New Mirrorless Cameras

[Tone Gopher]

Originally Posted by robj144

Yeah, the lenses are kind of expensive, but I got a deal on the body and kit lens which is not that bad of a lens. I also got a 85 mm prime which is amazing and it was $400 used. I also have a Sony NEX-F3 that I got probably 6 years ago or so and I have adapters for that camera. I bought quite a few vintage lenses for super cheap for that camera and it also works with the a7iii. Although they are all manual focus, so it's not for action shots.

How do you think action shots were acquired before the advent of autofocus???

Canon F1 with speed finder for me.

[robj144]

Originally Posted by Tone Gopher

How do you think action shots were acquired before the advent of autofocus???

Canon F1 with speed finder for me.

Sure, shooting action can be done manually, but it requires practice and a strategy. Even with both, you'll still have quite a few shots out of focus. Why even do this when there's autofocus????

[robj144]

Originally Posted by TaoMaas

We were talking about the new Canon and Nikon mirrorless cameras at our camera club board meeting earlier this week. What you mentioned is exactly what one of our members who uses mirrorless cameras liked most about his cameras. The tv show I work on is considering going with smaller DSLR-size cameras. They bought us a Canon 5D a few years ago to test the waters, but now we're thinking of going all-in. To my way of thinking, mirrorless makes a lot more sense. One of our videographers has a Panasonic G5 that he loves, but we're also considering the Sony a7 line. For the Sony users, how has your battery use been? That's the only real knock I've heard against them. Me? I'm a Pentax guy and have been using Pentax's K-01 and Q alongside my DSLR for several years now. I like them.

So, I have a APC Sony mirrorless that I got years ago which does not have an EVF. It's battery life is fantastic for me. I charge it once every few months and can take hundreds of pictures on a charge. I think because it doesn't have an EVF it got much better battery life than others of that generation.

My new a7iii with an EVF is also excellent in battery life too. My Nikon D750 is a little better than both, but not by much.

[DenverSteve]

Originally Posted by robj144

Sony is still the king of full frame mirrorless though and I'm a Nikon guy. I have a Nikon D750 that I got over 3 years ago, but I just got an A7iii and it's a beast.

After climbing the mountains above Machu Picchu this year with full-frame DSLR cameras and prime & zoom lenses up to 400mm - I came home looking for lighter fare. Sony won out hands down. Even as a CPS member for over 30 years, I sold off every piece of Canon pro gear and replaced it all with two Sony bodies. The RX10 IV body/lens is by far the most inclusive and high-quality bridge system and unmatched in its results.

I added the A7 body system to keep access to full frame. The RX10 allows up to 600mm Zeiss optical quality and the A7 with its Zeiss lens selection is the cherry on the cake.

[DenverSteve]

[QUOTE=HHP;5831336] Leica does offer an M series camera in digital but you'll need to mortgage the farm to afford it.

Leica continues to try to rely on their optical name but every digital photography review site states unequivocally that Sony destroys them at a fraction of the cost. Sony is making most of the top high-quality sensors and combining that with Zeiss lenses- top tier all the way.

[Dirk Hofman]

Originally Posted by HHP

One you might look at the Sony. They offer and APS-C format and the camera is very reminiscent in styling to the Leica M. The electronic viewfinder is placed where you would expect it to be on a rangefinder. The M3 and M6 from Canon have a shoe mounted EVF that reminds me of the old Leitz Imarect finders, plus you can use all your existing lenses with an adapter.

Leica does offer an M series camera in digital but you'll need to mortgage the farm to afford it.

The Olympus Pen F is also styled in the retro rangefinder look and feel.

Yeah, I was more talking about gear lust than any action I might really take. I'd love to have the Leica just based on look and performance, but I don't need it. Put a 35mm 1.4 on my 6D and I'll get incredible performance. I have the HQ of borrowlenses.com just 5 miles down the road from me, so that's a great option. Just returned an amazing 85mm 1.4 L today. What a lens!

Mirrorless would be great, I just can't justify the cost with such a good DSLR setup. My focus needs to be on shooting and printing with the great gear I have. I can always rent it if I' want to check it out. Funny, they don't actually let me "borrow" any lenses. They seem to want money...

So many great options out there now.

[Fran Guidry]

Originally Posted by TaoMaas

We were talking about the new Canon and Nikon mirrorless cameras at our camera club board meeting earlier this week. What you mentioned is exactly what one of our members who uses mirrorless cameras liked most about his cameras. The tv show I work on is considering going with smaller DSLR-size cameras. They bought us a Canon 5D a few years ago to test the waters, but now we're thinking of going all-in. To my way of thinking, mirrorless makes a lot more sense. One of our videographers has a Panasonic G5 that he loves, but we're also considering the Sony a7 line. For the Sony users, how has your battery use been? That's the only real knock I've heard against them. Me? I'm a Pentax guy and have been using Pentax's K-01 and Q alongside my DSLR for several years now. I like them.

