Looking for a light alternative to 5D system

[PWPhotography]

Simple...... Get the Sony a7r2.

Poor battery life would make it a debatable choice for a 3day hikes.

Personally I don't experience this is an issue. Yes one Canon LP-E6 = 2~3 Sony NP-FW50 in capacity, so I carried enough total 6 NP-FW50 batteries shared on A7r and A7 II in trips. They are pretty small that I usually put in pocket or in a small camera bag (thanks much smaller/thinner bodies and lenses so I no longer need a big camera bag). But usually two NP-FW50 is enough for entire day shooting in one A7-series camera. This is not an issue with my experience but then you will enjoy smaller/lighter body/lenses in hiking.

 

[davev8]

Simple...... Get the Sony a7r2.

Poor battery life would make it a debatable choice for a 3day hikes.

Personally I don't experience this is an issue. Yes one Canon LP-E6 = 2~3 Sony NP-FW50 in capacity, so I carried enough total 6 NP-FW50 batteries shared on A7r and A7 II in trips. They are pretty small that I usually put in pocket or in a small camera bag (thanks much smaller/thinner bodies and lenses so I no longer need a big camera bag). But usually two NP-FW50 is enough for entire day shooting in one A7-series camera. This is not an issue with my experience but then you will enjoy smaller/lighter body/lenses in hiking.

 

[Jon555]

yes i did mention the M in a post further up ...as the 11-22 is the sharpest canon UWA lens on APS-c... my M with the 11-22 makes a good combo with my 100D/SL1 with the 35mm F2is on it...the original A7 is light but op needs a UWA as well

I'll agree it's really sharp, but 2.9 stops of vignetting means you can't lift the shadows at all without the corners falling apart (which you may well care about in Landscapes) and the 3.2% distortion at the wide end often needs fixing, which will throw away some of the sharpness (the EF-S 10-22 is 1.4 stops and 1.2% for example). Oh and as the OP is hoping for 15mm then 17+mm is less good (and worse than they currently have), so I think I they're going Canon and APS they at least want something starting at 10mm. (Not that the 11-22 isn't good on an EOS-M3 provided you stop down a bit.)

 

[davev8]

yes i did mention the M in a post further up ...as the 11-22 is the sharpest canon UWA lens on APS-c... my M with the 11-22 makes a good combo with my 100D/SL1 with the 35mm F2is on it...the original A7 is light but op needs a UWA as well

I'll agree it's really sharp, but 2.9 stops of vignetting means you can't lift the shadows at all without the corners falling apart (which you may well care about in Landscapes) and the 3.2% distortion at the wide end often needs fixing, which will throw away some of the sharpness (the EF-S 10-22 is 1.4 stops and 1.2% for example). Oh and as the OP is hoping for 15mm then 17+mm is less good (and worse than they currently have), so I think I they're going Canon and APS they at least want something starting at 10mm. (Not that the 11-22 isn't good on an EOS-M3 provided you stop down a bit.)

yes i tend to use the 11-22 at F8....i think most landscape shooters will anyway

 

[PWPhotography]

Simple...... Get the Sony a7r2.

Poor battery life would make it a debatable choice for a 3day hikes.

Personally I don't experience this is an issue. Yes one Canon LP-E6 = 2~3 Sony NP-FW50 in capacity, so I carried enough total 6 NP-FW50 batteries shared on A7r and A7 II in trips. They are pretty small that I usually put in pocket or in a small camera bag (thanks much smaller/thinner bodies and lenses so I no longer need a big camera bag). But usually two NP-FW50 is enough for entire day shooting in one A7-series camera. This is not an issue with my experience but then you will enjoy smaller/lighter body/lenses in hiking.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums

The OP wants a camera, a wide zoom and a standard zoom. They also want no more than 1300g or so (I gather from suggested systems they were okay with). So for example:

A7rII - 625g (with battery)
7 spare batteries (guess, requirement is 3-day trip with no electricity) - 294g
16-35 f4 (they really want wider, 15mm or less) - 518g
24-70 f4 (currently 24-105 f4) - 426g
=======
1863g

Which even with less batteries gives a lot less suitable lens range and much too much weight. Adding a metabones mk IV adapter to use the 24-105 (70mm hardly gets you closer at all) adds 250g+ (lens is 670g).

Here is another option but still with FF IQ.

A7 II - 599g with battery. It also has the same IBIS and EFC as in A7r II. 24mp is more than enough to most people.

6 spare batteries - 255g, total 7 batteries are enough.

FE 24-240 zoom OSS - 780g which has very good optical quality, many owners said no less than FE 24-70/4.0 OSS. You can find many excellent photos from this lens in Flickr, very ideal large-range from 24 to 240mm all-in-one travel lens. For UWA, just stitch two photos from 24mm.

