Has anyone switched to a mirrorless camera?

[Neutrino]

First pics of the upcoming FF mirrorless from Sony:

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-hot-first-full-size-images-of-the-a7-and-a7r-cameras-with-lenses/


Looks like it's NEX7 size + bump on top. Looks quite compact with that 35mm prime

Really curious to try one

 

[Empty_Quarter]

First pics of the upcoming FF mirrorless from Sony:

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-hot-first-full-size-images-of-the-a7-and-a7r-cameras-with-lenses/


Looks like it's NEX7 size + bump on top. Looks quite compact with that 35mm prime

Really curious to try one

I am very interested about this. The most important thing I cant help but notice though is the huge size of the lens (and camera) in general. The lens is quite massive on it's own, no different than DSLR options. The camera itself is similar to the size of older SLR cameras.

It makes me wonder if this is the next step Nikon/Canon will take. They are already there with their cameras and lenses size-wide. All they have to do now is lose the mirror, and viola. competition.



To reply to the OP. I havent switched to mirrorless as I am in no way prepared to invest in a whole new set of lenses all over again, especially when none of the systems have matured enough IMO. But I am very interested in the compact "fixed lens" nature of this revolution (i.e. X100s).

 

[IdiotInCharge]

I don't have much time to really dig into this, except to say this- holy shit that camera is hot. I want an A7r, yesterday.

 

[Neutrino]

I am very interested about this. The most important thing I cant help but notice though is the huge size of the lens (and camera) in general. The lens is quite massive on it's own, no different than DSLR options. The camera itself is similar to the size of older SLR cameras.

It makes me wonder if this is the next step Nikon/Canon will take. They are already there with their cameras and lenses size-wide. All they have to do now is lose the mirror, and viola. competition.

.

I will very much disagree with you, it's not huge by any means. If i interpret the pictures correctly that is an RX1 body with a nex7 grip and a EVF bump....that is far smaller than any DSLR full frame.

The zoom lens looks big because of the small body + the fact that it's only so small you can make a FF lens.

The prime posted looks unbelievable small though, it will make an incredible portable FF camera

And no Canon and Nikon cannot just drop the mirror .... their lenses are set for long flange distance so the body has to be thick (or use an extension tube) similar to LEa2

If Cannon and Nikon want the same thing they have to start from scratch like Sony.

I don't have much time to really dig into this, except to say this- holy shit that camera is hot. I want an A7r, yesterday.

I think due to budget constraints I'll go with the regular A7 + kit lens (i think its a G ) + the 35mm 2.8 when i want to stay compact

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Well, here's the thing- I'm kind of tempering my excitement around the potential availability of lens adapters. Unlike the D800(E) with it's FX mount, this new FE mount may be more amenable.

And in that vane, the ability to adapt to EF mount lenses would be a very big plus, along with the advantages of the FE system as announced.

The big thing, though, is the affordable 36MP full-frame sensor minus the AA filter. When Sigma gets their lenses on it and EF adapters become available for Canon's stellar glass, this Sony represents a very unique combination of capabilities.

And, it really, really puts the heat on Canon to not only produce a high-res full-frame camera, but also to do it in a reasonable pricing envelope. Their best bet, now, is to put that high-res FF sensor they've been working on in the 6D body and call it a day.

 

[Neutrino]

Don't forget that the NEX system has been particularly amenable to vintage film era rangefinder manual lenses also....I so want to try my quirky zenith 58mm 2.0 with this

 

[buttons]

I have a fuji X-E1 with 35mm F1.4 lens and i can say its very compact/light package with great IQ... BUT

I wouldnt trust it for paid work. Autofocus is very unreliable indoors. Pictures out of the camera need very little post processing which is great because lightroom (my fav app) doesnt do much with them compared to my previous pentax cameras.

here is a sample I took last night with the 35mm F1.4/ X-e1

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Autofocus is the single reason I'm loathe to support Fuji, despite having the world going for them with X-Trans, decent bodies, and outright amazing lenses.

It's the real deal-killer these days; nobody does it right outside of Nikon/Canon DSLRs, and even then, there are significant gulfs between the low-end and the high-end.

 

[Neutrino]

@ OP: The new Sony FF are officially out.

Here is a direct comparison to your D800e:

http://camerasize.com/compare/#488,291

Sony A7R is 13% (19.1 mm) narrower and 23% (28.6 mm) shorter than Nikon D800E.
Sony A7R is 41% (33.3 mm) thinner than Nikon D800E.
Sony A7R [465 g] weights 54% (535 grams) less than Nikon D800E [1000 g] (*inc. batteries and memory card).

the A7r should give you almost identical IQ to your D800e for half the weight

Or save some money and get the regular A7 that should give the same IQ as the D600

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Only challenge with the A7(r)? They still can't focus like a DSLR. A high-MP Nikon body is worth that- and that access to an actual lens lineup, of course.

