Are You Shooting Mirrorless Yet?

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

What Is Your Mirrorless Status?

  • I'm shooting mirrorless exclusively

    Votes: 20 10.1%

  • I'm shooting mirrorless and DSLR

    Votes: 62 31.2%

  • Not shooting mirrorless yet but plan to

    Votes: 40 20.1%

  • Not shooting mirrorless and not sure if I will or not

    Votes: 71 35.7%

  • I'll never shoot mirrorless - DSLRs forever!

    Votes: 6 3.0%
  • Total voters
    199
Member's gallery
I currently am very happy and satisfied with my D500 and my gripped D850. Waiting for Nikon to release a Z8 or a Z7s and see whether it will be suitable for BIF and wildlife photography. Invested heavily in Nikon glass so will continue using Nikon for the distant future. Actually in my last 35 years of doing photography I have never ever tried anything other than Nikon. Have used most of the Nikon camera line up starting from the FM, FE, FM2, FE2, F3HP, F501, F801, F801s, F6, D80, D90, D300s, D3s, D800 and now use the D500 & D850. Have always loved the feel and grip of Nikon bodies. They just feel robust in your hands and are workhorses.
 
Member's gallery
As long as I will not have to replace my 500PF and 300PF, getting a mirrorless for wildlife photo will be possible if I see major improvements relative to the D500. Also for landscape photo, with new 14-24 f/2.8 coming soon, plus getting a true full frame, it will be another good reason.
 
Member's gallery
Hut said:
Why is it that dslr is better on moving subjects?
Click to expand...
Different types and designs of focus systems. DSLR's use phase detect which is quite fast, but can have issues around accuracy. Mirrorless initially started with contrast-based systems, which are quite accurate, but not fast, especially in continuous AF. The newer mirrorless systems now use hybrid systems which are much better than the contrast only predecessors, but they are still not quite up to the current phase detect systems when using C-AF, especially when you compare them to cameras like the D500 which has a dedicated AF processor.

--Ken
 
Replytoken said:
Different types and designs of focus systems. DSLR's use phase detect which is quite fast, but can have issues around accuracy. Mirrorless initially started with contrast-based systems, which are quite accurate, but not fast, especially in continuous AF. The newer mirrorless systems now use hybrid systems which are much better than the contrast only predecessors, but they are still not quite up to the current phase detect systems when using C-AF, especially when you compare them to cameras like the D500 which has a dedicated AF processor.

--Ken
Click to expand...
Thank You very much for the explanation.
 
Member's gallery
I'm shooting with both, but there are times when I wish I had just doubled down on DSLR's.
My wife and I both shoot and we have a pair of D500's and three Z6 bodies. We purchased our first Z6 cameras when they came out because I am a low-light and early morning shooter. I wanted a D5, but felt it was more money than I wanted to spend on a camera (I'd rather put that into optics). I waited to buy the 3rd Z6 until the D780 was introduced. I was really excited about the D780 until I learned that the AF module was not updated to the D500/D850 specs. In addition, with a price above $2000, I just decided to add another Z6 to the bag.
So why 2 mirrorless bodies?... One is for my landscapes and the other is for my 200-400VR. The Z6 AF, while slower than the D500, is super accurate. When paired with the 200-400 f/4, the lens performs better than ever.

cheers,
bruce
 
Member's gallery
I've been a Nikon shooter for many many years and still am, with a D5 and D500 but recently purchased the Sony A9ii along with the 200-600 and quite honestly I'm loving shooting with this combo.
 
Member's gallery
I suspect that I have taken a different route to get here than many, in that I started virtually from scratch with mirrorless. As a result of travelling to some remote parts of Australia fishing with mates, I have seen some great wildlife, particularly birds. Being very disappointed with the photos I took I decided to do something about it. I had been using an iPhone and a very old Canon SLR and on the advice of a friend who is a very keen photographer bought a Fuji XT-20. This was a jump up from the Canon and the quality of my photos started to improve. To my surprise, I started to get really interested in photographing birds, without realising how hard it was to get images that I was satisfied with. The XT-20 met its demise in a kayak fishing mishap while trying to photograph an azure kingfisher. I replaced it with a Fuji XT3 and subsequently purchased an XF100-400 zoom. I am enjoying using and learning this combination and am heartened to learn from reading other’s posts that many of my frustrations are shared. With no experience with quality lenses on any platform other than my current Fuji setup I have found Steve’s videos and the thoughtful posts here extremely helpful. While often Nikon specific there has been a lot of technique discussed that is manufacturer agnostic.

Thanks for a great site Steve,

Andy
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Replytoken said:
Have you used any older DSLR bodies you could compare the Z6 to for AF speed (e.g. D750, D300)? The comments about the Z6 AF for action work like BIF are quite spread out.

