Has anyone switch BACK form mirrorless to SLR?

Discussion in 'Mirrorless Digital Cameras' started by richard_bach|1, Feb 4, 2015.

  1. Brandon R.

    Brandon R. Guest

    I went back to DSLR. I shot for 2+ years with the Sony A7R and A7rii, but I just bought a Nikon D810, because of one thing- cleaning. It sounds so dumb, but Mirrorless cameras are so easy to get dust on the sensors and they are really easy to harm. I got really tired of the high cost of getting them professionally cleaned, or risking scratching the sensor cleaning myself. I had an A7 that I cleaned with the high cost Arctic Butterfly, and the $150.00 brush scratched the sensor. I decided that I missed DSLRS for shooting landscapes and big action shots, which is what I do. I still have an a6000 and water housing for surf photography, but for the land its all about my D810!
     
  2. I have an EOS 7DII and an M5. I photographed a swim meet last Sunday with the 7DII. I use it because I am more comfortable with it and large white lenses. I don't like to carry all this weight around most of the time so I also own the mirrorless. The M5 has a few more MPs than the 7DII and it makes nice pictures but the 7DII is considerably more effective with large lenses. The M has an EVF and it is not as effective as the OVF on the 7DII particularly in bright light where the optical finder handles the glare better. I will continue to shoot sports with the optical finder until EVF quality can meet that of an OVF specifically for action.
     
  3. There are some things a DSLR does which prove challenging for a MILC camera, to wit, action photography, especially when TTL flash is used. The ability to shoot hundreds or thousands of frames on a single battery charge is a boon to event and wildlife photography. The battery issue is not as important as imagined. Batteries for my Sony A7 are small and relatively inexpensive. It is not great burden to carry half a dozen spares - they fit nicely in a ThinkTank wallet, in a pocket. If I shoot at a leisurely pace, letting the camera return to idle (or turning it off), a battery lasts for 2-3 hours and put to 300 images. Taking pictures incurs about the same drain as keeping the EVF or back screen energized. For event portraits, I plug in a 20K mAH portable battery, and shoot 8 hours with capacity to spare. That is not an option with my Nikon, unless I resort to a heavy Anton-Bauer or Quantum system. I didn't get rid of my Nikon system, I just passed it to the capable hands of my adult son, who uses it for things which would be just as well served as a MILC. I don't use it because I don't need it. However I do recognize there may come situations where it is still the best choice. The small size, high quality and silent operation of my Sony are things I can't do without.
     
  4. While Edward Ingold (from his update just above) has made the full transition to mirrorless, I am still very much at the same position I was two years ago. Purchased the A7 initially to use with Leica M-mount glass; a move that turned out to be an epic faiI. Got some Voigtlander M-mount lenses instead in an attempt to create a compact manual focus travel kit but recently added two AF lenses to the bag (28/2 and 70-200/4). I also just traded up from the A7 to the A7 II (thanks to Sony's current instant rebate and generous trade-in bonus) and I fully expect that this system will see much use in the future but I am not about to give up on my Nikons. For avian and air shows, I cherish the D500 with 200-500 or 80-400. For walkaround, a D7100 with 18-140 or 16-85 does just fine (actually better than what I could do with a full frame DSLR or mirrorless). For landscape, replacing the D810 with the A7RII would just be an expensive lateral move without any apparent benefit.

    Just like Wouter mentioned above, the smaller size of the mirrorless is often not an advantage for me but an actual hindrance. I will equip my A7II with the external battery grip mostly to improve its handling; doing so, however, negates any weight or size advantage I might have gained over a DSLR. Neither the A7 nor the A7II are quiet cameras, despite their lack of a moving mirror; I don't find them any quieter than my D810 or D500 (The A7RII, however, can be operated virtually silent, a feature Sony choose not to implement in the cheaper A7II).

    So, I haven't moved back to DSLRs from mirrorless, I never totally moved away and see no reason to do so in the near future.
     
  5. I went from DSLR to mirrorless and it's fine. I wanted the mirrorless for travel but in retirement we just pretty much drive anyway so I take my film gear. I think I am going to give the mirrorless to my son and forget the digital thing except my cell of course.
     
  6. I am shooting micro four thirds and with both Panasonic and Olympus cameras. They satisfy all my present and future needs. Exceed the SLRs I have used. I have tried mating them with FD glass but that seems like a retrograde thing. Lightness and compactness and what most of us want nowadays. I handle NIkons in the stores and they are the large plastic lumps that now seem overweight. Live View with a crisp finder satisfies. No sir, I will not retreat to something I consider outpaced. But if one has a stable of lenses, that would be a different story. Lenses can run up a bill. And I would not give up the full use of good lenses, fair point.
     
  7. Well I tried Fuji, gave it three months alongside my Nikons and then carried on with my D810 and D3S and sold the Fuji, I don't like small cameras, I don't like EVF's and I need my shift lens, need my 14mm and love my 200-500 Nikkor, frankly I did not like the Fuji colours or overall look of the image or handling. Tried hiring Sony A7R2 and thought it handled horribly and felt odd with big pro lenses. Sticking with DSLR's for now. That answers the OP's question but thank god we are all different and there are cameras to suit everyone.......particularly since I am using my film cameras more and more for personal work, particularly MF and LF.
     
  8. I don't see the point of the thread as I don't see the point of the need, or presumption that it has to be one or the other. I use a Fuji XT-1 and I am enjoying the experience immensely, but I would not deem it prudent to let my full frame camera's go. My advice would be to take a breath and keep your full frame camera's.
     
  9. Don, that was all that needed to be said, thank you for cutting through the BS.....
     
  10. I started out with some mirrorless (because at that time, DSLRs re too expensive). Since I could afford a DSLR, I can not leave it anymore (but I still use a mirrorless when my DSLR is not with me). In my opinion, the mirrorless can have everything, the only thing that it lacks is the mirror.
     
  11. I have moved from Nikon D800 over to Sony a7RII and have not touched my Nikon gear in over a year. Why, it is simple. The Sony provides for great images (maybe even better than my Nikon) and it can do everything I need. So I am in the process of selling all of my Nikon gear. If you are interested send me an email. There are a few things I miss: the 200-400 f4 Nikkor lens and off camera RF based flash. Sony is fixing the off camera flash issue this spring, supposedly
     
  12. I bought a Sony NEX 7 so I could use all my manual focus lenses digitally. I couldn't afford an a7-series, and unfortunately, I still can't. So my wide angles aren't really behaving as wide angles. But in all other respects my NEX 7 excels. Well, except a few. I found, when I went to an airshow, that it was extremely difficult tracking the aircraftt using the external display. I'm not sure why this is but I think it just might be because the viewfinder (and display) is offset from the optical axis. So this means that an a7-series shouldn't have this problem. Using the viewfinder was almost impossible because it was a bright day and vf illumination couldn't keep up. Another thing about vfs or displays compared to a DSLR, an optical vf is always superior to a digital one. I don't care how high the pixel count is. I can tell the difference. So when I'm shooting with mf lenses, I rely heavily on the NEX's focus peaking aids. Which are not always accurate. All that being said, though, I still reach for my NEX first if I'm shooting digital.Of course, 24.3mp vs. 10.1mp might also have something to do with it. :cool:
     
  13. For me, I think you know what suits you. If you have to fight the ergonomics it really will hamper your shooting, especially if you have to shoot quickly. I don't think any of these systems are better per se, just what suits individual needs.
     

Share This Page