Why I’m Going Mirrorless: Volume I
Since Sony announced its full frame mirrorless cameras a couple of years ago, I’ve said I’d go mirrorless eventually. My timeline was “a couple of years” which I felt would be a sufficient amount of time for the lens lineup to be rounded out. Now, I’ve gone and done it. This is the first post on this blog containing only photos taken with my new Sony a7R II.
I’ve been shooting with the a7R II for a few weeks now, and have been documenting my thoughts, stream-of-consciousness style (so if this post has a disjointed, Catcher in the Rye vibe, sorry) in a draft blog post for that time. I figured it was time to finally edit some of my ramblings down to something suitable for public consumption, and this is the result. It’s “Volume I” because my thoughts are still a bit fluid as I grow into the camera, and I plan on doing a few posts about my foray in mirrorless.
Also, I didn’t want to spend 6 weeks writing some 20,000 word treatise only to realize this isn’t exactly the audience that cares about full frame DSLRs v. full frame mirrorless. (By the way, if you’re not a regular reader, here’s why there is an in-depth photography post on a Disney blog.) If there’s not interest in this topic here, I might move future installments over to TravelCaffeine.com.
You might be wondering what my motivating factors for going mirrorless. It’s a confluence of factors. The tipping point and major impetus occurred as I hobbled around Walt Disney World a few weeks ago after the Marathon carrying 26 pounds (yes) of camera gear. I thought, “there has to be a better way!” It didn’t help that I watched my friend Cody skip around with his lightweight bag of Sony gear as the image quality of his photos matched or exceeded mine.
Before that a lot of my excitement was predicated upon hype. I have seen the a7 series win “camera of the year” award after award, and countless working pros and bloggers have dubbed this line of Sony cameras “DSLR killers.” I remember the waves Trey Ratcliff made a couple of years ago when he announced that he was ditching Nikon for Sony. Now, it’s not viewed as nearly (or at all) as big of a deal because that type of sentiment has become more prevalent.
With that said, I still think it’s a pretty bold move, albeit one that requires serious contemplation. This will probably be the most boring “going mirrorless” blog post ever, because I’m not going to speak in superlatives, crown the Sony a7R II the Sultan of Agrabah, or treat it as if it’s a camera above reproach. Through these posts, I want to present some caveats and a more naunced take that presents some of the pros and cons of mirrorless, at least from my perspective.
For starters, mirrorless is not for everyone. Personal preference is a huge part of this equation, and there are various, totally valid reasons that mirrorless won’t be a good fit for some people.
However, after doing more research into the Sony a7R II, I decided it was time for me. Depending upon your perspective, I’m either decisive or impulsive, so rather than renting the body for a couple of weeks and seeing if it felt like a good fit, I ordered it and started selling off my Nikon gear on our forums and Craigslist.
Once I sold off enough gear to cover the cost of the Sony a7R II, Sony 24-240mm, Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, and Opteka 6.5mm Fisheye, I stopped. I think the folks at my nearby Starbucks are relieved of that, because I had commandeered their seating area as “Tom’s Electronics Showroom” on almost a daily basis for a while. Notwithstanding the mirrorless decision, this gear sale was a good thing, as I was probably one more lens away from being featured on “Hoarders: Buried Alive by Cameras.”
I was able to keep enough of my Nikon gear to have an (almost) complete DSLR bag, and also purchase the makings of my initial mirrorless camera bag. I didn’t purchase more lenses for a couple of reasons: 1) I didn’t want to dump even more money into the system until I was sure about it, and; 2) not all of the lenses I want are available yet.
This brings me to my first and biggest criticism. My constant refrain for the last couple of years before buying in was that I’d do it once the lens lineup matured. Despite all of the accolades, Sony has been glacial when it comes to releasing new lenses, and third party support for its full frame cameras from Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, etc., is non-existent.
I knew this before buying, and while the limited lens lineup is troubling, there are two pieces of gear coming out very soon that made me believe “now is the time” for me to go mirrorless. The first is the Commlite Nikon to Sony adapter. For the first time, Nikon lenses will autofocus, and that’s huge for me on the Sony a7R II. This is why I kept several of my Nikon lenses and am comfortable using both systems (if it comes to that).
