The Transition to Mirrorless (1 Viewer)

[JohnRice]

It's been obvious for several years that the single lens reflex (SLR) is on its way out as a logical camera design in a digital world. I'd considered trying a low end Sony years ago, but never made the jump. At that time, technology just hadn't gotten to where it needed to be. Last year I looked at what Nikon was up to, since that's what my lenses are, and realized they had finally gotten serious about mirrorless. I had lost interest in photography the last few years. Until about 14 years ago, my entire life and profession had revolved around photography. I was just a little burned out on it.

I initially got a Nikon Z5, their most basic, full frame model. I was quickly hooked, and decided to go ahead and also get a Z7 ii, which is 45MP vs the 24MP of the Z5, and get an infrared conversion on the Z5. I have to say, I'm stoked. Mirrorless cameras are just fun to use, and I have to say, the more you understand photography, the better they are.

What really surprises me is the fire-breathing hatred of mirrorless I'm seeing in online groups. I'm wondering if these are people who have never used any camera other than an SLR, and probably 35mm and digital SLRs. It seems like they aren't able to adapt to the rather insignificant (in my opinion) differences. The bigger issue is that the SLR has never made sense with digital, though it was a necessary step in the evolution of cameras. There are so many things that are possible now, largely due to the short flange distance, but also the large lens mounts. One example is, I got a full frame fisheye lens that blows away the image of any fisheye ever made, and it only cost $215. Manual focus, and preset aperture, but that especially is no problem on mirrorless. In general though, the image quality of the Z (Nikon mirrorless) lenses is astounding. I'm also very impressed with the innovative ideas Canon has been coming up with their lens line. Especially in reasonably priced lenses, like the 600mm f/11. I hope Nikon does some similar things. I'm sorry, but an 85mm f/1.2 that costs $2,800 is less of a priority than a 70-210mm f/4 that normal people could make great use of. In the meantime, I'll use my Tamron with an adapter, but I'd love to see how small and sharp something like that for mirrorless could be.

So, let's talk about mirrorless.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I bought my first mirrorless camera way back in 2014, picking up Canon's firs offering (an EOS M) for very little money on closeout. It came with a EF-M 22mm f/2 pancake lens that was worth alone what I paid for the entire kit. There were some serious limitations to the camera (really poor auto focus and no viewfinder being two biggies), but I could actually fit the thin in the pocket of my cargo pants / shorts.

About four years later, I picked up a Canon M50 body. The shortcomings of the original M were gone -- this body had usable AF and a viewfinder for much easier use outdoors. This, along with a few other EF-M lenses, became my small travel kit when I wanted to travel light, as everything fit in a rather small bag.

At the end of 2019, I picked up a Canon full frame EOS R kit with RF 24-105mm f/4 L lens on a really good closeout deal. Then the pandemic happened, and I found myself using only the R and M50 bodies, while my two dSLRs (Canon 5D MarkIII and 7D Mark II) sat gathering dust. At this point, I decided mirrorless bodies met my needs, so I decided to transition away from dSLRs and sold my two bodies. I then began transitioning my lens lineup to mirrorless, but have been doing this slowly, as my old Canon EF mount lenses work very well with their mirrorless bodies via an adapter.

My plans are to eventually end up with a similar full frame & crop body setup that I had with the 5D3 & 7D2, but I have held off on buying bodies for now. I would like to pick up either a R6 MarkII (full frame) or R7 (crop) this year, but still may hold off due to some other expenses coming up. I will probably transition away from the M50 at some point, too, as it appears Canon is abandoning the M mount. They are making some smaller RF mount bodies, so they just need to introduce some small RF mount lenses equivalent to my EF-M lenses. I also want to pick up a Canon RF 800mm f/11.

My current setup:
Canon EOS R full frame mirrorless body
Canon RF 24-105L, RF 16mm f/2.8, RF 35mm f/1.8, RF 50mm f/1.8 and RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 lenses
Canon EF 100-400 L IS II and Sigma 105mm f/2.8 macro EF mount lenses (use with EF to RF adapter)

Canon M50 crop mirrorless body
EF-M 22mm f/2 pancake, 11-22mm, 15-45mm, and 18-150mm lenses

Sold items:
Canon 5D3 and 7D2 bodies
Canon EF 24-105L, 50mm f/1.2 L, 16-35mm f/4 L, 70-200mm f/4 IS L and 40mm f/2.8 pancake lenses

I will probably eventually also sell my Canon EF 100-400mm f/4-5.6 IS L II lens plus 1.4x teleconvertor, but that's a hard lens to give up for me.

 

[JohnRice]

I bought my first mirrorless camera way back in 2014, picking up Canon's firs offering (an EOS M) for very little money on closeout. It came with a EF-M 22mm f/2 pancake lens that was worth alone what I paid for the entire kit. There were some serious limitations to the camera (really poor auto focus and no viewfinder being two biggies), but I could actually fit the thin in the pocket of my cargo pants / shorts.

About four years later, I picked up a Canon M50 body. The shortcomings of the original M were gone -- this body had usable AF and a viewfinder for much easier use outdoors. This, along with a few other EF-M lenses, became my small travel kit when I wanted to travel light, as everything fit in a rather small bag.

At the end of 2019, I picked up a Canon full frame EOS R kit with RF 24-105mm f/4 L lens on a really good closeout deal. Then the pandemic happened, and I found myself using only the R and M50 bodies, while my two dSLRs (Canon 5D MarkIII and 7D Mark II) sat gathering dust. At this point, I decided mirrorless bodies met my needs, so I decided to transition away from dSLRs and sold my two bodies. I then began transitioning my lens lineup to mirrorless, but have been doing this slowly, as my old Canon EF mount lenses work very well with their mirrorless bodies via an adapter.

My plans are to eventually end up with a similar full frame & crop body setup that I had with the 5D3 & 7D2, but I have held off on buying bodies for now. I would like to pick up either a R6 MarkII (full frame) or R7 (crop) this year, but still may hold off due to some other expenses coming up. I will probably transition away from the M50 at some point, too, as it appears Canon is abandoning the M mount. They are making some smaller RF mount bodies, so they just need to introduce some small RF mount lenses equivalent to my EF-M lenses. I also want to pick up a Canon RF 800mm f/11.

My current setup:
Canon EOS R full frame mirrorless body
Canon RF 24-105L, RF 16mm f/2.8, RF 35mm f/1.8, RF 50mm f/1.8 and RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 lenses
Canon EF 100-400 L IS II and Sigma 105mm f/2.8 macro EF mount lenses (use with EF to RF adapter)

Canon M50 crop mirrorless body
EF-M 22mm f/2 pancake, 11-22mm, 15-45mm, and 18-150mm lenses

Sold items:
Canon 5D3 and 7D2 bodies
Canon EF 24-105L, 50mm f/1.2 L, 16-35mm f/4 L, 70-200mm f/4 IS L and 40mm f/2.8 pancake lenses

I will probably eventually also sell my Canon EF 100-400mm f/4-5.6 IS L II lens plus 1.4x teleconvertor, but that's a hard lens to give up for me.

Scott, did Canon have an intermediate mount for that EOS M?

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Scott, did Canon have an intermediate mount for that EOS M?

John,

Yes, the EOS M and its successors have a separate mount called EF-M. There is an EF to EF-M adapter that allows Canon's dSLR EF and EF-S mount lenses to work on the M bodies, just as there is a EF to RF mount for the newer RF mount mirrorless bodies. The EF-M mount is a crop-only design. I did try some of my EF mount lenses on my M and M50, but it really defeated the purpose of what I bought the M for -- a small, light weight but fully capable body and lens combo. I ended up selling the adapter that came with my original M kit, as I wasn't using it at all.

It appears that Canon is abandoning the EF-M mount, as it hasn't released any new lenses in a few years and there have just been a couple of small refreshes of M bodies in recent years. They will probably release RF-M versions of the EF-M lenses over time. The system was more popular in Japan and other eastern countries, and never really took off over here. I like it for times when I do not want to pack my backpack or large camera bag, and want to travel really light. As long as my M50 keeps working, I will still use it, but if it dies I will just sell of the four EF-M lenses I own and move on.

To provide a size comparison, here is my EOS R full frame body with RF 24-105mm f/4 L IS lens and EOS M50 crop body with EF-M 18-150mm f/3.5-6.3 IS lens. That is the biggest EF-M lens I own, too.

Here is my old Canon 5D3 full frame dSLR with EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS lens sitting next to the bag I use to transport my entire M50 kit:

 

[Greg.K]

Thinking of going mirrorless soon. My Canon 6D is getting long in the tooth. Considering an R6 Mark II or the new R8 that was just announced. The R8 seems to have a lot of compromises (no IBIS, poor battery life, no mechanical shutter, no focus point selection joystick).

One downside to the RF mount is that Canon is not allowing third party native lenses to be made. I'd consider switching to Sony or Nikon, but buying all new lenses would be more of an upfront financial hit vs using what I've got.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

One downside to the RF mount is that Canon is not allowing third party native lenses to be made. I'd consider switching to Sony or Nikon, but buying all new lenses would be more of an upfront financial hit vs using what I've got.

Huh... what exactly does that mean though? I haven't been paying attention, but AFAIK, none of them really "allow" 3rd party native(?) lenses to be made per se -- 3rd parties usually have to just reverse-engineer things to suit/match whichever mount... although I guess mirrorless mounts could be harder to reverse-engineer at this point, but maybe not much diff than the early days of previous SLR mounts though.

So what exactly is Canon doing differently (that say Sony and Nikon isn't) that gives you pause?

Personally, I'm a Nikon user myself and like/prefer Nikon's system (and ways of doing things) for the most part pretty much all along... but that's mostly just personal preference plus what I just happened to choose (instead of Canon) during the earlier days of DSLRs -- I coulda easily gone Canon back then, especially if I jumped in before the D70 came out.

Currently, although I've had my Nikon Z6 for ~3 years now, I still haven't bothered to buy any dedicated lenses for its mirrorless Z mount, except the very nice 24-70 f/4 kit lens that came w/ my Z6 bundle. I'm considering getting a small, moderately wide or normal, prime lens for street photography, but otherwise, probably not getting any dedicated Z mount lenses for the foreseeable future...

_Man_

 

[Greg.K]

So what exactly is Canon doing differently (that say Sony and Nikon isn't) that gives you pause?

They are apparently being very aggressive in stopping them. At least for any lenses with autofocus.

We Won’t See Third-Party RF-Mount Lenses “Until Late 2024”

Canon is shutting down RF-mount third-party lenses. We share all the details - and discuss the future of Canon's lineup.

digital-photography-school.com

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Thinking of going mirrorless soon. My Canon 6D is getting long in the tooth. Considering an R6 Mark II or the new R8 that was just announced. The R8 seems to have a lot of compromises (no IBIS, poor battery life, no mechanical shutter, no focus point selection joystick).

One downside to the RF mount is that Canon is not allowing third party native lenses to be made. I'd consider switching to Sony or Nikon, but buying all new lenses would be more of an upfront financial hit vs using what I've got.

Yes, that new R8 seems too limited for me as well. I am still trying to figure out where to go next from my original EOS R -- either add a R7, or just sell the R and buy a R6 MkII.

I did just order the Canon RF 800mm f/11 -- it should be here tomorrow. I decided to pick this up now, since I will have some time to use it next month down in South Carolina. We will probably have time on this trip to visit Huntington Beach State Park, which has lots of birds.

As for Canon's stance on 3rd party lenses, I have never been a big purchaser of them (just have a Sigma 105mm macro, and once owned a Sigma 17-70mm crop sensor lens), but I still think this is short-sighted by Canon.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

My Canon RF 800mm f/11 lens arrived yesterday. I will not have a chance to give it much of a test for a few days, as we have an ice storm hitting our area today and tomorrow. I did take a few quick test shots in the backyard (see below).

The lens is quite light for 800mm -- it's lighter than my EF 100-400mm f/4-5.6 L II, and just a couple of inches longer. The locking mechanism for extending the lens was different than anything I've seen in a Canon lens, and took me a few minutes to figure out. There is a locking ring that must be twisted to the unlock position, then the lens must be pulled out into the extended shooting position, and finally the ring must be turned back to the locked position. Failure do this properly results in a message in the camera screen informing you to extend the lens into the shooting position.

The lens, like all Canon non-L lenses, did not come with a lens hood or tripod foot. I ordered 3rd party versions of each, and they should be here Friday. Canon's hoods are ridiculously priced, so I always buy 3rd party. The tripod foot is from a iShoot, and gets good reviews. A Canon hood plus Kirk tripod foot would have cost me $143, while this combo was only $52.

Here are a couple of comparison shots of my three telephotos side by side -- the RF 800mm f/11, EF 100-400mm f/4-5.6 L II (with EF to RF adapter), and RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8.

Here are a couple of quick test shots. The ball was in my neighbor's backyard, probably 100 feet or more away. The 2nd is the bird feeder at the back of our yard, approximately 60 feet away. Both shots were handheld, and neither photo has been cropped at all.

 

[JohnRice]

My Canon RF 800mm f/11 lens arrived yesterday. I will not have a chance to give it much of a test for a few days, as we have an ice storm hitting our area today and tomorrow. I did take a few quick test shots in the backyard (see below).

The lens is quite light for 800mm -- it's lighter than my EF 100-400mm f/4-5.6 L II, and just a couple of inches longer. The locking mechanism for extending the lens was different than anything I've seen in a Canon lens, and took me a few minutes to figure out. There is a locking ring that must be twisted to the unlock position, then the lens must be pulled out into the extended shooting position, and finally the ring must be turned back to the locked position. Failure do this properly results in a message in the camera screen informing you to extend the lens into the shooting position.

The lens, like all Canon non-L lenses, did not come with a lens hood or tripod foot. I ordered 3rd party versions of each, and they should be here Friday. Canon's hoods are ridiculously priced, so I always buy 3rd party. The tripod foot is from a iShoot, and gets good reviews. A Canon hood plus Kirk tripod foot would have cost me $143, while this combo was only $52.

Here are a couple of comparison shots of my three telephotos side by side -- the RF 800mm f/11, EF 100-400mm f/4-5.6 L II (with EF to RF adapter), and RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8.

Here are a couple of quick test shots. The ball was in my neighbor's backyard, probably 100 feet or more away. The 2nd is the bird feeder at the back of our yard, approximately 60 feet away. Both shots were handheld, and neither photo has been cropped at all.

And that lens is a fixed f/11, isn’t it?

 

[Scott Merryfield]

And that lens is a fixed f/11, isn’t it?

That is correct. The lens does have its limitations -- the smaller fixed aperture means using higher ISO settings in lower light, the minmum focus distance is almost 20 feet, and at f/11 not all the auto focus points in the camera body are available (just those in the center area). However, it does seem to provide sharp images. Until now, an 800mm lens was out of my reach -- the Canon RF 800mm f/5.6 L is $17,000, while this was $900. Canon also makes a 600mm f/11 version with a minimum focus distance of under 15 inches for $600, while their RF 600mm f/4 L is $13,000.

 

[JohnRice]

That is correct. The lens does have its limitations -- the smaller fixed aperture means using higher ISO settings in lower light, the minmum focus distance is almost 20 feet, and at f/11 not all the auto focus points in the camera body are available (just those in the center area). However, it does seem to provide sharp images. Until now, an 800mm lens was out of my reach -- the Canon RF 800mm f/5.6 L is $17,000, while this was $900. Canon also makes a 600mm f/11 version with a minimum focus distance of under 15 inches for $600, while their RF 600mm f/4 L is $13,000.

I have the Sigma 15o-600 C and the fact is, if you go outside f/8-11 at 150mm and f/11-16 in the mid to long range, the resolution drops so fast, those apertures might as well not exist.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

I have the Sigma 15o-600 C and the fact is, if you go outside f/8-11 at 150mm and f/11-16 in the mid to long range, the resolution drops so fast, those apertures might as well not exist.

I went w/ the Tamron competition in that range. Haven't had opp to use it much so far, but I seem to recall finding it quite usable, if not always excellent, throughout most of its range even just about wide open.

However, I don't have a body w/ quite the rez (and small pixels) of the Z7. On my 36MP D800, my Tamron seemed fine throughout IIRC.

Maybe the more expensive Sigma Sport version would be more comparable though -- the Tamron is priced right in between the 2 Sigma versions.

_Man_

 

[JohnRice]

I went w/ the Tamron competition in that range. Haven't had opp to use it much so far, but I seem to recall finding it quite usable, if not always excellent, throughout most of its range even just about wide open.

However, I don't have a body w/ quite the rez (and small pixels) of the Z7. On my 36MP D800, my Tamron seemed fine throughout IIRC.

Maybe the more expensive Sigma Sport version would be more comparable though -- the Tamron is priced right in between the 2 Sigma versions.

_Man_

I think the Tamron is better. I wish I’d spent the extra $ for it.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I have the Sigma 15o-600 C and the fact is, if you go outside f/8-11 at 150mm and f/11-16 in the mid to long range, the resolution drops so fast, those apertures might as well not exist.

Yeah, I don't think the aperture being fixed at f/11 will be that big of a deal. I wouldn't want to shut it down any more than that anyway. It would be nice to be able to open it up some, even to f/8, when light conditions lessen. Of course, if that was possible, it would be a much larger and more expensive lens. Having a usable 800mm full frame lens available with auto focus and image stabilization for $900 -- or a 600mm for $600 -- is something I never expected to see.

 

[Sam Posten]

Love my z5. It’s always in the truck with me

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I took my new Canon RF 800mm f/11 out for a test spin at a couple of local parks this morning. I shot most of these using a monopod, although a couple were handheld. None of the images are cropped.

I cropped this image in post processing. The swan was quite a ways away, and the composition stunk.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Another shot with my new RF 800mm f/11 lens on my full frame EOS R body. This was taken in my back yard, shot with a monopod. The bird was in our next door neighbor's yard. I cropped the image a little in post processing -- it helps when you have 30MP to begin with.

 

[Greg.K]

Well, annual bonus time is a dangerous time. I've ordered an R6 Mark II + RF24-105 F4 L kit, plus the EF-RF adapter from B&H. Should be here Tuesday.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Well, annual bonus time is a dangerous time. I've ordered an R6 Mark II + RF24-105 F4 L kit, plus the EF-RF adapter from B&H. Should be here Tuesday.

You'll love the RF 24-105L. I bought it as part of a kit with my EOS R, as my EF version's image stabilization was going wonky. The RF version is a nice upgrade.