p.1 #1 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
I have been ignoring mirrorless technology, advancements and cameras - so I feel a bit behind on the options and pros/cons. I have a large enough EF glass collection that I just assumed for my needs (mostly landscape photography) it didn't make sense. However, I just booked a bucket list trip to the Falklands, South Georgia and Antarctica and photography is my primary hobby and motivation for this type of travel. So it's time to critically evaluate what I want/need.
Current Gear
-5D3
-6D2
-16-35 f2.8 L III
-24-70 f2.8 L II
-70-200 f2.8 L IS II
-Sigma 150-600 f5-6.3 DG C
-2x III Extender
-Other assorted lenses not relevant to this trip
I had planned to pick up a 5DIV at some point and now in advance of this trip (Nov/Dec 2026). But maybe I need to jump to mirrorless instead? I now understand that I can use my EF glass with an adapter and upgrade/expand into RF glass as needed in future.
I used the above bodies and a subset of those lenses for an African safari in 2018 and was happy with the experience and assumed it's what I would take to Antarctica. Then I decided to prioritize a weather sealed long lens and was looking at a used 100-400 II. Because I had the 150-600mm range in my mind, I contemplated whether picking up a cropped body is worth considering as a second body. This led me down the path of "if I'm considering new bodies, should I look at mirrorless?" And now I'm down a rabbit hole.
If money was the only factor, grabbing the 5DIV+100-400II seems like the play. I'm selling several lenses that I no longer need that should more than cover used copies of those. But I'm very much a buy and hold photographer who has been shooting with SLRs for 30+ years (yikes). I'm willing to pay now and mentally amortize the costs over the many years of ownership/use I will enjoy. Especially before taking a trip like this that I might never do again. I'm very intrigued by the improved autofocus that would certainly increase my keeper rate with wildlife shots.
So far, my research has me leaning toward the R5II, but I'm open to input. In my normal shooting I gravitate toward landscape and travel photography. I enjoy shooting wildlife when the travel centers around it, but it's not what I tend to print big for display.
Assuming a 100-400II is part of the kit I will pack, should I...
-Buy a 5DIV and go with what I have (would my second body be the better sealed 5D3 or the flip screen 6D2)?
-Buy an R5II and use one of my DSLRs as my second body?
-Buy an R5II and an R7 for the APC-C crop factor to give me a 160-640 option with the 100-400?
-If I buy one or two mirrorless bodies, do I look to an RF lens instead of the EF 100-400II? I haven't looked at the RF lens lineup at all.
-Do something I haven't outlined?
Note that I don't intend to take all the lenses I listed - I'm leaning toward the 16-35, 24-70, and 100-400 with two bodies, but am still reading and researching. I want to move forward sooner than later re: bodies, especially if I go mirrorless so that I can retrain my muscle memory for the buttons/menus. Thanks for any insights!
p.1 #2 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
There's plenty of reviews out there that basically say that if the user is NOT into video, the upgrade from R5 to R5II is not worth it for most still photographers. Of course, there are those use cases that will point the other direction.
p.1 #3 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
There's definitely a learning curve when going mirrorless, especially with the AF. I wouldn't want to try figuring that out on a once in a lifetime trip.
p.1 #4 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
The R5 II is very advantageous for action in ES mode due to the ~6ms vs 16ms R5 readout speed (reduces rolling shutter) and the ability to use various FPS in ES mode not just 20FPS in the R5.
I'd suggest a 100-500 if using an RF body. It is a unique and very versatile lens. The R5 II is great at 30FPS for the penguins jumping around and flying into the surf. I have 100s of thousands of action images with R5 and R5 II and only have the R5 as a backup now.
I have a couple of 100-400 IIs and usually bring one as a spare lens. Consider renting some gear if you won't use it often. I've lost a camera in South Georgia due to an indicident. Make sure you have as much redundancy as you can travel with.
p.1 #5 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
what you are missing is a camera that does well in cold and/or wet conditions aside a backup.
