Mulling things over

[the black fox]

Re: Mulling things over

morning update .I have tried with all my available lenses bar the 150-600 ,conclusions are as others have stated its to slow for wildlife unless the bird is stationary ,with wide angle its o.k but thats not my forte .I was however quite surprised at how quickly it did focus with jans 400 f5.6 L lens though ,but not quick enough for b.i.f
with the macro once the correct set up is installed its pretty stunning and as that was my intended purpose for it I,m fairly happy .I doubt with what I have seen of its foibles that I will change to the whole system unless tests with my friends rig prove otherwise .

[Tigger]

Re: Mulling things over

not that I would want to push you onto another brand but have you seen what the AR7iii does with a zoom, results are amazing and for someone into wildlife the focus points on that system make the M3/5 look very basic...If I had my time over again its a far better and much lighter system, and still now keep thinking about buying a body and slowly making to move to it

[MilesH]

Re: Mulling things over

My biggest problem on the M3 was that I wasn't able to turn off the Exposure Simulation in the menus - it made it useless for table top studio stuff in manual exposure with off camera flash as you can't actually see what you are shooting on the screen. The software on the M3 seems to be closer to the Powershot series than the Eos series of cameras. To date the M3 remains the only camera that I could never get working easily using off camera flash. At least on the original Eos M you could load Magic Lantern on it to unlock the full Eos software suite. The M5 is everything that the M3 should have been ... just a couple of years too late.

[Richard W]

Re: Mulling things over

have you seen what the AR7iii does

But that's at a price level the same as the 5dMkIV, not really a fair comparison with the price for the M5.

At the high end, Canon will have to produce a full frame mirrorless body that can use EF lenses without an adapter if they want to stay competitive with Sony A series. And with much improved sensors as well.

[@imagesBV]

Re: Mulling things over

.....Sony AR7III....amazing spec.....same price as 5D4 as Richard says.....but it doesn't look as good....Sony make walkmans and stuff....not serious Tog equipment and they've copied the Canon white on long lenses which is an historical need rather than a modern one.
Make sure you get the better battery with the Sony....Z type is it?

[Tigger]

Re: Mulling things over

agree guys looking at the price the AR's are more on track with the higher end Canon's, but a lot smaller, lighter and if you look at swapping glass as well a lot smaller kit overhaul.. I only said to Jeff about the AR7 due to the high end kit he normally uses

[AndyMulhearn]

Re: Mulling things over

Hmm, a quick price check on the 5D IV and A7 mk III shows there’s a £1300 difference in favour of the Sony. Still a lot more than an EOS M but they’re not priced similarly which is why the mk III has such publicity around it - features from the top of the range A9 but a price point much lower.

[Richard W]

Re: Mulling things over

a quick price check on the 5D IV and A7 mk III

That's the A7 III, not the A7R III which Ian mentioned, the R is the more highly specified camera, including 42 mp sensor as opposed to 24 mp in the A7 III.
But yes, the A7 III does look very good value.
Sigma has just announced that it is making its excellent Art prime lenses available in Sony mount, which will go a long way to addressing the issue of relatively limited range of lenses for the Sony.
Canon still has an edge in reliability and completeness of its system, but even their Chief Executive admitted in an interview a few weeks ago that they had fallen far behind in terms of innovation.

[AndyMulhearn]

Re: Mulling things over

Ah, yes it is the R model. I stand corrected.

Regarding falling behind, at least Canon have a viable Mirrorless range, albeit lacking in native lenses preferring to sell adaptors. Nikon are well off the pace...

[Tigger]

Re: Mulling things over

A friend uses the A7R III and gets stunning results, but you do have to get used to a much smaller camera something that I've struggled with hence not buying one yet

[@imagesBV]

Re: Mulling things over

I'm sure I read on a Canon rumours website that Canon are going to 'focus' on development of their CSCs....including a FF version. Imagine a 5D4 in an M50 size body.

[Richard W]

Re: Mulling things over

at least Canon have a viable Mirrorless range

But not yet full frame, essential for pro use these days.

Adapters have been a weak spot for mirrorless, many reports that lenses don't focus nearly as well with them. Also, they are quite big which rather negates the point of having a very small camera.

Yes, the lens system for the M series is very limited and tests seem consistently to show that they are not as good as the basic equivalents on slrs, e.g. the 55 - 200 for M has far worse performance than the 55 - 250 IS STM. And all lenses on the M series show very high levels of vignetting, opinion seems to be that the body design struggles to cope with the APS-C size sensor. I did consider one of the M series when I got the 200d but the disadvantages seemed to outweigh the benefits.

I don't know if it's possible to design a full frame mirrorless body with a native EF mount (I gather it's tricky to say the least) but that would be the "killer" development for Canon.

[El Sid]

Re: Mulling things over

I don't know if it's possible to design a full frame mirrorless body with a native EF mount (I gather it's tricky to say the least) but that would be the "killer" development for Canon.

Assuming you mean something something like an EF-F mount, same technology but a different lens registration distance, I don't see why not - Sony have managed it, indeed IIRC the full frame E-mount is the same as the APS E-mount and accepts APS format lenses too. I do doubt though whether the EF-m mount is big enough to accommodate a full frame sensor in the same way, I suspect a larger diameter would be needed.

[Richard W]

Re: Mulling things over

What I mean is a mount that means all existing EF lenses designed for dslrs can also fit a full frame mirrorless body without needing an adapter, in effect a mirrorless camera with the same EF mount as we have on our slrs. Not sure if that is the same as you are saying. I've just read that it could be difficult. I guess Sony never had that problem as they never made slrs.

[@imagesBV]

Re: Mulling things over

As I understand it a smaller sensor allows the back of the lens to be set closer to the sensor...so a FF CSC would need the same back of lens to sensor distance as you have now on EF full frame lens/cameras.
Unless the lenses are redesigned in which case they would produce a bigger image circle than required when fitted back on to a DSLR with EF mount...hence a crop factor comes into play???