DSLR to Mirrorless

C

CraigV

Suspended / Banned
Messages
41
Name
Craig
Edit My Images
Yes
So as a longterm dslr user (currently d810) I am thinking of jumping ship and getting a mirrorless setup. Main reason is size and weight. I'd love a smaller and lighter camera.

I am totally torn between the Sony a7iii or the fujifilm xt-3.

I do like the idea of owning the Sony but the extensive menu system puts me off.

Does anyone have any opinions on these two cameras?

Cheers.
 
I have the Sony A7iv - to me, the menus are not an issue, but I've only used Sony (A200, A700, A900 previously), so much is familiar.
Note that while the camera may be smaller and lighter with mirrorless, many of the top end FF lenses are just as big (some more so, in then continued race for ever better performance).
Small, light FF lenses do exist, but you have to be selective to get them.

If you do opt for the Sony A7iii, I'd thoroughly recommend Gary Friedmans E-Book for that camera - it explains all the menus and controls, suggested setups. etc.

https://www.friedmanarchives.com/sony-alpha-a7-iii/
 
I can only speak for Fujifilm as I have an XT3. It's a nice camera, and very tactile. But it's old hat now. Is there a particular reason why you're interested in it? I only ask because there are better cameras these days. Technically, at least.
 
Maybe I can help having exactly the same problem with the same camera Nikon D810. I did a lot of research into this looking at several options. Eventually went down theMFT (micro four thirds) route, and the best decision I had made in many years. eventually P/X all my camera gear with Park Cameras and bought the Panasonic G9 with the kit lens 12-60mm f2.8-4.0 . Then the Panasonic G9ii came out so bought that as well. it is mainly the lens weight made the difference for me. Even the big Panasonic 100-400mm lens (200-800 in ff terms) is not a problem the Dual image stablisation on the G9ii and the Panasonic lenses working together was the deciding factor ,supposed to be the best.


Personally I would not touch Sony being very dissapointed with the brand and cameras from past experience.

You mention about extensive menu system ? wrong way of thinking if I may say so. Every camera you can start off in auto mode and let the camera do the work
Then after getting used to that then each individual item it the menu bit by bit and don't look at the whole and panic. If you don't use everything in a large menu or not it is there if you want to and not go later on looking to buy a camera with more features.

Then if used or not the video side of the Panasonic G9ii is truly amazing even at a very low 300 fps far slower than most cameras

straight from pan G9ii camera no editing

View: https://youtu.be/7DzwpPB3Vds

Needless to say I am now a huge fan of the cameras I mentioned above ,also being to update firmware on line via

Camera body (Micro Four Third) | Download | Digital Camera | Digital AV | Support | Panasonic Global

av.jpn.support.panasonic.com av.jpn.support.panasonic.com

which other makes don't always make available without a fee
 
Last edited:
Sony will give you better performance, better IQ and better AF amongst other things. Fuji will be smaller and lighter. Both have a great range of brand and 3rd party lenses available in virtually every focal length you could want. Don't worry about the menu's - once set up there's no need to go into them.
 
With all due respect Lee I don't understand you claim of better IQ without which cameras you are comparing with. Or even better AF if you are only using one make.
I often find claims made don't stand up In the real world without some kind of proof. Even cameras and lenses can vary within the same make and mdel or even what your seeing them through (monitor wise)

I would love to see your comparison of the same photo -same settings - taken with say something like your Sony and my Pana G9ii to back up your claim

Also the video side is amazing with the G9 camera even with poor lighting

View: https://youtu.be/AsHaLD5bJK0
 
Last edited:
The complexity of modern menus, not just with Sony, is a good thing as it makes the camera and its functions easy to customise but with modern cameras you have buttons and sometimes dials you can assign a function to and with Sony and possibly other makes too you can have your own fn menu into which you put the things you most want. I honestly only go into the menu to format the card (and even that can often be assigned to a custom menu) and set the clock twice a year. Sony menu complexity is IMO a complete non issue as you just don't need to get involved. It's like having 1,000 tv channels and only watching 2 or 3, the extra which you don't see are just not a problem.
 
Last edited:
realspeed said:
With all due respect Lee I don't understand you claim of better IQ without which cameras you are comparing with. Or even better AF if you are only using one make.
I often find claims made don't stand up In the real world without some kind of proof. Even cameras and lenses can vary within the same make and mdel or even what your seeing them through (monitor wise)
Click to expand...

I think the burden is on you if you think any Fuji APS-C camera and lens combination can match a FF Sony set up of similar tech generation for IQ and focus ability.

Panasonic MFT like the G9x can make sense but as a long term user of MFT I only see an advantage for MFT when looking at lens size and especially the size of longer lenses (like the 45-150mm and 100-400mm I have) and thinking more about size and weight of the lenses rather than IQ.
 
