What made you switch to Canon RF mirrorless?

[pcassel]

I can't see Pentax prospering in the MILC world because the resources needed to compete against Canon and Sony are enormous. Sony just introduced a high end 35 mm form MILC with a global shutter. Canon will almost surely have an answer in the R1 and likely the R5II Real Soon Now. Even Nikon seems to be flagging in the halo race being run by those two.

What could Pentax introduce in a MILC that would convince anybody to invest in its system over those two or even Nikon?

 

[Philnick]

I started with black and white photography and a home darkroom when I was in elementary school in 1958, carrying around a Kodak Retina folding camera with a tiny rangefinder I could put in its flash shoe, and a tiny light meter I could put into a second flash shoe I'd epoxied on top of the rangefinder.

Carried that assemblage around in my pockets in high school 'till I got my Canon FT-QL 35mm SLR with an FL stop-down metering lens mount as I graduated in 1968. Put an 85mm f/1.8 lens on it in college and while I added a few other lenses over the years (FL and FD lenses became inexpensive with the popularity of the EF mount), the 85mm saw the way I saw. That was my basic rig for 38 years until I went digital in 2006 after seeing how good it had become from shots from my wife's little point and shoot.

Got a Digital Rebel XT with an EF-S 15-85mm, then moved to the XTi with the glorious EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8. Got the T4i for its pioneering "scattered dual-pixel sites" experiment, upgraded to the "full dual-pixel" 70D and then 80D -- and then became intrigued by being able to see what my exposure looked like in the electronic viewfinder of my pocket Powershot G5X.

So I started looking for something like that in a camera that could use my EF-S lenses and got the R7 last summer.

After seeing my DSLRs get bigger and heavier with every upgrade, I was surprised and delighted to once again have a camera as small and light as my old film SLR while more capable than any camera I'd ever had.

As a 38-year 35mm SLR shooter, it's no small thing that I can make the R7 feel like home: it lets me set my f/stop on the lens with the Control Ring, my shutter speed with the main dial on the top deck, and "change the film" by setting the ISO with the ring around the joystick. Instead of a match-needle in the viewfinder I have real-time red, green, and blue histograms in a viewfinder that gets brighter and darker with changes in my exposure setting. I run in Manual exposure mode like I did with my FT-QL. I can even slide the focus point with my thumb on the rear screen while looking through the viewfinder. This setup is retro- and future-facing at the same time.

And the R7's high-resolution sensor lets me use sharp primes as if they were zooms simply by cropping my RAW files in post. (See the butterfly shots in the gallery linked below - all of which are deep crops from shots taken with my RF 85mm f/2.)

I've traded in my RF 70-200mm f/4L for a 27 year-old EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM which the R7's IBIS makes fully hand-holdable, even with the EF 1.4x III extender, giving me a faster and sharper lens for concerts without the extender, and a longer lens for birding with it.

I'm also trading in my EF-S 10-18mm for credit towards for the much smaller and lighter RF-S 10-18mm, which will be one of only two zooms remaining in my kit - the other being my EF-S 18-135 with the power zoom attachment - for shooting the occasional video. I'm torn over whether to sell or keep my RF 16mm f/2.8. (The kit RF 18-150mm was serviceable until I built my collection of RF primes, but it's now in mothballs.)

Before going mirrorless, I used my camera mainly on summer vacations. Now I'm taking pix several times a week. You can check out my stuff at Photos.PhilOlenick.com. The first three galleries were taken with my DSLRs. The later galleries are all from my R7.

 

[JoeTheSnowPlowGuy]

I can't see Pentax prospering in the MILC world because the resources needed to compete against Canon and Sony are enormous. Sony just introduced a high end 35 mm form MILC with a global shutter. Canon will almost surely have an answer in the R1 and likely the R5II Real Soon Now. Even Nikon seems to be flagging in the halo race being run by those two.

