Canon FF mirrorless...

RPhotos said:
One does already... The Sony A7 full frame and was available for around £550 recently hard to get a better bargain full frame mirrorless than that
Click to expand...


Keith was advised about that Amazon deal.

I nearly went for it myself but the other half would've killed me.
 
RPhotos said:
One does already... The Sony A7 full frame and was available for around £550 recently hard to get a better bargain full frame mirrorless than that
Click to expand...

What was the original price?
 
GreenNinja67 said:
Keith was advised about that Amazon deal.

I nearly went for it myself but the other half would've killed me.
Click to expand...

The body being cheap doesn't attract me to the expensive lenses, I'd end up adapting Canon lenses probably, so then why not get a Canon, the 6D is also nicely priced these days but I at least want a tilting LCD.

GreenNinja67 said:
£719 on Amazon with the 28-70 lens plus you get £150 cashback from Sony.
Click to expand...

I mean the original price of the camera upon release?

When I said I wish one of them would have the balls to do a cheap FF ML, I mean from the off, new tech, reasonably priced lenses, they can keep the 4K, one slot will do the job, make it all plastic even!
 
Last edited:
GreenNinja67 said:
Keith was advised about that Amazon deal.

I nearly went for it myself but the other half would've killed me.
Click to expand...

looking at the time stamp not sure what has happened with the posting of the message, definately wrote it early but the laptop died and only recently re powered it on must of only just uploaded the reply or some thing

Cagey75 said:
What was the original price?
Click to expand...

GreenNinja67 said:
£719 on Amazon with the 28-70 lens plus you get £150 cashback from Sony.
Click to expand...

Launch price or current price, its a bit wild to expect the latest and greatist features on a budget, something has to give to make it a budget, thats a bit like asking ford to sell you a top of the range focus for the price of a bottom of the range model.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
The body being cheap doesn't attract me to the expensive lenses, I'd end up adapting Canon lenses probably, so then why not get a Canon, the 6D is also nicely priced these days but I at least want a tilting LCD.



I mean the original price of the camera upon release?

When I said I wish one of them would have the balls to do a cheap FF ML, I mean from the off, new tech, reasonably priced lenses, they can keep the 4K, one slot will do the job, make it all plastic even!
Click to expand...

Any budget full frame DSLRS around?
 
RPhotos said:
Launch price or current price, its a bit wild to expect the latest and greatist features on a budget, something has to give to make it a budget, thats a bit like asking ford to sell you a top of the range focus for the price of a bottom of the range model.
Click to expand...

No, it isn't. Just because nobody has yet done it for FF does not mean it cannot or should not be done. Canon did it for lower end models, look at the 4000D. I can dream anyway .... even an M50 with a FF sensor would have done it.

RPhotos said:
Any budget full frame DSLRS around?
Click to expand...

I prefer ML, but I'd take it - the 6DII is about the best option there, and from what I've seen and read, it's not that much better than an 80D, which can be got for half the price.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
No, it isn't. Just because nobody has yet done it for FF does not mean it cannot or should not be done. Canon did it for lower end models, look at the 4000D. I can dream anyway .... even an M50 with a FF sensor would have done it.



I prefer ML, but I'd take it - the 6DII is about the best option there, and from what I've seen and read, it's not that much better than an 80D, which can be got for half the price.
Click to expand...


Whats the launch price of the canon 6d mark2? ($1999 to save you googling) exactly the same as the sony a7iii, so not really a budget camera, unless that is what you call a budget camera then you have 2 brands to pick from nikon and sony both have brand new cameras at the price point

4000d, 9 point af only f5.6 cross type at the centre, digic4+ processor, hardly current tech, more like they raided the old parts draw to get it to the low price.
 
RPhotos said:
One does already... The Sony A7 full frame and was available for around £550 recently hard to get a better bargain full frame mirrorless than that
Click to expand...

Hah! I took that very deal, really pleased with it.

But the thing is, it turned out to be a gateway drug, I have spent a further £1100 on lenses in the ten days since I got it.

No regrets, as long as 'she' doesnt find out.
 
chris malcolm said:
Or look at the repeated attempts of Microsoft to produce a good mobile phone. That's as hilarious as a good binge watch of Laurel & Hardy movies!
Click to expand...

OI! They were sunk by a lack of third party apps but other than that the OS UI was pleasant to use compared to Android and Apple and they had some reasonably nice hardware designs.
 
RPhotos said:
Whats the launch price of the canon 6d mark2? ($1999 to save you googling) exactly the same as the sony a7iii, so not really a budget camera, unless that is what you call a budget camera then you have 2 brands to pick from nikon and sony both have brand new cameras at the price point

4000d, 9 point af only f5.6 cross type at the centre, digic4+ processor, hardly current tech, more like they raided the old parts draw to get it to the low price.
Click to expand...

I didn't say the 4000D was anything special, I wouldn't touch it with yours tbh, plastic mount? :eek: I just used it as a quick example to show how Canon do consider the budget shooter, to save you googling :P

I can want whatever I like, it's not going to happen either way so I'm not sure why anyone is trying to convince me of anything.
 
IntenseJason said:
Hah! I took that very deal, really pleased with it.

But the thing is, it turned out to be a gateway drug, I have spent a further £1100 on lenses in the ten days since I got it.

No regrets, as long as 'she' doesnt find out.
Click to expand...
That's just cameras in general though, i would say realistically the camera body alone counts for 25-50% of what you spend, by the time you add stuff like other lenses, tripods, bags, filters, flashes, Adobe subscription, that new computer to edit on, hard drives, printer etc, the list is endless....... unless your perfectly happy with the kit lens like most who buy an entry level dslr are, but then they are mearly a gateway to hopefully getting you get an enthusiast model and then spending the big bucks on the add-ons. or next years shiny camera that has this must have feature that we are trained to want, like phones, laptops, cars etc
 
Well now it is official I must say I'm a bit more underwhelmed with this than the Nikon's, which were also a bit disappointing to me. :(

Canon and Nikon seem to be banking on their 'name's' and brand loyalty to cover the very poor first FF mirrorless entry's into the market imho. Pricey and lower specced. For anyone not biased by the well know brands the Sony alpha cameras look more attractive after the Canon and Nikon first attempts into this new sector.

The one card slot, done to death I know, :rolleyes: but still has to be mentioned. ;) Both very poor fps with AF and/or AE, and very poor buffer, though the Canon slightly better for buffer depth, but the worse for fps. Both the Canon and the Nikon should not be having buffer and speed problems with the cards they are using, and the performance of their DSLR's for similar or lower prices with regards to buffer size, and especially buffer writing to the memory card, particularly Nikon. I've said it before, but the D500, 20Mp, can shoot 200 12bit RAW files, and lifting the finger off the shutter with the fast XQD enables the cameras to go again. I know the Z7 files are a lot larger, which will slow down the camera data throughput, but the Nikon's don't seem to be taking full advantage of having the XQD cards. The Sony a9, and even some of the Nikon 1 cameras, show that high fps with AF and AE shouldn't have been a problem.

The prices of the lenses, :eek: if not going for small size, but aiming for high quality, seemingly disregarding size, means these lenses need to be some of the best ever against their competition at similar focal lengths and maximum apertures to justify the prices imho.

For Canon, the 1.7x crop for 4k seems very poor.

The good idea is adding filters to some of the adapters. That is thinking outside the box and using the adapter as something more than just adding space between the lens and the sensor. :clap:

Looks like Canon have done a proper battery grip, contoured and with buttons to control the camera when vertical, which Nikon seem to have not done. :rolleyes:
 
Cagey75 said:
I didn't say the 4000D was anything special, I wouldn't touch it with yours tbh, plastic mount? :eek: I just used it as a quick example to show how Canon do consider the budget shooter, to save you googling :p

I can want whatever I like, it's not going to happen either way so I'm not sure why anyone is trying to convince me of anything.
Click to expand...


Sorry not trying to convince or have a go at you, just amuses me all the posts on this forum and elsewhere that appear constantly complaining how expensive cameras are etc, and making claims of wanting the new tech at the old tech second-hand price point. whilst sony have been pretty aggressive in releasing new bodys (9 full frame mirrorless options) they have been pretyy good at feeding the older bodies down the market at lower price points, maybe they would get a better response by rebadging the a7ii as a new camera with the z battery calling it the a6 and realeasing that for £1200, rather than continuing to sell it as the a7ii for the same price.
have put my back out earlier so currently on rest duty and to much internet access, with nowhere else to go, so got sucked into the rabbit hole of replying, must escape and find something else to do
 
RPhotos said:
That's just cameras in general though, i would say realistically the camera body alone counts for 25-50% of what you spend, by the time you add stuff like other lenses, tripods, bags, filters, flashes, Adobe subscription, that new computer to edit on, hard drives, printer etc, the list is endless....... unless your perfectly happy with the kit lens like most who buy an entry level dslr are, but then they are mearly a gateway to hopefully getting you get an enthusiast model and then spending the big bucks on the add-ons. or next years shiny camera that has this must have feature that we are trained to want, like phones, laptops, cars etc
Click to expand...


I Agree, the point I was trying to make (Badly) is that a budget FF body is all very well, Canon or Nikon could certainly do this. But FF requires a step up in glass, kit lenses simply don't satisfy most people.
 
redhed17 said:
The good idea is adding filters to some of the adapters. That is thinking outside the box and using the adapter as something more than just adding space between the lens and the sensor. :clap:
. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The variable ND bit is super specialised, but some great thinking from canon, definatley something for the video market, which is at odds with the body, so knowing canon there is bound to be some r mount video camera bound to.

you can get a third party canon to sony adapter with a built-in nd filter, offered so much potential and as a dumb adapter works awesome (i shoot a lot of timelapse so great for that) but then then smart version they made was awful in my testing with it, the nd bit worked, but i had such variable luck with the thing actually working gave up on it, and now the switch to sony is fully done its no longer an option :(
 
RPhotos said:
Sorry not trying to convince or have a go at you, just amuses me all the posts on this forum and elsewhere that appear constantly complaining how expensive cameras are etc, and making claims of wanting the new tech at the old tech second-hand price point. whilst sony have been pretty aggressive in releasing new bodys (9 full frame mirrorless options) they have been pretyy good at feeding the older bodies down the market at lower price points, maybe they would get a better response by rebadging the a7ii as a new camera with the z battery calling it the a6 and realeasing that for £1200, rather than continuing to sell it as the a7ii for the same price.
have put my back out earlier so currently on rest duty and to much internet access, with nowhere else to go, so got sucked into the rabbit hole of replying, must escape and find something else to do
Click to expand...

Sony's lenses are too pricey for me, I have already stated this. No point in a reasonably priced body with expensive lenses. I think i'll just skip on FF this time. I shot it in the past and when I 'dropped' to APSC and then to M43, never really felt much loss, I don't even know why I'm looking at these new FFML models, maybe just sucked into the hype

Irish pricing btw: https://www.connscameras.ie/p/canon-eos-r/p-8714574659978

You know where Canon can shove that!
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
Sony's lenses are too pricey for me, I have already stated this. No point in a reasonably priced body with expensive lenses. I think i'll just skip on FF this time. I shot it in the past and when I 'dropped' to APSC and then to M43, never really felt much loss, I don't even know why I'm looking at these new FFML models, maybe just sucked into the hype

Irish pricing btw: https://www.connscameras.ie/p/canon-eos-r/p-8714574659978

You know where Canon can shove that!
Click to expand...
lol think everyone gets sucked in to hype, must just be a slow day for everyone.

Sony glass is the same price, if not cheaper in places that canon and nikon, if you compare new to new prices, if your comparing new to second hand, or even second hand to second then its not really fair due to the volume and time canon and nikon have been selling lens for so, so more on the market, drives prices down etc, here are a couple of lens options comparing prices on new current versions...


RPhotos said:
Sony gets a lot of crap about expensive lenses... here are some comparisons

Canon 70-200 2.8 MK3 - £2149 (f4 £1299)
Nikon 70-200e 2.8 - £2849 (f4 £1349)
Sony 70-200gm 2.8 £2499 (f4 £1250)

Canon 85mm 1.4 £1379
Nikon 85mm 1.4 £1549
Sony 85mm 1.4 £1649

16-35mm f4
Canon £999
Nikon £1169
Sony £1049

24-70 f4

Nikon Z £999
Sony FE £900
Click to expand...

Some where aps-c and m4/3 definitatly has an advantage over full frame is the smaller lenes meaning cheaper lenses
 
Last edited:
I just wonder if Canon decided they couldn’t get IBIS to work any better than their current lens IS and just left it out. The latest MkII IS is pretty decent.


Quite like the idea of being able to set the control ring on the R lenses to change either iso, aperture, shutter speed, ex comp, either having it act directly or in conjunction with a half press on the shutter button. Can also change its direction of operation. Also the adaptor does the same.


But it’s not for me. Just too expensive. I just don’t get the whole mirrorless thing anyway. Sure I can see the advantage of no mirror and better AF cover but where’s the next big step coming from? Just as DSLRs ran up against the buffer of what’s possible so mirrorless will do the same eventually and we will just see small incremental gains and more gimmicks that 99% will never use.
 
robinsslee said:
Yes, I am so close to consider A9 + 400mm 2.8 to be honest... but whilst waiting for the Sony 400mm 2.8 FE, I am vary about the performance of the adapters (MC-11 or MB V) on AF tracking and ability to use 20fps on adapted lenses.
Click to expand...

When your ready, let me know as I see if I can get you a bundle deal.
I’d love the FE 400mm 2.8 GM but hard to justify £10.5k when I don’t shoot much lol.
I would like some more GM primes, macro and maybe the FE 100-400mm GM. :D
 
jonneymendoza said:
check from the 3min mark:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1qOIibc15M
You cant charge the camera via usb. i find that useful for my sony as i am able to just travel without the battery charger and just use any usb cable and charger to charge my camera . Also can use a power brick which was very useful when i was camping
Click to expand...

