10 reasons why Jason Lanier went mirrorless

sean lancaster wrote:

DFPanno wrote:

narenek wrote:

DFPanno wrote:

gkstar wrote:

Probably not that well ballanced but a lot of truth. This is a good way to break the stereotypes out there.

The lack of balance diminishes the persausiveness of his presentation.

The fact is that most pros cannot depend on mirror-less alone at this point.

I would never hire someone whose intent was to shoot my daughter's wedding solely with a Sony A7S (by way of example).

Bet he will rent a DSLR when he needs it.

Of course it's not balanced. He's giving the reasons he changed not making a comparison between the systems, the reasons will always be in favour of the Sony because otherwise he wouldn't have made the choice to change.

Is that he makes it sound as though Sony has it "all over" Canikon when the truth is that it doesn't and any real pro will almost inevitably turn to their products for items that Sony does not currently sell.

If this guy is hired tomorrow to do a promo for NASCAR do you think he is going to arrive at the track with an A6000? An A7S?

Sony cannot compete in the DSLR world (for the moment) and their marketing strategy is to show people that they really don't need a DSLR. That is true in many cases but not all.

To be fair to the guy, his website notes he shoots wedding, landscapes (and combines landscapes with wedding shoots) and pinup shots. He is not claiming that sports photographers should switch. I wonder if he just shoots artistic shots for couples and someone else does the actual weddings??? Anyway, for what he does, he seems to have found mirrorless to work. He also claims to be the wedding photographer for NFL players, MLB players, resorts, and so on. I looked through some of his portfolio and he appears to dazzle clients with a lot of HDR type photography. Meh. But people pay for that kind of stuff, so more power to him. And if he can make his money using smaller equipment then all the better.

A lot of pros could make the switch without harm. A lot couldn't make the switch. All depends.

Good points.   If you can make x work for for you than y and z is not important.

My guess is that most pros could not abandon their DSLRs at this point in time.

It really does depend on what you are hired to do and what your client expects.

DFPanno wrote:

nevercat wrote:

You must look at the great pictures people took with their mirrorless cameras (from m43 up to FF) and accept that IQ is not in the cmaera anymore, but only in the photograper, as any camera is good enough to take excelent pictures. Those pictures only look realy different at pixel level.

IQ is clearly not an issue at this point.

What would be an issue for me is operational speed and predictability.

At this point DSLRs still operate on a plane that MILCs can't touch and that capability is what I would be looking for in any critical shoot.

When in a dynamic enviroment in which getting the shot is critical DSLRs still rule the roost.

You ever see a papparazzo with a MILC?

Will you hire any papparazzo for your daughters wedding just for having a DSLR? Are you sure?

-- hide signature --

¡Viva la Resolución!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dfpanno/
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/dfpanno/popular-interesting/
On Flickriver chose "Scale to Fit Screen" (upper left) for highest resolution.

sean lancaster wrote:

Wedding photographer weighs in today on the A7s: http://www.govindarumi.com/sony-a7s-for-weddings-real-world-review/

He shot his last 2 weddings with the A7s. Ultimate conclusion:

It has to be said that after using this camera in the last two weddings, and 90% most of those times. The era of mirror-less cameras replacing DSLR for weddings is near. My only concern is that I still trust my DSLR too much for important moments.

That comment says it all.

In my theoretical "daughter's wedding" every moment is an important moment to me.

As a client my expectation is that you are going to nab the shot, no ifs. ands, or buts. That's what I am paying you to do.

If I would be satisfied with mostly good shots I would let Uncle Jerry do the wedding and save a couple of bucks.

As I have said before on these forums - When I have an important moment to capture I will always grab my FF DSLR despite the fact that my FF mirror-less cameras have better IQ.

If you don't get the shot no amount of IQ is going to help you……..

I would imagine that sometime fairly soon these cameras will advance to the point where the differences between them are academic. That is not true now.

Intresting video. I switched from Nikon this summer when I tried an a6000. After a month with the a6000 I traded my FF Nikon in for a Sony a7. The a7 is the only I camera I'm using for event and portrait shoots right now. And I shoot it with manual lenses so I don't care about AF speed.

I know what moments I want and I know how to get them. That's just as important as your equipment. We've forgotten that in the era of the do-everything-for-you DSLR.

ShawnHoke wrote:

Intresting video. I switched from Nikon this summer when I tried an a6000. After a month with the a6000 I traded my FF Nikon in for a Sony a7. The a7 is the only I camera I'm using for event and portrait shoots right now. And I shoot it with manual lenses so I don't care about AF speed.

