Was switching to mirrorless worth it?

[DanK]

I'm prone to Gear Acquisition Syndrome, so I try to discipline myself not to buy new equipment unless I can specify a need it will meet. I put off going mirrorless until last month because I was shooting a Canon 5D mark IV DSLR, which is a wonderful camera. I finally swapped it for a Canon R6 Mark II mirrorless. I justified this because of a few features. The vastly better AF and tracking would help with candids of kids, which I do a lot. The much better image stabilization would allow me to leave a tripod at home much of the time, taking 4 unbalanced pounds (about 1800g) off my back. And the basic body plus walk-around zoom is 300g lighter.

With only a few weeks of experience, I can say that for what I shoot, this has been the biggest improvement I've ever had in moving from one body to another, and by quite a large margin. The R6 and R3 are said to have Canon's best AF, and I've found it remarkably effective. I'm getting far more keepers when I shoot photos of kids. I haven't yet put the IS to a formal test, but it's very effective. Like some other mirrorless cameras like the OM-1, if the body recognizes a compatible lens, it automatically coordinates in-body and in-lens stabilization, giving up to 8 stops (advertised) in the case of this body. The body size is about as small as would be comfortable for my big hands, and while 300g isn't much, it helps.

It also has some features that I hadn't considered much that are turning out to be helpful. It has a fully articulating LCD, and given the superb AF, I can take candids of little kids from below without lying on the floor, which is a big plus at my age. I'm finding that the option of having all the settings, including an RGB histogram, show up in the viewfinder is really helpful. With this camera, it's simple to toggle this on and off. the jury is out about how useful some other features will be, given what I shoot.

On the other hand, for some types of photography, the change wouldn't have been very helpful at all.

One thing that I've seen discussed here a good bit is how well old DSLR lenses work with an adapter. Almost everything I had read said that in the case of Canon, EF lenses work fine with a Canon adapter. It's still early days, but the two EF lenses I have used with it work just fine with the cheaper of Canon's two adapters. I'm finding it a nuisance to deal with the adapter because I have one RF lens (designed for mirrorless), so I can't leave the adapter on the body and have to move it from lens to lens or buy several. However, given that it would cost a lot to replace my EF lenses, I'll have to live with that.

[BobGilbody]

I did have a Canon 80D and a Canon 5Ds. Now I have the 5Ds and an R7. The R7 allows AF at f22. Just to see what would happen I tried using the Sigma 150-600 C with Sigma 2X extender on the R7. The following is a photo taken using a monopod:

Rainbow 13 05 23 -4776-DeNoiseAI-standard by Bob Gilbody, on Flickr

Like Dan I use EF lenses. I don't have any RF lenses so I can leave the adapter on the body all the time.

[pnodrog]

Hi Dan.

Just about all your comments sum up the reason after 11 happy years with a Nikon D800 I have ordered a Nikon Z8. I'm not prone to Gear Acquisition Syndrome but will no doubt be accused of it. The D800 has produced images that I have been very happy with, so image quality is not really a factor in the decision to upgrade. Focus response, ease of use, in body stabilization, bright viewfinder, pre shutter release capture option, focus stacking, intervalometer and exposure timing up to 90 minutes are some of the features that finally convinced me it was time to make use of the new technology. The improved lenses available was not a great inducement but they are certainly a benefit.

After ordering the Z8 I had the opportunity to briefly play with one and was delighted. Nearly ordered an extra one but I know my wife wouldn't let me - permission for one was hard enough.

[Rita]

I agree with your comments Dan, I recently upgraded my 5d3 to an R5 and was quickly convinced that it was a good decision. Like you I also use my ef lenses without any issues. As for features the eye tracking is a real game changer for doing birds in flight.

[billtils]

I'm prone to Gear Acquisition Syndrome, so I try to discipline myself not to buy new equipment unless I can specify a need it will meet. I put off going mirrorless until last month because I was shooting a Canon 5D mark IV DSLR, which is a wonderful camera. I finally swapped it for a Canon R6 Mark II mirrorless. I justified this because of a few features. The vastly better AF and tracking would help with candids of kids, which I do a lot. The much better image stabilization would allow me to leave a tripod at home much of the time, taking 4 unbalanced pounds (about 1800g) off my back. And the basic body plus walk-around zoom is 300g lighter.

With only a few weeks of experience, I can say that for what I shoot, this has been the biggest improvement I've ever had in moving from one body to another, and by quite a large margin. The R6 and R3 are said to have Canon's best AF, and I've found it remarkably effective. I'm getting far more keepers when I shoot photos of kids. I haven't yet put the IS to a formal test, but it's very effective. Like some other mirrorless cameras like the OM-1, if the body recognizes a compatible lens, it automatically coordinates in-body and in-lens stabilization, giving up to 8 stops (advertised) in the case of this body. The body size is about as small as would be comfortable for my big hands, and while 300g isn't much, it helps.