 

[Neutrino]

Only challenge with the A7(r)? They still can't focus like a DSLR. A high-MP Nikon body is worth that- and that access to an actual lens lineup, of course.

Here's the fun part...if you look at the A7 system as a modular one it can focus as a DSLR. You just need to add the Sony LAE4 (this should give A99-ish focus speeds)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1008166-REG/sony_laea4_a_mount_to_e_mount_lens.html

also if you are wiling to trade some AF speed or even go full manual the A7 has probably the largest selection of lenses (canon L, NikonFX, Pentax, old minolta, voigtlander, leica, even old Russian lenses.....)

The only thing it cannot do is give you cannon 1DX AF speeds (unless Sony can figure out how to do that AF system and put it in an adapter - not likely)

 

[Empty_Quarter]

If Cannon and Nikon want the same thing they have to start from scratch like Sony.

Of course they can. What canikon has over the rest is that they already own most of the market with their lenses. They will have to create an adaptor like Sony did which is easy enough. If they did create a mirrorless FF, they'll have to create new lenses for new adopters of course. They can easily keep customers a huge chunk of the market just by allowing people to use legacy nikon/canon lenses on mirrorless systems. I'd certainly buy a nikon mirrorless FF if they did that, without even thinking twice.

So in reality, they are already there, simply lose the mirror and as much as I hate to say it, the optical viewfinder - create a handful of lenses for the short flange, and create an adaptor for the long flange. It wont be long before either of them release something of the sort.


On another note, I do wonder if this will cause the price of the RX-1 to drop. Compared to these new releases, a price of $3k for the RX-1 seems a little obscene.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Here's the fun part...if you look at the A7 system as a modular one it can focus as a DSLR. You just need to add the Sony LAE4 (this should give A99-ish focus speeds)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1008166-REG/sony_laea4_a_mount_to_e_mount_lens.html

also if you are wiling to trade some AF speed or even go full manual the A7 has probably the largest selection of lenses (canon L, NikonFX, Pentax, old minolta, voigtlander, leica, even old Russian lenses.....)

The only thing it cannot do is give you cannon 1DX AF speeds (unless Sony can figure out how to do that AF system and put it in an adapter - not likely)

It doesn't have to have 1D X AF speeds- and actually, the 1D X isn't necessarily 'fast'. It's faster than other Canon DSLRs when used with slower focusing lenses that have tons of glass- namely, the fastest L lenses like the 50/1.2L and 85/1.2L II along with the Mk. II telephoto range- but otherwise, it's hardly faster than a contemporary Rebel. It's strengths lie in the shear breadth of it's focusing capability- mostly shared with the 5D III- and it's shutter speed.

I do get what you're saying, I just want to mention that any modern DSLR, be it from Canon or Nikon, or even Sony, focuses faster than any mirrorless camera.

I also do very much realize the absolutely stupid potential of the A7(r) when considering the breadth of adaptable lenses, and my point was simply this- absolute AF performance, whether it be for outright speed, low-light accuracy and speed, or tracking, lies solely with DSLRs and has not yet been replicated on a system lacking a true phase-detection autofocus sensor.

I really was hoping for better with the A7(r), mind you. The A7 should be pretty quick, tracking and low-light aside, with native glass, but not a one of those lenses is enticing. Adapting anything else, be it a native-mount lens or adapted, even with the SLT module, means even slower AF, and the SLT module means throwing away light too!

So the A7r is going to be the camera to get for legacy glass, or for using super-sharp alt glass with the high-resolution filter-less Sony sensor- cool. But if you want a high performing high-resolution camera? You're still going D800(E). If you want the best in the business? You're getting a 5D III or 1D X with Canon's glass.

That's the rap here, unfortunately. Sony is to be lauded, no question, but they're still not 'there' yet.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Of course they can. What canikon has over the rest is that they already own most of the market with their lenses. They will have to create an adaptor like Sony did which is easy enough. If they did create a mirrorless FF, they'll have to create new lenses for new adopters of course. They can easily keep customers a huge chunk of the market just by allowing people to use legacy nikon/canon lenses on mirrorless systems. I'd certainly buy a nikon mirrorless FF if they did that, without even thinking twice.

So in reality, they are already there, simply lose the mirror and as much as I hate to say it, the optical viewfinder - create a handful of lenses for the short flange, and create an adaptor for the long flange. It wont be long before either of them release something of the sort.


On another note, I do wonder if this will cause the price of the RX-1 to drop. Compared to these new releases, a price of $3k for the RX-1 seems a little obscene.

Here's your challenge, as I've seen debated elsewhere and agree with- let's say that Canon makes an FF mirrorless body. What's the advantage?

