OT: Photography: Moving from DSLR to Mirrorless

[mhespenheide]

Originally Posted by jamesdak

This is me, I have way too much in Canon glass to think about switching. Not to mention all the old manual focus Contax Zeiss, Leica R, Pentax, Olympus and even Mamiya 645 lenses adapted to the EF mount. I'm hoping to die before I get forced to switch.

To be fair, you can use all of that adapted glass on Sony mirrorless as well. I use an adapted Contax Zeiss 35-70 f/3.5 with some regularity.

You can adapt the EF mount Canon, too, but you'd need to be prepared to focus it manually.

[.RJ]

Originally Posted by fredd

My philosophy is the better camera is the one you like using more, and you can carry more easily, thus can use more.

So smaller = better so long as you choose a system you like working with.

Can say that shooting with fuji mirroless is a pleasure.

I also have a Fuji X100F to grab and go... I dont use it enough but if I only had to have 1 camera that would be it.

[MerckxMad]

My path: Nikon D810 > Nikon Z6 > Fujifilm X-T4/XPro 2/X100f

Mirrorless is lighter, more compact, and hence in my bag or hand more often. I’ve kept all my Nikon glass to use with the FTZ adapter.

Then tried the Fuji system, and now it’s all I use. I hate the Nikon menu diving and love that I can approach every subject by adjusting dials on the body of the Fuji camera. For me, it makes me think about what I’m doing even before I put the camera to my eye. The lens lineup is exceptional; all metal construction and actual clicks on the aperture ring!

I’ve gone smaller and smaller with each purchase. I find that I never leave the house without the X100f. If I find a subject that the fixed lens can’t handle, I return with X-T4. They all use the same setup and processor so the muscle memory is all there.

[benb]

I have no plans to buy anything Mirrorless any time soon, except I do have one of the early Canon compact mirrorless things.. it was a failure and I got basically the whole system for a song. But it never gets used, I need to get rid of it.

My path is more like stick with the DSLR and the alternate system is:

- Smartphone with as fancy as a camera as possible (waiting for an iPhone Pro 13, it has essentially my 3 favorite prime lens viewpoints.. it's going to make it really hard to lug a big camera a lot of the time.)
- Add a drone in

I can take the smartphone and the drone in about the same space as just my DSLR body and a single lens and the smartphone + drone has a weight advantage and certain huge advantages for creativity.

I am just as likely to just sell my whole DSLR rig and all the lenses as I am to buy a fancy mirrorless body and replace all the lenses.

The problem for me is my current setup is more than good enough. I've done a 60" wide print off my 5D3. That was literally a once in a lifetime print. I have no need to go bigger.

And switching has some massive disadvantages too. Namely massive cost, my DSLR gear might cost $20k to replace given how expensive camera gear has gotten. Lenses have gone up in price like crazy.

Also a lot of lenses have gotten bigger over the last 20 years for dubious quality advantages.. the manufacturers have been chasing the income of the spec chasing crowd. The increased image quality on some of these new lenses doesn't justify their increased cost & size & weight for me. If I was buying a mirrorless setup the mirrorless lenses are all new and are often bigger and might negate the weight advantages of the mirrorless body. Most of these last 1% image quality improvements have very little practical meaning for creative photography.

Last time I was checking mirrorless still had massive battery life disadvantages, has that situation improved? Carrying more batteries also removes the weight advantages the mirrorless body has.

But far and away it's that there are better things to spend money on and prints justifying the use of the DSLR system have become less common. None of the big gear makes any sense to me anymore unless I'm printing a lot. I have a 13"x19" capable printer but I just don't print very big that much anymore.

[ScottW]

D5100 as a rank noob then picked up a D600 which I've had for the last several years. In addition to the basic AF-S/G/VR zooms and primes I've acquired about a dozen older AI/AI-S manual focus Nikon lenses over the years. Not insanely expensive stuff (I don't think any single one is worth more than $300-400) and they're fun to shoot with. Next body will probably be a Z6/II or maybe a Z7 depending on how saucy I'm feeling. Smaller size would be welcome but isn't as big of a motivator as the pretty great looking IQ on these and the addition of in-camera stabilization would be nice with the older non-VR lenses.

This week I'll be picking up a lightly used 70-200/2.8G VRII lens, which will become the most expensive lens I've got. It's about the ideal tool for shooting the daughters' ballet stuff which I need to do next week, but I'll admit to being slightly nervous about spending to acquire more non-mirrorless DSLR gear.