It also has some features that I hadn't considered much that are turning out to be helpful. It has a fully articulating LCD, and given the superb AF, I can take candids of little kids from below without lying on the floor, which is a big plus at my age. I'm finding that the option of having all the settings, including an RGB histogram, show up in the viewfinder is really helpful. With this camera, it's simple to toggle this on and off. the jury is out about how useful some other features will be, given what I shoot.

On the other hand, for some types of photography, the change wouldn't have been very helpful at all.

One thing that I've seen discussed here a good bit is how well old DSLR lenses work with an adapter. Almost everything I had read said that in the case of Canon, EF lenses work fine with a Canon adapter. It's still early days, but the two EF lenses I have used with it work just fine with the cheaper of Canon's two adapters. I'm finding it a nuisance to deal with the adapter because I have one RF lens (designed for mirrorless), so I can't leave the adapter on the body and have to move it from lens to lens or buy several. However, given that it would cost a lot to replace my EF lenses, I'll have to live with that.

Dan, that pretty well mirrors (ouch!) my experiences with Nikon gear. I made the change because of weight but other things that I had never considered have ended up being more usefull. Probably the main one is the IBIS which allows me to get decent images when I do my 2 or 3 choir events, shot in a cathedral in winter: this one was hand held at 1/40s




and this one iin slightly better light at 1/60s



I also like the WYSIWYG electronic view finder and the i-Menu and articulated screen ... very happy chappie.

[DanK]

I'm also finding features that didn't play much of a role in my decision to be useful as well. I think the automated focus bracketing will be very useful in my work. In the case of the R6, the user chooses whether the camera creates a JPEG composite, and it saves the entire stack of raw files, which is what I want. I'm not sure whether pre-shutter-release captures will be helpful to me; given what I do, a simple burst might be simpler, and the R6 has a very fast burst speed. I doubt I will use the intervalometer often, but the exposure timer will be allow me to get rid of an external timer when doing night photography. All in all, it's a very big step up in capabilities.

[William W]

Hi Dan,

First of all - thanks very much for the feedback. I for one would appreciate and certainly (personally) find useful (to my GAS thinking), your thoughts after a couple of months; so if you're taking Christmas requests . . .

This point particularly captured my attention, because if I change my two 5D Series cameras to R Series camera(s), my thinking at the moment is to keep (probably all) of my EF Lenses:

. . . It's still early days, but the two EF lenses I have used with it work just fine with the cheaper of Canon's two adapters. I'm finding it a nuisance to deal with the adapter because I have one RF lens (designed for mirrorless), so I can't leave the adapter on the body and have to move it from lens to lens or buy several. However, given that it would cost a lot to replace my EF lenses, I'll have to live with that.

I reckon, at the moment with my two 5D cameras, I use two EF (L) Lenses > 80% of the time. I think most of us with a bag full of lenses, would make a similar claim.

I were to buy new R Lens(es) with an R Camera, then definitely the EF lenses that I would be using on the R Camera nearly all of the time would be the Duck's Guts - ergo probably my two EF (L) Telephotos, and maybe the 24 to 70/2.8L; although buying the RF 28 to 70/2 is at the moment in he forefront of my temptations.

I think once a commitment to an R Camera is established and if keeping some EF Lenses in a bag mixed with new R lenses, then it is a no-brainer to buy two (maybe three) EOS -R Adapters and leave them on the most used EF lenses.

***

I just had a squiz on B&H the EOS-R is USD$99.00 and the EOS-R Control Ring is on special USD$149.00 - down here the EOS-R is a few dollars cheaper, once I add Tax on the importation and the postage from the USA.

WW

[DanK]

Bill,

A few Canon-specific thoughts:

My 5D bodies had two control dials. The R6 has three. I think the R5 does as well. That has some bearing on the choice of adapter. Some if not all RF lenses have a programmable control ring on the lens as well. The more expensive adapter has a control ring on the adapter, giving you that additional functionality on EF lenses. I'm not sure how useful it is to have the fourth, particularly as it's in an entirely different place from where it is on RF lenses: against the camera body, as opposed to the far end of the lens. I bought the cheaper one, but in time, I may decide that was the wrong decision. I'll wait until I have more experience. At that point, I may buy a second so that I can leave them on my two most used EF lenses.

The R6 II has an additional mode, in addition to the standard three of manual, shutter priority, and aperture priority. It's labeled "Fv" for "flexible priority". This allows you to set any combination of shutter, aperture, ISO, to auto or a specific value, using different dials, as well as exposure compensation, all without taking your eye away from the viewfinder. I assume the other high-end R bodies have this as well. The only glitch is that sometimes you need an additional step to activate the auto setting.

The only RF lens I bought was the walk-around 24-104 L f/4, to replace the EF 24-105 L II. That's my most-used lens. I bought it because it's optically better, lighter, and better balanced on the body. (The adapter adds 2.5 cm to the length of the lens.) That combination saves 300g. The primary two EF lenses I will end up using with an adapter are the 70-200 L f/4 II and my 100mm L macro. I'd love to replace the 70-200 with the RF equivalent; which is lighter and shorter. However, the EF II is a fabulous lens, and it's in mint condition. Selling it and buying the RF equivalent would set me back another US$1000. (I think the value of used EF lenses has dropped.) That will have to wait.

Like some but not all mirrorless cameras, the R6 has three shutter modes: mechanical, electronic, and first-curtain electronic, which is of course a hybrid. I'm still figuring out when to use each. For example, an electronic shutter apparently sometimes produces banding under some sorts of artificial lighting. I have to experiment to see if that happens in urban night photography and, if so, whether electronic first curtain solves the problem. It also has a convenient "silent" mode that works regardless of the shutter setting. It switches to electronic shutter and turns of every other noise.

The bottom line for me is this. When I upgraded from a 5D III to a 5D IV, I was pleased with the new camera but not certain it was worth the expense. I have no doubts about this purchase. It's a very big step up in capabilities--again, for what I shoot.

Dan

[rpcrowe]

Switching from DSLR to mirrorless was well worth it for me. My Sony gear is less than half the weight of my Canon gear. Both are crop sensor outfits.

Comparing my Canon 7D2 and 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens (1600 grams) with my Sony A6600 and Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 lens (793 grams) and this is becoming more and more important as I grow older (I was 83 today!). The Sigma lens doesn't have IS but, my A6600 camera has IBIS. When I need a longer lens, the Sony 70-350mm is very close in performance to my Canon 100-400mm Mark II lens. And... The Sony weighs 625 grams while the Canon is a hefty 1640 grams.

The human and animal eye auto focus are also two of the things that I like best about the mirrorless cameras and lenses. And I also enjoy using older vintage lenses with my Sony body.

[William W]

Happy Birthday.

[davidedric]

I came at mirrorless from a different direction. Basically, this is 4 or 5 years ago, I found that m4/3 was my sweet spot and the fact it is mirrorless wasn't significant. Like Richard, I am aging and increasingly infirm, so the weight is a huge bonus.

I've followed the low weight aspect even further, and I now have a Sony RX100 vii. In spite of its ergonomic limitations, it's an amazing camera.

[rpcrowe]

I carried my Sony A6600 with the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 lens on a honor flight to Washington D.C. last fall. I am glad that I did not carry additional camera gear.

[ajohnw]

I came at mirrorless from a different direction. Basically, this is 4 or 5 years ago, I found that m4/3 was my sweet spot and the fact it is mirrorless wasn't significant. Like Richard, I am aging and increasingly infirm, so the weight is a huge bonus.

I've followed the low weight aspect even further, and I now have a Sony RX100 vii. In spite of its ergonomic limitations, it's an amazing camera.

I'm much the same and went E-PL1, E-PL3 to try the format, Then E-M5 followed by an E-M1. Dropped Nikon when I bought the E-M5. Weight though - I'm questioning their Pro lenses I have bought. Carrying a few of those and the weight goes up a lot and their plastic stuff has adequate performance really. more than really. I have looked at a light weight Sony full frame that can also be used with APC lenses as well. Looked very promising 'till I looked at lens performance - even with full frame on the ones I would choose. More dynamic range though.

[JDW in Oz]

For me, yes. The lighter weight and better ease of handling are well worth it.

I went from Nikon D800 to Z6ii and I've never looked back.

A tad expensive to change over, but certainly for me at my age, well worth it.

[JDW in Oz]

A follow-up to my previous post, #14.

The Z6ii I acquired turned out to be a dud. The exposure system wa not working properly and the metering was all over the place. Also other lesser problems which greatly impeded my trust in using it in the field. The Z to D lens adapter also did not connect properly and was reacting by (sort of) short-circuiting the connections.

Luckily for me, the secondhand dealer in Melbourne I bought it from took it back without, as I was well within the warranty period.

I will soon be getting a second Z6ii, used but a one owner camera with very low mileage, when the repair center that does the checking for my camera dealer has done the usual checks on it.

It should be in super good condition as it was had only one owner and will come to me with about 4000 actuations, so still a baby, so to speak.

Oddly, the seller/trader as one who sold my shop a D800 that I still have, which I acquired four years ago with 1900 actuations on its odometer.

Obviously the gentleman in question is not a machine-gunner. Also a good and reliable camera shop is a rare but valuable find. They do exist, but the trick lies in finding one. Happily, they are out there.

When all is said and done, I am ever happy at having had a positive ending to this potential problem.

[JDW in Oz]

Yet another follow-up to my previous follow-up, #14-#15. The saga goes on...

I am now well and truly out of the mirrorless game, for the time being. The promised second Nikon Z6ii was 'nixed' by my camera dealer's repair center, it seems for problems similar to those they found in the first Z6ii. I hope this isn't a usual fault int the Z6ii range, tho' I've not heard of any others having encountered unexpected and ongoing variations in exposure.

For the time being I will stay with my Nikon D800. It does what I want it to do with a minimum of fuss and almost no bother, the 36 MPs are a pleasant 'plus' even if I have it set at 24 MP anyway to keep file sizes to a satisfactory level.

I note the Zf is now on the market, or about to come in Australia. If the price tag is not too extortionate and if my camera dealer offers a fair trade-in for my D800, I may be tempted. Altho' the notion of having to cough up a lot of additional dosh for new lenses or an adapter for my collection of Ds, no longer appeals to me.

On the other hand, as I generally make do with three lenses (all Ds), the 28/2.8, 85/1.8 and 180/2.8, the F adaptor may be a useful investment for me - I can pick up one secondhand for about AUD $195, not a bad price given our South Pacific Peso is worth all of 63.something US cents and looks intent on dropping even lower.

I have come to the sensible (for me) conclusion that it makes a lot of sense to make do with what one has, especially so when like most of us, I use probably at most 25% of what the D800s offer.

So for now, with the D800 I will remain. Mirrorless must await another day...

[Stagecoach]

I note the Zf is now on the market, or about to come in Australia. If the price tag is not too extortionate and if my camera dealer offers a fair trade-in for my D800, I may be tempted. Altho' the notion of having to cough up a lot of additional dosh for new lenses or an adapter for my collection of Ds, no longer appeals to me.

The Zf with the Expeed 7 processor along with its 3D tracking is going to tempt a lot of people at its price.

[rpcrowe]

I have been ectremely pleased with any Sony mirrorless camera that I have ever used. I presently own three and the only reason I have not considered upgrading to newer Sony models (like the A6700) is that I am 83 years old and no longer shoot a lot!

[busb]

My first post here. I owned a Nikon D700 up to July 2019. A few months before, I handled a Nikon Z7 & noted that EVFs had come a long way in 12 or so years. I px'd the D700 against a Z6 that July. I do a lot of available light photography & was delighted to get a far clearer view in low light compared with an OVF. The high ISO noise performance was even better than the already good D700 that had half the resolution.

The Z6 has had its bandpass sensor filter replaced with a so-called all-spectrum one & have both 570 & 720nm IR clip-in filters. Focusing on the sensor suits AF in IR but many Z series lenses need post-processing to remove the hot spot & need stopping down more than with visible light.

The Z9 was a retirement present to myself & more or less matches the AF for moving subjects of that from Canon & Sony that previous Nikon models clearly did not. The Z9's electronic-only shutter is yet to be replicated on new models from other manufacturers - it Weill be interesting to see if others follow.

[Tronhard]

Hi. Due to some health issues, it's been a long time since I posted here, so I am a bit out of touch, but I shall hopefully contribute meaningfully.

I have a long history with SLR and DSLR cameras, and had, until recently, a large menagerie of camera gear going back over 40 years. I moved to Canon Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Cameras (MILCs) back in 2020, when the R5 and R6 bodies were released. While the R and RP had come out before, I considered them working prototypes and somewhat tentative moves into the platform. I have used the R5, R6 and R6MkII for some time and for the kinds of photography I do, which is predominantly wildlife, I find them brilliant. The elements that contribute to that position are: IBIS, on-sensor metering with resulting real-time preview of exposure. Then there is the eye tracking and focus lock, and finally the excellent optics of the RF mount. I currently shoot with the RF 14-35L, 24-105L, 100-500L and the excellent 24-240 IS USM lenses.

I can use my remaining EF lenses seamlessly with the EF-RF Canon adapters. Those lenses include EF 17-45L, 24-105L, 70-300L, 70-200L IS USM f/4 MkII, 100-400MKII, as well as the Sigma 150-600c and 60-600s lenses have no issues.

That said, I still shoot with my remaining DSLRs: 80D, 5DsR and enjoy the experience but I am quite comfortable with the evolution from DSLR to MILC and EF to RF.

The opportunity to work with legacy gear is closing. Canon announced the retirement of their M-series platform of ASP-C compact MILCs, and according to Canon Rumors, have also started dumping EF lenses at reduced prices. So I suspect the days of the DSLR platform are numbered as Canon reduces its diversity of platforms and gear, and concentrates on the new R bodies, and RF and RF-S lenses. There is even talk that they are conducting a survey to see if Canon users would like a retro design camera like Nikon's Df, Zfc and Zf cameras. I really hope they do!