AntonioReyna Loc: Los Angeles, California

At the World Cup, mostly seen the Canon whites and a few Sony/Nikon. As a former Nikon user and currently a Canon user, I too wish that Canon allowed third party lens makers to provide lenses, but Canon has a huge EF and RF selection with all of the EF lenses working even better on the mirrorless bodies. The EF lenses are cheaper with no loss of quality.

gwilliams6

Sports Pro freelancers tend to use what brand they have owned for years whether Nikon Canon or Sony. But those staff sports photographers from Associated Press, Canadian Press, UK Press , and Gannett Press at the World Cup are all now using Sony mirrorless. AFP staffers (Agence France Press) there are using Nikon Z9 cameras.

Size and weight of DSLR-designed lenses vs Mirrorless-designed lenses is different, just a fact. And when you add adaptors you add more size and another failure point.

I dont make idle chatter here, I know this from personal experience in shooting pro sports around the world with both the best DSLR gear and the best mirrorless gear. And the reality is the best newer mirrorless lenses do test optically a bit better than the older optical designs of the best DSLR-designed lenses, do the research. Optical design and focus motor tech has advanced.

Those DSLR-designed lenses were the standard for a long time and still produce excellent quality images. I have won Pictures of the Year, and World Press Photo Sports Awards using the best DSLR-designed lenses.

But you really cant say there is no difference in quality. I have seen the difference. Viewers wont know the difference and certainly if you as a shooter have tens of thousands of dollars invested in DSLR-designed lenses that work fine for you, you will stick with those lenses, even with adaptors used on new mirrorless bodies. These are the most skilled sport shooters, and their skill will get them the shots they need even with adapted lenses.

Cheers and best to you.

tgreenhaw

I’m not sure why everyone makes such a big deal about third party lenses. It seems to me that performance, support, ease of use, reliability and cost are much more important. I’d rather stick with lenses designed for a specific system than worry about compatibility. Additionally assuming a brand has a full range of options and backward compatibility I would rather stick with a brand that is not having a tough time financially.

tgreenhaw

I use the same lenses and they are some of my most used Take a look at the RF 16mm f2.8 for about $300. It’s super light and plugs the indoor existing light hole perfectly for me.

Doc Mck Loc: Terrell,Texas

I have tried ef mount lenses on TAMRON AND SOME LENSES with an adapter with good success. My 100-400 works and the 1.4 tc works fine. I do have a 100-400rflens also and a 24-70 rf lens. They are very nice.

gwilliams6

You obviously have no hands on experiences with the latest third-party native E-mount and Z-mount lenses, no adaptors needed. They are totally compatible as Sony and now Nikon have opened up their mirrorless mounts. The top third-party lenses have superb optical quality, often better than competitive OEM lenses, with great support, and offer much longer warranties than OEM, reliable, rugged and easy to use.

I love my Sony E-mount lenses, but as a longtime worldwide award winning pro that makes my living from my photography, I just as often use my excellent third party lenses that perform as well and cost less than many comparable OEM Sony lenses. That is why the E-mount is the most widely produced and used mirrorless lens mount in the world, with over 200 native mirrorless E-mount lenses and growing. And Nikon has followed suit and made collaboration with Tamron on third-party Z-mount lenses.

Maybe for Canon you are caught up in the hype that you must have Canon-only RF lenses, but Sony users and now Nikon Z users know there are many more great mirrorless lens options that deliver the goods, but wont break the bank.


Here just a sampling of some of my shots made with third-party lenses, fully able to resolve the 61mp sensor of my Sony A7RIV:

1) 61mp Sony A7RIV, Sigma Art 24-70mm f2.8 DG DN lens. The Golden Gate Bridge, San Francisco, California, USA. 24mm, ISO 200, f8, 1/80 sec,. handheld, all natural light.

2) 61mp Sony A7RIV, Tamron 17-28mm lens, The Palace of Fine Arts, San Francisco, California, USA. 17mm, ISO 400, f4, 1/60 sec. handheld, all natural sunset/dusk light.

3) 61mp Sony A7RIV, Sigma Art 24-70mm f2.8 DG DN lens. Male fashion model Dom on Santa Monica Beach, California, USA. 24mm, ISO 400, f2.8, 1/30 sec. handheld. Available natural light only.

4) 61mp Sony A7RIV, Sigma Art 24-70mm f2.8 DG DN lens. Hilly California Street, San Francisco, California, USA. 70mm, ISO 400, f5, 1/400 sec., all natural light, taken from aboard a Cable Car.

5) 61mp Sony A7RIV, Tamron 17-28mm f2.8 lens. Horseshoe Bend and the Colorado River, Page, Arizona, USA. An HDR image from five exposure-bracketed shots, merged in Lightroom. 17mm, ISO 400, f8, on a tripod, with exposure times bracketed.

Click on download to see better image quality.

Cheers and best to you.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

A group of phenomenal photographic masterpieces 🏆🏆👑🏆🏆

Spirit Vision Photography Loc: Behind a Camera.

All third party options are junk? :-/

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

Over the years I have spent huge sums of money on useless lenses. Not that there was anything wrong with them, I just didn't use them after I played with them for awhile.

Presently my inventory consists of five lenses, three I use routinely, two are in reserve and if I sold them they would not be missed.

Don't spend your money on multiple cameras and a plethora of lenses. Figure out what you really use and buy the best you can afford.

hwb Loc: IL

I whole heartily agree! Although it is hard not to sample....:)

topcat Loc: Alameda, CA

I am also thinking of going full frame. I have Nikon, but cropped sensor.
I have Sony A6000, which is also crop.
So I am on the fence about what full frame. I am thinking seriously of Nikon, the Z5 looks good. I was also thinking of the Sony A7iii.
Any recommendations?

topcat Loc: Alameda, CA

Very nice images. What ever you use, you get the most out of them.

hwb Loc: IL

Think about the way you shoot. Do like to get in close and shoot tight? Or, do you stay back and take a wide shot?

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Are you really posting this hijack question of page 5 of someone else's thread? If you have Nikon FX lenses, a Nikon body and the F-to-Z (FTZ) adapter is the logical choice.

tcanzano Loc: Bristol, NH

I check a bunch of youtube reviews and the Sony A7III is a much better camera. Check on youtube:
Tony Northrup and froknowsphoto and others. I have the Sony A7III on hold for me at Hunts Photo.