Architect looking for a Full Frame mirrorless upgrade

[unclefarkus]

Currently in the market for a new mirrorless. I have a Canon M3 that has been good but I'm ready to go full frame and get something with a real viewfinder.

I have a EF 50mm f/1.8 lens already as well as a EF-M 22mm f/2

Also whatever came with my M3 kit (but I plan to sell that with the camera)

 

I'm not opposed to selling those lenses too and switching to a different ecosystem such as Sony. They seem to have the mirrorless market.

But also find staying in the Canon world appealing.... although I would need lens adapters which aren't so appealing. So I may end up selling those lenses anyways.

 

ANYWAYS. What is the best value upgrade + a recommended lens to get (can probably only get 1 for now). I take a lot of photos of architecture (I'm an architect), portraits of people and my dog, and landscapes. All the cliche stuff. Going to Colorado at the end of next week and want something I can just leave on it for most of the trip and get good photos of all my favorite things.

 

Is the A7 II still worth getting or is the III the one to go for? What about the Canon EOS R? I see a lot of hate but also a lot of people saying "ITS ACTUALLY NOT THAT BAD YALL". The flip up screen seems cool on that one.

I may start doing an architecture-themed Youtube channel at some point so video also kind of matters. Open to any and all.

 

Thanks!

[scottyseng]

17 minutes ago, unclefarkus said:

-snip-

My opinion as a construction guy that likes to photograph too, I would get a wide angle lens regardless of which brand you go with. I bought an EF-S 10-18 and wow, the interiors I can capture now make it well worth it.

I'm still battling it out with the EOS M (The original). I think I'll probably get the EOS M50 body myself.

 

As for you, the A7 II is a solid camera. I'm not sure if it's worth it for you to cough up the money for either the A7 III or EOS R though.

Though I would recommend trying the camera out at a store, my hand did not fit the A7 II grip when I was at the camera section for fun at Best Buy.

[cc143]

I tried out the a7ii before buying a 5dmk3 3 years ago and found it lacking. If you want to go FF Sony, the a7iii is the one to get, which is quite a bit more expensive. 

 

Now, I usually say that FF is not really that important and recommend people go with fuji, but you seem pretty set on a FF sensor, so who am I to judge. 

 

I also still recommend dslrs, especially Canon, because the lens system is just so cheap now, but the same can be said for R mounts as well since you can adapt. 

 

Honestly, its not like the EOS R or even the RP for that matter won't do for what you want, they really will, they are capable cameras, the argument is wether they are worth it over the competition. I would say that the R is pretty ok, but, I would really wait for the next one before buying into the system, which given the lenses they have put out and announced till now and capability of adapting EF glass is very promising. 

 

So, I'd basically buy an RP to buy into the system, grey market or used even if I can find one, and flip it in a year or two (at a lower loss) when they release something more proper. 

[YellowJersey]

I'm pretty meh on the RP, particularly about the sensor as it reuses the 6DmkII sensor, which was already pretty meh when it came out, even compared to the original 6D sensor. I'd push someone towards the Fuji XT3 or XT30 instead of the RP; the Fujis are totally superior despite being APS-C. The lack of dynamic range on the RP would be a problem for landscapes. I used to use GND filters for my landscapes on my 5DmkIII, but my Sony A7rIII has so much dynamic range that I can often get it all in one shot.

What's your budget? That's the key. I think the A7III is probably the best value for money camera on the market if we're talking full frame. As far as lenses go, that new Tamron 17-28 2.8 would pair well with it and work well for architectural and landscapes. A 50mm or 85mm prime for portraits and you're golden.

[cc143]

6 hours ago, YellowJersey said:

I'm pretty meh on the RP, particularly about the sensor as it reuses the 6DmkII sensor, which was already pretty meh when it came out, even compared to the original 6D sensor. I'd push someone towards the Fuji XT3 or XT30 instead of the RP; the Fujis are totally superior despite being APS-C. The lack of dynamic range on the RP would be a problem for landscapes. I used to use GND filters for my landscapes on my 5DmkIII, but my Sony A7rIII has so much dynamic range that I can often get it all in one shot.

What's your budget? That's the key. I think the A7III is probably the best value for money camera on the market if we're talking full frame. As far as lenses go, that new Tamron 17-28 2.8 would pair well with it and work well for architectural and landscapes. A 50mm or 85mm prime for portraits and you're golden.

Reportedly the RP doesn't have the same dynamic range as the 6dii, so its possible the sensor is the same but they made changes to the processing system to allow for better DR.  I'll also say that I haven't heard much issue with the 6d2 from people who actually used the camera and recovering 3-4 stops of exposure the files hold up well in what I've seen. Now granted, Canon's dr has been lacking in general, but I think its not that big an issue. 

 

There are problems I hae with the camera mind you, smaller battery, no discrete sd card slot, but honestly, it seems like a pretty ok deal new, and if prices end up dropping the way the 5d4, 6d2 and r have, especially in the used market, you'd potentially be looking at a sub $1000 body only FF camera in 2 months. Hell right now I can get the r with 24-105mm f/4L RF for £2,200! You simply can't match that. 

[YellowJersey]

8 hours ago, cc143 said:

Reportedly the RP doesn't have the same dynamic range as the 6dii, so its possible the sensor is the same but they made changes to the processing system to allow for better DR.  I'll also say that I haven't heard much issue with the 6d2 from people who actually used the camera and recovering 3-4 stops of exposure the files hold up well in what I've seen. Now granted, Canon's dr has been lacking in general, but I think its not that big an issue. 

 

There are problems I hae with the camera mind you, smaller battery, no discrete sd card slot, but honestly, it seems like a pretty ok deal new, and if prices end up dropping the way the 5d4, 6d2 and r have, especially in the used market, you'd potentially be looking at a sub $1000 body only FF camera in 2 months. Hell right now I can get the r with 24-105mm f/4L RF for £2,200! You simply can't match that. 

I think it's a bit deceiving, tbh. Yes, it's technically full frame, but APS-C cameras like the Fujis will likely provide better IQ across the board. It's a quality over quantity issue. So I'd argue that the full frame the RP provides is of little to no benefit when compared to something like a modern Fuji at a similar price point. Despite being more expensive, the A7III offers significantly more to justify the price and still be considered a great value-for-money bargain.

 

 To me, the RP is like an 80 inch TV with a max resolution of 720 and 24hz for half the price. People get excited by the "80 inch" and "half the price" and it distracts them from the massive caveats.

 Hence why I really have difficulty recommending the RP over other similarly priced cameras.

[bloodthirster]

Is there a particular reason you need a mirrorless camera?  For video and some photography applications (silent shooting) mirrorless can be nice, but for the vast majority of photograph a (D)SLR is still perfecting fine.   By the time you add high quality glass on a body, there's hardly any noticeable weight difference.   There's also a LARGE quantity of used Canon and Nikon SLR glass.   Plus a poor EVF is much worse than a OVF (lag, refresh rate, resolution, etc).  I'm not saying to get a DSLR, but there's a LOT of good DSLRs to be had used for really good prices if you don't need a mirrorless.  (To be honest, a used D810 sounds like it'd fit your needs well.)