rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Debating switch to mirrorless after a stroke ... | |
If you're not going to be shooting professionally, what will you be photographing for personal enjoyment?
In some respects, our Canon digital journey has been similar. I started digital with the original 1D and have always only used 1D series cameras. I tried various other Canon DSLRs over the years, including the 7DII, and didn't really like them, in part because none were as responsive as a 1D series camera.
Since September I have borrowed from Canon Canada, through the CPS program, the R3, 5, 6 and 7 (though not all at once or even with much overlap) to determine how I will transition to mirrorless. What these tests revealed to me was that all of the cameras (less so the R7), were as good or better than the 1DXII in respect to AF performance when photographing events and sports. Particularly, AF precision and consistency shot to shot was a lot better in the mirrorless cameras.
Before this I was almost certain that I'd be getting the R3 because it is the closest currently available from Canon to a 1D series camera. But the R5 and R6 were revelations in how 'good enough' they were for my needs, which over the years as steadily shifted from primarily sports to primarily non-sports events. I did thoroughly enjoy the R3 and would have zero qualms about using one for everything I do. But... for the price of the R3, I can get an R5 or R6 and at least an RF lens, or maybe two, and still be happy with the camera (I've fallen for the 28-70/2 and will spend less on the body to be able to get one of these sooner than later). And the camera I've spent the most time with is the R6. In respect to AF, it's a match and an improvement over the 1DXII and obviously performs well above its price point. Other physical aspects of the R6 don't match the 1D or R3 level and are clearly designed to its price point. So it's a bit of a tradeoff in this respect. But after decades with 1D cameras, I really appreciate the smaller size and much lighter weight, which means I'll take it along more often when I otherwise wouldn't want to lug a 1D body.
So for me, I've decided to get the R6 Mark II for the newer AF system implementation found in the R3 and R7, better battery life and other refinements over the R6. I actually felt the R5 was the best compromise but will wait for its successor.
As tkbslc suggests, if you'll be primarily working from a tripod, and if it's a DSLR in live view, you'll get a similar experience, though not quite as refined as the mirrorless cameras. It's when you're working through the viewfinder that IMO mirrorless AF performance pulls ahead of traditional DSLR AF capabilities.
|
). I was also just asked to shoot an editorial spread (of dogs) for a major magazine and would like to try and see if I can do it. I won't be able to do sports work anymore because of my limitations, but I would like to have the freedom to dabble and just do some for fun and friends. And FWIW I was also recently diagnosed with ALS so this is a short term deal likely to only last a few years at best. Not saying that for sympathy, but to help explain why I just want to stick with the lens I have and not make a major switch other than to replace my broken 1Dx II body. I have always been well served by the 1D series and might just see if I can pick up a used 1DX III and go with that. I know I should probably just give it up, but it's hard to let go.