Which FF mirrorless

Fraser Euan White said:
mmmmmmmmmmmm.............I think the D850 is quite a bit ahead of any Sony Offering TBH.

Sony are good innovators but quality of anything they produce in whatever market has been shown to be poor.........quality of components is cut to keep manufacturing costs down and the precision of their engineering has always been highly questionable in every other market they have entered. (They are the VW of the electronics world!)
Click to expand...
Sony make the best sensors. So much so that loads of other manufacturers use them. Your line of argument is entirely ridiculous.

it's OK to not like certain cameras but the broad brush you just brought out to back your opinion up here is kindergarten stuff.
 
Mental isn’t it.

Pick what you can afford, what suits your needs and what you enjoy using. It makes no difference to anyone else and no-one has to justify a purchase to anyone else here.

People need to get a grip and stop turning everything thread into a pathetic flame-war trying to validate what they use.
 
JJ! said:
I’m slightly worried about not enjoying the A73 as I might get hunted down and shot!
Click to expand...

To be fair I understand where your coming from, for me the Fuji system is overall a more enjoyable experience but the Sony gets the job done and it does it very well with minimal fuss. For example as much as I adore the Fuji XT-3’s dials, I find the front and rear thumb dials on cameras for ISO/SS for quicker than having to unlock and twist a dial.
Fuji is more fun. :)
 
Fraser Euan White said:
Steve - you're obviously struggling with reading? (Some quotes from the article I posted.................)

J.D Power rank Volkswagen even lower than the WarratyDirect survey, ranking them 2 out of 5 for overall dependability. This puts them in “The Rest” category, which is not the category you want to be in.

The ConsumerReports survey of 2016 says very similar. It ranks Volkswagen as 22nd out of 29th for reliability with a reliability score of just 30 out of 100. This is down nine places from last year. The average reliability score for this survey is between 41 and 60, so Volkswagen are pretty below average in this case.

However, if you look at the reviews from owners of the Passat, you can see that there are some really good reviews, but also a lot of bad ones in terms of reliability. There is an awful amount of 1/5 and 2/5 reviews on there. But as we mentioned, there were problems with the engines in the Passats. reliability index doesn’t give them a great score and awards them a reliability index of 145. WhatCar? also report that the Passat has lower than class average reliability for pollen filters, brake pads and wiper blades.
Click to expand...

Volkswagen Golf R32 - 2004
Volkswagen Polo GTI - 2011
Volkswagen Golf R32 - 2004
Volkswagen GTI PP - 2013
Volkswagen Golf R - 2016

No problems at all :)
 
Fraser Euan White said:
If you want FF and the focal lengths your interested in I would buy a Nikon D810 + 24-70mm f2.8, or if budget allows the D850

I know it isn't mirrorless but it's a fantastic camera. Mirrorless offers no advantage for what you want IMO.
Click to expand...

The OP specifically asked about mirroless cameras tho so I'm sure he's thought about DSLRs and realises that's not what he needs
And I'm a big fan of DSLRs for what I shoot, wildlife they are still the best choice in my opinion but everyone's needs are different
 
Riz_Guru said:
To be fair I understand where your coming from, for me the Fuji system is overall a more enjoyable experience but the Sony gets the job done and it does it very well with minimal fuss. For example as much as I adore the Fuji XT-3’s dials, I find the front and rear thumb dials on cameras for ISO/SS for quicker than having to unlock and twist a dial.
Fuji is more fun. :)
Click to expand...

I’m not finished judging too. I have the A73 on loan and the 70-200 will hold it value so no rush for me to make any decisions!
 
frod said:
Sony make the best sensors. So much so that loads of other manufacturers use them. Your line of argument is entirely ridiculous.

it's OK to not like certain cameras but the broad brush you just brought out to back your opinion up here is kindergarten stuff.
Click to expand...

Not if it is the way the parent company operate (Cheap components to keep costs down)? I have never known Sony produce anything that would be considered 'quality' in any other market...not kindergarden but true; they are the AMSTRAD of Japan! :)
 
Last edited:
Fraser Euan White said:
Not if it is the way the parent company operate (Cheap components to keep costs down)? I have never known Sony produce anything that would be considered 'quality' in any other market...not kindergarden but true :)
Click to expand...

No one cares about your personal grudge against Sony. It's irrelevant to anyone besides yourself.

If you want to throw out comments like they're cheaply made toys how about you back it up with some facts? Please show us which components used in the A73 are so cheap as to be unreliable.
 
AndrewSt said:
Now in a position to purchase a new camera and not currently heavily invested in any system.

Wanting FF as I often shoot with a narrow DOF, and most of my shots are between 35 and 85mm. Don't need long lenses for sports or wildlife.

Which way would you go given the current choices and why?
Click to expand...

I'm in the same market as yourself body wise, though I do shoot sports and will eventually want a 'long' lens. Most of the advice I have received recommends the Sony current models, and it's not difficult to see why they're so popular. I think if I was going short term I would pass up FF and get an X-T3 but long term I don't really want to invest in glass for something that won't be any use to me when I inevitably decide to go FF. I'm currently torn between A73, A7R3 and A9 and it's driving me crazy making a decision.
 
Oh and on the VW debate I can say I've owned VW & Audi cars for all my adult life (plus a BMW) and VW group cars have never needed a single repair or penny spent outside of expected maintenance ;)
 
It's ok saying "DSLR are still the king", I won't agree or disagree with that statement but if someone is starting from scratch and buying decent lenses too, I'm not sure buying into DSLR while it's on it's way down from the 'top' is the greatest advice.
 
NewBeetle said:
It's ok saying "DSLR are still the king", I won't agree or disagree with that statement but if someone is starting from scratch and buying decent lenses too, I'm not sure buying into DSLR while it's on it's way down from the 'top' is the greatest advice.
Click to expand...

Especially when OP asks for mirrorless.
 
Brazo said:
You are right they are the future but we’re not there yet! By all means recommend a mirrorless in the future but dslr are still King today and by some margin.
Click to expand...
I have to say at this moment in time I think not buying and just waiting is the way to go.
With 3 new players to mirrorless full frame its a real period of upheaval. if buying now id go dslr and slightly older (less £ will be lost on selling) and wait to see what the next year or two brings.
I guess if money isn't a concern you could buy now and upgrade again when the dust settles a bit
 
If you are getting the images you want with what you have and already have these gear, sure, keep what you have and wait for the dust to settle down.

But if you are starting from scratch again, I think the money would be put towards mirrorless, that's where I would hedge my bet and currently, if you want to go out to shoot straight away with 35mm and 85mm lenses, just like the OP asked for then that only gives you Sony as the answer.

Then Fraser threw in Leica??? Sure, if you are made of money, and if you really like to shoot manual. Not to mention no Leica 35/1.4 or 85/1/4 is there? OP wants shallow DOF, if he wants F/2.0 lenses at 35mm summilux, he might as well go get the X-T3 with a 24/1.4 for almost the exact same look at equivalent F/2.1. So going Leica not only it won't give the OP what he wants, he has now spent tens of thousands on a look that doesn't fit the brief he asked for, in an manual body…major fail.

The information given by the OP + the choice on the market at this moment in time, plus the recent announcements of Canon/Nikon of their new mirrorless bodies gives the answer that Sony A73, with its native lenses out right now provides everything the OP asked for.

/period
 
Fraser Euan White said:
A camera you can hold comfortably and doesn't feel like a toy are a must have for me - it also helps if it doesn't dissolve in the rain like a sugar cube :p
Click to expand...
Hmm Stephan Wiesner dropped his A6000 in a stream and had it left there for minutes before realizing and picking it up. After a dry the evf was toast but the camera worked and served him for some time after. It didn't dissolve like a sugar cube. His A7RIII was filmed while he soaked it with a garden watering can. It too withstood the the soaking without dissolving.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
NewBeetle said:
It's ok saying "DSLR are still the king", I won't agree or disagree with that statement but if someone is starting from scratch and buying decent lenses too, I'm not sure buying into DSLR while it's on it's way down from the 'top' is the greatest advice.
Click to expand...
Sorry I genuinely thought I was in the other thread entitled are dslr’s still relevant!
 
@AndrewSt - you should really consider which lenses you want to start out with and which lenses you are likely to buy in future.