Thanks,

--Ken
Click to expand...
Hi Ken,
I've been shooting Nikon for a long time (1990's to 2005, left for Canon from'05-'14, and back to Nikon post 2014), so yes. I think that the Z6 AF is about as fast to focus and follow as the D810. The D810 was quicker to wake up and lock on, but the Z6 is way more accurate when it locks on. This is a real trade-off. I never used my D810 for fast action (or action in general), so the move to the Z6 wasn't a loss to me when doing wildlife photography.
Because the 200-400VR is a pain to AF fine tune with some real differences at 200mm, 300mm and 400mm, I always tuned it to my D500 at 500mm. This meant that the lens would often back focus at other focal lengths. Now that I have matched one of my Z6 bodies to either my 70-200E or 200-400VR, I do not have back/front focus issues with either lens. While I might miss the occasional shot due to the less responsive AFC (when compared to Nikon DSLRs), the focus is dead on once it locks in.
 
Member's gallery
Louis champan said:
I've been a Nikon shooter for many many years and still am, with a D5 and D500 but recently purchased the Sony A9ii along with the 200-600 and quite honestly I'm loving shooting with this combo.
Click to expand...
I've heard great things about this combination. The 200-600 seems to be an amazing accomplishment on Sony's part. While I'm not wild about the f/6.3 max aperture at 500-600mm, the fact that they made this an internal zoom lens for $2000 is mind-blowing.
I have seen a lot of images taken with this lens posted on FM. With the exception of those posted by people who really know how to post-process their work, it appears that the Sony lens had reduced contrast/micro-details at the longer end >500mm. From your experience, (all things being equal) how would you compare the image output of the Sony 200-600 + Sony A9II to the Nikon 200-500 + Nikon D5?.
I really want Nikon to redesign the 200-500 f/5.6 w/ and internal zoom... I'd pay a premium for this lens in Z or F mount if it had nano-coated elements and the more robust AFS motor.
 
Member's gallery
D850 now. Don't need a second camera, but if I find a good deal on a Z6/7 I might bite. Used prices for Z6/7 are ridiculous. Add the cost of the FTZ converter to a refurbished and might as well buy a new one.
 
Member's gallery
Harry.G said:
Except for the obviously "lighter" set up - what would be the full advantage of 100% mirrorless
Click to expand...
Honestly, lighter weight is way down on the list, I almost don't even care about that aspect of mirrorless.

The advantages I enjoy are AF points everywhere in the viewfinder (this is HUGE for me), tracking everywhere in the viewfinder (as a result of the last point), usually no need for AF fine tuning, better image quality due to wider lens mounts, generally higher frame rates, no blackout between shots (my a9ii does this, I think we'll see it in every camera in the not-to-distant future), live exposure information, far less shutter noise (no mirror slip LOL), and the cameras should also prove more reliable since there are less moving parts. Plus, mirrorless cameras are easier to transport. It's far easier for me to take a pair of Sonys overseas than my D6 and gripped D850.

At this point, I can do pretty much everything with my a9ii that I can with my DSLRs and then some. Just waiting for Nikon to catch up - if they had a version of the D6 and D850 in mirrorless, I'd probably be done with DSLRs. :)
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
At this point, I can do pretty much everything with my a9ii that I can with my DSLRs and then some.
Click to expand...
Are you running any of your big Nikkor glass with the Sony via Metabones or some other lens mount adapter or are you running all native Sony compatible glass with the a9iii? If the former, are you happy with the performance with adapters in the mix?
 
Member's gallery
DRwyoming said:
Are you running any of your big Nikkor glass with the Sony via Metabones or some other lens mount adapter or are you running all native Sony compatible glass with the a9iii? If the former, are you happy with the performance with adapters in the mix?
Click to expand...
Just running native Sony lenses (the 100-400 and 600 F/4 - my wife has the 200-600). I haven't tried the adapters yet, but I may. I just haven't really heard great things about using them, although I also haven't done much research about it either - yet :)
 
Member's gallery
I'm relatively new to photography so that means my gear is too. I'm really satisfied with my D7500 and all it has to offer. I'm still figuring things out along with what I like to shoot.

It's inevitable for me though. I'm sure at some point I'll get the bug and jump into mirrorless. For now it seems like the technology is getting better so I can hold out for a while.
 
