Change to mirrorless... or not?

[LCPete]

Am now saving for the Canon R5 will take a while though
I would like a full frame version of my 7D 2 and I think the R5 is the way to go
Full frame just for the image quality I’m using a 6D 2 for macro and the picture quality is wonderful it’s just the autofocus on the 7D is excellent for moving subjects and just want a newer sensor
Thought about a 1DX but I think I’ll be better off with the R5
I like the idea that I can use all my EF lenses properly with the adapter on the R5

 

[woof woof]

I don't think I've ever fluffed the focus using the camera equipment I have though....

I suppose factors are how many pictures you take, what of and how closely you look.

I had what I thought was a pretty good hit rate with my Canon DSLRs but I also remember what Canon themselves said on the web site which was, maybe not verbatim but... If you take three pictures of the same subject you can expect to see differences in focus and this is normal.

Due to the way DSLRs decide focus there are going to be the odd issue areas and this is partly why we see/saw people going though multiple copies of lenses trying to find "a good one" and why MA became a thing. These days, maybe even if only after much practice and fine tuning and fiddling with the settings, things seem to be repeatably possible now which would have been difficult to get with multiple attempts with DSLR's.

 

[SFTPhotography]

I suppose factors are how many pictures you take, what of and how closely you look.

I had what I thought was a pretty good hit rate with my Canon DSLRs but I also remember what Canon themselves said on the web site which was, maybe not verbatim but... If you take three pictures of the same subject you can expect to see differences in focus and this is normal.

Due to the way DSLRs decide focus there are going to be the odd issue areas and this is partly why we see/saw people going though multiple copies of lenses trying to find "a good one" and why MA became a thing. These days, maybe even if only after much practice and fine tuning and fiddling with the settings, things seem to be repeatably possible now which would have been difficult to get with multiple attempts with DSLR's.

Oh I look close and am fastidious. The 645z is hilariously accurate in low light. I'll see how the 5ds peforms that just came today.

Trying to find a good copy of a lens is an entirely different thing. If the middle part is sharp - but the stuff at the same distance is blurry in the sides then it ain't the camera, the focusing that is to blame.

I am well versed on this topic and the absolutely worst performing copy of a lens in this regard came from a mirror less system. It caused lots of wailing and knashing of teeth on the medium format thread - but the performance was stupendously bad. A member then sent me samples from his copy of this lens - and they were a good bit better.

Quality control has a lot do with that.

I dare say if I shot people, wildlife I'd be well up for a Canon R thing with the eye AF or the Sony A1 thing but for what I do it simply isn't what's required. And remember, the vast majority of camera users are amateurs and the most popular form of amateur photography is landscape where AF ability isn't the foremost important factor in a camera.

The thing that limits my photography I feel isn't camera gear, but the bloody weather

 

[droj]

You could characterise the rise of digital photography as a mass movement. I wasn't an early adopter of digital cameras but went for a hybrid workflow - film scanning could achieve higher resolution than the digital slrs of the time. But I relented eventually.

There's always a buzz around the latest tech - mirrorless is a mass movenent now - and some of that tech will be enabling, but it also has a consumerist side to it in the realm of spend spend spend. So you get shopaholic champions raving about the latest kit. But when the equipment is so sophisticated that it can exceed average human functioning, perhaps perversely this can become disempowering.

It's not really a triumph to own things, generally, and nor is it necessarily when an automated device usurps human judgement. "Look, I did this" - but did you, or did you just press a button? I know, I'm oversimplifying, but the perspective is genuine.

 

[Petrochemist]

By solid state I think Terry mean no moving parts inside the camera. There is the question of the shutter even if the flappy mirror is gone.
A1 is the closest we've got to removing the mechanical shutter but unfortunately its still needed in some instances.
Considering how expensive stacked sensor cameras are, I think we are still a fair while away before seeing large global shutter sensors with no mechanical shutter.

It won't be long till we have a global electronic shutter in mirrorless cameras, then the only use for a 'mechanical shutter' will be to keep muck off the sensor - a much simpler mechanism will work for that.

 

[Petrochemist]

I don't think I've ever fluffed the focus using the camera equipment I have though....

