If you shoot a dSLR

[Bear Dale]

If you shoot a dSLR do you see it (or another dSLR) seeing you right through your photography journey or do you think you will ever go to a mirrorless body?

If you do go mirrorless, will you go native lenses or use your current lenses via an adaptor?


I'm thinking I'll be staying with a dSLR and current lenses, if Nikon mirrorless body years down the track comes out that is just an insane wow factor over a dSLR, that could change my thoughts.

At this stage I couldn't see myself buying a complete range of mirrorless native lenses, so I would be using an adaptor.

But realistically, I'm happy with my current dSLR gear and think it will do me until its worn out...or I am :)

[ameerat42]

Just make sure any use of adapters allows full communication between lens and body.

[Bear Dale]

AM reading some reviews about using Nikon F mount lenses on the Z6 & Z7 bodies via the Nikon FTZ adaptor some people have said that the AF isn't as good and a few other niggles.

[John King]

Adapter quality is of prime importance IME.

[Geoff79]

If I’m being 100% honest, I don’t actually even know what mirrorless is. I know it’s there to read and understand if I want to, but for now there’s no point. I’ve wanted a full frame DSLR for a long time but it’s never been a financial option, and I assume I can amplify that for this mirrorless stuff. If it ever becomes relevant to me I’ll read up on it. :)

But I plan to ride out the 70D for as long as it operates.

[arthurking83]

I was going to spring for a new camera earlier this year, but instead, I opted for a more lavish garage instead.

But prior to the additional $'s on the garage, I gave myself the two options of a D850 or Z7.
The more I read about it, the more I think I would have went with the D850.
Never got to check out the Z7, more specifically it's EVF .. not a fan of EVF!! ... as the funds have now gone into the garage anyhow.

But my reasoning for the Z7 option was merely for the ability to play with and experiment with various alternative lens types, as the shorter register distance on the mirrorless camera allows for a lot more flexibility.
I have to disagree with Johns comment that the quality of the adapter is imperative, it really depends on what you're trying to do! ;)

Then again I also have to disagree with Am's comment that you want full communication too .. how boring! :p

Of course you can have 100 people needing 100 alternative features from their gear .. so the above musings falls under one of those requirements.

I think the advantages of one 'thing' over a 'different type of thing' only becomes clear once you know what it is you want from the thing(you're contemplating to acquire)

eg. if you shoot landscapes exclusively, I'd avoid a mirrorless camera simply due to the excessive battery use you'd encounter.
But then again this depends entirely on how you go about doing landscape, and I say this with my experience of doing landscape.

My method is slow, tedious and 'deliberate' .. I'll spend a long while on a single scene, no matter how simple it appears to be. Almost always it turns out there was a 'better' way to have captured the scene.
So I'll plonk myself, I may loiter and compose for a minimum 30mins, usually more like a minimum of an hour .. sometimes most of the arvo! .. just to get a simple not always so obvious scene shot.
With that glacial workflow in mind ... a mirrorless camera would be less ideal for me. I'd need 10x the battery count in my travels.

The above is the reason I decided that the D850(update from the D800E) was my suitable option ... but then again like I said .. $s disappeared into metal and concrete.

I may revisit the option again in the future, but in saying that, I've hit the lost mojo obstacle that other's have sometimes complained of too.
Although in saying that, a lot of my time was taken up playing bob the builder, so haven't really tried much to get out and about so often.
Just one aside from all that too tho, the one thing I really wish I had access too on my camera body is Electronic Front Curtain(EFC), where the front shutter is activated electronically, not the actual shutter.
This way high magnification stuff(i.e MACRO macro, not the pseudo cropped up stuff!) doesn't turn out so crappily as I can get from the D800E(sometimes).

Once all the dust settles(if ever) in the shed(I'm currently making doors), maybe the super solid concrete floor(as opposed to timber framed/timber trampoline ... floor! in the home) may make a more solid starting base.