Member's gallery
BLev65 said:
Hi Ken,
I've been shooting Nikon for a long time (1990's to 2005, left for Canon from'05-'14, and back to Nikon post 2014), so yes. I think that the Z6 AF is about as fast to focus and follow as the D810. The D810 was quicker to wake up and lock on, but the Z6 is way more accurate when it locks on. This is a real trade-off. I never used my D810 for fast action (or action in general), so the move to the Z6 wasn't a loss to me when doing wildlife photography.
Because the 200-400VR is a pain to AF fine tune with some real differences at 200mm, 300mm and 400mm, I always tuned it to my D500 at 500mm. This meant that the lens would often back focus at other focal lengths. Now that I have matched one of my Z6 bodies to either my 70-200E or 200-400VR, I do not have back/front focus issues with either lens. While I might miss the occasional shot due to the less responsive AFC (when compared to Nikon DSLRs), the focus is dead on once it locks in.
Click to expand...
This is helpful. I would agree that mirrorless is much more accurate, but not having shot with the Z6, I was interested in hearing your comparison. I have a D500 (and D750) and I would agree that tuning any long telephoto zoom is a challenge. I would trade the D500 for the Z6, but I am not sure I would be happy with the feature gain/loss trade-off right now.

Thanks,

--Ken
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
I thought I'd try a poll - so who's shooting mirrorless? Who's planning on it? Who's never gonna? Place your votes above :)
Click to expand...
D4, D850, Z6. I have really tried to use the Z6 as much as I could and have had great results. However, at this point it is only macro and landscape I feel happy using it. I can see the potential and I think it will be the future. I just hope Nikon keep up with the game. If I was starting now, with no kit, I think Sony would be a no brainer.
I really wanted the D6 to get rave reviews, to justify buying one. However, having shot with the D850 for the last year or so and being a birder, (cropping) I see the D6 as a pro sports camera. I think I will save my cash for the next Nikon mirrorless generation 🤞
 
Member's gallery
Replytoken said:
This is helpful. I would agree that mirrorless is much more accurate, but not having shot with the Z6, I was interested in hearing your comparison. I have a D500 (and D750) and I would agree that tuning any long telephoto zoom is a challenge. I would trade the D500 for the Z6, but I am not sure I would be happy with the feature gain/loss trade-off right now.

Thanks,

--Ken
Click to expand...
Ken,
If you are a Nikon guy, I would not sell your D500 yet. The Nikon D6/D5/D500/D850 are their best AFC bodies (listed in order of best to less best). There are no Nikon mirrorless bodies that approach the AF speed and frame rate of these DSLR's. The Z6 is an "also" body in the wildlife world... it is useable, just like the D750/D810/D7200, but it is not designed for rapid movement.
I like my two Z6 bodies... I have one with an L-bracket for wide-angle work (14-30 & 24-70), and the second has the battery grip that I use with my 200-400 and 70-200. W/my D500 on a 500PF, I can go into the field w/ 3 bodies on 3 cameras. Having pre-mounted lenses is especially helpful in the tropics, like Costa Rica, and in the frigid temperature of my home in MN.
 
Member's gallery
BLev65 said:
Ken,
If you are a Nikon guy, I would not sell your D500 yet. The Nikon D6/D5/D500/D850 are their best AFC bodies (listed in order of best to less best). There are no Nikon mirrorless bodies that approach the AF speed and frame rate of these DSLR's. The Z6 is an "also" body in the wildlife world... it is useable, just like the D750/D810/D7200, but it is not designed for rapid movement.
I like my two Z6 bodies... I have one with an L-bracket for wide-angle work (14-30 & 24-70), and the second has the battery grip that I use with my 200-400 and 70-200. W/my D500 on a 500PF, I can go into the field w/ 3 bodies on 3 cameras. Having pre-mounted lenses is especially helpful in the tropics, like Costa Rica, and in the frigid temperature of my home in MN.
Click to expand...
I hear you. I probably wont get rid of my D500, but for some reason we have not bonded like I did with my D300 and with my Olympus OM-D E-M1 bodies (excepting the latter for AF-C use). I am still working on the kinks, but it has had it challenges as I have limited amounts of time to get out and shoot things BIF. I look at my Olympus images when culling and images look as expected. When I look at many of my D500 images, they do not look sharply focused. As you mentioned, this is a great appeal of a mirrorless body. I have tried various AF tune methods, but I am not convinced I am seeing noticeable improvements. But, I am keeping at it in the hopes of finally getting things to be as they should.

--Ken
 
Member's gallery
I've been shooting backcountry sports, travel and other situations that benefit from a light kit with a Sony A6300 which I like but it's control layout and ergonomics is nothing like a Nikon DSLR. Like Chad and some of the posts above I've been considering swapping one of my DSLRs for a Z6 which I'd likely use for astrophotography and as a light walk around kit but I'll wait and see a bit longer on the Z6s or Z7s. If they turn out to improve the Nikon mirrorless game for faster action work and keep the great Nikon control layout I could seriously see adding one to my kit.

Like a lot of folks I've got a pretty big investment into Nikon F mount glass and have spent years getting used to the controls on Nikon SLRs and DSLRs so I'm not real eager to jump brands but there are certainly some very good mirrorless systems out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top