I "think" I'm finally ready to try an A1ii. I have been watching too many videos/reviews of the sony's, canon's, and leica's, that I'm going mad. Here is what I want very simply, a smaller camera that has the autofocus speed of my R3, a nice clean EVF (eyes aren't what they used to be) higher mp's so i feel like I can crop (in camera and in post) without losing too much detail, and some smaller lenses where my kids don't roll their eyes every time I go to take their picture with my R3 and 28-70 f/2. Kind of excited to try a new platform with Sony but have been a Canon shooter for over 20 years now, will I miss it? I think I'll post this in both sony forum and canon forum. I may still try the Leica Q3 43 but I think I'll always want the versatility of other lenses. What am I waiting for??
It is a good idea that you did NOT cross-post the thread on both forums; otherwise, it could get ugly fast.
I was a longtime Canon shooter, since the film days actually. I switched to Sony mirrorless system early on. I pre-ordered the original A7r years ago and shortly after that I sold everything Canon. Nowadays, you could get similar results with any of the 3 camera systems. If it is coming down to size and portability, yes, Sony has the edge. I do have the Sony A1 II but my favorite camera that I use a lot, especially when I travel and for family/people shots, is the A7c R. Basically, I have 2 sets of lenses, smaller and lightweight lenses (Sony G, Sigma DG DN, TTArtisan, etc.) that I use with the A7c R and medium-sized zooms to long tele lenses for more serious and wildlife/bird photography.
I am more than just content with my gear setup right now... Wish you the best in your selection! Whatever you end up choosing, enjoy photography!
Sounds like you’re already halfway out of the Canon door. If you’re going A1 II, I’d start with the 35GM and 70-200GM II and call it a day. You only live once, might as well have some fun with it.
I love my Sony stuff, but if you're not switching for paid work and the canon gear is doing what you need, I personally wouldn't switch right now. But that's me and my financials talking.
Only thing I miss about Canon were the nicer (to my eyes) skin tones and cr3 file sizes. Edit: And better screen quality.
mattchu wrote:
I "think" I'm finally ready to try an A1ii. I have been watching too many videos/reviews of the sony's, canon's, and leica's, that I'm going mad. Here is what I want very simply, a smaller camera that has the autofocus speed of my R3, a nice clean EVF (eyes aren't what they used to be) higher mp's so i feel like I can crop (in camera and in post) without losing too much detail, and some smaller lenses where my kids don't roll their eyes every time I go to take their picture with my R3 and 28-70 f/2. Kind of excited to try a new platform with Sony but have been a Canon shooter for over 20 years now, will I miss it? I think I'll post this in both sony forum and canon forum. I may still try the Leica Q3 43 but I think I'll always want the versatility of other lenses. What am I waiting for??...Show more →
The A1II is a very complete camera that does virtually everything in a relatively small body. It is not as small as the A7CR, but the A7CR does not have the EVF quality that you want, nor does it have a stacked sensor (which virtually always provides protection against LED lights & their banding effects when shooting with silent shutter). Paired with smaller or medium-sized lenses, The A1II will give you a compact kit.
Like Joshua above, I had been a Canon shooter for many years and got into Sony early and never looked back. The initial draw was the smaller size. That and the continuing quality and innovation have kept me happy.
@mattchu I was in your shoes a couple of years ago, when I was choosing a mirrorless system to migrate after 20+ years of Canon DSLRs. A couple of thoughts:
First, sometimes the change for the sake of change is good. Shaking things up brings a nice sense of exploration, makes you rethink old habits and possibly acquire new ones. For example, drifting away from Canon allowed me to fall in love with having real aperture rings on lenses. I simply didn't even think about that when I was happily shooting with my 5D Mk4. Basically, it's not about what's better, it's about the change itself.
Second, I believe you're fooling yourself by imagining a world where you kids won't roll up their eyes when you bust out your gear, if only it was a bit smaller. Nope. My experience suggests that all non-smartphone picture-taking devices trigger that reaction with younger generation unless they're into it.