I have when I've been rushed, but my mirrorless camera certainly focus more accurately than my Pentax DSLRs especially with manual lenses. It's one field where mirrorless is certainly BETTER.

 

[SFTPhotography]

I have when I've been rushed, but my mirrorless camera certainly focus more accurately than my Pentax DSLRs especially with manual lenses. It's one field where mirrorless is certainly BETTER.

That's the thing with landscape photography - it's rarely rushed and with stopped down lenses. Not arguing re wildlife shooting, wedding etc where the speed and spread of the AF system really matter more but I don't see what a new mirrorless would do for my photography - other than offer 13mp more or 50mp more if I went for an A7RiV or GFX100s. More MP interests me more than PDAF all over the place - and there has been some issues with certain cameras. I couldn't see it though on any sample images I have personally worked on...

It won't be long till we have a global electronic shutter in mirrorless cameras, then the only use for a 'mechanical shutter' will be to keep muck off the sensor - a much simpler mechanism will work for that.

Sensor dirt is the bane of my life. If there was one thing that I could banish from digital photography it would be that. Sell me proper self cleaning sensors, proper weather sealing as that is what keeps it out and I am interested. Again for stopped down shooting it's more of a thing.

 

[woof woof]

Oh I look close and am fastidious. The 645z is hilariously accurate in low light. I'll see how the 5ds peforms that just came today.

Trying to find a good copy of a lens is an entirely different thing. If the middle part is sharp - but the stuff at the same distance is blurry in the sides then it ain't the camera, the focusing that is to blame.

I am well versed on this topic and the absolutely worst performing copy of a lens in this regard came from a mirror less system. It caused lots of wailing and knashing of teeth on the medium format thread - but the performance was stupendously bad. A member then sent me samples from his copy of this lens - and they were a good bit better.

Quality control has a lot do with that.

I dare say if I shot people, wildlife I'd be well up for a Canon R thing with the eye AF or the Sony A1 thing but for what I do it simply isn't what's required. And remember, the vast majority of camera users are amateurs and the most popular form of amateur photography is landscape where AF ability isn't the foremost important factor in a camera.

The thing that limits my photography I feel isn't camera gear, but the bloody weather

By trying to find a good lens I mean one that's good on your camera. You may know about this issue but just in case you don't...

"This lens is soft" and other myths

One of the most common examples of anti-logic we see at LensRentals is the statement The lens is soft/front focuses/back focuses. Now don’t get me wrong, there are bad copies of lenses out there, as best we can tell ranging from 3% to 7% of lenses. And we know, despite our checkout procedures...

www.lensrentals.com

Even a perfectly made DSLR with no alignment issues and fitted with a perfectly compatible lens still limits your composition options as the focus points will be clustered around the central area.

Most of the pictures I take are happy snaps of places, things and people and although I shouldn't I do pixel peep and me the accuracy and consistency possible with mirrorless with both AF and MF is beyond anything I've experienced with any other sort of camera, plus there's the compositional freedom that being able to focus throughout the frame brings.

I do see the appeal of optical cameras, I used then for over 30 years but I do now see mirrorless as a better thing to take pictures with. Others will of course disagree and place more/less emphasis on things.

 

[LCPete]

I suppose factors are how many pictures you take, what of and how closely you look.

I had what I thought was a pretty good hit rate with my Canon DSLRs but I also remember what Canon themselves said on the web site which was, maybe not verbatim but... If you take three pictures of the same subject you can expect to see differences in focus and this is normal.

Due to the way DSLRs decide focus there are going to be the odd issue areas and this is partly why we see/saw people going though multiple copies of lenses trying to find "a good one" and why MA became a thing. These days, maybe even if only after much practice and fine tuning and fiddling with the settings, things seem to be repeatably possible now which would have been difficult to get with multiple attempts with DSLR's.

