# Canon 5D MIII to Fuji X-T1



## mustafaakarsu (Mar 13, 2015)

Hi!

I'm using a Canon 5D MIII with 24-105 and 100mm L Macro
I'm mostly interested in landscape, landscape astrophotography and Macro.

Unfortunately I feel that my kit is heavy, so I'm thinking to swap it with Fuji X-T1 with 16-55 f2.8 lens and Zeiss 50mm Macro (I'll upgrade this to Fuji 120mm Macro when it's available)

Do you think I'd miss a lot after this switch?

Thanks in advance for your help


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 13, 2015)

I had to sell my 1D MK IV because of wrist issues and get the light weight 5D MK III. Its all relative. When I pickup a 70D. it feels like a toy. I also consider the 100L and the 24-105mm L lenses to be on the light side as "L" lenses go. 

You are comparing FF to APS-C, so you get a good camera, but you also get the limitations of a smaller sensor. I'd have a hard time going back to a APS-C sensor.

The extra weight will not be a issue after you get used to it.


----------



## distant.star (Mar 13, 2015)

.
Only you can say how you will feel after the switch.

If I were you, I'd buy a used Fuji X100S or X-E2 and try it. They both have the same sensor you'll get in the X-T1 so you'll be able to judge image quality. If it's suitable, go to Fuji and either keep the X100S or X-E2 as backup or sell it.

My experience suggests you may not miss the Canon. I got an X100S a year ago and will probably leave the Canon 5D3 behind this year or next. My first impression was being rather angry. I found the image files from the $1200 APS-C sensor were the equal (or better) than the ones from the $3500 full-frame Canon sensor. I get shadow detail from the Fuji sensor I couldn't dream of getting from the Canon, and Fuji's high ISO performance equals the 5D3. More often than not my 5D3 stays home, and when I get back and process files from the X100S I don't see anything that could have been better if I'd had the 5D3.

You'll have to think carefully if size and weight are your main considerations. The X-T1 is not the smallest Fuji camera -- it's almost a small DSLR size and weight. And the 16-55 lens is almost too big to be considered a compact lens. I suggest you handle them both as part of your decision making process.

Good luck.


----------



## martti (Mar 13, 2015)

Nonsense.
Get a lighter lens and keep the 5DIII. It is, after all, a real camera. I am not kidding, I tried to leave the heavy Canon stuff behind and get by with the Sony a 6000. Ridiculous.

Get a lighter zoom or get a coach in a gym and work out.
Canon 5DIII is a real adult camera. It does everything.
Sonys are pieces of brilliant engineering with very good sensors.
Canons are cameras, a biosystem. So do not do anything stupid.


----------



## bmwzimmer (Mar 13, 2015)

XT-1 build quality and feel is nothing like a cheap A6000 or 70d. The Fuji is fully weather sealed with magnesium chassis. Dynamic range of those Fuji Xtrans Sensors is slightly better than the 5D but its ISO performance is a stop worse when scaled to the same size. 

I think it's a good idea to have 2 systems. A large FF system and a small compact mirrorless system with a couple small compact primes.


----------



## Dylan777 (Mar 13, 2015)

I would look into Sony A7 series plus their native lenses for lighter and smaller system while still be able to maintain high IQ.

Bodies:
1. A7s for high ISO
2. A7r for landscape
3. A7 or mrk II for general

Lenses: 
1. Sony/Zeiss 16-35 f4 OSS for landscape
2. NEW Sony/Zeiss 28mm f2 + Ultrawide converter to 21mm Landscape
3. NEW release Sony/Zeiss 90mm f2.8 Macro 

Their native lenses for FF mirrorless are not huge as Canon DSLR, but it will cover your needs. Keep your 5D III to handle larger L lenses or shoot fast action events.

I love the look and feel of Fuji X series, however, just like Mt Spokane Photography mentioned the high ISO from crop sensor got me think twice. 