I know what moments I want and I know how to get them. That's just as important as your equipment. We've forgotten that in the era of the do-everything-for-you DSLR.

Bingo! you don't judge a carpenter by its tools, but by the work he do with them...

-- hide signature --

Brooklyn, USA
Random Stuff on Flickr

nevercat wrote:

ShawnHoke wrote:

Intresting video. I switched from Nikon this summer when I tried an a6000. After a month with the a6000 I traded my FF Nikon in for a Sony a7. The a7 is the only I camera I'm using for event and portrait shoots right now. And I shoot it with manual lenses so I don't care about AF speed.

I know what moments I want and I know how to get them. That's just as important as your equipment. We've forgotten that in the era of the do-everything-for-you DSLR.

Bingo! you don't judge a carpenter by its tools, but by the work he do with them...

"Don't judge a carpenter by by his tools" and other such bromides have their use but that is not really my point.

Carpenters do judge other carpenter by their tools whether you like it or not.

If I see a carpenter using a claw hammer where a cross pein is indicated I do judge him.

Maybe he doesn't care that the one is better than the other or maybe he is too ignorant to know the difference. Perhaps he feels that having both is not worthwhile; etc., etc.

At the end of the day he isn't doing my joinery because being properly equipped is one of the first requirements in doing an equipment-dependent job properly.

Your old saw is OK for general conversation but it is quickly dismissed once we move the conversation up a notch.

DFPanno wrote:

nevercat wrote:

ShawnHoke wrote:

Intresting video. I switched from Nikon this summer when I tried an a6000. After a month with the a6000 I traded my FF Nikon in for a Sony a7. The a7 is the only I camera I'm using for event and portrait shoots right now. And I shoot it with manual lenses so I don't care about AF speed.

I know what moments I want and I know how to get them. That's just as important as your equipment. We've forgotten that in the era of the do-everything-for-you DSLR.

Bingo! you don't judge a carpenter by its tools, but by the work he do with them...

"Don't judge a carpenter by by his tools" and other such bromides have their use but that is not really my point.

Carpenters do judge other carpenter by their tools whether you like it or not.

If I see a carpenter using a claw hammer where a cross pein is indicated I do judge him.

Maybe he doesn't care that the one is better than the other or maybe he is too ignorant to know the difference. Perhaps he doesn't feel that having both is not worthwhile; etc., etc.

At the end of the day he isn't doing my joinery because being properly equipped is one of the first requirements in doing an equipment-dependent job properly.

Your old saw is OK for general conversation but it is quickly dismissed once we move the conversation up a notch.

The saying nevercat used might be an "old saw," however tools only get you so far. You need to know how to use the tools. If a photographer needs a blazing fast autofocus DSLR from Canon or Nikon to shoot a portrait or landscape, then said photographer is doing it wrong.

You mentioned weddings; there's a huge group of very high level wedding photogrpahers charging a fortune and getting it and they shoot medium format film. Several of them are booked out over a year in advance.

And I've seen plenty of photographers with the latest and greatest cameras who can't seem to get past HDR and other trite shots.

It's not only the camera.

ShawnHoke wrote:

DFPanno wrote:

nevercat wrote:

ShawnHoke wrote:

Intresting video. I switched from Nikon this summer when I tried an a6000. After a month with the a6000 I traded my FF Nikon in for a Sony a7. The a7 is the only I camera I'm using for event and portrait shoots right now. And I shoot it with manual lenses so I don't care about AF speed.

I know what moments I want and I know how to get them. That's just as important as your equipment. We've forgotten that in the era of the do-everything-for-you DSLR.

Bingo! you don't judge a carpenter by its tools, but by the work he do with them...

"Don't judge a carpenter by by his tools" and other such bromides have their use but that is not really my point.

Carpenters do judge other carpenter by their tools whether you like it or not.

If I see a carpenter using a claw hammer where a cross pein is indicated I do judge him.

Maybe he doesn't care that the one is better than the other or maybe he is too ignorant to know the difference. Perhaps he doesn't feel that having both is not worthwhile; etc., etc.

At the end of the day he isn't doing my joinery because being properly equipped is one of the first requirements in doing an equipment-dependent job properly.

Your old saw is OK for general conversation but it is quickly dismissed once we move the conversation up a notch.

