Reasons to go Mirror-less?

[srhmoto]

Motorsport - with having to shoot from behind barriers/safety fencing I need a fairly long lens. (400+mm). The large body of the camera actually helps the balance and changing to a mirrorless probably wouldn't save that much weight on the overall package.

Porsche 3 by Fraser White, on Flickr

Fraser, I shoot quite a bit of motorsport with a mirrorless m4/3 setup using a combination native and legacy lenses. I can only speak for m4/3, but if you compare lenses from other systems that give a similar or equivalent FoV, then the m4/3 lenses are physically smaller and lighter. However, as I couldn't / can't afford to buy the Olympus 300mm f4 Pro lens, my 'big' lens is an old Tokina 300mm f2.8 in Canon FD mount. It's very effective (even allowing for manual focusing), but it totally negates any weight or size savings

Flat Out by Simon Harrison, on Flickr

For me it highlights an ongoing (but diminishing) problem with all mirrorless systems at the moment and that's lens choice.

Cheers,

Simon.

 

[footman]

I'm interested to hear your experience with the Olympus EM1 Mk2 for bird photography. I note that one of the winners in the Bird Photographer of the Year Competition (portfolio section) uses the EM1 Mk 2 so it must have a lot going for it.

The E-m1 Mkii indeed has got a lot going for it but the parameters for success are much narrower than full frame IMHO. I used that body with the brilliant 300mm F4 pro and 1.4xTC for a couple of years and got some excellent results.
However the sensor made a meal of coping with anything but optimum light conditions, AFC was better than the marki but still iffy and tracking was not a joy to use.
It is a wonderful box of electronic tricks with some wonderful features which is why I've still got mine but I only use it for macro.
My A7Riii is easier to handle physically and does not throw wobblies which require any turning off and on or taking out the battery etc. It would be disingenuous to compare sensor performance.

 

[the black fox]

I'm interested to hear your experience with the Olympus EM1 Mk2 for bird photography. I note that one of the winners in the Bird Photographer of the Year Competition (portfolio section) uses the EM1 Mk 2 so it must have a lot going for it.

afraid you'll have a long wait till they drop in price a lot , my birding camera at this moment in time is the panasonic g80 and although mid range it it works well , coupled with the pano/leica 100-400 lens it gives a equivalent focal length of 800mm on a MFT sensor and works well for b.i.f , the only thing I cant comment on is winter use but I cant really see a problem if you look in the panasonic thread I recently posted a blackbird taken in a dark woodland at 6400 iso . it works as good as every other canon or nikon I have previously owned. I did a side by side test with a good friend of mine recently him with a 1dx 500mm f4 plus 1.4 t.c , me stood beside him . he had to use a gitzo tripod and gimbal I used my above mentioned rig hand held , he obviously had in lens i.s mine has 4 way ibis plus lens i.s .... looking online there is absolutely no difference in i.q between us ... whether you choose nikon, canon, Sony, fuji , olympus or zz-nik the end result is what counts and b.t.w my all up rig which also gives close focus from one lens weighs the the grand total of 1.5 kg , total no brainer

one good tern by jeff and jan cohen, on Flickr

breakfast is served by jeff and jan cohen, on Flickr

same lens . also hand held
mr blue by jeff and jan cohen, on Flickr

 

[nx4737]

I've used Nikon crop for years, D7200, 17-50 f2.8, 70-300, wide angle etc but at the start of this year I moved to a Fuji X-t20 with just the 18-55 kit lens.

I'm finding I'm getting much more use out of the Fuji than I ever got from the Nikon just because I'm actually taking it places with me rather than leaving it at home because I couldn't be bothered to carry a heavy bag around with me, also, I can't really explain why but the Fuji just seems more fun to use.