# Gets the Job Done....Every Time



## JohnDizzo15 (Sep 22, 2014)

My Canon kit - It works. It does what I need it to do. It never fails me. Gets the job done....every....single....time.

Having now owned and played with multiple systems from different companies, I am truly learning the value of the Canon ecosystem.

With as much chatter going on as there is about all of Canon's deficiencies and shortcomings, I felt as though it would be refreshing to bring a different view and experience to the table. Sorry if this has already been stated elsewhere, but this is my two cents that I've come to realize as of late.

Without fail, I have never gotten frustrated with the functionality of my kit to the point where I felt that something else could serve me better in every facet of my shooting. 

Having now owned an A7r rig, multiple modern Fuji rigs, and played with a Nikon rig, I have come to the conclusion that nothing really beats the overall functionality, completeness, and usability of my Canon kit.

Yes yes, I know. Canon Fanboy, right? Wrong. If that were the case, I wouldn't have spent my last 6-8k on trying out other company's offerings. To a fanboy, that is blasphemy. 

Anyhow, I have found that comparing IQ between all of the rigs, I am generally splitting hairs. There are a finite number of instances where I actually look at an image and say "wow, I am so glad I own ABCD rig because the images are so much better than the rest."

The differences for me at least, are in functionality and feature set....not IQ. Sure, IQ on some levels can be slightly improved with my Canon rig. But assuming I properly expose (or get close) and properly compose (or get close), there is nothing IQ-wise that my Canon rig cannot accomplish. 

The only reasons left when I really think about why it is I enjoy using other rigs are due to feature sets. For instance, A7r, allows me to use my TSE lenses with a very good manual focusing aid feature set. A smaller plus would be the increase in resolution and slight bump in DR (not as important to me). The xt-1 is super compact for what it brings to the table and has an even better manual focusing aid feature set (prefer it for all my old lenses that do not require electronic communication with the body). However, that's where the positives end for me when comparing them to my Canon DSLR.

For me, the autofocus is still way too unreliable and slow on every mirrorless camera I have owned or used. Battery life has been consistently atrocious across the board. Ergonomics are almost acceptable at best. And the worst part? The ecosystems range from barely starting to develop, or mildly developed and still lacking significantly. All of these things taken together make for systems that involve a lot of compromise. It makes them very niche/specific use tools. 

This brings me back to my original point, the Canon rig that never fails. Slight shortcomings, I will admit, are present. However, as a general rule in my experience, it has always gotten the job done and I have never felt it lacking to the point where I looked to another system and felt that I could do better.

The one truth I have found, the grass is almost never greener....


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 22, 2014)

Always interesting to hear from people who have real, practical experience with the different systems, rather than those who fantasise over what they think a different system can do to improve their photography. 

I must admit I'm a bit of a Fuji fan myself, but having learnt over the years that multiple systems are, to me, a distraction from making real images, I now religiously just stick to one, other than trying out the opposition now and again to keep myself up to date.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Sep 22, 2014)

Sporgon said:


> Always interesting to hear from people who have real, practical experience with the different systems, rather than those who fantasise over what they think a different system can do to improve their photography.
> 
> I must admit I'm a bit of a Fuji fan myself, but having learnt over the years that multiple systems are, to me, a distraction from making real images, I now religiously just stick to one, other than trying out the opposition now and again to keep myself up to date.



Multiple systems have only mildly been a distraction for me as I know exactly when I want to take a specific rig out for a specific reason. My main issue as far as distraction goes is when I sometimes forget how something worked on one rig because I had been using the other ones more frequently more recently (although it is usually like riding a bike and is only a momentary hickup).

I have to agree with you on Fuji. I too, am a fan of theirs. I feel like they have accomplished a lot with their system in a relatively short amount of time. I absolutely enjoy using their current line of offerings but still find that there are frustrations at times. Most recently, I was trying to shoot mildly dynamic situations where the AF on both my x100s and xt-1 + 56/1.2 were not getting the job done. There is the ever so slight lag here and there with the lens trying to focus. There is also the relatively frequent EVF hickup that gets kind of annoying when combined with the lens hesitation. Suffice to say I missed a lot of shots in a situation that was not as high speed as a sporting event.

The second little annoyance is with the battery. It seems to be worse on the x100s, but still present on the xt-1. Both devices show full battery even though they are probably closer to 50% or less. Usually, as soon as I show one tick less from full, the battery is ready to take a crap within minutes after. Not a deal breaker as I know to carry extras with me. But still super annoying when it happens as I don't think it would be too much to ask on cameras that cost upwards of 1k to have slightly more accurate battery life indicators.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 22, 2014)

Good points John. May I ask, what your next steps from here...? 

My kids still small and they have activities. Current mirrorless systems couldn't keep up with them. However, I do find my RX1 quite handy on lazzzy days.


----------



## MARKOE PHOTOE (Sep 22, 2014)

The short and sweet: Well researched and well written sysnopsis. I completely agree and feel a sense of gratitude knowing that I too have some of the same dirt on my shoes having kicked a few other systems to the curb. I've never felt that I could release Canon 100% as it always performs for any job I need. Period. 

Sure, I still shoot with Fuji on occasion for 'quick shots' and travel but there is a compromise and you know as well as I what that is.

Thanks for bringing this subject to light.


----------



## hachu21 (Sep 22, 2014)

Thanks john for this piece of opinion, well written and with necessary amout of nuance.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Sep 22, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> Good points John. May I ask, what your next steps from here...?
> 
> My kids still small and they have activities. Current mirrorless systems couldn't keep up with them. However, I do find my RX1 quite handy on lazzzy days.



Dylan, I too have young kids that are not still even when they aren't participating in activities lol. The current mirrorless systems are definitely a compromise when it comes to AF speed and accuracy. Just like you though, it is nice to have a compact system like the rx or the x100s in my case for day to day snaps.

As far as what my next step is, I think I may put the Sony rig up for sale soon as I am finding that the xt-1 is just way more enjoyable to shoot (for a compact ILC). I would still like to have something that offers me high res and overall high IQ with good focus aids. But I've had so many ongoing issues with the a7r that I just don't think it is worth it to keep around. 

I like the Zeiss 55/1.8 on the a7r. But the issue is that I am only shooting in conditions that allow me to be at ISO 100-400 about 10% of the time at best. When I shoot above that sensitivity, the images are no longer offering me anything over my other rigs. As a matter of fact, the colors are always the poorest amongst all of my rigs straight out of camera. So I would not only be dealing with IQ that isn't much different, but colors that are definitely worse.

When shooting adapted lenses, I find that for some reason, I am dealing with shake/softness in a lot of images where I absolutely did not anticipate finding any with the Sony. 

Also, the size factor is lost on the a7r as it is full frame which requires full frame lenses like the 55/1.8. While the combo is smaller than a DSLR rig, it is still not small by any stretch of the imagination for what it is. My view has always been to either truly be small, or just have the whole enchilada and be big. To me, there is no sense or use in being smaller but still too big. While the whole size issue isn't really a big deal to me, I figured I would mention it since it is still something that I have noted.

So the only thing left that's leading me to keep the Sony is the fact that I have electronic communication with my tilt shift lenses through it. But is that worth keeping almost 3k worth of kit around for? Only time will tell I suppose.

If a company like Metabones would release an electronic adapter for EF to X mount (or a speedbooster), the Sony would almost certainly be gone immediately.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 22, 2014)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > Good points John. May I ask, what your next steps from here...?
> ...



I agree with you about Fuji cameras - so much fun to shoot it.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Sep 22, 2014)

hachu21 said:


> Thanks john for this piece of opinion, well written and with necessary amout of nuance.



Thank you, hachu and markoe.

Just felt like it was something that needed to be said for all the people that are still dealing with the burning decision of whether to switch or try other systems. I wish I had been able to read more extensively about perspectives from other Canon shooters (with candid views) that had tried out all the other systems I was interested in prior to buying them. I have found that most of the opinions you do find online are pretty biased and not indicative of how one would feel in the real world when actually having the rigs in their hands.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Sep 23, 2014)

Something just struck me. To put it all into more of a nutshell, all systems have compromises. I'm certain we are all aware of this whether we like to admit it or not.

The issue I have with all the other systems I have tried is that while there are compromises to my Canon kit, they can all generally be worked around or dealt with relatively easily. The compromises with the other kits however, are ones that are just inherent in what they are and how the company has packaged them. They are issues which either cannot currently be helped, or issues that can be helped but are not so easily accomplished. 

Either way, if someone told me at this very moment in time that I could only keep one kit.... without hesitation, you know what the answer would be. 

It is because of this that Canon currently has most of my camera money and will continue to get most of it until others truly step up to the plate to fully replace my kit and/or meet all of my needs.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 23, 2014)

I've used multiple digital DSLR's and am comfortable with all of them. They all do the job if you know how to use them.

There are strengths and weaknesses to all systems, So its a pick the system with features you want or need. I see it as similar to selecting a car, I buy the one that is best for me.

The issue with cameras that is different, is that the cost lenses, flashes, and other accessories do make it expensive to switch bodies to a different brand. I have spare wheels for my car, but they don't cost as much as just one of my lenses.


----------



## Policar (Sep 23, 2014)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> My Canon kit - It works. It does what I need it to do. It never fails me. Gets the job done....every....single....time.
> 
> Having now owned and played with multiple systems from different companies, I am truly learning the value of the Canon ecosystem.
> 
> ...



100%. Truth is the real highly paid pros I know all shoot Canon and think even Sigma lenses would be insane (though they appreciate Nikon, if no other manufacturers, too). 

Why?

Job done well enough is a pay check.

Canon is conservative.

Canon shooters are conservative.

Pros are conservative: good enough is still a paycheck.

I use a 5D Mark III and a C100 and love them both, but if I cared for pure specs over reliability and ease of use I'd have long since abandoned them.

But I don't.


----------



## J.R. (Sep 23, 2014)

Good to hear a sane voice. I'm tired of people telling me how bad my gear is.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Sep 23, 2014)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> My Canon kit - It works. It does what I need it to do. It never fails me. Gets the job done... every... single... time.


Exactly the point I've been striving to make stick elswewhere on CR - there's nothing remotely fanboyish about appreciating gear which you _know_ won't let you down, and which will deliver excellent results every time.

Way back in the days of the D70, I was a Nikon shooter - I was happy with that little body, and it did what I wanted of it: at no point did I ever feel disadvantaged or hindered by using it.

But then I "upgraded" to the D200: I felt that I was progressing sufficiently in the craft to justifiy stepping up. 

And with that body (bodies - I owned two of the benighted things) everything changed. Its IQ was so bad that I _literally_ could not bring myself to step out of the door if the light was anything less than perfect. 

Which it hardly ever was.

_*I've never, ever, felt in any way "hamstrung" by the capabilities of any Canon camera I've owned subsequently: they've all done exactly what I expected of them, time after time, without fuss*_*.

Having been on the other side of that, I can't tell you what a luxury that is - and it's one I enjoy and appreciate to this day. 

Good post, John - if there was any justice in the world, Admin would make this a sticky and required reading.*


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Sep 23, 2014)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> My Canon kit - It works. It does what I need it to do. It never fails me. Gets the job done....every....single....time.



A nice post. But the only thing you have demonstrated is that a Canon kit is the best for you. There are Nikon, Pentax, Sony, ..... owners that are saying the exact same thing about their respective systems. 

It is important to recognize that there is NO best camera system. Only a camera system that is best for an individual based on their individual needs and desires. It does get a bit frustrating when some people adopt the paradigm "since the Canon system [insert any system actually] is best for me, it must be best for you and you are foolish if you don't get the system that works for me."

The world is filled with different photographers each with different needs and desires when it comes to cameras. There is room for all of them.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Sep 23, 2014)

Policar said:


> Canon shooters are conservative.


Actually, I'm not - _at all_. Even back in the day, when I was a serious guitarist, I was the guy who would (and did) buy a Hagstrom Swede rather than a Les Paul.

Being conservative, and knowing and appreciating what works for you, really aren't the same thing.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Sep 23, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> A nice post. But the only thing you have demonstrated is that a Canon kit is the best for you. There are Nikon, Pentax, Sony, ..... owners that are saying the exact same thing about their respective systems.


You're missing the point.

Which is that it's _OK_ for people to be satisfied with their gear; and that it's beyond bloody tiresome to be told that if we are, we're either fanboys or completely lacking in discernment.

J.R's post sums it up perfectly.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Sep 23, 2014)

Keith_Reeder said:


> You're missing the point.



There was nothing in my post that indicated that I missed the point. I was actually supporting your position, just from a system agnostic position. 

The fanboys, as I mentioned in my post, are those people who believe that a system they like must be not only the best system but the best system for other people. Again, I was agreeing with you.

The best camera system is the one that works best for the individual.


----------



## J.R. (Sep 23, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> Keith_Reeder said:
> 
> 
> > You're missing the point.
> ...



Agreed. 

BTW, I've not found too many fanboys here (which is the beauty of this site). There is general consensus that while Canon could get better at certain aspects (especially at you-know-what) of their cameras, most users don't find these issues limiting their photography. Trouble arises when people advocating another brand doesn't merely have an opinion, he has to beat everyone over the head with it. 