The saying nevercat used might be an "old saw," however tools only get you so far. You need to know how to use the tools. If a photographer needs a blazing fast autofocus DSLR from Canon or Nikon to shoot a portrait or landscape, then said photographer is doing it wrong.

Some of the world's most esteemed photographers have spent millions upon millions of dollars on Canon and Nikon gear.

Part of the reason that they are willing to spend that money is because both companies (particularly Canon) have offered "blazing fast" auto-focus.

Your suggestion that this first-tier of photographers "has it wrong" baffles me.

Take a look at any new camera introduction and you will see extensive reference to the cameras AF capabilities. Why? Because AF is central to a modern camera's desirabilty.

You mentioned weddings; there's a huge group of very high level wedding photogrpahers charging a fortune and getting it and they shoot medium format film. Several of them are booked out over a year in advance.

I would be willing to bet  you that not all shots are taken with MF film. Maybe some of the formal images.

You have suggested in previous posts that your abilities allow you to transcend the need for AF at event photography.  I have no real reason to doubt you as I don't know you but I can assure you that you are playing at a very rarified level of image capture.

I have a lot of experience with photography; the vast majority with MF gear. I enjoy the notion that I am pretty good at MF.

That said:

There is no way in the world that I could utilize MF to out-gun someone using a 5D3 on AF to capture a spontaneous moment.  You can and for that I will tip my cap.

DFPanno wrote:

ShawnHoke wrote:

DFPanno wrote:

nevercat wrote:

ShawnHoke wrote:

Intresting video. I switched from Nikon this summer when I tried an a6000. After a month with the a6000 I traded my FF Nikon in for a Sony a7. The a7 is the only I camera I'm using for event and portrait shoots right now. And I shoot it with manual lenses so I don't care about AF speed.

I know what moments I want and I know how to get them. That's just as important as your equipment. We've forgotten that in the era of the do-everything-for-you DSLR.

Bingo! you don't judge a carpenter by its tools, but by the work he do with them...

"Don't judge a carpenter by by his tools" and other such bromides have their use but that is not really my point.

Carpenters do judge other carpenter by their tools whether you like it or not.

If I see a carpenter using a claw hammer where a cross pein is indicated I do judge him.

Maybe he doesn't care that the one is better than the other or maybe he is too ignorant to know the difference. Perhaps he doesn't feel that having both is not worthwhile; etc., etc.

At the end of the day he isn't doing my joinery because being properly equipped is one of the first requirements in doing an equipment-dependent job properly.

Your old saw is OK for general conversation but it is quickly dismissed once we move the conversation up a notch.

The saying nevercat used might be an "old saw," however tools only get you so far. You need to know how to use the tools. If a photographer needs a blazing fast autofocus DSLR from Canon or Nikon to shoot a portrait or landscape, then said photographer is doing it wrong.

Some of the world's most esteemed photographers have spent millions upon millions of dollars on Canon and Nikon gear.

Part of the reason that they are willing to spend that money is because both companies (particularly Canon) have offered "blazing fast" auto-focus.

For sports and a few other things blazing fast AF is important. However, I can’t count the number of threads on here of people complaining about AF problems. I myself had back button focus AF fail several times with my Nikon DSLR in poor light. Usually when I needed it most and almost always with my 85mm f1.4.

Your suggestion that this first-tier of photographers "has it wrong" baffles me.

Sorry, I didn't word that correctly; just suggesting that you don't need the latest and greatest DSLR for many things.

Take a look at any new camera introduction and you will see extensive reference to the cameras AF capabilities. Why? Because AF is central to a modern camera's desirabilty.

You mentioned weddings; there's a huge group of very high level wedding photogrpahers charging a fortune and getting it and they shoot medium format film. Several of them are booked out over a year in advance.

I would be willing to bet you that not all shots are taken with MF film. Maybe some of the formal images.

I’m not sure about "all shots," but my friend is a high level wedding planner in SF and she has even mentioned how many photographers are specializing in medium format film to set themselves apart from what she calls the “spray and pray” photographers.

You have suggested in previous posts that your abilities allow you to transcend the need for AF at event photography. I have no real reason to doubt you as I don't know you but I can assure you that you are playing at a very rarified level of image capture.

My abilities are probably not that much different from anyone else who spends a little time practicing with MF and the right camera. I found the a7 so easy to focus manually (with the proper lenses of course) that those two clicks of the magnification button and a quick twist is just as easy as using back button AF on a Nikon DSLR.

It does take paying attention to things as they are happening and looking for the right moments, but it’s not anything special at all. You could most likely do the same if you wanted to. <— I think that’s the difference. I will admit that AF is very easy to use once you tune your camera combo the right way. But so is MF if you have the proper tool, i.e. something like the a7 series with peaking and magnification.

I have a lot of experience with photography; the vast majority with MF gear. I enjoy the notion that I am pretty good at MF.

You probably are! I had relied on my Nikon AF for many years, but when I switched it came back to me like riding a bike.

That said:

There is no way in the world that I could utilize MF to out-gun someone using a 5D3 on AF to capture a spontaneous moment. You can and for that I will tip my cap.

Ha, yeah I don’t think I’m going to outgun anyone with a 5D3. However, I do know that I am in tune with the event or session enough to get the shots that matter.

That’s not gear. That’s paying attention and focusing.

PVCdroid wrote:

DFPanno wrote:

nevercat wrote:

DFPanno wrote:

gkstar wrote:

Probably not that well ballanced but a lot of truth. This is a good way to break the stereotypes out there.

The lack of balance diminishes the persausiveness of his presentation.

The fact is that most pros cannot depend on mirror-less alone at this point.

I would never hire someone whose intent was to shoot my daughter's wedding solely with a Sony A7S (by way of example).

Bet he will rent a DSLR when he needs it.

Do you realy look at the gear a person is using and not at his portfolio. When I would hire a photograph I don't care with what camera he shoots, as long as the results are great. I don't know his work, so I don't know if I would hire him, but I will never let that depend on the gear he is using. When he makes beautifull pictures with a LOMO camera then that is what he use and he can get the job, when he takes very bad pictures with the latest hasselblad...

(don't get me wrong, I don't think that it is possible to take great pictures with a Lomo camera, but when someone succeed in that I will hire him over someone without good pictures)

I am too knowledgeable and experienced with photography not to look at the photographer's' gear.

I own and operate all formats and I know the limits of each category of equipment.

You want to shoot my daughter's wedding with just a mirror-less camera? Buh-bye.

My opinion will probably change in a generation or two but that's where I am as of today.

How dramatic. Maybe she will elope and you won't have to worry about it. I would welcome anyone with a FF mirrorless based on what the sensor delivers and the photographer's reputation. You've got Canon users that are picking up A7 series cameras left and right and not just for landscape.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3734816

I am the last guy on the forum that you should be lecturing on Canon vs. Sony.

My opinions are not based on what somebody on DPR wrote one day.  I actually use that gear to reasonably good effect (link to my images are in my sig).

As a 12 year Canon digital shooter I can assure you we are not buying Sonys for their AF…..

In fact many of us maintain both systems because they are not redundent.

Your certainly welcome to contract whoever you see fit…….

PVCdroid wrote:

DFPanno wrote:

nevercat wrote:

DFPanno wrote:

gkstar wrote:

Probably not that well ballanced but a lot of truth. This is a good way to break the stereotypes out there.

The lack of balance diminishes the persausiveness of his presentation.

The fact is that most pros cannot depend on mirror-less alone at this point.

I would never hire someone whose intent was to shoot my daughter's wedding solely with a Sony A7S (by way of example).

Bet he will rent a DSLR when he needs it.

Do you realy look at the gear a person is using and not at his portfolio. When I would hire a photograph I don't care with what camera he shoots, as long as the results are great. I don't know his work, so I don't know if I would hire him, but I will never let that depend on the gear he is using. When he makes beautifull pictures with a LOMO camera then that is what he use and he can get the job, when he takes very bad pictures with the latest hasselblad...

(don't get me wrong, I don't think that it is possible to take great pictures with a Lomo camera, but when someone succeed in that I will hire him over someone without good pictures)

I am too knowledgeable and experienced with photography not to look at the photographer's' gear.

I own and operate all formats and I know the limits of each category of equipment.

You want to shoot my daughter's wedding with just a mirror-less camera? Buh-bye.

My opinion will probably change in a generation or two but that's where I am as of today.

How dramatic. Maybe she will elope and you won't have to worry about it. I would welcome anyone with a FF mirrorless based on what the sensor delivers and the photographer's reputation. You've got Canon users that are picking up A7 series cameras left and right and not just for landscape.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3734816

I read the thread you referenced and the entire discussion revolves around landscape and astro-photography.  Both are types of static imaging in which the Alphas excel…….