Last edited:
CraigV said:
So as a longterm dslr user (currently d810) I am thinking of jumping ship and getting a mirrorless setup. Main reason is size and weight. I'd love a smaller and lighter camera.

I am totally torn between the Sony a7iii or the fujifilm xt-3.

I do like the idea of owning the Sony but the extensive menu system puts me off.

Does anyone have any opinions on these two cameras?

Cheers.
Click to expand...

I have an A7III and also an A7cII. If the A7cII appeals to you it could be a better option than the A7III.
 
The main issue is that which ever camera one uses and get used to is going to believe their's is the best, brand loyality. Before I change to Panasonic nothing would make me believe anything was better I even became a Listed Nikon Professional User No2154667 to be procise.
However due mainly to age problems I found the Nikon D810 my latest version was getting too heave to used. Not so much the camera but more the lenses that fit it.
This forces me to change over to Panasonicand MFT. So now my loyality has gone to Panasonic which suits me. Not just for image stablisation but also for video work. A shown I am quite happy to post videos/photos from the panasonic cameras i own, something I don't see others doing and I wonder why not????

P1013727.jpg

Panasonic G9 Lens 400mm (800mm ff) - iso 1250- f6.3 1/640 sec . Distance 67ft (20.5 mtr) Hand held
 
Last edited:
realspeed said:
With all due respect Lee I don't understand you claim of better IQ without which cameras you are comparing with. Or even better AF if you are only using one make.
I often find claims made don't stand up In the real world without some kind of proof. Even cameras and lenses can vary within the same make and mdel or even what your seeing them through (monitor wise)

I would love to see your comparison of the same photo -same settings - taken with say something like your Sony and my Pana G9ii to back up your claim

Also the video side is amazing with the G9ii camera even with poor lighting

View: https://youtu.be/AsHaLD5bJK0
Click to expand...

:ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: Thank you. That made me chuckle.

I have an A7, A7Riii and X100f.

I can assure you, that the performance, AF and IQ from the Sony bodies is much better than that of the X100f :)

Edit...... I also had an XE2 and 23/1.4 and 56/1.2 for a couple of months back when I just had the A7. Obviously that outcome explains itself.
 
Last edited:
Lee I see your reluctance to show the difference between anything. So I can only draw one conclusion which is obvious. Many make claim they can't for one reason or another they can't substantiate.
So let me see at least one video made by one of your cameras that is unedited.
 
Last edited:
realspeed said:
Lee I see your reluctance to show the difference between anything. So I can only draw one conclusion which is obvious. Many make claim they can't for one reason or another they can't substantiate.
So let me see at least one video made by one of your cameras that is unedited.
Click to expand...

I don't know how to shoot video on the Sony's. Why would I want to shoot video anyway?

I'm telling you that the general performance, the IQ & the AF from the A7Riii is better than the X100f. Are you disagreeing with that? Are you saying that the X100f is better?
 
Is APS-C out of the question? I have a full-frame Sony and an APS-C, and while the camera's aren't wildly different in size, the lenses sure are. If I had to use full-frame lenses all the time, the difference between a full-frame body and an APS-C body wouldn't mean much to me.
 
I switched to olympus several years ago due to heart failure and still using the system which has never let me down , good all rounder under most circumstances , but I have also recently gone down the route of a D500 nikon dslr which although great is showing its age limitations , so last week having the lenses I switched to a nikon Z6ii as wex are selling off a lot of as new models cheap .. its been a good choice so far and getting some good images though its still a learning curve .. and if I can learn new menus at 80 I'm sure you can
 
I’ll have to agree with others that if you’re aiming to downsize then a full frame mirrorless is pure smoke and mirrors.

Whilst my R6 is smaller and lighter than the 6d, and indeed the APSC DSLR’s I had, the lenses are mostly serious kit.

I’d be aiming for a Nikon APSC mirrorless in your shoes, less of a learning curve.
 
realspeed said:
With all due respect Lee I don't understand you claim of better IQ without which cameras you are comparing with.
Click to expand...
It's basic physics; you cannot discard light without paying an IQ penalty. And that same light (brightness/contrast) affects autofocus as well; particularly so with mirrorless cameras.

You may be able to negate the difference by a change in technology/generation. And you may be able to compensate to some degree with unequal processing (video). Plus 1 stop difference (FF/APS) isn't a big deal if you have a decent amount of light to start with. But, as a general statement it holds true.

Sony Corleone said:
Is APS-C out of the question?
Click to expand...
The XT-3 is APS-C...
 
Last edited:
You can have a very small full frame mirrorless set up if you don’t mind sacrificing some other things. While I have all of the best Sony gear I also have an A7CII for a lightweight set up with a range of small lenses.

Viltrox 14mm f/4
Viltrox 20mm f/2.8
Sigma 35mm f/2
Samyang 45mm f/1.8
Samyang 75mm f/1.8

There are lots of other very small light weight options available as well.

