Why You Should Stick with Your Canon DSLR and Forget Sony FF Mirrorless

[Sator]

Negligible or zero size advantage and a big dose of buyers regret.
Plus having multiple systems sucks.

-pw

There is a point to running multiple systems. I do. But these systems have to be complementary. Sony FF mirrorless plus Canon FF DLSR is NOT the way to go about this. A lot of Canon users are being tempted along this path.

It makes more sense, just to give one example, to shoot with medium format plus a Canon DSLR. MFD is just too slow to shoot action with, and is heavy. Alternatively, you can shoot FF or MFD, plus APS-C. You get more reach with APS-C lenses (e.g. for wildlife), or else it is just more portable for on location work. It's also better to shoot with dedicated APS-C lenses rather than mounting FF lenses on an APS-C body: you just lose too much resolution otherwise.

But FF mirrorless and FF DSLR aren't as complementary in most cases as it is made out to be. That's why I made it a major point of the post to avoid going down the path of adopting Canon lenses on a Sony, and to stick with native lenses. Others have come to the same conclusions:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYyj5w9wZ3k

 

[AvTvM]

Size/weight advantage of mirrorless is real. Availability of large lenses does not change any of it.

Only a mirrorless systems allows both: small, light and inconspicuous when used with compact primes *and* large lenses of any size will work too. Plus all the other system-inherent mirrorless advantages: EVF, no vibration, no noise ... and no AF/performance penalty compared to mirrorslappers ... very soon. That's why the future of photography comes without smoke and mirrors.

 

[candc]

As a Fuji user, I think they're smart in staying with the APS-C sized sensor.

Of course, one of the positive in Sony's favour is that their sensors are highly regarded.

Secondly, if Sony were genuine about making a high-quality compact system they should have just kept going with developing an APS-C MILC system. It would have been easier to implement IBIS on the E mount, and it would have kept the lens sizes from negating any size advantage. It would have complemented their FF A mount line much better.

Sony just released the a6300. It is an aps-c sensor camera. A very good one it seems. I use an a7rii with fd lenses and like how it works with the legacy manual focus lenses. I also like the live histogram and exposure preview in the viewfinder.

 

[Sunnystate]

Somebody is trying to rediscover America again LOL.

NOOOO there is something not perfect with mirrorles?

This is probably the last moment for DSLR to still look good comparing to mirrorless, allowing to write articles like that.
It's like trying to present twin lens or rangefinder technology compared with Minolta emerging AF technology some 25 years a go, of course there was a time that DSLR AF did not look so good either.

The funny thing is, and everybody will agree with, that when electronic technology is freed from mechanical restrictions it advances 10X faster ( that is why everybody is craving electronic shutter) and we wont have to wait all that long when posts like this will lose all the relevance.

I think a serious photographers that use unique models of mirrorless successfully like A7s etc already scratching heads with polite smirk reading articles like this one.
Happy shooting everybody.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I think a serious photographers that use unique models of mirrorless successfully like A7s etc already scratching heads with polite smirk reading articles like this one.

Of course, the serious photographers shooting dSLRs far outnumber those shooting MILCs. There are reasons for that - one of them is support... That polite smirk will be wiped right off their face when they have to wait weeks for Sony to fix a minor problem with their mirrorless camera, and they'll be scratching their heads wondering why they didn't choose a system that offers true professional-level service.

Just ask Matt Granger: http://petapixel.com/2016/03/14/photographer-matt-granger-ditching-sony/

 

[3kramd5]

Am I the only one who's sick of AFMA on DSLRs? To me the biggest advantage of mirrorless is being able to nail focus with a fast lens wide open.

Lack of need for AFMA is a big advantage, but it comes at a cost - you lose all the advantages of off sensor AF (primarily the size of dedicated AF sensors relative to imaging sensors). Another gain, however, is practically limitless support for lenses, since phase baselines aren't fixed.

 

[Sunnystate]

Of course this is a valid point and I am not making any guesses who the winner in the end will be, in the long run always the one smart enough and in business to stay not just get rich quickly win by offering most for less.
I am not advocating any manufacturer here (will dump Sony as quick and remorseless as Canon or Apple if not satisfied enough in some respects important for me) , I am defending just this particular technology.

I think a serious photographers that use unique models of mirrorless successfully like A7s etc already scratching heads with polite smirk reading articles like this one.

Of course, the serious photographers shooting dSLRs far outnumber those shooting MILCs. There are reasons for that - one of them is support... That polite smirk will be wiped right off their face when they have to wait weeks for Sony to fix a minor problem with their mirrorless camera, and they'll be scratching their heads wondering why they didn't choose a system that offers true professional-level service.

Just ask Matt Granger: http://petapixel.com/2016/03/14/photographer-matt-granger-ditching-sony/

 

[ritholtz]

One thing I never understood why can't Sony make their adapter working with A mount lens.

 

[krisbell]

its an interesting point regarding the size of the camera and lens setup - though irrelevant if you use all your current Canon lens' with an adaptor. I also dont understand why you are constantly changing lens caps and adaptors, I have one lens on my mirrorless and one on my FF and swap the two if required. The smallness of the camera body works in some other, strange ways. True story: I was once allowed to setup my A7r on a tripod at a popular bar because it looked like a toy camera but wasnt allowed to use my 5DIII.

One other point which you havent really touched on is image quality - I personally rate the a7r base ISO image quality and latitude much higher than anything Canon has produced thus far. It isnt for all applications but its a great, small backup body that takes superior base ISO landscape pictures for a smaller price than competing Canons. Say what you want about mirrorless not meeting your needs but I for one certainly do not regret investing in it.