The second piece of gear is from the newest line of ultra wide angle lenses from Voigtländer. I’m a wide angle fiend, and the prospect of a 10mm lens on full frame has me salivating. That lens being manual focus doesn’t bother me in the least, because at a focal length of 10mm, its going to be a “set it and forget it” type of lens that’s always in focus at f/8. I bought the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 as a stop-gap in the interim (and have been blown away by its performance–more on this in a full review later).
The second big reason why I felt like now is the time is upcoming traveling. When going to National Parks, a huge camera bag is no big deal. Navigating through cities in Europe and Asia is a totally different story. I swear that every restaurant in Europe was built in 1746 when people were approximately 67% smaller than they are today. Likewise, Asian cities are built for agile ninja-like navigation.
With my huge camera bag protruding from my back, I’m more like a clumsy Ninja Turtle than I am actual ninja. Every time I turn on a crowded train, I hit someone with my bag. Every time I try to navigate through a crowded restaurant, I have to carry my camera bag high in the air to avoid knocking into stuff. These are just a couple of examples of seemingly endless inconveniences of urban travel with a bulky camera bag. It is a pain, embarrassing, and a needless hassle.
With trips to France, Japan, China, and elsewhere all planned for 2016, I felt I needed to go mirrorless this year. I don’t want to be the proverbial bull in the china shop wherever I go. Consequently, a smaller more urban-friendly camera bag to go with my new set-up was a must, and I asked for feedback via Twitter on which bag to get. There were a lot of responses and I was debating between a few models, but the folks at Peak Design offered to send me their Everyday Messenger Bag to test out, so that made that decision easier.
To my surprise, after using the Sony a7R II for a few weeks and seeing more lenses in person, I’m doubtful that a significantly smaller camera bag is an inherent gain in going mirrorless. My camera bag will be smaller, but that’s because of specific lens choices I’m making with the system to ensure that my mirrorless set-up is smaller.
It’s not true that mirrorless is inherently smaller when making direct comparisons between lenses. Such comparisons couldn’t really be done in the past because most Sony full frame mirrorless zoom lenses were f/4 rather than f/2.8. When Sony announced its new f/2.8 zoom lenses, it became clear these would be as large or larger than their Nikon and Canon counterparts. Since most people tend to own more lenses than camera bodies, it stands to reason that the gains in camera body size will be eclipsed by the increases in lens size.
This ultimately doesn’t present a huge issue for me because I’m able to assemble a camera bag of smaller lenses, but it is an issue overall. One of the main selling points of mirrorless is smaller size, but when it comes to the a7 series, that is illusory. You could assemble a smaller camera bag with a Nikon DSLR if you chose smaller lenses, too.
Another selling point that has started to emerge is that the Sony a7 line brings full frame photography to the masses with cheaper prices. This is absolutely true when considering only the entry level bodies. The Sony a7 can be purchased for $1,000 (far less for a used or refurbished model), making it the cheapest full frame camera on the market.
This, again, is illusory because you can’t build a system without lenses. Unless you are sticking with the kit lens (in which case, why go full frame?), lens costs quickly escalate and exceed Nikon and Canon DSLRs. Sure, Zeiss glass is without equal and the Sony 24-240mm is the nicest super-zoom I’ve ever used, but the point stands that it’s misleading to talk about price when only the camera body is that cheap. Of course, you can use adapters and older manual focus lenses, but that’s hardly a 1:1 comparison.
All things considered, I would say the Sony a7 series is significantly more expensive than traditional full frame DSLRs. Again, not a huge deal to me. I wasn’t looking for a budget camera. I bought the Sony a7R II as a (hopeful) replacement for my Nikon D810, so I knew I’d be replacing expensive with more expensive.
Then there’s the electronic viewfinder (EVF). Since I last spent a month with the Olympus mirrorless system a couple of years ago, great strides have been made in EVF technology. There are even some situations where the EVF is even better than an optical viewfinder, but in most scenarios, seeing the actual scene is preferable, for me at least.
