Personal computing discussed

Moderators: Dposcorp, SpotTheCat

 
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2387
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado
Contact:

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Sat Sep 23, 2017 11:40 am

Heiwashin wrote:
My confusion and indecision is quite high. It's very difficult for me to sort through this information and make a definitive choice since I don't have the experience to know which of these options would suit my use the best.

One important factor I guess, how much do adapters affect picture quality? Does it alter the focal length? Is there any negative other than added equipment to adapting lenses?


If you are looking at Sony's offerings, they have the LA-EA4 and 3 adapters. The 4's are for the older, screw driven lenses going back to 1985 when AF A Mount lenses were first launched. The LA-EA3 only works with the more modern, SAM/SSM lenses.

Myself, I use dumb adapters. They are roughly $10. I do have a Metabones focal reducer that allows me to use my beloved Minolta Rokkor's at their near-native focal lengths. It gains some light, but severely loses corner sharpness. I use them only for portraiture. The Metabones Speedboosters are expensive. I paid something like $300 for it used.
Fuji XT2
16-55/28, 23/2, 56/1.2, 18-135, 100-400, 1.4x t/c.
Rokinon 12/2
Minolta MC 50/1.4, MD 135/2.8
 
JustAnEngineer
Gold subscriber
Gerbil God
Posts: 17613
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Heart of Dixie

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Sat Sep 23, 2017 1:52 pm

I'm not arguing that you should select Canon over Fuji or Sony. Any of these brands is likely to work well for you. I am familiar with how to find prices and reviews for Canon products, since I own a Canon DSLR and lenses, so I'll provide you some links and information. If you do buy Canon, the 10-20% off refurbished sale running through the end of September directly from Canon is an excellent deal. I have no qualms ordering refurbished equipment directly from Canon. It comes in a white box instead of the printed colored box, but otherwise, you can't tell the difference from new equipment. Some have argued that the refurbished equipment may be even better than new, since every piece has been more thoroughly evaluated than a new lens coming through the normal production line.

$749 refurbished EOS M5 camera
This is Canon's best mirrorless interchangeable lens camera body

$200 refurbished EF-M 15-45 mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM wide-normal zoom lens
Review here: http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/972-canon_m1545_3563
With the 1.6 crop factor of the APS-C size sensor, this has the equivalent field of view of a 24-72 mm lens on a full-frame 35 mm camera, which covers many general uses.
The closest focus distance for this lens is 0.82 feet with a maximum magnification ratio of 0.25 to 1, This means that an object 89 mm (3½") long will cover the entire horizontal image on the 22.2x14.8 mm sensor. If that's close enough for you, you may not need a dedicated macro lens.

$200 refurbished EF-M 55-200 mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM telephoto zoom lens
With the 1.6 crop factor, this lens has the equivalent field of view of an 88-320 mm lens on a full-frame 35 mm camera, making it useful for bringing distant objects closer. The f/6.3 aperture isn't very fast, so you'll want to use this lens where there is plenty of light. Minimum focus distance is 3.3 feet with a magnification ratio of 0.21 to 1. An object 106 mm (4.16") long could cover the entire horizontal image.

$216 refurbished EF-M 28 mm f/3.5 Macro IS STM macro wide angle fixed focal length prime lens
With the 1.6 crop factor, this lens has the equivalent field of view of a 36 mm lens on a full-frame camera.
The closest focus distance for this lens is 0.43 feet (from the sensor to the object) with an impressive magnification ratio of 1.2 to 1. An object just 18½ mm (3/4") long will cover the entire horizontal image. However, the relatively short focal length means that you'll have to move the camera very close to the subject to capture images at that magnification.

$128 refurbished Mount Adapter EF EOS-M + $650 refurbished EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM macro telephoto fixed focal length prime lens
With the 1.6 crop factor, this combination has the equivalent field of view of a 160 mm lens on a full-frame camera.
The closest focus distance for this lens is 0.99 feet with a magnification ratio of 1 to 1. An object 22.2 mm (7/8") long will cover the entire horizontal image. As part of Canon's Luxury professional lens line, the quality of this lens is impeccable, but you're paying for an expensive EF (full frame) lens and using only the middle portion of the image that hits the APS-C sensor. I don't shoot nearly enough close-up photos to justify keeping a dedicated macro lens, let alone one that costs this much.