Well, it'd have to be compared to the 6D for size, weight, battery life, handling, and speed. It'd have to exceed on most or all of those marks, AND provide something unique. What would that be? Remember, we're talking Canon again, who has the greatest lens lineup ever made.

First, any sensor made for a mirrorless camera would be also available in a DSLR. So yeah, they could debut a new sensor a la Sony, but that's not unique.

Next, the body would be smaller- but it'd literally just be a 6D minus the mirror-box, with a smaller mount made possible by the shorter flange distance. That's cool. But that'd only be useful for native lenses, which would have to be completely new designs, more resembling the 30-year-old FD lenses, or the EF-M lenses, but of course those won't work, because unlike Sony's E mount, the EF-M mount was not designed to accommodate a full-frame sensor. With very few introductory lenses, the primary appeal will be in adapted EF lenses, and here's the rub with that: the system would be the same basic size and weight as a DSLR! That's a no go.

Battery life is another challenge. DSLRs get thousands of shots off a charge by virtue of having efficient, dedicated processors that only really come alive when the shutter is pressed, and then promptly go back to sleep. Mirrorless cameras don't have that luxury, they have to be alive for the camera to function at all- which means that even if a Canon mirrorless camera could use the omnipresent LP-E6, it wouldn't get nearly the same battery life as the DSLRs that use it- it'd be worse than the endurance those DSLRs get when shot entirely in Live View mode. So, it'd need a higher capacity battery. Not out of the question, but that either necessitates an increase in size or cost, using exotic materials to provide a higher energy density and so on. And remember, if more efficient processors and higher capacity batteries can be made for a mirrorless camera, they can also be made for a DSLR.

Handling is something that Canon can get right, if they want to. But it mostly means making the resulting camera look and feel like a DSLR; even top-end 'bridge' cameras with long zooms do this, because it works.

Speed is something that has been tackled by the market already, for the most part- and it's an easy fix, really. Processing power is what's needed and it's readily available in spades. But autofocus is the real clincher here, and I'm betting that it's autofocus speed that has kept Canon to the rear of the mirrorless charge.

Considering what we've seen with the 70D and Canon's DPAF technology, there's considerable hope here, and considering what we know about real-time image processing we really should be pretty excited. It's entirely possible- nee inevitable- that a DPAF-like sensor technology combined with robust real-time processing would not only be able to provide discrete phase-detect beating performance, but also open up new worlds of photography, and initiate a new revolution in lens autofocus design. Imagine an autofocus system that could lock onto a point- say a person's iris- and then keep it in focus, no matter what, even at F/1.0. Call that a start.

Challenges abound here- and unlike Sony, Canon has very little to gain by jumping into mirrorless head first. Expect them to continue pushing their EF-M line- the next model will likely be quite interesting- but until they can provide a mirrorless system that can compete with the above-mentioned 1D X while providing advantages that could not also be integrated into a 1D X III (or 6D III or 5D V), don't expect them to start pushing on the high-end.

 

[Fading Phoenix]

I just want to mention that any modern DSLR, be it from Canon or Nikon, or even Sony, focuses faster than any mirrorless camera.

I also do very much realize the absolutely stupid potential of the A7(r) when considering the breadth of adaptable lenses, and my point was simply this- absolute AF performance, whether it be for outright speed, low-light accuracy and speed, or tracking, lies solely with DSLRs and has not yet been replicated on a system lacking a true phase-detection autofocus sensor.

Not so black and white in reality. For "outright speed" the more modern m4/3 cameras perform easily neck and neck with or beat modern dslrs. Dslrs still keep their advantage in tracking due to pdaf, but I've heard and seen promising results from the e-m1 with it's on sensor pdaf. I would still expect canon/nikon to be stronger tracking performers though. Regarding performance in low light vs dslrs I've heard mixed results; and I wouldn't really be surprised either way, but would probably put my money on dslrs.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Not so black and white in reality. For "outright speed" the more modern m4/3 cameras perform easily neck and neck with or beat modern dslrs. Dslrs still keep their advantage in tracking due to pdaf, but I've heard and seen promising results from the e-m1 with it's on sensor pdaf. I would still expect canon/nikon to be stronger tracking performers though. Regarding performance in low light vs dslrs I've heard mixed results; and I wouldn't really be surprised either way, but would probably put my money on dslrs.

MFT is catching up in the 'point-and-shoot' ILC arena that they were intended to compete in- this isn't really the domain of DSLRs.

But what about telephoto. What about sports. What about wildlife. What about macro. What about low-light- both autofocus capability and high ISO capability. The list goes on .

Now, I"m not complaining- just making the comparison. I still want a small system that can adapt to EF lenses, and while MFT is close, EF-M is closer, Fuji X even closer, and Sony FE real close.