I think this comes down largely to personal preference, though. The argument could be made that the EVF is better because you see what the sensor will “see” so your viewfinder image more closely aligns with what you’ll get. Okay, but my problem with this is that I post-process photos to combat this very problem.
The human eye has greater dynamic range than even the best camera sensor, which is why most landscape photographers edit their images. If you’re never going to post process your photos, I might see some merit to the argument that the EVF approach is better, but for everyone else (so, 95% of photographers?) the higher dynamic range to the optical viewfinder is better and makes things easier.
On a personal level, this is actually the single biggest hurdle with the Sony a7R II. I’ve made tweaks to the EVF settings to get results with which I’m more pleased, but the limited dynamic range (especially when shooting into the sun) and motion blur when I move the camera around are still challenges.
Over the course of the last 3 weeks, I’ve found myself getting used to this, and I’ve come around so significantly in this realm that you shouldn’t be surprised if this is inexplicably a “pro” of the camera in future mirrorless installments. I’ve already re-written this section on the EVF 3 times as my take on the EVF has changed. There’s definitely a question of whether it’s the EVF that’s the issue, or my years of familiarity with the optical viewfinder of my Nikon DSLRs.
Thats’s a good segue into other criticisms I have with the Sony a7R II, which might more accurately be labeled as quibbles. With all of these, I am having a tough time telling whether it’s just a matter of personal familiarity, or if they are true shortcomings.
Battery life falls under “true shortcoming” as it’s definitely worse. I see this cited as a big issue, and honestly, I just don’t see that. The camera comes with two batteries, and more importantly, can be charged via its USB port. This means I can charge it with my KMASHI External Battery Charger that I carry anyway for our phones.
USB charging is a big pro from my perspective, as my external charger is the equivalent of 10+ camera batteries, all for $20 instead of $50/battery. (In other words, don’t buy spare batteries.) So in reality, this is a “secret pro,” like when you go into a job interview and answer “I work too hard” when asked your biggest weakness.
Since the camera is smaller, all of its control buttons are placed on the right side of the camera. This has made changing settings quickly without looking tough, because it can be challenging to distinguish one button from another without looking. Hopefully, over time my muscle memory will become more fine-tuned and I won’t fumble for the wrong settings.
Other little things feel like they are missing, such as a “lock” button (which I use to mark photos while reviewing them in-camera), customizable buttons that allow any setting to be added to them, a custom menu, and a few other little things that probably only matter to me. As I get more comfortable shooting with it, I’m finding fewer and fewer cons in terms of design.
A lot of photographers advise newbies to go to a store and see which camera “feels” right in their hands. It’s not necessarily bad advice, but it presupposes that whatever “instincts” we possess for the feel of a camera are right and can’t evolve or change for the better over time. How on earth can someone wholly inexperienced with a type of product be the best judge of how that product should feel?
Hence the above being personal quibbles with the Sony a7R II, and not necessarily indicative of actual shortcomings. Sure, I might be fumbling and stumbling to find my way like an infant learning to walk, but in essence, that’s what I am. As a result, I have a tough time lobbing much serious criticism in these regards, just as an infant’s parents shouldn’t make an irate call to the CEO of Keds if their kid falls down.
That’s about it in terms of what I view as the downsides of going mirrorless. Now for some of the upsides.
First and foremost, the Sony a7R II demonstrates that mirrorless is in no way inferior to traditional DSLRs from an image quality perspective. The sensor here is every bit as good as that in my Nikon D810 in terms of dynamic range, color depth, and in every other regard that matters.
My goal is to pull as much data out of a single compressed raw file as possible, and I was able to go to +100 on both the shadows and blacks in the above image while also applying sharpening and zero noise reduction, without seeing any noticeable issues.
When it comes to low light, it trumps the D810, delivering clean images at higher ISOs akin to the D750. Since I don’t have a fast prime yet, I’ve been mostly using the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 on dark rides, pushing it above 12,800 in many cases.
In terms of handling low light, the Sony a7R II’s performance has been far superior to the D810 and about equivalent to the D750. I’ve been surprised with what I’ve been able to capture at f/2.8 and f/3.5.
I mentioned before that the Sony a7R II is my hopeful replacement for the Nikon D810. To that end, I was also very pleased that it implements features that are frustratingly absent from my Nikon D810. WiFi and tilting screen are chief among the bells and whistles (of which the Sony has many) that are the most welcome additions for me.
In all of these regards, the Sony a7R II basically is a “best of both worlds” camera with the strengths of both the D810 and D750. This alone makes it a serious winner for me, but then there are additional icing on the cake features…
In-body stabilization is another *huge* thing for me, and the 5-axis stabilization that Sony offers meant I was able to shoot handheld down to 1/8 of a second. In some cases, I pushed it to a half-second (albeit with a much lower keeper rate). I shoot in a lot of situations where tripods are impractical or flat out not allowed, so being able to use a slower shutter speed is significant. Being able to shoot handheld at these speeds will be great for cathedral interiors and at Tokyo Disneyland.
In the past, autofocus was said to be a weak point of the Sony mirrorless cameras, but I have not noticed this in the least. In my uses thus far, autofocus has not been an issue, and the phase detection autofocus system has performed excellently. Again, without a fast prime, I haven’t been able to put the camera through its paces in challenging scenarios (like Paint the Night or Peter Pan’s Flight), but I don’t feel I’m going out on a limb saying it’s better than the D810’s autofocus. The real question will be whether it can rival the excellent autofocus of the D750.
Focus peaking is another thing I’m really loving, especially when shooting low light landscapes. I could see this feature making manual focus lenses significantly easier to use, although my strong preference is still just for autofocus lenses. In the Disney photography realm, this could also be a game-changer for dark ride photography.
I’ve played with the 4K video a bit, and it’s definitely a notable feature if you’re into that sort of thing. I’m curious about video, but can’t say that has really pushed me one way or the other in terms of the camera.
Not exactly a thorough review, but this isn’t meant to be a review of the camera–it’s my observations thus far in my process of going mirrorless, and as this post creeps over 3,000 words, I think it’s time to wrap things up…
So, that’s where I stand as of right now, with one foot in the world of Sony mirrorless, and one in that of Nikon DSLRs. That’s sort of an odd predicament, because The Ten Photography Commandments dictates, “Thou shalt be firmly entrenched on Team Mirrorless or Team DSLR and hate the other.” I think it’s fair to say that mirrorless is the most divisive change in photography since HDR exploded in popularity several years ago. If I’ve learned anything as a photographer, it’s that everything is supposed to be love-hate with absolutely no middle ground. Oops.
I just don’t see that here. I think mirrorless and DSLRs each have advantages, both deserving a seat at the photography “table.” With each day I’m becoming more fond of the mirrorless system, and less bothered by its perceived shortcomings. I have absolutely no regrets about buying the Sony a7R II, and am glad I rolled the dice on it.
For those of you considering your own switch to mirrorless, this article probably wasn’t incredibly persuasive one way or the other. Hopefully you can evaluate some of the pros and cons I’ve identified thus far and apply them to yourself to determine whether mirrorless might be suitable for you.
Those of you jumping into higher-end photography for the first time are probably the ones who this helps more, as you enter without bias and familiarity to a certain system. If I were getting started in photography right now, I would go totally mirrorless. It would be easier to get used to the system’s quirks, and I think there is a higher ceiling and more room for future growth and evolution in the mirrorless system. While I don’t think mirrorless will ever render traditional DSLRs obsolete, I do think mirrorless has the much more exciting future.
Want to learn more about photography to take great photos in the Disney theme parks and beyond? The best place to start is Tom’s Ultimate Disney Parks Photography Guide, which covers a variety of topics from links to tutorials, tips, and tricks to recommendations for point & shoots, DSLRs, lenses, and more!
If you do want to purchase new photography equipment, we recommend the following trusted & authorized retailers. Buying from these retailers helps support this blog, and doesn’t cost you a thing:
Amazon
B&H Photo
Adorama
For other photography equipment recommendations or photography tips in general check out a few of my top photography blog posts:
Best Books for Improving Your Photography
5 Indispensable Tips for Better Vacation Photos
Choosing the Best Travel Tripod
Choosing the Best Camera Bag for Travel
If you enjoyed this post or found it helpful, we’d really appreciate it if you’d share it via social media to help spread the word about DisneyTouristBlog. We put a lot of work into making this site a helpful planning resource, and hope it’s useful to you! 🙂
Your Thoughts
Have you used a mirrorless camera system? Considering going mirrorless? Thoughts on the pros and cons? Additional concerns or things you’d like to know about going mirrorless? Share your thoughts or questions in the comments!