I will be going too - sometime later than sooner, and I will take my Olympus EM1mk2 with two lenses only and then the R3 with 3 tops.
In the current set you are considering, I would say the 24-70 is the least crucial. You have time to figure the MLS before the trip, but in question will be how will the Sigma do with a Canon MLS?
Sell the 6D2 and get a backup camera - P&S or an Olympus (pro series for good weather rating)
p.1 #6 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
As someone who's been to Antarctica a few times (twice with DSLR, twice with Mirrorless), I can say that MILC will definitely help with one aspect of your photography, and that's exposure of the ice. The viewfinder being WYSIWYG is a tremendous improvement over even the best DSLRs (I had the 5DsR and 1DX2 on the high end of DSLR, and R and R5 on the MILC end). The number of in-focus jumping penguins you'll get with the R5 (or even R, to be honest) compared to DSLRs is just staggering, but let's face it, the lack of exposure guessing will make your life so much easier.
The lenses you have are perfectly adequate, although the 16-35 won't win any awards. Get a couple of adapters and MILCs (even an R will do, I'm telling you it has a much worse rap than it deserves) and have a blast.
p.1 #7 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
danski0224 wrote:
There's plenty of reviews out there that basically say that if the user is NOT into video, the upgrade from R5 to R5II is not worth it for most still photographers. Of course, there are those use cases that will point the other direction.
Good to know, thanks! That's what I haven't been tracking at all by ignoring the mirrorless revolution. . But yes, I should have mentioned that video is fairly irrelevant to me.
---------------------------------------------
Mike_5D wrote:
There's definitely a learning curve when going mirrorless, especially with the AF. I wouldn't want to try figuring that out on a once in a lifetime trip.
Agreed. This is why I'm trying to decide and buy now so I have the rest of the year to get comfortable with anything I change.
---------------------------------------------
EB-1 wrote:
The R5 II is very advantageous for action in ES mode due to the ~6ms vs 16ms R5 readout speed (reduces rolling shutter) and the ability to use various FPS in ES mode not just 20FPS in the R5.
I'd suggest a 100-500 if using an RF body. It is a unique and very versatile lens. The R5 II is great at 30FPS for the penguins jumping around and flying into the surf. I have 100s of thousands of action images with R5 and R5 II and only have the R5 as a backup now.
I have a couple of 100-400 IIs and usually bring one as a spare lens. Consider renting some gear if you won't use it often. I've lost a camera in South Georgia due to an indicident. Make sure you have as much redundancy as you can travel with.
Thanks, will look into the 100-500 if I go the RF route. The R5II does seem to have some features that stand out, but I'm just not familiar enough yet with the specs to fully evaluate. I tend to be in the buy once, cry once category for gear purchases. I certainly will be as redundant as I can within the weight limitations for travel. I plan to bring as little clothing as possible - just like I did for Africa. Granted, the conditions require a few more layers in Antarctica.
---------------------------------------------
Bacalhau wrote:
what you are missing is a camera that does well in cold and/or wet conditions aside a backup.
I will be going too - sometime later than sooner, and I will take my Olympus EM1mk2 with two lenses only and then the R3 with 3 tops.
In the current set you are considering, I would say the 24-70 is the least crucial. You have time to figure the MLS before the trip, but in question will be how will the Sigma do with a Canon MLS?