And finally, from the functionality perspective you won't be missing anything. All latest MILCs from the big 3 are great at everything. When Fuji learns how to autofocus, that will make it 4.
Thank you all very much for the responses. I would agree that these cameras nowadays are just incredible. Hard to imagine what my kids will be using to shoot with in 20 years time. I welcome the technology but can also appreciate the days when I was shooting slide film and had to be purposeful with my shots. Those are the photos mostly hung on my walls (aside from kids stuff) these days. I'll keep you posted on my decision but am leaning hard into giving the Sony a try. Even though my wife thinks I'm going to miss the canon body I've grown accustomed to all these years!
shac wrote:
Unless you shoot a of of birds and need pre-capture, you could consider a used A1. Just a thought
The A1ii also has the fully-articulated rear screen, which has proven to be far more useful than I could have imagined. But other than that and pre-capture, I agree an A1 is still a good buy (I have both)
wordfool wrote:
The A1ii also has the fully-articulated rear screen, which has proven to be far more useful than I could have imagined. But other than that and pre-capture, I agree an A1 is still a good buy (I have both)
mattchu wrote:
a nice clean EVF (eyes aren't what they used to be) higher mp's so i feel like I can crop (in camera and in post) without losing too much detail, and some smaller lenses where my kids don't roll their eyes every time I go to take their picture with my R3 and 28-70 f/2. Kind of excited to try a new platform with Sony but have been a Canon shooter for over 20 years now, will I miss it?
I have found that a larger sensor like Full Frame does gives you a lot more "cropping power" compared to the smaller sensor formats. However if the sensor size is kept constant, 2x the MP does not give you anywhere near 2x the cropping power.
If you look at these samples, to my eye 24MP @ 77mm looks as good as 50MP @ 70mm. This implies that the 50MP sensor gives us an extra ~1.1x cropping power in this instance. 1.1x is not insignificant, but its not as much as what some people hope for.
To get a benefit greater than a 1.1x crop you need to be using well corrected, extremely sharp prime lenses, and the prime lenses need to be stopped down to the aperture at which they are at their sharpest.
Therefore if you either like to shoot your primes wide open, or prefer to shoot zooms then the A9iii brings a lot to the table. When shooting in burst mode the A9iii has the better EVF, and the A9iii's capabilities are a game changer for flash photography (with Sony flash units). You can easily shoot 100-200 frames of flash at 10-15fps and f/1.4 while beating the sun, no ND filters necessary.
I was going to try the 40 2.5 first just for it's size. Perhaps I could buy both the 35 1.4 and the 40 2.5 and see which one I get along with better. I know I'd prefer the speed of the 1.4. If i decided to keep the camera, then perhaps adding other primes. The 300 2.8 looks amazing, with incredible results with the 1.4 and 2x converters!
mattchu wrote:
I was going to try the 40 2.5 first just for it's size. Perhaps I could buy both the 35 1.4 and the 40 2.5 and see which one I get along with better. I know I'd prefer the speed of the 1.4. If i decided to keep the camera, then perhaps adding other primes. The 300 2.8 looks amazing, with incredible results with the 1.4 and 2x converters!
The GM 35mm f/1.4 is truly an amazing lens. It is not that big nor heavy, especially considering the speed. I am hesitant to buy used cameras but I would buy used lenses in a heart beat. My point is, if you buy a used GM 35mm f/1.4 at a decent price and if for whatever reasons you don't like it, you can sell it again at a slight loss or maybe even break even. I am referring to the B&S forum here.
The GM 300mm f/2.8 is indeed a superb performer and yes, it handles both TCs very well.
old-gregg wrote:
Second, I believe you're fooling yourself by imagining a world where you kids won't roll up their eyes when you bust out your gear, if only it was a bit smaller. Nope. My experience suggests that all non-smartphone picture-taking devices trigger that reaction with younger generation unless they're into it.
This hits a little too close to home.
