New Camera

Lowflynjack

Lowflynjack

En-Route
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
4,312
Display Name
Display name:
Jack Fleetwood
Well, it's an aviation related topic because I use my camera for aviation, right?

I often get camera and lens questions when posting my photos, so here's the latest.

My go-to cameras have been Canon 1DX series. Until a few days ago, I had a EOS-1D X Mark i, Mark ii, & Mark iii. The only issue I ever had was with the newest one, the Mark iii. It would get what appeared to be dust spots, but it turned out they were oil. At less than 30K photos (rated for 500K photos), I had to have it cleaned professionally twice. The third time I had it fixed and got rid of it.

So what next? I decided it was time for this dinosaur to move into the modern age. I just bought my first mirrorless camera, a Canon EOS R3. I just took it out of the box and first impression is that it's very, very light weight! Not sure what I think about that, I do like a heavy camera.

Anyway, fire away with questions/suggestions, etc. This is a new world for me. On my first few air-to-air shoots with it, I'll be carrying my 1DX2 with me and using it as well!
 
I’m real unsure I want to switch to mirrorless. My biggest beef is really looking at the object via a screen up close to my eye.
 
I just Googled it. Holy carp. By the time that thing is outfitted with a whole kit, it would probably cost more than my car.
 
I used to shoot professionally with Nikon gear, but moved to Fuji mirrorless a while back. It was worth it.
The weight savings are immense, but the Fuji is a crop sensor. You likely won't see as much overall weight benefit with a full frame system since the lenses aren't any smaller unfortunately.
 
Last edited:
Baked Potato said:
I used to shoot professionally with Nikon gear, but moved to Fuji mirrorless a while back. It was worth it.
The weight savings are immense, but the Fuji is a crop sensor. You likely won't see as much overall weight benefit with a full frame system since the lenses aren't any smaller unfortunately.
Click to expand...
It feels much better now that I've put my heavy lens on it!
 
RyanShort1 said:
I’m real unsure I want to switch to mirrorless. My biggest beef is really looking at the object via a screen up close to my eye.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Canon has produced their last DSLR. If I end up not liking this one, I'll go back and get a 1DX3 again and keep it until it dies!
 
After thirty years of Nikon, both film and digital, I switched to Sony last December. It was a tough choice between Canon and Sony.
My Nikon D850 DSLR was like firing a rifle - kablam kablam kablam at eight frames per second! Great feel.
My mirrorless Sony A7Riv is like shooting a scifi laser pistol - pew pew pew pew at ten frames per second, but nowhere near the tactile gratification of the DSLR. Shoot, the old film cameras with real film and big motordrives had just great tactile feel.

As you know, Canon makes great stuff and you can get an adapter for your existing Canon lenses on the R3 (which is a great body). I've heard Canon has really locked down their mirrorless stuff and will not allow Tamron, Sigma, or anyone to make aftermarket lenses; that's disappointing and costly.

You consistently take wonderful photos, Jack, so even if you're losing money on every job, hopefully you're making it up in volume! ;-)
And you're sure making all your viewers and clients happy.
 
G-Man said:
After thirty years of Nikon, both film and digital, I switched to Sony last December. It was a tough choice between Canon and Sony.
My Nikon D850 DSLR was like firing a rifle - kablam kablam kablam at eight frames per second! Great feel.
My mirrorless Sony A7Riv is like shooting a scifi laser pistol - pew pew pew pew at ten frames per second, but nowhere near the tactile gratification of the DSLR. Shoot, the old film cameras with real film and big motordrives had just great tactile feel.

As you know, Canon makes great stuff and you can get an adapter for your existing Canon lenses on the R3 (which is a great body). I've heard Canon has really locked down their mirrorless stuff and will not allow Tamron, Sigma, or anyone to make aftermarket lenses; that's disappointing and costly.

You consistently take wonderful photos, Jack, so even if you're losing money on every job, hopefully you're making it up in volume! ;-)
And you're sure making all your viewers and clients happy.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm a Canon guy and always have been, but only because my Mom used Canon and I started with her cameras! It's too expensive to change now. Sony has really made the other brands step up their game! So far, on the reviews I'm watching, the pros seem to think this is the best camera they've ever used. We'll see!

This one shoots 30 frames per second. I have no use for that with the photography I do, but I'm still impressed!

I've got the adapter and my lens on the camera already! Can't wait to try it out.

LOL, no making up what I lose, but I do it because I love it! Thanks for the kind words!
 
Eye focus - as in it focus where you look right :)

I saw a recent demo of a newer Sony camera that had human, animal and bird focus and well as airplane focus. The plane on did pretty well as it first locked onto the plane in general and then started shifting the focus to cockpit.

Sweet camera!!!
 
The new canon RF 135 f1.8 would be wicked on this one. The old EF135 F2 was one of their best lenses ever.
 
Sinistar said:
Eye focus - as in it focus where you look right :)

I saw a recent demo of a newer Sony camera that had human, animal and bird focus and well as airplane focus. The plane on did pretty well as it first locked onto the plane in general and then started shifting the focus to cockpit.

Sweet camera!!!
Click to expand...
Also, it finds an eye of the subject and tracks focus on it. Useful for portrait and animal photography and the having an eye in focus makes for a more pleasing photograph
 
RyanShort1 said:
I’m real unsure I want to switch to mirrorless. My biggest beef is really looking at the object via a screen up close to my eye.
Click to expand...
Then use the electronic viewfinder. It works pretty much like an optical viewfinder.
 
Lowflynjack said:
Well, it's an aviation related topic because I use my camera for aviation, right?

I often get camera and lens questions when posting my photos, so here's the latest.

My go-to cameras have been Canon 1DX series. Until a few days ago, I had a EOS-1D X Mark i, Mark ii, & Mark iii. The only issue I ever had was with the newest one, the Mark iii. It would get what appeared to be dust spots, but it turned out they were oil. At less than 30K photos (rated for 500K photos), I had to have it cleaned professionally twice. The third time I had it fixed and got rid of it.

So what next? I decided it was time for this dinosaur to move into the modern age. I just bought my first mirrorless camera, a Canon EOS R3. I just took it out of the box and first impression is that it's very, very light weight! Not sure what I think about that, I do like a heavy camera.

Anyway, fire away with questions/suggestions, etc. This is a new world for me. On my first few air-to-air shoots with it, I'll be carrying my 1DX2 with me and using it as well!
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that you have three shutter modes. You have the mechanical shutter that you are already comfortable with, and I imagine you will continue to use.
Another option is electronic first curtain shutter, where the exposure is started electronically, but ended with the mechanical shutter. It is supposed to eliminate mechanical shutter "slap" that causes the camera to "vibrate" from the shutter opening, but I don't see that problem in your images. The downside is that the bokeh may have odd shapes. For the most part, there few benefits from this shutter mode IMO.
The third option, electronic shutter, is where you can capture 30 images per second. However, it isn't a global shutter electronic shutter and moving objects, such as propellers, will sometimes look odd in the same fashion as seen in cell phone cameras.

Actually, there was a recent R3 firmware update that allows 195 frames per second for a short time, although exposure and autofocus are locked. This gives RAW and JPEG images.
 
RyanShort1 said:
Um, that probably won't work for me in the environment we operate in.
Click to expand...
Um, it works pretty much the same as a DSLR as far as the user is concerned. If you are using a DSLR, you can use a mirrorless.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Um, it works pretty much the same as a DSLR as far as the user is concerned. If you are using a DSLR, you can use a mirrorless.
Click to expand...
Maybe so, maybe so, but both my boss and I have looked at them plenty and so far we've decided to stick with traditional DSLRs.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Keep in mind that you have three shutter modes. You have the mechanical shutter that you are already comfortable with, and I imagine you will continue to use.
Another option is electronic first curtain shutter, where the exposure is started electronically, but ended with the mechanical shutter. It is supposed to eliminate mechanical shutter "slap" that causes the camera to "vibrate" from the shutter opening, but I don't see that problem in your images. The downside is that the bokeh may have odd shapes. For the most part, there few benefits from this shutter mode IMO.
The third option, electronic shutter, is where you can capture 30 images per second. However, it isn't a global shutter electronic shutter and moving objects, such as propellers, will sometimes look odd in the same fashion as seen in cell phone cameras.

Actually, there was a recent R3 firmware update that allows 195 frames per second for a short time, although exposure and autofocus are locked. This gives RAW and JPEG images.
Click to expand...

I only use burst mode when doing breakaway shots, which is right at the end of the shoot. Otherwise, I'm a single-shot kind of guy! Point, shoot, get the shot and move on! I take about 400-600 shots in a shoot now, and when I first got started it was probably over 1K.

Air-to-air is essentially a still shot most of the time. Any reason I shouldn't use the electronic shutter for shots in the 1/80 or 1/60 range? Still learning!
 