However anything longer than 85mm and you are into lenses that are similar sizes to their DSLR equivalents.


Personally I would skip the A7III as it has the older menus system. The newer camera’s from the A7IV onwards all has the newer more easy to understand menu. Lots of other improvements as well of course with a.f etc.

Probably just comes down to what you want to photograph and the lenses you need.

As already mentioned above the APSC mirrorless lenses are much smaller as a rule so while that’s an option I previously had a Sony A6400 which while very capable lacked the I.Q of its full frame big brothers.

As for M43. I had an Olympus OM-1 their pro lenses and some primes for one day. Image quality of M43 was not for me at all. I didn’t even have it for a full day only a matter of hours and swapped it all in for the A7CII and some glass.
 
LeeRatters said:
I don't know how to shoot video on the Sony's. Why would I want to shoot video anyway?

I'm telling you that the general performance, the IQ & the AF from the A7Riii is better than the X100f. Are you disagreeing with that? Are you saying that the X100f is better?
Click to expand...
I don't think there is any disagreeing with that (unless choosing very specific examples like an old FF sensors against a new APS-C sensor) since the bigger FF sensor will offer better image quality than an APS-C or m4/3 sensor. The question is more whether the increased size/weight and cost of a full frame body are worth it over a crop body.

I agree with Phil V though that if I was wanting to go for a smaller and lighter set up from a FF DSLR I'd be looking at APS-C or m4/3, I went from a FF DSLR setup to a FF mirrorless set up for performance reasons but while the body is a bit smaller I don't feel it makes much real world difference looking at the package of body and lenses.
 
realspeed said:
With all due respect Lee I don't understand you claim of better IQ without which cameras you are comparing with. Or even better AF if you are only using one make.
Click to expand...
realspeed said:
Lee I see your reluctance to show the difference between anything. So I can only draw one conclusion which is obvious. Many make claim they can't for one reason or another they can't substantiate.
So let me see at least one video made by one of your cameras that is unedited.
Click to expand...


You have clearly never used a Fuji in your life as you are talking out of your posterior.

Fuji's produce stunning images. The colours are beautiful.

But they are prone to heavy noise from anything above 6400 ISO and the reliability of their AF is dreadful.

In comparison any Sony after the A7II would knock one out of the park.

The only downside is that the cameras are soulless and feel like using a computer.
 
Last edited:
For downsizing Fuji is a good bet - mainly as the lenses are smaller. They have good quality lenses designed for the smaller sensor size. A slightly smaller FF body, with a few suitable lenses isn't going to be much smaller than a DSLR set up.
 
Craikeybaby said:
For downsizing Fuji is a good bet - mainly as the lenses are smaller. They have good quality lenses designed for the smaller sensor size. A slightly smaller FF body, with a few suitable lenses isn't going to be much smaller than a DSLR set up.
Click to expand...


Especially if you stick a battery pack on the body.

My X-H2s was much lighter than a 1Dx, even with the grip, but not that vastly different to an R3 with a 70-200/4.
 
Where are any photo examples ??????,?unedited straight from camera
 
Last edited:
realspeed said:
Where are any photo examples ??????,?unedited straight from camera
Click to expand...


I'm not supplying my work photos for your ego trip.

You are talking about cameras that you have never owned to people that have.

Find another playground.
 
JohnMcL7 said:
I don't think there is any disagreeing with that (unless choosing very specific examples like an old FF sensors against a new APS-C sensor) since the bigger FF sensor will offer better image quality than an APS-C or m4/3 sensor. The question is more whether the increased size/weight and cost of a full frame body are worth it over a crop body.
Click to expand...

Well there must be, because a certain person is (sorry, was! He's ignoring my posts now) is demanding proof that the Sony is better than the Fuji. And he wants that proof by me shooting a video for some reason.....

I'm not sure why he can't just Google A7Riii vs X100f and see the scores and marks and pros/cons they are given. Or simply accept that after shooting with the Sony for about 4 years and the Fuji for 2 years I should know which one is the better performer.
 
Last edited:
LeeRatters said:
Well there must be, because a certain person is (sorry, was! He's ignoring my posts now) is demanding proof that the Sony is better than the Fuji. And he wants that proof by me shooting a video for some reason.....

I'm not sure why he can't just Google A7Riii vs X100f and see the scores and marks and pros/cons they are given. Or simply accept that after shooting with the Sony for about 4 years and the Fuji for 2 years I should know which one is the better performer.
Click to expand...

He is best ignored Lee. I learned that a long time ago.
 
DemiLion said:
I'm not supplying my work photos for your ego trip.

You are talking about cameras that you have never owned to people that have.

Find another playground.
Click to expand...
I never said I had owned them if you read back my posts. As for not posting any photos is your choice an rightly so., I have no concerns about posting photos or videos "as already posted" to give an idea of what my Panasonic cameras are capable of From video at 300fps for slo- mo to the 400 (800mm ff)still. I ask why buy a camera and only use half of what it can do?? Video is just as demanding as shooting a still shot with the extra issue of sound. I left the Brownie 127 camera type photo only era years ago, back in the 1950's
I like what I use and no doubt you like what you use so lets leave it there
 
Last edited:
No one gives a crAp about what you think of Panasonic.

The thread (and the initial question) was about one Sony model versus a Fuji one - both seven year old cameras.

Which was all going well until you started to question Lee's opinion about camera models that you have never ever owned.


I'd suggest taking your own original advice - don't talk about kit that you don't know about.

In your case you might want to stick to kittens and dogs.,
 
Let's get back to the topic please everyone - just facts and personal experience with kit, and less point-scoring and argument. Nuff said.
 
Faldrax said:
I have the Sony A7iv - to me, the menus are not an issue, but I've only used Sony (A200, A700, A900 previously), so much is familiar.
Note that while the camera may be smaller and lighter with mirrorless, many of the top end FF lenses are just as big (some more so, in then continued race for ever better performance).
Small, light FF lenses do exist, but you have to be selective to get them.

If you do opt for the Sony A7iii, I'd thoroughly recommend Gary Friedmans E-Book for that camera - it explains all the menus and controls, suggested setups. etc.

https://www.friedmanarchives.com/sony-alpha-a7-iii/
Click to expand...

Thank you for your reply.. I accept lenses will be heavy but with the reduction of the camera body weight would be enough for me.
 
Plain Nev said:
I can only speak for Fujifilm as I have an XT3. It's a nice camera, and very tactile. But it's old hat now. Is there a particular reason why you're interested in it? I only ask because there are better cameras these days. Technically, at least.
Click to expand...
Its the budget tbh.. I calculated theoretical profits from most of cameras and lenses I own and fit in with secondhand fujifilm and sony. Plus I have always admired these cameras in the past. I am not one who falls for the latest and greatest tech.. My workstation is over ten years old but still kicks ass :)
 
realspeed said:
Maybe I can help having exactly the same problem with the same camera Nikon D810. I did a lot of research into this looking at several options. Eventually went down theMFT (micro four thirds) route, and the best decision I had made in many years. eventually P/X all my camera gear with Park Cameras and bought the Panasonic G9 with the kit lens 12-60mm f2.8-4.0 . Then the Panasonic G9ii came out so bought that as well. it is mainly the lens weight made the difference for me. Even the big Panasonic 100-400mm lens (200-800 in ff terms) is not a problem the Dual image stablisation on the G9ii and the Panasonic lenses working together was the deciding factor ,supposed to be the best.


Personally I would not touch Sony being very dissapointed with the brand and cameras from past experience.

You mention about extensive menu system ? wrong way of thinking if I may say so. Every camera you can start off in auto mode and let the camera do the work
Then after getting used to that then each individual item it the menu bit by bit and don't look at the whole and panic. If you don't use everything in a large menu or not it is there if you want to and not go later on looking to buy a camera with more features.

Then if used or not the video side of the Panasonic G9ii is truly amazing even at a very low 300 fps far slower than most cameras

straight from pan G9ii camera no editing

View: https://youtu.be/7DzwpPB3Vds

Needless to say I am now a huge fan of the cameras I mentioned above ,also being to update firmware on line via

Camera body (Micro Four Third) | Download | Digital Camera | Digital AV | Support | Panasonic Global

av.jpn.support.panasonic.com av.jpn.support.panasonic.com

which other makes don't always make available without a fee
Click to expand...
Hi there, thanks for your input. TBH I haven't ever thought about MFTs rourw. I think its worth investigating.
 
LeeRatters said:
Sony will give you better performance, better IQ and better AF amongst other things. Fuji will be smaller and lighter. Both have a great range of brand and 3rd party lenses available in virtually every focal length you could want. Don't worry about the menu's - once set up there's no need to go into them.
Click to expand...
Cheers Lee :)
 
I went from a A7iii to X-Pro3 and now have an X-T5. The Sony IQ is undoubtedly better than the Fujis but I switched for lighter kit. The lenses are a lot smaller and lighter. Straight out if camera the Fuji colours are nicer and I do like the film sims.
Looking through my photos I can tell which are Sony but the pros of the Fuji outweigh (for me) the pros of the Sony
 
Sony Corleone said:
Is APS-C out of the question? I have a full-frame Sony and an APS-C, and while the camera's aren't wildly different in size, the lenses sure are. If I had to use full-frame lenses all the time, the difference between a full-frame body and an APS-C body wouldn't mean much to me.
Click to expand...
Absolutely not :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top