Lumix GH cams in the US have no shot length limit and no overheating issues. I understand that both of these can be issues with Sony cams along with battery capacity. These are only problems if continuous shooting is required, like event shooting.

The GH5 also provides 4k/60fps, 10 bit internal recording, and better HDMI out as I understand it. The GH5S uses larger photosites/lower pixel count for improved DR and low light, but Sony still kills in those measures.

Fran

[Dirk Hofman]

Not surprised to hear the battery life is shorter, given the bright digital viewfinder. Easily solvable with some backup batteries though...

[David Eastwood]

Originally Posted by TaoMaas

For the Sony users, how has your battery use been? That's the only real knock I've heard against them.

Originally Posted by Dirk Hofman

Not surprised to hear the battery life is shorter, given the bright digital viewfinder. Easily solvable with some backup batteries though...

Exactly. I can get, typically, 220-250 shots out of a single battery with my Sony a6500. I always carry a couple of spares - there are a number of off-brand varieties out there that work well, and they take seconds to change. Battery life depends a lot on what and how I'm shooting, as well. I've photographed college baseball games where I've got over 500 shots out of a single battery, shooting sequences at 11fps, with capacity to spare.

[robj144]

Originally Posted by eatswodo

Exactly. I can get, typically, 220-250 shots out of a single battery with my Sony a6500. I always carry a couple of spares - there are a number of off-brand varieties out there that work well, and they take seconds to change. Battery life depends a lot on what and how I'm shooting, as well. I've photographed college baseball games where I've got over 500 shots out of a single battery, shooting sequences at 11fps, with capacity to spare.

Yes, but the new batteries for the a7iii's are MUCH better.

[David Eastwood]

Originally Posted by robj144

Yes, but the new batteries for the a7iii's are MUCH better.

Agreed! That's one of the features that makes the a7iii so attractive. Hopefully that battery will make its way to the much-rumoured APS-C successor to the a6500.

[harpspitfire]

i think the only real advantage of the mirrorless current stock is size and weight, i prefer a DSLR and wider selection of lens- truly good used deals to be had, i also prefer and optical viewfinder, even though the DSLR is capable of showing a preview on the LCD, really, some of these cameras are 30 megapixels, how many do you really need? to cram them in there they make them smaller and sensor has less dark sensitivity, i prefer not to increase the ISO and gain, i dont know but, i presume a DSLR has better hear disbursement over the smaller camera- for long exposure and extended low light shooting, this really matters

[robj144]

Originally Posted by harpspitfire

i think the only real advantage of the mirrorless current stock is size and weight, i prefer a DSLR and wider selection of lens- truly good used deals to be had, i also prefer and optical viewfinder, even though the DSLR is capable of showing a preview on the LCD, really, some of these cameras are 30 megapixels, how many do you really need? to cram them in there they make them smaller and sensor has less dark sensitivity, i prefer not to increase the ISO and gain, i dont know but, i presume a DSLR has better hear disbursement over the smaller camera- for long exposure and extended low light shooting, this really matters

What do you mean by "hear disbursement"? I assume that's some sort of typo. If you're talking about low light sensitivity, the mirrorless cameras have the same sensors as DSLR. There's no difference there.

Again, I think everyone who just blanketly prefers optical viewfinders, have not tried the current EVFs. I didn't like the EVFs a few years ago and FAR preferred optical viewfinders. I honestly thought I'd never like EVFS. Now, I prefer the EVFS.

[Sage97]

Originally Posted by TaoMaas

Me? I'm a Pentax guy and have been using Pentax's K-01 and Q alongside my DSLR for several years now. I like them.

I still have my original K5 but prefer my K3. If a mirrorless Pentax should ever come out, I’ll have to give it a serious look.

[harpspitfire]

Originally Posted by robj144

What do you mean by "hear disbursement"? I assume that's some sort of typo. If you're talking about low light sensitivity, the mirrorless cameras have the same sensors as DSLR. There's no difference there.

Again, I think everyone who just blanketly prefers optical viewfinders, have not tried the current EVFs. I didn't like the EVFs a few years ago and FAR preferred optical viewfinders. I honestly thought I'd never like EVFS. Now, I prefer the EVFS.

that should be heat disbursement, for research and science you can modify a DSLR with a cooler- basically noise increases with sensor heat- the sensors are not the same, depending on the camera, the more meg you cram into the sensor, the smaller the pixel size which they measure in microns- my point is, the larger pixel is better for low light sensitivity (for my applications anyway)