Sell the 6D2 and get a backup camera - P&S or an Olympus (pro series for good weather rating)...Show more →
Yeah, I don't anticipate bringing the Sigma now that I've thought deeper about the weather sealing. That's why the 100-400 II came onto my list and it snowballed from there. I don't see myself selling the 5D3 or 6D2 to move forward with any of these plans. If I decide on a new setup and find it has made those cameras irrelevant to me, I'll sell in future. I'm pretty comfortable with the 5D level of weather sealing as I will also have a rain cover and dry bag and such. I have a variety of P&S cameras suited for different uses I could consider including some that are waterproof, but I figured my backup of last resort at that point is just to use the iPhone that will already be with me. And I think I'm too deep in Canon to opt for a different manufacturer.
p.1 #8 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
stanj wrote:
As someone who's been to Antarctica a few times (twice with DSLR, twice with Mirrorless), I can say that MILC will definitely help with one aspect of your photography, and that's exposure of the ice. The viewfinder being WYSIWYG is a tremendous improvement over even the best DSLRs (I had the 5DsR and 1DX2 on the high end of DSLR, and R and R5 on the MILC end). The number of in-focus jumping penguins you'll get with the R5 (or even R, to be honest) compared to DSLRs is just staggering, but let's face it, the lack of exposure guessing will make your life so much easier.
The lenses you have are perfectly adequate, although the 16-35 won't win any awards. Get a couple of adapters and MILCs (even an R will do, I'm telling you it has a much worse rap than it deserves) and have a blast....Show more →
Yes, the video reviews I've been watching of the electronic viewfinder with all WYSIWYG and histograms in real time has certainly given me pause as to why I've resisted/ignored MILC for this long. And the eye tracking focus demonstrations have been astonishing. I reflect back to Africa and am sure I would have had a higher keeper rate with certain wildlife as someone who only opportunistically works on my wildlife focus/tracking skills.
p.1 #9 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
I traveled to South Georgia and Antarctica in November/December 2022. My camera equipment consisted of a Canon R3 with 100-500mm zoom and a Leica Q3. I used the Leica Q3 for photography on the ship and landscapes from the ship and my balcony. The Canon R3 and the 100-500 zoom was utilized for all other photography. The Canon equipment was perfect for all the wildlife situations. While on shore, especially South Georgia, there is an abundance of wildlife, including penguins, seals, and birds for which you need to keep your distance. There is literally a high density of penguins for as far as the eye can see.
A telephoto zoom is very helpful for photography from the zodiac excursions when a shore landing is not planned or possible. You can get great photos of penguins and seals at the water’s edge.
Weather proofing is not critical. The major risk of water exposure is on the zodiacs due to the waves and water splashing. I used a waterproof backpack to transport my Canon gear while on the zodiac and when traveling to a shore landing. I also covered my camera gear with a waterproof stuff sack while on the zodiac so my camera was always readily available but protected. The waterproof backpack easily compressed into my suitcase.
I left my backpack at the landing site along with my life preserver during shore excursions. We all did that on the shore landings. I did all my shore/wildlife photography with just the Canon R3 and the 100-500mm zoom. We could not rest our backpacks on the ground-snow or sit on the snow due to Avian flu concerns. No tripods allowed. No real concerns for the need of weatherproof camera gear on shore.
You don’t want to carry excess gear while you’re walking in snow, high winds, or cold weather. Neither do you want to be changing lenses in those situations. You are walking with multiple layers of clothing, including waterproof pants, boots and gloves, so keeping things simple and accessible is key.
Ideally a Canon R5 MKII with the 100-500mm zoom will meet the majority of your needs (especially with the ability to crop.). You can adapt your EF lenses to the mirrorless camera and still have the flexibility you desire. You can also take the 5D3 as a backup. Penguins and seals are not that challenging to achieve focus.
You’ll have a fantastic trip with many unique photographic opportunities. Enjoy.
p.1 #10 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
One more thing on lenses: You will regret not taking the 70-200/2.8 because you will be very close to the subjects (stinky penguins) and they look great at f2.8. They look even better at 135/1.8, I'm told, but I didn't get the lens in time for my last trip, but my friend who went later (with my lens, mind you) was very happy. The 400/4 also got a lot of workout. Having something to naturally obliterate the background can be useful in that environment.
p.1 #11 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
aryaah wrote:
I traveled to South Georgia and Antarctica in November/December 2022. My camera equipment consisted of a Canon R3 with 100-500mm zoom and a Leica Q3. I used the Leica Q3 for photography on the ship and landscapes from the ship and my balcony. The Canon R3 and the 100-500 zoom was utilized for all other photography. ...