All of these lenses have in-lens image stabilization, which compensates for vibration or shaking hands to provide sharp images with longer exposures than would otherwise be possible without a tripod.
i7-6700K, NT06-Pro, GA-Z170N-Gaming5, 32 GiB, RX Vega56, SM951, 5TB HDD, Blu-ray, FTZ01, SX600-G, C32HG70, RK-9000BR, MX518
 
DancinJack
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
Posts: 3014
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 3:21 pm
Location: Kansas

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Sat Sep 23, 2017 3:09 pm

I think we're getting far too into the weeds here. The reality is that any of the cameras we've suggested will do good enough video it isn't going to make a huge difference. IMO you should focus on the convenience factors, like lens selection. Just make sure whatever system you choose will have what you want. I am pretty sure any recent body is going to work well for you.
i7 6700K - Z170 - 16GiB DDR4 - GTX 1080 - 512GB SSD - 256GB SSD - 500GB SSD - 3TB HDD- 27" IPS G-sync - Win10 Pro x64 - Ubuntu/Mint x64 :: 2015 13" rMBP Sierra :: Canon EOS 80D/Sony RX100
 
Flying Fox
Gerbil God
Posts: 25408
Joined: Mon May 24, 2004 2:19 am
Contact:

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Sat Sep 23, 2017 9:14 pm

TheEmrys wrote:
Not sure if lens selection matters, but neither Sony or Canon have properly expanded the asp-c lens selection.

What about Fuji's line-up? I see a ton of noise about the Sony's and Panasonic's, but may be it is just my own web-surfing preferences/tracking.
The Model M is not for the faint of heart. You either like them or hate them.

Gerbils unite! Fold for UnitedGerbilNation, team 2630.
 
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2387
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado
Contact:

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Sat Sep 23, 2017 10:03 pm

Its gotten pretty robust. Fuji loves itsprimes, and really, I do, too. Its got 2 23's and 35's, a 14, 16, 50, a 56/1.2, a 56/1.2 APD, and a 90. A 60 macro, and its just announced an 80 macro. And they announced a 200/2(!). Then for zooms, there is a 16-50, 18-55/2.8-4 (great lens!), 16-55/2.8 (Excellent "bag of primes" lens), an 18-135, a 55-200/3.5-4.8, and a 50-230. On the long end is a 100-400,which is compatible with the 1.4x and 2x teleconverters.

They really have a solid lineup. Add in the Rokinon lenses and the 3 Zeiss Touits, a 12/2.8, 32mm, and a 50 macro, and its quite a good set of options. I

Out of these, I have owned the 16, 23/1.4,23/2, 56/1.2, 18-55/2.8-4, 18-135, 16-55/2.8, 55-200/3.5-4.8, and the 100-400 with 1.4x t/c. They are all excellent. The weakest zoom has been the 18-135. Its a typical superzoom. At f/8, its pretty good, but it never gets great. I still own it as it is perfect for travel and family uses. The very good are the 23/2, 18-55/2.8-4, and the 55-200/3.5-4.8. The excellent are the 16/1.4, 23/1.4, 56/1.2, 16-55/2.8, and the 100-400. These are really top end lenses. As good as anything out there. The stabilization is quite excellent, even with the teleconverter.
Fuji XT2
16-55/28, 23/2, 56/1.2, 18-135, 100-400, 1.4x t/c.
Rokinon 12/2
Minolta MC 50/1.4, MD 135/2.8
 
JustAnEngineer
Gold subscriber
Gerbil God
Posts: 17613
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Heart of Dixie

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Sat Sep 23, 2017 10:15 pm

TheEmrys wrote:
Neither Sony nor Canon have properly expanded the asp-c lens selection.
I would argue that Canon has expanded their selection of lenses for cameras with APS-C size sensors far too much. The large number of lenses with overlapping capabilities creates a sea of confusion. Canon could eliminate seven of the seventeen EF-S lenses that they currently offer for cameras with APS-C size sensors and very few people would miss them: 10-18, 10-22, 15-85, 17-55, 17-85, 18-55, 18-55, 18-55, 18-135, 18-135, 18-135, 18-200, 55-250, 55-250, 24, 35, 60. Of course, these cameras can also use EF lenses.
i7-6700K, NT06-Pro, GA-Z170N-Gaming5, 32 GiB, RX Vega56, SM951, 5TB HDD, Blu-ray, FTZ01, SX600-G, C32HG70, RK-9000BR, MX518
 
Airmantharp
Gold subscriber
Emperor Gerbilius I
Posts: 6046
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Sat Sep 23, 2017 10:43 pm

JustAnEngineer wrote:
It's an open tube with an EF-M bayonet mount and an EF/EF-S socket, some electronics for communication and a detachable tripod adapter. It extends the mirrorless camera body so that the APS-C size sensor is the same distance from the EF/EF-S mounting point as it is on a DSLR camera (like the EOS 80D) with an APS-C size sensor.


Because it's just a tube- just like an automatic extension tube- you can pick up a third-party adapter with no ill effects if you cannot source the Canon adapter inexpensively.

