After watching you for a series of years I can say that: You are the best and most serious bloggers about photography. Sorry to say that the majority of bloggers do not share information, they rather try to draw attention. And this is completely different. Tony and Chelsey, you do share a lot of useful information and thank you for this!
Thanks for sharing your views.... As a hobbyist photographer at 77yrs old I am still happy with my D500 & haven't considered upgrading yet..always enjoy hearing about new gear... Cheers..
I'm a D850 shooter and I approve this message. I Picked it up primarily for underwater (and I still have a LOT of Nikon glass) and am now "investing" a large amount of spare change into underwater housing, strobes, ports for my DSLR and one of my "go-to" lenses is the 16-35 but in the housing with the dome port, the size is NOT an issue. I have come to LOVE the viewfinder with back button autofocus for ALL situations - especially underwater. Yes, I do need a viewfinder extension that magnifies the viewfinder (older eyes... sigh) and I cannot USE touch screen underwater so I fall back to my manual film camera "muscle memory" in setting the shutter speed and aperture. This works well for me on dry land as well. Resale? Schmeesale! I'm still shooting Pentax 6x7 medium format (and processing my own film) and slice up my own Minox subminiature film from 35mm stock and load the teensy cassettes in the dark bag. Still have a few Nikonos amphibious cameras and lenses. It's a film-fetish, don't be hating.
On the whole size thing, I think the main benefit with mirrorless bodies is weight not size. I know while my A7Riii isn't that much smaller than a 5D iv, it certainly weighs a fair bit less 657 grams vs 890 grams and when you're carrying it around all day you do notice. It's a 200 gram difference and yes I am aware that professional glass is heavy but the net reduction in weight is awesome. Especially if you're carrying two cameras all day for a wedding or something, with two bodies it's a weight reduction of 400 grams which is nearly half a kilo. Nothing to be sniffed at. Also the size reduction is mostly in terms of depth of the camera because no mirror is required. The smaller depth means the camera is easier to store in a camera bag. I can fit 3 mirrorless bodies in the space that would be needed for 2 dslrs.
I used Sony DSLM for a very short time because the dust(spots) on the sensor drove me crazy. Under harsh conditions/in harsh environments (e.g. deserts and tropical jungles) they were just more or less useless! I now switched to Pentax and bought the new Pentax K3 Mk. III and all I can say is: This camera is an absolute dream to hold in your hands and an absolute fun to use! This camera has the ruggedness I need for my kind of photography! By the way: My favorite photographic shop was (and still is) completely surprised by the demand in this camera. The first batch was sold within 2 hours, the second (larger)batch is already sold, too but there are still 76 cameras on the backlog! Quite remarkable for a company that is said to be "doomed" by so many people...... ;-)!?
When I shot professionally, I upgraded only when client requirements forced me. These days, I love buying used cameras that are five to ten years old. I lusted for some of them then and none of those cameras became less valuable because newer ones were available. The older cameras only became cheaper. I have a lot of fun with hybrid and compact cameras that I'm getting for a quarter of what folks were paying new in 2016. I always met client specs but I've sold much of my gear because they don't benefit me. It's why f/4 has replaced f/2.8 and 24 megapixels are good enough for large prints. Because I don't shoot for billboards, pixel count beyond 24 only fills my cards and drives faster. I think shooting professionally has made my love of affordable and "good enough" cameras and lenses a long-lasting affair.
I switched from Canon dSLR to Sony mirrorless, then back to Canon dSLR (for purely money reasons), and one feature I really do miss is eye autofocus. It's absolutely invaluable for getting shots that are easy to miss due to the seconds wasted on faffing with the joystick and focus area modes on dSLR. I'd used joystick selection for years, and had become quite ninja with it, but for spontaneous pet shots etc, eye autofocus is MUCH faster.
The most important thing a photographer must do is learn how to take good photos regardless of whether you have the latest and most expensive Mirrorless camera or a relatively inexpensive DSLR. You need to take the time to learn how to make the best out of what you have. Too many aspiring photographers seem to think that if you buy the latest most expensive camera your photos will automatically be better - nothing could be further from the truth. The great thing about the movement towards mirrorless is that a lot of really good DSLR cameras are coming on the second user market and you can pick up some fantastic gear for a fraction of the price. I still use and love my Sony A77ii and Sony A99, they can produce some great photos, and I have got some superb Zeiss lenses for about a quarter of the price of the new mirrorless equivalents. Anyway, thanks Chelsea and Tony for another great informative video.
Another aspect to consider is that mirror less is still growing and fast! So the Sony camera you buy today is blown away by the next Sony in sometimes as quick as 6 months to a year. I switched from Canon FF and went to the Sony A7II. It was exciting but the AF was horrible. 1 year later, I sold it at a huge loss and bought the A7III. AF was better but the battery life was still dismal compared to the DSLR cameras. I finally jumped ship and went back to Canon FF DSLR. I am glad I kept my L lenses. I am back to taking photos and not chasing the ever changing landscape of latest greatest wiz bang features at substantial financial cost. I prefer to "focus" on composition and exposure. Photography has gone from a skill and art to automated tech. I am griping and I know mirror less makes many people happy. To me, it's just another marketing distraction to get our money. Aperture, shutter speed and ISO (or film speed) are all the settings I care about. Peace :)
What makes me skeptical about the new generation of lenses (on all the new lens mounts) is their dependency to be controlled by camera electronics. For how many years will camera firmware support them? They can't be used afterwards manually with only camera controlled aperture. I'm afraid the recommendation to buy valuable glass because it last's for generations of cameras ist not valid any more. Lenses got disposable items and aren't long lasting investments now. Which decreases the overall system value.
"Planned obsolescence" could become a real issue, for the exact reasons you've outlined - I would be absolutely beside myself if my camera manufacturer decided to stop supporting a favorite lens of mine with a firmware update, rendering it an extraordinarily expensive paperweight. (and thereby tanking any prospective resale value)
Different, but kind-of case in point, old Nikon lenses with AF driven by the body (requiring body support) are no longer supported by newer cams. On the contrary, though, old Canon lenses with lens motors and camera-controlled apertures still work just as well (AF and Aperture + lens IS if included) on my EF-M camera with an adapter as they did in 1987 or 1997 on an SLR. Electronic support is needed, but provided. But, just as Apple is building redundancy into their computer equipment, any of them could. You're really always at the mercy of the manufacturer or third-party support if you want to upgrade. Until mirrorless, old FD lenses were paperweights unless you shot film; there are always ways for them to make things hard to use or unusable if they want to. For cameras, though, if they drop support for the old, there is a better chance that you switch to a competing brand, so you have a better chance of support. Just like EF on EF-M. A little off-topic, but just saw a Techart pro adapter in a RUclips vid that autofocuses manual focus lenses by adjusting flange distance and has its own aperture. Never knew such a thing existed, totally wild. Where there is a will, there is a way.
As a migrant from Canon DSLRs to an R6 and R5 (in that order), I can say that both mirrorless models are way better than the DSLRs that they have replaced. But almost none of those advantages are related to the absence of a reflex mirror. Canon just decided to put their best tech into their new mirrorless bodies and the lenses that go with them. The R5 and R6 are measurably lighter than a 5D Mark IV. But other than the faster FPS, full-screen AF points, and eye AF, it's hard for me to think what Canon did with the R5 and R6 that they could not have done with the 5D series. had they chosen to do so.
I just bought a Pentax K-3 ii last week. I don't need to create good videos, and I still have many manual-focus lenses. If I want better image quality for landscape photography, I can simply use Pixel Shift and get about twice the effective resolution, and I'd much rather have a good grip and many buttons that are easy to reach than a touchscreen. And noone can beat the functionality of the K-3 ii at the same pricepoint even today. One major advantage I see in mirrorless is their ability to adapt almost any (DSLR) lens due to the flange distance.
Do the mirrorless viewfinders have auto on/off function? Occasionally I'm at a place where I use the viewfinder frequently. And once a year I'm at a car convention and that's two days with the camera almost constantly in my hands. Do I have to leave it on the entire time? Switching the camera on and off a couple thousand times each day would be very impractical. If auto function; will the constant on/off wear the screen out?
Think most mirrorless cameras [haven't tried all, so not 100% sure] have a power save option, that if turned on, will turn off the EVF and LCD after a set time. To activate the camera, you just touch the shutter button and the camera "spring back to life" though in reality, there is a short delay.
I am a closet photo gear junkie and I've been thinking about "upgrading" to a mirrorless camera for quite a while now. The problem is that I have a Nikon D850 that I think is just fantastic. I do not do video or action photography, just landscape, nature and technical (I am a retired geologist so you can guess the subjects.) I keep asking myself exactly what would I gain by getting a new mirrorless camera. The answer usually comes up as not much. But I want to thank both of you for that fine analysis of just what I should expect going with a dual photo equipment style. I do not intend to give up my D850 since everything I see online confirms that for my type of photography, I have already arrived.
Please explain. I was choosing between sony A6300 mirrorless and Canon 80D. So I bought the Sony and used it for one week and took it back and bought the 80D. The reason was I take a lot of sports action photos for our Special Olympics team, but every time would take a photo, especially in a burst, the viewfinder would lose the subject for an instant with a black screen in the viewfinder. I don't know what happened and the salesman could not explain it. I don't experience this using the 80D. Can you explain?
Q&A: Take a look at page 896 in the R5 Advanced User Guide. I don’t see any teleconverter setups listed. I have an EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM. Sometimes I like to use the 1.4x III with it. I want to upgrade from my 7D2 to an R6/R5. Of course, I will need the EF to RF Canon mount adapter. Which raises the question, should I use my EF 1.4x III, or should I buy an RF 1.4x to use with my EF telephoto lenses. BTW, I also have an EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM, which I may use with either a 1.4x or 2x teleconverters. Again, same question arises. Do I use the EF teleconverters, or should I buy the new RF teleconverters and use those?
Just watched this and it was very helpful. I have a Canon 5D4 and 6D which work very well for me but they are super heavy. I want a mirrorless camera for travelling and I've been looking at the new Canons with inexpensive kit lenses (like the R7 with a 18-150 lens) because they are lighter. I don't think I would use the mirrorless for my portrait photography but I know I would not be satisfied with an inferior image for travel. You definitely gave me some food for thought! The size of my DSLRs is actually useful for portrait work because, as a small woman with grey hair, they give me some "street cred" lol. I hear things like, "Wow, that's a serious camera!"
Regarding the Eye AF: if I was a wedding photographer I would want this as bad as I want my next breath. Moments fly by in a ceremony and getting that aspect sorted out would free me up to look for the moments.
I thought that too, but most wedding photogs actually use spot AF because in a crowded ceremony, often the focus will switch to the wrong subject. With dual pixel AF where no "focus point" is less accurate than another, they can move the point to wherever the eye is and shoot in servo. Touch and drag on Canon makes it way easier to do so than the traditional joystick method.
@@longliveclassicmusic i love how fast and responsive the canon touch focus is...even with the M50 (my choice for a compact camera for free time shooting). If my A7III, which I use for weddings just had that performance.. the joystick and touch is so clunky and slow it hurts.
@@andy.photoandfilm This is interesting from a real photographer. I keep reading that no one can hold a candle to Sony's AF. So in reality Canon's is more ergonomic?
Yes! And I still have an Eos Elan 2e from the mid nineties that had 3 point(!) eye controlled AF, which was pretty unreliable in practice. So I went back to the old way within a day or two. Hopefully the new stuff isn’t just a gimmick.
I bought my wife an R6 because, while she liked my 5dm3, she always had a hard time with "chimping" and not registering that with a dslr, you don't have a "wysiwyg" experience and would get a lot of over/under exposure and it would ruin her experience. With the R6, it's fast, responsive, and she gets the picture that she sees and is much more likely to actually pick up the camera and go use it. (From my perspective the R6 is an amazing progression of tech from even a good dslr and now I am jealous of my wife's camera)
Hi Tony and Chelsea, I upgraded from the Canon EOS 6D to a Canon EOS R6. The only drawback for me was battery life, even though it was not a disappointment. Other than that, everything else is awesome on the R6: the viewfinder, AF system, double card slots, frames per second and even video, that I rarely do. I will say though, I compared files between these two cameras and I wish the skin tones would be fixed via firmware, because they sometimes tend to get a little yellow/green. Files are much easier to work with on the R6 - dynamic range kicks ***. And the RF lenses are just a whole new league, 24-105 compared, at least. Thanks for the video!
