Worth switching to mirrorless?

Worth switching to mirrorless?

Author
Discussion

R1 Dave

Original Poster:

7,158 posts

262 months

Sunday 12th August 2018
quotequote all
Hi all,

Im currently a Nikon user and primarily use a D500. I've been shooting Nikon for about 15 years and had never considered switching but another recent switch (iPhone to Huawei P20 Pro) has made me realise I need to stop being so blindly brand loyal and start broadening my horizons!

I generally do weddings plus portraits of my kids and the odd landscape here and there. I'm tempted to move over to full frame and have seen loads of reviews of the Sony A7iii. The retro styling of the mirrorless cameras appeals to me. I know that Nikon is about to release a mirrorless but the price is likely to be above my budget (£2k).

I guess what I'm asking is have any of you guys made a similar switch and did you regret it? Lens wise I'd have to sell my DX lenses along with my speedlight but I'd probably get an adaptor and continue to use my 24-70 f2. 8.

Thanks in advance

Dave

JonChalk

6,469 posts

109 months

Sunday 12th August 2018
quotequote all
I went up through the Canon range from starting with a 100D (I think) to a 7Dmk2 over about 8 years, then got fed up with lugging loads of lenses around and ditched it all for a Sony a7II, plus just two lenses.

Loved that camera - picture quality was excellent. FF sensor gives unbeatable quality. Never noticed the missing mirror.

That's gone now for an RX10 IV because I've changed what I photograph and why, so this is so much more convenient.

Both have excellent EVF's.

edit: all secondhand, except the RX10, which was first new camera I've ever bought.

toohuge

3,429 posts

215 months

Sunday 12th August 2018
quotequote all
Op - it sounds like you’re considering change for change sake.... in that case, change and mirrorless is fine.

The only advantage full frame mirrorless will give over full frame dslr is a smaller and lighter body. If that’s important then switch.

If you’re happy with the speed and accuracy of the d500 - I’d be sticking to that if I were you.

The change to full frame will be more noticeable than whether there’s a mirror there or not.

Whoozit

3,579 posts

268 months

Sunday 12th August 2018
quotequote all
toohuge said:
The only advantage full frame mirrorless will give over full frame dslr is a smaller and lighter body. If that’s important then switch.
Don't forget the electronic viewfinder. And the generally easier remote connection as they're designed in the 21st century. And focus peaking which gives the ability to easily use third party manual lenses. For instance.

But yeah, if you only value lightness, then that works too.

R1 Dave

Original Poster:

7,158 posts

262 months

Monday 13th August 2018
quotequote all
Thanks for all the replies. Size and weight isn't the issue, the D500 isn't exactly heavy. Maybe I am just considering change for changes sake, I've just fancied a full frame for ages but it's always been more money than I could justify (I'd have gone with a D850) but seeing that I could achieve that within budget has got me thinking. I think I need to find an A series camera in a shop and have a proper look at it.

Lynchie999

3,421 posts

152 months

Monday 13th August 2018
quotequote all
R1 Dave said:
Hi all,

t but I'd probably get an adaptor and continue to use my 24-70 f2. 8.

Thanks in advance

Dave
... do not do that, get native lenses!


eein

1,331 posts

264 months

Monday 13th August 2018
quotequote all
I changed from Nikon to Sony mirrorless ~ 3 years ago, going form a D600 to an A7R2. I was surprised how much I got selling my old Nikon lenses on ebay so buying new Sony ones wasnt too bad. Initially there was not a great range of Sony lenses, but it's better now and I now have the few I need. Now that Sony are releasing their second generation of lenses aimed at the A7 range, you'll find more of the first set appearing on ebay at good prices.

Whether is due to the mirror or not, the things I enjoy after changing are these. Some I think are now possible on Nikon SLRs.
- Body is lighter, so when used with a simpel lens it's more like carrying around a creative compact camera than a 'SLR'.
- Silent operation - zero cliking of mirror or shutter or beeps. Useful at events such as weddings.
- Connectivity to smartphone to quickly pull off shots for whatever purpose.
- Electronic view finder shows you what the shot will actually come out like on the camera sensor. In particular shots in to the sun, etc are easier to judge.
- The whole operating system and functions on the A7R2 are the same as my parter's compact RX100 iv, so I can not much more easily jump between them and I now get better from the compact as I'm quick to spin up appropriate manual settings.


Other points to note:
- Equiped with a big lens (eg Sony 70-200 GM with 2.0x) it's as big and heavy as any SLR.
- Moving from Nikon where I'd had 4 bodys for over 10 years adjusting to the new button and control layout tooke ages. I'm not using it every week so it took probably 2-3 holidays to get slick. At the end of my time with the Nikon I was on holiday in Kyrgstyan in the middle of nowhere taking photos of the galaxy stars in the pure black sky, our driver had a base model Nikon and I was able to operate it with full manual settings adjustment (as required for star shots) in pitch black so dark I could not see my hands. This was a true test of brand consistency!
- The 'apps' on the Sony camera you have to pay for. Annoying shelling out £3k+ for a body and then having to pay £8 to get time lapse working.
- The buttons on body of the Sony are all configurable, this is marketed as a plus point versus the traditional brands. I don't like it, I assign them and then forget what they are, I'd rather they just fixed then and labelled them accordingly. I guess I could stick wee labels of my own on, but that's a bit .



R1 Dave

Original Poster:

7,158 posts

262 months

Monday 13th August 2018
quotequote all
Thanks for that, that's a very interesting insight.

GetCarter

29,358 posts

278 months

Monday 13th August 2018
quotequote all
R1 Dave said:
Thanks for that, that's a very interesting insight.
I also moved from Nikon D1, D2X D3, D800 to Sony A7Rii and would never go back.

I can fit two bodies with lenses fitted into a bag a quarter of the size, and a quarter of the weight.

Loads more pixels has obvious benefits.

ETA, as I said on another thread, IMHO mirrored cameras will stop production within the next 10 years - probably much sooner. It's a dead duck.

Edited by GetCarter on Monday 13th August 18:46

ukaskew

10,642 posts

220 months

Monday 13th August 2018
quotequote all
toohuge said:
The only advantage full frame mirrorless will give over full frame dslr is a smaller and lighter body. If that’s important then switch.
My a7RII, Sigma FE 35mm and 85mm ART combo disagree with you!

In all seriousness though...

- Silent shooting (a big deal for weddings)
- Full AF through the tilting LCD screen
- Scarily good Eye AF
- WYSIWYG viewfinder
- No microadjustment shennanighans
- Focus peaking
- Huge scope for adapted glass (ultra fast Canon glass works better on an a7Rii than any Canon I've experienced)
- Electronic Shutter, meaning possibility of wide open shooting in bright sunlight without filters
- All new glass built with very high res sensors in mind

I wouldn't swap my a7RII for a DSLR if you paid me now. Silent shooting at weddings alone has gained me photos that I'd never otherwise get.

Edited by ukaskew on Monday 13th August 18:45

Simpo Two

85,147 posts

264 months

Monday 13th August 2018
quotequote all
ukaskew said:
Electronic Shutter, meaning possibility of wide open shooting in bright sunlight without filters
And a high flash synch speed? I'm surprised most DSLRs are only 1/200th.

R1 Dave

Original Poster:

7,158 posts

262 months

Monday 13th August 2018
quotequote all
Thanks all for all the advice. The more I read, the more I want to switch. I did pop into my local branch of Curry's today hoping to find an A series to try out but all they had was an A6000 which I'm guessing is several iterations old (and I know it's a much lower level camera) as it was a bit crap.

ukaskew

10,642 posts

220 months

Monday 13th August 2018
quotequote all
Simpo Two said:
And a high flash synch speed? I'm surprised most DSLRs are only 1/200th.
With the Sony RX1 or Fuji X100 range yes, but not with the interchangeable lens equivalents. Sync speed quoted on the a7RII is 1/250.

I'd never wed myself to one system but I've been truly blown away by the a7RII (what amazes me is that apparently the a7III is a significant leap forward again). The D750 was pretty much perfect as a DSLR and if mirrorless was never invented I could have seen myself holding onto one of those for a very long time, but for me the a7RII is effectively the mirrorless equivalent. I'm certainly nowhere near being held back by in it any way...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/harry_s/albums/72157...


Edited by ukaskew on Monday 13th August 21:31

R1 Dave

Original Poster:

7,158 posts

262 months

Monday 13th August 2018
quotequote all
ukaskew said:
Simpo Two said:
And a high flash synch speed? I'm surprised most DSLRs are only 1/200th.
With the Sony RX1 or Fuji X100 range yes, but not with the interchangeable lens equivalents. Sync speed quoted on the a7RII is 1/250.

I'd never wed myself to one system but I've been truly blown away by the a7RII (what amazes me is that apparently the a7III is a significant leap forward again). The D750 was pretty much perfect as a DSLR and if mirrorless was never invented I could have seen myself holding onto one of those for a very long time, but for me the a7RII is effectively the mirrorless equivalent. I'm certainly nowhere near being held back by in it any way...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/harry_s/albums/72157...


Edited by ukaskew on Monday 13th August 21:31
Some great photos there

jamesbilluk

3,654 posts

182 months

Tuesday 14th August 2018
quotequote all
I was always a canon user, and had 2 bodies, with a good selection of lens’s, I made the switch to Sony (that was when there lens and camera selection wasn’t as good as it is now) and I would personally never switch back to DSLR again now I’ve got used to mirror less,

I have an A7Riii, and an A9 at the moment, both have different strengths, the A9 is a monster when it comes to speed, 20FPS, zero black out on the viewfinder, and completely silent shutter that can be used on fast moving objects. I used to think the Canon 1DX was quick, but this is in another level.

The A9 has certainly come down in price, but still pricy. I love the detailed images that come out of the A7RIII though. I have read very good things about the A7iii though. I think they’re trickling bits of A9 AF, and other aspects to the more affordable cameras now. There is some lovely e mount lens’s as well, the 24-70 2.8 GM, and the 70-200 F4 are very sharp.

Edited by jamesbilluk on Tuesday 14th August 08:59

eein

1,331 posts

264 months

Tuesday 14th August 2018
quotequote all
For purchasing it's work looking around at all your options. I got the A7R2 body in the Dubai Sony shop as it was much cheaper than the UK (£100s less despite being new out at the time), however the initial lenses I got much cheaper in the UK Sony online. More recent lenses (70-200 GM 2.8) I got from the ebay E-finity ebay store (used them a few times) - I had waited a few months after the lens was first released and the price drop off was huge.


V8_Fastback

1,154 posts

192 months

Tuesday 14th August 2018
quotequote all
eein said:
For purchasing it's work looking around at all your options. I got the A7R2 body in the Dubai Sony shop as it was much cheaper than the UK (£100s less despite being new out at the time), however the initial lenses I got much cheaper in the UK Sony online. More recent lenses (70-200 GM 2.8) I got from the ebay E-finity ebay store (used them a few times) - I had waited a few months after the lens was first released and the price drop off was huge.
True... thinking of upgrading my fairly new a6300 already.

In Dubai and our equivilant of Amazon currently has the a7rii at a 40% discount, so can get it for £1500 (Body only) which seems like a good deal.

Of course I’d rather the new a7riii but my skills don’t justify the outlay!

Gad-Westy

14,520 posts

212 months

Tuesday 14th August 2018
quotequote all
GetCarter said:
R1 Dave said:
Thanks for that, that's a very interesting insight.
I also moved from Nikon D1, D2X D3, D800 to Sony A7Rii and would never go back.

I can fit two bodies with lenses fitted into a bag a quarter of the size, and a quarter of the weight.
Ignoring all the other obvious benefits of the Sony, the above can't be true can it? Or at least not like for like?

An A7Rii is only about 250g lighter than a D800 and I was under the impression lenses were more or less the same size and weight.




singlecoil

33,310 posts

245 months

Tuesday 14th August 2018
quotequote all
V8_Fastback said:
...Of course I’d rather the new a7riii but my skills don’t justify the outlay!
Might be worth considering getting a camera you can 'grow into' though.

GetCarter

29,358 posts

278 months

Tuesday 14th August 2018
quotequote all
Gad-Westy said:
Ignoring all the other obvious benefits of the Sony, the above can't be true can it? Or at least not like for like?

An A7Rii is only about 250g lighter than a D800 and I was under the impression lenses were more or less the same size and weight.
Current camera bag: 10" x 8" x 5" with two bodies and lenses attached:

https://hawkesmill.com/product/small-regent-street...