Ideally a Canon R5 MKII with the 100-500mm zoom will meet the majority of your needs (especially with the ability to crop.). You can adapt your EF lenses to the mirrorless camera and still have the flexibility you desire. You can also take the 5D3 as a backup. Penguins and seals are not that challenging to achieve focus. ...Show more →
Thanks! Very helpful! Given I started as a film shooter, I've always been less enthused with the crop DSLRs I owned before the original 5D was release, so as I contemplated picking up an R7 for added reach I wondered if it would be a good fit for me long term or just a buy/sell piece for this trip. But maybe focusing more on the RF 100-500 instead of the EF 100-400 gives me enough reach but in a setup that I can see keeping long term.
---------------------------------------------
stanj wrote:
One more thing on lenses: You will regret not taking the 70-200/2.8 because you will be very close to the subjects (stinky penguins) and they look great at f2.8. They look even better at 135/1.8, I'm told, but I didn't get the lens in time for my last trip, but my friend who went later (with my lens, mind you) was very happy. The 400/4 also got a lot of workout. Having something to naturally obliterate the background can be useful in that environment.
Thanks for this! That is a great point. I was debating the 70-200 and thought I'd just see how the load out/weight went and which bag I opted for (haven't booked flights yet to know how fussy they might be), but some reach with the wide open 2.8 would be fantastic. Those photos are great!
p.1 #12 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
I'm quite happy with my R3 and R5II, and IMO they are a huge advance over DSLRs, but I live in California where the weather is usual mild. If you're considering the R5II, for a trip to Antarctica, you should read this thread. It's not clear to me that this issue has been resolved by Canon.
p.1 #13 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
Here's a suggestion: pick up a second hand R5 for a lot less money than the R5 II. Will surely keep you busy and entertained and gives you the opportunity to try mirrorless alongside your DSLR's.
After the trip, you can decide if you like it and pursue an upgrade path or not.
p.1 #14 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
There is a learning curve with mirrorless, so it would be best that you start sooner than later. IMO, it is 100% worth the switch from DSLRs.
Regarding 100-400 vs. 100-500: maybe Stan can comment on this, given his familiarity with the location and his suggestion to bring a 70-200. Would it be worth getting the 70-200 Z to replace the two other zoom options because you can use it with the teleconverters? That way you can take advantage of f/2.8 shallow depth of field when it is beneficial and also get 400mm f/5.6 reach when needed. The Z is a very sharp lens that takes the TCs well. It's also an internal zoom lens that has a much smoother, faster zoom action and no external parts moving in/out of the housing as potential entry point for water/dirt (not sure how relevant that is in that location). Yet Stan has previously stated he will sometimes prioritize the 100-500 for some of his outings.
p.1 #15 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
vbnut wrote:
I'm quite happy with my R3 and R5II, and IMO they are a huge advance over DSLRs, but I live in California where the weather is usual mild. If you're considering the R5II, for a trip to Antarctica, you should read this thread. It's not clear to me that this issue has been resolved by Canon.
I just did two weeks in Norway with the R5m2, where it was colder than on any of my Antarctica trips - and the cameras did just fine.
p.1 #16 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
vbnut wrote:
I'm quite happy with my R3 and R5II, and IMO they are a huge advance over DSLRs, but I live in California where the weather is usual mild. If you're considering the R5II, for a trip to Antarctica, you should read this thread. It's not clear to me that this issue has been resolved by Canon.