Oh I hadn’t thought of that not having to MA with mirrorless, that’s another advantage then
My setup needed adjustment I struggled to be honest to get the adjustment correct to give consistent focus
I took my lens and body to Canon in elstree they got it spot on and autofocus was excellent and consistent after that any missed focus was down to me
So if I understand it correctly MA isn’t needed as focus is taken directly off the sensor

 

[woof woof]

Oh I hadn’t thought of that not having to MA with mirrorless, that’s another advantage then
My setup needed adjustment I struggled to be honest to get the adjustment correct to give consistent focus
I took my lens and body to Canon in elstree they got it spot on and autofocus was excellent and consistent after that any missed focus was down to me
So if I understand it correctly MA isn’t needed as focus is taken directly off the sensor

That's the theory.

Matching cameras to lenses is all well and good but if you drop your camera or it otherwise dies you're starting again. None of this will matter if you/me/we stop pixel peeping and just look at pictures like normal people would as if we did that focus errors wouldn't be spotted as easily.

 

[LCPete]

That's the theory.

Matching cameras to lenses is all well and good but if you drop your camera or it otherwise dies you're starting again. None of this will matter if you/me/we stop pixel peeping and just look at pictures like normal people would as if we did that focus errors wouldn't be spotted as easily.

Yes that’s true most of the time focus errors aren’t noticeable, it’s at the extremes like with long lenses

 

[woof woof]

Yes that’s true most of the time focus errors aren’t noticeable, it’s at the extremes like with long lenses

These days few people see my pictures. I suppose the time when more people saw them was when I used to regularly go to live music events with my Nikon SLR, kit lens and ISO 1600 film. That used to limit me to low double digit shutter speeds and gave noise and motion blur even if I had managed to focus on something at some point in time but no one ever mentioned the problems, not once.

 

[SFTPhotography]

By trying to find a good lens I mean one that's good on your camera. You may know about this issue but just in case you don't...

"This lens is soft" and other myths

One of the most common examples of anti-logic we see at LensRentals is the statement The lens is soft/front focuses/back focuses. Now don’t get me wrong, there are bad copies of lenses out there, as best we can tell ranging from 3% to 7% of lenses. And we know, despite our checkout procedures...

www.lensrentals.com

Even a perfectly made DSLR with no alignment issues and fitted with a perfectly compatible lens still limits your composition options as the focus points will be clustered around the central area.

Most of the pictures I take are happy snaps of places, things and people and although I shouldn't I do pixel peep and me the accuracy and consistency possible with mirrorless with both AF and MF is beyond anything I've experienced with any other sort of camera, plus there's the compositional freedom that being able to focus throughout the frame brings.

I do see the appeal of optical cameras, I used then for over 30 years but I do now see mirrorless as a better thing to take pictures with. Others will of course disagree and place more/less emphasis on things.

Again - not an issue for landscape photography which remains the most popular form of amateur photography. And you can focus, recompose which admittedly I have done in the past.

I'm just not seeing what these new camera's will offer my photography, I'm not sold on the EVF's and the extra sensor dirt is a real turn off. Admittedly though the Fuji GF series seem to be very good at keeping them out - none of the users mention this as an issue on the medium format thread and the sample images I saw had NO bunnies at all.

I know of a few Sony users who cite though how regularly the sensor needs cleaned compared to their old SLR system - and their pictures just look the same.

One day I will have one...but I will hold out as long as I can. My 645z's are new, my 5ds is new, 50mp is good for me for a long time so feel very sorted.

 

[woof woof]

Again - not an issue for landscape photography which remains the most popular form of amateur photography. And you can focus, recompose which admittedly I have done in the past.

I'm just not seeing what these new camera's will offer my photography, I'm not sold on the EVF's and the extra sensor dirt is a real turn off. Admittedly though the Fuji GF series seem to be very good at keeping them out - none of the users mention this as an issue on the medium format thread and the sample images I saw had NO bunnies at all.

I know of a few Sony users who cite though how regularly the sensor needs cleaned compared to their old SLR system - and their pictures just look the same.

One day I will have one...but I will hold out as long as I can. My 645z's are new, my 5ds is new, 50mp is good for me for a long time so feel very sorted.

Even for landscape and including any hyperfocal or other technique you've only got one point/plane of focus and perhaps you'll see it if you look. I take a lot of scenic shots and I prefer the point of focus to be where I want it to be. I know I shouldn't be like this but to me accuracy and consistency are a part of it all. I did start out with a fixed focus camera but these days I expect and enjoy more. With modern cameras you can still focus and recompose if you want but you can do it better by using tracking and that should avoid the point of focus moving as you recompose. You could say that at f8/11 you'll never see the difference and that is a point but I could counter that if you looked closely maybe you could and people who think that accuracy and consistency are unimportant could well be happy with the results from kit costing a fraction of the kit they have.

On dust bunnies some DSLR's generated a lot as they spewed oil and debris from moving parts. I can't remember where I read it but years back I did read and believe that most sensor contamination was internally generated. At least with mirrorless although the sensor is exposed more the only moving part is the shutter and for some shots the electronic shutter could be an option.

I haven't had a DSLR for years but my Canon 300D, 10D, 20D and 5D were all contamination magnets. The 5D in particular was just awful for it. These days I go a long time between sensor cleans despite doing more lens changes than I ever did. Part of this will be due to better sensor coatings but some could well be due to reduced debris shedding moving parts and oil within the camera bodies.

 

[boyfalldown]

I doubt very much it'll come down to image quality. It far more likely that DSLR will become a tool used by those heavily invested in lenses, those who need the faster focusing speeds or studio photographers etc

 

[Faldrax]

I doubt very much it'll come down to image quality. It far more likely that DSLR will become a tool used by those heavily invested in lenses, those who need the faster focusing speeds or studio photographers etc

The top end mirror-less already match or better the top DSLS for focusing speeds (partly because the newest lenses, which have the latest AF motors to move the elements as quickly and as precisely as possible, are all for mirror-less), the A1 allows a faster max sync speed than any DSLR, making it superior for some studio work.
Just as Sony denied the end of A-Mount for many years after it shifted to concentrate on E-Mount, so Canon and Nikon will keep up the appearance of support for DSLR for some years, but in reality it just doesn't make economic sense to support two mounts (and two ranges of lenses), so their DSLR will, in time, get phased out.

 

[boyfalldown]

The top end mirror-less already match or better the top DSLS for focusing speeds (partly because the newest lenses, which have the latest AF motors to move the elements as quickly and as precisely as possible, are all for mirror-less), the A1 allows a faster max sync speed than any DSLR, making it superior for some studio work.
Just as Sony denied the end of A-Mount for many years after it shifted to concentrate on E-Mount, so Canon and Nikon will keep up the appearance of support for DSLR for some years, but in reality it just doesn't make economic sense to support two mounts (and two ranges of lenses), so their DSLR will, in time, get phased out.

Tell that to someone making a living from either sports or studio photography .

You do understand the differences between mirrorless and dslr focussing and why dslr will always be faster but not as accurate as mirrorless?

not arguing that for most users mirrorless is not atleast as valid a choice, but there will always be a place for dslr

 

[Petrochemist]

Tell that to someone making a living from either sports or studio photography .

You do understand the differences between mirrorless and dslr focussing and why dslr will always be faster but not as accurate as mirrorless?

not arguing that for most users mirrorless is not atleast as valid a choice, but there will always be a place for dslr

The differences do not mean DSLRs will always be faster. With a DSLR the mirror must be flipped out of the way. so when global shutters make it to mainstream cameras DSLRs will be slower. Mirrorless already use phase detect AF which has the predictive (degree of focus movement) advantages over contrast AF.

 

[boyfalldown]

The differences do not mean DSLRs will always be faster. With a DSLR the mirror must be flipped out of the way. so when global shutters make it to mainstream cameras DSLRs will be slower. Mirrorless already use phase detect AF which has the predictive (degree of focus movement) advantages over contrast AF.

And until they use all the light gathering capability of a lens (DSLRs stop down after the shutter is pressed) then they'll still be slower. For most users it won't make a difference, but they'll always be those it will.

ETA I know Fuji experimented with a 'hybrid AF' the combined Phase and contrast detect AF, but I don't know who else is. Enlighten me?

 

[SFTPhotography]

The differences do not mean DSLRs will always be faster. With a DSLR the mirror must be flipped out of the way. so when global shutters make it to mainstream cameras DSLRs will be slower. Mirrorless already use phase detect AF which has the predictive (degree of focus movement) advantages over contrast AF.

DSLR's use phase detect, just not on the sensor which has the plus of completely solving the PDAF striping and banding issue. Admittedly in the real world this isn't much of a thing but on certain camera's it has been documented (namely the A7RIII and Z7's). I saw a dreadful image on here with fine lines all over the shot from a Z5 - but it had been IR converted which might have created the PDAF pixels to become visible. On a DSLR it is just not a thing and whilst this is a niche area - it still is a win for the old DSLR.


And when we come to our old friend the EVF. A lot of DSLR users are not sold on them. I actively don't like them. And some of us like the bigger heavier camera's - the best mirrorless form wise I saw was the Panasonic SR1. It was about the size of my D810 I had at the time. Now size matters, with big glass a heavier body balances better in the hand and tripod. Deeper handgrips are nice too. The one on the 645z is the best yet. You can really hold on to it

 

[nandbytes]

DSLR's use phase detect, just not on the sensor which has the plus of completely solving the PDAF striping and banding issue. Admittedly in the real world this isn't much of a thing but on certain camera's it has been documented (namely the A7RIII and Z7's). I saw a dreadful image on here with fine lines all over the shot from a Z5 - but it had been IR converted which might have created the PDAF pixels to become visible. On a DSLR it is just not a thing and whilst this is a niche area - it still is a win for the old DSLR.


And when we come to our old friend the EVF. A lot of DSLR users are not sold on them. I actively don't like them. And some of us like the bigger heavier camera's - the best mirrorless form wise I saw was the Panasonic SR1. It was about the size of my D810 I had at the time. Now size matters, with big glass a heavier body balances better in the hand and tripod. Deeper handgrips are nice too. The one on the 645z is the best yet. You can really hold on to it

Aren't you buying the 5Ds?
He who lives in a glass house....
Really anyone owning that body really shouldn't be talking about banding of any sort on mirrorless

 

[SFTPhotography]

Aren't you buying the 5Ds?
He who lives in a glass house....
Really anyone owning that body really shouldn't be talking about banding of any sort on mirrorless

It just arrived today. It feels a bit small

These banding issues were solved under warranty on a quick google search. And mine won't be anywhere near ISO800

 

[nandbytes]

It just arrived today. It feels a bit small

These banding issues were solved under warranty on a quick google search. And mine won't be anywhere near ISO800

In that case you shouldn't face much issues with any mirrorless either. You only really experience issues pushing files.

But even at ISO100 that sensor has terrible dynamic range. It on the level of m43 sensors.
At least with m43 you'd have some really nice features and great stabilisation. You don't even get that.

 

[SFTPhotography]

In that case you shouldn't face much issues with any mirrorless either. You only really experience issues pushing files.

But even at ISO100 that sensor has terrible dynamic range. It on the level of m43 sensors.
At least with m43 you'd have some really nice features and great stabilisation. You don't even get that.

It has 12.4ev, ok not in the league of the Sony stuff but when I look at a lot of my exposures they don't even fill the full histogram anyway. And you can blend them or use GNDs if the scene is going to overwhelm the DR of the sensor.

For what I have planned for it it will be ok namely telephoto landscapes with a 100-400 - and with long range shooting you find there is less contrast as you are picking out details...the camera will be fine. Trust me, a landscape photographer as capable as me will be fine with it. And the lens has image stabilization so will be ok on that front. Sadly none of the longer pentax 645 glass has this hence all the Nikon stuff has been sold to finance this rig.

And name a M43 camera that gives 50mp.

 

[Petrochemist]

ETA I know Fuji experimented with a 'hybrid AF' the combined Phase and contrast detect AF, but I don't know who else is. Enlighten me?

Olympus introduced it about 3 camera generations ago. I think all manufacturers now offer on-sensor PDAF though I'm not sure how many combine it with CDAF - Sony certainly do & hybrid AF has even been fitted to DSLRs by Canon

 

[nandbytes]

It has 12.4ev, ok not in the league of the Sony stuff but when I look at a lot of my exposures they don't even fill the full histogram anyway. And you can blend them or use GNDs if the scene is going to overwhelm the DR of the sensor.

For what I have planned for it it will be ok namely telephoto landscapes with a 100-400 - and with long range shooting you find there is less contrast as you are picking out details...the camera will be fine. Trust me, a landscape photographer as capable as me will be fine with it. And the lens has image stabilization so will be ok on that front. Sadly none of the longer pentax 645 glass has this hence all the Nikon stuff has been sold to finance this rig.

And name a M43 camera that gives 50mp.

a few them do with pixel shift
tbh I rather have a better sensor than more megapixel
quality over quantity

any capable photographer will be fine with most bodies and that's not the point. the fact that you are more capable and understand the technicalities better means you can make better use of the features such as better dynamic range rather than the other way round.
though I do see your point about not needing much dynamic range for the telephoto stuff you would shoot.
I would have still gone with Nikon or even a Panasonic S1R with sigma 100-400mm if you could extend your budget that far and if you really dislike PDAF.
You could have seen how the other half lives with EVF

 

[Petrochemist]

DSLR's use phase detect, just not on the sensor which has the plus of completely solving the PDAF striping and banding issue. Admittedly in the real world this isn't much of a thing but on certain camera's it has been documented (namely the A7RIII and Z7's). I saw a dreadful image on here with fine lines all over the shot from a Z5 - but it had been IR converted which might have created the PDAF pixels to become visible. On a DSLR it is just not a thing and whilst this is a niche area - it still is a win for the old DSLR.


And when we come to our old friend the EVF. A lot of DSLR users are not sold on them. I actively don't like them. And some of us like the bigger heavier camera's - the best mirrorless form wise I saw was the Panasonic SR1. It was about the size of my D810 I had at the time. Now size matters, with big glass a heavier body balances better in the hand and tripod. Deeper handgrips are nice too. The one on the 645z is the best yet. You can really hold on to it

I shot converted mirrorless cameras all the time, banding has never been an issue & unlike shooting IR with a DSLR I can see through all the filters when using the viewfinder. No need to recalibrate focus either.

The first EVFs I tried (in video cameras) where absolutely awful, the one used in the G1 (the first mirrorless body) was poor for action but had advantages over an OVF in low light, or when magnification was wanted to nail focus. They have steadily improved since then.

I like cameras in a wide range of sizes, but my big heavy ones (5x4 monorails) very rarely come out. I have fairly big hands but have never had a problem holding on to my A7ii, or the smaller G5. The old GF2 wasn't great nor my Nex 6 but that's probably down to the old fashioned neck strap I still have on it....

 

[Petrochemist]

a few them do with pixel shift
tbh I rather have a better sensor than more megapixel
quality over quantity

Definitely!
I'd never want to crop hard enough to need 50MP, 24MP is ample for printing beyond A3 and even when exhibiting I rarely have space to hang much more than that. In fact even just 6MP is sufficient for A4 exhibition prints in many cases.
To my view the megapixel race ran out over 5 years ago.

 

[Phil V]

Am now saving for the Canon R5 will take a while though
I would like a full frame version of my 7D 2 and I think the R5 is the way to go
Full frame just for the image quality I’m using a 6D 2 for macro and the picture quality is wonderful it’s just the autofocus on the 7D is excellent for moving subjects and just want a newer sensor
Thought about a 1DX but I think I’ll be better off with the R5
I like the idea that I can use all my EF lenses properly with the adapter on the R5

Why not the R6? It’s cheaper, same great AF and similar resolution to your current kit. The R5 just adds more mix at a very high price.

 

[LCPete]

I do agree that 20 MP is plenty for what most people do there is no harm in having more as long as the sensor is good quality.
There are occasions in wildlife photography that you need to crop a bit although I always try to avoid it and get close enough
Earlier in the year I saw a Stone Curlew, it was a long way off and we didn’t want to go closer and possibly disturb in case it had chicks
I was shooting at 600mm with my 7D2 and still had to crop the image a lot, something like that is always only going to be a record shot but having more pixels would have helped

 

[LCPete]

Why not the R6? It’s cheaper, same great AF and similar resolution to your current kit. The R5 just adds more mix at a very high price.