 

[j-nord]

Thanks for your post! I read it and it seems to be a pretty honest straight forward comparison to me. Its good to hear since mirrorless people endlessly spout that its simply inherently better with out honestly discussing the cons of the system. Despite mirrorless having no advantage to me, I'm starting to thinking about a FF sony mirrorless body for landscape simply to get a better sensor. I'd be pairing it with a 7DII for wildlife and would only use canon EF lenses for both. Certainly waiting to see the 5DIV before exploring the sony mirrorless route closer.

 

[Ripley]

It's disappointing that, for example, the a6300 can shoot 4k and 120 frame 2k while the 80D doesn't even have 4k and tops out at 60 frame 2k.

Arguably, Canon is currently behind with some feature sets and isn't known for speed to market. I guess that's the price that has to be payed for a stronger ecosystem?

 

[romanr74]

Thank you for the post (which i didn't perceive as a rant). To me it was interesting to see comaprable system-setup's side by side.

 

[old-pr-pix]

When I decided to go mirrorless a couple years ago it wasn't to replace my Canon dSLR gear, but rather to augment it with smaller, lighter gear. Going to m4/3 format made for enough of a difference size and weight-wise - both body and lens - to have it make sense. I've considered the SL-1 & EOS M, but still the lenses alone are so much larger than m4/3 plus Imaging Resources review of IQ showed an advantage to m4/3 over Canon crop sensors of that time. I've found the m4/3 IQ way more than sufficient for my needs (stuff published is usually on the web or in print 11x17 or smaller) especially with the latest Olympus OMD bodies and PRO lenses.

EVF with WYSIWUG preview is very helpful. Battery life is a pain, but extra batteries are small and still overall kit is way less weight than any of my Canon equivalent stuff. Bottom line, I like and use both systems extensively; but, if I have to carry a lot of gear my preference is usually m4/3 unless there are really compelling reasons to grab the Canons.

 

[krisbell]

I'm starting to thinking about a FF sony mirrorless body for landscape simply to get a better sensor. I'd be pairing it with a 7DII for wildlife and would only use canon EF lenses for both. Certainly waiting to see the 5DIV before exploring the sony mirrorless route closer.

Yes I'm in the same boat - happy with my Canon lenses and waiting for 5D4 before deciding whether to go with Canon or Sony for my landscape option.

 

[3kramd5]

Yes I'm in the same boat - happy with my Canon lenses and waiting for 5D4 before deciding whether to go with Canon or Sony for my landscape option.

I had the A7R and hated it. It gathered much dust and I always used my 5D3s. With the interface improvements in A7R2, I gave sony another shot. Now I use it (the sony) the majority of the time. I use my 5D3s with telephoto lenses. Everything else I shoot on the sony.

If the 5D4 is a compelling update to the 3, I might replace mine.

 

[msm]

It's somewhat amusing that some people are trying to forcibly wringe an anti-mirrorless tirade out of my post where none exists.

Really? Is that why you compare sony a7 users to lemmings leaping of a cliff and accuse them of being irrational? :

Then goes on to "examine" the size advantage by comparing DSLR with a sony mounted the biggest F1.4 primes and F2.8 zooms available, or big adapted DSLR lenses as if that is what the size conscious photographers would choose. They wouldn't. Sorry but it's your post appears irrational to me.

How about comparing it to A7R with the compact lenses or for instance Batis, Loxia or the new Voigtländer FE lenses?

How about comparing an A7R with the new Voigtländer rectilinear 10mm FE lens with its closest match in the DSLR world?

 

[Larsskv]

The problem isn´t mirrorless, but the lack of business strategy and implementation from Sony. They started out "small" but their solutions are getting bigger. Further have we seen many examples of poor quality in lenses pointed out in a gentle manner in Lensrentals teardowns. Top that with some stupid issues in every A7-model released, and way to short life time between releases.

The offerings from Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic seems much better to me, if you are in the mirrorless market.

 

[countofmc95]

I had a brief foray into the Sony A7, and the major turnoff for me was the price of the native lenses. The 35mm 2.8 for $800, the 55mm 1.8 for $1000. Now I understand and agree these lenses (esp the 55mm) have outstanding IQ. But Canon has the 40mm 2.8 and 50mm 1.8 STM for under $200 each, and these lenses are almost equally compact as those Sony counterparts.

And in terms of mirrorless, Fuji's counterpart lenses - 23mm 1.4 and 35mm 1.4 - had excellent IQ and are faster lenses to at least partially offset the shallow DOF and low-light advantage of the Sony.

So I couldn't shake the feeling that as a value proposition, sticking with Canon DSLR or going to Fuji mirrorless was better.

 

[3kramd5]

I had a brief foray into the Sony A7, and the major turnoff for me was the price of the native lenses. The 35mm 2.8 for $800, the 55mm 1.8 for $1000. Now I understand and agree these lenses (esp the 55mm) have outstanding IQ. But Canon has the 40mm 2.8 and 50mm 1.8 STM for under $200 each, and these lenses are almost equally compact as those Sony counterparts.

Sony's lens lineup is certainly immature, but it's maturing.

Here's a competitive 50, for example:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1242613-REG/sony_sel50f18f_fe_50mm_f_1_8_lens.html

 

[Sunnystate]

For now maybe ;-)

Just think of A6300 plus Sigma 150-600 with Sigma native adapter and voila: incredibly capable set up for around $2500 with whopping 900mm reach, or new Sony 70-300mm with A6300 for around $2000 with reach of 450mm, beat that!!!

Where does that leave the DSLR?

Shooting events (ie. weddings), animals/birds and sports.