===

1634g

If the system absolutely must weight 1300g or below, then I guess only mFT (maybe mirrorless APS-C) can meet this requirement with some compromise. But don't forget crop factor with 2.0x and 1.5x respectively.

my canon 100D/SL1DSLR kit came to 900g say 1kg with batteries

My EOS-M1 mirrorless with kit lens is even smaller/lighter with the same battery ;-) Years ago, I bought $399 EOS-M1 package with 22mm/2.0 STM M and 18-55 IS STM M lenses and 90EX flash. Don't bother to sell and still use occasionally as it's very small and light to carry in pocket.

However many forgot original Sony A7 kit with FE 28-70/3.5-5.6 OSS that is a bargain to acquire (now BestBuy has $1189 package). FE 28-70 actually has quite good optical quality on money. You might find even better deal in eBay on imported.

A7 with battery - 474g (that can rival many APS-C and mFT mirrorless in weight and size) but with Sony 24mp FF sensor.

FE 28-70/3.5-5.6 OSS - only 295g with Sony's image stabilization, OSS.

Total - 769g. You cannot argue the lightest and smallest full frame camera with kit zoom lens. It beats OP's 5D in resolution, dynamic range and even high ISO.

yes i did mention the M in a post further up ...as the 11-22 is the sharpest canon UWA lens on APS-c... my M with the 11-22 makes a good combo with my 100D/SL1 with the 35mm F2is on it...the original A7 is light but op needs a UWA as well

Then you can have Voigtländer 15mm f/4.5 Heliar III for FE mount. It's MF lens however. But MF thru EVF and focus magnification or with help of focus peaking is very easy, quick and accurate. Its optical quality is excellent with very pleasing sun/star burst. I am considering to get one.

http://www.lonelyspeck.com/voigtlander-15mm-f4-5-heliar-iii-astrophotography-review/

https://www.flickr.com/groups/heliar/pool/with/26430306904/

Another option is that pretty cheap E-mount Samyang 14mm F2.8 that is also a MF lens (now Samyang has an AF mark II version) which optical quality is also pretty good. I bought one for astrophotography but so far didn't have a chance to use it.

---
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums

--
My 5D IS a MK1 classic
Health and safety ...saving the lives of the terminally stupid

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums

--
My 5D IS a MK1 classic
Health and safety ...saving the lives of the terminally stupid

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums

 

[seafan]

Thanks to all your suggestions, here are my thoughts now:

There are quite a few options, to help to narrow it down, I first ruled out the micro 4/3 systems (Olympus, Panasonic), based on the thinking that (correct me if I'm wrong) all else being equal, larger sensors produce better (lower noise) images at higher ISO. This maybe the old school thinking, I'm not sure if technology has advanced in recent years such that it no longer holds true - tell me if so.

Thanks to the suggestion by "PWPhotography", I took another look into Sony a7. While Sony 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens seems to be a great lens, Sony doesn't offer anything wider than 24mm for FF, that's why I ruled it out before. With Voigtlander 15mm, this combination becomes viable again.

I also took another look at Canon SL1. There is certainly advantage to go with Canon, as any other system would require a learning curve and change of work flow etc. While the body is light, battery life will be better than the Mirrorless cameras, Canon doesn't seem to have great lens for the UWA range, compared to the other vendors. Going with the 11-22mm lens (10+ yr old technology) seems to sacrifice too much in IQ, and it's not that wide on APS-C.

Fuji seems to have a great reputation of its lens quality, with the 10-24mm zoom, I could get the 15mm UWA I really want. However, its 18-55mm is not wide enough for me. As I've used the 24-105mm on FF most of the time, 24mm is really a sweet spot for me, as it's wide enough for 90% of my wide shots. Fuji's 16-55mm f2.8 is the right range for me, but weights twice as much! the 16-50mm seems to be much less quality in IQ. The other dilemma is, I like the 24MP sensor of X-PRO2, but want the articulated LCD and the 35mm camera feel of X-T1. The folks on Fuji forum suggest me to wait for the next model X-T2, but I'd like to get a new system for my trip next month...

So it's a choice between the Fuji X-T1/T2, and Sony a7.

Welcome your comments and suggestions!

 

[Great Bustard]

Thanks to all your suggestions, here are my thoughts now:

There are quite a few options, to help to narrow it down, I first ruled out the micro 4/3 systems (Olympus, Panasonic), based on the thinking that (correct me if I'm wrong) all else being equal, larger sensors produce better (lower noise) images at higher ISO. This maybe the old school thinking, I'm not sure if technology has advanced in recent years such that it no longer holds true - tell me if so.

Still true, but Canon is slightly behind the curve compared to other APS-C here, and a lot behind the curve with respect to base ISO DR (although the new tech in the new 80D has closed the gap a lot, but the gap is still there).

Thanks to the suggestion by "PWPhotography", I took another look into Sony a7. While Sony 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens seems to be a great lens, Sony doesn't offer anything wider than 24mm for FF, that's why I ruled it out before. With Voigtlander 15mm, this combination becomes viable again.