Are parts availability and servicing support going to continue on discontinued DSLR cameras ? That’s my main concern. Thanks. You didnt address that issue.
Thanks for the podcast! The missed (imho) parts of the podcast: 1) most of newer mirrorless manufacturers introduced wider lens mounts, which means more light can come in, so the lens design is different, which opens opportunity for newer and smaller formats, like Canon RF 50mm is simply tiny and weighs about nothing. As for older mounts - some new design appear, like recent 28-70/28-75 lenses from Tamron and Sigma, ~1/3 of price of original, 90-95% of image quality, and ~2/3 of the weight (Sigma 28-70 is 470g vs 835 of Sony 24-70, and most users would not be upset about losing 4mm on the wide end). So with the market shift towards mirrorless - newer gear in general is smaller and lighter. 2) AF quality and speed - Nikon D750 cannot compete with Sony A73. Sony is much faster and accurate, and both end up dropping in price a lot, so for the non-pro general-use folks - Sony would be a better pick. 3) The main benefit of EVF - realtime preview of the image, not what an eye sees through the glass, what the sensor actually gets. 4) Getting back to the high quality cameras - one doesn't need to purchase top of the line gear, there are much cheaper options that $6500 Sony a1, even in Tony's guide :) like Fuji XT-3, or Sony 6xxx series, or Nikon Z50, all are crop, but solid cameras. When talking sport/birds there is Nikon D500, which is probably better, but for an amateur taking photos of family and friends - Fuji/Sony would serve definitely better as general purpose cameras. 5) And regarding the resale value - non-pros would often lean to cheaper (and oftentimes 3rd party glass), and this glass is loosing it's price rather fast. Personal experience of selling of my Nikon gear - most of the glass (in perfect condition, used for 1-2 years) was sold at ~50-60% of the retail price. And manufacturers often discount older gear, which drops the prices even lower. 6) Primary purpose of purchasing the gear - for hobbyists - there is no sense in buying 3-5-7 year old camera, as the technology advances all the time, and 7 year old body with a kit lens will make images comparable to the top of the line smartphone. At least from the non-pros perspective. 7) With people buying phones for $500+ (and upgrading them every 2-3-4 years) - investing $1-2K in the camera is not a bad idea. 8) Each and every case is different.
T and C have a limitless budget for gear. Now and then they mention lower cost options, but invariably in the second breath they remind everyone that the cheaper gear is not very good. They're not the only ones -- all the pro gear reviewers do this. After every video you're left feeling that unless you mortgage your house you can never shoot with the gear they recommend. Everything I can afford is "good but not great." The images are "pretty sharp but not really sharp." And so it goes
@@timothylatour4977 Well, I split "users" from "hobbyists" and from "pros". In most cases "users" won't really notice difference between different shots, they care about the end result of smaller print, or photo viewed on phone/tablet. Hobbyists will have Gear Acquisition Syndrome, trying to upgrade all the time, and even when the image quality is just 1% better and not visible - they'll try to upgrade, pros - well, that comes from business, and when money is not a question - they buy. I know a family of photographers who still shoot on Nikon D3's (12MP cameras). And it works for their business. For myself - the biggest jump in photo quality was purchasing the Nikon 35mm 1.8 DX (crop one) for D5300. It was a major jump in image quality from the kit lens. 😁 Years later, I won't consider cheaper bodies as they just can't keep up with the type of photos I take, same for lenses. But looking back at photos from D5300 - they are good, but not the best, as you've said.
I am thinking of picking up a Nikon 1 j5 just to have a small light camera. I have an 800e kit with all pro glass. Not looking to compare the two but do you think I will be disappointed with the j5 results?
My opinions on minus point for mirrorless: no pop-up flash and (for Canon, at least, I bought a used R6) no USB cable to connect the camera to my PC for copying the photos/videos taken. Nope, the new thing is apparently you have to make TWO steps to do that: take out the cards (or, if you haven't one already: buy a card-reader), put it in your card-reader (as a Swede I don't know the correct english term for it) and connect it to the PC and at last copy the content. Instead of just connect the camera to the PC and copy the stuff. As I understand it you're supposed to use the memory cards to copy and install updated firmware? How unnessesary complicated is that? Wouldn't it just be better with a cable between the camera and the computer? I'm a little confused about this...
I use mirrorless, but not full frame. I own an Fujifilm X-T3. This body and the lenses are definitely smaller, but-well-not full frame. I gave the “she bought a mirrorless camera and went shooting a wedding the next day” a thought: No matter how good one is as a photographer, the camera is a toll one has to get used to. “Never change a running system” also means “make the new system run before you use it.” I love my Fuji for street photography but the electronic viewfinder doesn’t work for studio sessions with flash because before the flash goes of it’s all black. So I have to change the aperture value twice: open it to frame the picture, close it to take the picture. Of course it’s awful. Luckily I was able to handle it so far. Which brings me back to “know your tool”.
I jumped up from a 600d to an a7ii. My main gripe is the sensor being exposed all the time when I switch a lens (especially outside.) Other than that I have loved the massive increase in capability I gained at a reasonable price point. I do have to say that most of my lenses I had for the 600d were decent m42 lenses I could easily and cheaply convert to FE. I have invested around 1200 euros in 2 loawa macro lenses (15mm f4 wide angle, and 100mm f2,8 2x macro) and they are incredibly versatile. BUT! You can get these lenses for most mounts and honestly that versatility can be had on most bodies. I think it really just comes down to what glass you intend to use, and how you weigh some of the draw backs and benefits from mirrorless. The learning curve for me would have been high going for dslr or mirrorless anyways having had a 10+ year old camera. So I figured I might as well learn what probably will end up going to be the new standard.
Love my Canon R6. When shooting sports the ability to track across the entire sensor is amazing. One example is shooting softball with a batter that is a slapper is very difficult with a DSLR. With the mirrorless R6 shooting from a side profile as the batter quickly steps forward if they move out of the center of the frame the mirrorless tracking is more likely to successfully stay with them. With a DSLR you are more likely to have focus change to the background when this happens.
My first interchangeable lens camera was a mirrorless (a Sony a6000, which I still use) so I can't say I upgraded from DSLRs, but I upgraded from smartphones and point-and-shoots and I still had expectations about upgrading to a 'true' camera, and the things that really disappointed me with my a6000 were: - the EVF lag. It's really frustrating for fast action like motorsport. It can be done (I got some nice shots of superbikes and single seater open wheel formula cars, but only at slow-medium speeds) but I had to learn to compensate for the lag myself and therefore force myself not to rely on what's actually displayed on the EVF, which is a difficult mental exercise. I know newer mirrorless has gotten better at this, but I rarely can find actual measurements on the lag in reviews. - the (lack of) power saving. I'm not talking about the battery life itself while taking photos, but the body is just dumb when it comes to saving power. For example the 'standby' mode really is a power off mode: it takes as much time coming out of it as it does when turning it off completely and it resets the lens' power zoom, so I don't see a point to it. You can manually assign a button to the "turn screen off" function but it just does that, turns off the rear LCD. There is no intelligent standby where it would turn off the sensor and put the CPU in a very low power mode where only one button would wake it up while not e.g. reset the lens' power zoom so it's instantly usable when you decide to take it off standby. This point is rarely talked about in reviews so I have no idea if newer mirrorless cameras have gotten better at this. I remember a friend buying a Canon APS-C DSLR at the same time and its standby mode was much better: he could set the timout to a very short time in order to save power, and it would come out of standby much more quickly than my a6000. - the small grip: I have long fingers (but hands not that big overall), and it's not as comfortable as I wished when using it for a long time. I know the newer ones are much better for this, so when I eventually upgrade it will be nicer. Note that the depth of the grip really is the only disappointment for me, I don't really mind only being able to hold it with 3 fingers instead of 4 and I wouldn't want a bigger camera just to be able to hold it with 4 fingers. I had other disappointments, but they are not specific to the mirrorless format so I won't include them here. I don't really mind the small battery life, because while I won't say I love having to swap batteries and remember to charge them, I prefer having replacement batteries in my bag or pockets rather than a bigger battery in the camera adding to its weight.
If I understand you correctly, it sounds like you use the rear screen more with a mirrorless than you do with a DSLR. There are some things that you cannot do with the viewfinder because it's an electronic viewfinder, and you are not looking through the lens. I'm thinking of autofocus, for example. So,if you are using the rear screen more, won't that account in part for the lower battery life with a mirrorless camera?
For an old guy who is myopic well past the diopter range of any camera, mirrorless is a godsend. Recently switched from Pentax to Fuji - will never turn back. From this point, going only forward with GFX and maybe including a reststop at Nikon Z if they survive. Or heck - even if they don't survive there'll be some good deals. Sad thing tho - that they're seemingly in a spiral.
I agree with alot of the things you mentioned and thought it was a great video as always, however, I just wanted to point out that eye af isn't only great on high-end bodies, cameras like the sony a6100 have sonys latest af system, and thats in a $600 camera.
Also you can get A7III already quite cheap, and it may not be great in ergonomics, but the AF and image quality is still amazing. Also all the "hurr durr switching to mirrorless is so expensive" is only partially true. Yeah, if you use Nikon as an example. But just look at Canon. Get the R6 and your old EF lenses will actually perform WAY better through the original adapter than on any Canon DSLR.
@Cowsayspow62 I agree with you 100%. Even the cheap Canon RP has fantastic eye AF and tracking. After several firmware updates it works from a long distance and is very sticky and accurate. DSLRs were nowhere near as good (especially using fast lenses, wide open) as they did not have eye detection at all. They'd just focus anywhere on the face.
I am less than a rookie. My problem is focus within a coin. There us an indent error and I can not get the focus at the bottom of the indent. T7 tried several lens. Please advice is needed. All I want is to get great photos of errors on cents Quarters and Half dollars
Great information and video. I actually switched from cellphone to an Olympus OM-D. Easy to pick up and I like the size. As an older model, mk II, the autofocus is kind of meh, but I found myself loving more of the manual lens control.
I dived for the EOS R when it first came out with the RF 24 -105 L lense\ A great experience I find that sometimes in landscape photography it freezes /blurred and i have to change focus and zoom to get it going again The slider on the R is not delivering
Went from a (borrowed) 60D (had not been shooting with a “real camera” for a long time) to a R6. So.. it wasn’t necessarily just DSLR vs. mirrorless, but 10 years of advancing technology as well. And I love it. The eye AF, when it works, allows me to take better pictures much more easily. But as good as it is (when it works, it seems like magic) it’s not infallible. It’s frustrating when it just won’t pick up the subject and you lose the shot. I do wish the native lenses were less expensive, but adapted ones work just fine. I’m sure I’ll add to my collection as time and budget allows.. but the 24-240 is a good Jack of all trades lens that I intend to keep on my camera most of the time while travelling. The one disappointment with this lens is.. inexplicably and never mentioned in any of the reviews I watched/read.. the multiple exposure feature of the R6 body doesn’t work with this lens. Why? I have no idea, and I haven’t been able to get an answer anywhere. Is there a legitimate technical reason? Or am I the victim of the infamous Canon cripple hammer?
hi Guys, i have just upgraded from my old but in good condition Canon 7D to the R5. i had been saving like mad to get the 7D Mk2 but now thats old technology and Canon never made a 7D Mk3 so i put all my cash into getting the R5. My dilema is what to do with the glass i have. Do i start getting rid of my EF glass and change to RF glass or just keep what i have and use the adaptor? I currently have the 17-40 L , 100mm f2.8 L macro, 70-200 f4 L and the 100-400 L mk 2. i did think about changing the EF 100-400 mk2 to the new RF 100-500 and buying the RF 800mm f11 as an additional tele lens, but i dont know if i should change everything over time or keep and continue with the EF glass - any thoughts?
I have been a photographer since I was about 12 years old. As I got older my cameras got better, my knowledge of photography increased. As an adult, I went on to get a degree in photography. That didn't make me the best photographer. What it did do was give me better problem (photographic) solving skills. Solving problems didn't require updating equipment, often. I think a lot of the hype of mirrorless is to benefit companies that make gear. Photography has become less of a hobby from manufacturers point of view. (Cell phones) Mirrorless became "a shot in the arm." It did so be being hyped about things that aren't necessarily true. As an example size, maybe weight. The manufacturers have been able to make smaller cameras for a long time. Examples: the Olympus OM-1, the Pentax ME, MX. When photography was more popular for amaturers, makers could make them as they saw fit. When camera sales began to slump, camera makers needed something to really increase demand. Hence, the mirrorless camera. Humans are kind of herd animals- yeah let's get a mirrorless camera. The problem being mirrorless cameras are still being developed. They're teenagers if you will. If the features of mirrorless are truly solving problems for some photographers now, great. I think that for most users, however, it makes little difference. I also think there are still improvements that could come to dslr cameras. Do I have a mirrorless camera? No. I will when it really becomes necessary. When I am not paying so much for the R&D. I have 4 Canon bodies, 11 Canon lenses. All of these are in very good condition. They do what I need them to do. When they don't, mirrorless may be the way I go.