Sony doesn't have any f/1.8-2 35mm offering so far. Both canon and nikon have these (though the nikon one is rather large). Canon RF 35 also has a nice closeup feature.
but on downside you will have to adapt the 85mm on canon/nikon. I wasn't convinced by nikon's AF when I briefly tried it but if canon RF is anything like eos-M in terms of AF adapted EF 85mm lenses will work pretty well.

But if you are looking for 35mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.4 lenses, sony has more (also affordable) native options than the other two.
 
Try the Sony before committing*. The more I use the A73 the less I like it.

I’m still giving it a go, but on the whole, I’m not sure it’s a keeper for me.

*same for all cameras!
 
nandbytes said:
@AndrewSt - you should really consider which lenses you want to start out with and which lenses you are likely to buy in future.

Sony doesn't have any f/1.8-2 35mm offering so far. Both canon and nikon have these (though the nikon one is rather large). Canon RF 35 also has a nice closeup feature.
but on downside you will have to adapt the 85mm on canon/nikon. I wasn't convinced by nikon's AF when I briefly tried it but if canon RF is anything like eos-M in terms of AF adapted EF 85mm lenses will work pretty well.

But if you are looking for 35mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.4 lenses, sony has more (also affordable) native options than the other two.
Click to expand...
One could get the Zeiss Batis 40mm f/2 when it starts shipping in november. But then again why buy f/1,8-2 lenses if youre after the FF look. then you could just as well get the Fuji and the 23mm F1,4 and 56mm f/1,2
 
soeren said:
One could get the Zeiss Batis 40mm f/2 when it starts shipping in november. But then again why buy f/1,8-2 lenses if youre after the FF look. then you could just as well get the Fuji and the 23mm F1,4 and 56mm f/1,2
Click to expand...

Basis is expensive and unnecessarily huge or Sonys small mount doesn't allow for a small design like the RF 35mm f1.8 macro.

Because both those Fuji lenses are god aweful slow to focus. Especially the 56mm f1.2 when compared to my FE85/1.8.

Besides FF still have better tonality, dynamic range etc compared to APS-C.
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
Basis is expensive and unnecessarily huge or Sonys small mount doesn't allow for a small design like the RF 35mm f1.8 macro.

Because both those Fuji lenses are god aweful slow to focus. Especially the 56mm f1.2 when compared to my FE85/1.8.

Besides FF still have better tonality, dynamic range etc compared to APS-C.
Click to expand...
Whereas the f/1,4 Sony is small and light?The batis has a 67mm filter thread, the Sony 72mm. The Batis weighs 361g, the sony 630g- The Batis will focus to 24cm, the Sony to 30cm
 
soeren said:
Whereas the f/1,4 Sony is small and light?The batis has a 67mm filter thread, the Sony 72mm. The Batis weighs 361g, the sony 630g- The Batis will focus to 24cm, the Sony to 30cm
Click to expand...

Why are you comparing a f1.4 lens with f2 lens?
Where did I say sony 35mm f1.4 was small.

I said the new canon RF 35mm f1.8 is smaller and also focuses closer than batis 40.
 
Fraser Euan White said:
Not if it is the way the parent company operate (Cheap components to keep costs down)? I have never known Sony produce anything that would be considered 'quality' in any other market...not kindergarden but true; they are the AMSTRAD of Japan! :)
Click to expand...

My God you talk some tosh Fraser.

I back that up by saying I spent over 30 years either fixing kit or working in product approval.
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
Why are you comparing a f1.4 lens with f2 lens?
Where did I say sony 35mm f1.4 was small.

I said the new canon RF 35mm f1.8 is smaller and also focuses closer than batis 40.
Click to expand...
Hey Isnt it usually " mine is bigger than yours....."? :D
I surely hopes a macro lens will focus closer than a non macro lens
I wasnt the one bringing up f/1.8 - f/2 lenses or size of those. I have no personal experience with neither of the 2 Fujinons but it seems they work well enough to get the shots for a lot of people using them for street style photography and my reason for mentioning them was only the talk about the fullframe look.
Re tonality and DR Id say the difference is negligeable for the wast majority of photographers.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fraser Euan White said:
Not if it is the way the parent company operate (Cheap components to keep costs down)? I have never known Sony produce anything that would be considered 'quality' in any other market...not kindergarden but true; they are the AMSTRAD of Japan! :)
Click to expand...
Whereas one of the things that encouraged me to go with Sony was that I had decades of detailed previous experience of different kinds of Sony products, from hifi to robots, which had convinced me that Sony engineering was both of very high quality and innovative. That was what gave me the confidence in 2006 to "guess" that of all the camera companies Sony was the most likely to make both the first and the best engineered transition from the old "clockwork" SLR to the mirrorless future. In the dozen years since then I've bought nothing made by Sony which has thrown any doubt on that initial prognosis, nor has anything I've read about Sony camera products I haven't bought.

How weird that we've had such remarkably different experiences!
 
chris malcolm said:
How weird that we've had such remarkably different experiences!
Click to expand...

Hi Chris,

one of my other main interests is Hi-Fi and Sony was always seen as a 'joke' in terms of quality when comparing to products from companies like Linn, PT, Naim, Audio technica etc. Even budget Hi-Fi such as Rega were far better quality in terms of engineering and sound quality.

Their TV's are also being criticised for poor quality components with offerings from Panasonic and Samsung being much better quality.

In engineering instruments again Sony is regarded as fairly poor quality with products from Mitutoyo being the Japanese standard in Metrology; so yes, our experiences are quite different.

Interestingly there are a high number of people in Japan that believe Sony put a 'time switch' in their products that stop them working after a set length of time (a bit like Apple with their batteries) - I believe this is probably a myth but could be down to actual component failure.

Here:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/7054587/The-myth-of-the-Sony-kill-switch.html

I currently have three film cameras that are over 35 years old that work flawlessly from Nikon and Rollei - the two Sony cameras I have owned developed faults after three years and were useless after five years.
 
Last edited:
Funny that my £1000 Panasonic receiver died 3 months out of warranty but the replacement Sony at half the price still going after 4 years.

The Panasonic amp it actually the only electronic that I own which failed on its own in the last 10 years.

My Panasonic plasma suffers from a screen burn problem.

Our experience are very different.

My 1998 PS1 still works, I have a Sony minidisc from 2003 that still works.
 
My Samsung TV's have been the best - but I would never buy a Samsung camera.

My PS4 Pro is seriously good.

Never had an issue with anything Nikon - but then again... ALL my sensors have been Sony so they can't be that bad!!!

D40: 6 MP CCD Sony
D40x: 10 MP CCD Sony
D50: 6 MP CCD Sony
D60: 10 MP CCD Sony
D90: 12 MP CMOS Sony
D600: 24 MP CMOS Sony
D610: 24 MP CMOS Sony
D750: 24 MP CMOS Sony
 
Fraser Euan White said:
one of my other main interests is Hi-Fi and Sony was always seen as a 'joke' in terms of quality when comparing to products from companies like Linn, PT, Naim, Audio technica etc. Even budget Hi-Fi such as Rega were far better quality in terms of engineering and sound quality.
Click to expand...

Stop making nonsensical comparisons, why should anyone care that they made a worse hifi 20 years ago?

Sony had some of the best CRT screens back in the 90's but that doesn't make their current cameras any better or worse.
 
Raymond Lin said:
Funny that my £1000 Panasonic receiver died 3 months out of warranty but the replacement Sony at half the price still going after 4 years.

The Panasonic amp it actually the only electronic that I own which failed on its own in the last 10 years.

My Panasonic plasma suffers from a screen burn problem.

Our experience are very different.

My 1998 PS1 still works, I have a Sony minidisc from 2003 that still works.
Click to expand...

Suggest you stop buying anything Panasonic then


Experiences certainly are different, I went through 4 Playstation 1 machines before getting one that didn't have disc read errors, and 2x PlayStation 2. Meanwhile I have an Xbox 360 elite for over 10 years and never had one issue, the kids still use it constantly. Does this mean MS are better than Sony? Nope. I'm not backing up Panasonic here though, I had to send my G80 in twice for repair before they had to send a new unit, I've also never owned a Panasonic TV or HiFi. I have had a Samsung TV and phone fail on me, plus a couple old iPhones. None of this means anything, as gear from any manufacturer can fail. Brand loyalty is pants.
 