I also took another look at Canon SL1. There is certainly advantage to go with Canon, as any other system would require a learning curve and change of work flow etc. While the body is light, battery life will be better than the Mirrorless cameras, Canon doesn't seem to have great lens for the UWA range, compared to the other vendors. Going with the 11-22mm lens (10+ yr old technology) seems to sacrifice too much in IQ, and it's not that wide on APS-C.

Canon has *outstanding* UWA lenses for crop (and FF, for that matter), and there are outstanding 3rd party UWA options, too.

Fuji seems to have a great reputation of its lens quality, with the 10-24mm zoom, I could get the 15mm UWA I really want. However, its 18-55mm is not wide enough for me. As I've used the 24-105mm on FF most of the time, 24mm is really a sweet spot for me, as it's wide enough for 90% of my wide shots. Fuji's 16-55mm f2.8 is the right range for me, but weights twice as much! the 16-50mm seems to be much less quality in IQ. The other dilemma is, I like the 24MP sensor of X-PRO2, but want the articulated LCD and the 35mm camera feel of X-T1. The folks on Fuji forum suggest me to wait for the next model X-T2, but I'd like to get a new system for my trip next month...

So it's a choice between the Fuji X-T1/T2, and Sony a7.

Welcome your comments and suggestions!

To be perfectly honest, I'd base your decision on differences in operation, not IQ (the exception being if you push shadows heavily at base ISO -- then choose other than Canon). Stuff is so good nowadays, you'd have to try to get it wrong to make a bad choice. ;-)

 

[seafan]

Thanks to all your suggestions, here are my thoughts now:

There are quite a few options, to help to narrow it down, I first ruled out the micro 4/3 systems (Olympus, Panasonic), based on the thinking that (correct me if I'm wrong) all else being equal, larger sensors produce better (lower noise) images at higher ISO. This maybe the old school thinking, I'm not sure if technology has advanced in recent years such that it no longer holds true - tell me if so.

Still true, but Canon is slightly behind the curve compared to other APS-C here, and a lot behind the curve with respect to base ISO DR (although the new tech in the new 80D has closed the gap a lot, but the gap is still there).

Thanks to the suggestion by "PWPhotography", I took another look into Sony a7. While Sony 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens seems to be a great lens, Sony doesn't offer anything wider than 24mm for FF, that's why I ruled it out before. With Voigtlander 15mm, this combination becomes viable again.

I also took another look at Canon SL1. There is certainly advantage to go with Canon, as any other system would require a learning curve and change of work flow etc. While the body is light, battery life will be better than the Mirrorless cameras, Canon doesn't seem to have great lens for the UWA range, compared to the other vendors. Going with the 11-22mm lens (10+ yr old technology) seems to sacrifice too much in IQ, and it's not that wide on APS-C.

Canon has *outstanding* UWA lenses for crop (and FF, for that matter), and there are outstanding 3rd party UWA options, too.

Fuji seems to have a great reputation of its lens quality, with the 10-24mm zoom, I could get the 15mm UWA I really want. However, its 18-55mm is not wide enough for me. As I've used the 24-105mm on FF most of the time, 24mm is really a sweet spot for me, as it's wide enough for 90% of my wide shots. Fuji's 16-55mm f2.8 is the right range for me, but weights twice as much! the 16-50mm seems to be much less quality in IQ. The other dilemma is, I like the 24MP sensor of X-PRO2, but want the articulated LCD and the 35mm camera feel of X-T1. The folks on Fuji forum suggest me to wait for the next model X-T2, but I'd like to get a new system for my trip next month...

So it's a choice between the Fuji X-T1/T2, and Sony a7.

Welcome your comments and suggestions!

To be perfectly honest, I'd base your decision on differences in operation, not IQ (the exception being if you push shadows heavily at base ISO -- then choose other than Canon). Stuff is so good nowadays, you'd have to try to get it wrong to make a bad choice. ;-)

What are the great lens options for crop sensor Canon to cover 15-24mm and 24-80/105mm?

What is "base ISO"? What do you mean by "push shadows heavily at base ISO"? I could recover shadow details from Canon RAW files in PS, so much so that I find it rare to need to do HDR any more (or "digital blending").

I haven't kept up with techniques and technology, maybe I'm completely missing the point here?

 

[davev8]

Thanks to all your suggestions, here are my thoughts now:

There are quite a few options, to help to narrow it down, I first ruled out the micro 4/3 systems (Olympus, Panasonic), based on the thinking that (correct me if I'm wrong) all else being equal, larger sensors produce better (lower noise) images at higher ISO. This maybe the old school thinking, I'm not sure if technology has advanced in recent years such that it no longer holds true - tell me if so.

Thanks to the suggestion by "PWPhotography", I took another look into Sony a7. While Sony 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens seems to be a great lens, Sony doesn't offer anything wider than 24mm for FF, that's why I ruled it out before. With Voigtlander 15mm, this combination becomes viable again.

