In this corner we have the siren song of the full frame mirrorless offerings from Canon, Nikon and Sony. In the other corner we have my faithful, tried and true current camera gear from Fujifilm and Olympus. Switch to full frame or keep my current gear? Who will win this battle? "Let's get ready to rumble!"®*
For the past year, I've been toying with the idea of buying a full frame (35mm sized sensor) digital camera. I know you've heard this from me before, but I am ready to move back uptown, so to speak. It seems, I've been missing my Nikon D810 and the image files I was getting from that large but exquisite 36mp sensored camera. I don't quite know why and shouldn't as my images from my Fujifilm and Olympus gear are more than I need. However, there is just something about looking at a 36mp or larger file at 100% on a high quality large monitor that just can't be equaled by anything else I've owned. The incredible detail, color fidelity, and dynamic range just grabs me. Because of that, for the past year I've been (semi-seriously) toying with the idea of getting back into full frame digital photography. A couple of years ago I decided I'm pretty much committed to mirrorless digital cameras and would only, as a last resort, go back to a digital SLR. At this point, probably the only DSLR I would seriously consider is the 45.7mp Nikon D850, which I believe is the best all around camera on the market today. You may think otherwise and that is just fine.
As I've researched these new mirrorless full frame cameras, The Sony A7RIII, which has a 42mp sensor, quickly rose to the top of my list. Sony also has an A7III, which has 24mp. I wasn't considering the A9 (way too expensive) or the A7SII (don't need the extreme low light capabilities) but I had been carefully studying the other two Sony offerings as they were the only full frame mirrorless cameras I could afford. (Leica anyone?) In September, Nikon has introduced two new full frame mirrorless cameras and Canon one. Are those game changers? Would any of these now rise to the top of my list?
No doubt you already know that the Nikon Z7 is a 45.7mp camera, very similar to the D850, but a completely different sensor containing Phase Detection Autofocus Points in the sensor itself. Nikon also introduced a 24mp full frame mirrorless camera, the Z6, sort of a little brother with many of the same, some better, capabilities. Shortly after Nikon introduced the two cameras I just mentioned, Canon introduced their initial version of a full frame mirrorless camera, the EOS-R. At 30.3mp, it splits the gap between the Sonys and Nikons. Many think Canon used the same sensor as in their 5D Mark IV, which is an excellent camera in all ways. I don't think they did as this camera as PDAF points in the sensor as well. All three entries by Nikon and Canon, in my opinion and contrary to many YouTube and Internet geniuses out there, are rock solid and fully competent entries into the full frame mirrorless world. (I find it interesting when an individual "fully reviews" or makes definitive statements about an item when they have never held it nor used a production copy).
The early reviews of these three cameras were brutal. We've gone over that before. The three cameras just introduced may not have all of the features each of the reviewers deem necessary, but I would venture to say that most of the photographic population doesn't need 2 memory cards or want to pay for 4K video at 60fps and 10-bit recording as well as instantaneous everything else. They want a solid, well built camera which will serve them for some time to come. Some features are important to some photographers, other features to others, but few photographers demand every feature at the fastest speed possible as reviewers would suggest. As I've said in the past, if you listen to the "experts" out there, you would think everyone was only interested in top of the line cameras equipped with the best of everything and nothing less. Some are. Not many, I would venture to guess.
After carefully studying all entries by Sony and now by Nikon and Canon, I don't think any of these cameras are really attractive enough to me to reach in my wallet and spend several thousand dollars (US) of my hard earned money. The Sony A7RII comes closest but isn't quite there. I look at the cameras by Nikon and Canon as "place holder" cameras. Nikon and Canon needed to introduce something now to give their current users a mirrorless option and stop future defections to other brands. In my opinion, these three cameras are directed only at their respective current customers and are not out there to try to attract camera gear owners who currently own other brands. Nikon and Canon, being old, conservative companies, at this point are really just putting their big toe into the water so see how warm it is. Everything they do is well thought out and change is slow. However, I predict that the next generation of cameras from these two behemoths will be much more interesting and will be aimed at not only keeping their current customers happy but to also attract users of other brands of cameras. I seldom recommend buying the first generation of any product (even though I sometimes break my own rule on that) and I don't want to buy any of these three. As I said, they all are good cameras but none have the combination of features I would want for such a high price.
If I'm going to spend a lot of cash on a full frame digital camera, I want it to fully meet my needs now and for the future as well as give me image quality I don't now have. In the same vein, I don't go to buy a new car or truck and take whatever they have on the lot. If I'm going to spend that kind of money on a new vehicle, I want to ensure it has what I deem necessary to meet my needs for the next many years. Same with a camera. At my age, I no longer think I need the latest and greatest and the number of cameras I plan on buying in the future is diminishing, so I want to get something that will last me a long, long time. Therefore, I want to "future proof" it with just the right attributes.
From everything I've seen and read about the Sonys, Nikons and Canons, none are exactly what I want. None will give me more than I have with my Fujifilm X-T2 and my Olympus E-M1 Mark II, with the exception of a larger sensor and its associated attributes that only really come into play when photographing at what I call "the edges." For general photography, the differences are marginal if they can be seen at all in my images. I could buy 2 new Fujifilm cameras for the price of one high pixel Sony or Nikon camera. Then I would have to buy the lenses, extra batteries, very expensive XQD memory cards, L-Brackets, etc. That becomes quite an expense, hurting even more if the camera you buy isn't quite what you want it to be. Even after selling what I have the net expense is still too high.
For now, I think I'll sit back and see what is coming next year. There might be something introduced that can entice me to spend money on a full frame camera, lenses and associated accessories.
BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE! (like the infomercials) AND A SERIOUS CHANGE OF HEART!
Since we have returned from our road trip and I have had an opportunity to very closely look at all of my almost 2000 images, I've changed my mind about buying a full frame digital camera. I found that I am completely and fully satisfied and happy with the image quality I am getting from my current gear. Yes, its true. The images I made from my Fujifilm X-T2 and Olympus E-M1 Mark II are extraordinarily crisp, detailed, sharp and have a wonderful color rendition. There wasn't a single time that I found that I wished for more dynamic range, less noise, more detail or some other thing that my two cameras don't currently have. I realized I don't need full frame. Not at all. The difference between full frame and my gear is so minute (considering the types of photography I do) that buying a full frame camera would be a fool's errand for me. Your mileage may vary. YMMV
I've really examined my images closely for quality as my plan is to have three to four of my road trip images enlarged to 20" X 30" (50 X 76 cm), matted, framed and hang them proudly on my walls as a reminder of our experiences. I now find I have no need to spend a lot of money to buy something I really don't need. The yearning for full frame is completely gone!
I was all ready to pull the trigger and buy a full frame digital camera when we returned from our trip as a Christmas present to myself this fall. I'm glad we took that road trip as it reinforced that I wanted a full frame camera but I really didn't need a full frame camera. Another benefit of road trips! Lol.
Lessons learned: Don't worry about what you don't have. Don't assume you need better or more. Use what you have. Go out and make photographs. It is the art not the gear that is important.
*Trademarked by Michael Buffer.
Join me over at Instagram @dennisamook or my website, www.dennismook.com.
Thanks for looking. Enjoy!
Dennis A. Mook
All content on this blog is © 2013-2018 Dennis A. Mook. All Rights Reserved. Feel free to point to this blog from your website with full attribution. Permission may be granted for commercial use. Please contact Mr. Mook to discuss permission to reproduce the blog posts and/or images.
I am kind of in the same boat, only difference I plunged all my Fuji gear and am now completely relying on m43 (EM1.2 and Pro lenses). While I am very happy with what I have I am also missing FF. And Actually I tested the Z7 and am very intrigued by it. But is changing or adding this camera and some lenses now at this point in time appropriate for me?
ReplyDeleteMot really as I said I am pretty happy with what I have and I also think it is better to wait for the next iteration of the Nikon mirrorless cameras to fulfil all my desires and needs. So I also sit back for now and wait what Nikon brings over the next 12-24 months. And then I most definitely would add this camera with a selection of the then available Nikkor S lenses to my arsenal.
The issue gets even more complicated when you try to determine which Nikon lenses will do justice to the 47mp sensor. When I looked into it, I found that almost all of them cost over $2000 US. So, if I bought the three zooms, that is another $5000+ expense. I thought it was rather futile to buy a 47mp camera then buy lenses that will actually reduce the resolution that sensor provides. There aren’t many inexpensive lenses that can resolve 47mp from center to edge. Also, I think whatever Panasonic introduces is going to be very interesting as they have had time to sit back and see what everyone else has done. Then of course, Olympus is supposed to introduce an Uber camera in January. That will also be of great interest to me. It only gets better and better for us photographers!
DeleteDennis: I just had the chance to do some bird photography with my Fuji X-T1 and 100-400. The results satisfy me completely with regard to file quality. The AF was dicey, at times, and the motor drive was a bit slow, however. So, I'm looking at an X-T3 or, perhaps, a Panasonic G9. If the latter, I'd have to switch lens systems. I do like the Panasonic 6k photo options and smaller lens sizes. Thoughts?
ReplyDeleteThe 100-400mm lens is terrific, in my opinion. I've owned two copies and both of mine have been sharp wide open, without and with the Fujifilm 1.4X tele-converter. Stopped down a stop and it excels as good as any lens I've owned. If you switched systems, you would have to spend twice the money, camera and new long lens. Then add extra batteries, accessories, tele-converter and it comes to quite a bit. If upgrading only your camera, you keep your expenses to a minimum.
DeleteI have the Olympus E-M1 Mark II and I also have the Olympus 300mm f/4 PRO lens. Another super sharp, fast focusing, terrific lens. Very expensive, however. Also, being a prime, you are somewhat limited in its utility. Keeping the 100-400mm Fujifilm lens makes more sense to me. Let me tell you another reason why.
The X-T3 has a feature very similar to the one in my Olympus E-M1 Mark II. Hold that thought. It also has a vastly superior EVF to the X-T2 and Olympus, almost like looking through an optical viewfinder. Additionally, the it has PDAF focusing points across just about the entire screen. Couple the focus points with its much faster and much surer focusing than the X-T2 (which was better than the X-T1's) and the combination of the X-T3 and the 100-400mm lens, to me makes a great birding kit. Now for that thought you held.
A new feature on the X-T3, very similar to one on my Olympus Mark II, is the ability to hold the shutter button halfway down and the camera will start continuously buffering a number of images (I don't remember how many). When the shutter is fully pressed down, as if you wanted to capture peak action, the last number of buffered images are immediately written to the memory card and the additional images you captured after the full shutter press are then recorded also. That means you never miss peak action, even if your reflexes are a bit laggy, like mine. Lol It is a wonderful feature and I've written about it in this blog using my Olympus. I'm glad Fujifilm added it to the X-T3 as I know I will use it for bird and wildlife photography.
I have no experience with the G9. However, I've read in numerous places in the m4/3 forums and sites that those who own it seem a bit disappointed in the G9's ability for track focus compared to the E-M1 Mark II. Personally, I don't know. I'm only relaying what others have said. The other thing I've read about the camera is the very light shutter release. Adaptation to that should come with experience.
I hope this helps. Let me know if I can help in any other way.
Thanks, Dennis! I appreciate your thoughtful response. Switching systems would be costly for sure. I am attracted to the features of the G9. Good to hear about the X-T3's buffering feature. Definitely nice!
DeleteDo the right thing, then, Dennis. Take the money you would have spent on a camera and buy your wife a mink coat! Although discretion is advised since PeTA's galactic headquarters is 30 miles south of us.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your suggestion Mike. But I don’t think she likes fur. I’ll be better off keeping it in my wallet for a while. Lol
DeleteI had a similar experience but bought my XT2 some time ago on a whim specifically for portraiture. That camera has changed my life and I haven't thought about full frame since. My EM1 MkII is still the main camera for most things but the new AF of the XT3 is calling to me and if I succumb to it the EM1 will take second chair because that's all that was a little lacking for me on the Fuji.
ReplyDeleteThe X-T3’s autofocusing is very much better than the T2’s. AF points across the entire EVF are a nice bonus. Don’t ask me yet how I know! Lol.
ReplyDelete