My switch from Canon to Sony as a wedding photographer

Gary.D

Gary.D

Hoodie
Messages
2,499
Name
Gary Derbridge
Edit My Images
Yes
I have just made a video about some of the things I love about my switch from Canon to Sony.

It can be found over on youtube if anyone is interested - click here or on the photo

WhatsApp Image 2019-02-06 at 6.00.15 PM.jpeg

The 6 points I discuss are -

1. Eye autofocus
2. EVF
3. Weight and portability
4. Quality of images
5. Silent shutter
6. Tilt screen

Has anyone else made the switch?

I hope you find the video interesting

If anyone has any questions please feel free to fire away! I am now about a year in so hopefully can help :)
Gary
 
Last edited:
Why do so many people that switch to Sony feel the need to make a video or write a blog post about it? Have seen literally hundreds of these. :p
 
f/2.8 said:
Why do so many people that switch to Sony feel the need to make a video or write a blog post about it? Have seen literally hundreds of these. :p
Click to expand...
Because it's quite a big change in a couple of ways, from DSLR to mirrorless and one system to another and people might be interested?

After all, this is the gear section of a photography forum and if we're not going to write and read about kit it's going to get very quiet here very quickly.
 
You're not comparing like for like here. Your Canon was a pretty old model, the 5D mkIII, where the A7III is pretty much bang up to date, the current standard the others are trying to match in the FF ML world. If you had switched to the Canon R you'd have pretty much the same experience I imagine.
 
I'm seeing a lot of these championing switch to Sony posts from 'professional' photographers who aren't actually that successful. They claim to be a professional, but when you look into them a bit you find all they shoot is a half dozen a weddings a year at a low rate or cover low end events for close to minimum wage.
 
woof woof said:
Because it's quite a big change in a couple of ways, from DSLR to mirrorless and one system to another and people might be interested?

After all, this is the gear section of a photography forum and if we're not going to write and read about kit it's going to get very quiet here very quickly.
Click to expand...

At this stage of the game are they though?

The third gen Sony cameras have been available for quite some time now and this topic has been done to death.
 
I was looking forward to a write up on here? Some examples in the video covering each point would compliment it nicely, any chance of this? :)
 
Cagey75 said:
You're not comparing like for like here. Your Canon was a pretty old model, the 5D mkIII, where the A7III is pretty much bang up to date, the current standard the others are trying to match in the FF ML world. If you had switched to the Canon R you'd have pretty much the same experience I imagine.
Click to expand...

Good point! Thanks for your comment [emoji4]
 
riddell said:
I'm seeing a lot of these championing switch to Sony posts from 'professional' photographers who aren't actually that successful. They claim to be a professional, but when you look into them a bit you find all they shoot is a half dozen a weddings a year at a low rate or cover low end events for close to minimum wage.
Click to expand...

I shot 57 last year with my average at £1461. So hopefully this doesn’t put me in this category haha
 
f/2.8 said:
Why do so many people that switch to Sony feel the need to make a video or write a blog post about it? Have seen literally hundreds of these. :p
Click to expand...
I havnt. Just a few and tend to skip them if there is nothing interesting within the first few minutes. Actually Ive come to a point where I dont care much anymore but I do understand that people wish to share their thoughts, ideas and happiness with their gear.
 
f/2.8 said:
At this stage of the game are they though?

The third gen Sony cameras have been available for quite some time now and this topic has been done to death.
Click to expand...

You do have the option of not clicking on the link and you do have the option of taking a quick look in the thread, deciding it's of limited interest to you and moving on.

You've noticed a lot of Canon to Sony threads, ok. I've noticed quite a few comments in threads along the lines of "Why should I care what you do or think...." That's fine too but I do think that this sort of post just clogs up threads and adds to the negative nit picking vibe that seems to be taking over the net.

I had a spare five minutes so I watched the vid and what I saw was someone who seemed to be happy and enjoying the whole experience and just wanted to share... and what's wrong with that? If you have a free 5 minutes to watch...
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
You've noticed a lot of Canon to Sony threads, ok. I've noticed quite a few comments in threads along the lines of "Why should I care what you do or think...." That's fine too but I do think that this sort of post just clogs up threads and adds to the negative nit picking vibe that seems to be taking over the net.

