Considering a switch from Full frame DSLR to mirrorless, have a few questions

[sonicbuffalo]

There is 1 big problem with the XT1 if you shoot lots of low light it will only shoot upto iso6400 in raw anything after is JPG

Thanks gsgary.....I only knew that it would NOT shoot raw at or below 100, which didn't make sense to me. Thanks for sharing all of your knowledge with us. I guess I am glad I bought the A7. What flipped the switch for you to get it over, say, the Olympus?

 

[gsgary]

There is 1 big problem with the XT1 if you shoot lots of low light it will only shoot upto iso6400 in raw anything after is JPG

Thanks gsgary.....I only knew that it would NOT shoot raw at or below 100, which didn't make sense to me. Thanks for sharing all of your knowledge with us. I guess I am glad I bought the A7. What flipped the switch for you to get it over, say, the Olympus?

I was only ever going to buy the A7 because it's sensor is the same size as my Leica's

 

[sonicbuffalo]

Which one takes better pictures? I guess I shouldn't ask that one!

 

[gsgary]

Which one takes better pictures? I guess I shouldn't ask that one!

It's obvious

 

[sonicbuffalo]

Which one takes better pictures? I guess I shouldn't ask that one!

It's obvious

How many lenses do you have for the Leica? I guess a better question is why did Sony decide to make their new cameras very, very compatible to the Leica? WIth lenses, accessories, and even the cameras themselves are almost like a Leica. The big difference is the money spent. I bet your pictures on the Sony are almost to the quality you get on the Leica? Do you agree? I mean for the money spent.

 

[gsgary]

5 lenses 2 50mm, 2 35mm and a 28mm those are the only focal lengths I use on my Leica's, the adapter I use cost me £258 the Voigtlander close focus it reduces minimum focus by more than half they are different on each camera because my Leicas are film cameras if you look in b+w section you can see what the 28mm looks like

 

[sonicbuffalo]

5 lenses 2 50mm, 2 35mm and a 28mm those are the only focal lengths I use on my Leica's, the adapter I use cost me £258 the Voigtlander close focus it reduces minimum focus by more than half they are different on each camera because my Leicas are film cameras if you look in b+w section you can see what the 28mm looks like

What do you shoot the most? You must specialize in a certain genre to get short focal lengths?

 

[gsgary]

5 lenses 2 50mm, 2 35mm and a 28mm those are the only focal lengths I use on my Leica's, the adapter I use cost me £258 the Voigtlander close focus it reduces minimum focus by more than half they are different on each camera because my Leicas are film cameras if you look in b+w section you can see what the 28mm looks like

What do you shoot the most? You must specialize in a certain genre to get short focal lengths?

I will shot anything, I shoot more film than digital, I shoot quite a lot of street photography but I used to only shoot sport untill about 3 years ago

 

[gsgary]

Here's some sports shots with the A7 and 50mm

This shot is iso 16,000

 

[sonicbuffalo]

Nice.....really tack sharp shots...!

 

[Mirrorless Journey]

It took me two years to complete my switch from full frame to Micro 4/3. I sold my last 5D Mark II and lenses in july. I have no regret. I even started a blog to talk about that at Mirrorless Journey

 

[Gary A.]

Here's an article written by Thom Hogan, describing how a Nikon D7100 outfit, a Fuji XT-1 outfit, and an Olympus E-M1 outfit ACTUALLY worked on his two-week Galapagos workshop trip earlier this year.Equipment Used at the Workshop | byThom Sites | Thom Hogan

"The E-M1 and X-T1 were slightly more of a mixed bag, mostly attributable to focus. While most of us figured out ways to deal with fast motion and getting in focus shots, for me the EM-1 turned out to be the better choice, and I believe that is mostly due to lenses and the snap of the initial focus acquisition. The long telephoto option for the X-T1 does not seem to be as fast at adjusting focus as the m4/3 options we were using, and tended to move less rapidly to initial focus. If—and that’s a big if—you acquire focus and can keep the moving subject where the X-T1 wants it with the 55-200mm lens zoomed in, you’re fine, it’s actually better at holding focus tracking on regularly moving subjects than the E-M1 by a bit, though it will sometimes vary the burst rate doing so. Beware of what happens when you temporarily lose focus: more often than not you’re hosed for that sequence (not true of the D7100 or Nikon DSLRs at all when set properly. as their phase detect systems usually reacquire lost focus very rapidly). The Fujifilm often couldn’t reacquire initial focus quick enough when I lost it and restarted a focus sequence on a moving object."

And so on and so on.

I shoot with 1D's, EM1 and the XT1. Nothing compares to the AF of a pro level dSLR. But all cameras are compromises. That superior AF comes at a price of affordability and portability. A 1DX is nearly 5x more expensive than a XT1 and come in at 440 g while the 1D weights in at 1.54 kg. This isn't an apple to apples comparison in my book.

Mirrorless cameras work differently than dSLR's. Not different good or different bad, but certainly different.

The XT1 does not track. And I think many are confusing 'tracking' with 'holding focus'. I was confusing until I worked with the Fuji.
For action photography, a dSLR is clearly better than a mirrorless. But just because a dSLR is better, does not mean a mirrorless is useless for action. I found in good light that the Fuji will/may acquire focus just a bit faster than my 1D. Both cameras are pretty equal in acquiring AF using a single point mode. What difference there may be is insignificant. In very low light the 1D kicks the Fuji's butt.

The XT1 will hold focus in Continuous as long as you keep the subject inside the focus reticle. Once the subject moves out of the focus box ... it's all over. It gets worse because at 8FPS the EVF cannot maintain EVF updates so you start losing camera vision. But once you realize the shortfalls you can accommodate and work with and around the shortfalls. Shooting the XT1 for action you will work harder for less keepers than a dSLR. For some/most hobbyist, that's okay.

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

I can post this stuff all day long.

Gary

 

[rexbobcat]

My biggest concern would be autofocus speed. Even though many mirrorless cameras now have phase autofocus in the form of a hybrid system, they still seem a bit slower than DSLRs with dedicated phase-detect autofocus. If you're in decent light it's generally fine, but in low light and in situations where contrast is limited (smoke, fog, haze, shadowed areas) mirrorless cameras can struggle a bit.

Other than that, they're light, have great sensors for the most part, and can easily be stored. Plus, lenses focal lengths/apertures are often cheaper for mirrorless systems.

I'm wanting to get the Fuji XE-2 or X-Pro 2 (when it's released) just because the ease-of-use to quality factor is so incredible.

 

[Mirrorless Journey]

Well, the AF on static subject is faster on micro 4/3 than it was on my 5D Mark II and it is always spot-on. You can't have back or front focus problems. The GH4 is speced at -4EV for AF which is excellent. I was really surprise by it's performances on C-AF recently when I photograph my daughter's cross-country team in action. The tracking AF is not that good but I didn't have it on the 5DII anyway. The C-AF on the 5DII was really bad. With the 70-200mm f/2,8, It was not able to C-AF on her consistently when she was playing soccer.

The AF is still a bit faster on micro 4/3 than on the Fuji but it's getting closer (with the XT-1) and we can hope the X-Pro2 will be even better.

 

[goodguy]

I just moved from DX to FX so I am with you on the full frame band wagon.
The thing is that what really is big is the lenses, not so much the body, if you want good fast glass with full frame they will be BIG!
If you want smaller system then you will need to go to micro 4/3, great systems but in low light they will not hold a candle with a full frame.
I dont see myself moving away from DLSR for now but I am considering adding the Nikon 1, if is tiny and in good lighting conditionds is fantastic and if I want I can mount the F lenses (with adaptor) on it and get 2.7 magnification on it.
So I can enjoy both worlds.