DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Looking to buy a new camera
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 13 of 13, (reverse)
AuthorThread
04/06/2023 09:41:09 PM · #1
I currently own a Canon 7D with four lenses which are the Canon 70-200, 100mm macro, 17-28 wide angle, and a Tamron 28-75. I've been out of the loop for a decade, and I'm ready to update my camera to current technology and start shooting again. What would you suggest that would still work with my lenses? I spent a fortune on the 70-200 and would hate not to use it. Thank you.

Alecia
04/06/2023 10:31:06 PM · #2
I'm still clinging to my 6D II, but have had my eye on the mirrorless R7 and the lens adapter (there are several, but I haven't done any research). I would gradually sell off my EF lenses and replace with the EOS lenses.
04/07/2023 06:59:27 AM · #3
I haven't used one but the R7 sounds like a wonderful camera and you'll be able to use all your lenses with an adapter. And it has IBIS.
04/07/2023 08:03:20 AM · #4
I sold all my Canon gear few years ago and moved to Sony, I never regretted the move. Initially I thought about using an adapter for my 70-200 but I did not like the idea after all, too messy. I sold it for a very good price as I still had all the packaging and the warranty for it. I got Sony 100-400 as a replacement and I am very happy with it, it gives me better reach while not sacrificing quality.
04/07/2023 09:32:11 AM · #5
I'm Canon folk and the 70-200 holds it's value pretty well, but I don't think you need to reinvent the wheel. The fact is that mirrorless lenses are simply not as varied as the EF range, so most mirrorless people are using adapters and EF lenses to get what they need.

Personally I don't like mirrorless, I don't feel it's necessary yet or particularly good value. The main stickler is the battery life - it's simply not good enough compared to SLR to justify the switch, and then the huge cost of investment.

For me, my next and possibly last DSLR will be the Canon 6D Mark II. It does everything my 600D does, has a nice reposition able screen that I have found invaluable since last upgrading, takes EF lenses, has a good price and has a picture quality on par with anything on the market as well as good video.

What more could you want? Hell I'll buy three and never have to upgrade again :)

When I got my 600D second hand last year my rationale was this - I had a 400D that I barely used in 10 years. And I still wasn't anywhere near producing the quality of photos that guys at DPC were producing back in 2006 with the first generation Canon 300D and 10D. These cameras were used to shoot international advertising campaigns, movie posters, the works. They created digital images that most would not be able to distinguish in quality with today's models.

So how could I justify a top of the market new-fangled thing when evidently even the oldest DSLR can produce stunning results with EF lenses? I looked for the oldest Canon DSLR that did 1080p video (needed for other work) and settled on the 600D, which is only a couple of years newer than your 7D.

So for me... I would go with the 6D. It's full frame too, so you'll get rid of that doubt in your mind perhaps about APS-C vs full frame. And it's a good price. That's my personal take on it anyway, and you can use all your existing lenses and then some!
04/07/2023 09:53:52 AM · #6
I think some of the advantages of newer cameras is being able to shoot at higher ISO levels and getting cleaner images. I'm not one to speak to it with personal experience as I'm still shooting with older equipment (Sony), but have considered something newer just for the lower light capacity.
04/07/2023 09:57:06 AM · #7
I think it depends on what photos you want to take. I am sure Wendy makes great use of her Sony A1, it has many outstanding features for her birds in flight shots. And she used to have Canon gear so she knows the difference.

Re Sony battery life, never had any problems, plus I always carry a spare in any case.

Re quality of photos - very much depends on what you shoot. These days I take most photos with my compact Sony RX100 because I can carry it anywhere, anytime without noticing its size or weight.

So why have a full frame camera at all? I started to wonder recently ;)

04/07/2023 10:06:05 AM · #8
As Margaret said, it depends on what you're going to shoot. One of the features I really like on some mirrorless cameras is the pre-burst mode (Canon calls it Raw Burst) which buffers images as long as you've got the shutter button pressed half way, then saves the last 15-20 seconds worth of photos when you fully press the shutter. I'd never have got this photo without it:



By the time I'd pressed the shutter fully, the bird was out of the frame.
04/07/2023 10:08:01 AM · #9
Here's my take... go mirrorless and don't look back. As Rankles points out, yes, battery life on mirrorless cameras is somewhat shorter than on DSLRs. That, IMO, is a non-issue. I have had maybe one or two days in the past 1.5 years where I needed a second battery. The big advantage of mirrorless is what used to be its biggest detraction, namely AF performance. The AF performance of modern mirrorless bodies is nothing short of amazing. There is no question of focus offset or calibration issues with *any* lens, since the focus is being evaluated on the sensor itself, not a separate AF sensor. Then there is the face/eye detection and tracking that will nail focus on a much greater percentage of shots than any SLR.

You do need to figure out whether you want to stay with APS-C or go Full Frame. Your 70-200 will perform fabulously on either, and your 50/1.8 will do decently as well. Your 10-22 will not work, however, and your Tammy 28-75 will work but will not produce great results in the outer portions of the frame. I find that using EF lenses with the Ef/RF adapter (I use the adapter with the control ring) is convenient and the performance is just as if I were using the lens natively.

Canon is firming up its offerings in APS-C bodies, so staying with the smaller sensor format is an option. Your choice of camera body really depends on your budget. Give us a range that you are looking in, and we can recommend an appropriate body.
04/07/2023 02:53:47 PM · #10
I agree with looking at Canon's mirrorless lineup, using your existing lenses with an adapter. If Canon had come out with their mirrorless models a couple of years sooner, I may have switched to that, since I had already been using Canon. I ended up changing to Olympus micro 4/3, and am now invested in that system, so not changing again.
04/07/2023 02:58:08 PM · #11
Originally posted by MargaretNet:

These days I take most photos with my compact Sony RX100 because I can carry it anywhere, anytime without noticing its size or weight.

I bought an RX100 MK3 recently, as a cycling camera for when I eventually drop and break my Canon G7x. I have found the G7x is a little better for me to take photos while riding, as the controls are a touch larger and easier to handle. For normal usage it makes no difference and the Sony having a viewfinder is a big plus.
04/07/2023 07:46:11 PM · #12
Best thing to do is to rent what you're considering. If you're thinking Canon mirrorless, rent the mirrorless camera and whatever adapter is needed for your lenses. But also rent one of the mirrorless lenses. When I switched from Canon to Sony, I expected to use the Canon lenses for a while with an adapter. I very quickly found out that it really sucked. It's slowed down everything significantly and I couldn't get the wildlife shots that I wanted. So I had to very quickly get Sony lenses as well. If you rent the adapter but also rent one of the mirrorless lenses, you can compare and see whether you can live with the adapter for a while.

I'm glad I switched. I like the Sony better than the canons I had over 20 years. But it was a big expense when I thought I could do it slowly.

Since it's Canon and a canon adapter for a Canon camera, it's probably much better. But it's safe is to rent the stuff from lensrental.com, and know for sure.

I spent three times more on my Sony A1 then on my previous cameras. But I rented it first and as soon as I took the first shots I knew it had to be mine. There was absolutely no doubt that I was doing the right thing, and that's great piece of mind.

The good news is that you can still get decent money for your glass. If you need to upgrade. The bad news is the demand for SLRs is going down and some companies aren't making SLRs anymore and switching just to mirrorless versions, so there will be less and less people wanting the old glass over time.

Message edited by author 2023-04-07 19:52:52.
04/07/2023 08:35:09 PM · #13
Originally posted by vawendy:

I spent three times more on my Sony A1 then on my previous cameras. But I rented it first and as soon as I took the first shots I knew it had to be mine. There was absolutely no doubt that I was doing the right thing, and that's great piece of mind.


I was working for Konica-Minolta (in the copier/printer division) when they sold their camera business to Sony. I sometimes wonder if K-M regrets doing that. Sony really ran with it and became a major player in just a few years.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 05:19:50 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 05:19:50 AM EDT.