Which full frame camera, DSLR or Mirrorless? (Page 2): I think the Sony 7AII has the best image quality but it's almost twice the price of the D750 too.

BebuLamar

I think the Sony 7AII has the best image quality but it's almost twice the price of the D750 too.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

Any of the latest mirrorless cameras not starting with Canikon would get my vote. A9, A7riii, A6500, EM1ii, G9, GH5, XT-2, XT-20...in no particular order. That said, I'd also pass on FF. It negates the weight size factor with bigger, heavier lenses.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

bull drink water wrote:

I shoot sony but I only use the a-mounts, and the aps-c format. the slt mirror less models have features the dslr's don't. compare features then make your choice.

Actually, the crop sensor DSLTs are not mirrorless. They are Translucent mirror. The a6000 Series are actually crop sensor mirrorless.

mizzee Loc: Boston,Ma

Olympus OM-d Mark 5 II or the Mark 1 II. In camera stabilization of 5.5 stops and weatherproofing give you great versatility in lens choice and make.

MikeMc

MikeMc wrote:

I'm getting back into hobby photography and shoppi... (show quote)

Thanks for all the very helpful comments! I checked out these three cameras, and based on your inputs i think I'm leaning towards a Sony Mirrorless. Now to zero in on that, seems like either an a7Rll or a a7ll. For my use as described above, will the larger MP make much difference (43 vs 24mp)? I don't mind paying for better performance but don't want to throw money away either. which one if these do you think would be best?

le boecere

MikeMc wrote:

I'm getting back into hobby photography and shoppi... (show quote)

If the Sony RX100V was not satisfactory, that would seem to indicate you can vote the other Sony mirrorless cameras off the island, as well. If you're coming back from the old film days, I would have to believe that one of the Nicanons will be "the familiar" for you, and, therefore, the most satisfactory. Mirrorless is a whole new way to think about photography.

http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/the-latest-state-of-mirrorl.html

copladocus

If I may add some more. Since you are returning to phtography you might want to look at the Fuji mirrorless XT-1 here: http://www.fujifilmusa.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_t1/product_views/index.html
I had one in my hands as I shopped for my 6D and it was like holding my old Minolta SRT-super (101) with its control knobs and all. Had I not been invested in Canon lenses I would have strongly considered the Fuji.

MikeMc

My last camera, other than point & shoots was an Olympus E10, 4mp DSLR. I've been working in Silicon Valley for 45 yrs so I'm used to technology and changes. No prob with mirrorless. I just want the best images.

JPL

MikeMc wrote:

Thanks for all the very helpful comments! I checked out these three cameras, and based on your inputs i think I'm leaning towards a Sony Mirrorless. Now to zero in on that, seems like either an a7Rll or a a7ll. For my use as described above, will the larger MP make much difference (43 vs 24mp)? I don't mind paying for better performance but don't want to throw money away either. which one if these do you think would be best?

There is not much difference between those cameras except for resolution and price. I would go for the 43 mp model if you are going to want to print some of your photos large scale or if you want the best images possible. If you are only going to view them on your pc or TV screen the 24 mp is more than enough.

One thing to consider is that with the 43 mp sensor you will have more space to crop and adjust your photos in post processing but at the same time the files are larger and you need a good pc to work well with those files.

And if you do not plan to post process your photos or the idea is maybe to shoot jpeg files only and not raw then you should get the 24 mp camera. But shooting raw and use good post processing software is critical to harvest the image quality those cameras can deliver.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

copladocus wrote:

If I may add some more. Since you are returning to phtography you might want to look at the Fuji mirrorless XT-1 here: http://www.fujifilmusa.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_t1/product_views/index.html
I had one in my hands as I shopped for my 6D and it was like holding my old Minolta SRT-super (101) with its control knobs and all. Had I not been invested in Canon lenses I would have strongly considered the Fuji.

XT-2 would be better.

chrisg-optical Loc: New York, NY

CO wrote:

From now on, I'm only going to purchase cameras th... (show quote)

I second that regarding the Nikon recommendations - I have noticed that effect with the AA filters while pixel peeping hundreds of D750 images...it's very subtle but still there. I have the D7200 and images are pin sharp at the focus points.

In the MILC arena my choices are...

For FF I definitely would go with Sony A7 series (or A9 if it's in the budget and need those features)

For APSC Fuji X series (X-T2/20) - love the classic look and IQ should be right up there.

For M43 love the Oly OM-D M1 ii - silky smooth handling. Expensive but worth it.

Whichever one you choose you will be married to the system for lens choices and investments for full AF/AE functionality.

Renting is a great idea - try before you buy is best advice.

Have fun!

sb Loc: Florida's East Coast

I grew up on film cameras, and I like the traditional look and feel of my Canon camera. I purchased a refurbished 6D from Canon and have been nothing but impressed at the quality of photos as well as the ability to get good low-light images.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

In my humble opinion any of the cameras you have in mind will give you the results you expect if coupled with good optics.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Gene51 wrote:

Higher MP count will let you record images with amazing detail. As opposed to someone else's advice that does not recognize that viewing distance, not output size, is what determines how many pixels you need. For example, a Sony 4K projection screen at the local multiplex only uses images that are 8.8 mp. That being said, you really don't need 42 mp for a 50" tv screen.

What a camera with 36 or more mp offers, as I already said, better detail rendition. Also, if your lenses are top quality, you can crop a lot more before you start to see a loss of image quality.

With that in mind, you can get a used 36 mp D800, with a low shutter count, for under $800.

You can see some images I've taken with a D800 and D810 here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gene_lugo/

What I said about cropping is absolutely true;

Here are two images of a cat, taken with a D800 and a Sigma 150-600 Sport. One is the crop, the other before cropping. The second pair of images is of a smaller, twitchier subject, crop and un-cropped.

If these images were to be printed SMALLER, and viewed at 12" then you'd need 300 ppi or more but at greater distances the amount of detail you can see diminishes, to the point that an 8 mp iPhone 6 image looks amazing on a billboard, even though it is only about 25 ppi.

As far as mirrorless is concerned, the biggest problem I have found is the limited options for lenses. While there are quite a few available in the wide to short tele range, some of them offering outstanding quality, and with adapters like the MC11 you can adapt any Sigma lens for use on a Sony E-Mount camera, the performance is pretty substandard. Metabones also makes an adapter with even worse performance. You'd be frustrated trying to shoot wildlife or sports with a long lens that requires an adapter. If you don't need that, then the Sony cameras and their native lenses may be all you need. Mirrorless will use more battery, of course, but they are solid products that work well. I would not suggest a smaller sensor, though there are many that would, if optimum image quality is what you are after.

A word on the Sony RX10M4. I picked one up in December, and I just came back from a 3 week trip to Europe where it was the only camera gear I brought with me, and after 1500 images I can say it is quite a versatile little camera. Not great for landscape, because of the tiny sensor and the clumping of fine details in the distance, but it is super fast for sports, with the fastest and most accurate autofocus I have ever seen on a camera. It is amazing for what it is - a super zoom (Zeiss 8.8-220mm for a field of view equal to 24-600mm F2.4-F4), with a one inch sensor, but it is still a "bridge" or compromise camera. The image quality is quite good, but does not compare with what I get with a D800/D810.

Higher MP count will let you record images with am... (show quote)

Darn! Now I'll have to order a D850 and wait for it to arrive.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

BebuLamar wrote:

I think the Sony 7AII has the best image quality but it's almost twice the price of the D750 too.

When you narrow down your choices, read some comparisons.

(Reviews) https://www.youtube.com/user/TheCameraStoreTV/videos
http://www.cameradecision.com/
http://cameras.reviewed.com/
http://camerasize.com/
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
http://snapsort.com/compare
http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/cameras?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=mainmenu&utm_medium=text&ref=mainmenu