• Log In
  • Sign Up
    • My switch to mirrorless was first and foremost for medical reasons. Not kidding! I had both shoulders operated on (rotator cuff surgery) at the same time. As a pro, guide, and workshop leader, I needed to be able to carry and shoot even right after my surgeries. So, I got into Micro 4/3s. I was instantly hooked, loved the size and weight and features and the lens selection.

      OK Fast forwrd through recovery, and someone gave me a Sony APS-C camera (a6000) to try. Wow! For a tiny bit more money, little bit more size and weight, I had a huge jump in sensor size, image quality, and plenty good files for any high-iso work. Then, having gotten into the Sony system, I got to try the full frame bodies, and well, soon I sold all my Nikon gear, great glass and D810.

      I now shoot with Sony a7rIII, Sony a9, and soon, a Sony a7III. Baldy's right, many lenses are essentially the same in terms of weight and size (you can't change physics). The popular f/2.8 zooms (16-35, 24-70, 70-200) are all pretty much the same weight at Canon or Nikon. But there are a bunch of lenses that are much, much lighter: Compare the Zeiss Loxia 21 f/2.8 to a Canon or Nikon Z Mount 21. Compare the awesome Sony/Zeiss 55 f/1.8 to Canon or Nikon's similar. So there are some lenses designed for mirrorless that are super good and super light/small.

      I love the EVF. Nothing beats having all that info right there in the viewfinder. I love how Sony keeps innovating and bringing out incremental improvements. I love the sheer number of lenses available in native Sony E-mount. Adapters are available to let folks "transition" easily, by using thier Canon (or Nikon, though it's way easier to adapt Canon glass than Nikon) lenses with the Sony system. For me, I don't use any non-native lenses anymore, since there are now (often multiple) choices for every single focal range. I think the number is now over 100.

      I now carry just 4 lenses: Zeiss 21 f/2.8, Sony/Zeiss 55 f/1.8, Sony 24-105 f/4, and Sony 100-400 f/4-5.6. I also own the Sony 70-200 f/4, and will carry that when I don't need the 100-400 for wildlife.

    • I've just purchased the Fujifilm X-T20 to get back into photography. Previously I used a low end Canon for day to day photography, but have used more high-end Canon's when I was the second shooter for a wedding photographer. Can't say I miss the sound of mirrored cameras. Looking forward to using this new camera as soon as it arrives!

    • Interesting. I have not yet made the jump to mirrorless yet as I have been a Canon fanatic as long as I have had a camera in my hands. However; I have been toying with the idea of switching mostly because of weight. I would love to have a lighter-weight option for travel photography and the Sony A7 series is super tempting. This thread has given me a lot to think about....

    • I switched to mirrorless 4 years ago and I’ve never looked back. I was the first editorial photographer in Edinburgh turning up to jobs with a mirrorless camera and can still feel the stares from the other photographers in the press pool 😂. As you pointed out in your post, mirrorless has came a long way—even from when I started using them.

      I tried Sony but couldn’t get along with them—it’s real evident to me that Sony is an electronics company and not necessarily a photographic one. I shoot with a Fujifilm X Pro 2, which feels a little like an old film camera 😊. Have you looked into Fuji’s X Trans sensor? It switched the game up in terms of the unique way it’s built and, for me, it shows in the photos it produces.

      The nice thing about the X Pro 2 (and why I chose it) is that it’s a rangefinder camera, so you still get to have an optical viewfinder as well as the EVF.

      Everyone finds their preferred tool, I guess. 🙂

    • I am 5Dmk2 user since past 7 years, it still takes wonderful photos and quite strong too. Now i am thinking to upgrade to Sony Mirrorless and upcoming tamorn 28-75 lens. The main thing that impressed me is eye autofocus, cost, tilt lcd and DR of A7iii

      The one thing that confused me is color science of Sony when shooting portraits, is it really that bad as some people point out?.

      Not in rush just exploring this month :D

    • I’ve never had any issues with color with my A7II, which has the same sensor, and A7RII, though I don’t know much about the specific issues people have had. 

      I always shot raw for more latitude for adjustments, including color, in post. Like all CMOS cameras, shooting JPEG is just a interpretation of the raw data coming off the sensor, and it’s fairly set in stone in terms of adjustment range in post. Like JPEGs, photo editors interpret the RAW to show a default image with no adjustments.

      I find Lightroom and Photoshop often render A7(R)II files as oversaturated. Sometimes they botch the color tint and temp. But RAW editing will lets you fix these issues entirely through adjustments. I apply custom Lightroom presents on import so I never rarely run into problem images. I think Canon DLSR's have the same issues, though maybe Adobe + Canon have perfected default RAW rendering since Canon has been doing this now for nearly two decades with their DSLR's.