What could Pentax introduce in a MILC that would convince anybody to invest in its system over those two or even Nikon?

The same could probably be said for LUMIX and OM Systems, but they’re going strong. Look at Fuji with their majority APS-C sensor format cameras, they’re going strong. Ricoh could definitely build up Pentax into a mirrorless competitor, if they wanted to. I think to do that they’d have to seriously consider joining the L mount alliance for lens availability and perhaps offering MFT and FF format cameras. Pentax needs to stay in the niche market, and appealing to the adventure/wildlife community with MFT cameras wouldn’t be a terrible idea.

 

[J.Q.]

In analogue times I used Canon (FD and EF) and Contax. Made the switch to digital with the Nikon D700. Had several Nikons after that und switched to mirrorless with the Z6 (and Z6II). Never been satisfied with the AF on the Z6(II) and changed to Sony. Although the AF is brilliant and the lenses very sharp and compact, I never really got to like the system. Especially the Sony colors put me off. Didn't like the Nikon colors too much either. So the reason for my switch to Canon is the beautiful default colors mainly. I also like the affordable and quite compact lenses (24/35/50/85). The AF on the R5 is ok and the sensor (though somewhat outdated) produces beautiful pictures that need less post-processing (color-wise) than the files from the Sonys. Also the ergonomics on the R5 are quite good and the menu far more comprehensible and accessible than Sony's.

 

[Archibald]

Interesting thread. I share many of the thoughts and opinions. I was against mirrorless because the earlier models had AF that was too slow for BIF. But then the R5 came along. I bought it because it was small and lightweight, plus it had eye AF and great reach due to its high pixel density. It was an FF that could replace my crop 7D2 and still shoot FF when needed. Then the R7 came out with even greater px density and I bought it. The R7 would actually be all I need except there are no crop pro-level lenses for it. So I'm keeping the R5 and its wonderful RF 24-105mm L lens for people photography and other general work (stuff other than wildlife and macro).

 

[miuzi]

Seems like this long-dormant thread woke back up today, so I figure I may as well chime in.

Prior to buying my R8, I had a Nikon D7000 for almost 9 years, and I loved it. It fit my hands, and I created so many photos that I really loved. I had never really considered switching over to mirrorless, because any mirrorless camera I'd tried, like low-level Sony bodies, underwhelmed massively. However, a little under a year ago, I started using a Nikon Z50 for work, and was really wowed by how much more complete it felt compared to any mirrorless I'd tried before. It reinvigorated my interest in photography as a hobby, and I started checking out what was on the market. Because of the switch to mirrorless and the fact that I hadn't sunk any money into my Nikon system in a while, I was open to switching to another brand. The main things I was looking for were a smaller/lighter body and, if possible with that stipulation, a full-frame sensor. I have small children now, and wanted a camera that I could more easily just toss in a bag with other stuff, or let hang on my shoulder without worrying about concussing one of them while we're out and about. I was intrigued by the RP for its form factor and full-frame sensor, and very nearly decided to buy one, when Canon announced the R8, and I was very quickly sold on it and preordered one. The most appealing things aside from the form factor shared with the RP were the subject recognition, particularly for people as well as cars and aircraft, and the electronic shutter for both the frame rate possibilities and the completely silent shooting, which is amazing for candid photos of kids.

Contrary to the reputation (and, I'd concede, the reality at the higher end of the market) for Canon RF lenses being expensive, one of the first things that drew me towards Canon was the affordability of a lot of the non-L series RF lenses. There is nothing even close to the RF 50mm STM that I started out with for under $200CDN from Nikon. I acquired that lens, and then the 24-105 and 100-400, all together, for under $1500CDN, and I feel like I'm ready to shoot almost anything I'd ever want to. Looking at Nikon's full-frame offerings in the same price range, they weren't at all attractive to me. With the R8 and the 50mm I started with, I had a brand new body and lens that combined weighed less than my old D7000 body, were way faster, had far superior autofocus with subject recognition, and a full-frame sensor. The things I lost from my D7000 - weather sealing, the far superior battery life, and dual card slots - were worth the sacrifice for now having such a modern body. The leap from the D7000 to the R8 felt transformative, and was really creatively inspiring. I'm constantly looking for reasons to get my camera out. I have never had any professional aspirations for my photography, it's just a hobby that I derive a lot of joy from, and the R8 feels about as perfect as I think a camera could for my needs.