TheEmrys wrote:
I did remember it wrong. DPR has it at 64% coverage. But it isn't 100%.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-m5-review/4


No, not 100% effective coverage, no one has that as that's not possible with current optical technology [what I was talking about above]. Main point is that all available mirrorless cameras have plenty of coverage.
Canon 6D|24-105/4L |70-300/4-5.6 IS USM|50/1.4 USM|50/2.5 CM|50/1.8 STM|85/1.8 USM|Samyang/Bower 14/2.8|24/2.8 IS|Sigma 150-600 | C
Canon EOS-M|11-22 IS|22/2|EF-M 18-55
 
Airmantharp
Gold subscriber
Emperor Gerbilius I
Posts: 6046
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Sat Sep 23, 2017 11:18 pm

Heiwashin wrote:
My confusion and indecision is quite high. It's very difficult for me to sort through this information and make a definitive choice since I don't have the experience to know which of these options would suit my use the best.

One important factor I guess, how much do adapters affect picture quality? Does it alter the focal length? Is there any negative other than added equipment to adapting lenses?


As answered above about the Canon adapter, there is no optical loss, or any other loss- Canon DSLR lenses are native on their mirrorless cameras. This is one of the benefits of that system, and the main reason I haven't left for say Sony or Fuji.

TheEmrys wrote:
If you are looking at Sony's offerings, they have the LA-EA4 and 3 adapters. The 4's are for the older, screw driven lenses going back to 1985 when AF A Mount lenses were first launched. The LA-EA3 only works with the more modern, SAM/SSM lenses.

Myself, I use dumb adapters. They are roughly $10. I do have a Metabones focal reducer that allows me to use my beloved Minolta Rokkor's at their near-native focal lengths. It gains some light, but severely loses corner sharpness. I use them only for portraiture. The Metabones Speedboosters are expensive. I paid something like $300 for it used.


Deciphering Sony's adapter situation is complicated. Basically, Canon was way ahead of their time when they went to autofocus lenses- they went all electronic from the start, which meant electromagnetic diaphragms as well as integrated autofocus motors. As JAE noted, adapting any Canon EF- or EF-S mount lens to a Canon mirrorless camera is seamless because of this.

Sony, who inherited Minolta's DSLR autofocus system, Nikon, and Pentax (at least) started their autofocus lines by putting DC motors in their camera bodies alongside aperture actuators. They later added distance information contacts, and much later added autofocus motors, and in Nikon's case, they're just now getting around to updating their lineups with electromagnetic diaphragms.

This means that making adapters for their DSLR lenses to work with autofocus and autoexposure on their mirrorless lines, these mechanical issues have to be accounted for. Nikon actually did pretty good with their 1" sensor Nikon 1 series, which they've mostly abandoned, but from which they are likely using technology for their upcoming full-frame mirrorless camera(s).

And Sony halfassed their adapters. There are two current ones, and neither allow native functionality. The LA-EA4, for Sony/Minolta autofocus lenses that lack autofocus motors (use the screw drive DC motor on the body), includes a DC motor, but also unfortunately includes its own autofocus system that overrides the mirrorless autofocus system. This system was pulled from an older Sony DSLT camera and pales in comparison to the systems used in the A6x000-series. The LA-EA3, for Sony lenses that have built-in autofocus motors (the most current ones), uses the autofocus system of the mirrorless camera it is attached to, but does not allow native functionality. Limitations of autofocus modes and framerates are imposed, even when used to adapt Sony's US10,000+ super telephoto lenses to their incredible new US$4500 A9 'professional' mirrorless camera.

This is why I caution against using Sony crop mirrorless if you cannot find native E-mount lenses.
Canon 6D|24-105/4L |70-300/4-5.6 IS USM|50/1.4 USM|50/2.5 CM|50/1.8 STM|85/1.8 USM|Samyang/Bower 14/2.8|24/2.8 IS|Sigma 150-600 | C
Canon EOS-M|11-22 IS|22/2|EF-M 18-55
 
DancinJack
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
Posts: 3014
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 3:21 pm
Location: Kansas

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Sun Sep 24, 2017 12:55 am

Good deal going on right now for the X-T20 at B&H.
i7 6700K - Z170 - 16GiB DDR4 - GTX 1080 - 512GB SSD - 256GB SSD - 500GB SSD - 3TB HDD- 27" IPS G-sync - Win10 Pro x64 - Ubuntu/Mint x64 :: 2015 13" rMBP Sierra :: Canon EOS 80D/Sony RX100
 
JustAnEngineer
Gold subscriber
Gerbil God
Posts: 17613
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Heart of Dixie

