Looking for a light alternative to 5D system

[PWPhotography]

well, ir you are looking at ultra light with half decent quality, I'm not sure you can't do any better than the EF-M.

it lacks substance in the pro areas for sure, however for a lightweight travel kit where there is less focus (no pun) on fast motion - there's really no competition with the exception of the SL1 + EF-S lenses or the smaller m43's sensor equivalents.

Even though, the smaller m43 cameras - you do pay the price if you want excellent optical quality.

the EF-M 11-22 is excellent 220g
the 22mm ultra sharp at 105g
the 55-200 is pretty to very good, slow, but it's small and light and I find I really like taking this lens with me: 260g

the 18-55 is the weakest link .. but it's really not that bad if you use DPP and DLO to correct it's optical issues. (210g)

all 4 lenses would weigh in around the same as your one 24-105L

your total kit weight would be around 1kg and coverage from 17mm to 320mm not to mention that outside of m43's .. it is the smallest by volume taken into account lens and body size.

and it's also cheap - if you drop it, etc .. you're not out thousands.

I cannot disagree if weight/size is top priority to OP. I still own EOS-M package with M 22mm/2.0, 18-55 IS STM and 90EX flash ;-) But the same argument can go to the other APS-C or mFT mirrorless that could be further smaller/lighter, AF faster with better sensors from Sony over outdated Canon 18mmp sensor.

Here is EOS-M with M 11-22/4.0-5.6 IS STM vs Sony A5000 with E 10-18/4.0 OSS . A5000 body is further slightly smaller and lighter than EOS-M, and a constant f/4.0 and wider (OP wants UWA lens) E 10-18/4.0 OSS is only 5g over a narrower and slower (at teleside) EF-M 11-22/4.0-5.6 IS STM.

Total: Canon 518g with widest FF-eq 17.6mm while Sony 494g with widest FF-eq 15mm FOV. EOS-M (and in general Canon CDAF and LV AF even with dual-pixel) AF is way slower than Sony (and mFT) mirrorless AF, and Canon outdated 18mp sensor is inferior to Sony sensors used in its APS-C and mFT mirrorless lines especially in DR.

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

 

[rrccad]

well, ir you are looking at ultra light with half decent quality, I'm not sure you can't do any better than the EF-M.

it lacks substance in the pro areas for sure, however for a lightweight travel kit where there is less focus (no pun) on fast motion - there's really no competition with the exception of the SL1 + EF-S lenses or the smaller m43's sensor equivalents.

Even though, the smaller m43 cameras - you do pay the price if you want excellent optical quality.

the EF-M 11-22 is excellent 220g
the 22mm ultra sharp at 105g
the 55-200 is pretty to very good, slow, but it's small and light and I find I really like taking this lens with me: 260g

the 18-55 is the weakest link .. but it's really not that bad if you use DPP and DLO to correct it's optical issues. (210g)

all 4 lenses would weigh in around the same as your one 24-105L

your total kit weight would be around 1kg and coverage from 17mm to 320mm not to mention that outside of m43's .. it is the smallest by volume taken into account lens and body size.

and it's also cheap - if you drop it, etc .. you're not out thousands.

I cannot disagree if weight/size is top priority to OP. I still own EOS-M package with M 22mm/2.0, 18-55 IS STM and 90EX flash ;-) But the same argument can go to the other APS-C or mFT mirrorless that could be further smaller/lighter,

not when you include in a comparable kit and try and match optics.

AF faster with better sensors from Sony over outdated Canon 18mmp sensor.

except the M3 isn't the 18mp sensor.

Here is EOS-M with M 11-22/4.0-5.6 IS STM vs Sony A5000 with E 10-18/4.0 OSS . A5000 body is further slightly smaller and lighter than EOS-M, and a constant f/4.0 and wider (OP wants UWA lens) E 10-18/4.0 OSS is only 5g over a narrower and slower (at teleside) EF-M 11-22/4.0-5.6 IS STM.

except cost and size, and you are buying based upon specs - which makes sense, you use sony products. The 10-18/4 is 800 USD for a sub par performing lens, and then you are bolting it on a A5000? then on top of that, you're looking at photos on a 16:9 LCD screen, and for regular shooting of stills is nearly microscopically small compared to a real 3:2 LCD panel.

might as well just use a smartphone and call it quits.

