Should I make the switch?

[noggin2k1]

Hi all,

 

Canon user in peace (certainly not a fanboy), who's looking at making the next move. I'm ready to upgrade my trusty 6D, but trying to decide between 5D IV & A7RII

 

There are two very simple main requirements, and no one has given me a straight 'no BS' answer on if the A7RII would be a better fit than the 5D IV on Canon adapted glass

1. Improved low light AF accuracy & tracking of moving subjects
2. Improved DR

The dynamic range is one I'm confident in, it's just the AF side of things that worries me. I generally shoot real estate (easy for the camera), along with dancing events (hence the low light moving subjects). The latter is an area where the 6D does struggle with it's antiqued AF system. Glass is as follows

• Canon 16-35mm F4 L IS (look to keep)
• Canon 24-105mm F4 L IS (look to replace with either Canon or Sony 24-70 2.8)
• Canon 50mm F1.2 L (look to keep)
• Canon 100mm F2.8 L IS Macro (probably look to trade for either Canon 85mm 1.2 L II or Sony 85mm 1.4)
• Canon 135mm F2 L (look to keep)
• Future purchases: 35mm 1.4 & 70-200 2.8

I've attached a little of my typical work/working conditions - if anyone could give me their thoughts on the AF side of things, it'd be much appreciated.

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[thatkatmat]

Low light dancing I'd grab the 5DmkIV, The a7rII is an awesome beast, can it do low light? Yes.., but low light action is not one of it's strengths, plus you already have a fine set of lenses for a new 5DmkIV.

[EvilTed]

You need to think of the A7r II more like a D810 or 5Ds R than a 5D IV.

Speed is not it's thing and it will struggle to shoot a lot of frames in succession, especially when you shoot RAW uncompressed.

 

I shot 2x A7r II's side by side for 3 weeks in Tibet in January.

One with a Sony 35mm F1.4 and the other with a Zeiss Batis 85 F1.8.

The 85 struggled to lock focus in low light quite a bit but there were no problems with the Sony.

 

When I shot a series of shots in quick succession there were times where the buffer got stuck for a few seconds and I couldn't fire another shot.

For travel photography, the way I shoot, the A7r II is the best camera available.

I love the IBIS, EVF, 42MP and high ISO capability - every bit as good as my Nikon D5 or the A7s/A7s II that I've owned previously.

 

For action, I maintain my Nikon system because mirrorless is not even close to the performance yet.

I just ordered the new 70-200 E lens, which is meant to improve AF even more...

 

HTH

 

ET

[grammaloreto]

There are several things you will need to consider in your situation before you think of making the switch to Sony. I will try to point them out to you in an order that would hopefully make sense.

1. Autofocus in low light Issues

I see you wish to keep most of your Canon glass when you make the switch to a Sony A7rII. while this may work if you are going to manually focus on subjects the focusing will be a major pain in the neck if you going to go autofocus..Sony cameras work best with native Sony or Zeiss glass. Added to this I see that you are typically shooting in low light situations..the A7rII is not going to cut it for you in these conditions and theoretically neither will any of the future E-mount cameras..You will need dedicated phase detect autofocus and in the Sony camp the A-mount Sony A99II is the only full frame camera that has DSLR like autofocus..

 

2. High frame rates for capturing situations like the one you point out

The Sony A7rII is an excellent stills photo camera in good light situations..but again will not serve your purpose when shooting action sequences like the ones you listed above..The A99II is your answer again with its 12fps burst rate..

 

3. High costs of migrating to the Sony system

Given the fact that Sony cameras work best with native glass..you are looking at big $$ investment when you migrate to Sony and will most likely have to sell all of your Canon gear..It is best if you loan a Sony A99II with one of their 24-70mm 2.8 SSMII lens or Sony A7rII with a 24-70mm 2.8 G Master for a couple of real life test shoots before you take the decision to make the shift to Sony..

 

I currently own both Sony E mount cameras (Sony A7, Sony A6000) and their latest and greatest Sony A99II.. if I had to pick one camera it would be the Sony A99II..its is definitely a camera worth the shift..I have also tested the Sony A7rII..its a great camera on the Image Quality front..but does not have the Autofocus that I would ideally want in a pro camera..

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

Noggin, there is no reason to switch. If you look at the sensor measurements on DxO Mark, there is very little difference between 5DM4 and A7R2. For dynamic range, they are neck-in-neck.

 

Your 6D is a nice camera with good IQ, but the AF is very rudimentary. The 5DM4 will give you a huge boost in terms of AF (and IQ).

 

Last, it's not a great idea to use a Sony mirrorless camera with adapted lenses only. It does work, but these cameras really need native lenses to reach their full performance potential.

 

As you're not looking at a full system switch, you'd be better off staying with Canon bodies too.

[JonathanStewart]

If you could wait a few more months, the rumors all indicate that Sony is getting ready to release a new, higher-end body that's supposed to be better for sports/action photography.  You're always at a disadvantage when adapting lenses, however, and it looks like you've got a pretty sizeable investment, so totally switching all your glass would be costly.  If you can't wait, I'd recommend sticking with Canon. If you can wait, maybe give the new high-end Sony a chance, and see how people are reporting it works for your applications with adapted glass. 

[Marolou]

I would go for the 5D Mark IV.

 

Why?

1) Low light dancing - To focus on moving objects in low light would be rather difficult with the a7R II, especially with an adapted tele.

2) Your Canon lenses do work best on Canon. I observed that wide-angle lenses have more blurred corners and edges on my a7R II than on my canons; and AF (from out of focus) with my 70-200mm 2.8 LII on the Sony is accurate but takes a while (maybe half a second - with the Metabones IV). I would never try to catch birds on flight, although I heard it's possible once focus is established. In the far end, adapted Canon glass will not make you happy.

3) Good native Sony lenses are more expensive than Canon L glass - A switch would be more than only a few thousand dollars! Even more so,  for a coming  higher-end Sony body.

 

Suggestion: Rent a 5D Mark IV or a a7R II (with a good EF adapter) for a weekend and try them out :-)

 

I own the Canon 5DsR and 5D Mark III, and the Sony a7R II and shot some frames with the 5D Mark IV. IMHO, you will be very happy with the fast AF in low light and the DR of the 5D Mark IV.

I love to use the Sony for portraits, even with the Canon 85mm 1.2, but not so for fast moving targets.

[Baiwei]

Sony's 4D AF used in A7RII is nice. I'd say it's on par with Canon's AF (at last, Sony used to have problems with AF speed). BUT they both loose to Nikon's AF. Nikon's AF is the best if you seek object tracking capabilities. So it this is a primary thing for you, I suggest getting a Nikon camera... 

[IamJF]

When you don't use flash I would seriously try a camera with electronic viewfinder. Always costs me a smile when the guys with the big cams skimp on their screens;-)

For real estate the Sony is perfect.

Which lenses do you use for dancing? The 2470 and 70200 should be up to the task, at least for the shots you showed. But don't try it with adapted glass.

Nevertheless I'm sure you will also get great shots with the Canon!

But beware, when you switch you will also get some of this great Zeiss/Sony lenses - on the long run it will be more expensive. ;-)

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

I don't quite follow. An OVF doesn't have any lag or noise, and what's this skimping on screens comment? It's not like an EVF is an optional extra for SLRs.

 

As for shooting real estate, distorsion and blurry corners is a fact on Sony FE cameras.

 

Why recommend 24-70 and 70-200, but not adapted, when it's clear that the OP wants to keep his Canon lenses?

 

When you don't use flash I would seriously try a camera with electronic viewfinder. Always costs me a smile when the guys with the big cams skimp on their screens;-)

For real estate the Sony is perfect.

Which lenses do you use for dancing? The 2470 and 70200 should be up to the task, at least for the shots you showed. But don't try it with adapted glass.

Nevertheless I'm sure you will also get great shots with the Canon!

But beware, when you switch you will also get some of this great Zeiss/Sony lenses - on the long run it will be more expensive. ;-)