I'm currently shooting with A7s + Sony/Zeiss 55mm f1.8. I like the weight and size of this combo. I also have the New releases Sony/Zeiss 28mm f2 + UltraWide Converter to 21mm f2.8 on pre-order. I'm crossing my fingers on this new combo will give me decent quality for landscape: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1126141-REG/sony_sel075uwc_21mm_ultra_wide_converter_for.html/mode/gsa

Note: the battery life on Sony A7 series is not that great. You might need 2-3 to shoot all day.


----------



## mvinson1022 (Mar 13, 2015)

mustafaakarsu said:


> Hi!
> 
> I'm using a Canon 5D MIII with 24-105 and 100mm L Macro
> I'm mostly interested in landscape, landscape astrophotography and Macro.
> ...


----------



## sunnyVan (Mar 13, 2015)

Dylan777 said:


> I would look into Sony A7 series plus their native lenses for lighter and smaller system while still be able to maintain high IQ.
> 
> Bodies:
> 1. A7s for high ISO
> ...



The A7 may be small and light, but the lenses are not significantly lighter than canon counterpart.


----------



## Aglet (Mar 13, 2015)

I can't speak to the astro but I'll put a Fuji up against a FF Canon any day to compare IQ.

As stated by others, the XT1 is not light, neither are their very good lenses. The XE bodies are light and still have good EVFs too so worth considering if you don't need the design or weather resistance of the XT1.
Only thing you'll miss on the 5d3 is the AF system if you shoot action. You certainly won't miss the noisy files.

Rumor has it, a low-end XT1-alike is to be released this summer...

If you want really light and compact and don't need really shallow DoF, you can also consider the fine array of MFT bodies out there. I make good use of my Oly EM10 and print iso 800 shots 24" wide from it that look amazing. And I'll put that against any Canon crop body or even a FF for smaller output.


----------



## Dylan777 (Mar 13, 2015)

sunnyVan said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > I would look into Sony A7 series plus their native lenses for lighter and smaller system while still be able to maintain high IQ.
> ...



and you have better alternatives?


----------



## chas1113 (Mar 13, 2015)

I wanted a small alternative to my 5D Mark III, but didn't like Canon's APS-C bodies' IQ compared to full frame. I decided to go with a Fuji X-E1. I couldn't believe how close the image quality was to the 5DIII. The battery life sucked, the AF sucked, the shutter blackout sucked, and ergonomically everything was backwards (lens focusing rings, menu options, aperture ring), I mean everything. But the image quality for an APS-C camera was WOW!

If you're not shooting fast-moving objects or blowing images up to poster-sized prints, you might get along just fine. The X-T1 has much improved AF functioning over the X-E1. But I kept my 5DIII and added an X-E1. For a while I was shooting everything on the Fuji. Then over time I gravitated back to the Canon. If I'm hiking 4-5 miles over rough terrain to get a landscape, I'll take the Fuji. If I'm shooting an event or people or moving objects, it's the Canon. Shallow depth of field —Canon full frame. For low-light it's a tossup; sometimes the Fuji sensor outperforms the Canon. I am basically using the Fuji as a glorified P&S for casual shooting (which is not giving it credit); it's a much better camera/system than that.

There's just something about the functioning of a dSLR that I prefer over mirrorless. The Fuji feels like an old-style rangefinder in operation. I've even had people stop me and ask if it was an old Leica film camera.

Maybe you add the X-T1 and shoot both for a bit and then decide which system you will keep. I've kept both.

—chas


----------



## quod (Mar 14, 2015)

distant.star said:


> My experience suggests you may not miss the Canon. I got an X100S a year ago and will probably leave the Canon 5D3 behind this year or next. My first impression was being rather angry. I found the image files from the $1200 APS-C sensor were the equal (or better) than the ones from the $3500 full-frame Canon sensor. I get shadow detail from the Fuji sensor I couldn't dream of getting from the Canon, and Fuji's high ISO performance equals the 5D3. More often than not my 5D3 stays home, and when I get back and process files from the X100S I don't see anything that could have been better if I'd had the 5D3.
> 
> You'll have to think carefully if size and weight are your main considerations. The X-T1 is not the smallest Fuji camera -- it's almost a small DSLR size and weight. And the 16-55 lens is almost too big to be considered a compact lens. I suggest you handle them both as part of your decision making process.