Also if you note, I mentioned the entire kit and the presumption of optical quality and also the volume and cost consideration.

this is your setup:

even stopped down to match the 11-22 EF-M wide open, it's a complete POS when you consider it's twice the price.

your solution costs around $1200 right now, versus $800 right now and it's not even in the same ballpark.

Not to mention that canon includes complete optical corrections via RAW and DPP+DLO that simply work wonders as making that as good as what you can get from a canon L as far as resolution into the corners and lack of CA, you don't get those corrections unless you get DxO plugins for your sony stuff.

 

[trulandphoto]

Taking into account all your parameters I'd take a 6D and a 16-35mm f/4L IS. It would fit in a gallon freezer bag.

 

[PWPhotography]

well, ir you are looking at ultra light with half decent quality, I'm not sure you can't do any better than the EF-M.

it lacks substance in the pro areas for sure, however for a lightweight travel kit where there is less focus (no pun) on fast motion - there's really no competition with the exception of the SL1 + EF-S lenses or the smaller m43's sensor equivalents.

Even though, the smaller m43 cameras - you do pay the price if you want excellent optical quality.

the EF-M 11-22 is excellent 220g
the 22mm ultra sharp at 105g
the 55-200 is pretty to very good, slow, but it's small and light and I find I really like taking this lens with me: 260g

the 18-55 is the weakest link .. but it's really not that bad if you use DPP and DLO to correct it's optical issues. (210g)

all 4 lenses would weigh in around the same as your one 24-105L

your total kit weight would be around 1kg and coverage from 17mm to 320mm not to mention that outside of m43's .. it is the smallest by volume taken into account lens and body size.

and it's also cheap - if you drop it, etc .. you're not out thousands.

I cannot disagree if weight/size is top priority to OP. I still own EOS-M package with M 22mm/2.0, 18-55 IS STM and 90EX flash ;-) But the same argument can go to the other APS-C or mFT mirrorless that could be further smaller/lighter,

not when you include in a comparable kit and try and match optics.

My point is that there are other options of small and light package except EOS-M family that can take equally if not better IQ photos.

AF faster with better sensors from Sony over outdated Canon 18mmp sensor.

except the M3 isn't the 18mp sensor.

Still Canon sensors are outdated in technology especially in DR that is a very key part of landscape photos.

Here is EOS-M with M 11-22/4.0-5.6 IS STM vs Sony A5000 with E 10-18/4.0 OSS . A5000 body is further slightly smaller and lighter than EOS-M, and a constant f/4.0 and wider (OP wants UWA lens) E 10-18/4.0 OSS is only 5g over a narrower and slower (at teleside) EF-M 11-22/4.0-5.6 IS STM.

except cost and size, and you are buying based upon specs - which makes sense, you use sony products. The 10-18/4 is 800 USD for a sub par performing lens, and then you are bolting it on a A5000? then on top of that, you're looking at photos on a 16:9 LCD screen, and for regular shooting of stills is nearly microscopically small compared to a real 3:2 LCD panel.

The point is that EOS-M is not the only choice in small and light. A5000 is very cheap and still has much better AF and DR than any EOS-M family cameras. Add a little weight and size, then there are choices of A6000 and A6300 from Sony side alone, no mention other choices from Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic.

There are other lenses choices of other APS-C or mFT mirroless that probably have more choices over EF-M mount, such as those from Sony E-mount

http://briansmith.com/aps-e-mount-lenses-for-sony-mirrorless-cameras/

might as well just use a smartphone and call it quits.

Yes the argument can go to much smaller and lighter Sony RX-100 family that is another great choices for hiking. My RX-100 is way better than S95 that I used to own from aspects of IQ, DR, AF speed and battery life with similar size and only slightly heavier.

Also if you note, I mentioned the entire kit and the presumption of optical quality and also the volume and cost consideration.

this is your setup:

Well, Sony setup resolves more in most center area while Canon is better in edges/corners that also confirmed by PhotoZone tests (although they tested on A6000 instead). Get me no mistake that in general I like Canon lenses over Sony's that is why I still use EF 17mm TS-E and EF 24-70L/2.8 II on my A7r and A7 II. But Sony sensors are simply better especially if you lift shadows, and all other mirrorless cameras AF are way faster than Canon mirrorless, that something Canon just cannot figure out.

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Comp...s-Sony-A6000-versus-Sony-A5000___1019_942_929

even stopped down to match the 11-22 EF-M wide open, it's a complete POS when you consider it's twice the price.

your solution costs around $1200 right now, versus $800 right now and it's not even in the same ballpark.

