[Paul B]

Since taking a full time proper job I've got less time for photography and with other commitments long gone are the days where I'll sacrifice the opportunity to climb to take pictures. This means I'm taking less pictures as I simply won't carry my 5dII and assortment of lenses to the crag (even crags with almost no walk-in).

I own:
5dII
17-40mm f/4
50mm f/1.4
70-200 f/4

an X100s (35mm f/2).

The X100s is great for non-climbing holidays (of which I take as few as possible) and people shots (weddings, weekends away etc.) and it's a great thing to own; the sensor is lovely (colours), the controls (physical) are great and the list goes on. However, the X-trans sensor makes my computer struggle and I'm just not a great fan of the lens for anything other than portraiture.

I'm not going to get rid of the Canon as I use it from time to time and the body is worth far more to me than the second hand sale value. However, the X100s can go if I find something suitable as below:

I'd like the smallest combination of body/lens that'll give me something close to the 70-200 f/4 on the 5d, preferable with a viewfinder (rubbish EVFs are hard work).

Is there a reasonable size saving to be had? Second hand preferred as despite the job I'm still tight.

[dave]

If you get on with the Fuji then how abouts one of the other Xseries bodies and a tele?

Other than that, m4/3rds is a good system, the Olympus OMD bodies are great, and they have a 2.8 pro calibre tele zoom in the lineup. I wouln't even touch most of the other mirrorless systems like the Canon or Nikon systems, as they smack of a market-chasing afterthought.

[gingerninja]

i got a sony a5000 for taking biking and stuff. its got a apsc sensor and is still small enough to carry about. the ones higher in the range have view finders i think. if its compact you want i also got a lumix lm1 thats not bad. has an evf and isnt too bad. ive had the canon g cameras in the past and they new ones of those look pretty good.

[Fultonius]

If you get on with the Fuji then how abouts one of the other Xseries bodies and a tele?

Other than that, m4/3rds is a good system, the Olympus OMD bodies are great, and they have a 2.8 pro calibre tele zoom in the lineup. I wouln't even touch most of the other mirrorless systems like the Canon or Nikon systems, as they smack of a market-chasing afterthought.

What he said - the Oly's a great to handle (very much like a small DSLR/well laid out rangefinder). Not used the 40-150 f2.8 but it's meant to be a corker.

Buuut.... it might no be the size reduction you are after!

[dave]

I'm sure JB will chime in when he's back from killing rats in the WIndies, but there's also the Sony RX10 with a constant 2.8 zoom 24-200 equiv, fixed lens, might be worth a look.

[cofe]

I had a NEX5 for a bit: good in the hand (nice grip), brilliant sensor, weird computer-vibe menu system, but great pics. Did my nut in not having a VF, so swapped it for an OMD EM5 same as Dave. Maybe not quite as compact, but also great.

I had one of the Sigma art lenses for the NEX, might have been the 30mm. Cost £60, sharp as fuck.

[Johnny Brown]

Smallest option is 4/3rds: that 40-150 Zuiko is a lovely lens but not really an equivalent to yours; it's an upgrade. Panachronic do a 35-100/2.8 which is much smaller and a closer match length wise, reviews are good.

preferable with a viewfinder (rubbish EVFs are hard work)

Micro 4/3rds are all evf; the whole point of mirrorless is of course that there is no mirror for a reflex view. The latest evfs are ok, for general work they are fine. For fast action I'd prefer optical; for macro work the evf is a revelation.

Alternatively for OVF you'll have to go DX; small crop body (550D? I know nothing about Canon) plus Sigma 50-150/2.8 (NB Mk1 only, MKII massive, mine is very sharp on Nikon but Cofe didn't rate his on Canon) or Tokina equivalent. Gets you an optical vf and system compatibility, but the size difference is less marked.

Jury still out on my RX10. Specs very impressive; in the film era it would have been anyone's wet dream. Sensor small, DR limited, 2.8 not that fast, EVF not up to the one on my A7, Sony menus not great, AF unpredictable, battery life poor. Video is very good, stabilisation very impressive. I just took it to the Caribbean, it was very capable indeed for the size of the package.

Or get an A7 and a couple of old primes - the evf makes old manual lenses much more usable than they would be with an OVF. An 85/2 will be smaller than that 4/3rds 35-100, body similar size... and the output will beat your 5D. BOOM.

[Paul B]

Thanks all.

With respect to Fuji systems I'd rather not simply because of the amount of $$$ I'll need to invest (with all of the hype I think they're fairly pricey). The question would also be which body too as the X-pro series are as big as DX body and XE-series I didn't get on with it. I guess it'd be the newer body (see $$$).

The A7 does look like a great thing but I'd rather not go down the line of old primes (I'm assuming these are MF); I'm too lazy / lack skill and I'd be screwed taking beach pictures of the hound at full pelt, Canon AF was struggling with that! Sony would be more of a bite the bullet and change completely (which seems a bit extreme given I'm not using my cameras much currently).

Are there any M4/3rd primes (>85mm ish) that would be worth considering? If I did this I'd also likely buy one of the cheap small primes (Panasonic?) for a ~50mm option. Any cheaper bodys (GX with EVF? GH series?).

Fultonious - that's what I feared, there's not much of a win there in size (or enough of a win anyhow)!

[Fultonius]

If fast AF is important that probably wipes out the m4/3. (not sure how the new MKII EM-5 does, but mine isn't the best for birds/moving animals)

[cofe]

Oly 25mm is a very nice, sharp prime.

[dave]

Loads of choices for normal primes for m4/3: Panasonic 20/1.7, 25/1.4, 25/1.7, and Olympus 25/1.8 and 18/1.8. There's also the voigtlander and SLRMagic F/0.95 manual lenses for those inclined. All pretty well regarded.

For longer lenses the 45/1.8 Olympus is superb, small, fast AF and costs fuck all. They also do a fairly hefty 75/1.8 which has been universally lauded as a superb bit of glass.

[Johnny Brown]

You're keeping the 5d right? So either use that for your dog, or ditch it and invest in a fully featured smaller system. I got the impression you were more after a smaller camera to supplement it.

Fuji XT-1 looks like the pick, should be plummeting in price now the new one is out. Don't ignore the benefits of being familiar with the menus.

The great thing about the A7 is the lens options - you can use pretty much anything. I'm unlikely to consider 4/3rds until the wide options improve, tele and macro options look good.

[dave]

I'm unlikely to consider 4/3rds until the wide options improve, tele and macro options look good.

Zuiko 12/2 looks spectacular word.

[Johnny Brown]

That's not the reviews I've read. And the standard zooms already go to 12, I'd be looking for something a bit wider: 10 or 10.5mm.

[Fultonius]

7-14mm zoom, word  -  http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/olympus_m_zuiko_digital_ed_7_14mm_f_28_pro_review/

[Johnny Brown]

Yeah, not what I'm after - big and expensive, wouldn't use half the range.

[Paul B]

If fast AF is important that probably wipes out the m4/3. (not sure how the new MKII EM-5 does, but mine isn't the best for birds/moving animals)

She runs pretty straight usually which at least makes it a BIT easier, but yes, I'm worried it'll be limiting (and other subjects that move).

You're keeping the 5d right? So either use that for your dog, or ditch it and invest in a fully featured smaller system. I got the impression you were more after a smaller camera to supplement it.

/not willing to jump in with two feet (yet) / unwilling to invest heaps and heaps of cash (how much will I realistically get back from my Canon gear? Likely a depressingly small amount).

Fuji XT-1 looks like the pick, should be plummeting in price now the new one is out. Don't ignore the benefits of being familiar with the menus.

That's the one. They've just standardised button layout and menus across the Fuji range, so that should be a bonus going forward. Their files do make my computer struggle though (where it doesn't with the much larger files from the 5DII)

The great thing about the A7 is the lens options - you can use pretty much anything. I'm unlikely to consider 4/3rds until the wide options improve, tele and macro options look good.

Due to flange to sensor distance? Like I said above surely this means you're on MF?

Macro - not fussed
Wide - I've got the 17-40mm currently which it'd be nice for an equivalent to be available for if/when I jump with both feet.

[Fultonius]

Ah, JB, wide prime, you'd be wanting AF too I presume?

Paul - I don't do a lot of action shooting with mine, and I only have the 20mm 1.7 and the kit lens, so you might be better doing some more research on the AF front...   

[Paul B]

Ah, JB, wide prime, you'd be wanting AF too I presume?

Paul - I don't do a lot of action shooting with mine, and I only have the 20mm 1.7 and the kit lens, so you might be better doing some more research on the AF front...

It's limiting on the Fuji I've got and from my general understanding of how AF works on mirrorless systems vs. DSLRs it makes sense. I used the Fuji for the evening-do of a wedding and had to basically set the focus distance and just keep Xm away from the subject. It worked well but I wouldn't want to go too manual as the lump of sausage meat operating said camera often forgets basics (and I'd rather have the picture). That said, all the Canon did was hunt in the same conditions.

[dave]

That's not the reviews I've read. And the standard zooms already go to 12, I'd be looking for something a bit wider: 10 or 10.5mm.

Reviews must have changed since I was reading them a couple of years back.

