1. Sign-up to become a member, and most of the ads you see will disappear. It only takes 30 seconds to sign up, so join the discussion today!
    Dismiss Notice

Anyone gone mirrorless?

Discussion in 'Photography' started by Sam Posten, Jul 28, 2011.

  1. Scott Merryfield

    Scott Merryfield Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 1998
    Messages:
    15,474
    Likes Received:
    3,135
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Michigan
    A shot of our grand nephew with my new Canon EOS R and EF 50L lens (via the EF to RF lens adapter). I'm really pleased with the camera so far. It handles my EF lenses as if they are native to the body, auto focus performance is excellent, and the images need very little work in post processing. My 50L lens has never performed so well.

    [​IMG]
     
    Mike Frezon and Sam Posten like this.
  2. ManW_TheUncool

    ManW_TheUncool Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    6,268
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    The BK
    Real Name:
    ManW
    The new Nikon Z 70-200 f/2.8 VR S looks enticing... but... I can’t see myself spending that much on it for a small mirrorless body and then not also be able to use it on any Nikon DSLRs like my D800.

    I think if I spend that much at this point, I’d wanna be able to use it on my D800 too.

    OTOH, if they would give us a Z 70-200 or (especially) 70-300 f/4 VR S for say 1/2 that price, I’m there!

    _Man_
     
  3. Scott Merryfield

    Scott Merryfield Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 1998
    Messages:
    15,474
    Likes Received:
    3,135
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Michigan

    That's where I am at with telephoto lenses for my new Canon EOS R, too. As long as I own a Canon EF mount dSLR for use with my telephoto lenses, I really cannot consider upgrading my EF 70-200 f/4 IS or EF 100-400L lS lenses. I use those two lenses mostly with my Canon 7D2 dSLR, and only occasionally with my old Canon 5D3 full frame dSLR that is being replaced by the EOS R. For now, if I want to use one of the telephoto lenses on the EOS R, then I will just use the EF to RF adapter. There is absolutely no degradation in performance using EF lenses on the R vs. using them on a Canon EF mount body. The only downside is the adapter adds a little length to the lens -- it makes my EF 16-35mm f/4 IS lens look like a short telephoto. :laugh:

    I don't plan on replacing the Canon 7D2 anytime soon. I like having a dedicated body for wildlife shooting, as it greatly reduces lens changes when out in the field shooting both wildlife and landscapes. Until Canon makes an affordable RF mount replacement for the 7D2, I will stick with what I have.
     
  4. Cameron Yee

    Cameron Yee Executive Producer
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    May 9, 2002
    Messages:
    12,147
    Likes Received:
    944
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Since 2006
    Real Name:
    Cameron Yee
  5. Message #265 of 277 Feb 13, 2020
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2020
    Scott Merryfield

    Scott Merryfield Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 1998
    Messages:
    15,474
    Likes Received:
    3,135
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Michigan
    I have the RF 24-105mmL f/4 IS and RF 35mm f/1.8 lenses, which compare favorably price-wise with their EF counterparts. There is also an RF 24-240mm variable max aperture lens, but I have never been a fan of super zoom lenses. Otherwise, you are correct regarding the current RF lens line-up - - the other lenses are very expensive. Supposedly, Canon has 9 new RF lens releases planned for 2020, including two teleconvertors and a 100-500mm f/5.6-7.1 lens. The other lenses are unknown at this time, but hopefully some are in the more affordable areas.

    Personally, I would be happy with a replacement for my EF 16-35mmL f/4 IS and a more affordable 50mm offering -- the RF 50mmL f/1.2 is supposed to be incredible, but it's also $2,100. That's too rich for me. I would love a RF 50mm f/1.4 of similar quality to the RF 35mm I currently own. I could then sell my EF 50mmL f/1.2.

    I cannot envision replacing my two EF telephoto lenses while I still own a 7D2 for wildlife. The only other lens I own is a Sigma 105mm macro, and I am perfectly happy using the EF to RF adapter for it, as that lens doesn't get much use.
     
  6. Cameron Yee

    Cameron Yee Executive Producer
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    May 9, 2002
    Messages:
    12,147
    Likes Received:
    944
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Since 2006
    Real Name:
    Cameron Yee
    Next rumor in the mill is an R6 with 20MP and 4K video, which seems to be more within reach for me. I'm assuming this is the mirrorless successor to the 6D.
     
  7. JohnRice

    JohnRice Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2000
    Messages:
    12,531
    Likes Received:
    2,089
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    A Mile High
    Real Name:
    John
    I just have to ruminate on how absurd photography has gotten. I can't even begin to wrap my mind around the concept of a 50mm lens, any 50mm lens, that costs $2,100. The obsession with shallow depth of field is destroying creativity in photography.
     
  8. Cameron Yee

    Cameron Yee Executive Producer
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    May 9, 2002
    Messages:
    12,147
    Likes Received:
    944
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Since 2006
    Real Name:
    Cameron Yee
    Yeah, it's strange for a 50mm, since it's not even considered a "portrait lens" where you would want that shallow a DOF. The other scenario I think a 50mm f/1.2 *might* have some benefit is concerts, but it seems a concert photographer would be more interested in low light ISO improvements in the cameras than having a lens with that big of an aperture.
     
