sixteen-bit
Member
looks great. any post processing on this?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Photography: DSLR vs Mirrorless
- Thread starter jstripes
- Start date
- Status
looks great. any post processing on this?
how much you want for it? I'm in the market.
I have a D5300 and an X100S. Really love the latter, I can just throw it in my bag and take it with me pretty much everywhere. It's really fun to use as well, the EVF and the software features blow the D5300 away.
The DSLR is a little more work, but the D5300 is a relatively small and light DSLR so it is not so bad. I do like the versatility of the DSLR and the autofocus is better. I use both for different situations, but I think if I were buying now I'd get rid of both and go for an X-T1 to get the best of both worlds.
The DSLR is a little more work, but the D5300 is a relatively small and light DSLR so it is not so bad. I do like the versatility of the DSLR and the autofocus is better. I use both for different situations, but I think if I were buying now I'd get rid of both and go for an X-T1 to get the best of both worlds.
Ya, I think I'm going to get the mirrorless.
The convenience factor tips it for me. Especially given that I have an impatient girlfriend, which makes taking photos a pain sometimes. (We were in Cuba last year, and she'd just keep walking whenever I stopped to take photos.)
Plus, I can always bring out my D40x when I want to use my 50mm/1.8 lens. (The thing's a bitch to focus because I bought it for my SLR years ago.)
Don't "real man" me. I've got a boat load of old cameras (that I never use,) including a Brownie, a Hawkeye, and some soviet SLR. Somehow people got the idea that I collect these things, so they give them to me. I'm just allergic to taking photos on film because I'm cheap.
The convenience factor tips it for me. Especially given that I have an impatient girlfriend, which makes taking photos a pain sometimes. (We were in Cuba last year, and she'd just keep walking whenever I stopped to take photos.)
Plus, I can always bring out my D40x when I want to use my 50mm/1.8 lens. (The thing's a bitch to focus because I bought it for my SLR years ago.)
Don't "real man" me. I've got a boat load of old cameras (that I never use,) including a Brownie, a Hawkeye, and some soviet SLR. Somehow people got the idea that I collect these things, so they give them to me. I'm just allergic to taking photos on film because I'm cheap.
Chip N Chance
Member
I have a rebel t3. Am i a newbie?
Nope, shot in jpg using the 18-200 mm lens which is a bit bulky but nothing on the level of a dslr. I'll upload some photos from the kit lens when I get home from work.
Oh, I shot that using the Nex-5N.... I would recommend against the 3N or anything without a hotshoe. The screen on my 5N got so scratched/warn out from use that it was almost impossible to take shots in mid day... I eventually had to get the EVF (which is great but sorta pricey).
But yeah, that particular shot was taken without the EVF.
High five. Great camera for the price.
I got a 5r and it's been treating me great. It was my first "proper" camera and it's been above and beyond what I've expected, but as time has gone by its shortcomings have started to surface. The main one being lack of a VF. The screen works fine for most things, but if you're out in broad daylight you're not going to have a good time.
But it produces some great photos that are very editable in RAW. Jpg performance is a bit lacking though. WiFi inclusion may seem like a gimmick, but I love it and use it way more than I thought I would. There's just something about being able to share a photo in almost an instant from your camera.
It's treated me well but I'm looking to upgrade to the a6000, mainly for the EVF but also for the other improvements. If you can manage without the 5r might be fine.
Edit: forgot to mention the portability! It fits in almost any pocket I have too, which is amazing.
But it produces some great photos that are very editable in RAW. Jpg performance is a bit lacking though. WiFi inclusion may seem like a gimmick, but I love it and use it way more than I thought I would. There's just something about being able to share a photo in almost an instant from your camera.
It's treated me well but I'm looking to upgrade to the a6000, mainly for the EVF but also for the other improvements. If you can manage without the 5r might be fine.
Edit: forgot to mention the portability! It fits in almost any pocket I have too, which is amazing.
Maninthemirror
Banned
Do these smaller mirror less cameras support external flash ?
theepicoftyler
Member
I just got a NEX-5R and I absolutely love it. I'm new at this, so nothing I feel comfortable with showing off yet, but I'm having a blast shooting with it.
phazedplasma
Member
Funny, I'm actually selling all my DSLR gear and buying a Fuji x100s
Maninthemirror
Banned
If I have
Canon T3i
Tamron 17-200mm Stablizing lens
Canon 50mm 1.8
Rokinon 15mm wide angle lens
Is there a mirror less camera which has the features of the t3i and the range of lenses like i have ?
What i care about most
- zoom
- image stabilization
- low light photography (night shots/low light conditions)
- portraits (single and groups)
- bokeh
I dont care about video i only care about still photography.
Which mirror less setup surpasses my t3i in this regard under $1.5K
Canon T3i
Tamron 17-200mm Stablizing lens
Canon 50mm 1.8
Rokinon 15mm wide angle lens
Is there a mirror less camera which has the features of the t3i and the range of lenses like i have ?
What i care about most
- zoom
- image stabilization
- low light photography (night shots/low light conditions)
- portraits (single and groups)
- bokeh
I dont care about video i only care about still photography.
Which mirror less setup surpasses my t3i in this regard under $1.5K
How many lenses do you actually regularly use? I don't know if I need to broaden my horizons a bit but I have several different ones although I pretty much just stick to my two favorites for 95% of my photography.
Maninthemirror
Banned
The one i use most is 17-200 mm
Then for portraits the 50mm 1.8
Then on occasions the wide angle lens
CrudeDiatribe
Member
Is the bulk of the SLR really too much? I hate carrying a camera bag, but just the SLR and a lens felt great to me.
I find that the inherent image quality differences between the options are marginal compared to the effects of my [in]ability.
Get/keep whatever feels right to you in use.
I find that the inherent image quality differences between the options are marginal compared to the effects of my [in]ability.
Get/keep whatever feels right to you in use.
Chip N Chance
Member
Thanks man. I'm taking a photography class in college, and I wanted something that was decent for the price. I've gotten really good with it. Great way to learn your way around a dslr. This mirror less stuff is all new to me and looks super expensive. What's funny is that I'm actually somewhat understanding what you guys are talking about lol.
hitsugi
Member
...it's getting harder and harder to pass on this. Price is really the only deterrent at the moment.
Why not the best of both worlds? The Full Frame Sony A7 o A7R
My brother got rid of his DSLR and all his lenses after he bought one of those. Price looked ridiculous but apparently it's a little cheaper if you buy in Japan. They do take damningly good photos.
AstroNut325
Member
My next camera is either a Sony RX100 or a mirrorless. I don't want the bulk of the DSLRs anymore. I just want to take good low-light photos with friends and family.
My g/f has a RX100 and it takes really great photos and with some editing they can be comparable to even the best shots a mirrorless can take....however, not being able to change lenses is sort of a deal breaker for me.
Still, there are more than a few times I opt for the RX100 due to it's extreme compactness and portability.
If someone can make a mirrorless camera that has Canon mount I'd be in. I don't want to start from scratch with lenses.
A friend has one of the Sonys, it's compact and it takes beautiful pics (he does have Leica lens on it though).
Edit: Apparently Canon has released a mirrorless range. Don't know how good it is.
A friend has one of the Sonys, it's compact and it takes beautiful pics (he does have Leica lens on it though).
Edit: Apparently Canon has released a mirrorless range. Don't know how good it is.
Jack Random
Member
Those are awfully nice, but does one really need a full frame?
I have a NEX-6 and i love it.
I didn't really NEED to upgrade to a HD7950... Guess it's all in what your priorities are.
I have a Olympus XZ-1 for on-the-road with my bike, and a Pentax K-X. The thing that gets me about some of these large sensor mirrorless cameras is that my DSLR isn't much bigger than most of these suckers, esp. if they're using some crazy lens. If I want to the K-X would fit in my backpack / diaper bag just fine.
The RX100 does have me interested though... Couple years down the road I could see myself getting an updated version, or a discounted RX100.
BlueTsunami
there is joy in sucking dick
I took this with a Canon Rebel XT a couple of years ago
...
This camera can be bought for $100 USED (which blows my mind). Its very old, relatively, but IQ in daylight to lower light is very good, even in older DSLRs.
My choice for modern bargains, if IQ is paramount would be the Canon 5D Mk1. Its around $500 used now with a wonderful Full Frame IQ. No modern fixings though.
The NEX5N is another.
...
This camera can be bought for $100 USED (which blows my mind). Its very old, relatively, but IQ in daylight to lower light is very good, even in older DSLRs.
My choice for modern bargains, if IQ is paramount would be the Canon 5D Mk1. Its around $500 used now with a wonderful Full Frame IQ. No modern fixings though.
The NEX5N is another.
I actually had the XT prior to getting the 6D. I'm glad I'm not shooting APS-C anymore, but it served me pretty damn well.
I'm thinking of splitting the difference and getting a Sony RX10 -
I'm no pro photographer, if I bought a DSLR I'd likely never buy any more lenses, so I'm thinking this will do me for any situation where I want something better than a smartphone pic.
I have one. It is an amazing all-purpose camera.
I also have a 5Dmark3 for special purposes.
I wish they can easily do color customization on magnesium body. Color choices is the biggest thing I missed when I moved from K-x to a flagship. It was a nice ice breaker.
DSLR's are useless unless you are making a living shooting sports/birds. I switched to a Fuji mirrorless system and it is the best thing I ever did. Do it and your wallet and your back will thank you.
Maybe he wants a camera that has lenses.
Why not the best of both worlds? The Full Frame Sony A7 o A7R
Maybe he wants a camera that has lenses.
Weddings, landscapes, event photography, fashion + lenses m43 has the best option of lenses and they still dont have a complete range. And EVFs and autofocus aren't quite where they need to be on mirrorless cams.
i lol'ed.
there is much snark in this one.
CitizenVectron
Member
I originally bought a Canon Rebel, then moved up to a 7D, then moved up to a 5D mk iii. I'm not a professional - though I've done a wedding as a gift for a friend - but I could afford it after saving up, and I really enjoy photography.
Prior to that I use prosumer stuff from Canon. But nothing will ever beat DSLRs for me. The raw power and flexibility can't be matched by any of the other options.
Here are a few of the pictures I've taken:
Prior to that I use prosumer stuff from Canon. But nothing will ever beat DSLRs for me. The raw power and flexibility can't be matched by any of the other options.
Here are a few of the pictures I've taken:
Glad you "lol'ed" but you can buy an X-e1 with 18-55 for like $600 new nowadays.
You do know people have been professionally shooting weddings, events, landscapes, fashion and everything else with mirrorless cameras right? Please tell me you don't think dslr's are the only way to shoot those.
Are you a working professional by the way? Do you make your living from photography/videography?
Based on my recent research: Olympus XZ-2 is the best.
The catch with interchangeable lens cameras is that kit lenses tend to suck.
DSLRs are definitely not the only way to shoot weddings/events/et al, but they're certainly the best way.
Why are they the best way?
Phase detect AF > contract detect, the inherent superiority of OVFs in wider ranges of settings, bigger lens selection, and generally better battery life. The key advantage of EVFs is their ability to have focus peaking but it's slower than using a pentaprism viewfinder and the speed tanks in lower light.
Mirrorless cameras can and will take good pictures, but they're not better than SLRs at anything other than size which diminishes quickly with larger lenses.
Newer mirrorless cameras all have phase and contrast detect hybrid AF. Again lens selection is not an issue every camera you buy nowadays (except the A7) have the entire focal range you would shoot Weddings and events in fast primes and fast zooms. I am not sure when was the last time you looked at a mirrorless but the lack of lenses is not a problem whatsoever. And trust me I know my lenses due to my work. Not to mention you can use all legacy lenses with a simple adapter on mirrorless cameras and focusing is way easier thanks to EVF's compared to DSLR's.
Do you guys carry your dslr with you every day by the way? How heavy is your kit?
It's out of my price range. It's 300 where I live.
I've been looking at the Canon Powershot SX270 HS, it's 174. Not sure what to think of it, since I'm don't know what camera review sites are reliable.
And it's still slower.
Lens selection is still paltry, worse for the a7 yes, but not stellar.
So do I. There's a reason we don't deal with many mirrorless cameras anymore, nobody wants them.
It's still significantly worse than a good native lens selection.
full frame + 650g + black rapid strap + 40mm pancake combo is better than anything the mirrorless world can offer.
/\/\ Which camera?
No it's not. It is quite negligeable really. I shot with everything from mirrorless to 5dmark3 to red epics.
Again simply wrong. Give me an example what lenses Fuji and Olympus are lacking compared to DSLR's.
What do you do? Do you work at a photo shop? Who is the "nobody" who wants them?
This is also hilariously wrong on so many levels. There are a TON of amazing legacy lenses out there that shit on anything canon/nikon has put out in the past decade. It is simply a goldmine for videography and photography. Are you one of those guys who thinks only canon L lenses are good?
What 40mm is that? How is it better than "anything the mirrorless world can offer"? What happens when you want to shoot super wide or 85mm? My entire camera bag with three lenses (14mm/35mm and 50mm) with camera is lighter than your camera alone.
No it's not. It is quite negligeable really. I shot with everything from mirrorless to 5dmark3 to red epics.
Again simply wrong. Give me an example what lenses Fuji and Olympus are lacking compared to DSLR's.
What do you do? Do you work at a photo shop? Who is the "nobody" who wants them?
This is also hilariously wrong on so many levels. There are a TON of amazing legacy lenses out there that shit on anything canon/nikon has put out in the past decade. It is simply a goldmine for videography and photography. Are you one of those guys who thinks only canon L lenses are good?
What 40mm is that? How is it better than "anything the mirrorless world can offer"? What happens when you want to shoot super wide or 85mm? My entire camera bag with three lenses (14mm/35mm and 50mm) with camera is lighter than your camera alone.
Great, me too, and it's visibly laggier, and worse still in low light never mind the weak high iso capabilities.
Gear allocation, the nobody is the general public. The only time anybody bought mirrorless was when we had discounted them by 70%.
Well, no, there aren't. The best lenses of late on the market are Nikon, Zeiss, and Sigma (hilariously), the latter two of which have Canon mounts too.
Canon L lenses aren't the only good ones, they're just better than any mirrorless offering.
2.8
Because the only mirrorless than compete with the body-lens combo is an a7 which has 4 lenses and worse IQ.
Use a wide or 85mm lens?
If that's the only thing going for the camera, it's not something I find worth investing in.
PanicFreak
Member
I love my DSLR. (D5100)
I have two lenses but will add another in the coming year. They are big and bulky but I really enjoy seeking the perfect shot so it's worth it to me.
I'll be looking into a mirrorless after I have my lens kit all settled.
I have two lenses but will add another in the coming year. They are big and bulky but I really enjoy seeking the perfect shot so it's worth it to me.
I'll be looking into a mirrorless after I have my lens kit all settled.
What would that matter? People have different priorities. For someone who likes an optical viewfinder, good af, large sensor, manual contorls, good battery life, and good lens selection there is no mirrorless that would fit that description.
- Status