 

[Tappa]

I've been into photography for many years as I'm nearing 75 years young. I started back in the 60's with a Sears SLR made by Richo I believe. I finally decided to go with a Nikon that had automatic exposure modes. After years of shooting the Nikon, I saw a photographer in the paper that was selling a complete Canon Kit with several lenses and a film SLR. Several years later the digital bodies had gotten fairly good so I retired the film body and bought a Canon 30D body to use with the lenses I had. I've stayed with Canon ever since. From 30D to 50D to 7D to 1Dmk4 to 1DX to R5. The biggest factor in my purchase of the R5 was that my 1DX body failed and there was no repair parts available so I was in the market for a new body. I had been reading about the mirrorless camera and since my interest is in nature, wildlife, bird photography, it made sense to go with the R5. I Currently adapt lenses to it that I have on hand, 100mm L macro, 24-70 1-L and Sigma 60-600mm. Someday I will purchase some R lenses but now I satisfied with the results I'm getting.

 

[StevenAunan]

I've been a photographer since high school, when I bought a Petri 35mm and borrowed my dad's Pentax 50mm lens. I spent my corporate years with inexpensive gear because it didn't matter. Then I retired and got a Canon M6, followed quickly by the best camera I'd ever owned to date: the Canon 7D Mark II. The R7 came out six months later. I needed better video capability, the autofocus and electronic shutter blew my mind, so I immediately jumped to the R series. Then I needed better low light performance, so now I also have the R6 ... and I may be trading up to the R5 Mark II when it comes out.

BUT .... Sony's new Global Shutter sounds absolutely incredible. I'm not switching brands, but I am wondering if the new R3 or R1 models will have that ... Somebody Stop Me!

 

[lostnomore]

Pentax has a lot of good going for them. Their ergos are good. Their cameras are built like tanks. They prove that weather sealing doesn’t have to be a premium addition, and the colors their sensors (I believe some are Sony mfg.) produce are very good. I’ve heard the K3 Mark 3 really improved their autofocus, but I don’t see them succeeding as a DSLR company in a mirrorless world. Ricoh Imaging has the capabilities to produce magnificent mirrorless cameras, I think they need to accept that mirrorless has taken over and move on with it. I’d be interested to see what they can do.

I agree with everything you pointed out, but in addition to their AF lagging behind the competition, Pentax/Ricoh is always behind the times, often by several years. It took them many years, for example, before they even released their first FF DSLR (before which I left them for Nikon). I don't think it's too late for them to enter mirrorless and yes, they produce great cameras, I just think even their market share won't even hold a candle to the Big 3 (Canon-Nikon-Sony). They just don't have the money and market share to compete at this level of innovation and speed.

 

[lostnomore]

I can't see Pentax prospering in the MILC world because the resources needed to compete against Canon and Sony are enormous. Sony just introduced a high end 35 mm form MILC with a global shutter. Canon will almost surely have an answer in the R1 and likely the R5II Real Soon Now. Even Nikon seems to be flagging in the halo race being run by those two.

What could Pentax introduce in a MILC that would convince anybody to invest in its system over those two or even Nikon?

Absolutely agreed! Back in my Pentax days on my favorite forum, there were people leaving weekly for the competition. The AF was crushing that of Pentax. Also, Pentax took what seemed forever to finally release a FF DSLR. By then, many had abandoned the "S.S. Pentax." I can only wonder how few are left?