Moving to a Full Frame (Page 7): I have 5d MK III and 5DS-R and lenses; I can tell you that they are now too heavy for lots of hand held use (maybe arthritis with my age at almost 60).

photoshack Loc: Irvine, CA

I have 5d MK III and 5DS-R and lenses; I can tell you that they are now too heavy for lots of hand held use (maybe arthritis with my age at almost 60). I am considering instead the Sony mirrorless FF and making the switch if I can get a lens kit that is significantly lighter. The other cameras you were considering aren't much lighter than the Canons so you may want to consider the size/weight factor...

DeanS Loc: Capital City area of North Carolina

photoshack wrote:

I have 5d MK III and 5DS-R and lenses; I can tell you that they are now too heavy for lots of hand held use (maybe arthritis with my age at almost 60). I am considering instead the Sony mirrorless FF and making the switch if I can get a lens kit that is significantly lighter. The other cameras you were considering aren't much lighter than the Canons so you may want to consider the size/weight factor...

With all that Canon glass, have you ckd out the Canon R and RP ff mirrowless jobs?

photoshack Loc: Irvine, CA

DeanS wrote:

With all that Canon glass, have you ckd out the Canon R and RP ff mirrowless jobs?

I have not actually held that R camera yet...but to some degree even the Canon glass is too heavy (am okay with the lighter primes and slower 70-200 f4 but the other glass is heavy!)

DeanS Loc: Capital City area of North Carolina

photoshack wrote:

I have not actually held that R camera yet...but to some degree even the Canon glass is too heavy (am okay with the lighter primes and slower 70-200 f4 but the other glass is heavy!)

Good luck on choosing.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

photoshack wrote:

I have 5d MK III and 5DS-R and lenses; I can tell you that they are now too heavy for lots of hand held use (maybe arthritis with my age at almost 60). I am considering instead the Sony mirrorless FF and making the switch if I can get a lens kit that is significantly lighter. The other cameras you were considering aren't much lighter than the Canons so you may want to consider the size/weight factor...

What kit do you think is going to be lighter? An a7 III is 1.43 lbs an EOS RP is 1.07 lbs. The similar 70-200 2.8 lenses both come in at 3.3 lbs. Making the EOS RP the lighter choice. The EOS R is around the same weight as the Sony.

You are only going to save weight if you go down in sensor size and rely on the crop factor.

photoshack Loc: Irvine, CA

dsmeltz wrote:

What kit do you think is going to be lighter? An a7 III is 1.43 lbs an EOS RP is 1.07 lbs. The similar 70-200 2.8 lenses both come in at 3.3 lbs. Making the EOS RP the lighter choice. The EOS R is around the same weight as the Sony.

You are only going to save weight if you go down in sensor size and rely on the crop factor.

I have had the Sony A7 II and adapters for Canon lenses; that was unwieldy, unbalanced so I returned it. I will have a look at the RP, but ideally you buy the new lens format and all the rest goes to Ebay! Truly a 47 mp camera with a f1.8 10-200 zoom would be my camera...but that doesn't exist :-)

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

photoshack wrote:

I have had the Sony A7 II and adapters for Canon lenses; that was unwieldy, unbalanced so I returned it. I will have a look at the RP, but ideally you buy the new lens format and all the rest goes to Ebay! Truly a 47 mp camera with a f1.8 10-200 zoom would be my camera...but that doesn't exist :-)

No. The adapter for the RP works seamlessly with legacy lenses. Why would you put them on Ebay? My point was that going mirrorless ff to save weight is just not doable. The is no significant weight advantage between mirrorless and DSLR cameras of the same sensor size. The weight of the lenses is not affected.

DeanS Loc: Capital City area of North Carolina

photoshack wrote:

I have had the Sony A7 II and adapters for Canon lenses; that was unwieldy, unbalanced so I returned it. I will have a look at the RP, but ideally you buy the new lens format and all the rest goes to Ebay! Truly a 47 mp camera with a f1.8 10-200 zoom would be my camera...but that doesn't exist :-)

The RP comes with an adapter allowing EF and EF-S lens to mount. The RP also has a setting to swithch from FF to crop at 1.6.

photoshack Loc: Irvine, CA

dsmeltz wrote:

No. The adapter for the RP works seamlessly with legacy lenses. Why would you put them on Ebay? My point was that going mirrorless ff to save weight is just not doable. The is no significant weight advantage between mirrorless and DSLR cameras of the same sensor size. The weight of the lenses is not affected.

Yes. The point I was trying to make was that if I went with RP I would want lighter lenses (no adapter) or I may as well not bother.

CanonTom Loc: Birmingham

Has anyone heard from the OP since his first post? I believe he has left the building!

Oh well I have learned a lot about some of the new choices so I have enjoyed the thread anyway.....

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Hassie, I'm not sure what has been said throughout this thread, but why do you want to switch to full frame? Many very good photographers shoot nothing but crop sensor cameras. Frankly, I believe that Nikon has better crop cameras than Canon, but I have friends who are very good photographers who shoot Canon crop cameras. Depending on whether you shoot landscape or action photos, I would suggest that you purchase something like the Nikon D7200 (Landscape) or D500 (Action). My guess, based on your lens selection, is that you are a landscape shooter. In lieu of the 24-120 I would suggest the Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 non VR lens. You will find that this will stay on your camera most of the time. I'd add the new Tamron 10-24mm for wide angle and the Nikon 28-300mm for longer shots. With this setup you'd never need anything else....although later you might pick up the 35mm f1.8D in order to have a 1:1 prime.

aellman Loc: Boston MA

Vincejr wrote:

Yes you should do it if you want and can afford it. You just might take a lot more photos then you ever thought you would. Have fun.

Yeah, you have to wait for 24x36mm to get motivated. By the same logic, ownership of my 8 year old Sony alpha DSLRs would dictate that I would have nothing but blank pages in my portfolio.

CliftonAlvin

I love mine! I tried to find a used one today for a back up, I've picked up a 58mm & 85mm lens, besides the 24-120.

aellman Loc: Boston MA

no12mo wrote:

If you have a money bucket for the camera you want... Get it. We only go this way once.

Good luck, Al

Have to agree with you there. Rich people buy a lot of stuff much more frivolous than high-end photo gear. I just wish they'd give some of the overflow to charities that feed hungry kids in our country instead. >AL

DaveyDitzer Loc: Western PA

If FF is the primary objective then weight will be greater. If weight is the primary objective the many crop cameras are significantly lighter and more so with crop lenses.My FFs are Nikon Df. My lightest DSLR kit is a Nikon D5300 with crop lenses: 16-85 f2.8/4; Nikon 55-300 f4.5/5.6 and a 35mm f1.8. I did save some weight on the FF by using D lenses without focus motors.