Thinking about a smaller set up, need advice...

It's occurred to me lately that I may be happier with a smaller camera. I often opt out of taking my camera out with me unless I'm SURE there will be things for me to shoot. I would love to be able to carry something with me more often for unexpected moments and opportunities.

So...my options would be to either find a new smaller and lighter system to replace my current one, or to purchase a secondary camera to compliment my current set up.

I'm not very familiar with the current line of compact cameras. From what I can tell, there are two options...a compact camera with a fixed lens or a compact mirrorless camera with interchangeable lenses. Right?

Here's a little about what I have and what I do. I'm an intermediate hobbyist (I think). I have a Canon T2i. The lenses I use most are:

Canon 18-135, Sigma 17-50 2.8, Canon 50mm 1.8, Sigma 30mm 1.4.

I also have a 10-20mm wide angle and a 75-300mm zoom, neither of which I use very much.

I love my Sigma 17-50 2.8 because it has a decent zoom range and is decently fast (2.8 through the zoom range). I like using DOF. In that case I also like the ability to use my 30 or 50mm for more exaggerated DOF and good low light performance. Low light is important to me.

I do like to shoot landscape. For that I tend to use either the 17-50 or the 18-135. I think that's as much zoom as I use and could probably get away with the 17-50 most days.

So...are there compact options that would suffice as a replacement for my current set up? Options that would be smaller and light enough to warrant the change? In this area I would be looking at an interchangeable lens option. Or...would I need to find something that would be more of a secondary camera, which could be a fixed lens...I can imagine a camera option that would be like my 17-50 2.8 set up, however I would love something faster than that. Even if it were a secondary camera, I could still go with a changeable lens option as well. I think I could be happy with my 17-50 for versatile use and a 30 or 50mm fast lens for more intimate settings.

One last thing to mention...I do want to be able to do video. I do use my camera for shooting hi-res video at times. It's not often but I do do it. Would be nice to have a lens that focuses well for video. That said, I'd be using it mostly for still photos.

Any advice on which cameras to look into? Which types of cameras or set ups that would work for me? I've seen some Leicas that look really nice. Also some Sonys that are nice (and have nice sounding Zeiss lenses).

Oh, another important note is price. That's complicated. If I were to start a whole new system, and would potentially sell my current set up, then I'd be willing to spend a bit, especially considering that I'd be able to sell what I have. Maybe 2K or more depending... And if it were a secondary camera, to add to my current set up, it would depend on how much the camera did. If it was very versatile and covered a lot of uses, then I'd see spending up to $1500. If it were more limited, then I'd see spending $600-$1000.

Sorry if this post ended up being long. Hopefully someone can give me some areas to look into and consider. Thanks and if I can fill in any info to help, feel free to ask. Even if seeing the type of photos I shoot will help.

Thanks!

Since you have quite a few lenses, you could buy the a6000 (or the new a6300) with a Canon to Sony adapter and just use your lenses for awhile while making the transition. They won't work quite as well, of course, but it'll give you the time you need to sell off the kit and know which focal lengths you want to take with you everywhere.

I had a very similar situation. I had a T2i and later added a 7D but found I rarely took it with me because of the size. 1 inch compacts are nice but the IQ wasn't good enough for me so after a lot of thought, I decided to do a complete switch. I sold all my Canon stuff for Sony stuff (you can see my equipment list). I often buy used which saves a lot of money. For $2000, you can get used (if patient):

• Sony A6000 ($400)
• Sony 50mm f/1.8 ($200)
• Sony 16-70 f/4 ($800)
• Sony 55-210mm ($200)
• Sony 35mm f/1.8 ($400)

However, you would lose out on the normal 2.8 zoom. If you need that, I would suggest Olympus:

• Olympus OM-D E-M5 ($400)
• Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 ($700)
• Olympus 14-150mm f/4-5.6 ($300)
• Olympus 25mm f/1.8 ($200)
• Olympus 12mm f/2 ($400)

Just some ideas if you choose to go mirrorless

A 17-50 f/2.8 is my favorite for my Canon DSLR too. But getting an equivalent lens in an ILC that is also compact just is not going to happen.

While there are similar lenses for M4/3, etc, they do not leave you with a compact package. Of course the same thing goes for a 17-50 on a DSLR, so no surprise really.

There are fixed lens compact with fast zooms, not exactly the same spec as a 17-50 f/2.8, but close enough. These are pretty compact.

The more common way to get aperture with a mirrorless camera is with primes, not zooms.

So the transition to a smaller camera will also need a new approach to your lens system. Simply copying a DSLR system lens for lens usually doesn't get you very far.

Kelly Cook

Hey guys, thanks a lot for the replies.

It seems like when it comes to a mirrorless set up with interchangeable lenses, people like Sony, specifically the A6000. Thing is, like you said KCook, is it really that much more compact than my T2i? Once a lens is on it? Or are the lenses made to be compact as well? Are there other ILC options that are more compact?

Cato, I noticed on your gear page that you have a Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100. The newer model (IV) has a 24-70 1.8-2.8 Zeiss lens. That sounds pretty nice. How do you like shooting with the II? What do you guys think the comparison would be between the IV and my T2i with the 17-50 2.8?

Thanks again guys!

Of course overall package size depends on the particular lens. Link to examples -

Compact Camera Meter

Compare unlimited number of cameras with lenses, see how compact or bulky a camera is and sort by height, width, depth and weight.

j.mp

Kelly

Thanks so much, this site is really helpful.

I think I really like the Sony a6000. It's profile is much smaller actually. Seems like a good option for what I want.

I'm starting to look into lenses to see what I'd be happy with. Of course there will be fast prime lenses available, but I guess I won't find an equivalent to the 17-50 2.8 that I love, huh? I believe that's what you were saying in your previous post Kelly.

I'll continue to research these and see what's available. I'm leaning towards keeping my Canon set up and buying an a6000. The idea of getting an adapter for my current lenses seems like a nice option, to transition as I get used to a new set up.

Thanks.

Canon has its own mirrorless series, but so far these lack a viewfinder -


Kelly

I agree that primes are the way to go with mirrorless. If you go with the a6000, you might look into the CZ24 1.8 to replace your 17-50. People are madly in love with that lens both as a landscape and everyday lens. I've seen it used for around $650. It's small and light and renders colors beautifully (I mean, it is a Zeiss, after all, so no wonder!) One person recently told me that it's so sharp he uses it as a macro by just cropping the images. Probably not as effective as a true macro, but it should give you some idea of how sharp it is.

I love the 35mm f/1.8. Mounted on the A6000, I can fit it in my cargo shorts pocket (so yes, it is much smaller than the t2i). The RX100 II is nice when I need pocketability but doesn't do it for me compared to the A6000. The Sigma 60mm f/2.8 is really sharp and affordable.

I think I'm set on the a6000. I'm going to look for a used one, there seems to be a few around. I'm guessing around $500 with the lens is right, no?

And I'm thinking it's best to get one with the 16-50mm that comes with it, no? Aside from other prime lenses that I'll add to my collection, the 16-50mm 3.5-5.6 seems like a good compact option that I should have, no?

rvc1 said:

I think I'm set on the a6000. I'm going to look for a used one, there seems to be a few around. I'm guessing around $500 with the lens is right, no?

And I'm thinking it's best to get one with the 16-50mm that comes with it, no? Aside from other prime lenses that I'll add to my collection, the 16-50mm 3.5-5.6 seems like a good compact option that I should have, no?

Click to expand...

Well, it depends on who you ask. The reviews on the kit lens range from "underwhelming" to "crappy." I think it's partly a quality control issue, and partly because the compromise of incredibly small size and power zoom (which is desirable for video) means the optical quality is less than stellar.

I very rarely use the kit lens now. I find the 35 1.8 is small and versatile enough for my needs. I do take it on occasions when I know I need something wider than the 35. It needs to have lens corrections on, whether in camera or in Lightroom. With good technique, you can get good photos from it. If I were purchasing it again, I wouldn't pay more than $100 for it. So if you can find a good price on the bundle, I say go for it. Just set your expectations accordingly.

Take a good look at the primes, though. You'll find that some are so amazing that cropping still renders a better image than a zoom lens would, and with 24mp you have plenty of room.

Thanks, that's a great pint...with so much detail I can probably crop and get a better image. I'm most definitely going to get the 35mm 1.8. In that case I'll probably get the body without the kit lens.

However I did come across someone selling a used a6000 with a different zoom, it's the Zeiss 16-70mm f4. The body is $400 and the lens is $650. I'll look more into this lens but it seems like a nice lens. Not sure how much use I'd get out of it and it is kinda pricey. Are you familiar with this lens?

Thanks!

rvc1 said:

Thanks, that's a great pint...with so much detail I can probably crop and get a better image. I'm most definitely going to get the 35mm 1.8. In that case I'll probably get the body without the kit lens.

However I did come across someone selling a used a6000 with a different zoom, it's the Zeiss 16-70mm f4. The body is $400 and the lens is $650. I'll look more into this lens but it seems like a nice lens. Not sure how much use I'd get out of it and it is kinda pricey. Are you familiar with this lens?

Thanks!

Click to expand...

I haven't used that lens myself, but I have read the reviews on it. It's much better than the kit zoom, and $650 is a good price, especially with a $400 body. If you prefer zooms to primes, I think that's a great deal (as long as it's a reputable seller.) I personally prefer primes, but that's because they fit better with my style of shooting. I love opening them up all the way for those blurry backgrounds and I don't care about having to get closer or further to compensate. Other people need zooms because of the unpredictability of the situations they'll be in. Whatever works better for you. But yes, if you want a mid range zoom that's better than the kit lens for only a bit larger, I'd snatch that deal up.

rvc1 said:

It's occurred to me lately that I may be happier with a smaller camera. I often opt out of taking my camera out with me unless I'm SURE there will be things for me to shoot. I would love to be able to carry something with me more often for unexpected moments and opportunities.

So...my options would be to either find a new smaller and lighter system to replace my current one, or to purchase a secondary camera to compliment my current set up.

I'm not very familiar with the current line of compact cameras. From what I can tell, there are two options...a compact camera with a fixed lens or a compact mirrorless camera with interchangeable lenses. Right?

Here's a little about what I have and what I do. I'm an intermediate hobbyist (I think). I have a Canon T2i. The lenses I use most are:

Canon 18-135, Sigma 17-50 2.8, Canon 50mm 1.8, Sigma 30mm 1.4.

I also have a 10-20mm wide angle and a 75-300mm zoom, neither of which I use very much.

I love my Sigma 17-50 2.8 because it has a decent zoom range and is decently fast (2.8 through the zoom range). I like using DOF. In that case I also like the ability to use my 30 or 50mm for more exaggerated DOF and good low light performance. Low light is important to me.

I do like to shoot landscape. For that I tend to use either the 17-50 or the 18-135. I think that's as much zoom as I use and could probably get away with the 17-50 most days.

So...are there compact options that would suffice as a replacement for my current set up? Options that would be smaller and light enough to warrant the change? In this area I would be looking at an interchangeable lens option. Or...would I need to find something that would be more of a secondary camera, which could be a fixed lens...I can imagine a camera option that would be like my 17-50 2.8 set up, however I would love something faster than that. Even if it were a secondary camera, I could still go with a changeable lens option as well. I think I could be happy with my 17-50 for versatile use and a 30 or 50mm fast lens for more intimate settings.

One last thing to mention...I do want to be able to do video. I do use my camera for shooting hi-res video at times. It's not often but I do do it. Would be nice to have a lens that focuses well for video. That said, I'd be using it mostly for still photos.

Any advice on which cameras to look into? Which types of cameras or set ups that would work for me? I've seen some Leicas that look really nice. Also some Sonys that are nice (and have nice sounding Zeiss lenses).

Oh, another important note is price. That's complicated. If I were to start a whole new system, and would potentially sell my current set up, then I'd be willing to spend a bit, especially considering that I'd be able to sell what I have. Maybe 2K or more depending... And if it were a secondary camera, to add to my current set up, it would depend on how much the camera did. If it was very versatile and covered a lot of uses, then I'd see spending up to $1500. If it were more limited, then I'd see spending $600-$1000.

Sorry if this post ended up being long. Hopefully someone can give me some areas to look into and consider. Thanks and if I can fill in any info to help, feel free to ask. Even if seeing the type of photos I shoot will help.

Thanks!

Click to expand...

didn't read the entire post but sure, there's plenty of smaller camera set-ups

I use a pocket size 22mm f/2 pancake lens and 50mm for most shots

www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

You want small, but something with a bigger sensor like A6000. You liked the size of the RX100IV.

If this is all true the GM5 might be the perfect camera for you. Lenses are often better and usually much smaller than A6000 lenses, and the sensor quality is close enough the better lenses should equal things out. A GM5 fits in most pockets, and for low light, a 20mm F/1.7 can be carried in the same or another pocket. An A6000 won't fit in most pants pockets comfortably and won't come close to fitting in a shirt pocket at all. With an F/1.8 lens it won't fit in any pocket.

Video is excellent on the GM5 and the GM5 has features like a silent shutter that the A600o does not. With the GM5 there is a 150mm lens option 1/2 the size of the A6000 telephoto zoom option, as well as 300mm zoom which Sony does not have. As mentioned there are many 'tiny' wide aperture primes for GM5 which are highly rated, so you whole system will stay small, but compete very well with cameras like the Canon Rebels, the A6000, and the Nikons.

Hey guys, I finally came across an a6000 set that I'm interested in and want to see what you thought. It's an a6000 body with the 16-50mm kit lens as well as a 35mm f1.8 prime lens. The negotiation as it stands now is at $775 for the whole thing. Do you think that's a good deal? Everything is in very good condition.

rvc1 said:

Hey guys, I finally came across an a6000 set that I'm interested in and want to see what you thought. It's an a6000 body with the 16-50mm kit lens as well as a 35mm f1.8 prime lens. The negotiation as it stands now is at $775 for the whole thing. Do you think that's a good deal? Everything is in very good condition.

Click to expand...

sounds good for the "art of the deal"

www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

rvc1 said:

Hey guys, I finally came across an a6000 set that I'm interested in and want to see what you thought. It's an a6000 body with the 16-50mm kit lens as well as a 35mm f1.8 prime lens. The negotiation as it stands now is at $775 for the whole thing. Do you think that's a good deal? Everything is in very good condition.

Click to expand...

Sounds like a great deal, that's my favorite lens!

Yes, I know! That was a big part of my decision making...I was really hoping to find that lens, thanks. And with my current setup, I prefer my 30mm to the 50mm, so it seemed like the perfect prime to start with.

I made the purchase. Thanks to everyone for all the help with finding the right camera and lens.