Lowflynjack said:
I only use burst mode when doing breakaway shots, which is right at the end of the shoot. Otherwise, I'm a single-shot kind of guy! Point, shoot, get the shot and move on! I take about 400-600 shots in a shoot now, and when I first got started it was probably over 1K.

Air-to-air is essentially a still shot most of the time. Any reason I shouldn't use the electronic shutter for shots in the 1/80 or 1/60 range? Still learning!
Click to expand...
I think you'll get your full prop disk at those shutter speeds if the engine is faster than idle, which it generally is in your shots. Helicopters will be different as their rotor speed is lower than a propeller, and the rotors will be look odd at those shutter speeds with electronic shutter.
 
I think that the viewfinder is best for what we do, by far. One of the things I'm worried about is eyestrain from looking at a digital screen rather than the mirror... sometimes we're aloft for 8 hours in a day. The other thing is that the tiny bit of lag in a digital screen will essentially turn my job into more of a guessing game, trying to nail an exact angle. I think it's more of a problem for the stuff I shoot than it would be for an air-to-air, for instance.
 
RyanShort1 said:
I think that the viewfinder is best for what we do, by far. One of the things I'm worried about is eyestrain from looking at a digital screen rather than the mirror... sometimes we're aloft for 8 hours in a day. The other thing is that the tiny bit of lag in a digital screen will essentially turn my job into more of a guessing game, trying to nail an exact angle. I think it's more of a problem for the stuff I shoot than it would be for an air-to-air, for instance.
Click to expand...
People who shoot sports or wildlife with the R3 and R7 haven't reported any issues with lag.
 
EVF's in the top end Sony and Canon (i think also) Fuji are crazy sharp, don't blank between photos and in low light especially the Sony A7s series its like having night vision. I dont miss the optical viewfinder at all but also do not do paid work with a camera so its not critical.

Its cool that Canon brought back "Eye Control AF" after like 40 years.

Very curious which native RF lens you try first!
 
RyanShort1 said:
I think that the viewfinder is best for what we do, by far. One of the things I'm worried about is eyestrain from looking at a digital screen rather than the mirror... sometimes we're aloft for 8 hours in a day. The other thing is that the tiny bit of lag in a digital screen will essentially turn my job into more of a guessing game, trying to nail an exact angle. I think it's more of a problem for the stuff I shoot than it would be for an air-to-air, for instance.
Click to expand...

Yeah, things like that stopped me going mirrorless until Nikon's second version of the Z7, the Z7 II, came along — it's much better at things like coverage, lag, etc., and eyestrain doesn't seem to be a factor any more when I use it. It's probably not quite there yet for what it sounds like you do, but hey, give it another couple of years :). If an old dinosaur like me who's happily used and owned everything from 4x5 view cameras to iPhones to shoulder-mounted video cameras and does both video and still work (and used to do them both professionally) can adopt the Z7 II as his main full-frame camera for both stills and video, then I think the tech is getting pretty good…
 
After twenty plus years as a Digital Canon full frame shooter, I switched to Sony. It was a case of a screaming deal last year that made it worth the jump.
So far, loving the Sony Mirrorless camera.

Tim
 
I'm certainly not at the caliber of you pros, but I purchased a Nikon Z6ii last year and started doing some wildlife photography. I've since added a Z7ii. I use the viewfinder pretty much exclusively and have found no real difference from my older DSLR Nikons. (Which were not pro grade. I've got a D50 and a D80, so this is old stuff.)

One feature of the digital viewfinder that I love is it highlights the (largely vertical) edges that are in focus with red. That makes so much action photography easier! I find I use manual focus far more than auto because it wants to focus where I don't want it to. Even with single spot focus it often chooses something other than what I want, but with the red highlight I can get what I want. Mostly.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
People who shoot sports or wildlife with the R3 and R7 haven't reported any issues with lag.
Click to expand...
I always do a ton of research before buying something this expensive. My favorite review was from Jeff Cable. He's a very famous sports photographer and Canon gave him an R3 before anyone else had one. He got some amazing shots and now says it's his favorite camera. For what I do, even though we're flying through the air at high speed, it's like shooting a stationary subject most of the time. I should have no issues, but still nervous after exclusively using 1-DX cameras for so many years!
 
Lowflynjack said:
I always do a ton of research before buying something this expensive. My favorite review was from Jeff Cable. He's a very famous sports photographer and Canon gave him an R3 before anyone else had one. He got some amazing shots and now says it's his favorite camera. For what I do, even though we're flying through the air at high speed, it's like shooting a stationary subject most of the time. I should have no issues, but still nervous after exclusively using 1-DX cameras for so many years!
Click to expand...
There's an R3 (or two) thread on Photography on the Net. Although you haven't been there a while, you can still access it. The electronic shutter sometimes shows rolling artifacts, but you still have the dual-curtain shutter like your current kit. As we discussed, your lower shutter speeds should avoid the problem.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
There's an R3 (or two) thread on Photography on the Net. Although you haven't been there a while, you can still access it. The electronic shutter sometimes shows rolling artifacts, but you still have the dual-curtain shutter like your current kit. As we discussed, your lower shutter speeds should avoid the problem.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't see myself ever using 30 frames per second!
 
The last (nice) camera I bought was a Canon AE1 Program. It was actually a pretty nice camera back in the day for its price, but, like any other film camera, it's a lot like owning a Lear Jet** these days.


**You can buy them pretty cheap
 
I've had a series of Canons and now have the Rp (waiting for the Canon mirrorless line to settle down). I've brought forward all my old EF glass (including odd stuff like my tilt-shift lens) and have spent a bit on some new RF glass. I'm thinking of replacing the dirt cheap but works Sigma 100-500 with the Canon version next. Don't know if that is before or after I upgrade the body.
 
Eyestrain-wise it should be pretty much the same as an SLR. An SLR you're already viewing an image on a screen, it's just made with light from the lens projected on the screen instead of electronics. Still back-lit and presumably the same optics except no prism needed.
 
I am a very bad amateur photographer but I am enjoying my R6 - I alternate between the RF50 F1.2 L (portraits/indoors) and the RF24-105 F4 L (outdoors, walk-around lens) and have been able to get some very decent pictures.

I found it very easy to switch from DSLR to mirrorless and actually like the EVF now.
 
chartbundle said:
Eyestrain-wise it should be pretty much the same as an SLR. An SLR you're already viewing an image on a screen, it's just made with light from the lens projected on the screen instead of electronics. Still back-lit and presumably the same optics except no prism needed.
Click to expand...
No, there is no mirror (hence the term "mirrorless" ) to reflect the light to the viewfinder. The electronic viewfinder is displaying the image from the sensor. The auto-focus is also from the image sensor; in a DSLR, the auto-focus is another sensor fed by another mirror in the optical train to the view finder. The advantage is now there is no need to micro-focus adjust (MFA) so the image sensor focus is the same as the focus sensor.
See: https://www.slrlounge.com/dslr-auto-focus-actually-work/

Many (most now?) mirrorless cameras also use phase autofocus similar to the DSLR- this includes cell phones.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
No, there is no mirror (hence the term "mirrorless" ) to reflect the light to the viewfinder. The electronic viewfinder is displaying the image from the sensor. The auto-focus is also from the image sensor; in a DSLR, the auto-focus is another sensor fed by another mirror in the optical train to the view finder. The advantage is now there is no need to micro-focus adjust (MFA) so the image sensor focus is the same as the focus sensor.
See: https://www.slrlounge.com/dslr-auto-focus-actually-work/

Many (most now?) mirrorless cameras also use phase autofocus similar to the DSLR- this includes cell phones.
Click to expand...
The mirror doesn't reflect light to the viewfinder. It reflects it to the focusing screen, the focusing screen is now digital instead of direct view and they omitted the prism. From an eye strain perspective your eyes cant tell where the photons came from. It may even be better from an eyestrain perspective since you can control the brightness. The downside is that in low light you'll get sensor gain artifacts(noise) instead of an image that's too dark to see.
 
chartbundle said:
The mirror doesn't reflect light to the viewfinder. It reflects it to the focusing screen, the focusing screen is now digital instead of direct view and they omitted the prism. From an eye strain perspective your eyes cant tell where the photons came from. It may even be better from an eyestrain perspective since you can control the brightness. The downside is that in low light you'll get sensor gain artifacts(noise) instead of an image that's too dark to see.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I see what you are saying.
chartbundle said:
and presumably the same optics except no prism needed.
Click to expand...
But as I noted, the optics are different now. Your eye is seeing what the image sensor sees, not what is passed via a pair of mirrors and a pentaprism. Any optics engineer will say the optics are different. I'd prefer a noisy viewfinder image than one that I can't see. It's close to using "live view" on some later DSLRs except the image is displayed on the back screen instead of EVF in a mirrorless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top