[John King]

Bear, all the photos in this album were shot using my E-M1 MkI (mirrorless) using my four thirds 14-54 MkII lens via an Olympus MMF-3 adapter.

https://canopuscomputing.com.au/zen2/CarsandSuch/AustralianCarShow/

[ameerat42]

My first medium format camera was a mirrorless. - An Agfa (https://www.google.com/search?q=agfa+box+camera&client=firefox-b-d&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiAi8C0pYTkAhUEAXIKHZAICmkQ_AUIESgB&biw=1920&bih=916#imgrc=o7uW-KX4SXLYyM:)focus-free box camera. I've still got it.

After that I had a couple of 35mm mirrorless cameras - they were called "rangefinders".
Finally I got an SLR. Since then a couple of digital compacts, and again now a DSLR :D

The (D)SLRs are a temporary side-track in the advance of mirrorless photography :eek::eek:

And, don't read this (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_single-lens_reflex_camera) :p

[Bear Dale]

If I’m being 100% honest, I don’t actually even know what mirrorless is. I know it’s there to read and understand if I want to, but for now there’s no point. I’ve wanted a full frame DSLR for a long time but it’s never been a financial option, and I assume I can amplify that for this mirrorless stuff. If it ever becomes relevant to me I’ll read up on it. :)

But I plan to ride out the 70D for as long as it operates.

My son has my 50D Geoff that is 11-12 years old now and it still operates like the day it came out of its box, your 70D will be around for a quite awhile.

- - - Updated - - -


Bear, all the photos in this album were shot using my E-M1 MkI (mirrorless) using my four thirds 14-54 MkII lens via an Olympus MMF-3 adapter.

https://canopuscomputing.com.au/zen2/CarsandSuch/AustralianCarShow/

Nice John.

- - - Updated - - -


.. not a fan of EVF!! ...


If I ever bought another body with EVF I'd have to extensively test it beforehand. I've owned a Panasonic FZ2500 and a Sony RX10 III and both EVF's made me feel seasick.

[Brian500au]

I have had both SLR since 1981 and DSLR since 2002, but recently invested in a mirrorless. For me it was horses for courses - in this case the mirrorless was an addition to my kit (replacement actually). I already had a canon 1Dx so needed a smaller lighter body. The decision was easy for me as the canon supplied adaptor means I could use my existing Canon lenses flawlessly with the mirrorless body.

[Mary Anne]

On my two Olympus E-M1 & E-M1 Mk11 Cameras I shoot with Olympus m4/3 lenses.

Both Systems work for me Canon DSLR and Olympus Mirrorless m4/34, it all depends how I feel that day Strong as a Ox as everything is hand held, or weak as a little Puppy.


The reason I went Mirrorless Olympus E-M1 & E-M1 Mk11 was the lighter weight. Yes I still use my Canon gear and still Like it.
Who am I kidding about weight my Olympus 300mmf/4 lens weighs a tad more than my Canon 300mm f/4 lens, so only the Olympus camera is lighter.
I have the Kipon EOS m4/3 A Adapter 5 ½ years old now, not the cheapest though not up there with the price of the Metabones one which I wanted.
They did not make one at the time. I have not checked to see if Metabones make one now as I am not interested in buying one it's to late

Because everything is Manual on my adapter and you cannot see what f/- you are using you have to make sure you put it on what you want I forgot a few times.
I don't like it with the Canon 300mm f/4L lens and that why I saved for years to get the Olympus one.
It's not to bad with the Canon 70-200mm f/4L, I have taken a few images with my Canon 100mm f/2.8L Macro lens also.
I used to love playing around with my Canon M-PE 65mm Macro lens on the m4/3 camera for a bit of fun I actually got to shoot a Aphid Egg on 4x hand held.
And was very pleased with that image..

[ameerat42]

Reminder to members:

The nub of this thread is as cited below (from OP's 1st post):
" If you shoot a dSLR

If you shoot a dSLR do you see it (or another dSLR) seeing you right through your photography journey or do you think you will ever go to a mirrorless body?

If you do go mirrorless, will you go native lenses or use your current lenses via an adaptor?"

Discussions ONLY on the relative merits of camera systems - like Mirrorless vs DSLR - may be subject to moderation.

[Bensch]

Have used a (Nikon) DSLR for a number of years now, but recently (last year) picked up an Olympus E-M10 MkII (and recently an E-M1) with the intention of just using it for travelling.

However, it quite quickly became the main camera that I use (due to weight), and is now used for around 80% of my photography.

I did look at getting an adapter to use my Nikon lenses on the Olympus, however, the adapters generally don't have a pass through, so are manual focus and only shoot on the widest aperture, unless you have a lens that has manual aperture adjustment.

Am slowly upgrading my lenses to comparable M43 lenses. That being said, I won't give up my DSLR and lenses, but it only comes out on special occasions.

[John King]

I have adapters for my manual lenses from my film days, and an OEM 'smart' adapter for my four thirds lenses. All attach to my micro four thirds cameras. My old manual lenses also work on my four thirds cameras.

It's all to do with the registration distance (lens flange mount to sensor plane) and whether the electronic connections can be interpreted by a 'smart' adapter. A number of manufacturers make smart adapters and focal reduction adapters for many electronic lenses to mFTs and some other mirrorless makers/mounts.

[arthurking83]

....

I did look at getting an adapter to use my Nikon lenses on the Olympus, however, the adapters generally don't have a pass through, so are manual focus and only shoot on the widest aperture, unless you have a lens that has manual aperture adjustment.

Am slowly upgrading my lenses to comparable M43 lenses. That being said, I won't give up my DSLR and lenses, but it only comes out on special occasions.

I think you can .. get an adapter that will pass through electronic data(I think) .. will have to delve into it a bit more.
Obviously I'm not an Olympus user, so don't really delve into every possible option and accessory available, but I think Metabones may have an adapter for Nikon(lens) to Olympus(body) that does comms too.

...

Nah! sorry you're right .. no comms.
It was the Canon EF adapter that did comms to m4/3rd.
Obviously the Nikon AF protocol is too expensive(R&D) to deal with for some manufacturers.

[John King]

It's not expense. Check out what a Metabones adapter costs!

Much more likely to be a registration distance problem (too thin for connections).

[Mark L]

I have had both SLR since 1981 and DSLR since 2002, but recently invested in a mirrorless. For me it was horses for courses - in this case the mirrorless was an addition to my kit (replacement actually). I already had a canon 1Dx so needed a smaller lighter body. The decision was easy for me as the canon supplied adaptor means I could use my existing Canon lenses flawlessly with the mirrorless body.

So how do you reckon any mirrorless would perform over the 80D with my 600mm lens?

[John King]

So how do you reckon any mirrorless would perform over the 80D with my 600mm lens?

Mark, it seems to be a general rule across brands that even within a brand adapted lenses do not AF as fast as lenses native to the format/body. Sometimes they will not AF at all.

In Olympus land the E-M1 series overcome some of these problems by using on-sensor PDAF alongside the native CDAF, sometimes using both. It is still not as fast as using native CDAF lenses for the most part.

It really seems to be on a case by case basis. There is an Adapted Lens forum on DPR where these issues are discussed.

[Tannin]

I wrote a detailed response to this the other day, but it seems to have gone missing and I'll have to start again. Ouch!

I own and use both mirrorless (EOS R) and DSLR (5D II, 5D IV, 1D IV, 7D II) cameras. Simply, the mirrorless body is not even close to being as capable as the DSLRs. It copes well with slow-moving and static subjects, and in many light conditions, but it's just about useless as an action camera because of viewfinder lag and imprecise focus. (This rules out birding with it. Of my five bodies, it is the least capable for bird work, outclassed even by the ancient 5D II - a camera I have never regarded as suitable for bird work, not even when it was new and I was quite a lot younger.)

Also, the EVF can't cope with strong side-lighting. It becomes almost impossible to see what you are doing sometimes.

