hold a ridiculous amount of value.

I was never one to use multiple cameras let alone multiple systems. I went out once with my 50D and 5D to run a time-lapse with the former and since then have left the 50D in a drawer. I see your point in getting the a7R iii and 24-105 for a real world experience and selling it at a loss of a few hundred dollars if it doesn't work out.

Guess I was looking more for thoughts on whether there were clear deal breakers with the Sony a7 system. If so, really not worth the time/effort and minimal cost of buying/selling. Also if there was a huge adjustment from Canon to Sony.

As for the 'wait' part of it, I definitely feel like I'm hitting the limits of the 5D mk III but neither the mk IV or 5DS R fit as steps up from my mk III. Wondering if/when we'll see a big leap in Canon's dSLR lineup but realize that is pure conjecture/rumor.

Thanks everyone.

 

[drmikeinpdx]

eoren1, You mentioned a Canon 35/1.4 IS lens in your collection. I'm thinking that's a typo. Did you mean to type II instead of IS?

 

[eoren1]

eoren1, You mentioned a Canon 35/1.4 IS lens in your collection. I'm thinking that's a typo. Did you mean to type II instead of IS?

I meant the 35/2 IS...sorry!

Really a great lens

 

[Pookie]

One of the aspects of these types of questions has always intrigued me... why you need to wait or jump?

Reading your bio on your site I would think you could afford buying and trying out any gear you would like. Buy a second camera, any maker you'd like... use it and then decide which you prefer and keep or sell. If this is a passion for you and you enjoy taking photos... why limit yourself to one camera maker.

Speaking as a business owner (I own my portrait studio) and an avid photographer I've come to appreciate having multiple cameras and makers. I've also purchased, used and then decided to sell many systems. I own multiple Canons (for both business and pleasure), Pentax MF, Fujifilm recent offerings (MF, X100S, Xpro-2), Mamiya film, multiple Leicas (M10, 240, M6, M5, M3), and countless other makers and bodies. Each has something to offer and some are kept & used... some are sold.

I consider it renting. I just sold the Fuji GFX 50S, used it for about 6 months and hated it so I sold it. Up to the point of deciding the plan was to either keep wither the GFX50S or Pentax 645Z. I sold the GFX for about 90% the original cost and consider this to be one of the cheapest 6 month rentals you could ask for. I'm not saying buy a 100 different camera and take a financial bath. I'm saying if this is really an option you would like to consider, buy a Sony... use it for a few months and then consider which system to keep and either sell one or keep both. Not a huge gamble if you make the decision while there is some value in either system you won't lose much. Especially with Canon gear... I can tell you I've sold many Canon products over the last 20 years and often for the same price or more than I purchased for.

Good points Pookie and agree about these cameras/lenses tending to hold value. I treat my lenses well and forget that they hold a ridiculous amount of value.

I was never one to use multiple cameras let alone multiple systems. I went out once with my 50D and 5D to run a time-lapse with the former and since then have left the 50D in a drawer. I see your point in getting the a7R iii and 24-105 for a real world experience and selling it at a loss of a few hundred dollars if it doesn't work out.

Guess I was looking more for thoughts on whether there were clear deal breakers with the Sony a7 system. If so, really not worth the time/effort and minimal cost of buying/selling. Also if there was a huge adjustment from Canon to Sony.

As for the 'wait' part of it, I definitely feel like I'm hitting the limits of the 5D mk III but neither the mk IV or 5DS R fit as steps up from my mk III. Wondering if/when we'll see a big leap in Canon's dSLR lineup but realize that is pure conjecture/rumor.

Thanks everyone.

Just food for thought...

Often the deal breakers for me or anyone else on this site are not concerns for someone else... and really only you can tell that with some amount of real world use. People often suggest renting. I've just found it to be an exorbitant cost for a few days when compared to a purchase and re-sell down the road.

Best of luck...

 

[jeanluc]

Also being intrigued with the A7R hype, I have spent a fair bit of time at my local Best Buy playing with one.

After about half an hour of menu-scrolling, and certainly no manual-reading,I was able to get it set up like my Canon bodies for landscape shooting...back button AF, bracketing etc. You can definitely set it up very much the same for that.

The nuances of the AF modes I did not worry about, since I don't use these as my camera is nearly always on a tripod and nothing moves. So no comment there.

For me the Canon ergonomics are a lot better, the menus are WAY easier to intuitively navigate and frankly with my size 8 hands, the slightly smaller body is no advantage at all. In fact, with 2.8 lenses the A7 just doesn't balance well for me.

So I do have some techno-envy, but when I'm shooting in the rain and my hands are muddy from climbing down into some wet ravine and the light is changing fast, I will stick with what I know and works very well all the time.

When Canon does go FF mirrorless, I really hope they do not change much including the body size. After making pro-level bodies for a long time, the design is mature and works very well for many well-proven reasons.

I also feel with the 5D4 sensor there is no meaningful gap in IQ any more, (although with the 5d3 there sure is). The upcoming 5DSR2 will almost certainly be even better with higher resolution if that is an issue for you.

Since the IQ results are what matters, I am staying put.

 

[bokehmon22]

I'm waiting for Canon to respond. I do wedding photography on the side in addition to 6 figure job so it isn't all about money, but glass, workflow, ergonomic (especially for 12-16 hrs weddings), compatibility with strobe/lighting gears. I'm willing to take a hit if it's significantly improve my image quality. We have to see the real life review.

I also play with A7RII and it feel like a toy. I would have to buy a grip to make it comfortable for long wedding. The menu is clunky but I can get use to that. I hope adapted lens will be much improve with A7RIII.

If Canon doesn't respond with FF mirrorless and it's lackluster, the Sony A7RIII/A7III will be much cheaper by the time Canon responded.

 

[ethanz]

Why not try out the 1DX2? I think it would do all you want, except for the resolution bump.

 

[Ozarker]

Yeah, it's time to jump ship.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Sony and Canon have two basically different philosophy's, Sony miniaturizes the products, and this makes them very expensive to repair. By the time the warranty is up, it can be smarter to toss a broken one than pay big bucks and wait months for repair. Sony invented Throw-Away products. They were successful and they have stayed with it. Its particularly painful for their lenses, which Canon users expect to last for 20 and more years. When a Sony lens breaks, it tends to be difficult to repair, and its a long wait. If you are running a business, you just toss it and buy another. If you are not wealthy, it can be painful.

Canon gives a very high priority to the manufacturing and repair costs of a product, and does not put a feature in a product that their target market does not need. This makes the products less cutting edge, less expensive to manufacture and less expensive to repair, so the cost of ownership is lower.

Each philosophy works for a different group of buyers, there is no right or wrong, its a individual choice. Buyers in general don't know or care about all this, they go to Best Buy, Costco, Walmart, Amazon, etc and buy a brand they trust for the lowest possible price.

Some countries have residents who tend to value photography more than others. Japan is often considered to be in that category. Thus, buyers of cameras in Japan are believed to be paying more attention to the workings and ergonomics of what they buy, and are looked to as a bellwether for which is best, the caveat being that the fit into a person's hand, and overall size may have different values by country or region.