My understanding is the OP's trip will not be during the southern hemisphere winter period and conditions should not be extreme, where the R5II may or may not have problems. My experience with a recent-build R5II in conditions around freezing is that it does pretty well. I'm seeing between 1000-2000 frames from a battery in e-shutter with moderate chimping.
p.1 #17 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
Buy a 5D4, it's cheap, extremely reliable, has zero issues with the cold, wind or whatever, it has more than adequate AF for penguins and you can shoot a whole day with one battery, has large buttons so you can use it with gloves.
p.1 #18 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
I'd sell what you're able to and grab the 100-400ii and used 5d4 (and R5 if able). The functionality of the R5 is very similar to the DSLRs. I can very naturally go back and forth between it and my 5dsr. The benefit of the DSLRs is they still feel more resilient, and the battery life will be much better.
The 100-400ii is an exceptional lens. For the savings vs. the 100-500, and it's compatibility between DSLRs and mirrorless, it's a no brainer IMO. If you look at some online reviews, the difference between 400mm and 500mm isn't nearly as pronounced as the difference between 200mm and 400mm. You could also grab the 1.4x III extender for ~$200 to get up to 560mm.
p.1 #19 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
I don't think getting an R7 would be a play I would consider. It would be like putting a 2x teleconverter on your 5D3 for resolution, but at the expense of everything else. I think the 5D IV or R5 / R5II will offer a noticeable upgrade already.
Without a doubt I think a 100 - 400 IS II is a great lens to have. Behind a big white, I think it's one of the best lenses you can get. Dimensional it's the same as your 70 - 200MM, but for whatever reason it seems less front heavy. Put a 1.4x TC on that lens when needed and it would take the place of your sigma but in a much smaller footprint.
My two cents is that mirrorless is a huge learning curve. If you're not using the camera a lot, it will gladly punish you every time you pick up the camera because you didn't know or forgot about a setting you needed to reconfigure. One example is that if you're using AF tracking, make sure you switch it from people to animal. Forget that and the camera isn't going to perform as well. Mirrorless can do a lot more, but there's a lot more options that can be set so you really need to do more prep for it to give you the results you want.
For cameras the 5D IV would be the most simple upgrade. It's so similar that if you aren't paying attention to the label on the front, you'll not even realize you picked up the III instead of the IV if you have both of them in your bag. (Why isn't this camera going above ISO 12800 and underexposing? Oh wait) https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Camera-Product-Images.aspx?Camera=792&CameraComp=1074
If you have time and are willing to commit to diving into mirrorless, then I'd say go R5II. There's plenty of upgrades that would make that jump worthwhile.
p.1 #20 · Upgrade from DSLR to Mirrorless Before Antarctica Trip?
brianbeatty wrote:
The benefit of the DSLRs is they still feel more resilient, and the battery life will be much better.
WRT battery life - AFAIK, none (or very few) of Canon's FF DSLRs allow charging or operation via USB power. The mirrorless cameras do allow this, including running the cameras while in use from a suitable USB power supply. One or two such USB power banks, ranging in price from $30-50, are easy to carry and have multiple potential uses for a trip such as this one (charging phones, tablets, laptops, headphones, etc). While having to run a USB cable from camera to the battery pack is a bit of a PITA, it's certainly doable. I have taken this approach with the R5II when covering intensive day-long sporting events and was easily able to power the camera through most of the day from a 72Wh USB battery. Even a battery with half the capacity (and half the size) will provide 3x or more shots than a single LP-E6NH/P battery.
I guess my point is there are solutions or workarounds to offset or negate the higher power requirements typical of mirrorless cameras that might be worthwhile if you can benefit from the advantages mirrorless offers over DSLRs. By no means do I wish to imply that OP can't continue to create worthwhile images with DSLRs. Mirrorless may simply provide them with more options. That said, for a major 'bucket list' trip such as this one, there is some risk in initiating a complete system switchover shortly beforehand while still immersed in the significant mirrorless learning curve. As others have suggested, a 'hybrid' approach might be wise, wherein OP would take one mirrorless camera and one DSLR to mitigate some of the risks and still benefit from advantages each system offers.
. But yes, I should have mentioned that video is fairly irrelevant to me.