Yeah it’s a real ballache packing a charger for a LP-E6N.
 
The lenses looks amazing (expensive too) but if these are the grade of lenses they are going for, the system as a whole will be great once they start keep up with the competition on the body.
 
One thought. The adaptor with ND or polariser slot in, it will only allow EF lenses due to the flange distance so if you are a landscape shooter....this might be a cheap and compact way to carry less stuff (cheap if you think changing body is cheap)...1 filter for all lenses. Pretty neat.
 
There are a few things which I think are a mistake

1 - single card
2 - lack of joystick
3 - no wheel
4 - no 4k full frame video (although i don't care personally)
5 - relatively bad AF speed vs competition
6 - lack of IS
7 - dedicated charger

A few of those might be just for this body (like lower end model always lack something) and the model up will fix it, like the single card, joy stick and AF speed. However I get this impression that IBIS won't be here for a while, not in a few years seeing they are putting IS in the launch lenses, that's 2/4 lenses have IS. It looks to me they are putting their eggs in the lens IS basket.

I am sure one day it will have IBIS but i can't see it happening until mk2 which is ages away.

The good…

1 - proper touch screen
2 - looks to be a great grip size
3 - proper battery GRIP :p
4 - EVF and rear LCD looks decent
5 - Flip screen and full size mic and headphone input with 10bit and C-Log
6 - great lenses, almost want to buy a body to try them

Almost.
 
Last edited:
As I know nothing about these ff, but how do they compare to the original a7 on release? Also how many years was it after the original did we get the mk3?
 
geejgee said:
As I know nothing about these ff, but how do they compare to the original a7 on release? Also how many years was it after the original did we get the mk3?
Click to expand...

This is probably better than the A72 (minus the IBIS) but behind the A73. It is similar to the A7R2 in that it can do Eye AF but not in continuous, single card.

I'd say Canon is about a generation behind. They are also recycling a lot of tech from other bodies that they have. The most innovative stuff they have done is in the lenses, not the body. Say what you will, 28-70/2.0 is ridiculous, who would have expected that (leaks excluded).
 
Raymond Lin said:
There are a few things which I think are a mistake

1 - single card
2 - lack of joystick
3 - no wheel
4 - no 4k full frame video (although i don't care personally)
5 - relatively bad AF speed vs competition
6 - lack of IS
7 - dedicated charger

A few of those might be just for this body (like lower end model always lack something) and the model up will fix it, like the single card, joy stick and AF speed. However I get this impression that IBIS won't be here for a while, not in a few years seeing they are putting IS in the launch lenses, that's 2/4 lenses have IS. It looks to me they are putting their eggs in the lens IS basket.

I am sure one day it will have IBIS but i can't see it happening until mk2 which is ages away.
Click to expand...

Basically 75% of important stuff and the reasons to move to mirrorless.o_O:confused:
 
Ok, finally got a chance to read the Engadget break down which seems like it covers it pretty well.

Thoughts are, I get the impression this is a better first attenpt over Nikon's. There are some things which should be there but just simply are not for reasons which we can only speculate such as IBIS and dual slots but anyway, they're not there so what do we have.

The ergnomics looks interesting, it seems like it's got a decent sized grip. The new lenses sure do look lovely as well. It's obviously not a "pro" camera but I don't get the impression it's trying to be one either. However the price does dictate that it's up at the upper end of the enthusiasts range.

It was never going to beat the A73 on a first attempt so anyone disappointed it doesn't just set themselves up for failure. When does a 1st attempt beats a 3rd iteration?

What this along with the Nikon has given is the Sony the start of some actual competition. Yeah the Sony is better, but overtime it will balance out more, in value and lenses and also technical advances.

I think we won't here hummings of a 2nd gen R (2R maybe?) Until the 5D4 begins reaching its end of life. I know if I was already invested in Canon I would be taking a serious look at this camera as a next one. Really looking forward to seeing how well the adapters perform with existing lenses. Also I saw on wex that it is included when buying the body from the get go. Isn't Nikon's extra?

Overall I like it :) looking forward to the press getting their hands on it and reviews popping up.

Also wanted to add. It's not a pro body YET. Next iterations will be is my betting but the lenses are pro level already from the get go. Nice :)

I wonder if they will bring out a cheaper range of lenses to use the new mount for those who don't need fast aperture speeds. But just good optics.
 
Tom Green said:
Basically 75% of important stuff and the reasons to move to mirrorless.o_O:confused:
Click to expand...

I already have a A73 with 3 lenses and a 4th on order, all F/1.4

(technically I also have a 5th one but will be selling it soon, it's only a 1.8)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top