My kids already roll their eyes at anything that isn’t a phone. So if they’re going to be mortified anyway, I might as well like the camera… hence my totally reasonable plan to buy a Leica M.
mattchu wrote:
I was going to try the 40 2.5 first just for it's size. Perhaps I could buy both the 35 1.4 and the 40 2.5 and see which one I get along with better. I know I'd prefer the speed of the 1.4. If i decided to keep the camera, then perhaps adding other primes. The 300 2.8 looks amazing, with incredible results with the 1.4 and 2x converters!
I used to use the EF 40/2.8 for the size
However frankly on Sony bodies it’s not necessary. A zoom like the 24-50/2.8G is a much more useful lens. It’s not worth losing zoom capability just to get f/2.5. 1/3 stop is not enough
The a7Rv would seem to click all of your boxes but at a cheaper price point than the a1ii. Unless you are shooting eagles all the time or auto racing, the a7Rv has the EVF, good AF tracking, a flippy screen, and is excellent at just about everything. It is not an a1ii, but there are very few things that could not be done with it.
As others have mentioned, the 35GM is excellent, but honestly, all of the GM lenses are. It really comes down to what focal length you use most. The 300 is sublime and focuses at the speed of thought. Compared to lugging around the (beautiful beast) Canon EF 300/2.8 L IS from 20 years ago, the 300 GM is a piece of cake. I can shoot with that all day long, in rough seas, whale watching no problem. I can’t speak for Sony zooms, as the only one I own is the 100-400, but their primes are stellar.
As for the Q3 43, it is a truly wonderful piece of engineering elegance. With the newest firmware, it has respectable AF speed - though no contest winner - and accuracy. It can do anything in that focal length, which covers much of what I shoot, but I could never use it as my only camera. It is a very fun to use indulgence that delivers great results.
I thought a lot about the A7 RV, but then thought if I were getting a new (or like new) A1ii, I would be getting some of the latest technology. I do like shooting wildlife, birds, and my fast moving kids. I'm used to the FPS on the R3 and the pre-capture mode seems very inviting. I do appreciate the aspect of buying more glass though.
So I am going to try out an RF 45 1.2 lens from canon with my R3 and see how that feels for a walk around type lens. A couple people mentioned trying an A1. Do you think an A1 would give me a good taste of what a sony system can provide? If so, what one lens to try with it, a 35 1.4 or the 40 2.5? If that went well, I'd get a 300 2.8 GM. So attracted by the weight of that lens!! Seems like it could be my one and done wildlife lens with teleconverters and cropping!
mattchu wrote:
So I am going to try out an RF 45 1.2 lens from canon with my R3 and see how that feels for a walk around type lens. A couple people mentioned trying an A1. Do you think an A1 would give me a good taste of what a sony system can provide? If so, what one lens to try with it, a 35 1.4 or the 40 2.5? If that went well, I'd get a 300 2.8 GM. So attracted by the weight of that lens!! Seems like it could be my one and done wildlife lens with teleconverters and cropping!...Show more →
The Sony A1 and A1 II are geared more towards fast-paced photography. Fast moving kids, unless they do sport, would not be considered fast-paced in my opinion. If financially feasible, and since you also like bird photography then by all means the A1 II would be a great camera for you. Besides that, I would suggest getting a Sony A7r V. Both the A7r V and A1 II have that great screen tilt mechanism that the original A1 has. In addition, the viewfinder of both is better than that in the A1.
Some folks may suggest renting a camera to try the system out. If you are familiar how Sony cameras work, then yes, that's a good suggestion. But if you are not, it would take a while to get familiar with the camera and you may not have enough time to evaluate the camera in some depth. I would suggest buying a good used copy on this forum and if for whatever reasons you want to sell it again after awhile, there is a chance that you loose only a little or may even break even. Lenses, on the other hand, are fine to rent for an evaluation.
IMHO, the main attraction of the Sony G 40mm f/2.5 is its small size and light weight. I would choose a GM 35mm f/1.4 to try out the system.
I hope you will find/get a system that will tick all your boxes. Good luck!
