trade in my canon 5Diii and 7dII for new canon mirrorless or go sony? (Page 2): I would go with the new R5 or R6 and an adapter, so you can reuse your lens.

miked46 Loc: Winter Springs, Florida

I would go with the new R5 or R6 and an adapter, so you can reuse your lens.

SonyBug

cosmo54 wrote:

So if the full frame size glass from sony isn't any lighter, you just answered my question. I have no reason to switch. Thank you!!

The big glass may be the same but the camera is several pounds lighter. I sold a huge array o Nikon FF and have a Sony a7iii with only two lenses. One 70 - 300 and a 28 - 85. The low light and focus are both great! For times I really want to travel light, I also have the R100v7. I did trial the 100 - 400 GM and that was a lot to carry so I returned it. If you use the GM you also would need a tripod as it really is not light enough for hand holding.

leftj Loc: Texas

cosmo54 wrote:

so I have a lot of canon gear (2 bodies, lots of l... (show quote)

Having a lighter camera is not going to help much. The weight is still going to be there in your long lenses needed for wildlife.

Jeffcs Loc: Myrtle Beach South Carolina

cosmo54 wrote:

I do already use the Olympus em1 iii and 300mm lens and its great, but not a full frame. I guess for now, ill just stick with what I have.

I’m a converted from FF Nikon (D5) and all of the glass
I went to Olympus and I don’t see any difference in prints one exception is extremely low light FF or larger sensor does a better job of collecting light
So why do so many ppl always say Olympus is good, but, it’s not FF and to add to that my OMDem1mk2 and mk3 runs circles around the Nikon D5
Again why

leftj Loc: Texas

SonyBug wrote:

The big glass may be the same but the camera is several pounds lighter. I sold a huge array o Nikon FF and have a Sony a7iii with only two lenses. One 70 - 300 and a 28 - 85. The low light and focus are both great! For times I really want to travel light, I also have the R100v7. I did trial the 100 - 400 GM and that was a lot to carry so I returned it. If you use the GM you also would need a tripod as it really is not light enough for hand holding.

That is total BS. The camera is not several pounds lighter.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

cosmo54 wrote:

so I have a lot of canon gear (2 bodies, lots of l... (show quote)

GO SONY.

tcthome Loc: NJ

David Martin wrote:

Actually yes, in my case considering selling the Nikon D500 (crop sensor) and my assortment of lenses to go with Sony full frame. My 200-500 lens is heavy; Sony's 100-400 looks very attractive. Sony's AF and tracking also look much better. Been reading up on the a7iii vs. a7Riv vs. a9ii.

Sony’s focus system is said to be a lot better butt to get their best you would most likely have to go with the 7r4 or A911. Mark Smith’s you tube channel has a couple of vids where he claims their long glass ie a lot lighter. It is probably best to hold it in your hands to compare weight before switching.

LEWHITE7747 Loc: 33773

Go CANON!!!!!!!!!

Jimmy T Loc: Virginia

CHG_CANON wrote:

I shoot an EOS 5DIII and a Sony a7II. You get a smaller body with the mirrorless, but no a lighter body in a real sense. The Sony body is sold and metal, and combined with a full-frame sized glass, not any lighter.

Rather than guessing what might be better, rent an EOS R5 with the EF-R adapter and see what you think with your lenses. Maybe even add the RF 100-500L to test the all-mirrorless 'wildlife' platform.

- Great advice!!! -

Toment Loc: FL, IL

If you want light, Panasonic/Olympus fills the bill.
Camera and lenses are small. Or a compact with a large sensor. Full frame small cameras are high priced and the lenses are fixed around 35mm.
My 2 cents

RGreenway Loc: Morristown, New Jersey

After being all Nikon for 20 years or more, went the Sony full frame route with several bodies over a few years and then went exclusively to their higher quality APSC line, the last one being the A6500. I loved this with full frame lenses like the 200-600 with gave me the reach of a 900mm with great autofocus (birds are my favorite subjects). Never missed full frame since you can now get great ultra-wide zooms like the 10-18 which is way wide enough for me on APSC. The depth of field issue doesnt bother me a bit, dont do much portraiture and and usually stage a setting with a bit more distance to a background clutter to get a better background if need be.

Now made the switch to the Leica CL and sold off all my Sony gear! I started my journey in the 1960's with an Agfa rangefinder which I still have btw! The Leica is to me fun! Cant really explain it, but I love it! And for long lines I am using the Leica TL 55-135 which gives me the reach of a 200mm full frame set up and for longer shots the excellent Sigma 100-400 which gives me the reach of a 600mm FF lens on a Full Frame body. This set up is a lot lighter than my Sony A6500 with the 200-600 G lens!

Sorry for the long post, but I would encourage you to try the APSC route with lens adapters to use your current lenses and perhaps look into some smaller glass for some uses.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

cosmo54 wrote:

so I have a lot of canon gear (2 bodies, lots of l... (show quote)

There are no full frame light weight options ! ! If you value fast accurate AF, then no adaptations !

If you are truly serious about lighting the load with SOME compromise for IQ, I recommend the Sony RX10IV. Ken Rockwell has a good review on his site. Yes, it is a big jump - but is your best chance for still being happy with your images - IMO.
.

cosmo54 Loc: Easton, PA but will travel for photos

imagemeister wrote:

There are no full frame light weight options ! ! If you value fast accurate AF, then no adaptations !

If you are truly serious about lighting the load with SOME compromise for IQ, I recommend the Sony RX10IV. Ken Rockwell has a good review on his site. Yes, it is a big jump - but is your best chance for still being happy with your images - IMO.
.

Sorry but no desire to go to a one lens fits all ;-)

tomad Loc: North Carolina

Staying with full frame of any type in any brand is not going to save you very much weight. With full frame, especially for shooting wildlife, most of the weight is in those giant lenses, not the camera.

Please try this before you just write it off because it's not full frame. Rent a Sony RX10 IV for a week and go shoot wildlife and birds. 24 to 600mm in one package that probably weighs less than your Canon body with your smallest lens. You can still make enlargements up to 16 by 20 with no problems.

Nalu Loc: Southern Arizona

If part of your goal is wildlife (birds) then you will be wanting the system with the best AF system. This is the question I would be asking. Is the verdict out on the Canon mirrorless systems. Do they stand up to the proven focusing capabilities of the top of the line FF Sonys?