The way some people argue on these forums, you would have to believe that Canon gear is trash and everyone needs a D810 and the 12-24 for getting a half decent picture of a doorknob that you need to push by 5 stops to get right ... Ugh ... and I mean Ughhh


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 23, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> ...those people who believe that a system they like must be not only the best system but the best system for other people.



Such as Nikon missionaries journeying here to the land of Canoon to proselytize the joys of the Holy Exmor to the ignorant heathens... :


----------



## Knut Skywalker (Sep 23, 2014)

Great post! And it sums up my hobbyist experience as well. I always felt like the Canon system had everything I would ever want for the situation I am facing. I like doing portraits and I found the perfect lenses for me to do that with, both at a very god price point. I am using a 100 2.0 and a 50 1.4 on a 5D2 and this kit never disappointed (except the 50 wide open, as everybody knows...).

The thing is, you have to appreciate your gear to appreciate the photos you take with it. At least that is what I think.


----------



## axtstern (Sep 23, 2014)

Let me reduce this to

Gets the Job Done....99 out of 100 times
Don't want to split hairs but I had my little issues.

Still less than with any other manufacturer I have tried so far. However in my case a certain large Internet warehouse may impact the results. As easy it was whenever required to get a new bought faulty piece exchanged as easy I fear it was for other customers to receive exactly the one I sent back....
If a Canon lens type for example was said to have a soft spot than I wonder how often different people were actually reporting about the same flawed lens being returned and sent out again and again...


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Sep 23, 2014)

J.R. said:


> BTW, I've not found too many fanboys here (which is the beauty of this site).



Are we on the same website? ;D


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Sep 23, 2014)

I absolutely agree with much of what has been stated. The Canon kit and my feelings about it are definitely subjective from the the vantage point with which I have made my assessments.

I agree that everyone has different needs and differing systems may serve those specific needs much better. I also recognize that large companies like Nikon are also very developed and would be a great choice for any photographer should they decide to go that way.

My main goal was just to point out that through my own experiences of trial and error, I have found that I always return to my Canon kit when I need something faithful that I know will not fail me through any of the shooting scenarios I find myself in.

Yes. There is lighter, smaller, more DR, more resolution, better this, and better that. But what I have found is that with those advantages from other systems come with plenty of disadvantages.

I know that when I pack up my Canon rig to go out (regardless of what I am shooting that day), I have every single tool I need to choose from right in front of me. 

I also know that none of those tools will be compromised in such a way that would make it supremely difficult for me to accomplish my goal for that day.

To briefly illustrate:
Canon kit = multiple fast portrait lenses, multiple macro lenses, multiple 2.8 stabilized zoom lenses, multiple telephoto lenses, TC, multiple tilt shift lenses, multiple fast wide angle lenses, a specialty zoom in the 8-15, and multiple native flashes/triggers. 

All of those items work seamlessly together for everything that I do.....ever. I don't have to worry about focus issues, battery issues, compatibility issues, lack of lens or tool choice issues (adapting brings a slew of other issues), amongst other things.

All of it just works. And while there are things about it that could be slightly improved, all of the characteristics of the system are already pretty stellar. I have tried the other systems that are supposed to yield great improvements over my Canon kit. However, it takes more work to get myself the shots I want and they don't always look better than what I would have gotten with the Canon kit anyway. 

I've learned now that it is much better to have the ability to get any job done either well enough or excellently than to be able to do one or two things slightly better and be crippled in a multitude of other significant ways.


----------



## Lee Jay (Sep 23, 2014)

I've just had my first (in 35 years) significant failure of Canon equipment.

One of the little tiny screws holding in the back plate of my 5D fell out and is missing. The whole plate moves around and sort of crunches when you squeeze it. The camera still works fine.

$10.80 on ebay for a new set of screws.

I called Canon. They sent me a set as a courtesy, no charge.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Sep 23, 2014)

Agree with the general consensus here ... as long as the photographer is satisfied with the gear he/she uses, the brand name really does not matter. I recently started using Sony mirrorless cameras & lenses most of the time, as I really like the small form factor, which makes it very convenient ... but when it comes to serious work, I use Canon. Like others have mentioned, every system has its strengths and limitations ... the trickiest part is to know how to get around the weaknesses and use the strengths to their full potential ... having said that, for the vast majority (myself included) the modern cameras are far more capable then the skill set we possess.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 23, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> I've just had my first (in 35 years) significant failure of Canon equipment.
> 
> One of the little tiny screws holding in the back plate of my 5D fell out and is missing. The whole plate moves around and sort of crunches when you squeeze it. The camera still works fine.
> 
> ...



I bought a used 5D recently with a screw or two missing. I keep a stock of tiny screws that I save from broken cameras and lenses, so I had just the right one.

I pickup a used film SLR or Broken lens from Garage sales for a buck or two, and, if they can't be fixed, I keep the screws and other frequently needed parts like the eye piece.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Sep 23, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> There was nothing in my post that indicated that I missed the point. I was actually supporting your position, just from a system agnostic position.


Uummm... I think there kinda is - that'll be why I posted!



While of course you're right to suggest that other systems' users can say something similar to what John said, _his_ point can't be made system-agnostically - it's explicitly about Canon ownership and use.

And it's not about him "demonstrating that Canon kit is best for [him]" - he's not really "demonstrating" anything at all. What he's saying is that _*it's not for other people to tell him that he's wrong about that*_. It's a different nuance, and the key "take-away" from his original statement. 

Like a lot of us, John appears to have been shooting long enough to have established what his needs are and how to satisfy them, which on the face of it is why (like me and others) he is tired of comments which characterise expressions of satisfaction with a brand - satisfaction based on experience and objective analysis - as being fanboyish and/or indicative of low, easily-satisfied standards.


----------



## Tabor Warren Photography (Sep 23, 2014)

Excellent post.

I own a good amount of Canon gear, only used a Nikon once, and the button layout was confusing. That being said, had I begun with Nikon, Sony, whoever, I'm sure the Canon layout would have felt very foreign. 

It always cracks me up when wedding guests attempt to one-up the superiority of their xyz system over the gear I'm using. If theirs has better DR, autofocus, MP, whatever, that's cool, I like my Canons.

I often mention to clients that the debate is similar to the superiority of Ford, Chevy, and Dodge in the truck world. They all make excellent machines, I just happen to own an F150.

Thank you for the refreshing, real world, take on the different systems. It is good to know at least some one has done the experimenting. ;D

Cheers,
-Tabor


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Sep 23, 2014)

Rienzphotoz said:


> Like others have mentioned, every system has its strengths and limitations ... the trickiest part is to know how to get around the weaknesses and use the strengths to their full potential ...



Figuring out how to get around those weaknesses is the part that starts to get the most troublesome after a while. This is especially true when you have multiple systems to choose from which offer very different shooting experiences.

Taken by themselves, I could imagine that my Fuji or Sony rig would be just fine. But when used in conjunction with my Canon rig and my sometimes borrowed Nikon rig, I realize how much having to "get around" weaknesses truly bothers me. 

This was a key point to bring to light regarding work arounds. While I do not mind thinking about and planning for getting around obstacles with shooting a certain rig, using the Canon rig after all is said and done reminds me of how it feels to shoot (for all intents and purposes) in a hassle free fashion. I am not preplanning for how I am going to get something done and how to deal with the compromises of the rig I'm holding. I am simply just......shooting.

It all goes back to what it is I can accomplish with any given system. When you latch onto specific strengths and ignore weaknesses is when you get into the trap of seeing the greener grass on the other side. GAS, unfortunately grabs ahold of you during this period. I have now gone through the a7r, xe-2, xt-1, and a slew of adapters, work-arounds, etc.

If I have a rig out with me, I don't want to have to think to myself "oh sh*t, wish I had the other rig." And that is where the Canon (for me) comes in. It is the only kit I have currently that allows me to feel confident in that I can shoot absolutely any scenario that I come across. I may not have the most dynamic range/resolution, it may not be the smallest/lightest, but I never have to worry about solving the problem of how to get a shot because my rig makes it difficult to do so.

The other issue I have with this is that often times, I will go ahead and work around the issues of the rig I'm using. But then upon review of the images, I realize that the end product isn't really much, if any improvement at all over my Canon kit which then makes me feel as though it was all done in vain.

There will always be the guys that only shoot this, or that, and don't concern themselves with other things. For me, I chase my kids around, landscape/travel, events on occasion, portraiture, macro - food and product, and possibly some other things I have forgotten at the moment. The Sony and the Fuji can get a lot of that done. But neither one handles all of it very easily. The rig that has consistently allowed me to get the most usable/keeper shots in general? Still the Canon.


----------