I am not a fan of Sony lenses' prices either but there are other options from other vendors such as Sigma.

Not to mention that canon includes complete optical corrections via RAW and DPP+DLO that simply work wonders as making that as good as what you can get from a canon L as far as resolution into the corners and lack of CA, you don't get those corrections unless you get DxO plugins for your sony stuff.

People like me only use LR so this is hardly an advantage as LR also has its lens profiles. Nevertheless I agree in general that Canon lenses are better than Sony counterparts. I am more familiar with FF cameras. But Sony new GM lenses seem excellent, very pleasing bokeh, much improved QC (as good as Canon and Nikon according to Lensrentals) except very expensive prices. Canon has tradition in lens design while Sony is still catching up.

Nevertheless I still recommend A7II or A7 to OP. If size and weight are his absolute top priority, then there are lots of choices, and certainly EOS-M family is one of them. But since OP never owns any EOS-M products, personally I don't think this is his best choice among APS-C and mFT mirroless choices from perspective of overall performance - IQ, lens choices, DR, AF speed and high ISO.

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

 

[rrccad]

People like me only use LR so this is hardly an advantage as LR also has its lens profiles.

LR lens profiles aren't the same. you really should do a little googling and understanding before answering.

DLO in DPP does the same as DxO optics pro.

 

[Le_Kilt]

Taking into account all your parameters I'd take a 6D and a 16-35mm f/4L IS. It would fit in a gallon freezer bag.

Why would you want to put it in the freezer ???

:

:

:

:

:

Sorry, just leaving...

;-)

 

[PWPhotography]

People like me only use LR so this is hardly an advantage as LR also has its lens profiles.

LR lens profiles aren't the same. you really should do a little googling and understanding before answering.

DLO in DPP does the same as DxO optics pro.

I have seen several threads of this DLO in DPP discussions and debates in the past. Personally I have not seen advantage over LP's lens profiles. But I have no arguments if someone insists it or DXO Optics Pro is the best, no mention DPP and DLO are only for Canon CR2 files. I will stay with LR on perpetual or subscribed license as I see it's the best RAW processing software overall.

 

[davev8]

well, ir you are looking at ultra light with half decent quality, I'm not sure you can't do any better than the EF-M.

it lacks substance in the pro areas for sure, however for a lightweight travel kit where there is less focus (no pun) on fast motion - there's really no competition with the exception of the SL1 + EF-S lenses or the smaller m43's sensor equivalents.

Even though, the smaller m43 cameras - you do pay the price if you want excellent optical quality.

the EF-M 11-22 is excellent 220g
the 22mm ultra sharp at 105g
the 55-200 is pretty to very good, slow, but it's small and light and I find I really like taking this lens with me: 260g

the 18-55 is the weakest link .. but it's really not that bad if you use DPP and DLO to correct it's optical issues. (210g)

all 4 lenses would weigh in around the same as your one 24-105L

your total kit weight would be around 1kg and coverage from 17mm to 320mm not to mention that outside of m43's .. it is the smallest by volume taken into account lens and body size.

and it's also cheap - if you drop it, etc .. you're not out thousands.

I cannot disagree if weight/size is top priority to OP. I still own EOS-M package with M 22mm/2.0, 18-55 IS STM and 90EX flash ;-) But the same argument can go to the other APS-C or mFT mirrorless that could be further smaller/lighter, AF faster with better sensors from Sony over outdated Canon 18mmp sensor.

Here is EOS-M with M 11-22/4.0-5.6 IS STM vs Sony A5000 with E 10-18/4.0 OSS . A5000 body is further slightly smaller and lighter than EOS-M, and a constant f/4.0 and wider (OP wants UWA lens) E 10-18/4.0 OSS is only 5g over a narrower and slower (at teleside) EF-M 11-22/4.0-5.6 IS STM.#

you have to look at the numbers on camera size not the photos...the M is a little smaller all-round than the A5000 the M2 is 10% smaller still than the M and within 5g of the A5000 the m/m2 is made out of magally the 5000 is err not

also the EF-m 11-22 is sharper than the sony 10-18 and has 1/2 the chromatic aberrations Here click mesurments > sharpness>field map

so the M2 with the 11-22 will be the same to the gram but sharper ...also sony has nothing to compete with the 22mm F2 or the 55-200 with ether optical performance or size...the efm18-55 is probably less spectacular than the other M lenses mentioned but probably better than the sony 18-55..i have both but not do any formal testing but i feal the ef-m lens is better .more so at the long end

Total: Canon 518g with widest FF-eq 17.6mm while Sony 494g with widest FF-eq 15mm FOV. EOS-M (and in general Canon CDAF and LV AF even with dual-pixel) AF is way slower than Sony (and mFT) mirrorless AF, and Canon outdated 18mp sensor is inferior to Sony sensors used in its APS-C and mFT mirrorless lines especially in DR.