[Jared Purdy]

Originally Posted by .RJ

I have the X-T4 also. Its really nice piece of kit.

I love the retro feel and look of it. Digital, yet analogue.

[.RJ]

Originally Posted by benb

Also a lot of lenses have gotten bigger over the last 20 years for dubious quality advantages..

And a lot more expensive. I think most of the cost is going into better coatings and AF motors, but, IQ for good lenses hasnt changed much and has improved quite a bit for the mid-range lenses IMO.

I dont have any battery life issues with my X-T4, I'll go almost a whole week shooting on vacation on 1 battery. On my last trip I brought my extra and didnt even bring a charger.

[Jared Purdy]

Originally Posted by MerckxMad

My path: Nikon D810 > Nikon Z6 > Fujifilm X-T4/XPro 2/X100f

Mirrorless is lighter, more compact, and hence in my bag or hand more often. I’ve kept all my Nikon glass to use with the FTZ adapter.

Then tried the Fuji system, and now it’s all I use. I hate the Nikon menu diving and love that I can approach every subject by adjusting dials on the body of the Fuji camera. For me, it makes me think about what I’m doing even before I put the camera to my eye. The lens lineup is exceptional; all metal construction and actual clicks on the aperture ring!

I’ve gone smaller and smaller with each purchase. I find that I never leave the house without the X100f. If I find a subject that the fixed lens can’t handle, I return with X-T4. They all use the same setup and processor so the muscle memory is all there.

That’s one of the main reasons I went with the xt4. That and I don’t need full frame and the associated cost and size of the lenses.

[fredd]

Originally Posted by benb

- Smartphone with as fancy as a camera as possible (waiting for an iPhone Pro 13, it has essentially my 3 favorite prime lens viewpoints.. it's going to make it really hard to lug a big camera a lot of the time.)

Getting an iphone 13 (not pro) has only made me want a pocketable camera more. I just find smartphone photography to be underwhelming, both in terms of the process as well as the results...

[Spdntrxi]

my pocket camera is a Leica Dlux7.... overall pretty happy with it. Had a Canon S90 before that.

[gavingould]

I started photography with Canon film SLRs in the late 90s.
My last Canon body was a 5D3.
Switched to Fuji first with an X100S, then added an XPro2, then sold off the X100 and added an X-T2.
Shot a lot of cross races with the XPro2/XT2 combo.
Couple years ago sold the XT2 and picked up a GFX50R mirrorless medium format, which is nice albeit slow.
Most recently both the XPro2 and GFX50R both took a very wet beating at the Fayetteville Cross World Cup… nursed them through JingleCross, then sent in the GFX for out-of-warranty service, basically it’s toast.
The XPro2 still shoots, but the back screen for review is dead. Wouldn’t be worth the cost to fix at this point so I’ll probably just keep using it until it won’t fire any more. It bangs around in my handlebar bag on most rides these days.
I did pick up a new GFX100S though - which is probably about the size/weight of a Canon 5D but much larger sensor and 100MP. Insane detail, but also insane cost for someone whose real job isn’t photography.

[gavingould]

all that to say, you don’t need a zillion pixels to make a nice photo. I’ve got a number of 3’x4’ prints hanging around the house that I shot while traveling in China/HK/Japan that were shot with a 16 megapixel X100S or 24 megapixel XPro2.

[fredd]

Originally Posted by gavingould

all that to say, you don’t need a zillion pixels to make a nice photo. I’ve got a number of 3’x4’ prints hanging around the house that I shot while traveling in China/HK/Japan that were shot with a 16 megapixel X100S or 24 megapixel XPro2.

16 MP is more than enough. I'd be happy with 12. There's a lot more that goes into image quality than just pixels.

[reuben]

Originally Posted by gavingould

all that to say, you don’t need a zillion pixels to make a nice photo. I’ve got a number of 3’x4’ prints hanging around the house that I shot while traveling in China/HK/Japan that were shot with a 16 megapixel X100S or 24 megapixel XPro2.

Yeah, I've sold a lot of 30x45 prints made from 16Mp images with no issues. You have to know the environment, your equipment, and how to process the images. My Z6 is 24Mp (I think), but that's not why I bought it. And the cameras now with 30 or 40Mp, I just can't imagine a need for one of those. Image quality is about a lot more than the number of pixels.

[.RJ]

I cant imagine how fast my hard drives would clog up with 40mp files