Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
DSLR vs Mirrorless camera?
- Thread starter mavericks7913
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What you said! Our Sirui ball head and Fiesol legs together weigh less that either the RRS 55 ballhead or Gitzo legs we used to carry. Can't wait for the E-M1 MarkII to be announced next month at Photokina. I believe it will have 20MP sensor, improved AF and ISO handling, high res mode merging around 8 raw images into one that should be in the 80MP range, dual card slots, and other goodies.
I did have a 105mm macro, but sold it to buy the 200mm for the increase in working distance. Most of my macro work is photographing gemstones, and the lighting is better if I have more distance between the stone and lens. The 200mm is a great tool for this, but not something one would want to lug around out in the woods.
I bit the bullet today. My trusty 30D died during our vacation. I had dreams about a A7II for a long time, but did the the cowards way out: 6D. Can't leave the system that I've locked myself in ( lenses, remote, flash).
The thing that persuaded me was the 40mm pancake. Great quality and it makes a 6D easier to lug around while hiking.
For all the other uses I can still use my 17-40 and 200mm.
The thing that persuaded me was the 40mm pancake. Great quality and it makes a 6D easier to lug around while hiking.
For all the other uses I can still use my 17-40 and 200mm.
i have several photography buddies that photography is their main source of income, and quite a few use the Sony A7r series.
Personally i have the D600 + 14-24 lens. Nikon lenses are great, BUT there are a TON of fantastic lenses i cannot use, since Nikon has a smaller lens mount than Canon. I used to shoot Canon, and used Mamiya, OM, Pentax, etc lenses on the canon bodies - plus they were cheap!
I am going to sell the D600 and get an A7r and the adapters. Several weeks ago, i backpacked 36 miles in 2.5 days in the Titcomb Basin of the Wind Rivers in Wyoming, and weight became an issue. The 14-24 is already a beast, but add in the weight of 4 batteries, tripod on top of all my other gear (bear vault, camping gear, etc etc) - it really adds up quick.
Personally i have the D600 + 14-24 lens. Nikon lenses are great, BUT there are a TON of fantastic lenses i cannot use, since Nikon has a smaller lens mount than Canon. I used to shoot Canon, and used Mamiya, OM, Pentax, etc lenses on the canon bodies - plus they were cheap!
I am going to sell the D600 and get an A7r and the adapters. Several weeks ago, i backpacked 36 miles in 2.5 days in the Titcomb Basin of the Wind Rivers in Wyoming, and weight became an issue. The 14-24 is already a beast, but add in the weight of 4 batteries, tripod on top of all my other gear (bear vault, camping gear, etc etc) - it really adds up quick.
How many shots were you taking to need 4 batteries over 2.5 days? Unless I'm shooting nature or an air show, I'd not normally need more than 1.
Agree the 14-24 is a beast, but it is the best landscape lens in the world.
well i went overboard on the batteries haha. ended up being way overkill as i used one.
Nicely done. Perhaps if you are inclined, share how you went about creating this final merged/flattened image.Been fooling around today with Focus Stacking on the Olympus OM-D M1. Here is a shot on my desk with built in image stacking in the camera.
Actually the camera does it. You turn on bracketing, and then one of the choices is Focus Brkt. You can control the amount of focus adjustment on a relative scale of 1 to 10. Then you just make the exposure, and the camera rapidly shoots a bunch of images adjusting the focus, then stacked them into one additional final image.
If you have stacking software, then the came can take up to 999 images, which would way over kill, and these can be stacked in your own software.
The E-M1 does both focus bracketing and focus stacking using electronic shutter and 11 fps. Bracketing can create up to 999 images while Stacking will use only 8 shots and and compile them into a jpg in body. Stacking will save the 8 images it used to create the jpg.
http://www.getolympus.com/us/en/upgrade
http://www.getolympus.com/us/en/upgrade
Nice feature in the camera to be sure. I am familiar with focus stacking using software. As well, I did focus stacking with multiple exposure using the beginnings of a complex rig for some close up and macro photography (involved a slit of light that was moved from front to back in pitch darkness (darn nice that there is software and cameras to do it now).
I switched from Nikon to Fuji a couple of years ago and I will never buy another DSLR. The Fuji lenses are really good, and I really like the aperture ring.
The quality difference compared to 35mm is small enough not to worry about it for the stuff I do. Fujis colors are great too.
If I ever need higher quality then medium format would be more likely for me to get into than 35mm. An Alpa camera with a digital back would be fun to work with. Or that new mirrorless Hasselblad X1D maybe. I'm not too concerned about megapixels but the dynamic range and tonality of medium format is just great. Now, I don't need it nor do I have that kind of money laying around but it would be fun. I see no 35mm in my future though.
One of the things I have come to appreciate most about my fuji is the live preview of exposure and white balance, as well as color and contrast. I didn't think it would make a big difference but it really does for me. Having a focus window with the focus point enlarged in split screen is awesome. And it the camera says it's in focus, it really is in focus. It never back or front focuses. The focus is determined on the sensor so no alignment issues.
Of course it's not for everyone. At least not yet. DSLRs still have better AF tracking, although the X-T2 seems quite good in that department to, more native lens options, especially for long lenses and speciality stuff like tilt-shift.
Most of the pro DSLRs are still tougher and can take more of a beating.
I wouldn't buy another DSLR but whatever works for you. I think everyone should at least think about if mirrorless is an option, and if not then fine. I want everyone to have the camera that works best for them, not what others think they should use. Make a decision, then stop thinking about gear and go out and create awesome work ☺️
The quality difference compared to 35mm is small enough not to worry about it for the stuff I do. Fujis colors are great too.
If I ever need higher quality then medium format would be more likely for me to get into than 35mm. An Alpa camera with a digital back would be fun to work with. Or that new mirrorless Hasselblad X1D maybe. I'm not too concerned about megapixels but the dynamic range and tonality of medium format is just great. Now, I don't need it nor do I have that kind of money laying around but it would be fun. I see no 35mm in my future though.
One of the things I have come to appreciate most about my fuji is the live preview of exposure and white balance, as well as color and contrast. I didn't think it would make a big difference but it really does for me. Having a focus window with the focus point enlarged in split screen is awesome. And it the camera says it's in focus, it really is in focus. It never back or front focuses. The focus is determined on the sensor so no alignment issues.
Of course it's not for everyone. At least not yet. DSLRs still have better AF tracking, although the X-T2 seems quite good in that department to, more native lens options, especially for long lenses and speciality stuff like tilt-shift.
Most of the pro DSLRs are still tougher and can take more of a beating.
I wouldn't buy another DSLR but whatever works for you. I think everyone should at least think about if mirrorless is an option, and if not then fine. I want everyone to have the camera that works best for them, not what others think they should use. Make a decision, then stop thinking about gear and go out and create awesome work ☺️
If you are doing professional work, go for the DSLR, it won't be much heaver or bigger than a proper mirrorless with a lens on it. In my opinion, if you can't fit it in your pocket, it's the same thing as a DSLR.
I've considered switching from my full frame Nikon D610 to a Sony A7S for a while. Mainly because of the sick ISO performance and because I'm kind of sick of the tiny auto focus field of the D610. But I know I will regret it, lenses and basically everything is more expensive in that game and besides the ISO performance, there isn't much gain in there for me.
For portability, I recently bought a Canon G7X Mark II, it's a great little camera as long as you keep the ISO under 800. The 24-100mm equivalent lens is great, it basically works for everything. It is totally the go to "Vacation camera" for me, although sometimes I regret not having my D610 to take extra sharp pics of some other stuff.
If I had a ton of money I'd get a Leica M9, its decently sized, manual, physical controls (this bugs me big time on the G7X) and the optics are great. But yeah, I'd have to sell my car AND one kidney for one of those.
I've considered switching from my full frame Nikon D610 to a Sony A7S for a while. Mainly because of the sick ISO performance and because I'm kind of sick of the tiny auto focus field of the D610. But I know I will regret it, lenses and basically everything is more expensive in that game and besides the ISO performance, there isn't much gain in there for me.
For portability, I recently bought a Canon G7X Mark II, it's a great little camera as long as you keep the ISO under 800. The 24-100mm equivalent lens is great, it basically works for everything. It is totally the go to "Vacation camera" for me, although sometimes I regret not having my D610 to take extra sharp pics of some other stuff.
If I had a ton of money I'd get a Leica M9, its decently sized, manual, physical controls (this bugs me big time on the G7X) and the optics are great. But yeah, I'd have to sell my car AND one kidney for one of those.