I..
Click to expand...

There is a good ignore function on this forum, you always have the option of using it.
 
Gary.D said:
Good point! Thanks for your comment [emoji4]
Click to expand...

Jut my first thought ;) I did watch your video - and I know you didn't ask for critique, but just one thing - look into the lens, you seem to be looking to the side, at a flip screen perhaps? Viewers find it more engaging if you're making eye contact with them :)
 
Cagey75 said:
If you had switched to the Canon R you'd have pretty much the same experience I imagine.
Click to expand...
I haven't watched his video yet but canon R wouldn't give the same experience in terms of eyeAF which is the first point listed in the OP.
 
My thoughts...

1. Eye autofocus - I can see that being useful :)
2. EVF - not bothered
3. Weight and portability - may be an issue for wimps :D
4. Quality of images - really? Are Canons that bad lol - joke aside, only we pixel-peepers care, our clients I doubt would ever notice
5. Silent shutter - ok this I'll give you is very useful :)
6. Tilt screen - got one already, don't use it

So for me the switch would be for

1 & 5

If I could do that for £100, maybe I'd consider it - at a push I might even go to £200

When my mate switched to Sony A9s from his Nikon set-up, very close to my own, it cost many thousands of £s !!! And I'm sorry but its just not worth it

Dave
 
DG Phototraining said:
My thoughts...

1. Eye autofocus - I can see that being useful :)
2. EVF - not bothered
3. Weight and portability - may be an issue for wimps :D
4. Quality of images - really? Are Canons that bad lol - joke aside, only we pixel-peepers care, our clients I doubt would ever notice
5. Silent shutter - ok this I'll give you is very useful :)
6. Tilt screen - got one already, don't use it

So for me the switch would be for

1 & 5

If I could do that for £100, maybe I'd consider it - at a push I might even go to £200

When my mate switched to Sony A9s from his Nikon set-up, very close to my own, it cost many thousands of £s !!! And I'm sorry but its just not worth it

Dave
Click to expand...

I know of someone who still shot a D700 until recently when it practically died (ok he had a D750 too) but the old body was part of his two body setup.
You ask him why he didn't upgrade he'd tell us "what for" it wouldn't make him any more money or get anymore business. It's not like his wedding couples wanted billboard size pictures on the wall to view from 1 feet away.

He spent his money on stuff that made more money or made for nicer customer service, like a nice website, nice electronic delivery since apparently not many people order albums anymore.

So if you think like this then I suppose Sony A9 won't really look all that attractive.

It's one way to think about it or if you are gear head it's new shiny and it must be bought! :D
For many people it's a hobby so they don't really think in terms of how much it's worth or if the upgrade is worth it. So a 'new shiny' is enough justification.

Of course if you are one those online reviewers making money from clicks on your video/blog then you won't really make much reviewing gear from last decade. So it's worth it for them.
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
I know of someone who still shot a D700 until recently when it practically died (ok he had a D750 too) but the old body was part of his two body setup.
You ask him why he didn't upgrade he'd tell us "what for" it wouldn't make him any more money or get anymore business. It's not like his wedding couples wanted billboard size pictures on the wall to view from 1 feet away.

He spent his money on stuff that made more money or made for nicer customer service, like a nice website, nice electronic delivery since apparently not many people order albums anymore.

So if you think like this then I suppose Sony A9 won't really look all that attractive.

It's one way to think about it or if you are gear head it's new shiny and it must be bought! :D
For many people it's a hobby so they don't really think in terms of how much it's worth or if the upgrade is worth it. So a 'new shiny' is enough justification.

Of course if you are one those online reviewers making money from clicks on your video/blog then you won't really make much reviewing gear from last decade. So it's worth it for them.
Click to expand...

Do I detect a hint of cynicism here :D

I found upgrading for years did actually bring benefits, mostly more pixels and better high ISO performance. As soon as I switched to the D750 and primes I peaked

I got the look I knew I was after, but that DX and zooms couldn't give me, and the performance across other factors improved too. Of course there are 'better' lenses than mine and higher resolution cameras too, but not in a way that I feel matters or makes for a business decision to spend any money on

Until last year one of the more successful portrait tutors I know shot with his D300 until that too broke, he too didn't need anything more than it delivered

I doubt I'll change my D750s until they break, and even then picking up a used one (assuming new isn't an option by then) may well be my preferred option :)

Dave
 
DG Phototraining said:
My thoughts...