I also took another look at Canon SL1. There is certainly advantage to go with Canon, as any other system would require a learning curve and change of work flow etc. While the body is light, battery life will be better than the Mirrorless cameras, Canon doesn't seem to have great lens for the UWA range, compared to the other vendors. Going with the 11-22mm lens (10+ yr old technology) seems to sacrifice too much in IQ, and it's not that wide on APS-C.

Fuji seems to have a great reputation of its lens quality, with the 10-24mm zoom, I could get the 15mm UWA I really want. However, its 18-55mm is not wide enough for me. As I've used the 24-105mm on FF most of the time, 24mm is really a sweet spot for me, as it's wide enough for 90% of my wide shots. Fuji's 16-55mm f2.8 is the right range for me, but weights twice as much! the 16-50mm seems to be much less quality in IQ. The other dilemma is, I like the 24MP sensor of X-PRO2, but want the articulated LCD and the 35mm camera feel of X-T1. The folks on Fuji forum suggest me to wait for the next model X-T2, but I'd like to get a new system for my trip next month...

So it's a choice between the Fuji X-T1/T2, and Sony a7.

Well i would give the X-T1 i miss...i had the XE-2..it has the same sensor .. with all the hype i expected it to rival or better my 10 year old 5D but it very quickly came apparent that it was not to be...infact my 100D/SL1 was doing a better job with fine detail and general look ,,thinking it was me and LR 5.7 (light room is not supposed to play well with fuji raw) i did a test with both cameras on a tripod with the SAME sharp prime stopped down on both and gave the fuji raw file to the fuji community to process... (on 3 different occasions)i process the 100D in LR5.7 ..i have not seen anyplace on the net where fuji and a 18MP canon file has been compared to each other where the SAME lens was on both and multiple people using different software have edited the fuji raw and the best was chosen ...what did come apparent, it was not so much what software that was used but who was using it...the best fuji edit at pixel level was by PhotoNinja with LR6.4 a close 2ed but to me the best edit when the complete photo is on a large monitor was LR6.4

If Look here scroll almost 1/2 way down and see MY 100D edit side by side with the best fuji edit....as you can see the 100D resolves better detail in a nicer way my be an ider to read the text just befor my list of photos

PS is you frequent the fuji and sony forums be aware that post/threads that show fuji/sony in a bad light are often remuved

Welcome your comments and suggestions!

 

[Great Bustard]

Thanks to all your suggestions, here are my thoughts now:

There are quite a few options, to help to narrow it down, I first ruled out the micro 4/3 systems (Olympus, Panasonic), based on the thinking that (correct me if I'm wrong) all else being equal, larger sensors produce better (lower noise) images at higher ISO. This maybe the old school thinking, I'm not sure if technology has advanced in recent years such that it no longer holds true - tell me if so.

Still true, but Canon is slightly behind the curve compared to other APS-C here, and a lot behind the curve with respect to base ISO DR (although the new tech in the new 80D has closed the gap a lot, but the gap is still there).

Thanks to the suggestion by "PWPhotography", I took another look into Sony a7. While Sony 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens seems to be a great lens, Sony doesn't offer anything wider than 24mm for FF, that's why I ruled it out before. With Voigtlander 15mm, this combination becomes viable again.

I also took another look at Canon SL1. There is certainly advantage to go with Canon, as any other system would require a learning curve and change of work flow etc. While the body is light, battery life will be better than the Mirrorless cameras, Canon doesn't seem to have great lens for the UWA range, compared to the other vendors. Going with the 11-22mm lens (10+ yr old technology) seems to sacrifice too much in IQ, and it's not that wide on APS-C.

Canon has *outstanding* UWA lenses for crop (and FF, for that matter), and there are outstanding 3rd party UWA options, too.

Fuji seems to have a great reputation of its lens quality, with the 10-24mm zoom, I could get the 15mm UWA I really want. However, its 18-55mm is not wide enough for me. As I've used the 24-105mm on FF most of the time, 24mm is really a sweet spot for me, as it's wide enough for 90% of my wide shots. Fuji's 16-55mm f2.8 is the right range for me, but weights twice as much! the 16-50mm seems to be much less quality in IQ. The other dilemma is, I like the 24MP sensor of X-PRO2, but want the articulated LCD and the 35mm camera feel of X-T1. The folks on Fuji forum suggest me to wait for the next model X-T2, but I'd like to get a new system for my trip next month...

So it's a choice between the Fuji X-T1/T2, and Sony a7.

Welcome your comments and suggestions!

To be perfectly honest, I'd base your decision on differences in operation, not IQ (the exception being if you push shadows heavily at base ISO -- then choose other than Canon). Stuff is so good nowadays, you'd have to try to get it wrong to make a bad choice. ;-)

What are the great lens options for crop sensor Canon to cover 15-24mm and 24-80/105mm?