--
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

 

[PWPhotography]

well, ir you are looking at ultra light with half decent quality, I'm not sure you can't do any better than the EF-M.

it lacks substance in the pro areas for sure, however for a lightweight travel kit where there is less focus (no pun) on fast motion - there's really no competition with the exception of the SL1 + EF-S lenses or the smaller m43's sensor equivalents.

Even though, the smaller m43 cameras - you do pay the price if you want excellent optical quality.

the EF-M 11-22 is excellent 220g
the 22mm ultra sharp at 105g
the 55-200 is pretty to very good, slow, but it's small and light and I find I really like taking this lens with me: 260g

the 18-55 is the weakest link .. but it's really not that bad if you use DPP and DLO to correct it's optical issues. (210g)

all 4 lenses would weigh in around the same as your one 24-105L

your total kit weight would be around 1kg and coverage from 17mm to 320mm not to mention that outside of m43's .. it is the smallest by volume taken into account lens and body size.

and it's also cheap - if you drop it, etc .. you're not out thousands.

I cannot disagree if weight/size is top priority to OP. I still own EOS-M package with M 22mm/2.0, 18-55 IS STM and 90EX flash ;-) But the same argument can go to the other APS-C or mFT mirrorless that could be further smaller/lighter, AF faster with better sensors from Sony over outdated Canon 18mmp sensor.

Here is EOS-M with M 11-22/4.0-5.6 IS STM vs Sony A5000 with E 10-18/4.0 OSS . A5000 body is further slightly smaller and lighter than EOS-M, and a constant f/4.0 and wider (OP wants UWA lens) E 10-18/4.0 OSS is only 5g over a narrower and slower (at teleside) EF-M 11-22/4.0-5.6 IS STM.#

you have to look at the numbers on camera size not the photos...the M is a little smaller all-round than the A5000 the M2 is 10% smaller still than the M and within 5g of the A5000 the m/m2 is made out of magally the 5000 is err not

EOS-M is a bit taller than A5000 however.

also the EF-m 11-22 is sharper than the sony 10-18 and has 1/2 the chromatic aberrations Here click mesurments > sharpness>field map

Yes on DXO test. In PhotoZone tests, E 10-18 resolves more on 24mp A6000 in center than 11-22 on 18mp EOS-M and match in edges/corners when stop down, A5000 will be a bit less but likely still resolve a bit more in center as it's on 20mp (and slightly bigger) sensor.

so the M2 with the 11-22 will be the same to the gram but sharper ...also sony has nothing to compete with the 22mm F2 or the 55-200 with ether optical performance or size...the efm18-55 is probably less spectacular than the other M lenses mentioned but probably better than the sony 18-55..i have both but not do any formal testing but i feal the ef-m lens is better .more so at the long end

Yes as I said Canon lenses in general are better and even cheaper, no argument. Indeed EF-M 22/2.0 is very sharp. Not familiar with APS-C and mFT mirrorless worlds in general but I read Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic have some wonderful lenses, a frequent argument from those owners over Sony APS-C choice from what I have read. Good news is that Canon seems still commit to M system but really Canon needs to address sluggish AF (it's the only mirroless in the town with such slow AF) and improve sensor especially in DR (but we do see positive sign in newly released 80D although it still lags behind Sony). One rumor said Canon is also developing FF mirrorless. But it will be a big embrasement if EF lenses AF (much) faster on A7r II/A7 II (and rumor A9) and have better IQ (DR) if Canon fails to address these issues.

Total: Canon 518g with widest FF-eq 17.6mm while Sony 494g with widest FF-eq 15mm FOV. EOS-M (and in general Canon CDAF and LV AF even with dual-pixel) AF is way slower than Sony (and mFT) mirrorless AF, and Canon outdated 18mp sensor is inferior to Sony sensors used in its APS-C and mFT mirrorless lines especially in DR.

--
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

 

[seafan]

Thank you all to your additional input! Yesterday I went to our local camera store, they happened to have an event for all vendors to show and tell their products, it was a great opportunity to see all the camera and lens, have them in my hands, and talk to the vendor reps.

*** Canon SL1, M

As folks suggested Canon models, I took another look at the options. Canon M doesn't have a viewfinder, for SL1, the Canon rep told me the available lens in the range I was looking for were not on par with the lens I have been using. So while the size and weight are good, going this route seems to give up too much on IQ for me.

*** Sony & Fuji

A few folks suggested Sony a7, and based on the specs, I think the following would best suit my needs:

1. Sony a7

Voigtlander Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f/4.5 Aspherical III Lens for Sony E

Sony - Vario-Tessar T* FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens

2. Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless Digital Camera Body- Black

Sony Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens (24-105mm)

Sony 10-18mm f/4 OSS Alpha E-mount Wide-Angle Zoom Lens (15-27mm)

3. Fujifilm X-Pro2 / X-T1 / X-T2

XF 10-24mm f/4 R OIS Lens (15-36mm)

XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 R LM OIS Zoom Lens (27-84mm)

Among these 3, Sony a7 probably would give the best IQ, Sony a6300 has the best lens range for me, Fuji may have the best lens, widest UWA reach. It's almost a draw, any one among them should work for me.

*** price and other SUBJECTIVE factors

Aside from my concern with possible Sony lens QC issues, which did leave me a deep impression as I mentioned and makes me a little wary about buying Sony products in general (just my personal feelings, please don't get offended if you love your Sony), when I had them in my hands, I have to say I like the feel of the Fuji cameras more, they seems to be more solid built and could take a little abuse in outdoor situations, while Sony looks more like nice electronic gadgets that should be used with care. Fuji has more knobs and buttons that could be adjusted manually, while Sony is more menu driven.

I didn't include the cost/price into this discussion yet. The Sony a7 set would cost about $3200, the a6300 set about $2200, and Fuji X-T1 set about $2700. Fuji is running a rebate program now, and I could get the X-T10 with kit lens for $900 to get a taste of the system, and later upgrade to X-T2 when it comes out. That seems to be the lowest entry ticket to try a new system, and I'll probably go that route.

As I read up on these products in the past week, Fuji lens seem to have a great reputation, but Fuji RAW files have less software support, their JPEG look is hard to replicate using PS. Like Dr Ron said, it comes down to what compromise I'm willing to make. Going with the Fuji system, I won't get the 24mm end of the standard zoom, that may be something I could regret. Fuji JPEG rendition seems to be loved by a lot of people, so much that I got curious, even a little excited to find out how they look.

 

[davev8]

Thank you all to your additional input! Yesterday I went to our local camera store, they happened to have an event for all vendors to show and tell their products, it was a great opportunity to see all the camera and lens, have them in my hands, and talk to the vendor reps.

*** Canon SL1, M

As folks suggested Canon models, I took another look at the options. Canon M doesn't have a viewfinder, for SL1, the Canon rep told me the available lens in the range I was looking for were not on par with the lens I have been using. So while the size and weight are good, going this route seems to give up too much on IQ for me.

*** Sony & Fuji

A few folks suggested Sony a7, and based on the specs, I think the following would best suit my needs:

1. Sony a7

Voigtlander Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f/4.5 Aspherical III Lens for Sony E

Sony - Vario-Tessar T* FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens

2. Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless Digital Camera Body- Black

Sony Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens (24-105mm)

Sony 10-18mm f/4 OSS Alpha E-mount Wide-Angle Zoom Lens (15-27mm)

3. Fujifilm X-Pro2 / X-T1 / X-T2

XF 10-24mm f/4 R OIS Lens (15-36mm)

XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 R LM OIS Zoom Lens (27-84mm)

Among these 3, Sony a7 probably would give the best IQ, Sony a6300 has the best lens range for me, Fuji may have the best lens, widest UWA reach. It's almost a draw, any one among them should work for me.

*** price and other SUBJECTIVE factors

Aside from my concern with possible Sony lens QC issues, which did leave me a deep impression as I mentioned and makes me a little wary about buying Sony products in general (just my personal feelings, please don't get offended if you love your Sony), when I had them in my hands, I have to say I like the feel of the Fuji cameras more, they seems to be more solid built and could take a little abuse in outdoor situations, while Sony looks more like nice electronic gadgets that should be used with care. Fuji has more knobs and buttons that could be adjusted manually, while Sony is more menu driven.