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:12 am

Airmantharp wrote:
JustAnEngineer wrote:
It's an open tube with an EF-M bayonet mount and an EF/EF-S socket, some electronics for communication and a detachable tripod adapter. It extends the mirrorless camera body so that the APS-C size sensor is the same distance from the EF/EF-S mounting point as it is on a DSLR camera (like the EOS 80D) with an APS-C size sensor.
Because it's just a tube- just like an automatic extension tube- you can pick up a third-party adapter with no ill effects if you cannot source the Canon adapter inexpensively.
I had forgotten about third-party adapters. They certainly are less expensive.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... canon.html
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... r_for.html
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... mount.html
https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/cata ... efurbished
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... r_Kit.html
i7-6700K, NT06-Pro, GA-Z170N-Gaming5, 32 GiB, RX Vega56, SM951, 5TB HDD, Blu-ray, FTZ01, SX600-G, C32HG70, RK-9000BR, MX518
 
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2387
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado
Contact:

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Sun Sep 24, 2017 9:01 am

JustAnEngineer wrote:
TheEmrys wrote:
Neither Sony nor Canon have properly expanded the asp-c lens selection.
I would argue that Canon has expanded their selection of lenses for cameras with APS-C size sensors far too much. The large number of lenses with overlapping capabilities creates a sea of confusion. Canon could eliminate seven of the seventeen EF-S lenses that they currently offer for cameras with APS-C size sensors and very few people would miss them: 10-18, 10-22, 15-85, 17-55, 17-85, 18-55, 18-55, 18-55, 18-135, 18-135, 18-135, 18-200, 55-250, 55-250, 24, 35, 60. Of course, these cameras can also use EF lenses.


I would totally agree. I have never understood why there are three versions of the same focal length being offered. And primes are definitely easier to use from FF to aps-c, though. An 85mm makes a nice 135mm equivalent, and so on.

Also forgot two Fuji zooms. 10-24/4 and the newly announced 8-16/2.8.

I would love for Fuji to make a 66/1.4.
Fuji XT2
16-55/28, 23/2, 56/1.2, 18-135, 100-400, 1.4x t/c.
Rokinon 12/2
Minolta MC 50/1.4, MD 135/2.8
 
Heiwashin
Maximum Gerbil
Topic Author
Posts: 4120
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 1:21 pm
Location: Denham Springs, LA

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Sun Sep 24, 2017 10:27 pm

I think i've decided that weird focus jumps during video would be the most annoying thing that i would experience, so right now the plan is to pick up an eos m5 since you guys are saying it performs best in that respect.
Looking for Knowledge wrote:
When drunk.....
I want to have sex, but find I am more likely to be shot down than when I am sober.
 
Voldenuit
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2788
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:10 pm

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Wed Sep 27, 2017 1:03 pm

JustAnEngineer wrote:
$749 refurbished EOS M5 camera
This is Canon's best mirrorless interchangeable lens camera body


It's also Canon's worst MILC, because they literally do not give a **** about their mirrorless range.

Stay away from Canon if you want to go mirrorless, they simply don't care about the product line. They are way behind everyone else in terms of performance and usability.
Wind, Sand and Stars.
 
Voldenuit
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2788
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:10 pm

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Wed Sep 27, 2017 1:20 pm

Heiwashin wrote:
I think i've decided that weird focus jumps during video would be the most annoying thing that i would experience, so right now the plan is to pick up an eos m5 since you guys are saying it performs best in that respect.


I think you're worrying too much.

Hundreds if not thousands of vloggers are shooting with cheap Panasonic G7 or Sony A6300s.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjv6KoUeC_Q
Wind, Sand and Stars.
 
Airmantharp
Gold subscriber
Emperor Gerbilius I
Posts: 6046
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:29 pm

Voldenuit wrote:
It's also Canon's worst MILC, because they literally do not give a **** about their mirrorless range.

Stay away from Canon if you want to go mirrorless, they simply don't care about the product line. They are way behind everyone else in terms of performance and usability.


Worst for what? It's more compact with native lenses than even the smallest Rebel, while maintaining competitive image quality and native compatibility with all of Canon's lenses.

Voldenuit wrote:
Hundreds if not thousands of vloggers are shooting with cheap Panasonic G7 or Sony A6300s.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjv6KoUeC_Q


...and thousands if not tens or hundreds of thousands use DPAF-equipped Canon cameras like the EOS-M5/M6, SL2, T77i, 70D, 80D, 7D II...

And they don't give up sensor size to a Panasonic Micro-Four Thirds camera nor native video autofocus lens selection with Sony APS-C.
Canon 6D|24-105/4L |70-300/4-5.6 IS USM|50/1.4 USM|50/2.5 CM|50/1.8 STM|85/1.8 USM|Samyang/Bower 14/2.8|24/2.8 IS|Sigma 150-600 | C
Canon EOS-M|11-22 IS|22/2|EF-M 18-55
 
Voldenuit
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2788
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:10 pm

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Wed Sep 27, 2017 10:52 pm

Airmantharp wrote:
Voldenuit wrote:
It's also Canon's worst MILC, because they literally do not give a **** about their mirrorless range.