On the UWA front:

Canon 10-18 / 4.5-5.6 STM IS

Canon 10-22 / 3.5-5.6

Canon 11-22 / 4-5.6 STM IS (if using the EOS-M mirrorless body)

Canon 18-55 / 3.5-5.6 STM IS (not to be confused with earlier versions of this lens)

Sigma 17-50 / 2.8 OS (center sharp from wide open, edges sharp from one stop down)

Sigma 8-16 / 4.5-5.6

Tokina 11-16 / 2.8

As for the other focal ranges, check and see what they have tested -- I'm too lazy. ;-)

What is "base ISO"?

The lowest "real" ISO setting of the camera (ISO 50 is simply ISO 100 with +1 EC).

What do you mean by "push shadows heavily at base ISO"?

Apply a tone curve to the RAW conversion that renders the shadows much brighter than they would have otherwise been rendered.

I could recover shadow details from Canon RAW files in PS, so much so that I find it rare to need to do HDR any more (or "digital blending").

Excellent -- then Canon's lower DR won't be an impediment to your photography.

I haven't kept up with techniques and technology, maybe I'm completely missing the point here?

Dunno. Seems like Canon has what you'd want/need, but that's not to say that others might not suit you even better.

 

[PWPhotography]

Thanks to all your suggestions, here are my thoughts now:

There are quite a few options, to help to narrow it down, I first ruled out the micro 4/3 systems (Olympus, Panasonic), based on the thinking that (correct me if I'm wrong) all else being equal, larger sensors produce better (lower noise) images at higher ISO. This maybe the old school thinking, I'm not sure if technology has advanced in recent years such that it no longer holds true - tell me if so.

Thanks to the suggestion by "PWPhotography", I took another look into Sony a7. While Sony 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens seems to be a great lens, Sony doesn't offer anything wider than 24mm for FF, that's why I ruled it out before. With Voigtlander 15mm, this combination becomes viable again.

Sony does have FE 16-35/4.0 ZA OSS that optically is better than its FE 24-70/4.0 ZA OSS, it's a bit heavy and big but still lighter and smaller than DSLR 16-35/4.0 IS/VR counterparts, only slightly heavier than Canon 17-40L/4.0 (without 'IS'), 518 vs 475g, but not bigger, 72mm vs 77mm filter size. It's a very good lens, you can see many photos from this lens in my Flickr link. Voigtlander 15mm F4.5 has quite good optical performance but a MF lens which is not big deal in landscape.

I also took another look at Canon SL1. There is certainly advantage to go with Canon, as any other system would require a learning curve and change of work flow etc. While the body is light, battery life will be better than the Mirrorless cameras, Canon doesn't seem to have great lens for the UWA range, compared to the other vendors. Going with the 11-22mm lens (10+ yr old technology) seems to sacrifice too much in IQ, and it's not that wide on APS-C.

Fuji seems to have a great reputation of its lens quality, with the 10-24mm zoom, I could get the 15mm UWA I really want. However, its 18-55mm is not wide enough for me. As I've used the 24-105mm on FF most of the time, 24mm is really a sweet spot for me, as it's wide enough for 90% of my wide shots. Fuji's 16-55mm f2.8 is the right range for me, but weights twice as much! the 16-50mm seems to be much less quality in IQ. The other dilemma is, I like the 24MP sensor of X-PRO2, but want the articulated LCD and the 35mm camera feel of X-T1. The folks on Fuji forum suggest me to wait for the next model X-T2, but I'd like to get a new system for my trip next month...

So it's a choice between the Fuji X-T1/T2, and Sony a7.

It's APS-C vs FF. A7's DR is better at base ISO (base Sony ISO 100 vs base Fuji ISO 200) and you will have cleaner photos in shadow after pushing up. Also Adobe ACR RAW processing is not optimized for Fuji RAW. So if you use LR it could be an issue.

Welcome your comments and suggestions!

 

[Jon555]

If you want light plus don't like the X-Pro2 or m43 then (err, sorry) I'm going with neither of your suggestions and:

A6300
16-70 f4 (=24-105)
10-18 f4 (=15-27)
35mm f1.8 (I would recommend a lens for low light, or lower DoF, work)

As it's a smaller, lighter kit and gives you the focal lengths you want. Also it's half the weight of your current set-up. You will need a bunch of batteries though, but the price difference to an A7rII will still leave you quids-in, and the weight difference less worn out.

(Edit) Oh, sorry, left out:

Sony A6300 - 403g (with battery and card)
Five spare NP-FW50 batteries (42g ea) - 210g
16-70 f4 (=24-105, effectively longer if crop the 24MP down to 10-16MP) - 225g
10-18 f4 (=15-27) - 308g
35mm f1.8 (I would recommend a lens for low light, or lower DoF, work) - 155g
=======
1301g

 

[davev8]

Thanks to all your suggestions, here are my thoughts now:

There are quite a few options, to help to narrow it down, I first ruled out the micro 4/3 systems (Olympus, Panasonic), based on the thinking that (correct me if I'm wrong) all else being equal, larger sensors produce better (lower noise) images at higher ISO. This maybe the old school thinking, I'm not sure if technology has advanced in recent years such that it no longer holds true - tell me if so.