Of course, Canon releasing a NEX/A7-styled EOS-M with the new DPAF sensor would be killer for a Canon shooter.

 

[Fading Phoenix]

MFT is catching up in the 'point-and-shoot' ILC arena that they were intended to compete in- this isn't really the domain of DSLRs.

But what about telephoto. What about sports. What about wildlife. What about macro. What about low-light- both autofocus capability and high ISO capability. The list goes on .

Now, I"m not complaining- just making the comparison. I still want a small system that can adapt to EF lenses, and while MFT is close, EF-M is closer, Fuji X even closer, and Sony FE real close.

Of course, Canon releasing a NEX/A7-styled EOS-M with the new DPAF sensor would be killer for a Canon shooter.

My comment was merely to point out that your blanket statement regarding AF speeds wasn't completely accurate.

I feel I have to note before I give the wrong impression that I am a dslr user. The E-M5 was the first mirrorless to pique my interest and the E-M1 is the first one I would consider switching to, though the entire Fuji/Pana/Oly lineups could easily be enough for a very large portion of photography. It merely seems to me that there's a lot of naivety on forums like this regarding mirrorless systems and more specifically m4/3.

m4/3 had caught up to the ILC "point and shoot" market as you put it when it released. The truth is it's been catching up to dslrs. Telephoto itself is very easily capable on m4/3, although for sports and wildlife canikon would be more capable (ignoring on sensor pdaf and the future improvements that will come to it). That said I've seen plenty of great work in both fields from mirrorless cameras, it seems to just take a different approach. And m4/3 actually lends itself very well to macro...I have trouble even seeing why you think it would have trouble. As for low light, mixed reports on focusing as I said, but as for iso it's passed the capability I would ask of it and can compete with aps-c...full-frame not so much. By all means let the list go on. Outside of action m4/3 is easily as capable as aps-c and m4/3 seems purged to break that barrier for action capability-being the most responsive mirrorless sytem to date and merely lacking pdaf which has now changed.

Understandably if I wanted to adapt EF lenses to a mirrorless system the A7r would be my choice as utilizing the full sensor would make more sense, though for anything other than short/normal primes I feel the small body loses its point.. If I switch to any mirrorless system though I'll likely be adopting native lenses short of keeping a very few select of my current arsenal; and m4/3 is the only system to really tempt me to date due in part to the lens selection but more importantly the performance and feature sets of cameras like the em5/gx7/and particularly the em1.

 

[Aki]

Being using Fuji's X-Pro1 since it was released. It's a lovely piece of kit - it suits my professional work (art reproduction for publishing processes) and interests (flowers). Prior to the X-Pro1, I was on a Nikon D200, Fuji S3 Pro and S5 Pro with a bunch of prime Nikkor lenses.

Fuji X-Pro1, in my opinion, is a fantastic experience. Its AF (at launch) was abysmal, but the newer firmware upgrades have really come through on its own. I'm not going back to DSLR bodies any time soon... my usage doesn't need the bulk nor AF speed

Images below are resized using some stupid Wordpress gallery plugin... I am that lazy.

Shot with Fuji X-Pro1 with a Fujinon 60mm f/2.4 @ f/4 (unprocessed)

Shot with Fuji X-Pro1 with a Fujinon 35mm f/1.4 @ f/8 (unprocessed)

Shot with Fuji X-Pro1 with a Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D @ f2.8 (not in meta data) and a Kipon Nik G-FX Adapter (unprocessed)

I have also successfully used a Nikon PB-6 bellows with the Kipon adapter on a Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D too

Please be gentle

 

[IdiotInCharge]

My comment was merely to point out that your blanket statement regarding AF speeds wasn't completely accurate.

I'm with you there .

My biggest problem with all mirrorless systems is that they struggle in three key areas- absolute AF speed, which is where they're clearly catching up, telephoto AF speed, where they still need a lot of work to get acquisition speed up to par, and in challenging situations such as low-light and action.

Macro falls in the 'telephoto/low-light' category, and comprises everything from 1:2 'near-macro' shots to 5:1 microscopic shots and so forth. Obviously they can excel in a number of niche macro situations, especially in controlled conditions, but they're still pretty limited compared to a traditional DSLR with a stabilized macro lens.

And honestly, many/most of the limitations of MFT/mirrorless APS-C/FF ILCs are attributed to the still developing on-sensor phase-detection technologies as well as the amount of effort being expended to improve the processing capabilities of the cameras, both in software and the hardware it runs on, as well as limitations in battery capacity.

