Camera upgrade advise (Sony A7ii or FUJI XT1)

[shek]

Hi everyone,

I’m deciding whether I should upgrade my camera from Canon EOS-M to Sony A7ii or FUJI XT1.
Key questions:
1. If I go with FUJI XT1 - is it much of an upgrade from EOS-M ?
2. Are there much affordable lenses to Sony A7 series? (Esp. Wide angle , Zoom)
3. Is Sony’s Full Frame really worth the price as compared to APS-C?
4. Are the lenses size for Sony FF considerably larger than FUJI’s that it outweigh the portability of mirrorless camera?
5. Based on my need (explained below), which is the best choice?

A bit of background:
I’m hobby photographer who use my camera mostly for travelling - taking landscape photos, (outdoor) portrait, night long exposure (milky way etc). Not so much for shooting sport and moving objects. As a beginner, I’ve bought my canon eos m about 2 years ago. It was great at the time and I’ve learnt to control aperture, iso, exposure to shoot desired photos.

The reasons I want to upgrade:
- I like having a viewfinder, so I can more focus on composing the photo
- The grip on EOS M is annoyingly small
- I think there’s some problem with the camera that auto white balance is always too purple...
- If I am looking for an upgrade anyway, I’d like to try a full frame camera, but still lightweight enough to travel with

With all these reasons added up, I think the Sony A7 series is very appealing to me.
However, I currently have two lenses for the EOS M - ef m 11-22 (Wide angle - great for landscape) and ef m 55-200 (Telephoto zoom - great for focusing on an object at distance). If I make the switch, I don’t want to spend way too much on lenses yet. Having done some research, Samyang lenses are good alternative to native expensive sony lenses, but will have to learn manual focus (I’m up for the challenge anyway).

Just before I finalised my decision, I looked at FUJI XT1. There are so many great reviews about the camera itself, the collection of lenses choices, the ergonomic, and image quality. To me, the main difference is that one using a Full Frame sensor and the other is a ASPC sensor. Having never tried Full Frame camera, I have no idea if the image quality is really that much of a difference...


So in summary, I want a camera with:
Really great image quality (Hence I though Full-Frame would be better. But I could be wrong)
Affordable range of lens choices
Easy to carry for travel


That’s it, advices appreciated!

 

[cherylynne1]

1.) In my opinion, pretty much any other mirrorless offering is an upgrade from EOS-M. I don't think it was a serious effort on their part.

2) Depends on your definition of affordable. $500-800? Yeah, most normal focal lengths covered. $800-$1500? Great quality and most of what you'd need. But less than that, you're looking at adapters, legacy lenses and manual focus. It sounds like you're up for that challenge, in which case you might be very happy. I think some of the happiest Sony owners are the ones that are pairing old manual lenses with the rockin' Sony sensor.

3) That depends solely on you and the way you shoot. Can you look at an image and know whether it was full frame or APS-C? Do you need low light capabilities? Do you need a great deal of subject separation? For basic landscape shots, probably not. For low light (like you mentioned, Milky Way) or portraits with wide apertures, maybe.

4.) This is where it would really help to see the cameras in person. Even if you have to travel a bit, is there a camera store anywhere near you? Too big for you might be just fine for someone else, and vice versa. But in short, I would say Sony is small compared to full frame DSLRs, but not compared to Fuji.

5) Hard to say. I think the Sony has more potential for growth...as in, if you plan for photography to be a lifelong hobby that you will continue to add equipment and skills to forever, it will be a good choice. But if you want a travel camera with good shots for personal scrapbooks, the Fuji might be the better choice. Sony will take more work, more effort, more space, but if you really love it, it'll be worth it.

Good luck!

 

[IronMaskDuval]

I personally feel that the only real advantage of the a7 II over the a7 is the IBIS, which is amazing if you shoot hand held, low light. If not, I think the savings on a used a7 can buy you a nice native FE lens; otherwise, there is not such thing as a cheap FE lens other than the kit lens, which is actually a pretty good performer. If you're ok with shooting manual focus, then cheap lenses are everywhere in legacy lenses.

 

[goodguy]

I am a full frame guy so I will say the A7 II hands down, just better in low light, its physics!
As for lenses, get the adaptor and get Canon lenses or third party Canon mount lenses.
Not sure why you are limiting yourself to mirrorless though, DSLR make good cameras and if you go full frame the lenses are the big and heavy part anyway.

 

[Derrel]

[QUOTE="cherylynne1]1.) In my opinion, pretty much any other mirrorless offering is an upgrade from EOS-M. I don't think it was a serious effort on their part.[/QUOTE]

Ouch! EOS-M = the Sony NEX system...half-baked...

 

[cherylynne1]

[QUOTE="cherylynne1]1.) In my opinion, pretty much any other mirrorless offering is an upgrade from EOS-M. I don't think it was a serious effort on their part.

Ouch! EOS-M = the Sony NEX system...half-baked...[/QUOTE]

I wasn't trying to be inflammatory...and I admit I haven't researched any of their firmware updates or the newest version. I just remember that when I was looking to buy a mirrorless camera, the EOS-M was almost universally ranked at the bottom. I originally wanted to buy Canon, but they simply didn't have what I wanted. The NEX-6, however, was almost always at or near the top of the recommendations, and it fit my needs perfectly, so that's what I went with. But that is comparing the first generation of Canon mirrorless to the...ninth, maybe? of Sony mirrorless. Sony had a lot more time to figure out what that part of the market wanted, so maybe that is an unfair comparison.

I personally don't think Canon takes any mirrorless camera seriously. They don't see them as competition. And maybe they aren't. For better or worse, Canon prefers to focus on their strength, which is making high-quality professional DSLRs.

 

[beagle100]

LOL !

www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

(please excuse the half baked pictures - it's a $100 camera!)

 

[Derrel]

[QUOTE="cherylynne1] 1.) In my opinion, pretty much any other mirrorless offering is an upgrade from EOS-M. I don't think it was a serious effort on their part.

I wasn't trying to be inflammatory...and I admit I haven't researched any of their firmware updates or the newest version. I just remember that when I was looking to buy a mirrorless camera, the EOS-M was almost universally ranked at the bottom. I originally wanted to buy Canon, but they simply didn't have what I wanted. The NEX-6, however, was almost always at or near the top of the recommendations, and it fit my needs perfectly, so that's what I went with. But that is comparing the first generation of Canon mirrorless to the...ninth, maybe? of Sony mirrorless. Sony had a lot more time to figure out what that part of the market wanted, so maybe that is an unfair comparison.

I personally don't think Canon takes any mirrorless camera seriously. They don't see them as competition. And maybe they aren't. For better or worse, Canon prefers to focus on their strength, which is making high-quality professional DSLRs.

You're right...Canon's EOS-M was not supported by Canon:

The EOS-M is the brand-new mirrorless camera that Canon refused to stand behind in North America.

Canon refused to sell some of the camera's lenses in this hemisphere. Would not import them to this market...Sales of the EOS-M were so weak that Canon deemed the camera not worth their bother in North America. Blame the half-baked status on Canon: their initial launch product was universally panned, and they fire-sale unloaded a few thousand units at 70% or so off intro price...

The camera's initial release was a disaster, due to the abysmal focusing issues and disgruntled bloggers panning the EOS-M...after that, Canon just left mirrorless to wither in North America, and focused on selling mirrorless in other markets, ones where mirrorless cameras have sales levels that Canon corporate deems worth going after. This post here is the ***first*** one I can remember that mentions the EOS-M by name, in more than two years...it's not your fault Cherylynne, nor my fault...Canon's just not focusing on its mirrorless sales, nor its customers,in this market.

 

[beagle100]

[QUOTE="cherylynne1] 1.) In my opinion, pretty much any other mirrorless offering is an upgrade from EOS-M. I don't think it was a serious effort on their part.

I wasn't trying to be inflammatory...and I admit I haven't researched any of their firmware updates or the newest version. I just remember that when I was looking to buy a mirrorless camera, the EOS-M was almost universally ranked at the bottom. I originally wanted to buy Canon, but they simply didn't have what I wanted. The NEX-6, however, was almost always at or near the top of the recommendations, and it fit my needs perfectly, so that's what I went with. But that is comparing the first generation of Canon mirrorless to the...ninth, maybe? of Sony mirrorless. Sony had a lot more time to figure out what that part of the market wanted, so maybe that is an unfair comparison.

I personally don't think Canon takes any mirrorless camera seriously. They don't see them as competition. And maybe they aren't. For better or worse, Canon prefers to focus on their strength, which is making high-quality professional DSLRs.

You're right...Canon's EOS-M was not supported by Canon:

The EOS-M is the brand-new mirrorless camera that Canon refused to stand behind in North America.

Canon refused to sell some of the camera's lenses in this hemisphere. other markets, ones where mirrorless cameras have sales levels that Canon corporate deems worth going after. This post here is the ***first*** one I can remember that mentions the EOS-M by name, in more than two years...it's not your fault Cherylynne, nor my fault...Canon's just not focusing on its mirrorless sales, nor its customers,in this market.

maybe it's a corporate conspiracy

Canon M1, M2,. M3, etc. not sold in stores in the US
it's not advertised, not promoted
secret ebay sales .... like prohibition

www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[Derrel]

It is corporate bean-counting and market evaluation based on their own, internal sales data...blame Canon and its customers for not embracing the EOS-M system; it ran head-on into better, more-established, more-popular, better-selling mirrorless cameras. Nikon had the same problem with their mirrorless 'system'...just a sales turd...

Notice how the OP in this post has narrowed the choice down to a Sony A7ii OR to a Fuji XT-1?

NO mention of Canon or Nikon mirrorless....plenty of other products have suffered the same fate of poor sales and near-universal marketplace neglect and lack of sales. The real issue is, I think, that Canon, and Nikon as well, are focused wayyyyyyy more on their core camera business, rather than on developing new market segments. Sony and Fuji OTOH, are aggressively going after this market segment.

Which is why the OP is interested in actually buying a Sony A7 series OR a Fuji X-series camera.

 

[beagle100]

It is corporate bean-counting and market evaluation based on their own, internal sales data...blame Canon and its customers for not embracing the EOS-M system; it ran head-on into better, more-established, more-popular, better-selling mirrorless cameras. Nikon had the same problem with their mirrorless 'system'...just a sales t

NO mention of Canon or Nikon mirrorless....

indeed, it's a bad long term marketing strategy ..... or brilliant
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[Derrel]

Mirrorless Camera News and Commentary | Sans Mirror | Thom Hogan

Camera Database | Sans Mirror | Thom Hogan

Fujifilm X-T1 | Sans Mirror | Thom Hogan

Sony Mirrorless Cameras | Sans Mirror | Thom Hogan

Sony A7 Mark II | Sans Mirror | Thom Hogan

Lenses:
Lens Database | Sans Mirror | Thom Hogan

 

[Gary A.]

I have a complete Canon FF system, a complete Olympus MFT system and a complete Fuji APS-C system. I have found that the Fuji APS-C is a great compromise between the IQ of FF and the small footprint of MFT. The Sony and Fuji are about the same size the big difference is in lens size. FF lenses must be bigger to fill the larger FF sensor. Fuji lenses are not petite but still smaller than an equal FF lens.

Fuji XF lenses are wonderful, and at a minimum, the equal of my L lenses. I doubt that up to a 16x20 and at ISO 3200 or less, you will see a significant difference in IQ between the Sony and the Fuji.

Seeing a real visual difference, without a computer, between a modern FF and a modern APS-C, will not be consistently realized by most hobbyist photographers.

For most of us, significant improvement photography success and consistency will not come from FF equipment but rather from improving one's photographic eye and previsualization, composition/perspective, timing, exposure and post.

 

[beagle100]

Seeing a real visual difference, without a computer, between a modern FF and a modern APS-C, will not be consistently realized by most hobbyist photographers.

right, it takes a true pro to see the realized visual differences

www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[shek]

Thanks for the comments so far, very useful!

@cherylynne1 Great advices.
“pretty much any other mirrorless offering is an upgrade from EOS-M” - is that in terms of sensor & functionality?

@IronMaskDuval I am thinking with A7 II’s IBIS, it’s easier to pair with legacy lenses that may not have IS.

@goodguy - I like the mobility of mirrorless over DSLR


About Canon’s EOS-M:
I was in Asia when it came out, I guess the marketing effort was bigger over there as compared to North America. Sale & Marketing aside, I’ve lost fate of it because of the lack of big improvement from M1 to M3. It still feel like their main focus is on DSLR, not mirrorless.



It's still a hard choice between A7 or XT1... I think I'll have to see more sample photos from both camera to see if the Image quality is noticeably different