There are numerous other issues with the EOS R, mostly to do with rushed design and remarkably poor handling, but these are specific to that particular model and it is reasonable to assume that Canon will fix them in future releases, so they can be ignored in this context.

I'll be using my existing SLRs (and from time to time buying new ones) for the foreseeable future. Mirrorless technology isn't even close at present. I'll revisit the question if and when they come up with mirrorless systems suitable for birds and action. It will take major progress though.

(Note that I do use the mirrorless camera often, and get good results with it - but only for landscapes and other static subjects where its limitations are not generally relevant.)

[John King]

Tony, I have absolutely none of those problems with either of my two mirrorless cameras. Maybe make/model specific?

[Brian500au]

So how do you reckon any mirrorless would perform over the 80D with my 600mm lens?

Mark I am not as harsh as Tony, but I will say in my limited time I have used the mirrorless it is not a replacement for a sports / wildlife camera. I bought this camera for a specific reason - as a back up camera to my 1Dx for static wild life and a lighter rig for when I go hiking in Africa next year.

I needed a second body, and had the choice of investing in a second DSLR or make the move to mirrorless. There are some aspects of this body I really like (the articulated rear screen) and I am not against the EVF. In honesty if time was on my side then I would have waited for the second generation of canon mirrorless, but I wanted to get as much practice in as practically possible before I travelled next year. What made the decision easy for me was the flawless adaptor allowing my existing range of lenses to work on the mirrorless body. I have canon, zeiss and sigma lenses and all seem to work as well if not better on the mirrorless body.

As with the change from SLR to DSLR, I think the future is moving towards mirrorless now that canon has made the move, they will force that move (as that is where most of the newer lenses are being developed).

For the work you are doing I do not see any advantage in moving over to mirrorless just yet - wait for the next generation of bodies, and see if Canon release a crop sensor version (equivalent to the 90D+).

[William W]

If you shoot a dSLR do you see it (or another dSLR) seeing you right through your photography journey or do you think you will ever go to a mirrorless body? If you do go mirrorless, will you go native lenses or use your current lenses via an adaptor?

I've had a Canon DSLR system since 2004, immediately prior to that, my 135 Format was Nikon SLR.

I bought a Fuji x100s a few years ago to test the water - I loved the ideas of: leaf shutter, compact size and silent action. Got hooked on the Prime Lens 'feature' of this neat little camera.

Bought an EOS M5 about 18 months ago - of course I bought the EF-M to EF/EF-S adapter for the M5, thinking I'd use all my nice Canon EF Lenses - I've used that adapter once or twice. All out of balance -totally.

I liked the M5 camera and I switched my thinking and bought a neat little kit of very fast (manual) Prime Lenses for it.

My thinking is that they're different camera systems.

Certainly Canon didn't get their act together with the EF-M lens offerings - and I doubt that they will now, but I don't mind. The compact size and weight of the M5 and the small Prime Lenses are great to use, easy to carry, and for want of a better word, a bit 'nostalgic'.

If I ever buy into the Canon "R" Series Cameras - I'd buy RF Lenses.

Nikon's path has been different, not so sure it will be different enough that plonking legacy lenses on Nikon Mirrorless will be the best choice for everyone.

WW

[swifty]

Hi Bear,
I'm currently a dual system DSLR and mirrorless user and have been for many years.
I think you should largely ignore the DSLR/mirrorless distinction and focus just on your needs and whatever system fulfill it the best is your answer. If your needs/wants span quite a large gamut of uses, then you may end up like me and having multiple systems catering for different uses.
My biggest problem is my two systems are essentially mutually exclusive so that reduces their versatility so if there's one wish I have is to consolidate my mirrorless and DSLR system into something that is largely compatible.

The current main reasons I have chosen to maintain a second system is to have a smaller kit that is also able to shoot silently. That naturally meant I needed to look at both mirrorless options as well as a smaller sensor format.
But looking towards the future, since Nikon FF is my main system I'll naturally be looking at whether Z mount (including with adapters) can combine both my needs. So whilst I'm still happy with my DSLR I think my natural progression may be towards a full mirrorless transition.

*Note: I'm down to only G and E lenses on my Nikon F-mount and so they mostly work well with FTZ. But if you own many non-AFS lenses then I'd probably just stick to DSLRs.

[ameerat42]

...I think you should largely ignore the DSLR/mirrorless distinction and focus just on your needs and whatever system fulfill it the best is your answer...

Good point, among other like ones, including the rationale on lenses.

[the scientist]

If I replace my entry-level dSLR, I'll want something with a stronger and more satisfying click-cluck of the mirror, not do away with it altogether :)

I can see advantage of the smaller and lighter body, but I also like having a big comfy body to hold.

[ameerat42]

^The conversation is supposed to be mainly about lenses, per this reminder (http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?161741-If-you-shoot-a-dSLR&p=1490282#post1490282).

[Lance B]

AM reading some reviews about using Nikon F mount lenses on the Z6 & Z7 bodies via the Nikon FTZ adaptor some people have said that the AF isn't as good and a few other niggles.

I have both the D850 and the Z7 and there is no issue whatsoever with the FTZ adaptor and my current crop of F mount lenses being used on the Z7. They focus basically just as fast and generally more accurately on the Z7 - no AF fine tune woes nor focus shift woes. Having said that, none of my F mount lenses require any AF fine tune on my D850 either, but there are sometimes issues that can probably be attributed to focus shift. The other thing with requiring AF fine tune is that it you can only adjust for one camera to subject distance and one aperture and with a zoom, one focal length. This is not to say that there will be huge differences of AF fine tune required for different camera to subject distances or different apertures and with a zoom, different focal lengths. However, there may be slight anomalies that may just take the edge of absolute sharpness. The thing is, generally images from the Z7 are crisper more of the time than they are from the D850 and this may be attributed to these slight anomalies. I am not saying they always are, but there may be issue sometimes. I have basically rarely used the D850 since getting my Z7 in October last year, only using the D850 for tracking BIF. All other duties are the realm of the Z7 simply because I love using it so much. Don't get me wrong, the D850 is still arguably the best FF camera you can use as it is good at nearly all aspects of photography, but that doesn't mean it's the best to use.

The other benefit of the Z mount is the promise of better overall IQ and the new mount has delivered with the new native lenses. Every new Z mount lens is an improvement over it's F mount counterpart and I can safely say this because I have had the F mount versions of these new Z mount lenses, except for the 50 f1.8G. However, from the reviews and reports from users I have seen, the Z mount is vastly superior. Also, the benefits have to be taken in context of their design parameters and a case in point is the diminutive 14-30 f4S compared to say the 14-24 f2.8 or the 16-35 f4 VR. The context of design for the 14-30 f4S is a *very* compact size and this was it's main criteria for travel users. Here we have a lens that is not only small and light, but it at least matches the 14-24 f2.8 for overall IQ yest is smaller and lighter and only misses out in the large maximum f2.8 aperture. The 24-30 clearly outshines the 16-35 f4 VR yet is half the size and still much smaller. The 14-30 f4S is possibly the "perfect" travel ultra wide angle zoom due to it's diminutive size and light weight. The 24-70 f4S is also diminutive, giving a brilliant 2 lens lightweight travel package along with the 14-30 f4S yet with excellent overall IQ from both. Even the 24-70 f2.8S is much smaller and lighter than it's F mount counterparts yet also delivers better IQ, in fact outstanding IQ rivaling F mount primes.

The other benefit is IBIS, this also helps very much with getting the most from your lenses. All my F mount lenses are now image stabilized even if they do not have VR!

[Bear Dale]

Thanks Lance a very good review from someone who owns a D850 and a Z7.

[John King]

Agree about the IBIS and no focus adjustment Lance.

My E-M1 MkI and MkII used with my 12-100 (24-200 in 35mm terms) both have what Olympus calls "sync-IS" - combined IBIS and in-lens optical stabilization. They claim something like 6.5 stops! Every bit helps as I become less steady by the day.