Thanks that’s very true it’s just that I think that I may wish I’d gone for the higher resolution camera afterwards
I use a 300 2.8 with my 7D 2 and 100mm macro with my 6D 2
The idea of the R5 is to replace both cameras and I think I will need to use a 1.4 tc with the 300 mm lens if I went full frame . I was thinking that with a higher resolution body it will give me some leeway to crop if I need to

 

[the black fox]

Yet again in a thread , certain posters seem to make desultry remarks about Olympus ,in reality it shows you really haven’t spent the time to use the menu system to make the camera work for you . I find absolutely no difference between using the viewfinder and using one on a DSLR .
Each and every brand has its pros and cons , and unless you have unlimited money to try out all the combos in a level playing field then it’s best to say nowt .

 

[LCPete]

Yet again in a thread , certain posters seem to make desultry remarks about Olympus ,in reality it shows you really haven’t spent the time to use the menu system to make the camera work for you . I find absolutely no difference between using the viewfinder and using one on a DSLR .
Each and every brand has its pros and cons , and unless you have unlimited money to try out all the combos in a level playing field then it’s best to say nowt .

It was actually someone showing me on his Olympus what it could do, the in camera focus stacking that made me wish that Canon did it
They do now do it on the new mirrorless cameras like the R5 but at the time it was Olympus that was the first as far as I know
We was both taking turns photographing a butterfly, I was focus stacking manually and he was able to do it automatically in camera
We both ended up with the same result it’s just his way with the Olympus was easier

 

[nandbytes]

It was actually someone showing me on his Olympus what it could do, the in camera focus stacking that made me wish that Canon did it
They do now do it on the new mirrorless cameras like the R5 but at the time it was Olympus that was the first as far as I know
We was both taking turns photographing a butterfly, I was focus stacking manually and he was able to do it automatically in camera
We both ended up with the same result it’s just his way with the Olympus was easier

wish my camera did this or at least had focus bracketing

 

[LCPete]

wish my camera did this or at least had focus bracketing

Yes it looks so useful
At the moment I do it by hand but would be a lot easier to have the camera do focus bracketing

 

[the black fox]

my latest omd1-mkiii has so many bells and whistles added I have yet to get round to using them , apart from the inbuilt focus stacking . it has starry skies A/F , inbuilt N/D filters , plus loads of other stuff which I may or may not use but its there and of course Olympus's i.b.i.s which I believe is years ahead of the competion at the moment

 

[SFTPhotography]

my latest omd1-mkiii has so many bells and whistles added I have yet to get round to using them , apart from the inbuilt focus stacking . it has starry skies A/F , inbuilt N/D filters , plus loads of other stuff which I may or may not use but its there and of course Olympus's i.b.i.s which I believe is years ahead of the competion at the moment

Admittedly that does sound really exciting but like you I'd use precisely none of all that stuff.

And that's what I come back too - the modern camera's are a technical tour de force - no doubt but none of the new stuff directly effects or impacts my photography so I'll be sticking to what I know for the foreseeable.

Even the 645z has focus peaking and I've not yet used this feature either.

 

[Petrochemist]

Even the 645z has focus peaking and I've not yet used this feature either.

This clearly show how different photographers can be. The first Camera I got with focus peaking was my Nex 6, for the first 6 months or so with that camera focus peaking &/or magnified view were used every time I used the camera. I did end up getting a native lens after that, allowing me to simply use AF.

 

[SFTPhotography]

This clearly show how different photographers can be. The first Camera I got with focus peaking was my Nex 6, for the first 6 months or so with that camera focus peaking &/or magnified view were used every time I used the camera. I did end up getting a native lens after that, allowing me to simply use AF.

I literally stuck it in M mode, use the wheels for Aperture and shutter, disabled auto ISO, enabled single point AF, made it right to dual cards and turned on RAW + RAW. I can use manual focus but the 645z never fluffs it, ever. I like the RGB histograms and highlights turned on in image preview, and I set up my 5ds in the same way last night. Boom

 

[stu.artd]

I purchased a Canon EOS R to use instead of my old 5D2 and 7D. Returned the first due to a fault. Returned the replacement due to the same issue and opted for a refund after that. I have no intention of buying another Canon mirrorless camera.