Stay away from Canon if you want to go mirrorless, they simply don't care about the product line. They are way behind everyone else in terms of performance and usability.


Worst for what? It's more compact with native lenses than even the smallest Rebel, while maintaining competitive image quality and native compatibility with all of Canon's lenses.


I'd say it's the worst system for the OP's intended use of shooting video documentaries. The video from the EOS M5 is said to be soft, and exacerbated by the in-body IS, which seems to use a smartphone-like EIS with cropped video.

Check out these reviews :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVlr_x_zeh8
https://youtu.be/8X1EhOm64QE?t=751
https://youtu.be/UHEyW_8Ltss?t=624

It's not a bad camera for stills, but for video, it would be /far/ from my first choice, or even second.
Wind, Sand and Stars.
 
Airmantharp
Gold subscriber
Emperor Gerbilius I
Posts: 6046
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Wed Sep 27, 2017 11:17 pm

Voldenuit wrote:
I'd say it's the worst system for the OP's intended use of shooting video documentaries. The video from the EOS M5 is said to be soft, and exacerbated by the in-body IS, which seems to use a smartphone-like EIS with cropped video.


I wouldn't advocate for using the software IS unless you are up against a wall where not using it would mean introducing more noise that would be worse than the soft IS.

Voldenuit wrote:
It's not a bad camera for stills, but for video, it would be /far/ from my first choice, or even second.


Or my third or fourth, you know, if pulling focus manually were an option. For video autofocus in a small package, you cannot beat an EOS-M5/M6.
Canon 6D|24-105/4L |70-300/4-5.6 IS USM|50/1.4 USM|50/2.5 CM|50/1.8 STM|85/1.8 USM|Samyang/Bower 14/2.8|24/2.8 IS|Sigma 150-600 | C
Canon EOS-M|11-22 IS|22/2|EF-M 18-55
 
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2387
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado
Contact:

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Thu Sep 28, 2017 8:45 pm

Airmantharp wrote:
Or my third or fourth, you know, if pulling focus manually were an option. For video autofocus in a small package, you cannot beat an EOS-M5/M6.


Its a bold, but totally unfounded claim. The reason being is that every other manufacturer has released firmware to improve the af-c/video af. At this point, I haven't seen anything that makes the Canon video AF more compelling than Sony's, Panasonics, or Fuji's, and all three include far higher quality codecs, bitrates, and resolutions. Cinema5D, has yet to review it. But everyone else seems to find it highly flawed.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/2/6/14520976/canon-m5-review-mirrorless-camera-sample-photos

Here is one from Thom Hogan, who is pretty fair. He c alls it equivalent to the a6300, but doesn't compare it to the a6500, which has more sophisticated autofocus in video.

http://www.sansmirror.com/cameras/a-note-about-camera-reviews/canon-mirrorless-camera/canon-eos-m5-review.html
Fuji XT2
16-55/28, 23/2, 56/1.2, 18-135, 100-400, 1.4x t/c.
Rokinon 12/2
Minolta MC 50/1.4, MD 135/2.8
 
Airmantharp
Gold subscriber
Emperor Gerbilius I
Posts: 6046
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Fri Sep 29, 2017 12:27 am

TheEmrys wrote:
But everyone else seems to find it highly flawed.


Sorry, I'm quoting just this point because the hyperbole made me laugh. There is no perfect, and there is no terrible here: there is a balance of a number of factors. Given that solid video AF in a mirrorless package is listed as a priority, I put Canon's offerings first, because their tech doesn't miss. It's not good, or really good, it's as close to perfect as you can get.

Even the A9- with Sony's best mirrorless AF yet- can jump. Fuji's is a bit less reliable and has some goofy autoexposure stuff going on with respect to changing apertures on the fly, and the Panasonic stuff is a bit less reliable than that given that Panasonic doesn't use phase detection at all.

Now, if solid video focus isn't necessary but good video focus is, then (as I mentioned above) I'd move away from Canon's offerings toward Fuji or Panasonic, in that order. I love Fuji's system, and I love the size of Micro Four Thirds. I am however wary of the prices of the better lenses, and that some of the better lenses especially for Fuji are split between slower but weather resistant and faster but not weather resistant as well as slower focusing (think XF35/2 vs. XF35/1.4).