  9. JohnRice

    JohnRice Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2000
    Messages:
    12,531
    Likes Received:
    2,089
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    A Mile High
    Real Name:
    John
    Which brings up another thing, and the final nail in a casket of my trying to help people. A guy was complaining that his Nikkor 105mm f/1.4 needed focus calibration. He posted a bunch of example photos, all of which appeared to have no focus problems. The problem was he was shooting tight faces at f/1.4, so he only had about 1/8" of depth. I commented that his focus appeared to be fine and what he needed to do was stop down a bit to get more depth of field. The guy kind of lost his mind, telling me that he didn't buy that lens to stop it down and he knew he could get the result he wanted wide open because he'd seen other examples with the same lens shot wide open with the results he wanted. Of course, those examples weren't such tight shots, so they had more depth due to the greater camera to subject distance. But, just try explaining that to someone with a lot of dollars and no sense, and zero desire to understand anything. The guy ended up trolling me so much, warning everyone I responded to that I didn't know what I was talking about, I eventually just left.

    End rant.
     
  10. Message #270 of 277 Feb 21, 2020
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2020
    ManW_TheUncool

    ManW_TheUncool Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    6,268
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    The BK
    Real Name:
    ManW
    Yeah, I can't even get myself to spend $600 on the Nikon Z/S f/1.8 version, but they have the even more absurd Noct 58 f/0.95 despite needing to come out w/ tons more Z/S glass... Granted, the FTZ adapter does work well and gives new life to some of their modern AFS glass (along w/ other 3rd party ones) while also extending compatibility to very old, manual glass (particularly the AIS stuff), but still... just seems silly considering they're fighting to recover marketshare from Sony...

    Well, at least they did release a superb 24-70 f/4 to go w/ the Z bodies and even offered it bundled at fairly attractive price, which seems nearly perfect for me (short of a 24-105 or 24-120 at f/4 perhaps... though those would probably involve noticeable compromises)...

    Also glad they made another significant firmware update for my Z6 (that I care about) though...

    _Man_
     
  11. Cameron Yee

    Cameron Yee Executive Producer
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    May 9, 2002
    Messages:
    12,147
    Likes Received:
    944
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Since 2006
    Real Name:
    Cameron Yee
    This reminds me of when I was looking at a family friend's wedding photos from the hired (notice I didn't say "professional") photographer. Broad daylight (granted, some were in the shade) and she was shooting at f/1.8 for everything, including the group photos. Metadata can be a dangerous thing. :D
     
    ManW_TheUncool likes this.
  12. JohnRice

    JohnRice Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2000
    Messages:
    12,531
    Likes Received:
    2,089
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    A Mile High
    Real Name:
    John
    Group photos shot wide open. Freaking brilliant.
     
  13. Cameron Yee

    Cameron Yee Executive Producer
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    May 9, 2002
    Messages:
    12,147
    Likes Received:
    944
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Since 2006
    Real Name:
    Cameron Yee
    But it definitely froze any unexpected action at 1/4000 of a second. :)
     
    ManW_TheUncool likes this.
  14. ManW_TheUncool

    ManW_TheUncool Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    6,268
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    The BK
    Real Name:
    ManW
    :popcorn:

    :laugh::laugh::laugh:

    Probably shouldn't laugh too hard... since it was your friends' wedding, heh...

    Did they at least like (most of) the results? That's probably what matters most... as long as they don't plan to blow them up to be hung around the house... :P

    _Man_
     
  15. Cameron Yee

    Cameron Yee Executive Producer
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    May 9, 2002
    Messages:
    12,147
    Likes Received:
    944
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Since 2006
    Real Name:
    Cameron Yee
    It was a friend of my parents, actually, and I only saw the photos because they happened to be in one of the group shots. So I don't know how the couple felt about the results. They looked "fine" on the computer monitor but yeah, would not have held up to much enlargement.
     
  16. Scott Merryfield

    Scott Merryfield Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 1998
    Messages:
    15,474
    Likes Received:
    3,135
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Michigan
    Yeah, some people insist on shooting wide open all the time with a fast lens. I never understood that mentality. I do not think I ever have shot my 50mm f/1.2 wide open -- other than just to test it out. The only reason I ended up with that lens is because Canon's f/1.8 and f/1.4 50mm lenses had major auto focus issues, and I really like that focal length for family events on a full frame body.
     
  17. JohnRice

    JohnRice Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2000
    Messages:
    12,531
    Likes Received:
    2,089
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    A Mile High
    Real Name:
    John
    I ran into the same problem trying to help people with their sports photography. Again, I suggested not shooting everything wide open, in order to gain some wiggle room with focus. And again, I got trolled with comments like "So, you're saying Sports Illustrated photographers are doing it wrong?" When I tried to explain that Sports Illustrated photographers have the skill needed to do it that way, it was like opening a flood gate of hatred and trolling. Anyway, the result is the same. It's disheartening.
     
    Scott Merryfield likes this.

Share This Page