Cagey75 said:
Suggest you stop buying anything Panasonic then


Experiences certainly are different, I went through 4 Playstation 1 machines before getting one that didn't have disc read errors, and 2x PlayStation 2. Meanwhile I have an Xbox 360 elite for over 10 years and never had one issue, the kids still use it constantly. Does this mean MS are better than Sony? Nope. I'm not backing up Panasonic here though, I had to send my G80 in twice for repair before they had to send a new unit, I've also never owned a Panasonic TV or HiFi. I have had a Samsung TV and phone fail on me, plus a couple old iPhones. None of this means anything, as gear from any manufacturer can fail. Brand loyalty is pants.
Click to expand...

It was an epic amp (when it worked), THX certified, 7.2 channels, sounds good with music and movies. One day it just stopped, it powers up with no sound anywhere. Ended up selling it as broken for £100 and bought a Sony for £500 which although good, it’s not in the same league.

Ps I had red ring of death for my 360.
 
JJ! said:
My Samsung TV's have been the best - but I would never buy a Samsung camera.

My PS4 Pro is seriously good.

Never had an issue with anything Nikon - but then again... ALL my sensors have been Sony so they can't be that bad!!!

D40: 6 MP CCD Sony
D40x: 10 MP CCD Sony
D50: 6 MP CCD Sony
D60: 10 MP CCD Sony
D90: 12 MP CMOS Sony
D600: 24 MP CMOS Sony
D610: 24 MP CMOS Sony
D750: 24 MP CMOS Sony
Click to expand...


D40: 6 MP CCD Sony
D40x: 10 MP CCD Sony
D50: 6 MP CCD Sony
D60: 10 MP CCD Sony
D70: 6 MP CCD Sony
D80: 10 MP CCD Sony
D90: 12 MP CMOS Sony
D7000: 16 MP CMOS Sony
D3000: 10 MP CCD Sony
D3300: 24 MP CMOS Sony
D5000: 12 MP CMOS Sony
D5100: 16 MP CMOS Sony
D5300: 24 MP CMOS Sony
D5500: 24 MP CMOS Sony
D100: 6 MP CCD Sony
D200: 10 MP CCD Sony
D300: 12 MP CMOS Sony
D600: 24 MP CMOS Sony
D610: 24 MP CMOS Sony
D750: 24 MP CMOS Sony
D800/D800E: 36 MP CMOS Sony
D810/D810A: 36 MP CMOS Sony
D850: 45MP CMOS Sony
D1: 2.7 MP Sony
D1h: 2.7 MP Sony
D1x: 5.47 MP Sony
D2x: 12 MP CMOS Sony
D3x: 24 MP CMOS Sony

Strange that a major component (made poorly by Sony) used in Nikon cameras has never led to any of their recalls ;)
 
Last edited:
twist said:
D40: 6 MP CCD Sony
D40x: 10 MP CCD Sony
D50: 6 MP CCD Sony
D60: 10 MP CCD Sony
D70: 6 MP CCD Sony
D80: 10 MP CCD Sony
D90: 12 MP CMOS Sony
D7000: 16 MP CMOS Sony
D3000: 10 MP CCD Sony
D3300: 24 MP CMOS Sony
D5000: 12 MP CMOS Sony
D5100: 16 MP CMOS Sony
D5300: 24 MP CMOS Sony
D5500: 24 MP CMOS Sony
D100: 6 MP CCD Sony
D200: 10 MP CCD Sony
D300: 12 MP CMOS Sony
D600: 24 MP CMOS Sony
D610: 24 MP CMOS Sony
D750: 24 MP CMOS Sony
D800/D800E: 36 MP CMOS Sony
D810/D810A: 36 MP CMOS Sony
D850: 45MP CMOS Sony
D1: 2.7 MP Sony
D1h: 2.7 MP Sony
D1x: 5.47 MP Sony
D2x: 12 MP CMOS Sony
D3x: 24 MP CMOS Sony

Strange that a major component (made poorly by Sony) used in Nikon (and a lot of other manufacturers devices) cameras has never led to any of their recalls ;)
Click to expand...
who makes the D500 and D7500 sensor then? :eek:

I know D7100/7200 was toshiba but sony bought their sensor division after that...
 
twist said:
Looks like Sony also makes D500, D7500 and D5 sensors.... unsurprisingly.
Click to expand...
Sony are KING of sensors :D And if they keep cracking out bodies like the Sony A9 in the future...... then who knows :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top