There's also the well regarded 12mm samyang, MF and big filter ring though. There's also a Samyang 10mm but with a built-in hood. Voigtlander have just brought out a 10.5mm f/0.95. That's already 4 more wide primes than Nikon have ever bothered to bring out for DX.

[Johnny Brown]

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2011/11/olympus-12mm-review.html

Good knowledge, I wasn't aware of those others. I'm sure I'd be fine with manual focus. However a quick google knocks them all out - big, expensive or both. It would need to be smaller than my 21mm Zuiko on the A7, which those aren't, and I could upgrade to the incredible Zeiss Loxia 21mm for that money.

Agree Nikon are no better but I'll not consider switching until there's an attractive option.

[dave]

TBH the best to me looks like the 12mm f/2 Samyang - quite small, reviews well (I have their 7.5mm fisheye which is excellent) and cheap. I would however have to hacksaw the 67mm filter ring off and glue on a 46 or 49mm ring.

[Johnny Brown]

Doesn't look like that would work - front element sticks out too far. It would need to be a really compelling option for me sizewise, given it's not as wide as I'd like and the benefits of the A7 sensor.

Anyway, enough about me. What does P-Ben want? I suspect the AF on a recent Oly body with a pro lens would compete with the 5D, but that means jumping in to a full system really. If not, look at a bridge camera like the RX10. One inch sensors have come a long way in the last few years, and matching a lens to a sensor has it's benefits.

[Paul B]

Johnny, do you lose AF if you go cross-brand on an A7? I'm guessing yes or have adapters become more intelligent?

[Johnny Brown]

No, adaptors that preserve AF on all your Canon lenses are available and getting cheaper/ better all the time. Don't expect it to track like your 5D though. Don't underestimate either how easy MF is - you get a button to magnify the view, and peaking if you want it. With a dedicated lens these can be coupled to the focus ring.

[Stu Littlefair]

If you're interested in the size comparisons, then the camera size comparison at http://camerasize.com/compact is pretty handy.

For example, I've sized up an OM-D body with some lenses you might like,

the Samyang 12mm f2, the Oly 45 f1.8, the Oly 12-42 f2.8, the Oly 75 f1.8, the Panasonic 35-100 f2.8

finally for comparison, the 5dII with a 70-200 f4

http://camerasize.com/compact/#521.558,521.93,521.412,521.346,521.366,192.294,ha,t

The only thing you'll miss from your 5d is low light performance and autofocus speed. 

[Paul B]

Wow, that's really useful, thanks! Scrolling rightward you're suddenly struck by the size of the 5dII and what is a reasonably compact zoom (the 70-200 f/4 L non IS).

Having a flick the A7 body is as small as the Oly but as soon as you go near lenses things get large (dictated by sensor size?).

Hmmm choices!

[Johnny Brown]

Having a flick the A7 body is as small as the Oly but as soon as you go near lenses things get large (dictated by sensor size?).

Yeah, although there's not much in it with wide angles. As above, options are limited for 4/3 wides and Dave's options above are as big as any of the Sony FE prime wides. If you're ditching the Fuji the sony zeiss 35mm will be very close match, it's the only non-adapted lens I've got.

What do you mean by your computer struggles with Fuji files? The raw processor or what?

[Paul B]

Lightroom isn't built to handle the X-trans setup (or wasn't originally), it works, but making adjustments on my 5dII RAW files are much faster than the lower resolution Fuji X100s (which is painfully slow). I'd imagine there's a lot of extra maths to convert RGB, RGB into the semi-random array used by Fuji and that's using processing power?

[Paul B]

LR4 doesn't support the .ORF RAW files which is a pain! Another upgrade would be required.

[Johnny Brown]

So when you said 'my computer struggles with xtrans files' you actually meant 'my out of date raw processor struggles'. I'd be very surprised if there aren't significant improvements with the latest version, and it's a much cheaper upgrade than a camera.

[Paul B]

It may or may not solve the issue with the X trans but doesn't solve anything else so that's a moot point.

[cheque]

I have the Panasonic 35-100 2.8. My opinion of it (and it's brother the 12-35) is similar to Charlton Heston's view of his rifle.

It's about the size and weight of a can of Coke and amazing. The Olympus 40-150 is big, heavy and pricey in comparison and doesn't have IS. This is the case with all the Olympus M43 zooms- they're a bit better than the Panasonics but at the expense of practicality.

Do not underestimate how much focus peaking improves the experience of manual focussing if you haven't tried it.

[dave]

Worth pointing out that the Olympus m4/3 bodies have extremely effective IS built into the sensor, so you get IS with every lens anyway (even old legacy primes on an adapter), hence why they don't also make IS lenses.