For an experienced photographer I would actually put Sony before Fuji or Panasonic, but with the qualification that lenses purchased alongside the camera as well as future lens purchases should be evaluated strictly as getting good video AF on Sony mirrorless can be difficult, or just plain expensive.
Canon 6D|24-105/4L |70-300/4-5.6 IS USM|50/1.4 USM|50/2.5 CM|50/1.8 STM|85/1.8 USM|Samyang/Bower 14/2.8|24/2.8 IS|Sigma 150-600 | C
Canon EOS-M|11-22 IS|22/2|EF-M 18-55
 
JustAnEngineer
Gold subscriber
Gerbil God
Posts: 17613
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Heart of Dixie

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Fri Sep 29, 2017 5:06 am

If you do choose a Fujifilm X-T series, check out prices here:
http://www.fujipricewatch.com/

Here are some options to consider:
$1200 Fujifilm X-T20 camera with XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 R LM OIS wide-normal zoom lens.
Review here: http://www.photozone.de/fuji_x/783-fuji1855f284

$700 XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 R LM OIS telephoto zoom lens.
Review here: http://www.photozone.de/fuji_x/879-fuji55200f3548

$649 XF 60mm f/2.4 R macro (0.5 to 1 magnification ratio)
Review here: http://www.photozone.de/fuji_x/744-fuji60f24
Last edited by JustAnEngineer on Sat Sep 30, 2017 1:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
i7-6700K, NT06-Pro, GA-Z170N-Gaming5, 32 GiB, RX Vega56, SM951, 5TB HDD, Blu-ray, FTZ01, SX600-G, C32HG70, RK-9000BR, MX518
 
JustAnEngineer
Gold subscriber
Gerbil God
Posts: 17613
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Heart of Dixie

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Fri Sep 29, 2017 5:36 am

I happened to spot a press release headline this morning stating that Canon had just won a technical Emmy award for their EF lenses. I wondered "How much does one of those Cine-Servo lenses actually cost?"
Oh my! :o
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?N ... rt&ipp=100
i7-6700K, NT06-Pro, GA-Z170N-Gaming5, 32 GiB, RX Vega56, SM951, 5TB HDD, Blu-ray, FTZ01, SX600-G, C32HG70, RK-9000BR, MX518
 
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2387
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado
Contact:

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:21 am

Airmantharp wrote:
TheEmrys wrote:
But everyone else seems to find it highly flawed.


Sorry, I'm quoting just this point because the hyperbole made me laugh. There is no perfect, and there is no terrible here: there is a balance of a number of factors. Given that solid video AF in a mirrorless package is listed as a priority, I put Canon's offerings first, because their tech doesn't miss. It's not good, or really good, it's as close to perfect as you can get.


The first review I linked to: CANON M5 REVIEW: THE BEST MIRRORLESS CAMERA OF FOUR YEARS AGO. Some other highlights:
But the M5’s sluggish performance and lower quality build should be red flags for potential buyers.

The M5’s EVF is fine — the refresh rate is good enough that motion looks smooth and realistic — but the 2.36 million dot screen doesn’t look quite as fantastic as the ones you find on Sony and Fujifilm cameras.

The M5’s cheap build would almost be forgivable if it weren’t for the fact that, when the shutter fires, the entire camera body rattles.

The M5 is like a loud friend that you have to make excuses for — in some situations, you’ll be better off bringing someone else to the party.

the EVF is slow to respond to the presence or absence of your eye. Image playback is also slow, which leads to a lot of mistaken button tapping and waiting around.

The continuous autofocus (and the object tracking) can be easily fooled if an object is running directly toward you.

Other gems:

DPR:
Inexplicably, the Auto ISO behavior on the EOS M5 has been crippled

For most users, the autofocus and general performance on the EOS M5 will be more than good enough, but it has a few quirks that keep it from being the best mirrorless option in its class for shooting fast action.

Imaging Resource:
Low light autofocus is an area of weakness for the M5. It is rated to work from -1 EV to 18 EV, which is okay, but not great. However, many of the EF-M lenses are moderately slow with narrower apertures, which hurts low-light autofocus performance. I regularly struggled to capture in-focus shots in moderately low light. Compared to other similarly-priced mirrorless cameras I've tested, the M5 felt slower in dim conditions.

JPEG images were a bit soft at default in-camera sharpening but still showed some sharpening artifacts. The camera exhibited minor to moderate loss in detail due to in-camera noise reduction, even at low ISO settings.