I strongly disagree with this; Doing professional photo work does not equal needing a DSLR. A camera is a tool, choose the one that suits you (and your work). I know plenty of pro photogs that don't, or don't exclusively, use a DSLR for their work. Mirrorless being one of the alternatives. Besides DSLRs I use both mirrorless and film cameras as an alternative for instance.
Mirrorless is different from DSLR, size being an obvious difference. But even besides that it is definitely not the same.
"choose the one that suits you (and your work)." Those are not necessarily compatible criteria. I know 3 wedding pro's who prefer mirrorless. Use it for pre-wedding stuff. But when it comes time to shoot the real deal, the dslr's come out. For those specializing in travel, lower res still's, accept limits on quality lenses, perhaps mirrorless satisfies both. But it's pretty safe to say that with the variability of shooting environments and the higher criteria of client satisfaction, one does not and should not take chances.
Mirrorless shooter here. Ex-Nikon FF for 35 years. If my reputation and living depended on camera choice, I'd still be lugging those dslr's around. Flash, AF, depth of quality lens line, battery life, decades of developing systems for Pro's, manufacturer support, peer group support, accessory supplier's, speed of operation, speed of viewfinder, parts availability, durability. Other than weight, mirrorless just isn't there yet. Take a look at the A7 line and for each criteria that matters to a Pro, ask yourself how well Sony stacks up. Or Fuji, where I tend to see more Pro's gravitating and at least has a native lens line you don't have to go poking around in used lens shops to round things out.
Last edited:
Indeed. You can be a successful (i.e. money earning) photographer using any PoS your employer wants you to use (even a [insert fierce competitor to your favourite brand]
), and at the same time you can find your own artistic expression with a pin-hole camera. Hence...For the art of photography I hold: only a fool blames the tool.
For the business of photography: many criteria are important, a lot of which have nothing to do with sensor size or MTF. I hold my judgement there, because there are so many different kinds of businesses based around photography.
As an unpaid photographer just use what you can afford, what feels good to you, what delivers images your mates love (in that order).
As to the OP, I dunno. I still think Canon and Nikon have better support. Check the user forums for Pentax, Oly, Panny experiences with warranty repairs and turnarounds. Not inspiring (and I own all of 'em).
At the non pro end I think the features offered by every non Canikon at entry price points are better. And I'm not sure that inherent reliability or durability is better for Canikon, but their support is. Just comes with the bigger market share, dealer presence, etc I guess. As noted a mirrorless might be a great tool to have, especially for certain features, like in body stabiliization, pixel shift, video, etc. And it depends a LOT on what you're producing for: web, print, fast sharing like sports, etc.
At the non pro end I think the features offered by every non Canikon at entry price points are better. And I'm not sure that inherent reliability or durability is better for Canikon, but their support is. Just comes with the bigger market share, dealer presence, etc I guess. As noted a mirrorless might be a great tool to have, especially for certain features, like in body stabiliization, pixel shift, video, etc. And it depends a LOT on what you're producing for: web, print, fast sharing like sports, etc.
To me it sounds like you are looking too much at specs and support, and not enough at your personal needs.
What is it that your current DSLR is missing for you? Or areas of the camera that you think that you can benefit from if improved?
Alternatively, would investing in good glas benefit you more than investing in a new/different camera?
The wife and I were shouting coastal brown bears at Lake Clark. We had rain and fog for over 3 days. The folks around us were shooting the 2 major DSLR system. Even with rain sleeves and plastic bags several had problems with leaks. We shot Olympus m43 system without any sleeves or baggies...without any problems. I might post a shot when we get home next week.
I go hiking taking photo's in Algonquin Park each year. This will be my first year with the Olympus micro 4/3 system. Normally it's a Nikon D750. My lens I take range from 14 to 300mm and Macro with Nikon, with the Olympus it will be the same except extending to the equivalent of 600 mm.
The size of the bag is about 1/3 of the Nikon, and the weight about ¼. To me, that is kind of a big deal over a 6 mile hike on a rough trail. As far as image quality goes, there is very very little difference between the D750 and the OM-D M1, and I do get better depth of field on the Oly Macro than the Nikon.
The size of the bag is about 1/3 of the Nikon, and the weight about ¼. To me, that is kind of a big deal over a 6 mile hike on a rough trail. As far as image quality goes, there is very very little difference between the D750 and the OM-D M1, and I do get better depth of field on the Oly Macro than the Nikon.