+1. 

I have the X100S too. I don't see a huge difference in IQ compared to my 5D3 except that I notice the DR, which is excellent, the files are really sharp (no AA filter), and the rendering is a little different. The X-T1 is not tiny, but it is noticeably smaller and lighter than the 5D3. The 16-55 is supposed to be a very good lens, but it's about the same size as the 24-105, you will gain 1 stop, but you will lose IS. The Fuji weather sealing is excellent, much better than Sony, but probably on par with the 5D3. The big difference for me shooting my X100S vs. the 5D3 is that I really enjoy shooting the X100S. It's fun to shoot. In comparison, I don't view the 5D3 as "fun" but rather that is a very competent tool. I briefly goofed around with an X-T1 and I was not wowed by it, despite my love for the X100S. I echo the statement that you may want to give it a try before you buy.


----------



## sunnyVan (Mar 14, 2015)

Dylan777 said:


> sunnyVan said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



nope. waiting.


----------



## sdsr (Mar 14, 2015)

I realize that Fuji has its ardent admirers, and I really wanted to be one too because I like the design of the cameras and prefer mirrorless and EVFs - but I was so unimpressed by the image quality (compared to the 5DIII and 6D I had at the time) that I returned it after a few weeks (a combination of lack of sharpness, smeared detail, flat colours, RAW files not working well in a wide range of software). Much is made of the low noise at high ISOs, but it's pretty clear that this is the result of high levels of noise reduction, even on the RAW files, and manifests itself in lack of sharpness and definition. I could sometimes get good images on things that were fairly close, but fine detail on distant things (trees, buildings, etc.) is lacking, even more so I think than is usually the case with APS-C (I certainly wouldn't want to use one for landscape work). Maybe you can avoid shadow noise better than on a Canon sensor, but that's also true of other brands. At first I thought I had a defective copy, but I see from poking around on-line and looking at sample images that I'm not alone (including images posted by people who are fans of the cameras). I have no idea whether you would agree, of course - best to rent one and try for yourself. I would rather use a SL1.... 

For smaller/lighter, my preference is m43 (this is the only system which has a significant weight advantage across the board, married with very good image quality) or, for better image quality, the Sony a7 line (I use the a7r and a7s). Two of the native primes are small (the 35mm 2.8 is tiny and weighs next to nothing) and have first rate image quality (though I mostly use mine with old manual lenses, which are fun to use on mirrorless bodies, inexpensive, and usually lighter than their modern counterparts). If you need very long primes, or constant 2.8 zooms, though, you're out of luck - they're unavoidably big and heavy (and, for now, non-existent in native E-mount).


----------



## Aglet (Mar 14, 2015)

sdsr said:


> ..I was so unimpressed by the image quality..



can you qualify that with what Fuji body you were using and what firmware?
I know there have been complaints about such issues but I came a little late to the Fuji party, starting with a new XA1, then XM1, 4 XE1s and finally an XT1.
Firmware updates seem to have addressed those complaints and advances in raw converters, like Iridient Digital's latest v3 can extract tremendous detail from the older XE1's raw file, making all those XE1s in my inventory worth even more now.
eg, a 27mm lens shot of a bldg with a screen door I took last year. OOC and other converters you knew there was a screen there. with Irridient Developer 3 I could make out the wires of the screen. Greenery also took on more definition.
I print large so I have to pixel peep and I find no IQ shortcomings from Fuji's current lineup. In fact I mainly use them for close-up and macro work because the output is very sharp and pleasing.



> best to rent one and try for yourself. I would rather use a SL1....



yes, ergonomics on Fuji's are certainly different and, in that regard, I'd prefer a small SLR many times on that point alone so that is good advice if the OP can find one to rent.
I'd recommend buying a used XE1, grab the ID demo software and see what you can do with it. You can sell it if you don't like it and pay less than a rental.

>For smaller/lighter, my preference is m43...[/quote]
+1
It's not my best camera, or my best IQ camera, but my EM10 has actually quickly become my _favorite_ camera to use and I often grab it when I don't need d800 goodness. And some of the fast primes for it are really good and not very expensive, even the slow kit zooms are pretty decent. Panasonic's got lots of nice goodies too. EM5 ii is beckoning tho.

If I were still a Canon fan I doubt I'd completely trade a FF system but I'd sure add a modern ML camera to my kit if I could afford one. You'll then gravitate to what you enjoy using and that can help you get better images than a technically superior camera that feels like a chore to use.


----------



## YuengLinger (Mar 14, 2015)

A friend tried. Not only did she try Fuji, she tried Olympus. As she was getting a bit older, and always petite, her 5DIII and various lenses began to seem a burden. She is a very experienced photographer.

But she was so frustrated with the IQ, and, on the Fuji in particular, the elaborate menu systems and generally ragged ergonomics, that she found a new love for her dSLR, and learned to pack more efficiently. 

To me, though a high-quality small camera is very tempting and on the horizon, actually switching from a dSLR to one of the current options seems so radical as to almost be changing hobbies. Sure, I've seen examples online and in Professional Photographer and Rangefinder of lovely photos taken, but things had to be set up just right, and the flexibility is not there.

For snapshots, a smartphone can work, or a Canon G-something, but for serious portraiture, landscape, macro, events, nothing YET touches a dSLR.

Still, heaven forbid, if a handicap, some health issue struck, for sure I'd settle for what works.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Mar 14, 2015)

mustafaakarsu said:


> Unfortunately I feel that my kit is heavy...



Dear mustafaakarsu, you simply have to change your way of thinking. DSLR systems are absolutely essential in particular for men, because they provide two services in one: good stills and video functions + sports equipment. If you carry your gear frequently, you can terminate your gym visits and save money. When I am on hiking tours with my 5D3, 7D, my EF 500mm plus some other lenses and TC's in my backpack, I return extremely fit from vacations. Its like doping, I am much faster when I do bike training in the hills here around my home.

So, that's the real argument for big DLSR gears. My take-home message for you, mustafaakarsu, is: small mirrorless cameras turn real men into wimps!


----------



## distant.star (Mar 14, 2015)

.
I go to 100% on every file I work. The X100S files are as sharp overall as anything I've seen.

The Fuji X-Trans sensor sometimes requires a different approach to sharpening -- here's a piece that may help...

http://petebridgwood.com.gridhosted.co.uk/wp/2014/10/x-trans-sharpening/


----------



## SwampYankee (Mar 14, 2015)

I have a 5DIII and recently picked up a Fuji X100S. the X100s goes with me about 90% of the time and the Canon gets left home unless I need something besides the fixed lens. The Fuji is putting about pictures just as sharp as the the 5DIII and that is the same sensor as the the X-T1. The Fuji just feels right. It's like old school shooting real dials that click instead of flipping through menus. unless you are heavily invested in lenses there is no downside to moving to Fuji


----------



## zlatko (Mar 14, 2015)

Fuji image quality is excellent for the aps-c sensor size. But the menu system is a mess compared to Canon, and the build quality is not as good either. I bought a lightly used X-T1 and 35/1.4 and both turned out to have internal damage — stuff was loose that wasn't supposed to be loose. Repair estimates total $450. To bad because it is the perfect size and fun to use. My impression is that Canon gear in the same price range is built to a higher standard.


----------



## zlatko (Mar 14, 2015)

sdsr said:


> I would rather use a SL1....



The SL1 is so good. The only thing that brings it down for me is the small viewfinder. It's just too small. It's ok for quick shooting. But hard to use when you're used to a big viewfinder and really want to see the subject for framing or timing the moment.

One thing about the X-T1 that no one seems to mention is the viewfinder blackout time. In drive mode S (single frame), the blackout time makes it seem like every shot is taken at 1/20th or 1/30th second, even when the shutter speed is much faster. And in the continuous drive modes (CL and CH) you get a brief playback of the image even if playback is set to OFF. WTF?


----------



## zlatko (Mar 14, 2015)

YuengLinger said:


> ... and, on the Fuji in particular, the elaborate menu systems and generally ragged ergonomics, that she found a new love for her dSLR, and learned to pack more efficiently.



This! Fuji menus have some fundamental flaws and "ragged" is a good description of the ergonomics. Fuji doesn't seem to understand how important this is. Canon has really refined their menu system and ergonomics beyond what other manufacturers seem to be capable of.

And if someone finds the 5D3 and 24-105L to be heavy, Canon makes a lot of lighter options.


----------



## qska (Mar 14, 2015)

mustafaakarsu said:


> Hi!
> 
> I'm using a Canon 5D MIII with 24-105 and 100mm L Macro
> I'm mostly interested in landscape, landscape astrophotography and Macro.
> ...



Oh where do I start....

Long story short - I have a 6D with a bunch of Sigma Art lenses and basic L series zooms (24-105, 17-40).
I wanted smaller gear, so I tried:
Panasonic G3, GX7, Fuji XE-2, X-T1. 

For the Fuji I had the 18-55, 10-24, 35 1.4, 60mm 2.4 lenses, so quite a lot of them...

Landscape wise I think Fuji system is quite competent, but:
- the X-Trans sensor processed in Lightroom produces "smearing artefacts" (google this for more info),
- X-Trans files are SLOW to process in Lightroom, on average 3x times slower to import/export than any Bayer sensor,
- RAW files are large (compared to pixel count)

Now for other drawbawcks, non-landscape related....

X-E2 was quite poor with moving subjects (my kids), so I took the plunge and gave Fuji even more of my money, thinking X-T1 will be the answer... And it almost was.
The AF was much better, but the camera didn't give me enough confidence that the Focus was spot on, so I ended up taking 3 times as many shots as I did with Canon - and for a good reason, as the Fuji still had random AF failures (focused on the background for example).

But the biggest issue was the handling. I thought I'll like the idea of aperture dials, shutter speed dials and all that. But in reality it sucked. Why? The dials were quite stiff to turn, so I needed to take the camera away from my eye to adjust anything. In my 6D I can do everything while still looking through the viewfinder.

And viewfinder... My Goodness... X-T1 has a nice "small TV" in it, but it is just that - a display. As other commenters pointed out - it suffered horrible blackouts, especially when shooting in Burst mode. Tracking my kids running around was very very hard.

What surprised me the most though was a side effect of a smaller bulk - the camera felt more like a toy, and I didn't end up using the same rigour when shooting. I was throwing it around like a Point and Shoot, didn't take the time to e.g. crouch as much as I should, or compose the shot adequately. 

Also, smaller and lighter cameras are easier to introduce the camera shake (physics).

Another thing - lenses.

Canon has a nice lineup of decent quality and CHEAP lenses (24-105, 17-40, Sigmas non-art etc.). Fuji has some crap lenses (XC series), and VERY expensive "proper" lenses (XF), but nothing in the middle.

So I ended up selling my 17-40 for X, and had to pay almost twice as much for the Fuji 10-24, which wasn't even that much smaller!

One of the staple Fuji lenses, 35mm 1.4 had very "digital" bokeh, was slow to focus....

So in the end I sold all the Fuji stuff, and overpaid the mortgage with the money - it's a better use of cash 

One more thing - some Fuji lenses (35mm, 60mm) are NOISY. I didn't use a Canon lens that made any noise since... 5 years? I was SHOCKED that Fuji lenses could sound this bad in 2015 - and nobody even mentions it!