Interesting perspective… I also have gone back and forth between the 2 realms. In fact, I currently shoot with the Nikon D750 and the A6000 (soon A6300) as my lighter camera.
But everything you’ve written… simply suggests no groundbreaking differences. (And I generally agree). You *thought* you would save on size… but only because you are using smaller lenses for the time being. You could have downsized your Nikon the same way. And eventually, you will be hit by GAS (knowing it would happen to me), and you’ll want some of the bigger and better lenses.
You didn’t really hit on any big advantages to mirrorless — You hit In-body-stabilization, focus peaking, and the fact that the IQ is “as good” as the D810/D750.
I’m wondering if in the long run, you will see this as an upgrade or purely as a lateral move. I suspect eventually I’ll be following you, but for now, when I want to keep size down, I’ll stick with the A6000/A6300 — The A6300 should play nice with my Nikon lenses. And the camera body really is very compact, and there are a few very compact APS-C lenses.
Anyway, I’ve always been a big fan, so I’m looking forward to seeing everything you do with the A7rii.
I’ve seen a couple of comments on Twitter along these same lines, so I should probably clarify, because for me, this most definitely is *not* a lateral move. I do think it would be one for many photographers, so I hedged some of what are otherwise unequivocal advantages for me.
For starters, right now I’m shooting with both the Nikon D810 and Nikon D750 because each offer distinct advantages. The Nikon D810 is better for landscapes and night shooting, albeit frustrating when I get low to the ground (which I do a ton due to the tilt screen). The D750 is better for dark rides and other lower-light handheld situations, as well as anything moving in low light thanks to the autofocus (thanks to the autofocus).
My preliminary take is that this offers the best of both worlds, eliminating the need to have two cameras. (I’ll still travel with a backup, but it will be relegated to my suitcase rather than my camera bag.) At least, that’s what I’m hoping for once I have spent more time with the AF and tried it in more demanding situations.
I probably downplayed the significance of the in-body stabilization. For me, shooting handheld at 1/4 or even 1/2 second (with a lower keeper rate) is HUGE. My best low-keeper handheld shutter speeds are 1/30th with the D810 and 1/15th with the D750. I love to run and gun around sunset so I can capture fleeting light without being slowed by a tripod and I’m shooting in places that don’t allow tripods quite a bit (Tokyo Disneyland, churches, museums, maybe Shanghai Disneyland(?), etc.) For me, this *alone* would be enough to justify the switch.
Then there’s size. If that Voigtlander lens is small (and based on other Voigtlanders, I have every reason to believe it will be), my camera bag gets considerably smaller. Since this lens isn’t available for Nikon, that size decrease is not something I personally could have accomplished with my Nikon system. My comments on the system’s smaller size being illusory were made broadly–when applied specifically to what I’ll be assembling, they do hold true.
It was tough to convey all of this in the article as I was trying to balance speaking to my personal experience with generalities about most uses of the system. I’m cognizant of the fact that a lot of people make gear purchases based on my recommendations, and I don’t want to come across as being a cheerleader for Sony when the reality is that many people aren’t going to see many of the potential gains.
Hope that makes sense…
(TL;DR – I think it will be a lateral move for many people, but do not expect that to be the case for me given my unique circumstances.)
Makes sense… Particularly, I think, wide angle shooters are more likely to get a size advantage..
Have you ordered/received the commlite adapter yet?
Congratulations on your change. I can see the attraction for someone who is traveling a lot, and stomping around the wilderness (you have my envy), You are correct that this is not a one-size-fits-all type of issue. A large percentage of my photography is wildlife, especially birds. EVFs just don’t cut it for this application, in my experience, so this sort of switch is not on my radar for the foreseeable future. It sounds great for you, however.
