Is mirrorless FF really smaller?


Whatever size reduction taken out from the sony bodies, we pay back with every system lens we carry. One workaround to lighten the load is to use an adapter with comparable nikon, canon lenses.
compare the size difference between these 2 35mm f1.4
nikon35f14ais.jpg

sony-zeiss-35mm-14.jpg
 

Attachments

  • $nikon35f14ais.jpg
    $nikon35f14ais.jpg
    20.9 KB · Views: 16
Last edited:
i have a question =)

this means smaller body hasn't really worked out to it's full potential correct? so no point for dslr users to make the switch right? coz i also "gian" hahaha
 

i have a question =)

this means smaller body hasn't really worked out to it's full potential correct? so no point for dslr users to make the switch right? coz i also "gian" hahaha
From merely a 'camera load-saving' perspective, there isn't much savings to be gained by switching systems. But there are other advantages to mirrorless for video use, no doubt. Such as EVF, realtime DOF, insane low-light sensitivity. Bang for buck, no other brand has offered more pro-video features to consumers at the price Sony can offer.

But holistically speaking, there is immense load savings on lighting equipment, sliders, tripod etc when using A7s with adapted lenses.
 

Last edited:
Frankly I now use the smallest camera ie my iPhone camera
 

i have a question =) this means smaller body hasn't really worked out to it's full potential correct? so no point for dslr users to make the switch right? coz i also "gian" hahaha

From a stills perspective, no there isn't much weight savings. However, do note that you do have the advantage of being able to use almost any FF lens out there with adapters. That gives you a tremendous amount of choice.

When I switched, weight savings was certainly not on my mind. Yes there is SOME weight savings but it isn't significant enough IMO.
 

Back
Top