1. Eye autofocus - I can see that being useful :)
2. EVF - not bothered
3. Weight and portability - may be an issue for wimps :D
4. Quality of images - really? Are Canons that bad lol - joke aside, only we pixel-peepers care, our clients I doubt would ever notice
5. Silent shutter - ok this I'll give you is very useful :)
6. Tilt screen - got one already, don't use it

So for me the switch would be for

1 & 5

If I could do that for £100, maybe I'd consider it - at a push I might even go to £200

When my mate switched to Sony A9s from his Nikon set-up, very close to my own, it cost many thousands of £s !!! And I'm sorry but its just not worth it

Dave
Click to expand...

EVF is very useful, seeing the exposure before you shoot helps creativity.

Also reviewing images in bright sun light (summer weddings) will be a massive help!
 
I attempted to make the switch to Sony last year when I purchased the new Sony A7iii on launch. I am a canon shooter so the possibility of using my existing glass and cutting weight was what brought me to that decision. I had the camera two weeks and returned it. It just didn't do what i needed with the metabones adapter, focus was slow at times, unreliable and for video just not good enough. I quickly realised that although it's a great camera without fully switching all my glass to native lenses(which would have been thousands of pounds on top) i would be hindering my workflow/results. I got a 1dx mkii instead which is a beast and much heavier(ironic as i was trying to save weight initially) and use a 5d mkiv to accompany it. Not the cheapest or lightest options but the best fit for me in the end.
 
T_J_G said:
EVF is very useful, seeing the exposure before you shoot helps creativity.

Also reviewing images in bright sun light (summer weddings) will be a massive help!
Click to expand...

I know how my camera meters in tricky conditions and can adjust accordingly, that and the HUGE DR these days lets me make mistakes and get away with it anyway

So while I'm sure its useful, its not something I'm bothered about. As for reviewing in harsh sunlight, all I'm looking for are the blinkies and they are always easy to spot :)

Dave
 
nandbytes said:
I haven't watched his video yet but canon R wouldn't give the same experience in terms of eyeAF which is the first point listed in the OP.
Click to expand...


It'll still be a damn sight better than the none on the 5DIII. He sys it's great to have, I'm sure if the Eye AF on the R was the first he tried, it would be completely sufficient.

No odds to me what people buy, the A7III looks a little beast, but everyone and their granny seems to have one now, possibly even some of the wedding guests. I have covered some but I certainly wouldn't add 'wedding photographer' to my list of skills - I would imagine though there's little worse than seeing guests use the same gear as you when shooting one. It's more likely these days than ever I think. That is just a side thought btw ...
 
Cagey75 said:
I would imagine though there's little worse than seeing guests use the same gear as you when shooting one. It's more likely these days than ever I think.
Click to expand...

Actually, this, or Guests with better gear, has happened several times every year I've been shooting Weddings

About 6-7 years ago an elderly chap asked me nicely if he could take a few pics - No problems says I - then he whips out a Blad and digital back, about £40,000's worth I reckoned at the time

I've not cared a damn since :)

Dave
 
I am still not 100% happy with the flash side of things on the Sony, Godox is okay....but not as good as the Canon and the Sony flashes are just insane money...

Shot 4 weddings now where i did the day time with Sony and night with Canon because i am a perfectionist and an idiot....that is a LOT of gear to lug around.
 
DG Phototraining said:
Actually, this, or Guests with better gear, has happened several times every year I've been shooting Weddings

About 6-7 years ago an elderly chap asked me nicely if he could take a few pics - No problems says I - then he whips out a Blad and digital back, about £40,000's worth I reckoned at the time

I've not cared a damn since :)

Dave
Click to expand...

Well, you peaked there :D

it shouldn't matter anyway even if 10 guests had A7III's, fast lenses and speedlights and back up side shooters, your images should always be priority. And chances that guest will take the time and effort to process 500+ images and send them full res to the B&G are minimal at best.

I only used weddings as the usual quick example, where you're more likely to see some higher end gear pop up in the crowd. I don't think it's like it used to be though, where the wedding 'tog had huge gear swinging from all angles and the guests GTFO of the way with their compacts when commanded to do so. Now Aunt Betty with her son's D850 muscling in on you might cause a bit of grief :D
 
Last edited:
I once turned up in a wedding as a guest with my A73, 1 flash, 35/1.4 and 85/1.4 GM.

The Bride and Groom had hired these, and I recall there was 1 other guy.

K88CwcB.jpg
 
Cagey75 said:
It'll still be a damn sight better than the none on the 5DIII. He sys it's great to have, I'm sure if the Eye AF on the R was the first he tried, it would be completely sufficient.

No odds to me what people buy, the A7III looks a little beast, but everyone and their granny seems to have one now, possibly even some of the wedding guests. I have covered some but I certainly wouldn't add 'wedding photographer' to my list of skills - I would imagine though there's little worse than seeing guests use the same gear as you when shooting one. It's more likely these days than ever I think. That is just a side thought btw ...
Click to expand...

The eyeAF is R is barely useful in a studio let alone in a more dynamic situation like a wedding. It barely recognises the eyes if unless the face fill about 60-70% of the frame. Sony on the other hand is very good at locking eye from very far and supposedly getting an improvement over an already excellent system in March/April.

Fuji is between the two for eye-AF. And nikon has no eyeAF but they promised a FW to add it so we'll see where it falls.
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
The eyeAF is R is barely useful in a studio let alone in a more dynamic situation like a wedding. It barely recognises the eyes if unless the face fill about 60-70% of the frame. Sony on the other hand is very good at locking eye from very far and supposedly getting an improvement over an already excellent system in March/April.

Fuji is between the two for eye-AF. And nikon has no eyeAF but they promised a FW to add it so we'll see where it falls.
Click to expand...


I didn't know it was that bad! Even my wee G80 can pick out an eye at distance
 
Raymond Lin said:
I once turned up in a wedding as a guest with my A73, 1 flash, 35/1.4 and 85/1.4 GM.

The Bride and Groom had hired these, and I recall there was 1 other guy.

K88CwcB.jpg
Click to expand...

Lol, looks like a tourist hot spot. Bit overkill no?
 
Cagey75 said:
I didn't know it was that bad! Even my wee G80 can pick out an eye at distance
Click to expand...

my LX100 and LX100ii are pretty good too. But a small sensor is supposedly easier to implement such things on since they are more forgiving.
 
nandbytes said:
my LX100 and LX100ii are pretty good too. But a small sensor is supposedly easier to implement such things on since they are more forgiving.
Click to expand...

Makes sense, just like IBIS - much more effective on the smaller sensors because it's has more room to manoeuvre .
 
I remember being seriously impressed with this video, more so with how fast it reacts but the acquisition is also mighty impressive:


And this one was nothing short of fantastic:



It's certainly a sign of what's to come with mirrorless.
 
Thanks for those links Graham, not seen them before and they just reinforce what I already knew/feared - Sony has taken mirrorless AF from the Achilles Heel to market leading, and it's a major advantage :eek: Good and relevant tests, properly conducted and well presented (makes a change ;)) and there can be no argument.

Canon has one more chance with me, sitting on this bluddy fence is getting tiresome, so the EOS-R II had better deliver :)
 
HoppyUK said:
Thanks for those links Graham, not seen them before and they just reinforce what I already knew/feared - Sony has taken mirrorless AF from the Achilles Heel to market leading, and it's a major advantage :eek: Good and relevant tests, properly conducted and well presented (makes a change ;)) and there can be no argument.

Canon has one more chance with me, sitting on this bluddy fence is getting tiresome, so the EOS-R II had better deliver :)
Click to expand...

Those videos are what I thought the A6000 was capable of, what with all the hype and being the fastest focusing camera in the worl......blah blah....misleading gits! But I should have done my research better. I was convinced it was down to the lenses alone, but turns out it's the AF system and perhaps a little to do with the lenses.

The A73 and A9 are too much wonga for me as it's just a hobby, so I'm back to DSLR. It actually feels a little strange being able to focus all the time on erratic subjects (can I call my children that???) in dim light. I fear the D500 would have been even better, but regardless of all the debate, for me there really is something different and special about a good full frame camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top