I’ve dabbled with Sony’s mirrorless for a couple of years now… And frankly I have one big positive that has kept me using them – the ability to use older lenses. I’ve got a closet full of old Leica lenses that were doing nothing because I was never willing to invest in an overpriced Leica digital camera and had given up film…. So for that ability alone I am committed to continue with mirrorless…. However I am not committed to stick with Sony and am hoping that Nikon will do a FF mirrorless with a short enough flange to film distance that I can use any lens on it… and that is because the biggest flaw I have found with Sony is their flash system is crap. I use my old Nikon and when I have to use the flash it works, rarely will I get a poor exposure… That isn’t true when I use the Sony… It wasn’t true when I had a Sony dslr and it isn’t true now that I’m using their mirrorless camera – when I use the flash its completely random whether it it will be properly exposed and it isn’t something where I know it will always be over exposed or under exposed, I could deal with that easily enough… No the exposure when using their flash system is completely random. I’ve taken several photos of the same subject and if I don’t go completely manual the exposure with a flash will be over and under and maybe a couple that are actually spot on. Sony has no clue when it comes to the flash.
This was a shocking article to see in my Facebook feed this morning! But after reading I see you haven’t gotten rid of ALL your dslr gear. I have bought so much photography equipment due to your reviews and recommendations. I already had a little bug in my ear urging me to go mirrorless. Now I think you’ve pushed me over the edge decision wise. Sigh…
I went mirrorless last year and I was trying to decide between the Sony a6000 or the Olympus OM-D M10 and eventually went with the Olympus because of the multitude of lenses available. Though I wish I’d have gotten the next model up (M1 or M5) because they have water resistant bodies and lenses. A coworker has one (M5) and shoots in rain while everyone else is running for cover or getting their waterproof covers out!
I’ll NEVER go back to a mirrored camera, the mirrorless is so light and small I keep it with me more often.
I’ve been mirro-less for a good while now. I started when Samsung came out with the NX brand. Of course now it seem they totally abandoned the series and I’ll need to change to Sony.
But I made that decision for the same reason as you do now. Wanted to carry something light on my trip and take great pictures without the hassle of carrying a big bag around.
As for having post like this on this blog… please keep doing it. It is one of the main reason why I started reading you.
I will be looking forward to hearing your thoughts on the difference in lenses and gear you carry is different. I currently shoot with a Canon 70D and in the next year I am considering going full frame and I am not sure if I want to go mirrorless or not. Your pictures with the Sony are excellent as usual and I am curious to see how you feel since you are not just shooting mirrorless but still using your Nikon. I will be looking forward to more comparisons and thoughts in the differences. Thanks again for all your great articles and insight.
Definitely interest in this kind of photography post here. I’ve been looking for this one since I saw you selling your Nikon gear in the forum! I’d really like to go mirrorless & full frame (I’m currently Canon APS-C), but my main drivers of desire have been size & price. As I’ve been looking lately I feel like I’ve come to the same conclusion as you – It likely won’t be cheaper, and I’ll have to carry more lenses to replace what I have now offsetting the size advantage. I feel like it should be possible so I keep looking, but I can’t find a lens combo I like. The new G master 24-70 2.8 would be an awesome walk about lens, but not sure I want to spend that kind of cash.
Thanks for the excellent report on going Mirrorless. I was very curious to hear of your experiences so thanks for making the effort to share them with us.
Now some thoughts that are swimming in my head… One of the things that I miss from my “film” camera days is the focusing split screen that assisted with manual focus. Now that I am older and wear bifocals manual focus is pretty much out of reach unless I have a lot of time (relatively) to achieve it. I’m sort of thinking that “focus Peaking” is the electronic version of the split screen, which is a welcome addition to the focusing tools line up. Pity us old people and our ever increasing reliance on auto focus. I’m thinking that as the tech evolves, auto focus will become absolutely the way to go unless there is some artsy reason you don’t want the camera to focus where you place the 51,000 cross focusing brackets. ; )
Much like what you see is what you get with the EVF, this type of viewfinder is another aspect that may prove challenging as a person’s vision ages. I know that the movement lag would drive me crazy. Is there significant shutter lag or is the response instantaneous just like in a DSLR? Also, I am wondering about “Auto ISO”. Is that available and if so how is it working out?
Then there are the lenses. I was really curious to see if the mirrorless system could get around the lens size and weight problem. There seems to be no size/weight substitute for quality glass I’d venture that the most important part of the equipment side of photography are the lenses and the Mirrorless systems are at the same limitations as the DSLR’s when it comes to this aspect. I wasn’t sure what the deal would be concerning this part but your review really cleared that up.
I’m also thinking that the better ISO performance is just a part of the overall creep towards better specs as the years go by. Cameras are so stratified in what each price level will offer so I’m thinking that Mirrorless cameras aren’t so much superior in the better ISO aspect as a part of their inherent nature but more like they just included a better level of ISO capability. Progress marches forward…
Now I find myself thinking how are the big guns like Nikon and Canon going to answer this challenge from the mirrorless side of the aisle? Is this the next direction for photography, like going from film to digital, or is it an additional route? I’ll take a guess and say that Nikon and Canon are going to focus on revolutionizing their lenses and perhaps taking the best tech from the mirrorless cameras, like the in body image stabilization. Following this train (wreck) of thought I’d have to wonder if the next big thing in lenses, post image stabilization, would be wider f stops. We are already seeing zooms with continuous f 4, blah, blah, blah. How cool would a zoom be if it could offer continuous f1.8? Ha!
Since I’m not anywhere close to understanding the limitations of the optics involved I will just have to stay tuned and see what pops up at B&H as the next best thing. Equipment Acquisition Syndrome has no end does it?
PS. I definitely want to hear more about anything photography. Thanks again for keeping us in the photography loop as you journey through life.
~Joanie
Continuous f/1.8 zooms sound great, until you realize that they haven’t cancelled the laws of physics quite yet! Such lenses, particularly if they went beyond the “normal” zoom range, would be huge, heavy, and very expensive. There is a reason that we don’t have such lenses.
Tom,
Thank you again for another intriguing photography post. I am glad to see that it’s on this site. I think the mirrorless debate will be a topic of discussion for the future with other sensor improvements and other cameras due to market. I my self am in the boat now where full frame or mirrorless is on the horizon, unless I stay with apc (d500 or d7200). Sony definitely seems to be the mirrorless King and the bsi sensor seems to be the way of the future. Since Nikon and do have a sensor relationship it will be interesting to see how and if it makes its way into future Nikon full frame cameras. To me I think the d750 or it’s possible successor is where I would lean based on lens availability and the fact that I often rent for vacations. It will be interesting to see in future posts how you think the Sony a7 stacks up against the d750 or d810 since you have had both and like the d750 so much. It certainly is a hot topic and can’t wait to see more photos from your new a7r II and more photography posts on the tourist blog.
Welcome to mirrorless! I got Sony a7 a couple years ago when I was first really getting into it, upgrading from a Canon Rebel T2i. I really love my camera, but it’s all I really know. You right about the price and size of the lenses though. Those were both two selling points I remember thinking about when getting the camera, but as my lens repertoire grows it’s been neither cheap or small. I love taking pictures of animals, so the new 70-200m with 2x teleconverter has me very intrigued, but that’s the very opposite of small and affordable.
I see you were given a Peak design Everyday messenger bag, how do you like it? Do you use anything else from Peak design?
Hi Tom! Your photography posts and reviews are my favorite. I’ve learned quite a few things and I found this article very interesting. Right now I’m using a crop sensor camera and am looking to switch to full frame in the near future.
Please keep us the photography lens reviews, tips, etc!!! I Always re-read your dark ride and firework posts before and during my Disneyland trips.
As a crappy photographer I’ve been using mirrorless for a few years. Got a Sony NEX-5 (with lenses on a Best Buy price error, thank you very much), and I’ll never go back. I think it’s funny to watch equally crappy photographers lug around cameras and lenses 2 and 3 times as big as mine. I love my camera, lugging around significantly less gear, and occasionally lucking into a halfway decent photo.
Never thought I’d see you or other serious photogs making the switch, but welcome to our world. I guess I was leading the trend into coolness (LOL), if not good pics. Maybe we’ll be the next wave of hipsters, with our tiny capable cameras.
Yes, my Canon EOD 5D Mark III feels better in my hands, but who wants to lug that around Disney? I find that for the shots I take, my tiny Sony A6000 does just fine, thank you. I can carry the camera, a wide angle lens, a walkabout lens, and a dark ride lens in a tiny case that is not much larger than the 5D.
Wow Tom! I’m a little shocked to be honest. I’m in WDW this week with a rental A7Rii and 3 lenses, testing it out. Not so much image quality as I think at my level all systems outperform my capabilities as a photographer. I’m more interested in ease of use, size and weight of kit and “joy of use”.
So far so good!
And yes, put me in the camp of wanting to hear a good amount of photography stuff!!
I really like my mirrorless setup. I have a Samsung NX1 with the Pro S lenses 15-50 2.0 and 50-150 2.8 along with some primes. Compact , great low light performance and excellent EVF. Manual focus is fast and accurate with focus peaking. 4K video on the NX1 is arguably the best out their today. This also allows for high MP screen grabs off of the 4K allowing for limitless opportunity to get that perfect action shot.
One “secret pro” of the EVF I’ve seen as a more intermediate shooter is that I only had to learn one mental translation from “what I see” to “what I get” instead of having one for the viewfinder and one for live view. Also, I’ve never been good with depth of field preview in an optical viewfinder so I like the EVF for that.
That’s a really good point. The more I hear, read, and experience for myself, the more I think the EVF is one of those things that’s going to vary based upon the photographer. At this point, I’m not so sure whether it’s a pro or con for me. I think I still need a few more weeks with the camera to figure that out.
Before you invest in anything more expensive I would suggest that you pickup a vintage lens. (Careful, it’s addictive) Last week I picked up an older 50mm f1.8 Voigtländer for $109. It’s a dream to shoot with! I also love my Rokkor 45mm f2 – razor sharp wide open and it wasn’t even $40. The quality on this old glass is unbelievable for the price!
I thought for sure I would adapt all my old glass but eventually I even traded in my beloved Sigma 35 1.4 Art for a tiny Voigtländer. The bulk just wasn’t worth the minimal image quality difference. One quick tip – be sure to check out the adapter first to see how much bulk it will add. M39 is the best mount. It’s super slim on Sony.
I now feel about manual focus like I used to feel about setting the camera to manual. It’s very uncommon for me to give up that control. Now that I’m used to pulling focus on my own I almost never miss. I’ll be very curious to see if you start to feel the same way. Can’t wait to read about how you like the transition. Thanks for sharing!
I’d be curious to hear what other vintage lenses you’ve picked up. In particular, what was the lens that replaced the legendary Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art?!
To replace that one I went for Voigtlander Nokton Classic 35mm f/1.4. It isn’t vintage, but has that feel. I picked it up used for $400 with the metal hood. (Metal hood is a total waste so don’t bother) It isn’t as sharp as the Sigma and has a weird magenta aberration, but I honestly love the character. The 40mm is supposed to not have these quirks and it’s cheaper if you decide to try it.
Kodak retina lens are also PHENOMINAL on the Sony mirrorless.
Hey Jeff – which ones do you have? I looked but seems like lots of 50mms lenses. Thanks!!
Nice dark ride shots! I got a first generation a7R late last year and I’ve been happy with it but the AF performance makes dark ride photos hopeless on anything wilder than an omnimover. It’s nice to see that it seems to have improved with the a7R II
Have you tried manual focus on dark rides? I’m not sure how well focus peaking would work on something as dark as Haunted Mansion, but it’s probably worth a shot–especially on a wider lens, which would allow for a greater margin of error.
Hey Mearn – I just saw that this was you. If you’d like to meet at the parks some time I’ll show you how to maximize manual focus. There isn’t a dark ride that I can’t get photos on and I only have an a7. (I’m not a nutcase – we met once. Just in case you don’t remember!)
What I find is that the focus peaking works as long as the photo is possible. If the scene is so low light that I could only get mush, then the peaking never shows. So as an example there are scenes in HM that I just can’t get even with a f1.4 lens.