Both of these comments are coming from the point of view of a Canon user (so keep that in mind, as I cannot directly hands on compare to other brands). "Mirrorless is smaller" The point was not far off... however there are some exceptions. Compare the R series to the equivalent camera, and there is a noticeable shrinkage (i.e. the R5 to 5D). Glass on the other hand is all over the board. That generalized point is spot on. For glass it's more that they have new possibility of lens constructions to take advantage of. For example most of the Canon RF L glass is not smaller than the EF (without EF+Adapter) such as the 50/1.2L. The example given was a bit ironic as the RF 70-200/2.8L is much smaller/lighter than the EF version. "It's easy to switch to mirrorless": There were 2 points made on this... hardware (right away) + usage (most of the topic). I disagree on the hardware aspect. Many Canon users are getting better results with their old lenses with an adapter. So one of Canon's strengths is making it easy for users to bring their lenses with them. Agree on the usage aspect... however that can be said about going from any camera to any other camera. Rest was pretty good.
I switched from a Nikon D600 to a Fuji XT3 18 months ago. I kept my D600 for a few months, as going from DSLR to Mirrorless was quite a change for me. Once I managed to feel 100% comfortable on Fuji, I switched completely. I still miss the low light capabilities of a Full Frame dslr, as I do concert photography and I need good low light performance, and also the battery life on the XT3 drove me mad until I managed to find a 2nd hand battery grip. But boy oh boy, the autofocus system alones makes up for all of the other shortcomings. And the video capabilities, so powerful and yet so easy to learn.
I switched from (or rather I complemented) my Canon 6D Mark II to a Canon R3 - I have had no issues with the image quality or speed advances using my EF L series lenses including the EF 50mm 1.2, my EF 70-200mm 2.8 L series, my Tamron 150-600mm, or any of my other L series lenses. Although I do not have older EF lenses so I have not loss fps issues that the older lenses have as indicated by Canon. I enjoyed your segment, especially as I am considering migrating to Square Space.
Moving to mirrorless is awesome. LOVE the autofocus on my R5 over 5DM4. The silent shutter is good weird. Takes a while to learn how to use it. Squeeze the shutter button, think a tactile feedback sensor would be helpful. Media card upgrade is expensive and battery life is much shorter with mirrorless, not a myth. Overall, mirrorless tech is amazing and I will never go back to DSLR or optical viewfinder cameras for work. That being said, you still need to be a good photographer to capture great images. Mirrorless camera systems can be complicated for new photographers (giant user manual), would recommend a simple and older SLR or DSLR, Nikon F3 or Canon 5DM2, if you want to become a great photographer. Then shift to mirrorless.
Tony and Chelsea, tell me if I'm wrong, I want to purchase a Canon R5 camera, an adapter so that I can use my 100-400 5.6 lens for birding, plus I use a 1.4 teleconverter. Is all this possible and will I get the sharp pics that I think I will? Thanks
I bought a Sony A77ii after watching raving reviews about the spectacular auto focus and tracking etc... that was disappointing but I used several Sigma Art lenses and thought some of the issue may have come from the slower lenses etc... So thankful that the newer full mirrorless cameras are right on point with focusing speed and accuracy etc.
The Canon 1dx3 does 20 fps in both mechanical and electronic shutter. In fact, it basically acts as a mirrorless camera with full tracking and edge to edge focus points.
I'm doing it so I can get 2x magnification out of a 1:1 macro lens along with 50MP hi-rez mode. And so I can have a lightweight telephoto street photography rig. Everybody sees you when you've got a 70-200, you might as well be waving an AK47 around.
I had to replace my d750 after it died from a wave at the beach. I wanted to stay with Nikon. My choice was between the d780 and the new z6 II. I wasn't even considering the z6. The d780 actually costs more than the z6 II. They're nearly identical on the video side but not on the stills side. I watched many videos on the z6 II before making a decision. The benefits outweighed the drawbacks so that's what I went with. The eye auto focus may not be the best compared to other brands but it is much better than trying to use a single focus point on the d750. I very seldom get a shot out of focus now. There is a learning curve as you mentioned. I'm still learning which type of focus to use and when. One of the things I like about the z6 II is the box you can put on a person so it will track that person better. You can configure the EVF and LCD screen in different ways. You can have it set to just use the EVF, use just the LCD screen, or use both. These options can help save battery life. If my camera is on a tripod and I'm not using the EVF I can just have the LCD screen on. Silent mode is awesome! I took pictures at my daughter's play last week. I had to keep checking to see if it took a picture. I would like to have a white box inside the EVF around the outside of the screen that flashes when the picture is taken in silent mode so you know it took a picture. I love having the histogram displayed in the EVF. You probably know about light defraction with lenses because of the distance to the sensor in the older type lenses. They have to put more elements inside the lenses to focus the light in the corners so they're not too soft. With the phlange distance on mirrorless being closer to the sensor they can design the lenses better to give you sharp images corner to corner. They haven't perfect mirrorless cameras yet so DSLRs do have certain advantages but the number of advantages are shrinking. Oh and you didn't mention the firmware updates that the mortified systems get to improve them that the DSLRs don't get.
Upgraded from a 5dIV to an R6 and love everything about it! Maybe 5% of the time I miss the more megapixels but I knew that going in. In every other way I love the R6. My transition to mirrorless has been very pleasant!
I think this was a video made to make everyone happy. If you had a similar level mirrorless to your DSLR, got to know it, you would not want to go back. Mirrorless creams DSLRs and that's coming from a die-hard DSLR shooter from the SLR film days.
Thank you. Good video. I am about to retire. I was once a decent amateur slr film photographer. But, life happened, and I have not done any photography at all (except iphone stuff) in over 30 years. I have never owned or used a DSLR or any good digital camera with usable auto focus. Still, I do have some decent skills. But, I've decided to get back into photography as a retirement activity,. Mostly wildlife and landscape stuff. I have no investment in any camera system. I'm reading and watching reviews. I have a decent but not unlimited budget. Right now I am leaning toward Canon R6 and one good long wildlife lens to start, probably the Canon RF 100-500. Later I will likely end up with a good zoom wide angle, (maybe 14-35). Make sense?
Thanks for the video guys!! Here is the main reason I felt I just HAD to switch to mirrorless a few years ago (and glad I did) : Was shooting an acoustic music performer at a small arts venue and the clickety clack of my DSLR was louder than some of the soft passages of the music. After a few stares and recognizing I was ruining the experience for everyone (I'm a musician so naturally didn't want to be inconsiderate of the artist) I just stopped shooting and thought to myself "Never Again". Well, because I couldn't afford to switch right away, "Never again" came too soon at yet another event shooting where I was covering an outdoor music festival; I was asked to actually come up on stage and "discreetly" capture some of the musicians playing. I felt that certainly no one will hear the shutter of my camera in this setting. I was wrong. Dreadfully wrong. Embarrassingly wrong. The music was roaring, fiddles, banjos, guitars etc and just as I neared within two feet of the fiddle players ear, sneaking up like a Ninja Numbskull, wouldn't you know the music suddenly- unbeknownst to me- had an interlude where the violin player would take a nice, sweet soft and quiet solo. You are probably ahead of me here and yep, once again as the music abruptly changed volume my clunky dslr, even in "quiet" mode (haha yeah right) went CliCKeTy CLaCK snap SnaP! Ugh. Pardon my French but I was the jackass of the hour...again. :-/ I'll never forget the side-eye stare she shamed me with. Rightfully so. That week I began my quest for the "perfect camera" and landed comfortably and happily in Fuji land. :-) I still use Nikons, Canons, love older OM's and for video Sony's are hard to beat, but my first dip into the mirrorless waters was a Fuji X-T1 which I still have and shall cherish for years.
additional: Sure, there are pros and con to any system. There is no one size fits all. But for me it was all about being able to shoot respectfully and truly discreetly in quiet environments. Sorry about the book here haha but if for NO other reason alone this is my case for going mirrorless. Peace.
@@c.h.5519 It depends on the budget and style of body you prefer.. Something new or is used ok? For street I shoot Fuji's , the X-T2 being my all time favorite. (OMs, Panasonics and smaller Sony's, Ricohs cool too) and I LOVE my X-T1, but since you mentioned wildlife I'd go with a system which has top top notch auto focusing; you could go Sony Alpha 1 if you can afford it (I can't) ... the Nikon Z's are nice and have IBIS, I haven't shot with the newer Canons, but If you preferred smaller body designs I'd go with Sony a6400, 6600 Sony's.. Being aps-c 's and fantastic auto focus would help with wildlife...though you'd have to rely on native lenses for stabilization in the 6400 . 6600 has ibis I believe. If you love the Fuji aesthetics and "vintage vibe", I'd say X-T4 because it has IBIS, good focus, aps-c, weather sealing etc. but it'll cost more in todays market. If your budget is less than $1000 US, I'd focus on what was MOST important to you (wildlife or street? Form or Function? Features or ....etc.) then build up from there. I would also take into account the gear you have, ie if you ARE on a tight budget yet already have good glass I'd look into the system which best suits your needs allowing you to use the glass you have. I use an X-H1 which is great for about $800 US (2022) as a "do all" camera because already I have Fuji glass and its heavy duty mount and IBIS allows me to use vintage glass with confidence for video-art work. Admittedly I don't do a lot of wildlife so super fast auto-focus isn't as important to me. For street it's too big for me though so I'm fond of the X trans 16meg look paired with a 35XF prime on my X-T1 or Zonlai 22mm or Pergear 25mm (manual focus only) or 28mm Zuiko, for video it's the X-T2 and a Zuiko 50mm etc. and for pro work where I want IBIS it s back to the X-H1 with various glass. If you wanted a good "do all" newer mirrorless, and could live without weather sealing you could go with an X-S10 for about $,1000. It has better IBIS and auto focus than the X-H1. It also has a fully articulating screen for vlogging which some hate and some love. If your budget is $500 I'd suggest looking into the OM-D-EM1, X-T1, Sony A6300 or Lumix G85. Underrated systems each with reputable dynamic range and outstanding image qualities. Peace!
Let's give credit: Without Panasonic & Olympus (and Kodak) you would not have any mirrorless cameras today from any company (Not even Canon, Sony, Fuji nor Nikon), because everyone was proudly pushing their own DSLR's and how theirs was the best. That clunky mirror, the "Live view that you had to switch on/off with every shot, that lack of video. They all copied Lumix * Olympus, and I am glad they did.
After months of debate and research I am upgrading to mirrorless for night photography and sports. Not that a DSLR can’t do the job because I know that I can but mirrorless is something that I want to experience and what I have found fits my budget. this video was pretty helpful though.
Your views seem to be angled towards the high end and full-frame cameras. I moved from DSLR to mirrorless several years ago with the Fujifilm X-T20. In a few respects it was inferior to my faithful Nikon D7100, but for its compactness, the joy of the EVF, and the photography-oriented controls I was an immediate convert. There are several mirrorless cameras with cropped sensors that are economic and attractive alternatives to DSLRs. We don't all need or want the Canon R5s and Sony A1s.
I'll have to disagree and say it was worth upgrading to R5 just for eye AF. even in studio shooting because I can place my model wherever I want and never have to focus and recompose. It helps even more shooting outside with fast lenses where the focus DOF is miniscule. Focus recompose doesn't work very well with a 135mm f2.
That person is NOT out thousands. Maybe 10% at most. Good vendors have excellent return/exchange policies. There is a huge demand for ML cameras and lenses due to the out of stocks. I sold my 4-5 year old f-mount gear (well kept) for very respectable prices and most within 72 hours! I even sold some Z mount glass for near MSRP. It was cheaper than renting, and it takes me more than a few days to get used to near gear. I say help that person out, buy their gear, and have a giveaway. ;)
I dropped the D750 for the Z6 and I was mostly upset at the AF on the mirrorless camera. I have the Z6ii now and the firmware updates on that one have made me a much happier user for my wedding photography gigs.
That is kind of odd since the expected subjects at a wedding are quite slow even if they dance. Do you actually mean the AF or the AI controlled subject identification prior to AF? Check your single point AF, you can also move it on the touchscreen. With the Z6 I never had issues with taking pictures of humans on events, even stage performance like dancing shot at 300mm with an adapted INCOMPATIBLE Tamron 70-300 lens. Yes, the AF works fine even on an incompatible lens, with that lens the IBIS does not work and the lens image stabilization will choke and shake once in a while if active. Continuous AF on fast moving subjects like flying birds however is a different story especially at 600mm but the main issue is the EVF which prevents shooting and following the subject due to blackouts and „slideshow“/„lag“. As I have heard the Z6II still has the same issue with the EVF. It seems that many mirrorless cameras have similar issues with the EVF but this is mostly not addressed. Maybe because wildlife and sports is a niche.
I switched from an enthusiast APS-C DSLR (80D) with full frame pro lenses (holy trinity 2.8) to a pro mirrorless (R5) (with the same lenses) and I saw no difference. The body of the R5 feel nicer and better build but the weight and the size are similar. The only gain is the additionnal 2mm on the grip for my pincky. The weight saving from the lenses is much more substential (Sony 50 1.2GM, Canon, 70-200 L 2.8,...) For the battery life I will say it really depends. When I use my R5 for video it can destroy a battery in 1.5h but for photography with the right config it can last as long as my 80D (which use the same battery). You just need to have a very agressive sleep mode and keep the lcd screen off except for reviewing images and navigating menus.
You couldn't have a 800mm f/11 lens for DSLRs if you want to be able to focus with it... Also, good luck seeing through the optical viewfinder Chelsea..
I own the Canon EOS R and the sensor is covered without a lens attached. You can enable shooting without the lens attached, i.e. the sensor uncovered, but that's for something like attaching to a T-ring and telescope OTA.
Also, there are manual focus third-party RF-mount lenses by Samyang, NiSi, Rokinon, etc. that the RF bodies cannot recognize. So you must enable "shutter release without lens" or you cannot take pictures with those lenses. Canon will not open their mount to third parties, and it will be a while before third party makers can reverse-engineer full compatibility and autofocus into their lenses.
I got my Sony A1 in the mail a few days ago and so far I love it. I love that I have a programmed button just for switching between human, animal, and bird focus...critical when doing street photography. What I'm very annoyed by is that Sony went with CF-Express A instead of B. I tried to use my SDXC cards but they just couldn't handle the camera's buffer very well, so I was forced to spend $900 on 2 Sony CF-Express A memory cards. Not a happy camper!
Well thank you for the clarification on some of these myths but I for one I need gonna change what works for me DSLR I like to compose without having to turn n the camera to do it, Also I like seeing things outside of my frame while shooting since I often shoot in crop mode even with a Nikon D7200 crop camera (I shoot 1.3x crop of that) fro added range to my telephoto while retaining enough resolution for a nice picture That I would have had o crop anyway in post. Seeing the lines inside the viewfinder & what's outside these lines is very valuable to me. So I'm saving my money & keeping my DSLR.
I worked with the 5d MK III for years and loved it. Had just a couple problems. Focus Problems with some of the lenses. Front-focus on my 70-200. I hated to correct it manually and adjust all of that. It was big and steady and would never break. I didn't liked that there was no video auto focus, flip screen and for mountain use its just to big for me. Took it with me across the alps, not the happiest I have ever been. Switched to the a6500 and absolutely hated every single thing about it. The worst was the usability with gloves and the battery life. Just (2 Month ago) got me a used EOS R and I love every single thing about it. Yes it has only one SD card slot, yes 4k crop and yes no 20fps in 50 mpx. But for me it's perfect. Lighter than the 5d. Just as good image quality and amazing video capabilities. Love to use my old L- glass with the controls ring adapter. Photos look stunning and the usability is great. Hope everybody finds the perfect camera for themselves. thx for the video
I have not transitioned to mirrorless per se, as they are an “in addition to” my Nikon D850 not a replacement. That said, the more I get comfortable shooting with the Z6 and Z7II, the less I live in the F mount ecosystem. For now, however, the D850 remains my deep winter camera. Its a beast. Ultra reliable. The EVF sensor that allows me to toggle between screen and viewfinder on the Z simply gets too fogged up to function properly at -20C temperatures. Super frustrating. The other 10 momths of the year, I love the mirrorless. I find I bracket less, which saves time when editing, neutral density filters are a breeze, and the eye autofocus is great for capturing photos of quick and erratic toddler granddaughter. Its a steeper learning curve than I thought, but well worth the effort.
So I have a D850 and moved into the Fuji world with an XT3. I love it but switching back and forth is tough. That first time you pick up the D850 in awhile I find I almost have to use Live View to get a similar experience. Quite happy keeping both systems though.
There are many who went mirrorless, only to come back to DSLRs. Me personally, I'll always want an OVF, no matter any technical advantages offered by an EVF. Natural light > LED light. And only being able to look at a screen makes the camera "too" digital for my taste.
Changing - no. But if you want to go full frame - I not go DSLM. That was my reason, I kept the DSLR (80D) for some jobs (Recently got a 6D2 cheap, so now all is full frame)
Mostly factual, some opinion. You do not need a high-end mirrorless to out-perform the autofocus of a DSLR. Absolute BS. You need a high-end DSLR to match a cheap mirrorless from Sony or Canon.
Hobbyist here, not even a serious one for that matter. Not so long ago i bought a mirrorless. Sony A7ii with a tamron 28-75 f2.8. I'm happy with it, think it's a good choice and it's my first full frame camera, before i had a canon g7x ii (compact) in combination with a underwater housing. And even before that i borrowed for a small year a canon d1000. And that is basically my photographing experience with actual camera bodies. The quality and the sharpness of the canon was something i missed even though it was an aps-c sensor, just like the g7x, but that one didn't even come close to the quality of what the dslr gave me. Anyway, the A7ii surpasses them both :) I am impressed My only 'tiny' regret is the lens, i underestimated the size of it. And starting to realize, that A) the lenses are more expensive then aps-c lenses and B) Size.. But.. i am a sucker for quality, to be able to crop (zooming in) and see every detail is something i guess i am willing to pay for. Not to mention the bokeh, almost like bubbles and everyone loves bubbles.. hehe :) Anyway.. i went for mirrorless, not simply for better.. but for the future and smaller/tighter, read somewhere that because the lens can be closer to the sensor it's beneficial for the image quality. Since i am new, figured it was better to invest in a 'new' system. After long thinking and contemplating, i choose for sony. I like the in body image stabilization and figured with 3rd party lens developers there would be enough choice eventually. Also with the low amount of different body to lens mounts, i figured it's a 'save' investment. That i would never run into the trouble of a different mount type. I don't know.. just a new guy trying to figure out the maze of companies, lenses, mounts, Dof's, stops, shutter times and iso's. hehe
What happens if I'm at an event using eye AF and I try to get a shot where everyone has their backs to me? AF won't find any eyes so will it ever focus or will it take a long time to focus???
Thanks, very interesting talk. Do you guys have a suggested video or source for setting up the autofocus for the Sony A7R4 (I shoot primarily events & portraits). It seems like I haven’t quite optimally worked that out. I’m still relying on my Canon 5D4 for pro shoots until I’m comfortable with the Sony.
I think the camera size for mirorless is definitely a plus because it really is smaller and it helps when traveling. While the lenses are pretty much the same size it does help I noticed it on my trip to Costa Rica recently.
BTW fps is not the be all and end all - you have to also consider the AF performance which also depends on the lens too. Can the camera/lens keep up with the fps, and can the AF acquire and track the focus accurately. Finally, there is buffer depth - is the buffer deep enough to handle a longer burst of 10-20 fps. That is the totality of it all for sports/wildlife.
Good video again guys except that an 800mm f/11 wouldn't work well as a DSLR lens as few DSLRs can focus beyond f/8 but mirrorless cameras work well with small apertures
Hi. I have a canon 7d (first version)and i am thinking of to buy a newer camera. I am photographing only wildlife and birds. So I would want one with some fast fps. But I don't know if i going to buy mirrorless or dslr
At 6:28 about the 800mm f11, it's impossible to make a lens like this work on a DSLR, the AF system on DSLR wouldn't work at all with such a slow aperture
Well, there is a reason they don't make the f/11 for DSLR, or not necessarily that it is DSLR, but it is only pretty recently that you could AF f/11 on DSLR, no? Or is that only to f/8? I'm sure that the aperture is likely the main reason a similar lens wasn't out earlier.
Sometimes I think I'm an old fashion guy but mirrorless does not convince me 100% yet. Started as a hobby with the D70, D90, to the D7000 then D500 and 2 years ago purchased the D850. I'm quite please with it and I don't see any mirrorless giving me better photos. Upgrading to it because mine is loosing value? Nope, if you talk about market value, maybe. But what that camera gives me, even being 2 years old, that the value I give to it and I'm an open mind tech guy. Thank you for the video!
Given that Nikon isn't releasing new DSLR gear anytime soon, I hope I'm wrong, and the shelves are being cleared of DSLR's, I think you're quite safe from depreciation! Not everyone needs that much sharper that what f-mount provides. PS NEVER show your wife photos of themselves at 100%. LOL
That is a good video for you pros. How about comparing the a6100,6400 6600 and it's competition vs DSLR. In other words, top consumer-level cameras. I'm biased, I just upgraded from an a6000 to an a6400 fwiw/.
Interesting to hear that you quote the Nikon D850 as the benchmark for image quality. I agree. I changed briefly to a Z7 and regretted it as the image quality was certainly not as good. I produce A1 and A2 prints from my D850 and I have not yet found anything to match it in a 35mm format camera. Yes, I can see some benefits with mirrorless cameras, but I believe that going mirrorless means sacrificing image quality. Whatever else people tell me about mirrorless and encourage me to move that way, I intend to keep my superb D850 !
Great reason to buy the Porsche, have fun and not lose a ton of $ to depreciation. Older ones are actually appreciating, but there are issues with maintaining an older car but the fun factor is huge.
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
Best part about Mirror less cameras is that the best used DSLRs are affordable now. 🙏🏼
😄
Yes and just wait till 2024 ! They will be easily under $500 haha
Price is going up on the 5D IV, if you can find them new.
dude! don't let them know that!
You can get teh sony a5000 for under a 100 eur which is a steal
After watching you for a series of years I can say that: You are the best and most serious bloggers about photography. Sorry to say that the majority of bloggers do not share information, they rather try to draw attention. And this is completely different. Tony and Chelsey, you do share a lot of useful information and thank you for this!
Thanks for sharing your views.... As a hobbyist photographer at 77yrs old I am still happy with my D500 & haven't considered upgrading yet..always enjoy hearing about new gear... Cheers..
I'm a D850 shooter and I approve this message. I Picked it up primarily for underwater (and I still have a LOT of Nikon glass) and am now "investing" a large amount of spare change into underwater housing, strobes, ports for my DSLR and one of my "go-to" lenses is the 16-35 but in the housing with the dome port, the size is NOT an issue.
I have come to LOVE the viewfinder with back button autofocus for ALL situations - especially underwater. Yes, I do need a viewfinder extension that magnifies the viewfinder (older eyes... sigh) and I cannot USE touch screen underwater so I fall back to my manual film camera "muscle memory" in setting the shutter speed and aperture. This works well for me on dry land as well.
Resale? Schmeesale! I'm still shooting Pentax 6x7 medium format (and processing my own film) and slice up my own Minox subminiature film from 35mm stock and load the teensy cassettes in the dark bag. Still have a few Nikonos amphibious cameras and lenses. It's a film-fetish, don't be hating.
On the whole size thing, I think the main benefit with mirrorless bodies is weight not size. I know while my A7Riii isn't that much smaller than a 5D iv, it certainly weighs a fair bit less 657 grams vs 890 grams and when you're carrying it around all day you do notice. It's a 200 gram difference and yes I am aware that professional glass is heavy but the net reduction in weight is awesome. Especially if you're carrying two cameras all day for a wedding or something, with two bodies it's a weight reduction of 400 grams which is nearly half a kilo. Nothing to be sniffed at.
Also the size reduction is mostly in terms of depth of the camera because no mirror is required. The smaller depth means the camera is easier to store in a camera bag. I can fit 3 mirrorless bodies in the space that would be needed for 2 dslrs.
I used Sony DSLM for a very short time because the dust(spots) on the sensor drove me crazy. Under harsh conditions/in harsh environments (e.g. deserts and tropical jungles) they were just more or less useless! I now switched to Pentax and bought the new Pentax K3 Mk. III and all I can say is: This camera is an absolute dream to hold in your hands and an absolute fun to use! This camera has the ruggedness I need for my kind of photography! By the way: My favorite photographic shop was (and still is) completely surprised by the demand in this camera. The first batch was sold within 2 hours, the second (larger)batch is already sold, too but there are still 76 cameras on the backlog! Quite remarkable for a company that is said to be "doomed" by so many people...... ;-)!?
When I shot professionally, I upgraded only when client requirements forced me. These days, I love buying used cameras that are five to ten years old. I lusted for some of them then and none of those cameras became less valuable because newer ones were available. The older cameras only became cheaper. I have a lot of fun with hybrid and compact cameras that I'm getting for a quarter of what folks were paying new in 2016. I always met client specs but I've sold much of my gear because they don't benefit me. It's why f/4 has replaced f/2.8 and 24 megapixels are good enough for large prints. Because I don't shoot for billboards, pixel count beyond 24 only fills my cards and drives faster. I think shooting professionally has made my love of affordable and "good enough" cameras and lenses a long-lasting affair.
Still hanging on to the G16.
I switched from Canon dSLR to Sony mirrorless, then back to Canon dSLR (for purely money reasons), and one feature I really do miss is eye autofocus. It's absolutely invaluable for getting shots that are easy to miss due to the seconds wasted on faffing with the joystick and focus area modes on dSLR. I'd used joystick selection for years, and had become quite ninja with it, but for spontaneous pet shots etc, eye autofocus is MUCH faster.
Hello. Please enable closed-captions. It makes a huge difference to those of us who are hearing impaired. Thank you.
My CC feature worked just fine. Wonder why yours did not.
It should be enabled....I just turned it on for this vid and it’s working fine.
It works.
Just click the CC button in the lower right. Worked for me.
The most important thing a photographer must do is learn how to take good photos regardless of whether you have the latest and most expensive Mirrorless camera or a relatively inexpensive DSLR. You need to take the time to learn how to make the best out of what you have. Too many aspiring photographers seem to think that if you buy the latest most expensive camera your photos will automatically be better - nothing could be further from the truth. The great thing about the movement towards mirrorless is that a lot of really good DSLR cameras are coming on the second user market and you can pick up some fantastic gear for a fraction of the price. I still use and love my Sony A77ii and Sony A99, they can produce some great photos, and I have got some superb Zeiss lenses for about a quarter of the price of the new mirrorless equivalents. Anyway, thanks Chelsea and Tony for another great informative video.
Another aspect to consider is that mirror less is still growing and fast! So the Sony camera you buy today is blown away by the next Sony in sometimes as quick as 6 months to a year. I switched from Canon FF and went to the Sony A7II. It was exciting but the AF was horrible. 1 year later, I sold it at a huge loss and bought the A7III. AF was better but the battery life was still dismal compared to the DSLR cameras. I finally jumped ship and went back to Canon FF DSLR. I am glad I kept my L lenses. I am back to taking photos and not chasing the ever changing landscape of latest greatest wiz bang features at substantial financial cost. I prefer to "focus" on composition and exposure. Photography has gone from a skill and art to automated tech. I am griping and I know mirror less makes many people happy. To me, it's just another marketing distraction to get our money. Aperture, shutter speed and ISO (or film speed) are all the settings I care about. Peace :)
What makes me skeptical about the new generation of lenses (on all the new lens mounts) is their dependency to be controlled by camera electronics. For how many years will camera firmware support them? They can't be used afterwards manually with only camera controlled aperture. I'm afraid the recommendation to buy valuable glass because it last's for generations of cameras ist not valid any more. Lenses got disposable items and aren't long lasting investments now. Which decreases the overall system value.
"Planned obsolescence" could become a real issue, for the exact reasons you've outlined - I would be absolutely beside myself if my camera manufacturer decided to stop supporting a favorite lens of mine with a firmware update, rendering it an extraordinarily expensive paperweight. (and thereby tanking any prospective resale value)
We're going to need to reverse engineer protocols and get proper digital adapters.
You are absolutely right Sir. If I ever switch to mirrorless I would keep getting DSLR lenses for that only reason.
Go for Leica M. Problem solved.
Different, but kind-of case in point, old Nikon lenses with AF driven by the body (requiring body support) are no longer supported by newer cams. On the contrary, though, old Canon lenses with lens motors and camera-controlled apertures still work just as well (AF and Aperture + lens IS if included) on my EF-M camera with an adapter as they did in 1987 or 1997 on an SLR. Electronic support is needed, but provided. But, just as Apple is building redundancy into their computer equipment, any of them could. You're really always at the mercy of the manufacturer or third-party support if you want to upgrade. Until mirrorless, old FD lenses were paperweights unless you shot film; there are always ways for them to make things hard to use or unusable if they want to. For cameras, though, if they drop support for the old, there is a better chance that you switch to a competing brand, so you have a better chance of support. Just like EF on EF-M. A little off-topic, but just saw a Techart pro adapter in a RUclips vid that autofocuses manual focus lenses by adjusting flange distance and has its own aperture. Never knew such a thing existed, totally wild. Where there is a will, there is a way.
As a migrant from Canon DSLRs to an R6 and R5 (in that order), I can say that both mirrorless models are way better than the DSLRs that they have replaced. But almost none of those advantages are related to the absence of a reflex mirror. Canon just decided to put their best tech into their new mirrorless bodies and the lenses that go with them. The R5 and R6 are measurably lighter than a 5D Mark IV. But other than the faster FPS, full-screen AF points, and eye AF, it's hard for me to think what Canon did with the R5 and R6 that they could not have done with the 5D series. had they chosen to do so.
I just bought a Pentax K-3 ii last week. I don't need to create good videos, and I still have many manual-focus lenses.
If I want better image quality for landscape photography, I can simply use Pixel Shift and get about twice the effective resolution, and I'd much rather have a good grip and many buttons that are easy to reach than a touchscreen. And noone can beat the functionality of the K-3 ii at the same pricepoint even today.
One major advantage I see in mirrorless is their ability to adapt almost any (DSLR) lens due to the flange distance.
I sold my Canon 5 D MK IV for the R6 and overall I am pleased with the R6, but for top quality and ease of use I sometimes miss my. 5D MK IV.
Do the mirrorless viewfinders have auto on/off function?
Occasionally I'm at a place where I use the viewfinder frequently. And once a year I'm at a car convention and that's two days with the camera almost constantly in my hands. Do I have to leave it on the entire time? Switching the camera on and off a couple thousand times each day would be very impractical.
If auto function; will the constant on/off wear the screen out?
Think most mirrorless cameras [haven't tried all, so not 100% sure] have a power save option, that if turned on, will turn off the EVF and LCD after a set time. To activate the camera, you just touch the shutter button and the camera "spring back to life" though in reality, there is a short delay.
I am a closet photo gear junkie and I've been thinking about "upgrading" to a mirrorless camera for quite a while now. The problem is that I have a Nikon D850 that I think is just fantastic. I do not do video or action photography, just landscape, nature and technical (I am a retired geologist so you can guess the subjects.) I keep asking myself exactly what would I gain by getting a new mirrorless camera. The answer usually comes up as not much. But I want to thank both of you for that fine analysis of just what I should expect going with a dual photo equipment style. I do not intend to give up my D850 since everything I see online confirms that for my type of photography, I have already arrived.
Please explain. I was choosing between sony A6300 mirrorless and Canon 80D. So I bought the Sony and used it for one week and took it back and bought the 80D. The reason was I take a lot of sports action photos for our Special Olympics team, but every time would take a photo, especially in a burst, the viewfinder would lose the subject for an instant with a black screen in the viewfinder. I don't know what happened and the salesman could not explain it. I don't experience this using the 80D. Can you explain?
Q&A: Take a look at page 896 in the R5 Advanced User Guide. I don’t see any teleconverter setups listed.
I have an EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM. Sometimes I like to use the 1.4x III with it. I want to upgrade from my 7D2 to an R6/R5.
Of course, I will need the EF to RF Canon mount adapter. Which raises the question, should I use my EF 1.4x III, or should I buy an RF 1.4x to use with my EF telephoto lenses.
BTW, I also have an EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM, which I may use with either a 1.4x or 2x teleconverters. Again, same question arises.
Do I use the EF teleconverters, or should I buy the new RF teleconverters and use those?
My Canon R does have a shutter curtain that is down when the camera is off.
Just watched this and it was very helpful. I have a Canon 5D4 and 6D which work very well for me but they are super heavy. I want a mirrorless camera for travelling and I've been looking at the new Canons with inexpensive kit lenses (like the R7 with a 18-150 lens) because they are lighter. I don't think I would use the mirrorless for my portrait photography but I know I would not be satisfied with an inferior image for travel. You definitely gave me some food for thought! The size of my DSLRs is actually useful for portrait work because, as a small woman with grey hair, they give me some "street cred" lol. I hear things like, "Wow, that's a serious camera!"
My Pentax K-01 also covers the sensor with the curtain when it is turned off :)
Technology continues to improve on mirrorless. Can't hang on to old myths! Great conversation! Thank you!
Technology also continues to improve on DSLR
Regarding the Eye AF: if I was a wedding photographer I would want this as bad as I want my next breath. Moments fly by in a ceremony and getting that aspect sorted out would free me up to look for the moments.
I thought that too, but most wedding photogs actually use spot AF because in a crowded ceremony, often the focus will switch to the wrong subject. With dual pixel AF where no "focus point" is less accurate than another, they can move the point to wherever the eye is and shoot in servo. Touch and drag on Canon makes it way easier to do so than the traditional joystick method.
@@longliveclassicmusic Subject tracking on Sony.
@@longliveclassicmusic on my Canon R6, I set two different focus buttons - one for spot AF and the other for Eye AF. Solved all my problems.
@@longliveclassicmusic i love how fast and responsive the canon touch focus is...even with the M50 (my choice for a compact camera for free time shooting). If my A7III, which I use for weddings just had that performance.. the joystick and touch is so clunky and slow it hurts.
@@andy.photoandfilm
This is interesting from a real photographer. I keep reading that no one can hold a candle to Sony's AF. So in reality Canon's is more ergonomic?
Remember when our Eye AF was using the center AF point and then re-composing the scene? :D
Yeah, except I don't recall that working very well for moving subjects...
Yes! And I still have an Eos Elan 2e from the mid nineties that had 3 point(!) eye controlled AF, which was pretty unreliable in practice. So I went back to the old way within a day or two. Hopefully the new stuff isn’t just a gimmick.
I bought my wife an R6 because, while she liked my 5dm3, she always had a hard time with "chimping" and not registering that with a dslr, you don't have a "wysiwyg" experience and would get a lot of over/under exposure and it would ruin her experience. With the R6, it's fast, responsive, and she gets the picture that she sees and is much more likely to actually pick up the camera and go use it. (From my perspective the R6 is an amazing progression of tech from even a good dslr and now I am jealous of my wife's camera)
Hi Tony and Chelsea, I upgraded from the Canon EOS 6D to a Canon EOS R6. The only drawback for me was battery life, even though it was not a disappointment. Other than that, everything else is awesome on the R6: the viewfinder, AF system, double card slots, frames per second and even video, that I rarely do. I will say though, I compared files between these two cameras and I wish the skin tones would be fixed via firmware, because they sometimes tend to get a little yellow/green. Files are much easier to work with on the R6 - dynamic range kicks ***. And the RF lenses are just a whole new league, 24-105 compared, at least. Thanks for the video!
Are parts availability and servicing support going to continue on discontinued DSLR cameras ? That’s my main concern. Thanks. You didnt address that issue.
Thanks for the podcast!
The missed (imho) parts of the podcast:
1) most of newer mirrorless manufacturers introduced wider lens mounts, which means more light can come in, so the lens design is different, which opens opportunity for newer and smaller formats, like Canon RF 50mm is simply tiny and weighs about nothing. As for older mounts - some new design appear, like recent 28-70/28-75 lenses from Tamron and Sigma, ~1/3 of price of original, 90-95% of image quality, and ~2/3 of the weight (Sigma 28-70 is 470g vs 835 of Sony 24-70, and most users would not be upset about losing 4mm on the wide end). So with the market shift towards mirrorless - newer gear in general is smaller and lighter.
2) AF quality and speed - Nikon D750 cannot compete with Sony A73. Sony is much faster and accurate, and both end up dropping in price a lot, so for the non-pro general-use folks - Sony would be a better pick.
3) The main benefit of EVF - realtime preview of the image, not what an eye sees through the glass, what the sensor actually gets.
4) Getting back to the high quality cameras - one doesn't need to purchase top of the line gear, there are much cheaper options that $6500 Sony a1, even in Tony's guide :) like Fuji XT-3, or Sony 6xxx series, or Nikon Z50, all are crop, but solid cameras. When talking sport/birds there is Nikon D500, which is probably better, but for an amateur taking photos of family and friends - Fuji/Sony would serve definitely better as general purpose cameras.
5) And regarding the resale value - non-pros would often lean to cheaper (and oftentimes 3rd party glass), and this glass is loosing it's price rather fast. Personal experience of selling of my Nikon gear - most of the glass (in perfect condition, used for 1-2 years) was sold at ~50-60% of the retail price. And manufacturers often discount older gear, which drops the prices even lower. 6) Primary purpose of purchasing the gear - for hobbyists - there is no sense in buying 3-5-7 year old camera, as the technology advances all the time, and 7 year old body with a kit lens will make images comparable to the top of the line smartphone. At least from the non-pros perspective.
7) With people buying phones for $500+ (and upgrading them every 2-3-4 years) - investing $1-2K in the camera is not a bad idea.
8) Each and every case is different.
T and C have a limitless budget for gear. Now and then they mention lower cost options, but invariably in the second breath they remind everyone that the cheaper gear is not very good. They're not the only ones -- all the pro gear reviewers do this. After every video you're left feeling that unless you mortgage your house you can never shoot with the gear they recommend.
Everything I can afford is "good but not great." The images are "pretty sharp but not really sharp." And so it goes
@@timothylatour4977 Well, I split "users" from "hobbyists" and from "pros". In most cases "users" won't really notice difference between different shots, they care about the end result of smaller print, or photo viewed on phone/tablet. Hobbyists will have Gear Acquisition Syndrome, trying to upgrade all the time, and even when the image quality is just 1% better and not visible - they'll try to upgrade, pros - well, that comes from business, and when money is not a question - they buy. I know a family of photographers who still shoot on Nikon D3's (12MP cameras). And it works for their business. For myself - the biggest jump in photo quality was purchasing the Nikon 35mm 1.8 DX (crop one) for D5300. It was a major jump in image quality from the kit lens. 😁 Years later, I won't consider cheaper bodies as they just can't keep up with the type of photos I take, same for lenses. But looking back at photos from D5300 - they are good, but not the best, as you've said.
I am thinking of picking up a Nikon 1 j5 just to have a small light camera. I have an 800e kit with all pro glass. Not looking to compare the two but do you think I will be disappointed with the j5 results?
My opinions on minus point for mirrorless: no pop-up flash and (for Canon, at least, I bought a used R6) no USB cable to connect the camera to my PC for copying the photos/videos taken. Nope, the new thing is apparently you have to make TWO steps to do that: take out the cards (or, if you haven't one already: buy a card-reader), put it in your card-reader (as a Swede I don't know the correct english term for it) and connect it to the PC and at last copy the content. Instead of just connect the camera to the PC and copy the stuff.
As I understand it you're supposed to use the memory cards to copy and install updated firmware? How unnessesary complicated is that? Wouldn't it just be better with a cable between the camera and the computer? I'm a little confused about this...
I use mirrorless, but not full frame. I own an Fujifilm X-T3. This body and the lenses are definitely smaller, but-well-not full frame.
I gave the “she bought a mirrorless camera and went shooting a wedding the next day” a thought: No matter how good one is as a photographer, the camera is a toll one has to get used to. “Never change a running system” also means “make the new system run before you use it.”
I love my Fuji for street photography but the electronic viewfinder doesn’t work for studio sessions with flash because before the flash goes of it’s all black. So I have to change the aperture value twice: open it to frame the picture, close it to take the picture. Of course it’s awful. Luckily I was able to handle it so far. Which brings me back to “know your tool”.
I jumped up from a 600d to an a7ii. My main gripe is the sensor being exposed all the time when I switch a lens (especially outside.) Other than that I have loved the massive increase in capability I gained at a reasonable price point. I do have to say that most of my lenses I had for the 600d were decent m42 lenses I could easily and cheaply convert to FE. I have invested around 1200 euros in 2 loawa macro lenses (15mm f4 wide angle, and 100mm f2,8 2x macro) and they are incredibly versatile. BUT! You can get these lenses for most mounts and honestly that versatility can be had on most bodies. I think it really just comes down to what glass you intend to use, and how you weigh some of the draw backs and benefits from mirrorless. The learning curve for me would have been high going for dslr or mirrorless anyways having had a 10+ year old camera. So I figured I might as well learn what probably will end up going to be the new standard.
Love my Canon R6. When shooting sports the ability to track across the entire sensor is amazing. One example is shooting softball with a batter that is a slapper is very difficult with a DSLR. With the mirrorless R6 shooting from a side profile as the batter quickly steps forward if they move out of the center of the frame the mirrorless tracking is more likely to successfully stay with them. With a DSLR you are more likely to have focus change to the background when this happens.
My first interchangeable lens camera was a mirrorless (a Sony a6000, which I still use) so I can't say I upgraded from DSLRs, but I upgraded from smartphones and point-and-shoots and I still had expectations about upgrading to a 'true' camera, and the things that really disappointed me with my a6000 were:
- the EVF lag. It's really frustrating for fast action like motorsport. It can be done (I got some nice shots of superbikes and single seater open wheel formula cars, but only at slow-medium speeds) but I had to learn to compensate for the lag myself and therefore force myself not to rely on what's actually displayed on the EVF, which is a difficult mental exercise. I know newer mirrorless has gotten better at this, but I rarely can find actual measurements on the lag in reviews.
- the (lack of) power saving. I'm not talking about the battery life itself while taking photos, but the body is just dumb when it comes to saving power. For example the 'standby' mode really is a power off mode: it takes as much time coming out of it as it does when turning it off completely and it resets the lens' power zoom, so I don't see a point to it. You can manually assign a button to the "turn screen off" function but it just does that, turns off the rear LCD. There is no intelligent standby where it would turn off the sensor and put the CPU in a very low power mode where only one button would wake it up while not e.g. reset the lens' power zoom so it's instantly usable when you decide to take it off standby. This point is rarely talked about in reviews so I have no idea if newer mirrorless cameras have gotten better at this. I remember a friend buying a Canon APS-C DSLR at the same time and its standby mode was much better: he could set the timout to a very short time in order to save power, and it would come out of standby much more quickly than my a6000.
- the small grip: I have long fingers (but hands not that big overall), and it's not as comfortable as I wished when using it for a long time. I know the newer ones are much better for this, so when I eventually upgrade it will be nicer. Note that the depth of the grip really is the only disappointment for me, I don't really mind only being able to hold it with 3 fingers instead of 4 and I wouldn't want a bigger camera just to be able to hold it with 4 fingers.
I had other disappointments, but they are not specific to the mirrorless format so I won't include them here.
I don't really mind the small battery life, because while I won't say I love having to swap batteries and remember to charge them, I prefer having replacement batteries in my bag or pockets rather than a bigger battery in the camera adding to its weight.
If I understand you correctly, it sounds like you use the rear screen more with a mirrorless than you do with a DSLR. There are some things that you cannot do with the viewfinder because it's an electronic viewfinder, and you are not looking through the lens. I'm thinking of autofocus, for example. So,if you are using the rear screen more, won't that account in part for the lower battery life with a mirrorless camera?
For an old guy who is myopic well past the diopter range of any camera, mirrorless is a godsend. Recently switched from Pentax to Fuji - will never turn back. From this point, going only forward with GFX and maybe including a reststop at Nikon Z if they survive. Or heck - even if they don't survive there'll be some good deals. Sad thing tho - that they're seemingly in a spiral.
Yes, the eyesight issue is a real one for many of us.
I agree with alot of the things you mentioned and thought it was a great video as always, however, I just wanted to point out that eye af isn't only great on high-end bodies, cameras like the sony a6100 have sonys latest af system, and thats in a $600 camera.
Also you can get A7III already quite cheap, and it may not be great in ergonomics, but the AF and image quality is still amazing. Also all the "hurr durr switching to mirrorless is so expensive" is only partially true. Yeah, if you use Nikon as an example. But just look at Canon. Get the R6 and your old EF lenses will actually perform WAY better through the original adapter than on any Canon DSLR.
@Cowsayspow62 I agree with you 100%. Even the cheap Canon RP has fantastic eye AF and tracking. After several firmware updates it works from a long distance and is very sticky and accurate. DSLRs were nowhere near as good (especially using fast lenses, wide open) as they did not have eye detection at all. They'd just focus anywhere on the face.
I am less than a rookie. My problem is focus within a coin. There us an indent error and I can not get the focus at the bottom of the indent. T7 tried several lens. Please advice is needed. All I want is to get great photos of errors on cents Quarters and Half dollars
Great information and video.
I actually switched from cellphone to an Olympus OM-D. Easy to pick up and I like the size. As an older model, mk II, the autofocus is kind of meh, but I found myself loving more of the manual lens control.
I have an A7iii and a Fuji xt3 and I always end up picking my Olympus m5ii for non paid staff.
@@reykfoto You don't pay your staff? That's not nice!
I dived for the EOS R when it first came out with the RF 24 -105 L lense\
A great experience
I find that sometimes in landscape photography it freezes /blurred and i have to change focus and zoom to get it going again
The slider on the R is not delivering
Went from a (borrowed) 60D (had not been shooting with a “real camera” for a long time) to a R6.
So.. it wasn’t necessarily just DSLR vs. mirrorless, but 10 years of advancing technology as well.
And I love it. The eye AF, when it works, allows me to take better pictures much more easily. But as good as it is (when it works, it seems like magic) it’s not infallible. It’s frustrating when it just won’t pick up the subject and you lose the shot.
I do wish the native lenses were less expensive, but adapted ones work just fine. I’m sure I’ll add to my collection as time and budget allows.. but the 24-240 is a good Jack of all trades lens that I intend to keep on my camera most of the time while travelling.
The one disappointment with this lens is.. inexplicably and never mentioned in any of the reviews I watched/read.. the multiple exposure feature of the R6 body doesn’t work with this lens. Why? I have no idea, and I haven’t been able to get an answer anywhere. Is there a legitimate technical reason? Or am I the victim of the infamous Canon cripple hammer?
hi Guys, i have just upgraded from my old but in good condition Canon 7D to the R5. i had been saving like mad to get the 7D Mk2 but now thats old technology and Canon never made a 7D Mk3 so i put all my cash into getting the R5. My dilema is what to do with the glass i have. Do i start getting rid of my EF glass and change to RF glass or just keep what i have and use the adaptor? I currently have the 17-40 L , 100mm f2.8 L macro, 70-200 f4 L and the 100-400 L mk 2. i did think about changing the EF 100-400 mk2 to the new RF 100-500 and buying the RF 800mm f11 as an additional tele lens, but i dont know if i should change everything over time or keep and continue with the EF glass - any thoughts?
I have been a photographer since I was about 12 years old. As I got older my cameras got better, my knowledge of photography increased.
As an adult, I went on to get a degree in photography. That didn't make me the best photographer.
What it did do was give me better problem (photographic) solving skills. Solving problems didn't require updating equipment, often.
I think a lot of the hype of mirrorless is to benefit companies that make gear. Photography has become less of a hobby from manufacturers point of view. (Cell phones) Mirrorless became "a shot in the arm."
It did so be being hyped about things that aren't necessarily true.
As an example size, maybe weight. The manufacturers have been able to make smaller cameras for a long time. Examples: the Olympus OM-1, the Pentax ME, MX.
When photography was more popular for amaturers, makers could make them as they saw fit. When camera sales began to slump, camera makers needed something to really increase demand. Hence, the mirrorless camera.
Humans are kind of herd animals- yeah let's get a mirrorless camera. The problem being mirrorless cameras are still being developed. They're teenagers if you will.
If the features of mirrorless are truly solving problems for some photographers now, great. I think that for most users, however, it makes little difference. I also think there are still improvements that could come to dslr cameras.
Do I have a mirrorless camera? No. I will when it really becomes necessary. When I am not paying so much for the R&D.
I have 4 Canon bodies, 11 Canon lenses. All of these are in very good condition. They do what I need them to do. When they don't, mirrorless may be the way I go.
This was a great video! I'd love to see an update, now that it's been two years. What's the market space look like now?
Both of these comments are coming from the point of view of a Canon user (so keep that in mind, as I cannot directly hands on compare to other brands).
"Mirrorless is smaller"
The point was not far off... however there are some exceptions. Compare the R series to the equivalent camera, and there is a noticeable shrinkage (i.e. the R5 to 5D). Glass on the other hand is all over the board. That generalized point is spot on. For glass it's more that they have new possibility of lens constructions to take advantage of. For example most of the Canon RF L glass is not smaller than the EF (without EF+Adapter) such as the 50/1.2L.
The example given was a bit ironic as the RF 70-200/2.8L is much smaller/lighter than the EF version.
"It's easy to switch to mirrorless": There were 2 points made on this... hardware (right away) + usage (most of the topic).
I disagree on the hardware aspect. Many Canon users are getting better results with their old lenses with an adapter. So one of Canon's strengths is making it easy for users to bring their lenses with them.
Agree on the usage aspect... however that can be said about going from any camera to any other camera.
Rest was pretty good.
I switched from a Nikon D600 to a Fuji XT3 18 months ago. I kept my D600 for a few months, as going from DSLR to Mirrorless was quite a change for me. Once I managed to feel 100% comfortable on Fuji, I switched completely. I still miss the low light capabilities of a Full Frame dslr, as I do concert photography and I need good low light performance, and also the battery life on the XT3 drove me mad until I managed to find a 2nd hand battery grip. But boy oh boy, the autofocus system alones makes up for all of the other shortcomings. And the video capabilities, so powerful and yet so easy to learn.
Thanks a lot. After watching your video I may wait another year and keep using my 6D mki.
I switched from (or rather I complemented) my Canon 6D Mark II to a Canon R3 - I have had no issues with the image quality or speed advances using my EF L series lenses including the EF 50mm 1.2, my EF 70-200mm 2.8 L series, my Tamron 150-600mm, or any of my other L series lenses. Although I do not have older EF lenses so I have not loss fps issues that the older lenses have as indicated by Canon. I enjoyed your segment, especially as I am considering migrating to Square Space.
Sony, especially couple with Samyang primes and Tamron zooms, allows for a much smaller kit than equivalent DSLR
Moving to mirrorless is awesome. LOVE the autofocus on my R5 over 5DM4. The silent shutter is good weird. Takes a while to learn how to use it. Squeeze the shutter button, think a tactile feedback sensor would be helpful. Media card upgrade is expensive and battery life is much shorter with mirrorless, not a myth. Overall, mirrorless tech is amazing and I will never go back to DSLR or optical viewfinder cameras for work. That being said, you still need to be a good photographer to capture great images. Mirrorless camera systems can be complicated for new photographers (giant user manual), would recommend a simple and older SLR or DSLR, Nikon F3 or Canon 5DM2, if you want to become a great photographer. Then shift to mirrorless.
+1 for silent shutter with feedback (sound /tactile) as long as hit to battery life is miniscule
Tony and Chelsea, tell me if I'm wrong, I want to purchase a Canon R5 camera, an adapter so that I can use my 100-400 5.6 lens for birding, plus I use a 1.4 teleconverter. Is all this possible and will I get the sharp pics that I think I will? Thanks
I bought a Sony A77ii after watching raving reviews about the spectacular auto focus and tracking etc... that was disappointing but I used several Sigma Art lenses and thought some of the issue may have come from the slower lenses etc...
So thankful that the newer full mirrorless cameras are right on point with focusing speed and accuracy etc.
Thanks for putting this together. I'm teaching a nature photography class next Saturday, and, I'm sure some of these questions will be asked..
The Canon 1dx3 does 20 fps in both mechanical and electronic shutter. In fact, it basically acts as a mirrorless camera with full tracking and edge to edge focus points.
Not using the viewfinder you only get 16 fps , only get 20 fps in liveview when it's working like a mirrorless camera
So here is a good question, do you justify moving from APS-C DSLR to MFT to use Panasonic Leica Lenses
I'm doing it so I can get 2x magnification out of a 1:1 macro lens along with 50MP hi-rez mode. And so I can have a lightweight telephoto street photography rig. Everybody sees you when you've got a 70-200, you might as well be waving an AK47 around.
I had to replace my d750 after it died from a wave at the beach. I wanted to stay with Nikon. My choice was between the d780 and the new z6 II. I wasn't even considering the z6. The d780 actually costs more than the z6 II. They're nearly identical on the video side but not on the stills side. I watched many videos on the z6 II before making a decision. The benefits outweighed the drawbacks so that's what I went with. The eye auto focus may not be the best compared to other brands but it is much better than trying to use a single focus point on the d750. I very seldom get a shot out of focus now. There is a learning curve as you mentioned. I'm still learning which type of focus to use and when. One of the things I like about the z6 II is the box you can put on a person so it will track that person better. You can configure the EVF and LCD screen in different ways. You can have it set to just use the EVF, use just the LCD screen, or use both. These options can help save battery life. If my camera is on a tripod and I'm not using the EVF I can just have the LCD screen on. Silent mode is awesome! I took pictures at my daughter's play last week. I had to keep checking to see if it took a picture. I would like to have a white box inside the EVF around the outside of the screen that flashes when the picture is taken in silent mode so you know it took a picture. I love having the histogram displayed in the EVF. You probably know about light defraction with lenses because of the distance to the sensor in the older type lenses. They have to put more elements inside the lenses to focus the light in the corners so they're not too soft. With the phlange distance on mirrorless being closer to the sensor they can design the lenses better to give you sharp images corner to corner. They haven't perfect mirrorless cameras yet so DSLRs do have certain advantages but the number of advantages are shrinking. Oh and you didn't mention the firmware updates that the mortified systems get to improve them that the DSLRs don't get.
Upgraded from a 5dIV to an R6 and love everything about it! Maybe 5% of the time I miss the more megapixels but I knew that going in. In every other way I love the R6. My transition to mirrorless has been very pleasant!
What a well presented unbiased opinion for and against mirrorless and DSLRs. I'll keep with my DSLR for the moment and may even get a second body.
I think this was a video made to make everyone happy. If you had a similar level mirrorless to your DSLR, got to know it, you would not want to go back. Mirrorless creams DSLRs and that's coming from a die-hard DSLR shooter from the SLR film days.
I was told by a “pro” that a mirrorless camera is less likely to steal the subjects soul.
Thank you. Good video. I am about to retire. I was once a decent amateur slr film photographer. But, life happened, and I have not done any photography at all (except iphone stuff) in over 30 years. I have never owned or used a DSLR or any good digital camera with usable auto focus. Still, I do have some decent skills. But, I've decided to get back into photography as a retirement activity,. Mostly wildlife and landscape stuff. I have no investment in any camera system. I'm reading and watching reviews. I have a decent but not unlimited budget. Right now I am leaning toward Canon R6 and one good long wildlife lens to start, probably the Canon RF 100-500. Later I will likely end up with a good zoom wide angle, (maybe 14-35). Make sense?
Thanks for the video guys!!
Here is the main reason I felt I just HAD to switch to mirrorless a few years ago (and glad I did) : Was shooting an acoustic music performer at a small arts venue and the clickety clack of my DSLR was louder than some of the soft passages of the music. After a few stares and recognizing I was ruining the experience for everyone (I'm a musician so naturally didn't want to be inconsiderate of the artist) I just stopped shooting and thought to myself "Never Again".
Well, because I couldn't afford to switch right away, "Never again" came too soon at yet another event shooting where I was covering an outdoor music festival; I was asked to actually come up on stage and "discreetly" capture some of the musicians playing. I felt that certainly no one will hear the shutter of my camera in this setting. I was wrong. Dreadfully wrong. Embarrassingly wrong. The music was roaring, fiddles, banjos, guitars etc and just as I neared within two feet of the fiddle players ear, sneaking up like a Ninja Numbskull, wouldn't you know the music suddenly- unbeknownst to me- had an interlude where the violin player would take a nice, sweet soft and quiet solo.
You are probably ahead of me here and yep, once again as the music abruptly changed volume my clunky dslr, even in "quiet" mode (haha yeah right) went CliCKeTy CLaCK snap SnaP!
Ugh. Pardon my French but I was the jackass of the hour...again. :-/ I'll never forget the side-eye stare she shamed me with. Rightfully so.
That week I began my quest for the "perfect camera" and landed comfortably and happily in Fuji land. :-)
I still use Nikons, Canons, love older OM's and for video Sony's are hard to beat, but my first dip into the mirrorless waters was a Fuji X-T1 which I still have and shall cherish for years.
additional:
Sure, there are pros and con to any system. There is no one size fits all. But for me it was all about being able to shoot respectfully and truly discreetly in quiet environments.
Sorry about the book here haha but if for NO other reason alone this is my case for going mirrorless. Peace.
If you were to buy a quiet camera now, which would you choose? I shoot street photography and wildlife and the click is annoying to me.
@@c.h.5519 It depends on the budget and style of body you prefer.. Something new or is used ok? For street I shoot Fuji's , the X-T2 being my all time favorite. (OMs, Panasonics and smaller Sony's, Ricohs cool too) and I LOVE my X-T1, but since you mentioned wildlife I'd go with a system which has top top notch auto focusing; you could go Sony Alpha 1 if you can afford it (I can't) ... the Nikon Z's are nice and have IBIS, I haven't shot with the newer Canons, but If you preferred smaller body designs I'd go with Sony a6400, 6600 Sony's.. Being aps-c 's and fantastic auto focus would help with wildlife...though you'd have to rely on native lenses for stabilization in the 6400 . 6600 has ibis I believe.
If you love the Fuji aesthetics and "vintage vibe", I'd say X-T4 because it has IBIS, good focus, aps-c, weather sealing etc. but it'll cost more in todays market.
If your budget is less than $1000 US, I'd focus on what was MOST important to you (wildlife or street? Form or Function? Features or ....etc.) then build up from there. I would also take into account the gear you have, ie if you ARE on a tight budget yet already have good glass I'd look into the system which best suits your needs allowing you to use the glass you have.
I use an X-H1 which is great for about $800 US (2022) as a "do all" camera because already I have Fuji glass and its heavy duty mount and IBIS allows me to use vintage glass with confidence for video-art work. Admittedly I don't do a lot of wildlife so super fast auto-focus isn't as important to me. For street it's too big for me though so I'm fond of the X trans 16meg look paired with a 35XF prime on my X-T1 or Zonlai 22mm or Pergear 25mm (manual focus only) or 28mm Zuiko, for video it's the X-T2 and a Zuiko 50mm etc. and for pro work where I want IBIS it s back to the X-H1 with various glass. If you wanted a good "do all" newer mirrorless, and could live without weather sealing you could go with an X-S10 for about $,1000. It has better IBIS and auto focus than the X-H1. It also has a fully articulating screen for vlogging which some hate and some love.
If your budget is $500 I'd suggest looking into the OM-D-EM1, X-T1, Sony A6300 or Lumix G85. Underrated systems each with reputable dynamic range and outstanding image qualities. Peace!
Thanks for the advise I will look at these options
@@c.h.5519 You are most welcome. Peace.
Let's give credit: Without Panasonic & Olympus (and Kodak) you would not have any mirrorless cameras today from any company (Not even Canon, Sony, Fuji nor Nikon), because everyone was proudly pushing their own DSLR's and how theirs was the best. That clunky mirror, the "Live view that you had to switch on/off with every shot, that lack of video. They all copied Lumix * Olympus, and I am glad they did.
After months of debate and research I am upgrading to mirrorless for night photography and sports. Not that a DSLR can’t do the job because I know that I can but mirrorless is something that I want to experience and what I have found fits my budget. this video was pretty helpful though.
Your views seem to be angled towards the high end and full-frame cameras. I moved from DSLR to mirrorless several years ago with the Fujifilm X-T20. In a few respects it was inferior to my faithful Nikon D7100, but for its compactness, the joy of the EVF, and the photography-oriented controls I was an immediate convert. There are several mirrorless cameras with cropped sensors that are economic and attractive alternatives to DSLRs. We don't all need or want the Canon R5s and Sony A1s.
Brilliant video - I'm keeping my 6D mk2 instead of getting the EOS R. Happy to wait till things inprove.
What about someone that isn't upgrading and just considering getting into it just because. What would you say the better option is?
I'll have to disagree and say it was worth upgrading to R5 just for eye AF. even in studio shooting because I can place my model wherever I want and never have to focus and recompose. It helps even more shooting outside with fast lenses where the focus DOF is miniscule. Focus recompose doesn't work very well with a 135mm f2.
That person is NOT out thousands. Maybe 10% at most. Good vendors have excellent return/exchange policies. There is a huge demand for ML cameras and lenses due to the out of stocks. I sold my 4-5 year old f-mount gear (well kept) for very respectable prices and most within 72 hours! I even sold some Z mount glass for near MSRP. It was cheaper than renting, and it takes me more than a few days to get used to near gear. I say help that person out, buy their gear, and have a giveaway. ;)
I was thinking the same thing. Rent the stuff for two weeks and then decide. You don't need to pay thousands before trying it out.
After a pretty huge upgrade, I made recently (canon 500d to a sony a7iii) I am really disappointed with dust getting on the sensor.
I dropped the D750 for the Z6 and I was mostly upset at the AF on the mirrorless camera.
I have the Z6ii now and the firmware updates on that one have made me a much happier user for my wedding photography gigs.
That is kind of odd since the expected subjects at a wedding are quite slow even if they dance.
Do you actually mean the AF or the AI controlled subject identification prior to AF? Check your single point AF, you can also move it on the touchscreen.
With the Z6 I never had issues with taking pictures of humans on events, even stage performance like dancing shot at 300mm with an adapted INCOMPATIBLE Tamron 70-300 lens. Yes, the AF works fine even on an incompatible lens, with that lens the IBIS does not work and the lens image stabilization will choke and shake once in a while if active.
Continuous AF on fast moving subjects like flying birds however is a different story especially at 600mm but the main issue is the EVF which prevents shooting and following the subject due to blackouts and „slideshow“/„lag“.
As I have heard the Z6II still has the same issue with the EVF. It seems that many mirrorless cameras have similar issues with the EVF but this is mostly not addressed. Maybe because wildlife and sports is a niche.
I switched from an enthusiast APS-C DSLR (80D) with full frame pro lenses (holy trinity 2.8) to a pro mirrorless (R5) (with the same lenses) and I saw no difference. The body of the R5 feel nicer and better build but the weight and the size are similar. The only gain is the additionnal 2mm on the grip for my pincky. The weight saving from the lenses is much more substential (Sony 50 1.2GM, Canon, 70-200 L 2.8,...) For the battery life I will say it really depends. When I use my R5 for video it can destroy a battery in 1.5h but for photography with the right config it can last as long as my 80D (which use the same battery). You just need to have a very agressive sleep mode and keep the lcd screen off except for reviewing images and navigating menus.
You couldn't have a 800mm f/11 lens for DSLRs if you want to be able to focus with it... Also, good luck seeing through the optical viewfinder Chelsea..
I own the Canon EOS R and the sensor is covered without a lens attached. You can enable shooting without the lens attached, i.e. the sensor uncovered, but that's for something like attaching to a T-ring and telescope OTA.
Also, there are manual focus third-party RF-mount lenses by Samyang, NiSi, Rokinon, etc. that the RF bodies cannot recognize. So you must enable "shutter release without lens" or you cannot take pictures with those lenses. Canon will not open their mount to third parties, and it will be a while before third party makers can reverse-engineer full compatibility and autofocus into their lenses.
I got my Sony A1 in the mail a few days ago and so far I love it. I love that I have a programmed button just for switching between human, animal, and bird focus...critical when doing street photography. What I'm very annoyed by is that Sony went with CF-Express A instead of B. I tried to use my SDXC cards but they just couldn't handle the camera's buffer very well, so I was forced to spend $900 on 2 Sony CF-Express A memory cards. Not a happy camper!
Well thank you for the clarification on some of these myths but I for one I need gonna change what works for me DSLR I like to compose without having to turn n the camera to do it, Also I like seeing things outside of my frame while shooting since I often shoot in crop mode even with a Nikon D7200 crop camera (I shoot 1.3x crop of that) fro added range to my telephoto while retaining enough resolution for a nice picture That I would have had o crop anyway in post. Seeing the lines inside the viewfinder & what's outside these lines is very valuable to me. So I'm saving my money & keeping my DSLR.
I think you actually can do that on some mirrorless cameras.
I worked with the 5d MK III for years and loved it.
Had just a couple problems. Focus Problems with some of the lenses. Front-focus on my 70-200. I hated to correct it manually and adjust all of that.
It was big and steady and would never break.
I didn't liked that there was no video auto focus, flip screen and for mountain use its just to big for me. Took it with me across the alps, not the happiest I have ever been.
Switched to the a6500 and absolutely hated every single thing about it.
The worst was the usability with gloves and the battery life.
Just (2 Month ago) got me a used EOS R and I love every single thing about it.
Yes it has only one SD card slot, yes 4k crop and yes no 20fps in 50 mpx.
But for me it's perfect. Lighter than the 5d. Just as good image quality and amazing video capabilities.
Love to use my old L- glass with the controls ring adapter. Photos look stunning and the usability is great.
Hope everybody finds the perfect camera for themselves.
thx for the video
Manual focus beats AF all day everyday.
I have not transitioned to mirrorless per se, as they are an “in addition to” my Nikon D850 not a replacement. That said, the more I get comfortable shooting with the Z6 and Z7II, the less I live in the F mount ecosystem. For now, however, the D850 remains my deep winter camera. Its a beast. Ultra reliable. The EVF sensor that allows me to toggle between screen and viewfinder on the Z simply gets too fogged up to function properly at -20C temperatures. Super frustrating. The other 10 momths of the year, I love the mirrorless. I find I bracket less, which saves time when editing, neutral density filters are a breeze, and the eye autofocus is great for capturing photos of quick and erratic toddler granddaughter. Its a steeper learning curve than I thought, but well worth the effort.
So I have a D850 and moved into the Fuji world with an XT3. I love it but switching back and forth is tough. That first time you pick up the D850 in awhile I find I almost have to use Live View to get a similar experience. Quite happy keeping both systems though.
Thank you! In many ways I was looking for a reason to change. I can not offer an actual reason to change from my DSLRs and your advise really helped.
There are many who went mirrorless, only to come back to DSLRs. Me personally, I'll always want an OVF, no matter any technical advantages offered by an EVF. Natural light > LED light. And only being able to look at a screen makes the camera "too" digital for my taste.
Changing - no. But if you want to go full frame - I not go DSLM. That was my reason, I kept the DSLR (80D) for some jobs (Recently got a 6D2 cheap, so now all is full frame)
Thank you for the candid and factual review/talk/discussion. Cheers!
Mostly factual, some opinion. You do not need a high-end mirrorless to out-perform the autofocus of a DSLR. Absolute BS. You need a high-end DSLR to match a cheap mirrorless from Sony or Canon.
@@cooloox Agree
oh what camera are you filming with? the colours are all wrong on it mainly on Chelsea
Hobbyist here, not even a serious one for that matter.
Not so long ago i bought a mirrorless. Sony A7ii with a tamron 28-75 f2.8.
I'm happy with it, think it's a good choice and it's my first full frame camera, before i had a canon g7x ii (compact) in combination with a underwater housing. And even before that i borrowed for a small year a canon d1000. And that is basically my photographing experience with actual camera bodies. The quality and the sharpness of the canon was something i missed even though it was an aps-c sensor, just like the g7x, but that one didn't even come close to the quality of what the dslr gave me. Anyway, the A7ii surpasses them both :) I am impressed
My only 'tiny' regret is the lens, i underestimated the size of it. And starting to realize, that A) the lenses are more expensive then aps-c lenses and B) Size.. But.. i am a sucker for quality, to be able to crop (zooming in) and see every detail is something i guess i am willing to pay for. Not to mention the bokeh, almost like bubbles and everyone loves bubbles.. hehe :)
Anyway.. i went for mirrorless, not simply for better.. but for the future and smaller/tighter, read somewhere that because the lens can be closer to the sensor it's beneficial for the image quality. Since i am new, figured it was better to invest in a 'new' system. After long thinking and contemplating, i choose for sony. I like the in body image stabilization and figured with 3rd party lens developers there would be enough choice eventually. Also with the low amount of different body to lens mounts, i figured it's a 'save' investment. That i would never run into the trouble of a different mount type. I don't know.. just a new guy trying to figure out the maze of companies, lenses, mounts, Dof's, stops, shutter times and iso's. hehe
What happens if I'm at an event using eye AF and I try to get a shot where everyone has their backs to me? AF won't find any eyes so will it ever focus or will it take a long time to focus???
Yes it will focus and quite fast depending on the model. Mirrorless doesn’t just work on eyes alone....trust me....
What would you suggest someone who is looking to upgrade to a full frame from a crop DSLR? Should he get a ff mirrorless or dslr?
Thanks, very interesting talk. Do you guys have a suggested video or source for setting up the autofocus for the Sony A7R4 (I shoot primarily events & portraits). It seems like I haven’t quite optimally worked that out. I’m still relying on my Canon 5D4 for pro shoots until I’m comfortable with the Sony.
I think the camera size for mirorless is definitely a plus because it really is smaller and it helps when traveling. While the lenses are pretty much the same size it does help I noticed it on my trip to Costa Rica recently.
Most of m43 bodies and lenses are smaller than dlsr… even smaller than a lot of apsc
BTW fps is not the be all and end all - you have to also consider the AF performance which also depends on the lens too. Can the camera/lens keep up with the fps, and can the AF acquire and track the focus accurately. Finally, there is buffer depth - is the buffer deep enough to handle a longer burst of 10-20 fps. That is the totality of it all for sports/wildlife.
The sharpness of the Nikon z lenses is noticeably better than their f mount counterparts in my opinion. Have shot a lot with both.
Good video again guys except that an 800mm f/11 wouldn't work well as a DSLR lens as few DSLRs can focus beyond f/8 but mirrorless cameras work well with small apertures
Hi. I have a canon 7d (first version)and i am thinking of to buy a newer camera. I am photographing only wildlife and birds. So I would want one with some fast fps. But I don't know if i going to buy mirrorless or dslr
Hold off and see if the rumored R7 is what you want. Listen to T&C video on the R7.
At 6:28 about the 800mm f11, it's impossible to make a lens like this work on a DSLR, the AF system on DSLR wouldn't work at all with such a slow aperture
Well, there is a reason they don't make the f/11 for DSLR, or not necessarily that it is DSLR, but it is only pretty recently that you could AF f/11 on DSLR, no? Or is that only to f/8? I'm sure that the aperture is likely the main reason a similar lens wasn't out earlier.
* with some exceptions, I think there is a really old catadioptic with AF, maybe it was a Minolta.
Sometimes I think I'm an old fashion guy but mirrorless does not convince me 100% yet. Started as a hobby with the D70, D90, to the D7000 then D500 and 2 years ago purchased the D850. I'm quite please with it and I don't see any mirrorless giving me better photos. Upgrading to it because mine is loosing value? Nope, if you talk about market value, maybe. But what that camera gives me, even being 2 years old, that the value I give to it and I'm an open mind tech guy. Thank you for the video!
Given that Nikon isn't releasing new DSLR gear anytime soon, I hope I'm wrong, and the shelves are being cleared of DSLR's, I think you're quite safe from depreciation! Not everyone needs that much sharper that what f-mount provides. PS NEVER show your wife photos of themselves at 100%. LOL
@@skyrunr That's right, NEVER! LOL
That is a good video for you pros. How about comparing the a6100,6400 6600 and it's competition vs DSLR. In other words, top consumer-level cameras. I'm biased, I just upgraded from an a6000 to an a6400 fwiw/.
With few exceptions T and C are not interested in consumer-level gear. They live at the top of the heap.
Disappointed with the ergo and balance of mirrorless with good fast glass… love the silent and electronic shutter modes.
Interesting to hear that you quote the Nikon D850 as the benchmark for image quality. I agree. I changed briefly to a Z7 and regretted it as the image quality was certainly not as good. I produce A1 and A2 prints from my D850 and I have not yet found anything to match it in a 35mm format camera. Yes, I can see some benefits with mirrorless cameras, but I believe that going mirrorless means sacrificing image quality. Whatever else people tell me about mirrorless and encourage me to move that way, I intend to keep my superb D850 !
If I needed a new camera, I'd get a d850. I currently have a d800 so don't need a new camera, though...
Great reason to buy the Porsche, have fun and not lose a ton of $ to depreciation. Older ones are actually appreciating, but there are issues with maintaining an older car but the fun factor is huge.