Then there are the lenses..... All slow. The kit lens is prone to more CA than Sony's (how is that even possible? That is one of Sony's worst for CA). There is one f/2 lens and then a bunch of very slow zooms, like the 15-45/3.5-6.3(!!!) and 18-55/3.5-5.6. Not one constant aperture zoom, which is vital to video. I

The m5 is certainly Canon's best effort. But its nowhere near "close to perfect." Its a decent body that is at the same place or behind every other mirrorless manufacturer in everything.
Fuji XT2
16-55/28, 23/2, 56/1.2, 18-135, 100-400, 1.4x t/c.
Rokinon 12/2
Minolta MC 50/1.4, MD 135/2.8
 
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2387
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado
Contact:

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:22 am

JustAnEngineer wrote:
I happened to spot a press release headline this morning stating that Canon had just won a technical Emmy award for their EF lenses. I wondered "How much does one of those Cine-Servo lenses actually cost?"
Oh my! :o
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?N ... rt&ipp=100


Outrageous prices. Fuji released an 18-55/t2.9 for a mere $3800. Its considered "a bargain."
Fuji XT2
16-55/28, 23/2, 56/1.2, 18-135, 100-400, 1.4x t/c.
Rokinon 12/2
Minolta MC 50/1.4, MD 135/2.8
 
Heiwashin
Maximum Gerbil
Topic Author
Posts: 4120
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 1:21 pm
Location: Denham Springs, LA

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:33 am

JustAnEngineer wrote:
I happened to spot a press release headline this morning stating that Canon had just won a technical Emmy award for their EF lenses. I wondered "How much does one of those Cine-Servo lenses actually cost?"
Oh my! :o
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?N ... rt&ipp=100


Yes uh....I think I can safely rule out that lens.
Looking for Knowledge wrote:
When drunk.....
I want to have sex, but find I am more likely to be shot down than when I am sober.
 
Airmantharp
Gold subscriber
Emperor Gerbilius I
Posts: 6046
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Fri Sep 29, 2017 11:21 pm

My God.
TheEmrys wrote:
The M5’s EVF is fine — the refresh rate is good enough that motion looks smooth and realistic — but the 2.36 million dot screen doesn’t look quite as fantastic as the ones you find on Sony and Fujifilm cameras.

So it's fine, then?
TheEmrys wrote:
The M5’s cheap build would almost be forgivable if it weren’t for the fact that, when the shutter fires, the entire camera body rattles.

Cheap build -> used lightweight materials.
TheEmrys wrote:
The M5 is like a loud friend that you have to make excuses for — in some situations, you’ll be better off bringing someone else to the party.

Okay, and?
TheEmrys wrote:
the EVF is slow to respond to the presence or absence of your eye. Image playback is also slow, which leads to a lot of mistaken button tapping and waiting around.

Haven't seen this- maybe they used a slow SD card? I don't use slow SD cards, and never recommend them. Fast, large ones are just too cheap.
TheEmrys wrote:
The continuous autofocus (and the object tracking) can be easily fooled if an object is running directly toward you.

There's a requirement for tracking subjects running toward the camera here?
TheEmrys wrote:
Inexplicably, the Auto ISO behavior on the EOS M5 has been crippled
For most users, the autofocus and general performance on the EOS M5 will be more than good enough, but it has a few quirks that keep it from being the best mirrorless option in its class for shooting fast action.

We're talking to a new photographer here, so more than good enough for most isn't good enough?
TheEmrys wrote:
Imaging Resource: Low light autofocus is an area of weakness for the M5. It is rated to work from -1 EV to 18 EV, which is okay, but not great. However, many of the EF-M lenses are moderately slow with narrower apertures, which hurts low-light autofocus performance. I regularly struggled to capture in-focus shots in moderately low light. Compared to other similarly-priced mirrorless cameras I've tested, the M5 felt slower in dim conditions.

We have a requirement for fast low-light autofocus? And how much slower is 'slower'? Would you purposefully use a slow lens for low-light work?
TheEmrys wrote:
JPEG images were a bit soft at default in-camera sharpening but still showed some sharpening artifacts. The camera exhibited minor to moderate loss in detail due to in-camera noise reduction, even at low ISO settings.

JPEG images out of camera are always a matter of taste. If you don't like what the camera puts out, change it, or better yet, edit your own freaking RAWs. Canon provides free software with the camera that handles RAW editing very well.
TheEmrys wrote:
Then there are the lenses..... All slow. The kit lens is prone to more CA than Sony's (how is that even possible? That is one of Sony's worst for CA). There is one f/2 lens and then a bunch of very slow zooms, like the 15-45/3.5-6.3(!!!) and 18-55/3.5-5.6. Not one constant aperture zoom, which is vital to video.

Sony's lenses are slow. That's the most comparable system, but you can also adapt the fastest AF lenses made to the EOS-M5, natively, if you need to. Want to rent a 50/1.2L had shoot video? With the M5, you can! With Sony? Good luck with that adapter :D. (and drop down to MicroFourThirds, now you're at half the sensor size and much higher noise at higher ISOs, so that f/1.2 aperture won't help nearly as much, if the camera can even hold focus with that little depth of field...)
TheEmrys wrote:
The m5 is certainly Canon's best effort. But its nowhere near "close to perfect." Its a decent body that is at the same place or behind every other mirrorless manufacturer in everything.

I never said the EOS-M5 was 'close to perfect'. Please go back and look.
What I have said is:
Airmantharp wrote:
Given that solid video AF in a mirrorless package is listed as a priority, I put Canon's offerings first, because their tech doesn't miss. It's not good, or really good, it's as close to perfect as you can get.

It's also good in terms of responsiveness and image quality, and better/best in terms of system support with lenses, flashes, and accessories.
Canon 6D|24-105/4L |70-300/4-5.6 IS USM|50/1.4 USM|50/2.5 CM|50/1.8 STM|85/1.8 USM|Samyang/Bower 14/2.8|24/2.8 IS|Sigma 150-600 | C
Canon EOS-M|11-22 IS|22/2|EF-M 18-55
 
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2387
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado
Contact:

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:44 am

"Close to perfect as you can get." Exactly what you stated. Well, over-stated. Much like the 100% coverage gained from the dual pixel pdaf which is actually ~64%.

And photographer's skill doesn't matter. Prosummer level was requestsd. Not entry level. If the OP wants a lower level body, that is an entirely different discussion. But this is a request for information on semi-pro level bodies . And the m5, just isn't. It's a very good second body, but it is a very limited body in potential. Whereas the other options are much more suited for the OP's needs and wants.
Fuji XT2
16-55/28, 23/2, 56/1.2, 18-135, 100-400, 1.4x t/c.
Rokinon 12/2
Minolta MC 50/1.4, MD 135/2.8
 
Airmantharp
Gold subscriber
Emperor Gerbilius I
Posts: 6046
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Sat Sep 30, 2017 7:56 am

TheEmrys wrote:
"Close to perfect as you can get." Exactly what you stated. Well, over-stated.


Please, just stop. No need to get petty when called out for misquoting.
Canon 6D|24-105/4L |70-300/4-5.6 IS USM|50/1.4 USM|50/2.5 CM|50/1.8 STM|85/1.8 USM|Samyang/Bower 14/2.8|24/2.8 IS|Sigma 150-600 | C
Canon EOS-M|11-22 IS|22/2|EF-M 18-55
 
TheEmrys
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2387
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 8:22 pm
Location: Northern Colorado
Contact:

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Sat Sep 30, 2017 9:55 am

Airmantharp wrote:
It's not good, or really good, it's as close to perfect as you can get.


Then maybe I have misunderstood. This does, on the surface, seem quite unequivocal. Perhaps you didn't mean that Canon's tech isn't as close to perfect as you can get. Cn you elaborate on what you meant?
Fuji XT2
16-55/28, 23/2, 56/1.2, 18-135, 100-400, 1.4x t/c.
Rokinon 12/2
Minolta MC 50/1.4, MD 135/2.8
 
DancinJack
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
Posts: 3014
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 3:21 pm
Location: Kansas

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Sat Sep 30, 2017 1:05 pm

The discussion was good at first. It's just annoying now.
i7 6700K - Z170 - 16GiB DDR4 - GTX 1080 - 512GB SSD - 256GB SSD - 500GB SSD - 3TB HDD- 27" IPS G-sync - Win10 Pro x64 - Ubuntu/Mint x64 :: 2015 13" rMBP Sierra :: Canon EOS 80D/Sony RX100
 
Airmantharp
Gold subscriber
Emperor Gerbilius I
Posts: 6046
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm

Re: Looking for Prosumer mirrorless

Sat Sep 30, 2017 10:41 pm

TheEmrys wrote:
Airmantharp wrote:
It's not good, or really good, it's as close to perfect as you can get.


Then maybe I have misunderstood. This does, on the surface, seem quite unequivocal. Perhaps you didn't mean that Canon's tech isn't as close to perfect as you can get. Cn you elaborate on what you meant?


I'll reiterate: I'm talking about Canon's prowess with video focus when I say 'it's as close to perfect as you can get'. Video focus was listed as a requirement, and put simply, it just works.

For stills, every camera we've talked about has been good. Most are semi-pro (not sure about the lower-end Micro Four Thirds) with two control dials and have very good to excellent image quality. They all have good to great autofocus for stills too, depending on scenario, including the lens attached. For the stills requirement, separate from the video requirement, I'd probably rate the EOS-M5 last (depending on specific comparison), but still better than needed, and balance that with lens selection and system support.

Also, to reiterate, if video focus isn't the highest priority, I wouldn't hesitate to recommend Fuji instead.
Canon 6D|24-105/4L |70-300/4-5.6 IS USM|50/1.4 USM|50/2.5 CM|50/1.8 STM|85/1.8 USM|Samyang/Bower 14/2.8|24/2.8 IS|Sigma 150-600 | C
Canon EOS-M|11-22 IS|22/2|EF-M 18-55

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest