Canon’s mirrorless: an alternative to Sony?

Introduction

canon ef 200mm 1.8 l usm review sigma mc 11 mc-11 sony a7r2 a7rii a7rm2 mark2 markII
Sony A7rII | Canon EF 200mm 1.8 L | f/1.8

Quite a few of you were already asking about our opinion on the new Canon mirrorless, so we will have a look at what we know so far.

You may also have a look at our article concerning the Nikon mirrorless cameras.

Why Canon?

canon ef 200mm 1.8 l usm review sigma mc 11 mc-11 sony a7r2 a7rii a7rm2 mark2 markII
Sony A7rII | Canon EF 200mm 1.8 L | f/1.8

Talking about DSLRs, Canon still has the most complete and at the same time a pretty much unrivaled lens setup with many specialty lenses found nowhere else like the TS-E 17mm 4.0L (and the rest of the TS-E series), 50mm and 85mm f/1.2 lenses with AF and some (unfortunately discontinued) halo lenses no one else ever dared to make like EF 50mm 1.0L USM with AF and the EF 200mm 1.8L USM.

Unfortunately a real draw back has been the low ISO sensor performance, especially considering dynamic range, which was quite a bit behind the Sony and Nikon sensors, and that for several years now.
A colleague once said: “I bought an A7 series camera to finally be able use Canon lenses on a state of the art sensor”.

The camera

What we know of so far:

  • fullframe sensor with 30mp
  • new RF mount with 20mm flange focal distance
  • 3.7m EVF
  • no in camera image stabilizer
  • one card slot
  • 660g ready to shoot without lens
  • top screen as Nikon Z-series and Leica SL
  • 350-560 shots per charge (CIPA)
  • eye AF (seems only single shot, no tracking)

What we don’t know:

  • actual sensor performance

The real question to me is sensor performance, rumors say there has been little improvement over the 5d MK IV.
Having 2 card slots does not matter as much to me as it might matter to some of you, yet it was standard in the higher end Canon cameras to have 2, so I am a bit surpised here.
Battery life we should wait for the first field tests before we complain, but on paper looks slightly better than Nikon Z-series and worse than Sony gen3.

I am still not sure about the positioning of this camera as it sits in between A7III/Z6 and A7rIII/Z7.
I quite like the Sony (and now Nikon) approach of having pretty much the same camera with different sensors. The A7rIII/Z7 sensors obviously offer higher resolution and if for higher ISO the A7III/Z6 are also better than Canon’s new sensor it will be in a bit of a dangerous spot: jack of all trades, expert of none.

The Lenses

The lenses we actually get soon

We get a 4/24-105 standardzoom with IS, a fast 2/28-70 standardzoom without IS, a 1.2/50 fast normal prime and a 1.8/35 macro with IS.

In Nikon’s lineup there is no lens available soon that really raised my eyebrows (at least not in a positive way) but here we have actually 3 really interesting lenses and a new reincarnation of the 24-105.

For a long time I wish for a nice wide macro that covers full frame (see my APS-C Tokina 2.8/35 macro review). My guess: this will be much cheaper than the Zeiss Batis 2/40 and at the same time focus closer and even offers IS.

A newly designed 1.2/50 was also long overdue I am really curious what the design criteria for this one were, I expect a huge emphasize on nice bokeh (similar to Sony FE 85mm 1.4 GM), not so much on resolution (we have Sigma Art for that).

I would much rather have a 4/24-105 than a 4/24-70 and the older EF mount 4/24-105s have always been some of Canon’s best selling lenses and I expect this one will also find lots of customers.


The real surprise is the 1.4 kg 2/28-70 as there hasn’t been something like that so far. I see many wedding photographers wanting a lens like this, I just hope the bokeh will be good.

Nikon was teasing us a lot but when the cards were finally on the table I guess there was quite the party at the Canon HQ.
We had to watch all these teaser videos on how great the new Z-mount is and what amazing lenses it allows for and in the end we got an f/4 zoom and two f/1.8 primes and a mock up of a huge 0.95/58 which does not even offer AF.
Canon gives us a never seen before 2/28-70 zoom and an f/1.2 prime, both with AF.

The adapters

We get 3 of these (all for EF and EF-S lenses):
Normal one (99$)
One with additional control ring as on the RF lenses (199$)
One with filter slot to use drop in ND or polarizer (399$)

The normal one is pretty cheap and should be good enough for most. If you mix RF and EF lenses from a handling point of view it might make sense to equip all your EF lenses with their own adapter.
100$ extra for that control ring, this doesn’t impress me too much.
The filter slot in adapter can be really useful when you have lenses like the 4/11-24 or the TS-E 4/17. Considering the prizes of an 150mm or even 180mm filter system it can be good value although being expensive at first look.

The lenses on the road map

Unfortunately Canon did not give us one. I expect a mix of new unique lenses and redesigns, just as we already got.
For now I expect super tele lenses to keep coming out as EF lenses as these can be used on all their three current mounts.

Conclusion(?)

canon ef 135mm 2.0 l usm sony a7rii a7 7-series ilce-7 review detail bokeh portrait
Sony A7rII |Canon EF 135mm 2.0 L | f/2.0

When Sony announced the original A7 they were still trying out what sticks. I don’t think it was planned from the beginning to ever use this mount for a full frame camera, because otherwise we would have not seen the LA-EA1 and LA-EA2 adapters first.
They were just lucky a full frame sensor fit in.

This Canon offering looks very mature compared to the first gen A7 cameras and also compared to Nikon’s Z-series, but the Sony cameras are already in their 3rd generation. Also Canon now has to take care of 3 different mounts and there won’t ever be an RF-EOSM adapter, so we will see what platform lenses will be developed for.
Eye-AF with tracking is still only available on Sony cameras today. I rather have IBIS than no IBIS, but the absence of it would not be a dealbreaker for me.
The sensor performance seems to leave something to be desired, but this could also be the reason for the rather low entry price of the camera, leaving room for a higher end model when there is a better sensor available.
We also have yet to see how good these EF adapters work.

The lens line up is quite compelling already. Finally someone adapted 10 rounded aperture blades (only for the 1.2/50 though). If you are a wedding shooter I think the 2/28-70 could seriously appeal to you. And that 1.8/35 is a lens Sony shooters are still waiting for.

Among those first gen Sony FE lenses there are quite a few duds, but the later ones have been really good. I hope Sony can keep this pace up and will consider replacing some of the not so great lenses with core aperture/focal length combinations rather sooner than later. That new Canon 2.8/400 III will also steal some thunder from Sony, as it is pretty much the same thing with the same weight reductions.

Unlike Nikon Canon will put a lof of pressure on Sony. I am also not sure who is able and willing to throw more resources at their imaging business, Canon or Sony.
Sony has already dumped many of their core businesses in the past while Canon and Nikon are camera companies comitted to the camera business.

So: I am not buying (yet), but I am tempted and would rather buy this than the Nikon-Z.

One thing should be noted though: among the 3 big manufacturers Sony is now in the same spot in the mirrorless world as Nikon has been in the SLR world: smallest mount diameter with most design restraints.
We will see where this leaves us in the future, especially considering cross-platform third party lenses.

Phillip’s rather short take

I have a lot of respect for Canon as a lens manufacturer. Sony has been very innovative over the last 4 or 5 years which resulted in a few pretty good lenses but also a few lenses which lack behind the competition. Many lenses als suffer from centering issue and they break more often than Canon’s lenses (according to Roger Cicala whom I consider the definitive source in this field). When you read a tear down by Roger you usually see a few pretty neat things but also one or two weak spots. Canon in contrast surely can’t be described as an innovative company but their products are very reliable. Their stuff breaks less often, is better centered than Sony’s and their new lenses are often a little better than the competition and very seldom behind. Which has been true since the 70s where they were really ahead of the competition in some areas.

Personally I look forward to their new lenses. More from an academic perspective though since I am certain that I won’t shell out many thousand Euros for a new camera and lens when Sony covers most of my needs a lot better at the moment. At times I would appreciate an articulated screen but other aspects of the EOS-R like uncompetitive sensor tech, 3 fps, lack of IBIS and limited eye-AF and most importantly lack of available manual lenses would feel rather limiting to me. I find it hard to imagine a future scenario where their system would actually be better suited to cover my needs.

When I take a step back and look at the whole marked space I see potential for their new mirrorless system. Canon is clever in focusing on vloggers with an articulated screen and dual pixel AF because these have a lot of reach these days. They are very good at giving users a smooth overall experience which is more important to many than the technicalities we geeks care about. The more extreme lenses should also help to catch attention of some buyers though I doubt that many people will actually buy these heavy and expensive 1.2/50 or 2/28-70. This is more about catching attention at the moment and a lot will depend on the followup lenses.

At the moment the EOS-R just like the Nikon Zs seems to me like a first generation camera which does not compete that well with Sony. I and many others were ok with using the obviously first generation a7 when there was no alternative FF-mirrorless. But today Sony has a pretty mature a7III and a7rIII supported by a large lens lineup. So I think that they could be a very attractive option for many when they have more and better mirrorless cameras in the market but as things are I am not sure that Canons entry into the FF-mirrorless market will do more than slow down Sony’s gain in market share a little.

Further Reading

The following two tabs change content below.
My name is Bastian and for many years I have been mostly shooting Nikon DSLRs. As of today I have made my transition from Nikon to Sony and I am mainly using small but capable manual lenses. My passion is landscape photography but I also like to delve into other subjects from time to time.

Latest posts by BastianK (see all)

28 thoughts on “Canon’s mirrorless: an alternative to Sony?”

  1. I agree that Canon’s real problem is they just won’t follow up and update their sensor. So far Sony is still the winner, hands down.

    And I doubt 28-70 F2 will be such a hit. Sure f2 is tempting, but I bet there are a lot of people who will find a wider 24mm more useful than the extra stop, not to mention the weight difference. I think Tamron made a better bet by doing a low cost, light 28-75 f2.8.

  2. The camera is boring, but the RF system could be really interesting and (1-2 sensor generations from now) I think lenses will become a key differentiator again. Canon has understood that, hence this awesome lineup.
    I’m hoping for a high-res body with IBIS in the coming years 🙂

    Some interesting questions remain:
    – what will Nikon do to remain relevant? The Z does not seem good enough.. neither lenses nor cameras..
    – how much cheaper and faster will the Fuji GFX become?
    – Panasonic ???
    – Sony’s reaction? I assume fancy sensor tech / computational stuff based on high read-out speeds

    Good times for photo geeks 🙂

  3. So Olympus still has an opening with a digital relaunch of Maitani’s modular OM-X concept that preceded the OM cameras.

    Who wouldn’t like a custom 3D-printed grip or tailored top plate? Taking the idea into the present would also mean open software, of course.

    Never going to happen.

  4. Let’s hope all this means that 1) I get better camera’s to mount my beloved canon lenses on (currently they’re on an A7, but of course autofocus sucks); and 2) that the prices will come down. Contrary to Bastian I do NOT consider 2000 euro’s + “cheap” or even affordable for a camera that you have to write off in 3 years or so. Not if you do not earn your money with it. And let’s hope that both canon (and sony) will start making FF camera’s that are not only compact, but light as well… Less than 500 grams, that is.

  5. The R system seems really half baked to me in comparison to the Z series.

    You get one camera with extremely limited performance (AF tracking at 3fps?) and the highest pricetag in the class. Aside from the EVF, Canon seems to be delivering a body that’s actually somewhere below the A7mII in performance, and well behind the A7mIII or Z6.Right now for the Canon shooter you’ll get better all-round performance by buying an A7mII or A7mIII and a MC-11 or Metabones adapter than an EOS R and EF adapter.

    The lenses are all individually interesting, but I cannot see any argument why one would buy more than 2 of them. They’re not a system, they’re 4 semi-random lenses. Nikon’s lenses were more pedestrian in spec, but are all aimed at the same base target market (and you can buy all 3 for the price of the 50/1.2L). All 3 of the initial launch lenses match the bodies, they’re mid-speed & semi-compact designs with promised high optical quality (much like 3 of the initial 4 FE lenses, although in that case the 24-70/4 did not deliver).

    Nikon’s bodies are also far better sorted. Less limitations, better performance, better pricing. The only real issue with them is how they managed to get that bad battery life with a battery that’s higher capacity than the Z series battery in the mkIII’s

    Nikon messed up the marketing, but like Sony and Fuji, they’ve delivered a consistent line from the get go. Canon has thrown stuff at the wall and maybe something will stick.

  6. The 28-70mm is potentially a game changer. Was wondering if the tide would ever turn from electronics companies that made lenses to lens companies that make cameras. Sony has done nothing but expensive incremental improvement with the low Mid range of the A7 line for 5 years now. Perhaps they get a wakeup call. Zeiss the world is catching up and quickly.

  7. Really interested in the 35/1.8 macro and 50/1.2. The Dpreview’s full-res images of 50/1.2 look really good (in portrait distances), and the MTF suggests the same. So sad that currently there is not a top-notch sensor to pair with it. The EOS R comes with low-pass filter, and I don’t think we can adapt RF lenses to Sony cameras…
    Also want to try the 28-70 beast but my purse and shoulders are suggesting otherwise.

  8. I am a bit puzzled by the negativity towards the Nikon Z here and elsewhere. The Nikon Z is a well thought out system with supposedly world class f1.8 lenses, practical and humble from the start and a promising lens road map. Not the Canon entry: what a blingbling lens line, 1.5kg f2.0 standard zoom, wow, not really nice on a hike or a stroll through the city. The 50/1.2 feeds the pride of ownership and the subtle differences in bokeh between the Nikon S f1.8 and Canon R f1.2 will start the experts. Sorry, I am not buying a mirrorless cam to carry more than with a DSLR. I will wait and see what Zeiss or Voigtlander brings for these cameras. And I hope they bring a good and small native MF standard lens for the Nikon Z first. Then I will change from Canon FF DSLR to Nikon Z mirrorless if I am not expanding my also excellent m43 stuff.

    1. Nikon decided to introduce a new mount and they had many teasers and fanfare how great it will be and what amazing lenses can be designed for it.
      But so far it looks to me like we mostly got lenses which are available for pretty much any other mount already and that barely make use of the new capabilities.
      Even many cheap lenses are pretty good today and it remains to be seen whether many people will go for that pretty big and heavy S 1.8/50.
      Many not so fast yet expensive primes (Lox85, Batis85, Batis135 (therefore the discount), Summarit series) seem to have a hard time, not with me, but at the sales counter.

  9. Dear Bastian and Phillip,
    I am a long term follower of phillipreeve and really appreciate your work, because normally YOU TRY BEFORE SPEAKING and because in your reviews and tutorials you look 100% from a photographers perspective.
    Now I am sorry, but I feel these speculating articles about Nikon and Canon mirrorless surely leave that path, and insofar they are not at all different to the huge bunch of other bloggers speaking behind a desk about what they read and heard – not touched and used. If I look at the numerous quite nasty comments on the new Nikons (Canon’s too fresh) and compare them with Stefan Wiesners real life experience on youtube, I have the impression we look at two entirely different systems (even reg. battery life). And Stefan can be pretty critical at times. When reading Bastians cool judgement about the boring first Nikon lenses – if Sony would have been able to produce a GOOD 4/24-70, instead of selling crap for a lot of money, I would still happily use it for a lot of my pics instead of selling with a big loss and trying for years lots of adapted or extremely expensive heavyweight solutions. When I compare first gen. Sony A7 range (having inacceptable flaws like poorest bayonet mount ever, shutter shock on A7R…) with what I see (not touch, so far) from CaNikon, I have the impression (not proof) they could be better. When I consider the arrogant Sony behaviour (remember the app policy, forcing you to buy what others had incorporated ex works, forcing you to open a Sony account to be able to BUY an app for timelapse…only to skip these totally in the latest gen. III without offering alternatives… on workshops, I could only admire what others using Fuji cameras created with double exposures… me having Sony w/o even offering the option…), sometimes it is REALLY frustrating.
    But I am in the same boat with Phillip: meanwhile being invested heavily in Sony (and Sigma C/AF and Zeiss and Canon lenses…), most likely I will not change but make photos instead. If only Zeiss extended the Loxias and Batis lens’ towards Nikon Z, and if somebody would develop decent AF adapters to use Canon EF glass on Nikon Z…. could be tempting. 🙂

    Cheers,
    Uwe

    1. Dear Uwe,
      it is always a pleasure to read you detailed and thorough comments!
      Thing is, the preorders have already started and if you really want any of these new devices you better order now, otherwise you might have to wait for months to get what you want.
      We also got asked a lot what we think about these new fullframe cameras so we decided to give our opinion based on what we already know.

      Regarding lenses both manufacturers clearly chose a different approach:
      Nikon made lenses which are reasonably sized with moderate maximum aperture and allegedly very good performance.
      But there is no lens without a very similar substitute for F-mount and if you are an F-mount user I don’t think there is an S-lens that would really make you buy a Z camera (yet).
      Looking at Canon they decided to make a “never seen before” 28-70mm 2.0 zoom and finally updated their ages old 50mm 1.2, a lens many people have been asking for.
      So I think a Canon user might be more tempted to get the Eos R to use one of these lens (of course only if those are lenses of interest to him or her).
      Also comparing F->Z and EF->RF adapters Nikon just did the bare minimum while Canon offers a bit more. And at a cheaper pricepoint, comparing the plain adapters.