I didn't include the cost/price into this discussion yet. The Sony a7 set would cost about $3200, the a6300 set about $2200, and Fuji X-T1 set about $2700. Fuji is running a rebate program now, and I could get the X-T10 with kit lens for $900 to get a taste of the system, and later upgrade to X-T2 when it comes out. That seems to be the lowest entry ticket to try a new system, and I'll probably go that route.

As I read up on these products in the past week, Fuji lens seem to have a great reputation, but Fuji RAW files have less software support, their JPEG look is hard to replicate using PS. Like Dr Ron said, it comes down to what compromise I'm willing to make. Going with the Fuji system, I won't get the 24mm end of the standard zoom, that may be something I could regret. Fuji JPEG rendition seems to be loved by a lot of people, so much that I got curious, even a little excited to find out how they look.

i think thats a good plan...try the camera before you dive into the hole 9 yards

thats what i did i get a second hand XE-2 but find i was not happy with the output after 3 or 4 month i put it back on feebay with an 50mm manual focus M42 lens that cost me £5+an adaptor and made just over £100 GBP profit ...Happy days

 

[Great Bustard]

Thank you all to your additional input! Yesterday I went to our local camera store, they happened to have an event for all vendors to show and tell their products, it was a great opportunity to see all the camera and lens, have them in my hands, and talk to the vendor reps.

*** Canon SL1, M

As folks suggested Canon models, I took another look at the options. Canon M doesn't have a viewfinder, for SL1, the Canon rep told me the available lens in the range I was looking for were not on par with the lens I have been using. So while the size and weight are good, going this route seems to give up too much on IQ for me.

Something's off about that. As I demonstrated above, there are more than a few outstanding lenses for Canon that most certainly do not require you "to give up too much on IQ". Of course, that's not to say that other options, such as those you list below, would not suit you better. Just saying that it wouldn't be available lenses for Canon holding you back with regards to IQ.

*** Sony & Fuji

A few folks suggested Sony a7, and based on the specs, I think the following would best suit my needs:

1. Sony a7

Voigtlander Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f/4.5 Aspherical III Lens for Sony E

Sony - Vario-Tessar T* FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens

2. Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless Digital Camera Body- Black

Sony Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens (24-105mm)

Sony 10-18mm f/4 OSS Alpha E-mount Wide-Angle Zoom Lens (15-27mm)

3. Fujifilm X-Pro2 / X-T1 / X-T2

XF 10-24mm f/4 R OIS Lens (15-36mm)

XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 R LM OIS Zoom Lens (27-84mm)

Among these 3, Sony a7 probably would give the best IQ, Sony a6300 has the best lens range for me, Fuji may have the best lens, widest UWA reach. It's almost a draw, any one among them should work for me.

*** price and other SUBJECTIVE factors

Aside from my concern with possible Sony lens QC issues, which did leave me a deep impression as I mentioned and makes me a little wary about buying Sony products in general (just my personal feelings, please don't get offended if you love your Sony), when I had them in my hands, I have to say I like the feel of the Fuji cameras more, they seems to be more solid built and could take a little abuse in outdoor situations, while Sony looks more like nice electronic gadgets that should be used with care. Fuji has more knobs and buttons that could be adjusted manually, while Sony is more menu driven.

I didn't include the cost/price into this discussion yet. The Sony a7 set would cost about $3200, the a6300 set about $2200, and Fuji X-T1 set about $2700. Fuji is running a rebate program now, and I could get the X-T10 with kit lens for $900 to get a taste of the system, and later upgrade to X-T2 when it comes out. That seems to be the lowest entry ticket to try a new system, and I'll probably go that route.

As I read up on these products in the past week, Fuji lens seem to have a great reputation, but Fuji RAW files have less software support, their JPEG look is hard to replicate using PS. Like Dr Ron said, it comes down to what compromise I'm willing to make. Going with the Fuji system, I won't get the 24mm end of the standard zoom, that may be something I could regret. Fuji JPEG rendition seems to be loved by a lot of people, so much that I got curious, even a little excited to find out how they look.

 

[davev8]

Thank you all to your additional input! Yesterday I went to our local camera store, they happened to have an event for all vendors to show and tell their products, it was a great opportunity to see all the camera and lens, have them in my hands, and talk to the vendor reps.

*** Canon SL1, M

As folks suggested Canon models, I took another look at the options. Canon M doesn't have a viewfinder, for SL1, the Canon rep told me the available lens in the range I was looking for were not on par with the lens I have been using. So while the size and weight are good, going this route seems to give up too much on IQ for me.

Something's off about that. As I demonstrated above, there are more than a few outstanding lenses for Canon that most certainly do not require you "to give up too much on IQ". Of course, that's not to say that other options, such as those you list below, would not suit you better. Just saying that it wouldn't be available lenses for Canon holding you back with regards to IQ.

i am with you17-40L vs ef-s 10-22 both on same camera stopped down to a landscape F stop the ef-s lens has a very slight edge...obversely if you put the FF lens on FF it will be better

*** Sony & Fuji

A few folks suggested Sony a7, and based on the specs, I think the following would best suit my needs:

1. Sony a7

Voigtlander Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f/4.5 Aspherical III Lens for Sony E

Sony - Vario-Tessar T* FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens

2. Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless Digital Camera Body- Black

Sony Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens (24-105mm)

Sony 10-18mm f/4 OSS Alpha E-mount Wide-Angle Zoom Lens (15-27mm)

3. Fujifilm X-Pro2 / X-T1 / X-T2

XF 10-24mm f/4 R OIS Lens (15-36mm)

XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 R LM OIS Zoom Lens (27-84mm)

Among these 3, Sony a7 probably would give the best IQ, Sony a6300 has the best lens range for me, Fuji may have the best lens, widest UWA reach. It's almost a draw, any one among them should work for me.

*** price and other SUBJECTIVE factors

Aside from my concern with possible Sony lens QC issues, which did leave me a deep impression as I mentioned and makes me a little wary about buying Sony products in general (just my personal feelings, please don't get offended if you love your Sony), when I had them in my hands, I have to say I like the feel of the Fuji cameras more, they seems to be more solid built and could take a little abuse in outdoor situations, while Sony looks more like nice electronic gadgets that should be used with care. Fuji has more knobs and buttons that could be adjusted manually, while Sony is more menu driven.

I didn't include the cost/price into this discussion yet. The Sony a7 set would cost about $3200, the a6300 set about $2200, and Fuji X-T1 set about $2700. Fuji is running a rebate program now, and I could get the X-T10 with kit lens for $900 to get a taste of the system, and later upgrade to X-T2 when it comes out. That seems to be the lowest entry ticket to try a new system, and I'll probably go that route.

As I read up on these products in the past week, Fuji lens seem to have a great reputation, but Fuji RAW files have less software support, their JPEG look is hard to replicate using PS. Like Dr Ron said, it comes down to what compromise I'm willing to make. Going with the Fuji system, I won't get the 24mm end of the standard zoom, that may be something I could regret. Fuji JPEG rendition seems to be loved by a lot of people, so much that I got curious, even a little excited to find out how they look.

 

[Jon555]

I personally think Silkypix is probably the best Raw processor for Fuji X-Trans, although Capture One and Iridient developer (Mac only) seem to have their supporters. (Aside - not sure I should have fixed that typo, Catpure One kinda worked for me...)

There are some good deals on Silkypix at the moment so I've just bought a copy, if you have a raw file or two you'd like me to run through in the future it I'd be happy to, although I'm at the bottom of an impressive learning curve.

Allegedly ( http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56819809 ) Fuji's in-house converter ( http://www.fujifilm.com/support/digital_cameras/software/myfinepix_studio/rfc_2/win/ ) is basically a 3-4 version old Silkypix.

The demosaicing software in the current Lightroom and ACR versions is the same as the one discussed here: http://chromasoft.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/lightroom-44rc-and-capture-one-versus-x.html

 

[Great Bustard]

Thank you all to your additional input! Yesterday I went to our local camera store, they happened to have an event for all vendors to show and tell their products, it was a great opportunity to see all the camera and lens, have them in my hands, and talk to the vendor reps.

*** Canon SL1, M

As folks suggested Canon models, I took another look at the options. Canon M doesn't have a viewfinder, for SL1, the Canon rep told me the available lens in the range I was looking for were not on par with the lens I have been using. So while the size and weight are good, going this route seems to give up too much on IQ for me.

Something's off about that. As I demonstrated above, there are more than a few outstanding lenses for Canon that most certainly do not require you "to give up too much on IQ". Of course, that's not to say that other options, such as those you list below, would not suit you better. Just saying that it wouldn't be available lenses for Canon holding you back with regards to IQ.

i am with you17-40L vs ef-s 10-22 both on same camera stopped down to a landscape F stop the ef-s lens has a very slight edge...obversely if you put the FF lens on FF it will be better

Indeed. The performance of a lens, in terms of the visual properties of the recorded photo, depends very much on the sensor behind that lens.

In any case, there are excellent lens choices for Canon APS-C. That's not to say that Canon APS-C is the best choice for the OP; rather, it's to say that the reasons to choose another system are not for lack of lenses that won't "give up too much on IQ".

 

[PWPhotography]

Thank you all to your additional input! Yesterday I went to our local camera store, they happened to have an event for all vendors to show and tell their products, it was a great opportunity to see all the camera and lens, have them in my hands, and talk to the vendor reps.

*** Canon SL1, M

As folks suggested Canon models, I took another look at the options. Canon M doesn't have a viewfinder, for SL1, the Canon rep told me the available lens in the range I was looking for were not on par with the lens I have been using. So while the size and weight are good, going this route seems to give up too much on IQ for me.

*** Sony & Fuji

A few folks suggested Sony a7, and based on the specs, I think the following would best suit my needs:

1. Sony a7

Voigtlander Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f/4.5 Aspherical III Lens for Sony E

Sony - Vario-Tessar T* FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens

2. Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless Digital Camera Body- Black

Sony Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens (24-105mm)

Sony 10-18mm f/4 OSS Alpha E-mount Wide-Angle Zoom Lens (15-27mm)

3. Fujifilm X-Pro2 / X-T1 / X-T2

XF 10-24mm f/4 R OIS Lens (15-36mm)

XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 R LM OIS Zoom Lens (27-84mm)

Among these 3, Sony a7 probably would give the best IQ, Sony a6300 has the best lens range for me, Fuji may have the best lens, widest UWA reach. It's almost a draw, any one among them should work for me.

*** price and other SUBJECTIVE factors

Aside from my concern with possible Sony lens QC issues, which did leave me a deep impression as I mentioned and makes me a little wary about buying Sony products in general (just my personal feelings, please don't get offended if you love your Sony), when I had them in my hands, I have to say I like the feel of the Fuji cameras more, they seems to be more solid built and could take a little abuse in outdoor situations, while Sony looks more like nice electronic gadgets that should be used with care. Fuji has more knobs and buttons that could be adjusted manually, while Sony is more menu driven.

I didn't include the cost/price into this discussion yet. The Sony a7 set would cost about $3200, the a6300 set about $2200, and Fuji X-T1 set about $2700. Fuji is running a rebate program now, and I could get the X-T10 with kit lens for $900 to get a taste of the system, and later upgrade to X-T2 when it comes out. That seems to be the lowest entry ticket to try a new system, and I'll probably go that route.

As I read up on these products in the past week, Fuji lens seem to have a great reputation, but Fuji RAW files have less software support, their JPEG look is hard to replicate using PS. Like Dr Ron said, it comes down to what compromise I'm willing to make. Going with the Fuji system, I won't get the 24mm end of the standard zoom, that may be something I could regret. Fuji JPEG rendition seems to be loved by a lot of people, so much that I got curious, even a little excited to find out how they look.

i think thats a good plan...try the camera before you dive into the hole 9 yards

+1. Go to a camera shop or show, try each of these above choices with one comparable typical lens to see if you are comfortable with weight, size and handling. Save RAW files to your SD card and do side by side comparison in computer. Or do some search in internet and compare. Each of these is very capable and should meet OP's need. It's the most important first step to choose a system.

thats what i did i get a second hand XE-2 but find i was not happy with the output after 3 or 4 month i put it back on feebay with an 50mm manual focus M42 lens that cost me £5+an adaptor and made just over £100 GBP profit ...Happy days

--
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

 

[PWPhotography]

Review: Voigtlander 10mm 5.6 E aspherical for Sony E-Mount

Review of the brand new Voigtlander 10mm 5.6 Hyper Wide Heliar aspherical for Sony E-Mount cameras. Find out everything you want to know in this...

phillipreeve.net

Camera is just one side of story, another side is lens. If you like UWA lens, this CV 10mm/F5.6 is another choice, pretty compact (although a slow lens) with beautiful sunstars (that something Sony lenses are not very good at in general). CV is porting original Leica M-mount lenses (can be used on A7-series thru adapter) to native Sony E-mount.