So why did I end up selling the Fuji? The reason is simple. Originally I wanted to switch from Canon to Fuji altogether, but the Fuji system just wasn't delivering... I took about 6000 shots with both the XE2 and XT1, and I had some keepers, but the rate was much lower than for my 6D.

One more thing - flash support... Don't get me started... Canon is Ferrari, Fuji is 1960s Ferrari (fully manual, single-shot mode only). It even disables the flash in Continuous shooting mode! I find this inexplicable.

PS. Lumix G3/G7X - similar story, albeit they suffered from NOISE in the blue skies even at their base ISO 200. 

PS2. All small cameras have handling handicaps. There isn't a more comfortable camera to USE than a DSLR. There are more comfortable cameras to CARRY, but not USE 

Anyway, good luck


----------



## qska (Mar 14, 2015)

One final thing - from all these adventures with Lumix/Fuji I went with... Canon EOS M2!

There's a great deal on eBay, I got 11-22, 22, 18-55, the flash, EF adapter and the body for less than the Fuji X-E2 body alone!

And the M2 with 11-22 is my secondary camera on all trips - the 6D with 50mm 1.4 or 24-105, M2 with the ultrawide. Works a treat!


----------



## Hillsilly (Mar 15, 2015)

justaCanonuser said:


> DSLR systems are absolutely essential in particular for men....


This is my perspective. When I go out with a DSLR, girls run a mile. Yet when I go out with my X100 or X-E1, girls actually come up to me to discuss photography and camera gear. Even my wife (who has almost zero interest in cameras) has commented numerous times how sexy my Fuji cameras look. So the short answer is simple - If you are single, get an X100. Now that I've sorted out everyone's love life sorted out, back to the OP.

You've mentioned your interests as landscape, landscape astrophotography and Macro. There's no reason why an X-T1 shouldn't be a serious alternative to your 5D3. Some things to consider is that you'll lose some MPs, depending on what lens you normally use for astrophotography, there might not be a Fuji alternative (I don't have one, but I assume the 16-55 would be perfect for this.) Other people have a different perspective, but I personally find shooting at night time with the Fujis a lot easier as the EVFs have the ability to boost the image and you can easily see if it properly focused. With Macro, I've got the Fuji 60mm and (apart from AF speed - a problem not uncommon with macro lenses) its a very nice lens. (and the Zeiss is probably better.) The image quality is as good/better than my non-L Canon 100mm. Although this could also be because of the sharper images that Fuji cameras make. It only goes to 1:2 (or 2:1...which ever means half life size). But if you're serious about Macro, the beauty of mirrorless cameras is that you can mount and use almost any macro lens that you want to use. And when I want 3x or 4x magnification I use the old reverse mounted lens coupled to a bigger lens trick. 

If you look at any of the Fuji forums (such as Fujix-forum.com) you'll quickly pick up that most people buying into the system are knowledgeable photographers who have both a DSLR and mirrorless system. You'll also quickly pick up that unless you're shooting sports, action etc the Fuji cameras are as good (if not better) for everything else.

By the way, the new 16-55 is a big, expensive lens. Apart from weather resistance and the f2.8 aperture at the long end, I don't know if it has many benefits over the kit lens. There is a 16/1.4 about to be released that might be really good for landscape and astrophotography.


----------



## Hillsilly (Mar 15, 2015)

qska said:


> Fuji has some crap lenses (XC series)


Just curious why you'd put it that way? I'd struggle to objectively find a bad Fuji lens. I can't think of one - that's one the main selling points for the system. I've got an XC lens - the 50-230. It was $230, provides a sharp 350mm FF eq, has effective IS and weighs only 375g. Its a really nice travel lens for landscapes and street scenes when using a tripod or in good light. As you'd expect from the price and weight, it doesn't feel like a solidly built lens, but the image quality (as, I understand, is the same with all XC lenses) is fine. The XC lenses are really good value. Plus you can shoot wildlife with it!


----------



## martti (Mar 15, 2015)

A bit off subject but on the Leboncoin buy&sell site I could exchange my Canon to a LeicaM6 or a FujiXT.
The other way around no offers...
edit: Yes, in fact there are now...goes both ways, it seems.


----------



## Hector1970 (Mar 15, 2015)

There's no doubting Fuji produce goodproducts and the XTI is a good camera.
I have the Fuji x100s and it is good.
Image quality as good as it is Just doesn't equal a full frame 5D Mark III .
The 5D mark III is a no excuse camera . If the quality is poor it's the photographers fault.
So for weight it's the right decision . It's the image quality that potentially could disappoint you but only because you are used to something special.


----------



## mustafaakarsu (Mar 16, 2015)

Thanks a lot for responses, I couldn't ask for more. 
Having both system is out of question for me, 
But having a Canon mirrorless body may be an alternative. 
And yes giving up on a 5D MIII is actually not easy, it's a great camera. I think I'll keep reading about the camera and try to find one to use it for a short time, so I'd have a better idea


----------



## AvTvM (Mar 16, 2015)

mustafaakarsu said:


> But having a Canon mirrorless body may be an alternative.



The EOS M3 will be out shortly - it will definitely be an improvement over the EOS M and M2 in some of the most critical areas, especially AF-speed. Also the body is a bit more chunky offering more grip - which many users will probably like. Jury is still out re. image quality from the new Canon 24 MP APS-C sensor as well as overall performance from that new body. 

All those compact and cheap Canon EF-M lenses are definitely little price-value miracles and well worth every cent. I got them all and really like them. Additionally there is the small adapter for EF-S and EF lenses, which does come in handy for using special lenses. Since I have it, I use the EOS M (1) significantly more often than my EOS 5D III with big, heavy L glass. Basically for me it is EOS M for everyday/street use and 5D III only for specific, planned shootings, events, low light. 

Unfortunately the EOS-M3 will initially not be sold in the U.S. (and Canada). Depending on how well it sells in Asia and Europe, Canon may decide to bring it to North America as well. But even then the M3 (plus EVF-DC1 external electonic viewfinder!) will be available from Japan / Asia / Europe via ebay and other sources.


----------



## Random Orbits (Mar 16, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> All those compact and cheap Canon EF-M lenses are definitely little price-value miracles and well worth every cent. I got them all and really like them. Additionally there is the small adapter for EF-S and EF lenses, which does come in handy for using special lenses. Since I have it, I use the EOS M (1) significantly more often than my EOS 5D III with big, heavy L glass. Basically for me it is EOS M for everyday/street use and 5D III only for specific, planned shootings, events, low light.



How well does the EF-M 55-200 work? Can't find many reviews on that lens.


----------



## AvTvM (Mar 16, 2015)

Random Orbits said:


> How well does the EF-M 55-200 work? Can't find many reviews on that lens.



for me ... generally very well. Used the EF-S 55-250 IS STM first via EF/EF-M adapter. Then got the native EF-M 55-200mm because it is quite a bit more compact and I was willing to give up 50mm and half a stop of light on the long end. Obviously it is not suitable for action sports - but neither is the EOS M/M2 AF system. I see IQ between the 2 lenses pretty much as equal - meaning, "worth every cent the lens costs and then some". 8)

Adobe Lightroom 5.7.1 / Camera Raw 8.7.1 does not offer a lens profile for automatic lens correction for the EF-M 55-200 yet. I manually select "Canon" and LR then automatically picks the EF-S 55-250 IS STM profile. Seems to work reasonably well.

Some Images I've taken with EF-M 55-200 on EOS M at different focal lengths:


----------



## Random Orbits (Mar 16, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> Random Orbits said:
> 
> 
> > How well does the EF-M 55-200 work? Can't find many reviews on that lens.
> ...



Thanks for sharing your experience!


----------



## Bennymiata (Mar 16, 2015)

Fuji make some of the best lenses on the market, hence why all the new Hasselblad lenses are made Fuji, as are many of the top of the line video lenses.
I've had a few Fuji cameras and have been happy with all of them, but they aren't a substitute for my 5D3.
For fun and casual photography they are great, but for serious photography, you can't beat a good DSLR - period!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 16, 2015)

mustafaakarsu said:


> Thanks a lot for responses, I couldn't ask for more.
> Having both system is out of question for me,
> But having a Canon mirrorless body may be an alternative.
> And yes giving up on a 5D MIII is actually not easy, it's a great camera. I think I'll keep reading about the camera and try to find one to use it for a short time, so I'd have a better idea



Beware of reading specifications or fan posts for any camera. The real bottom line is how it works for you. Rent one, or buy from a place that allows returns if you don't like it.


There is little doubt that the ergonomics and menu's will seem strange, maybe awkward, but that's always the case when switching brands, you will get to know it well after using it a bit.

From what I understand, its a fine camera. The Nikon D7200 might be another camera to try out. It will likely have a better resale value, as well as a lot more lenses to pick from. It has a reasonable price as well. 

I'm one who feels that I could pretty much get along fine with any camera, but I do use Canon's liveview, and have not personally experienced anything close to matching it. Nikon's version is pretty weak.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Mar 17, 2015)

bmwzimmer said:


> XT-1 build quality and feel is nothing like a cheap A6000 or 70d. The Fuji is fully weather sealed with magnesium chassis. Dynamic range of those Fuji Xtrans Sensors is slightly better than the 5D but its ISO performance is a stop worse when scaled to the same size.
> 
> I think it's a good idea to have 2 systems. A large FF system and a small compact mirrorless system with a couple small compact primes.


+1, I have both systems and I found different situations/uses for both. My 5D3 continues to be my beloved camera, after leaving behind the 7D. I picked the Sony a6000 with some small lenses for travelling light, after waiting for an EOS-M camera with decent AF and variety of lenses, despite I can use an adapter for my Canon L lenses, but AF really dissapointed me.
If I were going to switch systems XT-1 is a terrific camera and Fuji has tremendous lenses and Sony is doing also a good job with the A7II and latest E-Mount lenses.


----------



## alexanderferdinand (Mar 17, 2015)

Owning a 5D3, a 1D4, several L- Lenses, the magnificant RT- flash system; AND the Fuji X100s, a X- E2 with a few lenses: 
sensors of the Fuji (its both times the X- trans II, so its one sensor...) are awesome.
handling the X100s in lowlight- a joy to use.
Using the 23/1,4: a wonderful glass, not cheap.

BUT: me as the back- button afficionado miss the AF- tracking for the quick action.
The small Fujis are wonderful to carry around, but cant beat the quick respond and allround qualities of the Canon-system.

Luckily I have both- so I notice every time I use a system, what are the differences.
Its a pleasure to have different tools. 
Thought a while about trading in the Canon- system, but wont do it.


----------



## mustafaakarsu (Mar 26, 2015)

After a long and careful consideration, I've decided not to switch my system. I've decided to get a carbon fibre tripod which would cut off 2 kilograms off my camera bag.
I got 3legged thing, Brian. 8)


----------



## tomscott (Mar 26, 2015)

I don't get the too heavy too bulky thing yes it could be lighter but if it was the lenses wouldn't feel as good in the hand.

I've just traveled over 30,000 miles with my 5DMKIII, 24-105 F4 L, 16-35 2.8 L, 70-300mm L and the nifty fifty all adds up to around 7kg not including accessories and my 20kg backpack with clothes and supplies.

I don't think I could have had a better travel companion. The only thing I wish I had had was an extra 100mm on the 70-300 at times.

IQ brilliant
Ergonomics brilliant
FPS brilliant 
Weather sealed brilliant 
AF brilliant 

There's not much more I could have asked of it! And 25k pics later with plenty of war wounds it's still shooting like a champ. Built for hard use and delivers.


----------