      At the moment it looks to me like Canon invested more R&D and trust in their RF mount than Nikon did in their Z-mount.
      I still think this is something than can be written without having used these cameras personally.

      PS: it looks I will be getting an Eos R review sample from Canon in early October and I will also ask Nikon for a Z camera.

    2. Thank you for your constructive criticism. It is as welcome as rare :).

      I think there is a place for such posts here but they will never define the blog and I try to make sure that there are enough long-term articles between such “softer articles”. They get quite a few views so there is interest in them though. It was just that the Nikon and Canon announcements came back to back so that we felt it would be interesting to many to give our perspective on the systems.

    3. I think that it IS an event what’s happening now:
      in 2 weeks, two major camera manufacturers make official announcements about their new systems.
      Therefore, I’ve read these two articles as they would be the result of an open minded awareness. The FF E-mount was (till now) the (only) opportunity to review adaptable lenses. Who knows if the authors will or will not test lenses adapted on Z mount and/or R mount?! Or who knows if the team will be larger, including other serious authors using the new systems?! I would not skip those articles, for sure.
      🙂

  10. I heard, the Canon R will give us manual focusing aids from the Cineline cameras.

    Like this, see below:
    https://vimeo.com/131935367

    Would this be helpful for stills photography, adapted manual focusing lenses or for hopefully coming native mf lenses like Loxia etc. ?

    Does Nikon Z provide sth. comparable?

  11. (From your answer to Uwe:) “PS: it looks I will be getting an Eos R review sample from Canon in early October and I will also ask Nikon for a Z camera.”

    These are good news! I am already eager to read your review(s). I think it/they will be well-reasoned, both meticulous and practical – this is what I am really missing from all these emotional hymns of praise or damning reviews (espec. about Nikon’s Z6/Z7) which flood the WWW right now.

    Many people doing “tests” or “reviews” in blogs or on YouTube do not even really know the other mirrorless systems; sometimes they praise Nikon for inventing something which Sony users have already been using for years, or they accuse Sony of mistakes which have already been fixed in the Α7 ΙΙ or A7 III, and they often do not know the real remaining problems in the E-Mount system.

    So I hope you – knowing the different systems well – can write a really instructive comparison. Best, Roman

  12. Nikon and Canon are probably not looking at people who already own a Sony and some expensive Sony lenses.
    Their adapters will be of big importance to keep their old customers in good mood. Think of all semi-or professionals with their big collections of Nikon/Canon lenses. It is smart to present adapters and bodies in a package for a good price as I can se dealers in Sweden already offers….interesting times for me who is running 3 systems for the moment…and i cant decide wich is better or worse…as always…

  13. Hi ! Thanks for these two articles about Canon and Nikon’s new mirrorless systems. I agree with Uwe that this should never become the blog’s main type of articles yet I was quite pleased to have a more in-depth “first reactions” from what we know to be a fairly ojective and technical team.

    The most interesting part was that one : “One thing should be noted though: among the 3 big manufacturers Sony is now in the same spot in the mirrorless world as Nikon has been in the SLR world: smallest mount diameter with most design restraints.”

    I was already aware that Sony’s mount was a bit tight.
    Could you develop a little bit on it ?
    1. Do you think that Canon and / or Nikon will be able to present lenses we will never be able to mount on our EF system ?
    2. Do you think that some of the manual or old lenses you did review in this blog could achieve better results when adapted to a biger diameter mount than EF ?

    I was already aware of the thickness of the sensor glass issues since you have intensively covered here, but is the mount diameter so important ?

    1. I guess instead of Canon EF you were referring to Sony E (or FE).
      1. Yes, that is possible. In many cases though lenses for bigger mounts are just easier and cheaper to produce.
      Still, there are lenses for Canon EF that Nikon never would have been able to match for F-mount (TS-E 4/17, 1.2/50 with AF).
      2. Some longer lenses with rather simple optical design (Visionar 1.9/183) can show some blackened corners,
      as the mount is too narrow (my guess). This is more of a rare thing to encounter though, but also could be the reason
      most of Sony’s full frame tele lenses for E-mount feature many aspherical elements, while none
      of the comparable lenses from other manufacturers do.

  14. Actually it is quite a surprise that you are concerned abut ISO performance, since canon 6D is still one of the best in this regard.
    In fact I think Canon offer the best higher ISO capabilities among all the competitors. The noise in Canon cameras look best, while other cameras struggle to provide a pleasing result at higher ISO`s, the images look somewhat dirty, cold and unpleasing, canon has some level of noise but it is not distracting. After moving from 6D to Sony A7II I can tell that higher ISO on Sony A7 looks worse.

    Canon has different perspective on editing and dynamic range. While others offer more capabilities in post processing, usually when editing I still use pretty much the same amount of available DR as the canon can offer, because using more jut does make my outcome look unrealistic and the quality drops slightly… So on one had you have more dynamic range but you also need to push it out which takes a lot more time compared to the raws from canon.
    I feel like canon sensors are made so they could provide good results through the whole range of ISO and good results in all environments possible, while other cameras can be better only in some conditions.

    1. I tested the ISO performance of the Canon 6d, sony a7S, a7ii, a7Riii with a friend. The 6d is better than the a7ii. The a7s and a7Riii perform better at higher ISO with quite a large margin. The 6d especially lacks if darker parts need to be pushed a little at higher ISO values.

  15. I read somewhere that Canon AF worked until – 6ev versus sony – 3ev.. Is it confirmed and does it make a difference in your eyes? Thanks

  16. For me it’s obvious that Canon’s and Nikon’s first FF mirrorless offerings has the primary goal of trying to slow down the churn rate. These cameras are geared towards the existing user base giving them a reason and security to stay within their existing system. and they will succeed with that i think, especially Canon.
    Future 2nd or 3rd generations are more interesting for us invested into other brands. Interesting times indeed.

  17. I wonder what the weather sealing is like on this camera?

    The lack of credible weather sealing on Sony A7 bodies, together with the quality control issues Bastian mentioned in his analysis (and the number of dud lenses Sony has in its lineup) are problematic for many of us. As for Astro, well, we also know about the star eater issue.

    That the A7 series still sold well was an indication of the advantages brought by mirrorless (and by the ability of Sony’s to mount third party lenses–this is a huge advantage). Even if Canon (or Nikon) come out with compelling mirrorless cameras, the third-party lens limitation will still be a serious drawback (as indicated here and elsewhere, both Canon and Nikon have not taken a very open-minded approach on this score).

    All that said, I do hope that these new cameras induce Sony to spend a lot of money rectifying the problems I mentioned.

  18. The Nikon cameras seem almost a match of Sony with better weather sealing and EVF. The Canon has 4 nice lenses, 2 of which are impractical for 90% of enthusiasts. It also has a nice flip screen.

    Here’s why I think the Nikon Z is a better option for most people who visit this website…

    IBIS alone is very important if you’re adapting any lenses. (And half the articles on this website are about adapted lenses!) No IBIS alone is a dealbreaker for me. The Sony IBIS is a lot less effective than the M4/3 and Fuji IBIS. I’m hoping Nikon’s is as good as those.

    Beyond that the native Canon lenses don’t appeal to me much. The Canon F2 zoom and 1.2 prime are cool but gigantic with the 50mm 1.2 weighing about 1kg! That’s almost double the weight of the older DLSR version and triple the weight of the Voigtlander 50mm 1.2 m-mount that was just released.

    As a sidenote, I don’t get why wedding photographers seem to be mentioned in every video I’ve seen about these new camera systems. I (and I suspect most enthusiasts who read this site) don’t buy a camera based on which one appeals to wedding photographers! 🙂 They must make up >5% of the people interested in these enthusiast cameras anyway.

    The Nikon 35mm 1.8 does look bigger than the Canon, but they measure at 370g and 305g respectively. 65g is not that much in the big picture, especially since the Nikon lens is supposedly sharp wide open to the corners and weather sealed, whereas the Canon is more of a consumer lens. A few centimeters closer focusing distance is a nice touch, though.

    Speaking of weight, the walk around zoom lens for Nikon is much smaller and lighter than Canon. The Nikon 24-70mm F4 is about the same size and not much heavier than the the Olympus micro 4/3s zoom that covers the same range! Meanwhile the Canon zoom is over 200g heavier, which is a weight gap much larger than the primes. (Albeit the Canon can zoom in more.)

    Some of the ergonomic choices of the Canon are puzzling, too. Why put the on/off switch on a separate dial on the left? The Nikon has the switch in a more logical position around the shutter button, and that’s where my finger is usually resting anyway. If you want to turn on your camera and take a photo with one hand quickly, the Canon won’t let you do it.

    The Canon is also heavily reliant on the touchbar and touchscreen and has no focus joystick. This may turn out to make the camera almost unusable in cold winter which is half the year in many parts of the western world.

    Who knows? I may change my mind in the future when I actually handle the two cameras. But this is my own first impression.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *