Change to mirrorless... or not?

Yeah I have seen some say they don't get on with Fuji, it's all a matter of taste and personal preference, can only speak for myself. But I know if I were allowed to bring my XH1 in to work [could but, wouldn't be insured to cover any damage] I'd find it so much easier, the guys I work with keep trying to touch the screen to shoot for one, can do this in the Fuji , also the delay on the Nikon LCD can be frustrating for them
 
live exposure preview alone is worth getting mirrorless.
Really depends on what you are doing... It's worse than useless for studio work (lighting); and the quality of the preview image also affects the autofocus (to some degree). Also, it is basically a processed jpeg you are seeing and not entirely accurate in regards to a raw file.
 
Last edited:
I brought my first mirrorless second hand to use my existing lenses in a tilt adapter. (Very much cheaper than a tile lens).
I subsequently found it had advantages over my DSLRs for many kinds of shooting. In the last 8 or so years I've expanded my mirrorless set up considerably - I do still use my DSLRs occasionally & still find them marginally better for motorsports.

There are numerous posts on line from photographers who swear they can't get on with an EVF even though I generally prefer them.

Given the wide variety of responses to them I'd suggest having a good try before switching - borrow or hire one similar to the model you think you might switch to. Switching & then going back would be very expensive.

I have never fully switched, using multiple mirrorless systems but still keeping my DSLRs too. If it wasn't for the fact all my cameras are at least 5 years old my approach would be excessively expensive.
 
I’ve seen your photos and I’m in awe of your abilities and others posting bird photos using Olympus, however I’m in need of as much help as I can get! I’ve borrowed an OM-D E1 mkii and an R6, the R6 animal af is stunning, but to get somewhere similar I’d need an OM-D E-M1X and then the size and weight difference is being eaten into when comparing body and 100-400mm against R6 plus 100-400mm and 2x tc. I guess by nature I’m a prevaricator and for fear of making a mistake I’m doing nothing.
Your overthinking it gordon , you DONT need bird a.f to get a good photo ,just the right settings and good reactions . You also say your in awe of mine and others pics . Put it in perspective I have used most makes and brands of cameras and lenses over the years and have settled on Olympus due to weight and I.q ,I shoot hand held 99% of the time using a single focus point for 75% of shots which I can follow in real time on my EVF .
And when you take into account I’m 75 years old and have a dodgy ticker meaning I have to take things easy ,what are you worrying about
 
This depends whether you’re talking about using Canon lenses on another brand (where there’ll be compromises) or on a Canon mirrorless, where they’ll work at least as well as you’re used to.
I know that current lenses could be used with an adapter but I feel that i was going to make the change I would like to buy the actual lenses designed to go with the Camera(s)
Unless you absolutely need the resolution of the 5dIV I’d say the R6 offers a lot more for similar money. Faster shooting and an infinitely better AF system.

Then I’d only sell any EFS lenses, and build from there.
 
Last edited:
Lens wise, I mostly a Canon 24-70 f4 and a 70-200 f2.8, which I think will both work ok on a Canon mirrorless? (with the adapter of course)
I would also use a sigma 10-20 f3.5 which I m not sure will fit or not?
Its interesting to hear a few people suggest that its GAS in a sort of negative manner. I would have thought that everyone who has an interest in photography would like to add to there gear at some point. When I first started I took some good advice in picking up gear that wasnt too expensive to shoot for a while, and then decide where to go from there (and Im sure new folks will still be getting this advice to this day). Now when I would like to buy a full frame camera for all the obvious benefits its just GAS? The decision I need to make now is as per the thread title...

I have a couple of further queries if anyone can help:
How would one of the FF mirrorless cameras autofocus compare to my 7D for sports?
Im assuming that the low light capabilities of the new FF mirrorless would be way ahead of my current 7D and 550D? (something I have gradually become more disappointed with)
With regards to extending the focal length, are there extenders available for the mirrorless systems, and if so how good are they?
Am I right in thinking that Canon and Nikkon are a bit behind others (eg. SONY/FUJI) in mirrorless, but are catching up? Is sticking with Canon, so that I can use my current lenses sensible, or would a complete change to a different brand with superior gear be the right thing to do at this point? I know that everyone will have different points of view here, Im just keen to hear agruements for and against both...
 
these answers are just from my research into Canon mirrorless so far...
How would one of the FF mirrorless cameras autofocus compare to my 7D for sports?
Much better.

Im assuming that the low light capabilities of the new FF mirrorless would be way ahead of my current 7D and 550D? (something I have gradually become more disappointed with)
Yes much better, particularly the eye AF, watch the YouTube vids demonstrating eye AF or animal eye AF.

Am I right in thinking that Canon and Nikkon are a bit behind others (eg. SONY/FUJI) in mirrorless, but are catching up? Is sticking with Canon, so that I can use my current lenses sensible, or would a complete change to a different brand with superior gear be the right thing to do at this point? I know that everyone will have different points of view here, Im just keen to hear agruements for and against both...
The Canon have certainly caught up with the Sony which was the gold standard. I don’t think the Fuji AF is close to being as good as the latest Canon or Sony’s.
 
Thanks folks, would it be fair to say that the iq at high iso would also be vastly improved compared to my current cameras?
Starting to think that an r6 might be my best option?
 
Thanks folks, would it be fair to say that the iq at high iso would also be vastly improved compared to my current cameras?
Starting to think that an r6 might be my best option?
My 6d is night and day better than my 7d, I believe the R6 is better still.
 
Dxomark give test score for sports low light iso, 7D 1082, R6 3394 so yes that’s a big improvement.
 
You need to be clear on what you want to achieve. Recently, I bought into ML but just to reduce the weight I had to carry. I was using a Canon 5D MkIV with various Canon lenses. I have bought a Sony A6600 and with a selection of Sony E lenses. I also bought the adaptor so could attached my Canon lenses but have no specific plans to do so. Because of Lockdown, I have had few chanced to use my Sony yet though it does seem to perform well enough. I am keeping my Canon kit for now. I find the Menu and screen on the Sony annoying compared to the touch screen on the Canon. I expect that I will still use the Canon on occasions when I do not have to carry it any distance e.g. studio work.

Dave
 
I just arrived in a similar predicament. I'd been frugal lately but it was time to update my DSLR. I wanted to get back into street, urban and landscape after years of mostly macro and product and the thought of lugging huge amounts of gear around didn't exactly excite. The last time I shot these genres in earnest was back in my 20s when I shot live up and coming bands in Sweden and Scandinavia where I lived for many years. Back then I used a Leica M6TTL and 3 fast Leica primes but a rangefinder wasn't going to work for my macro and product work and I wasn't about to invest into 2 systems. Mirrorless, therefore, seemed the obvious road to take. Having used an X-T1 for some time, Fujifilm was an obvious choice and an X-T30/X-T3 was on the cards but after a little mulling and debate on here I was rightly persuaded to go FF as I have quite a decent range of vintage lenses that I want to utilise on the street. Sony was an option and several on here suggested I go that route but I eventually opted to stick with what I know and ordered a new Nikon Z5. Lens-wise, I'm not heavily invested into DX so changing that around won't be a problem. I was a tad disappointed to find the FTZ adapter didn't allow AF on the older AF-D lenses but hey ho. All that said, my decision to go mirrorless had little to do with demise of the DSLR. I think they will be around for many years to come and if I were doing studio work only I'd have upgraded to another DSLR in a heartbeat.
 
Last edited:
DSLR and indeed SLR's have their charms but I think a FF mirrorless camera is the best thing to use old lenses on if you want to be able to pixel peep and see that the focus is exactly where you wanted it to be.
 
Keep going back and fourth between a 5div or an R6.
Can anybody on here let me know what benefits the 5div would have over the R6, apart from battery life and build quality (if any)?
 
I just arrived in a similar predicament. I'd been frugal lately but it was time to update my DSLR. I wanted to get back into street, urban and landscape after years of mostly macro and product and the thought of lugging huge amounts of gear around didn't exactly excite. The last time I shot these genres in earnest was back in my 20s when I shot live up and coming bands in Sweden and Scandinavia where I lived for many years. Back then I used a Leica M6TTL and 3 fast Leica primes but a rangefinder wasn't going to work for my macro and product work and I wasn't about to invest into 2 systems. Mirrorless, therefore, seemed the obvious road to take. Having used an X-T1 for some time, Fujifilm was an obvious choice and an X-T30/X-T3 was on the cards but after a little mulling and debate on here I was rightly persuaded to go FF as I have quite a decent range of vintage lenses that I want to utilise on the street. Sony was an option and several on here suggested I go that route but I eventually opted to stick with what I know and ordered a new Nikon Z5. Lens-wise, I'm not heavily invested into DX so changing that around won't be a problem. I was a tad disappointed to find the FTZ adapter didn't allow AF on the older AF-D lenses but hey ho. All that said, my decision to go mirrorless had little to do with demise of the DSLR. I think they will be around for many years to come and if I were doing studio work only I'd have upgraded to another DSLR in a heartbeat.
I’ve just found a old nikon D700 I had in the cupboard. Having been using Sony mirrorless for the last couple years it was surprising how big it felt. Mirrorless cameras maybe smaller/lighter but FF lenses are generally the same size barring a few that have been redesign and are smaller.
 
Yep, forgot to mention resolution... although its been said that unless you are printing large scale, the difference is not massive?
 
Yep, forgot to mention resolution... although its been said that unless you are printing large scale, the difference is not massive?
I’ve never owned a camera in excess of 21mpix, and my next camera is definitely the R6. But if comparing the 5dIV with the R6, it could be a consideration.

I’ve delivered A3 spreads in wedding albums from much lower spec’d cameras, I have no concerns at all.
 
Switch. New gear gear is fun! Also you get to build up a new set of lenses from scratch which usually streamlines your kit.
 
So the r6 is best in all other areas then?
There's no such thing as 'best', as Tim says, it's about whatever suits your needs.

All I can say is that for me, I was planning to buy a 5dIV this year, and I'm getting an R6 instead, because it does seem to be a more capable camera for my needs. Other people may have perfectly valid reasons to choose the opposite.
 
i bought into the sony a9 mirrorless rubbish
im glad i kept my nikon d850 far superior camera
mirrorless are still in there infancy just now
but if you need to have the latest gadget / technology fill your boots
if you've still got a DSLR i would keep that for the foreseeable future
 
i bought into the sony a9 mirrorless rubbish
im glad i kept my nikon d850 far superior camera
mirrorless are still in there infancy just now
but if you need to have the latest gadget / technology fill your boots
if you've still got a DSLR i would keep that for the foreseeable future

I wouldn't say A9's are actually rubbish. I personally think that's going a little far. I also wouldn't say that A9's or mirrorless in general are the preserve of those who want the latest gadget as there are real benefits for some in mirrorless.

DSLR's do have their charms but I do think that anyone looking to get into this from scratch and even those looking to invest any significant amount of money into new purchases needs to go into this with an open mind and well informed and that means giving mirrorless at least a long and hard consideration. Information is power to you.
 
Last edited:
i bought into the sony a9 mirrorless rubbish
im glad i kept my nikon d850 far superior camera
mirrorless are still in there infancy just now
but if you need to have the latest gadget / technology fill your boots
if you've still got a DSLR i would keep that for the foreseeable future
In what way didn't it suit your needs
 
i bought into the sony a9 mirrorless rubbish
im glad i kept my nikon d850 far superior camera
mirrorless are still in there infancy just now
but if you need to have the latest gadget / technology fill your boots
if you've still got a DSLR i would keep that for the foreseeable future
The A9 is far to new/expensive for me. My mirrorless cameras range from the Panasonic G5 to the Sony A7ii. all are quite capable & FAR better than any Nikon DSLR for use with adapted lenses - one point Nikon are exceptionally bad for. As that clue might have indicated I don't use mirrorless to have the latest gadget / technology. I use them for the real advantages I found with the antique G1 which I got about 5 years after it was released.
For the cameras/lenses I use mirrorless proves better for 95% of my shooting, but there are still times when my old DSLRs prove useful.

I do find that Sony Ergonomics are not so carefully thought out, needing a bit more menu diving to find controls, but ergonomics are very personal things I've never got on with Canon or Nikon cameras either.
 
bif was to slow for focus and tracking
hated the viewfinder terrible
handling didn't feel right
mirrorless have a long way before there as good as a dslr
 
bif was to slow for focus and tracking
hated the viewfinder terrible
handling didn't feel right
mirrorless have a long way before there as good as a dslr

My experience is the opposite. I've had Canon cameras for a long time, a good selection of Canon lenses and have gradually been making the change to mirrorless. Shooting Canon 1DXM2 alongside the R5 with battery grip for sports, events and wildlife including bif, I found to my surprise a better experience and results with the R5. For landscape and studio work Fuji's GFX is better again.

A couple of years ago I did have a sony on trial and couldn't get along with the handling or menus, so I do appreciate it's a personal thing. For anyone wondering, I would recommend testing to see for yourself.
 
bif was to slow for focus and tracking
hated the viewfinder terrible
handling didn't feel right
mirrorless have a long way before there as good as a dslr

I was not a huge fan of the X-T1 viewfinder but the one on the Z6 is brilliant. Having peaking again is also a joy when using manual lenses, especially when your eyes are no longer what they used to be.
 
I don't particularly get on with evfs, which some might find odd since I'm fond of manual focus lenses. But I prefer the seamless 3d view that an optical vf gives - it just seems more natural, direct, & 'tactile'.

If manual focussing with an evf, I find that focus peaking, whatever options are selected, intrudes and compromises the clarity of view.

Also, invoking vf magnification can be somewhat clunky, and another intrusive step to the fluidity of the experience if working hand-held.

So I'm sticking with ovfs & dslrs.

For similar reasons in the old days, I'd stick a plain screen into a film slr and eschew the stock screens with focus aids.

These days, wearing bi (or vari) focals, I look into a dslr's ovf through the upper part of my glasses - the distance rather then the 'reading' part of the lenses - because that's the natural posture. But the vf dioptre has been pre-adjusted to suit.

Indeed, it's personal.
 
Just thought I'd reply with my thoughts.

I've been using Canon DSLRs since the 40D, currently still have a 5D mk1, and mostly use a 5D mk3. (Previously had Minolta film SLRs and their first digital body - the Dynax 5D).

I really like full frame - there was a noticeable change in the overall quality of the image when I moved from the 40D to the 5D. I know this is really old kit, but personally I wouldn't consider moving to a smaller sensor (whether DSLR or mirrorless).

As the 5Dmk3 is also now quite old in terms of tech, I've been considering a change of body, mainly for improvements to low light performance and quality, but also keen on potential AF improvements (especially stuff like eye and animal tracking).

It looks like the future is definitely mirrorless, with Canon stating that they will be concentrating on this route and have apparently abandoned development work on the 5Dmk5. They also stated that they will not be releasing new EF lenses and have recently discontinued 24 of their existing lineup. (Some info towards the bottom of this article)

In terms of mirrorless, Canon have been lagging behind the other manufacturers, especially Sony, but with the release of the R6 and R5, and now with the announcement of the R3 (and potential future R1), it looks like they have definitely caught up. They also appear to have caught up in terms of low light performance too.

GIven that you already have the Canon 24-70 f4 and 70-200 f2.8, and the fact that these (and other EF) lenses apparently work very well on the R series bodies with the Canon adapter, in your position, I'd definitely be leaning towards the R6 rather than the 5Dmk4. By the way, it looks like the Sigma 10-20 f3.5 is a "DC" (EF-S) rather than "DG" (EF) Sigma lens, so although not fully compatible with the EOS-R6, it is still apparently usable on that body, but the R6 would switch to "crop mode" producing an image equavalent to an APS-C sized sensor rather than full frame (see responses on this forum thread)

Also staying with Canon, as opposed to switching to another manufacturer means that you are already familiar with the feel and operation of the menus/user interface (something which should not necessarily be dismissed as a small thing).

As has been suggested, perhaps look into hiring an R6 for a weekend to see how you get on with it?

For me, I think I've already decided that I'll be looking to move to a Canon R5 and continue to use my existing lenses with the adapter. Any new lenses I'd possibly buy in the new R fitting (although this has the disadvantage of not being able to use them on the 5D3), but am expecting many years further use of my existing lenses (which is good, as it would be pretty expensive to replace them all). By the way, it looks like Canon really have done a great job of ensuring backward compatibility for EF (and EF-S) lenses enabling a very smooth path to adopting their mirrorless bodies.

In any case, good luck with whatever you decide.
 
Last edited:
Ideally, I would like to be like a professional golfer and have a caddy carry my kit around for me. If I had that, I would remain with my DSLR kit but not practical unless I get a volunteer (please do not suggest my wife, or if you do, duck immediately).:D

Dave
 
I don't particularly get on with evfs, which some might find odd since I'm fond of manual focus lenses. But I prefer the seamless 3d view that an optical vf gives - it just seems more natural, direct, & 'tactile'.

If manual focussing with an evf, I find that focus peaking, whatever options are selected, intrudes and compromises the clarity of view.

Also, invoking vf magnification can be somewhat clunky, and another intrusive step to the fluidity of the experience if working hand-held.

So I'm sticking with ovfs & dslrs.

For similar reasons in the old days, I'd stick a plain screen into a film slr and eschew the stock screens with focus aids.

These days, wearing bi (or vari) focals, I look into a dslr's ovf through the upper part of my glasses - the distance rather then the 'reading' part of the lenses - because that's the natural posture. But the vf dioptre has been pre-adjusted to suit.

Indeed, it's personal.
I’m not a fan of evf and also prefer optical.I actually prefer the lcd on my mirror less to an evf
 
I’m not a fan of evf and also prefer optical.I actually prefer the lcd on my mirror less to an evf

They are slowly getting much better these days.

i tried one of the latest ones that is "5.76m dots and a 120fps refresh rate"

that one was far more acceptable than some of the older ones i tried.

still look like an EVF of course but much nicer to use
 
Ideally, I would like to be like a professional golfer and have a caddy carry my kit around for me. If I had that, I would remain with my DSLR kit but not practical unless I get a volunteer (please do not suggest my wife, or if you do, duck immediately).:D
Sadly, I'd have to let the servants go to afford replacing my SLR gear with mirrorless. So I think carrying it around for me is the least they can do.
 
Sadly, I'd have to let the servants go to afford replacing my SLR gear with mirrorless. So I think carrying it around for me is the least they can do.
I needed 3 beefy servants to carry my Pentax DSLRs & compatible lenses, now I've gone mirrorless there are so many more lenses I can use I think I'd need at least a dozen (currently over 200 lenses available in my hoard)!
The weight advantage of mirrorless depends heavily on the kit concerned with my MFT kit it was significantly lighter than my broadly equivalent DSLR set up, but my A7ii bag is definitely heavier than my DSLR bag.
NB Fortunately I never try taking all my compatible lenses for whatever camera I'm using. I generally draw the line at 10 lenses, only breaking this limit when testing out unusual lenses & I have the car nearby. :)
 
Just thought I'd reply with my thoughts.

I've been using Canon DSLRs since the 40D, currently still have a 5D mk1, and mostly use a 5D mk3. (Previously had Minolta film SLRs and their first digital body - the Dynax 5D).

I really like full frame - there was a noticeable change in the overall quality of the image when I moved from the 40D to the 5D. I know this is really old kit, but personally I wouldn't consider moving to a smaller sensor (whether DSLR or mirrorless).

As the 5Dmk3 is also now quite old in terms of tech, I've been considering a change of body, mainly for improvements to low light performance and quality, but also keen on potential AF improvements (especially stuff like eye and animal tracking).

It looks like the future is definitely mirrorless, with Canon stating that they will be concentrating on this route and have apparently abandoned development work on the 5Dmk5. They also stated that they will not be releasing new EF lenses and have recently discontinued 24 of their existing lineup. (Some info towards the bottom of this article)

In terms of mirrorless, Canon have been lagging behind the other manufacturers, especially Sony, but with the release of the R6 and R5, and now with the announcement of the R3 (and potential future R1), it looks like they have definitely caught up. They also appear to have caught up in terms of low light performance too.

GIven that you already have the Canon 24-70 f4 and 70-200 f2.8, and the fact that these (and other EF) lenses apparently work very well on the R series bodies with the Canon adapter, in your position, I'd definitely be leaning towards the R6 rather than the 5Dmk4. By the way, it looks like the Sigma 10-20 f3.5 is a "DC" (EF-S) rather than "DG" (EF) Sigma lens, so although not fully compatible with the EOS-R6, it is still apparently usable on that body, but the R6 would switch to "crop mode" producing an image equavalent to an APS-C sized sensor rather than full frame (see responses on this forum thread)

Also staying with Canon, as opposed to switching to another manufacturer means that you are already familiar with the feel and operation of the menus/user interface (something which should not necessarily be dismissed as a small thing).

As has been suggested, perhaps look into hiring an R6 for a weekend to see how you get on with it?

For me, I think I've already decided that I'll be looking to move to a Canon R5 and continue to use my existing lenses with the adapter. Any new lenses I'd possibly buy in the new R fitting (although this has the disadvantage of not being able to use them on the 5D3), but am expecting many years further use of my existing lenses (which is good, as it would be pretty expensive to replace them all). By the way, it looks like Canon really have done a great job of ensuring backward compatibility for EF (and EF-S) lenses enabling a very smooth path to adopting their mirrorless bodies.

In any case, good luck with whatever you decide.
Thanks again everyone... this one particlarly useful as it has given a view on my exact gear, lenses etc. I have been leaning towards the R6 since my first post on this thread (with maybe hiring for a weekend first). Ref the wide angle sigma lens, it can stay on one if those, as I'll prob not sell them, and hopefully some of the kids will have an interest as they get older, so these will be great starter cameras. Cheers folks
 
Back
Top