Thanks to the suggestion by "PWPhotography", I took another look into Sony a7. While Sony 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens seems to be a great lens, Sony doesn't offer anything wider than 24mm for FF, that's why I ruled it out before. With Voigtlander 15mm, this combination becomes viable again.

Sony does have FE 16-35/4.0 ZA OSS that optically is better than its FE 24-70/4.0 ZA OSS, it's a bit heavy and big but still lighter and smaller than DSLR 16-35/4.0 IS/VR counterparts, only slightly heavier than Canon 17-40L/4.0 (without 'IS'), 518 vs 475g, but not bigger, 72mm vs 77mm filter size. It's a very good lens, you can see many photos from this lens in my Flickr link. Voigtlander 15mm F4.5 has quite good optical performance but a MF lens which is not big deal in landscape.

The sony 16-35 does seem very good but its only about 2 Sony battery's lighter than the canon 16-35 and a sony A7ii is 3 and a bit battery's lighter than a Canon 6D

I also took another look at Canon SL1. There is certainly advantage to go with Canon, as any other system would require a learning curve and change of work flow etc. While the body is light, battery life will be better than the Mirrorless cameras, Canon doesn't seem to have great lens for the UWA range, compared to the other vendors. Going with the 11-22mm lens (10+ yr old technology) seems to sacrifice too much in IQ, and it's not that wide on APS-C.

Fuji seems to have a great reputation of its lens quality, with the 10-24mm zoom, I could get the 15mm UWA I really want. However, its 18-55mm is not wide enough for me. As I've used the 24-105mm on FF most of the time, 24mm is really a sweet spot for me, as it's wide enough for 90% of my wide shots. Fuji's 16-55mm f2.8 is the right range for me, but weights twice as much! the 16-50mm seems to be much less quality in IQ. The other dilemma is, I like the 24MP sensor of X-PRO2, but want the articulated LCD and the 35mm camera feel of X-T1. The folks on Fuji forum suggest me to wait for the next model X-T2, but I'd like to get a new system for my trip next month...

So it's a choice between the Fuji X-T1/T2, and Sony a7.

It's APS-C vs FF. A7's DR is better at base ISO (base Sony ISO 100 vs base Fuji ISO 200) and you will have cleaner photos in shadow after pushing up. Also Adobe ACR RAW processing is not optimized for Fuji RAW. So if you use LR it could be an issue.

Welcome your comments and suggestions!

 

[JMTS]

Hi folks,

I have been using Canon 5D with 17-40mm and 24-105mm lens for landscape photography for almost 10 years now, thinking of upgrading the 5D camera. But that combination is too heavy for (starting) backpacking, when every ounce would count. At my age with some knee problems, I'm trying to keep my pack to under 30 lbs. So I've been looking for something smaller and lighter for backpacking.

What I'm looking for in the alternative light weight and small system are:

2. reliable and well built, that could withstand outdoor conditions, like cold temperature (could be lower than 15F) and high altitude (4000-5000m)

6. good battery life (no electricity for 3-4 days trip)

I think a different approach to this would be to keep the system you have now (possibly upgrading the camera body if you have the itch). Use some of the money saved to hire an extra local guide/carrier, preferably with a mule or whatever is used as a carrying animal where you are going.

Bring your favorite tripod e.t.c. and offload the weight on the person and mule paid for the job. If you can get a mule strong enough to carry a person it would be be worth its weight in gold if your knees start messing with you dozens of kilometres from the nearest village or worse if you get severe high altitude sickness or food poisoning or other health problems.

 

[JesseC]

There have been a couple suggestions about getting a Sony. I have a NEX-6 and a6000, both of which are nice lightweight cameras. But the OP needs a camera which will last for several days while backpacking. My experience with Sony batteries is that one will last for a half day of active RAW photography. So, Sony may be a good choice if the OP is willing to bring along quite a few spare batteries.

This is true of most mirrorless cameras (the Panasonic GH4 perhaps being the main exception). My thought was firstly to carry a spare battery and secondly if you get a camera that will charge the battery (in-camera) via USB then have a USB power pack to charge it in the evenings.

I struggle with the DSLRs, the Nikons below the 7200 (i.e. 3300, 5500) are reasonably small and light, but they have poor raw file support and other limitations, plus:

Nikon D7200 - 765g
Tokina 11-16mm - 560g
Nikon 16-80mm - 480g
Nikon 35mm f1.8 DX - 200g
=======
2005g

Which is silly as it's not saving anything.

Maybe your idea of simply bringing a big bunch of batteries is a good idea, as the A6300 suggestion I made (originally) is very light so you could take 5 batteries (or 2 and a power-pack). The main thing with taking a lot of batteries is you need a lot of batteries, as even if you have electricity available charging even 2 batteries is a pain as you have to get up in the night and swap them over in the charger.