So I'm extremely hopeful that mirrors will go the way of the dodo soon enough. With good PDAF sensors, responsive, high-performance lenses, and processing capabilities allowing the camera to intelligently track subjects, I think that it's highly likely that pretty much everyone is about to jump head-first into the large-format mirrorless ILC game. Hell, I think that's what Canon and Nikon are wanting to perfect before they go there- a full-frame mirrorless Canon/Nikon body will have to compete very favorably with their semi-pro cameras (6D/5D III, D610/D800E) before they commit to actually releasing a product.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Those are some killer shots Aki, thanks for stopping by!

Fuji has most of my interest in the mirrorless scene, as I said above. The X-Trans sensor is just downright amazing, along with Fuji's colors, their incredible lenses, and their enviable bodies. The just-announced X-E2 is particularly mouth-watering.

If I were truly in the market for a small system to complement my Canon gear, Fuji really would be it- there's just really no comparison given everything they bring to the table. My only hesitation has been the sales of the EOS-M; I'm kind of waiting to see if the body + 18-55 + 22 + flash kits go on sale again, because I can use the flash on my 6D, and the lenses are more than worth the price, considering that the body 'works' and better bodies and lenses are coming down the road. An EOS-M with DPAF adapted to a 24-105L would make a pretty decent video kit, don't you think?

 

[Aki]

Macro falls in the 'telephoto/low-light' category, and comprises everything from 1:2 'near-macro' shots to 5:1 microscopic shots and so forth. Obviously they can excel in a number of niche macro situations, especially in controlled conditions, but they're still pretty limited compared to a traditional DSLR with a stabilized macro lens.

I don't understand the bit about "stabilized macro lens".

1. Mirror slap has always confounded me when I photographed micro organisms... my X-Pro1 seems to have alleviated that issue.
2. Any vibrations are reduced with weights on tripod or having a macro-focused rail/tripod system.
3. Remote triggers to minimise movement.
4. Focus is always manual, no?

I don't think there is anything that "vibrates" within the lens.. unless you're talking about those Vibration Reduction lenses.

 

[Aki]

Those are some killer shots Aki, thanks for stopping by!

Fuji has most of my interest in the mirrorless scene, as I said above. The X-Trans sensor is just downright amazing, along with Fuji's colors, their incredible lenses, and their enviable bodies. The just-announced X-E2 is particularly mouth-watering.

If I were truly in the market for a small system to complement my Canon gear, Fuji really would be it- there's just really no comparison given everything they bring to the table. My only hesitation has been the sales of the EOS-M; I'm kind of waiting to see if the body + 18-55 + 22 + flash kits go on sale again, because I can use the flash on my 6D, and the lenses are more than worth the price, considering that the body 'works' and better bodies and lenses are coming down the road. An EOS-M with DPAF adapted to a 24-105L would make a pretty decent video kit, don't you think?

Thanks IdiotInCharge

X-Trans makes me lazy with post-processing. Shoot and print is my motto.. more so when I do it professionally for art gallery projects and faced with tight deadlines. I absolutely refuse to post-process unless it's about cropping or resizing for 300dpi prints. Workflow-wise... it's Fuji/PhaseOne for a more precise RAW conversion to TIFF (LR and others which I tried... are really bad to Fuji's colours).

XE-2 is a great buy at a great price. It brings the X-Trans II sensor from X-Pro1 and X100 to a consumer-level. And gawds, did you see that "High Performance Mode" for AF on the XE-2? Holy hell... 0.08s on a Fujinon 14mm F/2.8. I'm buying this as a secondary.

I can't advice you on Canon though.. but I will try my darnedest to get you to buy the XE-2

 

[IdiotInCharge]

I don't understand the bit about "stabilized macro lens".

1. Mirror slap has always confounded me when I photographed micro organisms... my X-Pro1 seems to have alleviated that issue.
2. Any vibrations are reduced with weights on tripod or having a macro-focused rail/tripod system.
3. Remote triggers to minimise movement.
4. Focus is always manual, no?

I don't think there is anything that "vibrates" within the lens.. unless you're talking about those Vibration Reduction lenses.

'Vibration Reduction' (this one in Nikon-speak) is what I'm talking about. The best lens in the business, Canon's 100L, is both an incredible macro lens with everything bolted down to rails, and as a handheld 'walkaround' macro lens, and everything between- in addition to being an outstanding stabilized short telephoto lens, for everything that you might use an 85mm-135mm equivalent lens for. That flexibility is what pays for it, over and over.

Otherwise, for precise macro work, almost any close focusing lens is great. Narrow apertures, controlled lighting, and physical stabilization all work positively to produce excellent results, as is the case with non-stabilized macro lenses from Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Tamron, etc.

The main point is that with mirrorless systems, a good chunk of that 'in between' functionality is shorted due to slower telephoto focus speeds (they get slower as lenses get longer) and lack of in-lens or optical stabilization, which is also more effective on longer lenses than IBIS, which works better for shorter/wider lenses.

Again, this is better/less better, not better/worse or can/can't . Having an X-mount camera and Fuji's stupid-sharp lenses in your pocket is worth dealing with a few inconveniences, I think!

 

[Aki]

*snip* Again, this is better/less better, not better/worse or can/can't . Having an X-mount camera and Fuji's stupid-sharp lenses in your pocket is worth dealing with a few inconveniences, I think!

And stupid cheap as well. I have never encountered such quality and small lenses at bargain prices. I sold my huge camera bag and shrunk it down to a very small one now. I'm no fan of huge knockers in white/red trim or black/gold trim.. unless they wobble in the most excellent fleshy way.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Thanks IdiotInCharge

X-Trans makes me lazy with post-processing. Shoot and print is my motto.. more so when I do it professionally for art gallery projects and faced with tight deadlines. I absolutely refuse to post-process unless it's about cropping or resizing for 300dpi prints. Workflow-wise... it's Fuji/PhaseOne for a more precise RAW conversion to TIFF (LR and others which I tried... are really bad to Fuji's colours).

XE-2 is a great buy at a great price. It brings the X-Trans II sensor from X-Pro1 and X100 to a consumer-level. And gawds, did you see that "High Performance Mode" for AF on the XE-2? Holy hell... 0.08s on a Fujinon 14mm F/2.8. I'm buying this as a secondary.

I can't advice you on Canon though.. but I will try my darnedest to get you to buy the XE-2

My only complaint about the X-system is that Fuji actually wants what the lenses are worth to let them go . But I'd seriously be happy with a body, fast(er) standard zoom, and a fast ~35mm equivalent prime, along with a solid EF-to-X adapter that could at least report to the camera and control aperture.

Still, Canon's fire-sale of the first generation EOS-M is a bit too enticing. Only three lenses exist for that system yet, but they're all excellent, and a second-gen body with their new APS-C sensor would be hard to beat- especially since it's just an OEM adapter away from being a second body for my litany of EF-mount lenses .

 

[Neutrino]

Personally I would seriously consider the Fuji XE1 if they would freaking add a tilt screen. I find the whole "pros only use the viewfinder" attitude ridiculous
.
Doing Cirque du Soleil contortion acts or even worse doing the spray and pray just to get a weird angle shot

Plus I love shooting from the hip rollei style ... I find a very steady position

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Well, after talking B&H into letting me have the black EOS-M kit with zoom and flash for the same price as the white one, I was able to get that, plus the adapter and the 22/2 lens.

It's not the camera I want- though it will suffice- but these fire-sale prices on the rest of the M system are hard to pass up.

 

[Aki]

While Metabones is "supposedly" working on a Canon-X Speed booster adaptor, some Fuji/Canon users are using Kipon adapters.

http://fujixfiles.blogspot.sg/2012/07/fuji-x-pro-1-and-canon-ef-lenses.html

You lose the AF and IS, but supposedly makes you readjust your thinking by forcing you to go old school - manual focus and breathing techniques.

Also, there's a lot of good reviews on the Fujinon 35mm

http://fujixfiles.blogspot.sg/2013/01/how-good-is-fuji-xf-35mm-f14-r-lens.html
http://kenrockwell.com/fuji/x-mount-lenses/35mm-f14.htm
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/tag/fuji-35-1-4/

I can attest to the 35mm as well. It stays on the camera most of the time, unless I'm with the family (I would use the 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS instead).

While I own only the 35mm, 60mm Macro and the 18-55mm... In my experience, the 60mm Macro is not good enough for my macro/micro work, it's slow and constantly AF hunts. However, I use it as portrait lens instead to good effect. I'm looking forward for a payout before I pick up 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS and the 23mm F1.4 R (Go for XF series, not XC... R for physical aperture).

 

[IdiotInCharge]

It's that loss of aperture control that really hurts, but otherwise, it's nice to see an X-Trans sensor looking through Canon glass.

I don't know if I'd be too fond of the Metabones adapter. Same issues as an extender, dropping optical quality a notch, but it is a nice option, and if they can get aperture control and lens reporting, cool- if they can get IS powered and AF working, well, that'd be incredible .

 

[Frankie]

Necro:

Anyone have an A7 or A7R? I'm kind of enamored of them but pictures of what are purported to be excessive weird sensor reflections of bright lights (sun, street lamps) at small apertures has me a little turned off, and its a little tough to sort out the truth of the situation as I've seen all of the following statements made by various owners:

1. The A7 has it bad, the R not at all.
2. A7 is bad, R not as bad.
3. A7 is bad, R just as bad.
4. Happens with all lens combos.
5. Only happens with some lens combos.
6. Happens with all digital cameras and the A7 is worse but the A7R isn't.
7. Etc.

I'm not sure if the specific conditions that appear to cause it would ever even be relevent to me, but I'm pretty sure after saying that that at some point in the future I'll take a potentially pulitzer prize winning photograph that ends up being ruined by sensor reflections.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Fred Miranda reviewed the a7R with Canon glass on an adapter- he found that he had to add material to the inside of the adapter to prevent reflections.

Have you heard about this issue with the Sony FE lenses designed for the a7(R)?

 

[Frankie]

Fred Miranda reviewed the a7R with Canon glass on an adapter- he found that he had to add material to the inside of the adapter to prevent reflections.

Have you heard about this issue with the Sony FE lenses designed for the a7(R)?

Yeah, which is why I'm hesitating. If it was just other glass I wouldn't worry about it as I don't own much other glass.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3613281

Third post in the above thread shows the problem with the A7 and the FE 24-70.

And in the below link the 2nd post here (same thread) this is non FE glass, but a comparison between the A7 and a Leica M with the same lens. The A7 photo looks great except for the reflections which look absolutely horrible.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3613281?page=2

Later on on the same page shows the problem with the A7 and FE35, though he says the FE55 doesn't exhibit it.

Link below, 2nd to last post, says he has the problem with the A7R and the FE35. And it basically ruins what would otherwise seem like a nice picture, though I'm not sure it needed to be taken at f14 and it seems like at f9 or below it wouldn't have exhibited the reflections.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3613281?page=5

There are some posts in the same thread showing the same issue, though not as severe, in the NEX-5 and 6. And I think also at least one post showing a Minolta or some other brand doing the same thing, though again it seems much less severe.

I'm curious to see what dpreviews forthcoming A7R review says about it, if anything.

I'm still on the fence, personally, though I think if it weren't for this I'd have already pulled the trigger. My guess is I'll pick one up though, how often am I shooting with a bright point light source on the periphery of the image at f11 or slower.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Why get an A7R over the D800E if picture quality is your main concern? Is there a specific lens/lens system that the Nikon can't handle?

 

[Frankie]

Size. Most of my picture taking happens when hiking and backpacking. I had a D80 (actually still have it, but am planning on selling it to help fund my next purchase if I make one) and frequently either wouldn't take it with me or wouldn't stop as much as I'd like to drag it out of my pack/camera bag, got an NEX-5 and all of a sudden I was taking 10 times as many pictures because with a 35mm lens (and even larger, depending) it'll fit in a jacket pocket.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

The camera will be smaller, but the sensor size will dictate the size of lenses. Note that the current Sony FE lenses aren't that small, and they're pretty slow- faster lenses, or lenses on adapters, will blow the size/weight budget beyond a capable DSLR pretty quickly.

To that end, I'm also using an EOS-M along with my 6D, primarily because it's so small with the 35mm equivalent 22/2 pancake, due to the focal length being close to the flange focal distance, and the 11-22 wide-angle lens, which results in a significantly smaller package than a DSLR plus 10-22 or 17-40. But the EOS-M much more resembles your NEX, which has a wider native lens selection.

Also, if you're not going to be taking a tripod or other type of stabilization, the A7R's resolution will be mostly lost; even the A7 will be a challenge.

So, I don't really have much to add to your question. Trying to minimize size and weight with a full-frame system is going to be a challenge, and those few ounces gained by going with one of Sony's mirrorless cameras come with drawbacks in usability and flexibility.

Might I recommend a better strap, regardless of which body you choose? Using BlackRapid's Sport strap, my 6D and 24-105L or 70-300 pretty much disappear; with the 40/2.8 pancake lens, it might as well be a large point-and-shoot.

 

[Frankie]

The camera will be smaller, but the sensor size will dictate the size of lenses. Note that the current Sony FE lenses aren't that small, and they're pretty slow- faster lenses, or lenses on adapters, will blow the size/weight budget beyond a capable DSLR pretty quickly.

To that end, I'm also using an EOS-M along with my 6D, primarily because it's so small with the 35mm equivalent 22/2 pancake, due to the focal length being close to the flange focal distance, and the 11-22 wide-angle lens, which results in a significantly smaller package than a DSLR plus 10-22 or 17-40. But the EOS-M much more resembles your NEX, which has a wider native lens selection.

Also, if you're not going to be taking a tripod or other type of stabilization, the A7R's resolution will be mostly lost; even the A7 will be a challenge.

So, I don't really have much to add to your question. Trying to minimize size and weight with a full-frame system is going to be a challenge, and those few ounces gained by going with one of Sony's mirrorless cameras come with drawbacks in usability and flexibility.

Might I recommend a better strap, regardless of which body you choose? Using BlackRapid's Sport strap, my 6D and 24-105L or 70-300 pretty much disappear; with the 40/2.8 pancake lens, it might as well be a large point-and-shoot.

The issue isn't the weight, it's the size and trying to keep the camera out of the elements as much as possible (I'm very frequently hiking through rain, wet heavy brush, etc). I should be able to pop an A7 or A7R with a 35mm lens in one pocket and a 55 or 85 or 24-70 or something in the other pocket and be able to do a lot of shooting without having to rummage around in my backpack. I don't think you can really do that with any DSLR no matter what lens is on it.

I've tried camera bags around my neck/shoulder or attached to my belt which wouldn't be much more inconvenient in terms of access than jacket pockets, but I hated it. Always getting caught on things or sliding around and throwing me off balance or just in general getting in the way in other manners. Maybe there's some sort of bag that would be better for this that I'm just not aware of.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Well, that's a pretty unique requirement. While I wouldn't have an issue using my 6D and an L lens in that situation as I imagine it, I'm going to assume that my imagination isn't broad enough to cover your usage .

I will say that after reviewing the shots you referenced above, I might be just as hesitant to pick up a current Sony-branded camera at the moment, at least until Sony recognizes the problem and presents a way forward.

 

[UnknownSouljer]

The issue isn't the weight, it's the size and trying to keep the camera out of the elements as much as possible (I'm very frequently hiking through rain, wet heavy brush, etc). I should be able to pop an A7 or A7R with a 35mm lens in one pocket and a 55 or 85 or 24-70 or something in the other pocket and be able to do a lot of shooting without having to rummage around in my backpack. I don't think you can really do that with any DSLR no matter what lens is on it.

I've tried camera bags around my neck/shoulder or attached to my belt which wouldn't be much more inconvenient in terms of access than jacket pockets, but I hated it. Always getting caught on things or sliding around and throwing me off balance or just in general getting in the way in other manners. Maybe there's some sort of bag that would be better for this that I'm just not aware of.

I think we all have different tolerances as to what we're willing to carry. I did a 15km trek through Sa Pa, Vietnam (where there aren't a lot of 'real paths' and the terrain is anything other than straight or level) and I carried my 5D2 w/ grip and a 24-70 f/2.8L the entire time. I wouldn't have it any other way. If I did it again, I might go for a 50mm prime and maybe keep another 2 lenses in the bag, but at the time I only had one lens so it was an easy choice.

However, if you really want to go mirrorless and want a compact light and excellent camera, the camera to beat (in my opinion) at this point is the upcoming Fuji X-T1. The X-Pro1 was already amazing, and I half-considered fully switching to that as my primary system, the X-T1 is going to up the bar massively. It doesn't have as many MP as other cameras but it doesn't need to. 16MP is enough for general shooting (it's still enough for the D4 as an example), and in addition to that it has a (updated) Fuji X-Trans sensor which is natively sharper and doesn't need an aliasing filter (meaning in comparison with other 16MP sensors it has higher apparent resolution. Fuji claims higher than many Full Frame cameras). Fuji's glass is nuts (and by nuts I mean amazingly sharp, excellent micro contrast, and fantastic color rendition) and with their 23mm/35mm/58mm you have 35/50/85 covered. They also have a fairly good wide angle zoom if you're a landscaper, and a some-what decent telephoto.

I admit there are certain things that are alluring about the A7/A7R, but I've never been attracted to MP for the sake of MP. If I was going to go with Sony, I'd probably get the A7 which has the better shutter and then stick manual Leica glass in front of it, or a Zeiss Prime.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

I admit there are certain things that are alluring about the A7/A7R, but I've never been attracted to MP for the sake of MP. If I was going to go with Sony, I'd probably get the A7 which has the better shutter and then stick manual Leica glass in front of it, or a Zeiss Prime.

One of the main attractions I see is that we now have lenses that can actually make real use of a 36MP sensor. Sony's Zeiss-designed FE lenses are rated for extremely high resolution, and you have current and incoming Sigma lenses that can also take advantage of it.

Even better are the adapters that allow communication and AF with Canon lenses. What's not to like about having the sharpest zooms, telephoto primes, and tilt-shift lenses on the market usable with the best sensor available?

 

[Frankie]

Well, that's a pretty unique requirement. While I wouldn't have an issue using my 6D and an L lens in that situation as I imagine it, I'm going to assume that my imagination isn't broad enough to cover your usage .

I'm a geologist. Hiking through rainforests in Alaska with an exposed camera isn't possible unless you don't mind the camera being destroyed within a week, stopping and getting it out of your backpack every time isn't possible due to time constraints, and to elaborate upon shoulder/belt bags, e.g., making your way across a wet skree slope at the angle of repose is already pretty hairy, a shoulder or belt bag that can shift or get caught on things or get banged against rocks just isn't a good idea.