Rashid Abdu Loc: Ohio

First, I want to congratulate you on beating a serious health problem. Your courage, your spirit, and your great outlook, are inspiring. You have my sincere wishes, and much admiration.
For the camera, I own a 2.5lbs Sony, Rx10 1V, with a Zeiss lens, f2.4, 24-600mm. It is stable, and will meet your needs to shoot landscape and birds. That's what I do, mostly. You are entitled to have a little hand tremor, after what you went through, but with this camera, it is stable, and you don't have to change lenses. Occasionally, I use a light monopod. Research it, look at the reviewers, videos, and then decide.
Meanwhile, stay the course, and I wish you a healthy and a happy new year.
Rashid

lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.

Hi, SharpShooter! It’s been awhile.

Forgive me for making what some might view as an isolated "trollish" comment, as I know that sometimes you do make excellent pointed statements, but your above remark (and that of CHG CANON,) sounds like you either do not understand rwoodvira's POV or more benignly, you are reminding him of a logical alternative (in case he has overlooked this possibility.) I could be wrong, but I think I do understand, as since 2007, currently I have a mild-to-moderate degree of Parkinson disease mainly manifested by asymmetric tremors in my upper and lower extremities.

Humbly, IF I am correct in my understanding of him, his answer would be something to the effect of, "because I do not want to schlep a tripod around with me all the fu**ing time."

Like me, I am sure rwoodvira understands the benefits of using a tripod, including from long exposures to HDR to the sharpest possible image free of motion artifact, but hauling even lightweight extra items can be a pain if for no other reason than its increased bulk. People like me place a premium on image stabilization (which works for me most of the time,) particularly if we have no plans to make posters out of pictures.

Please understand that I do not intend the preceding to be construed as being self-righteous or acerbic.

Thank you,
lev29

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Buy the Sony, but keep the Canon. Each camera will have it's uses. Eventually, you'll prefer one over the other, and you can sell what you don't want to keep.

ole sarg Loc: south florida

The good thing is that if you make the move there are adapters that allow you to use your canon and sigma glass!

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Since you have done it before, you are probably well aware that any change of system is EXPENSIVE. While you can use some lenses via adapters (which are pricey), you'll probably end up replacing others. Other dedicated accessories are likely to be needed too (only you can say, but things like batteries, chargers and maybe more).

Also a switch from DSLR to mirrorless and from APS-C to full frame?

Check the specs carefully, since you express a concern about weight. Full frame mirrorless are very close to the same size and weight as full frame DSLR... the body might be a little smaller, but that's offset by the lenses which need to be the same size or even larger. By the time you add some adapters, especially, the size/weight end up being about the same.

Especially considering the Canon SL2 is the lightest DSLR being made... lighter even than many APS-C mirrorless. (SL2 is 2nd lightest DSLR anyone has ever made, only because it gained a few grams compared to the SL1 which is the lightest.)

But you also mention a steadiness problem and a bit heavier camera might be easier to hold steady. (It's one of the reasons I use battery grips on mine... additional mass makes for better control and steadiness.)

Image stabilization in any system can only do so much. You mention using some Sigma lenses, which I've always heard do a pretty good job implementing in-lens stabilization (I've had no personal experience with it to speak of). But some of the more recent Canon lenses have upgraded forms of IS, too. Older lenses had IS that gave 2 to 3 stops worth of assistance. Most of the newer lenses are rated for at least 3 to 4 stops and some for up to 5. Of course it's effectiveness varies with the user's abilities. Don't know if it's "better" than the in-camera stabilization of Sony... or vice versa. But that will vary too, I'm sure. Hopefully some folks have used both and can give you some honest hands-on comparisons. But I'd take it with a grain of salt and ask a lot of questions, there's always a lot of hype about these things.

You might be best served renting one of the Sony cameras and lenses and giving it try before you buy.

And there are other things you can do to help steady your shots.

All things considered, you're going to have to weigh the pluses and minuses carefully. The "grass is always greener"... But sometimes it's only because it's "Astroturf" on the other side of the fence.

newvy

My 9year old could not lift my former Nikon D4 w 80-200f 2.8 and SB800. I recently switched (after 40 yrs w Nikon) to the A6500 and 70-300. I also have a 16-50 kit lens. It feels like a toy because it is so small but make no mistake it’s 11fps make shooting my beloved hummingbirds easy. And the crop factor needs to be accounted for. Can’t wait to pick up a Tamron 28-70 2.8 as mentioned previously. I shot it in near darkness at Halloween and it’s low light performance was amazing.

Blaster34 Loc: Florida Treasure Coast

Canon, Sony, Nikon, Olympus are all top brands and the technology difference between them is about a dimes worth....and in the end it'll come down to personal preference and style of shooting. Rent one, try it out and if you like it, buy it. btw, I have the Sony A7iii and love it, an overall a smaller package.

Remember that any system you chose, lenses will be the limiting factor as to overall size and weight. That doesn't mean I wouldn't love a Canon or Nikon (the smaller bodies), Sony is just my preference...good luck with whatever you choose. Merry Christmas and stay well.

rwoodvira

Many thanks to all that answered. Healthwise - reason for the occasional shakes is I'm missing most of my esophagus, 7 inches of the small and 10 inches of the large intestines. If you want a laugh one buddy said that if I donated my body to science, when they opened me up they would think I'm an alien. My gastro dr said for me not to worry about it - they wouldn't want me now. I am currently cancer free and to pay back Penn for saving me I counsel other patients before, during and after treatment. I also think that it has something to do with only the good die young. I'm 4 years out. I've been disappointed in Canon adopting new technology. I'll be posting some photos soon that I took at Assateague that were with Sigma lenses, which I love. The British publication Photoplus has a great table rating the various lenses for Canon and my two were rated pretty high - I bought both used. I had a pro critique my pictures and he suggested moving to full frame and the Canon's are too heavy and don't have the 5 axis stabilization. When you shake it could be any direction. I love Canon color, and the closest I've found so far are the new Sonys. lev29 thank you for your eloquent explanation of why no tripod (you said it about how I would have). I may try a monopod and see if that helps. What I really wanted to try was the A7000 APS-c Sony which so far is vaporware. My issue with the 6000 series is I'm left eye dominant - my eye dr said contrary to camera dealers you are or you aren't. I may rent the Sony A7iii and try it before I move ahead. BTW The Sonys A7iii and A7Riii do have the feature of switching to APS-c which would help in photoing wildlife from a distance. I also want to try the Irix 15mm which I saw at a show and would do well with a full frame. Again - thank you all for taking the time to respond - it gave me a lot to think about. Have a Very Merry Christmas to those who celebrate it and a Happy Holiday to those who don't.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Sony A7III (24MP, $2000)... 1.43 lb./650 grams
Canon 6D Mark II (26MP, $1300)... 1.51 lb./685 grams

Sony FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS ($1300)... 1.46 lb./663 grams
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 IS USM II ($1100)... 1.75 lb./795 grams

1318 gram Sony combo versus 1460 gram Canon combo.... a savings of 142 grams... or 5 oz.

But the original poster isn't using a full frame camera now, so needs to compare the size/weight of the above with what they have now and other APS-C cameras and crop sensor lenses...

Canon 70D (20MP)... 1.66 lb./753 grams
Canon 80D (24MP)... 1.61 lb./730 grams
Canon Rebel SL2 (24MP)... 0.9 lb./406 grams
Canon EF-S 18-135mm IS STM... 1.06 lb./480 grams
Canon EF-S 18-135mm IS USM... 1.13 lb/515 grams
Canon EF-S 15-85mm IS USM... 1.27 lb./575 grams

Sony a6500 (24MP).... 1 lb./453 grams
Sony E 16-70mm f/4 OSS... 0.68 lb./308 grams
Sony E 18-105mm f/4 OSS... 0.94 lb./427 grams
Sony E 18-135mm...... 0.72 lb./326 grams

Assuming they are using one of the above EF-S lenses on their Canon APS-C DSLR, in all cases a full frame Sony MILC and lens would end up heavier.

I would note too that the original poster mentions using several Sigma lenses and it's not uncommon for those to be bigger and heavier than some of the alternatives. Just for example, the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 "Art" is a real bruiser at 815 grams. In comparison the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 weighs 290 grams. That's a difference of over 1 lb.... or, another way of looking at it, the Sigma is almost 3X the weight. The Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM is even lighter, at 160 grams... but even the premium Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM is lighter at 580 grams!

Depending upon the exact combinations, a Sony APS-C MILC and lens can be a bit lighter than Canon 70D/80D series DSLR and lens.... But the original poster's Canon SL2 and a lens end up virtually the same weight.

But, again, light weight (and small size) are sometimes at odds with steadiness and, especially with longer telephotos, good balance. A battery grip that adds some mass actually might help. The Canon 70D/80D can be fitted with a vertical/battery grip. The Rebel SL2 cannot. Canon also offers a battery grip for Rebel T6i/T6s, but not for T7i or 77D. Sony doesn't appear to offer a grip for a6500. There are 3rd party grips (Vello?) for a6500, T7i and 77D, but those have limited functionality compared to OEM style grips.

Indy55

I switched from Canon to Olympus. I have no regrets what-so-ever. The technology and weight improvements are significant. I have the EM1 Mark II and the EM5 Mark II. Nothing can match the features, weight, quality ratio in my opinion.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

FYI.... Canon makes their own CMOS sensors, and have done so since around 2000 or 2001 (everyone else continued using CCD until 2006-2008).

Sony also makes their own CMOS sensors... as well as almost everyone elses'. Nikon and Pentax outsource their sensors from Sony. So there shouldn't be very much difference in color rendition. There may be some variance straight out of the camera due to differences in firmware, processing and way each manufacturer "tunes" their camera... but the potential color rendition should be very similar (lenses might make more difference).



That's probably a very good idea. You might compare it to the Canon 6D Mark II, too.



Yes, they do. Nikon also can be switched to APS-C mode. But....

1. That's no difference from simply cropping an image from those or any other full frame camera in post-processing. Exact same result.

2. Resolution takes a huge hit:
- What remains might be "enough" with the 42MP A7RIII ($2800)... in APS-C mode it produces 18MP images.
- It's probably not with the 24MP A7III ($2000)... in APS-C mode all that remains is about 10MP.

Compare to the 20MP of your APS-C 70D or the 24MP of your SL2.

There was a lot of talk about this going on, so we did a head-to-head comparison years ago: 21MP Canon 5D Mark II full frame versus an 18MP Canon 7D APS-C.... shooting the same subject from the same distance using the same lens under carefully controlled conditions (tripod, manual focusing using Live View magnification, mirror lockup, etc.)... then cropping the FF image down to match the APS-C. The result was that the APS-C image was very obviously superior... after all, it was still 18MP, while the cropped image from the FF camera was around 8MP.

IMO the "APS-C modes" simply aren't all that useful. You can do the same with a simple crop in post... And there's significant loss of image quality when it's done with anything other than the very high resolution FF cameras (42MP Sony, 46MP Nikon, 50MP Canon). Give it a try... but be prepared for disappointment.

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

When I bought my A7r2 I had no idea how useful IBIS actually is. Buying a cheap tripod in lieu of stabilization could only be suggested by someone who has never used it. A tripod is an extra piece of gear that must be carried and set up, inhibits free movement and positioning and is generally a pain in the butt.

Of course a tripod has its place and is not only useful but invaluable in many situations, but I am finding that IBIS has been a godsend, allowing me to get a multitude of shots that would not have been possible (due to lighting conditions and the need for speed) and at lower ISOs that I could never have done without it.

sergiohm

First of all I’m glad that in spite of all you’ve still kicking. I have some shake issues and the best solution for me was Micro 4/3.
I have 3 Olympus cameras and they’re all feature rich and take great pictures!
I also have the Fuji XT2 and although the body is not stabilized some of the Fuji lenses are and they are fantastic.
I’ve also had the Sony A7 III and although a great camera, the body & lenses are a bit on the heavy side.
Take care

bnsf

Could l toss this idea to you. I was approached by a repairman years ago when l was going thru the same problem of getting the 99m2 or the 77m2. He told to rent both units with the same lens for a weekend and shot everything you can see. Then compare the two photos. The photos will give you the answer. It did and l purchased the 99m2.

bnsf

Could l toss this idea to you. I was approached by a digital camera repairman a couple years ago when l was going thru the same problem of getting the Sony 99m2 or the Sony 77m2. He told to rent both units with the same lens for a weekend and shot everything you can see. Then compare the two photos. The photos will give you the answer. It did and l purchased the Sony 99m2.