Panasonic GX8 - 487g (SD card, Battery, Body) weather sealed

Panasonic 7-14mm f4 - 300g

Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8 - 305g weather sealed

Panasonic 20mm f1.7 - 87g

Panasonic 35-100 f2.8 - 360g weather sealed

Total weight =1539grams

Just throwing it out there as a thought.

 

[Jon555]

Panasonic GX8 - 487g (SD card, Battery, Body) weather sealed

Panasonic 7-14mm f4 - 300g

Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8 - 305g weather sealed

Panasonic 20mm f1.7 - 87g

Panasonic 35-100 f2.8 - 360g weather sealed

Total weight =1539grams

Just throwing it out there as a thought.

I can't argue that much, as if you look here you'll see we aren't far apart when considering m43...

Looking for a light alternative to 5D system

Hi folks, I have been using Canon 5D with 17-40mm and 24-105mm lens for landscape photography for almost 10 years now, thinking of upgrading the 5D camera. But that combination is too heavy for (starting) backpacking, when every ounce would count. At my age with some knee problems, I'm trying...

www.dpreview.com

(But they later said they didn't want a longer zoom but did want a standard zoom)
or here

Looking for a light alternative to 5D system

I've been avoiding it, but you could maybe consider the EOS-M3. Add-on EVFs are always a pain and it isn't the fastest or best, but with an adaptor you can also use your existing lenses. Then when a super-duper EOS-M comes along you have the lenses ready to go. The weight is good, IQ in the...

www.dpreview.com

(Where I went for the Oly 7-14 over my previous choice of the Panasonic as I think the extra light was probably worth the weight, especially as I couldn't talk them into a fast prime for lower light)

But the OP has now said they don't want a m43 system...

 

[PWPhotography]

Thanks to all your suggestions, here are my thoughts now:

There are quite a few options, to help to narrow it down, I first ruled out the micro 4/3 systems (Olympus, Panasonic), based on the thinking that (correct me if I'm wrong) all else being equal, larger sensors produce better (lower noise) images at higher ISO. This maybe the old school thinking, I'm not sure if technology has advanced in recent years such that it no longer holds true - tell me if so.

Thanks to the suggestion by "PWPhotography", I took another look into Sony a7. While Sony 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens seems to be a great lens, Sony doesn't offer anything wider than 24mm for FF, that's why I ruled it out before. With Voigtlander 15mm, this combination becomes viable again.

Sony does have FE 16-35/4.0 ZA OSS that optically is better than its FE 24-70/4.0 ZA OSS, it's a bit heavy and big but still lighter and smaller than DSLR 16-35/4.0 IS/VR counterparts, only slightly heavier than Canon 17-40L/4.0 (without 'IS'), 518 vs 475g, but not bigger, 72mm vs 77mm filter size. It's a very good lens, you can see many photos from this lens in my Flickr link. Voigtlander 15mm F4.5 has quite good optical performance but a MF lens which is not big deal in landscape.

The sony 16-35 does seem very good but its only about 2 Sony battery's lighter than the canon 16-35 and a sony A7ii is 3 and a bit battery's lighter than a Canon 6D

Add together, the weight and size difference are still quite obvious, no mention A7 is much better in DR at base ISO.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#487.440,380.425,ha,t

A7 + FE 16-35, 992g

6D + EF 16-35, 1385g

Each Sony NP-FW50 battery is 42.5g (third-party ones such as from Wasabi is slightly lighter). With my experience, 1 Canon LP-E6 battery is roughly about 2.5 NP-FW50 capability.

To OP, there is also Zeiss Batis 18mm F2.8 auto-focus prime lens. There are lots more native E-mount lenses released to market in last two years from different vendors. E-mount has becoming a major platform.

I also took another look at Canon SL1. There is certainly advantage to go with Canon, as any other system would require a learning curve and change of work flow etc. While the body is light, battery life will be better than the Mirrorless cameras, Canon doesn't seem to have great lens for the UWA range, compared to the other vendors. Going with the 11-22mm lens (10+ yr old technology) seems to sacrifice too much in IQ, and it's not that wide on APS-C.

Fuji seems to have a great reputation of its lens quality, with the 10-24mm zoom, I could get the 15mm UWA I really want. However, its 18-55mm is not wide enough for me. As I've used the 24-105mm on FF most of the time, 24mm is really a sweet spot for me, as it's wide enough for 90% of my wide shots. Fuji's 16-55mm f2.8 is the right range for me, but weights twice as much! the 16-50mm seems to be much less quality in IQ. The other dilemma is, I like the 24MP sensor of X-PRO2, but want the articulated LCD and the 35mm camera feel of X-T1. The folks on Fuji forum suggest me to wait for the next model X-T2, but I'd like to get a new system for my trip next month...

So it's a choice between the Fuji X-T1/T2, and Sony a7.

It's APS-C vs FF. A7's DR is better at base ISO (base Sony ISO 100 vs base Fuji ISO 200) and you will have cleaner photos in shadow after pushing up. Also Adobe ACR RAW processing is not optimized for Fuji RAW. So if you use LR it could be an issue.

Welcome your comments and suggestions!

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums

--
My 5D IS a MK1 classic
...
emmm.....no way to win this discussion ......my favorite camera will look bad...what to do what to do.......DELETE THE THREAD.....again.......i win

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums

 

[davev8]

Thanks to all your suggestions, here are my thoughts now:

There are quite a few options, to help to narrow it down, I first ruled out the micro 4/3 systems (Olympus, Panasonic), based on the thinking that (correct me if I'm wrong) all else being equal, larger sensors produce better (lower noise) images at higher ISO. This maybe the old school thinking, I'm not sure if technology has advanced in recent years such that it no longer holds true - tell me if so.

Thanks to the suggestion by "PWPhotography", I took another look into Sony a7. While Sony 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens seems to be a great lens, Sony doesn't offer anything wider than 24mm for FF, that's why I ruled it out before. With Voigtlander 15mm, this combination becomes viable again.

Sony does have FE 16-35/4.0 ZA OSS that optically is better than its FE 24-70/4.0 ZA OSS, it's a bit heavy and big but still lighter and smaller than DSLR 16-35/4.0 IS/VR counterparts, only slightly heavier than Canon 17-40L/4.0 (without 'IS'), 518 vs 475g, but not bigger, 72mm vs 77mm filter size. It's a very good lens, you can see many photos from this lens in my Flickr link. Voigtlander 15mm F4.5 has quite good optical performance but a MF lens which is not big deal in landscape.

The sony 16-35 does seem very good but its only about 2 Sony battery's lighter than the canon 16-35 and a sony A7ii is 3 and a bit battery's lighter than a Canon 6D

Add together, the weight and size difference are still quite obvious, no mention A7 is much better in DR at base ISO.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#487.440,380.425,ha,t

A7 + FE 16-35, 992g

looks like i quoted for the A7ii

6D + EF 16-35, 1385g

Each Sony NP-FW50 battery is 42.5g (third-party ones such as from Wasabi is slightly lighter). With my experience, 1 Canon LP-E6 battery is roughly about 2.5 NP-FW50 capability.

To OP, there is also Zeiss Batis 18mm F2.8 auto-focus prime lens. There are lots more native E-mount lenses released to market in last two years from different vendors. E-mount has becoming a major platform.

I also took another look at Canon SL1. There is certainly advantage to go with Canon, as any other system would require a learning curve and change of work flow etc. While the body is light, battery life will be better than the Mirrorless cameras, Canon doesn't seem to have great lens for the UWA range, compared to the other vendors. Going with the 11-22mm lens (10+ yr old technology) seems to sacrifice too much in IQ, and it's not that wide on APS-C.

Fuji seems to have a great reputation of its lens quality, with the 10-24mm zoom, I could get the 15mm UWA I really want. However, its 18-55mm is not wide enough for me. As I've used the 24-105mm on FF most of the time, 24mm is really a sweet spot for me, as it's wide enough for 90% of my wide shots. Fuji's 16-55mm f2.8 is the right range for me, but weights twice as much! the 16-50mm seems to be much less quality in IQ. The other dilemma is, I like the 24MP sensor of X-PRO2, but want the articulated LCD and the 35mm camera feel of X-T1. The folks on Fuji forum suggest me to wait for the next model X-T2, but I'd like to get a new system for my trip next month...

So it's a choice between the Fuji X-T1/T2, and Sony a7.

It's APS-C vs FF. A7's DR is better at base ISO (base Sony ISO 100 vs base Fuji ISO 200) and you will have cleaner photos in shadow after pushing up. Also Adobe ACR RAW processing is not optimized for Fuji RAW. So if you use LR it could be an issue.

Welcome your comments and suggestions!

 

[AmbleYonder]

2. reliable and well built, that could withstand outdoor conditions, like cold temperature (could be lower than 15F) and high altitude (4000-5000m)

steer clear of Sony then as they are fair weather cameras

Sony Forum - Photography - FM Forums

Explore Sony Forum photography discussions. Share your photos, discuss gear and techniques, and buy or sell equipment in our marketplace.

www.fredmiranda.com

same goes for the 6D (which I own )

 

[PWPhotography]

2. reliable and well built, that could withstand outdoor conditions, like cold temperature (could be lower than 15F) and high altitude (4000-5000m)

15F, is not even that cold in my area. None of my cameras including EOS-M stopped working at even -2 F. You can find my photos in my link from A7r and A7 II from 5200m above sea level on Tibet roof.

steer clear of Sony then as they are fair weather cameras

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1335252/0

same goes for the 6D (which I own )

I encountered moderate rain with A7r and A7 II and no problem as long as I covered. Nobody including 1DX and D5 owners will exposure cameras under heavy rain for a long time without a cover. Otherwise I have seen many photos from older A7 and A7r from glacier areas.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums