Confused about Canon FF DSLR (and generally)

Fairyrose

Fairyrose

Messages
75
Edit My Images
No
Hello, I’m trying to figure out which camera to get in addition/substitution of what I’ve currently got and would appreciate you more experienced people’s advice!

I’ve got at Fuji X-T20 and a Nikon D7500. I’ve invested a great deal of time and energy into getting to know the Fuji and now feel that I’m really familiar and comfortable with it (even got muscle memory for the main settings, which is how it should be, right?)

I’ve not really invested much time in the Nikon yet and am reluctant to do so as I’m not sure if I’m even going to keep it.

The issue is this: I feel I’ve slightly ‘outgrown’ the XT20 - or in other words, I’m ready to move to a more (semi) professional camera, possibly full frame. I feel that if I’m going to invest a great deal of time in a new camera I want it to be worth my while, a step up in the world of photography. With the D7500 I don’t fell that I’m getting that.

I want to do more landscape/ seascape photography and so think that full frame will be worth it, for the extra light and also as I want to do some larger printing. However I still need the camera to be capable of fast autofocus (think kids and dogs) and a decent amount of FPS.

The confusion I have is this:

- Seeing most professional landscape photographers seem to use Nikon (or am I wrong about this?) I’ve looked at Nikons but cannot identify which one would be worth getting. I think the D850 is too big and slightly too expensive but the D750 is 5 years old (does this matter?) and the D810 doesn’t have a flippy screen and no flash (can be handy).

- I’ve thought about the Fuji X-T3 (advantage would be that settings and menu similar to what I’m used to) but wonder if I’m missing out by not getting the option of a ‘proper’ FF camera with optical viewfinder, better battery life etc

- I am thoroughly confused by Canon’s offering. I don’t even get the whole MD Mark naming of their cameras! So what’s the Canon equivalent to the Nikon D810, 850 or 750?? Which Canon would you recommend for landscapes but also capable of fast kids/family shots?

- is it still worth getting a traditional FF DSLR with the market seemingly going mirrorless?

Any thoughts welcome. Thanks in advance.
 
I am a BIG fan of SLR cameras - the mirrorless are a lot better than the were but I am OCD about sensor dirt and I like the optical view finder. Mirrorless cameras really fall apart with keeping sensor dirt out. SLRs tend to be better weather sealed and the mirror acts as a shield to keep dust etc off the sensor. To me that is a huge draw back.

I find I am ok without a flippy screen and the D810 suits me well - but buying a full frame Nikon SLR system fresh I would think I the D850 is the logical one. However Nikons new Mirrorless system uses a different lens mount and it's clear to see the development is going into new Z mount glass, not the F mount that fits the SLRS. For that reason alone I would probably not sink a lot of money into a system that's probably in its twilight years - although it will give years of service but the game moves on. They will make more F mount bodies but I suspect only 1 maybe 2 more models and I bet no more high end F mount glass. I could be wrong but that is a concern I would have if I was you.

Canon wise - your closest D810 equivalent is the Canon 5dmk4 - it is a very fine camera indeed although my choice would be the 5dsR and some L glass or Sigma ART lenses. They are amazing cameras for landscape and seascape use and the extra MP over the 5d4 helpful. Use filters or exposure blending to deal with any shortfall in dynamic range.

If you can go for a Mirrorless system - the Sony has to be the one. The Nikon Z bodies lag behind the A7R3's (good deals on these going now the A7R4 is coming out) and there is a decent lens range for them - by a manufacturer keen to make waves in the market and grow its market share. It's probably, if you don't especially want an SLR system, the one to sink money into and in all balance, despite their draw backs (sensor dirt, small size, EVF) probably the thing I would buy if starting anew. If I had to have the SLR - I'd be torn between the D850 but worried about the obsoleteness of the system, and the Canon and smart money says Canon if buying an SLR now.
 
Last edited:
Canon’s number is easy.

XXXXD is entry level
step up is XXXD
Step up from that is XXD
Step up from that is XD

The smaller the number, the higher the level.

So 1D is the flagship.
 
If buying now I don't think the EF mount is the way to go and canon seem to be way behind in the mirroless market .just my thoughts.
Rob.
 
GyRob said:
If buying now I don't think the EF mount is the way to go and canon seem to be way behind in the mirroless market .just my thoughts.
Rob.
Click to expand...

It is a newer mount than the F mount though and the EF mount lens fit both their Mirrorless and SLR bodies.

Probably best what feels best but money's on either the Z mount Nikon (lenses are good - and the range expanding - hopefully the bodies will improve) or the Sony stuff if going Mirrorless
 
Fairyrose said:
is it still worth getting a traditional FF DSLR with the market seemingly going mirrorless?
Click to expand...
As someone who moved from Canon full frame to M43 and APS here's my take: full frame dSLRs are big and heavy and the lenses are the same. If you're out looking for landscape shots that equipment bag on your shoulder will soon start to feel like Sisyphus's boulder and you'll be sweaty and fed up before you reach the first place you want to shoot from. Unless you really need some lens that you just can't get an equivalent for in the Fuji mount I'd stick with the Fuji and take more pictures.
 
Last edited:
AndrewFlannigan said:
As someone who moved from Canon full frame to M43 and APS here's my take: full frame dSLRs are big and heavy and the lenses are the same. If you're out looking for landscape shots that equipment bag on your shoulder will soon start to feel like Sisyphus's boulder and you'll be sweaty and fed up before you reach the first place you want to shoot from. Unless you really need some lens that you just can't get an equivalent for in the Fuji mount I'd stick with the Fuji and take more pictures.
Click to expand...

It’s not FF DSLR that are big and heavy, it’s FF systems are big and heavy.

The Canon R glass are bigger and heavier than the EF glass.
 
Raymond Lin said:
It’s not FF DSLR that are big and heavy, it’s FF systems are big and heavy.
Click to expand...
One of my FF cameras was a 1Ds II. That is definitely big and heavy, even before you stick (say) an 80-200/2.8 L on the front!
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
One of my FF cameras was a 1Ds II. That is definitely big and heavy, even before you stick (say) an 80-200/2.8 L on the front!
Click to expand...

This is the common argument but you have to think.

What lenses typically are used with bodies like these? Telephotos

How do people typically shoot with these set ups? Monopods

What really matters in the end? The total weight of the gear.

A single or 2 larger body isn't that much of an issue when 6 of your mirrorless lenses are all 50% heavier and larger.
 
Raymond Lin said:
A single or 2 larger body isn't that much of an issue when 6 of your mirrorless lenses are all 50% heavier and larger.
Click to expand...
But they're not. If you feel differently then go for it and I wish you good picture hunting.
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
But they're not. If you feel differently then go for it and I wish you good picture hunting.
Click to expand...

They are if you can do maths. You typically carry only 1 or 2 bodies but much more in glass. More equal more weight.

Check the weight of a EF 85L m2 vs R 85L
EF 50L/1.2 vs R 50L
The more glass you have, the heavier your kit becomes. If you intend to replace like for like, then you are saving weight on 1 or 2 bodies and increase in weight for like 6, 7, or 10 glass.

Cumulatively , the total weight is more.

It's simple maths.
 
I do agree if I was starting out now I would definitely be looking at mirrorless.

Raymond Lin said:
It’s not FF DSLR that are big and heavy, it’s FF systems are big and heavy.
Click to expand...

I have to agree here. Whatever FF system you use whether it’s mirrorless or DSLR the full frame element means the lenses are going to be of a comparable size. Mirrorless camera bodies themselves can be smaller and lighter but the lenses aren’t going to be.

When I was changing I looking into weights. Part of the issue is many manufacturers massage the weight figures by not including the tripod foot, lens hood or lens caps in their stated weight figures. Sony definitely does that and I think Nikon does to an extent too. My comparisons of comparable lens set ups:

Sony weight
Sony a7riii 650g
Sony 24-105 f4 663g
Sony 70-200 f4 840g
Total 2153g

Nikon weight
D810 980g
Nikon 24-120 710g
Nikon 70-200 f4 850g
Total 2540g

To be honest there isn’t much in it. For me it was downgrading a 200-400 f4 down to a 100-400 f4.5-5.6 that saved the most weight.
 
SFTPhotography said:
It is a newer mount than the F mount though and the EF mount lens fit both their Mirrorless and SLR bodies.

Probably best what feels best but money's on either the Z mount Nikon (lenses are good - and the range expanding - hopefully the bodies will improve) or the Sony stuff if going Mirrorless
Click to expand...

Canon Mirroless need an adapter to fit EF Lenses .
Rob.
 
Raymond Lin said:
It's simple maths.
Click to expand...
M43 and APS mirrorless systems are very much lighter than full frame systems. The OP has a Fuji APS mirrorless camera. My advice was that if his interests lie in landscape photography he should stick with that lighter system. You seem determined to prove some obscure point about carrying several lenses which I cannot make head nor tale of so I suggest we agree to politely disagree.
 
I have to say though for someone starting out - the value in FF DSLR kit just now is unreal, certainly the used values of some stellar bits of kit have fallen through the floor, £650ish for a D750 is incredible for a camera that really isn't a slouch v similar newer models, the D810 as well for around £1150 used is incredible.

Also same with lenses, you'll struggle to get a mirrorless 24-70 f2.8 for less than £1300 even used - you can pickup a 3rd party (Tamron) or slightly older Nikon 24-70 f2.8 for less than £600 now so you have to consider costs as well.
 
Personally I would stick with what you have .. having spent a small fortune over the years getting ever better cameras and lenses ,selling some that I now regret doing ,blaming camera for faults that was down to the lens and vice-versa .. when I look back over my files can I tell by looking at my photos what was taken with what .. can I hell as like .

The camera makers have got us all on a game feeding us small increments each year which in the big picture amount to nothing at all .learn and use what you have now and rest assured the grass is NOT greener on the other side of the fence
 
and just to drop another pebble in the pond: my friend is an avid landscape photographer. He used to be Canon for landscapes but has gone to Fuji GFX series. He says the detail is spectacular and that there are some great used bargains at the moment as people bought them thinking they would be all round on the go cameras. Of course, he is now hankering pointlessly after the 5 figure GFX 100 [or whatever it is called] but given that 50MP is more than most humans will ever need he is not going to go there. I have a Canon set up. I use my 5D4 for landscapes when I do them. However, there's a lot of good advice on here. It might come down to what feels good in your hands which for many people is the deal maker. I also use my Oly to get high key monochromes [shoot in RAW] and it is mirrorless, light and lovely. I find I have to really get my composition right in camera [and be mindful of firmware upgrades which meant I shoot in small jpegs last month when we were away - d'oh] but they give a lovely quality when I process the files in a combination of LR, PS and Nik software. Good luck with your decision.
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
M43 and APS mirrorless systems are very much lighter than full frame systems. The OP has a Fuji APS mirrorless camera. My advice was that if his interests lie in landscape photography he should stick with that lighter system. You seem determined to prove some obscure point about carrying several lenses which I cannot make head nor tale of so I suggest we agree to politely disagree.
Click to expand...

Of course M43 and APS are smaller, that is not the point i am making. If you go back to my original post, I said
It’s not FF DSLR that are big and heavy, it’s FF systems are big and heavy.

The Canon R glass are bigger and heavier than the EF glass.
Click to expand...

I had made no comparison with other sensor size systems, because they are a given. I am making a comparison between DSLR and mirrorless FF systems. Not Mirrorless APSC systems or mirrorless M43 systems.
 
The Canon 6D is probably the smallest and lightest FF DSLR you can get. A mint used original 6D with low shutter count can be bought quite cheaply (for what it is) these days. However, the megapixel count is a bit on the low side these days and there's no flippy screen, but it should still give you lovely looking landscape photos if you don't mind not having the latest and greatest and stunning detail. Whether it focuses quickly enough for you will probably depend on how fast your kids and animals are!

The 6D MkII has a flippy screen and more MP if you want to pay more and go newer. Then there are the lenses, with Canon's EF fit (EF-S lenses are for crop frame cameras and don't fit Canon full frame cameras) L type professional lenses being required to get the best out of a high-quality camera.

For better resolution, more megapixels (but bigger and heavier) there's the 5D Mk iv or the 5DS R. However, amongst other things, the more megapixels, the bigger the file size! Will your current computer handle processing such large files, and will the hard drive fill up to the extent you'll need to buy external storage drives? Regardless of the make of camera, you may need to budget for a new computer (or an upgrade to your existing one) if you go for a high MP camera.

Then there's lens quality, you'll need top quality lenses to get the best out of your high mp camera; there's not much advantage in having one without the other, and pro-quality lenses don't come cheap (Canon have a list of suggested 'L' lenses for their high megapixel FF cameras).

So there you go, switching to a FF DSLR or Mirrorless camera could be an expensive step, unless you are happy to settle for a slightly older camera and some mint-ish used lenses from a reputable dealer.

That's just my thinking on the subject, others may well have alternative ideas or disagree with me, but I hope the above is helpful to you.
 
Last edited:
I don't think it's the dslr vs mirrorless as much as New vs older lens designs. It's also an ongoing trend in dslr lenses e.g. 50mm f1, 4 afd vs sigma art 50mm
 
soeren said:
I don't think it's the dslr vs mirrorless as much as New vs older lens designs. It's also an ongoing trend in dslr lenses e.g. 50mm f1, 4 afd vs sigma art 50mm
Click to expand...

This as well, very much so.

I think the whole "mirrorless systems are smaller" was just an ad for M43 when it first came out, and the whole Olympus system pushing the selling points of same DSLR quality (not really) in a much smaller size. At the time the only mirrorless system were m4/3 so that was true, but when FF moved into mirrorless that term no longer applies.
 
Well it really depends on what's your poison. The voigtlander 12mm is significantly lighter than the 14mm nikor and that will be more or less true for a lot of primes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
soeren said:
Well it really depends on what's your poison. The a voigtlander 12mm is significantly lighter than the 14mm nikor and that will be more or less true for a lot of primes.
Click to expand...

I don't think that is like for like, unless the Voigtlander have made a AF 12mm?
 
It's the lenses that lock you into a brand but it tends to be the body that is more affected by personal preference (ergonomics, intuitive menus, etc).

Re the 6D it's a great camera for landscape and low light but really lacking in focus points.

Re the flippy screen - most modern cameras have WiFi so you can use your phone as a separate screen which can be much more versatile, however you do have to hold the phone in one hand and the camera in the other.

If I were starting from scratch today I'd have a serious look at Sony and Fuji, mirrorless allows for some good innovative features such as IBIS, eye detection, etc.
 
In your shoes, I'd either stick with the X-T20 and trade the Nikon in if you see no use for it or trade both in and get an X-T3. Having used a Nikon D800 since 2013 and a D810 since 2015, I've just picked up a Fuji X-E3 in order to save some weight on my standard kit. I'll still use the D810 (which does have a built in flash) for things where I don't mind the extra weight.

For my kit, weight wise it looks like so:
Nikon Kit:
D810 = 980g
20mm f1.8 = 354g
55mm f2.8 micro AF = 394g
80-200mm f2.8 AF-D = 1275g
Total = 3.03Kg

Fuji Kit: (planned)
X-E3 = 337g
14mm f2.8 = 234g
35mm f1.4 = 186g
50-140mm f2.8 = 987g
Total = 1.74Kg

The fuji mirrorless kit is nearly half the weight not to mention smaller in this case so would fit in a lighter more compact bag too. So far in use via adaptors to use my nikon lenses manually, I've not had any reason to complain about the image quality.
 
Last edited:
AndrewFlannigan said:
It's unfortunate that you seem to have jumped into combat mode without reading what I wrote either...
Click to expand...

It's not combat mode and again, if you see my first post and what I quoted, I made no reference to that sentence either. I am just stating facts and facts can come across as "combat" when it's just the truth.

I was talking about FF, I don't deny M4/3 are smaller, that so much is a given and wouldn't need to be mentioned. So of course if the priority is weight and size then M4/3. That is very simple and not any debate required.
 
Last edited:
Mr Badger said:
The Canon 6D is probably the smallest and lightest FF DSLR you can get. A mint used original 6D with low shutter count can be bought quite cheaply (for what it is) these days. However, the megapixel count is a bit on the low side these days and there's no flippy screen, but it should still give you lovely looking landscape photos if you don't mind not having the latest and greatest and stunning detail. Whether it focuses quickly enough for you will probably depend on how fast your kids and animals are!

The 6D MkII has a flippy screen and more MP if you want to pay more and go newer. Then there are the lenses, with Canon's EF fit (EF-S lenses are for crop frame cameras and don't fit Canon full frame cameras) L type professional lenses being required to get the best out of a high-quality camera.

For better resolution, more megapixels (but bigger and heavier) there's the 5D Mk iv or the 5DS R. However, amongst other things, the more megapixels, the bigger the file size! Will your current computer handle processing such large files, and will the hard drive fill up to the extent you'll need to buy external storage drives? Regardless of the make of camera, you may need to budget for a new computer (or an upgrade to your existing one) if you go for a high MP camera.

Then there's lens quality, you'll need top quality lenses to get the best out of your high mp camera; there's not much advantage in having one without the other, and pro-quality lenses don't come cheap (Canon have a list of suggested 'L' lenses for their high megapixel FF cameras).

So there you go, switching to a FF DSLR or Mirrorless camera could be an expensive step, unless you are happy to settle for a slightly older camera and some mint-ish used lenses from a reputable dealer.

That's just my thinking on the subject, others may well have alternative ideas or disagree with me, but I hope the above is helpful to you.
Click to expand...


probably the most realistic post in this thread
 
I don’t think I’ve ever caused a 4-page thread before [emoji4] Thank you all so much for your replies!

I didn’t really think weight was so much of a deciding factor (more like, all things being equal weight included what should I get?) but seeing that a FF kit can easily weigh in at >3kg compared to about half with a mirrorless System perhaps I should take that into account....

But ... I’ll still ask: ignoring weight as a consideration would you still go full frame over mirrorless, because of (ergonomic) handling, dynamic range, low light performance, autofocus...?
 
I went the other way, from full frame Canon DSLR, to a Fuji X-T2. Weight was the main consideration, but I much prefer the ergonomics of Fuji - despite shooting for 10 years on Canon, picking one up after a few months on Fuji felt alien. I do prefer the images from my old 5D, although I rarely used it due to weight etc. Have used the Fuji a lot more.
 
I had a d300 nikon semi pro.... lots to play with if you wanted it. Mainly found settings I liked and left if on Aperture mode most of the time. Probably equivalent in canon.
If you havent and do not wish to learn the d7500 (which if I recall was a lower model but pretty good for starting in) and prefer a more pre camera, look to getting a used semi pro, nikon, canon which ever. I would suggest going to a photo meet and seeing what other cameras are there and whether the people would be kind enough to show/let you use their camera so you can feel the differences. Plus they can show you the lenses etc you might be interested in.
If heading to this way, used is best as if you dont like it you shouldnt lose too much money selling on. However if you find you like it, you usually can keep the glass and get a better body later on.

Me I wanted a full frame. I wanted a leica.. Now I have a used leica and I like it a lot!
But if you can, try them first. With canon I can take a shot but it felt weird, nikon felt right. Maybe it was at the time.

Weight becomes a double factor. usually the nicer lens are well built and are heavier. couple that with the weight of the body... well hiking/walking around may tire you out more (with all the lens on the nikon I was carrying around 10kg in total). Apart from lugging it all around, is the tripod (sturdy and light is a hard combo to find) but probably a necessity for landscape... maybe ;)

Down to GAS (Gear Aquisition Syndrome)... the bug bites :)
Whichever you decide to go with, there are helpful people on this forum and at meets to guide to taking better pictures...
 
Fairyrose said:
But ... I’ll still ask: ignoring weight as a consideration would you still go full frame over mirrorless, because of (ergonomic) handling, dynamic range, low light performance, autofocus...?
Click to expand...
No.

On the other hand we're all different and you might see things in the final image that wouldn't bother me but do bother you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top