Am I Crazy?

I'm a confessed tech junkie myself, and I keep a close eye on mirrorless cameras, but I'm still hanging on to my D610 for now. I do a lot of fast action photography, so even though I have not tried any high end mirrorless cameras, nor read anywhere so far that they were equal of superior to DSLR, I will not switch.

Another reason to wait is that I've started 30 years ago with a film camera, and I'm so used to the look of a FF camera with its lenses. For that reason, I wouldn't want a mirrorless camera that is not FF, but with such condition, I won't save much on the bulk though. Unless there's something I don't get, lenses for FF DSLR and FF mirrorless cameras will be about the same size, so no gain in term of size.

Lastly, with all the lenses (4) I like to have with me at all time, even if they are 30% smaller and lighter, I'll still have to carry a bag. Not sure I'm saving much on that end.

That being said, I'd like to purchase a mirrorless camera to get used to this technology, and have something very small and pocketable when I choose not to bring my DSLR, something that doesn't happen very often.
 
I came from a FF Canon DSLR and I honestly can't tell much of a difference as far as image quality is concerned (I don't really pixel peep). I contemplated the Sony because of the FF sensor but ended up with the Fuji because I just enjoyed using it more and really like the JPEG out of the camera. I also could not believe Sony does not include a battery charger with the camera. You have to charge it USB. Unbelievable! If super fast auto focus is important to you mirrorless might not be the way to go. Yet.
 
I'm a confessed tech junkie myself, and I keep a close eye on mirrorless cameras, but I'm still hanging on to my D610 for now. I do a lot of fast action photography, so even though I have not tried any high end mirrorless cameras, nor read anywhere so far that they were equal of superior to DSLR, I will not switch.

Another reason to wait is that I've started 30 years ago with a film camera, and I'm so used to the look of a FF camera with its lenses. For that reason, I wouldn't want a mirrorless camera that is not FF, but with such condition, I won't save much on the bulk though. Unless there's something I don't get, lenses for FF DSLR and FF mirrorless cameras will be about the same size, so no gain in term of size.

Lastly, with all the lenses (4) I like to have with me at all time, even if they are 30% smaller and lighter, I'll still have to carry a bag. Not sure I'm saving much on that end.

That being said, I'd like to purchase a mirrorless camera to get used to this technology, and have something very small and pocketable when I choose not to bring my DSLR, something that doesn't happen very often.

I really considered Fuji, and really loved their image quality. I kept having second thoughts on why I was switching. I kept looking at the Olympus.
I decided on Olympus because I really couldn't tell a difference in image quality between the Fuji and Olympus, because their lens lineup is larger, they are smaller lenses, and they have some cheaper option lenses. I wanted smaller, so I got smaller. I don't feel I've lost image quality either.
 
I decided on Olympus because I really couldn't tell a difference in image quality between the Fuji and Olympus, because their lens lineup is larger, they are smaller lenses, and they have some cheaper option lenses. I wanted smaller, so I got smaller. I don't feel I've lost image quality either.

Don't Olympus uses Micro 4/3 sensors in their mirrorless cameras? If so, it's smaller than APS-C, and about half the size of full frame. Obviously, having a smaller sensor makes it possible to make much smaller lenses, but you loose quite a bit on the ability of a larger sensor to use its shallow depth of field for creative purposes. Depending on the type of photography you are doing, maybe it's not that important, but to me, this is crucial. Was it a problem for you? Did you need to adjust to that?
 
Last edited:
I went from 1Ds to MFT and I ended up at APS-C mirrorless (Fuji). I still have a sizable stash of L lenses, but I've been giving them to my kids. Now I'm giving my kids my E-M5s and having the, sell off the Canons.

I used to be a pro photog. For me, it is all about the final image. If I needed a 12 pound camera to capture the image I needed ... then I'd haul around a ten pound camera. If I needed a two pound camera ... then I'd have a two pound camera. I accepted what ever burden was required to get the shot ... it is what it is. My motive to move to a smaller system wasn't out of consideration for my back but more of curiosity. I tried MFT but ended up with APS-C as a good compromise between the small package of MFT and the high IQ of FF.

For what I shoot and how I shoot, the difference in IQ between FF and APS-C is insignificant. While I easily accepted the size and weight of FF, I appreciate the lesser weight of the APS-C. Mirrorless is different than dSLR. Not different good or different bad, just different. Mirrorless focuses differently than a dSLR. It has taken me considerable time to harmonize with mirrorless AF after shooting dSLRs for a decade. (I picked up a 20D in 2003 and I picked up my first mirrorless, a GF1, around 2012/2013.) I am still not completely harmonized with mirrorless, but I have gone from AF frustration with the EM5 to being comfortable with the XT1.

I typically shoot people ... nonstationary, action photos of people doing stuff in a fluid environment. From sports to theatre to street and I've found mirrorless to be a very capable system to capture it all. The main deficiency in Fuji AF is that it doesn't track. More often than not, the Fuji SAF is easily as fast as a dSLR in decent light. In flat light or low light AF performance starts to go downhill. I have shot enough sports, that I am higher on the mirrorless learning curve, that I am confident of capturing the exceptional action image with my XT1's, every time I shoot a contest.

Is mirrorless the best camera for sports ... no, it doesn't track. But it does focus lightning fast, and for Fuji AF, keeping the subject in the reticle you can consistently capture sequential action shots. But, you have to work harder and you will have less keepers than with a Pro dSLR.

I found MFT to look very digital-ish. It is very subtle, but to my eye, the Fuji sensor delivers the most film-esque IQ of any digital camera I've used.
 
Fuji also just announced a big firmware update coming out in June. It is supposed to improve the auto focus among other things. I really appreciate how Fuji releases updates that improves the camera in significant ways instead of just releasing an updated camera body.
 
Fuji also just announced a big firmware update coming out in June. It is supposed to improve the auto focus among other things. I really appreciate how Fuji releases updates that improves the camera in significant ways instead of just releasing an updated camera body.

To be fair, Olympus also provides firmware updates to previously purchased bodies.
 
Fuji also just announced a big firmware update coming out in June. It is supposed to improve the auto focus among other things. I really appreciate how Fuji releases updates that improves the camera in significant ways instead of just releasing an updated camera body.

To be fair, Olympus also provides firmware updates to previously purchased bodies.

I just have not had any experience with Olympus but I have heard good things. Some of the other large companies not mentioned seem to lack in customer support in my experience. I'm sure others have different opinions.
 
I did same about a year ago. Sold my Nikon D600, Flash, along with five high ticket lenses in favour of the FujiFilm XE2 and have not regretted the switch one bit.
 
Sold it all on Ebay. Took a little bit of a hit. Lost more than i would have liked but i'm over it.
 
Well, I cant speak for others, but I dont look into mirrorless because I want a smaller camera.

I look into mirrorless because I hope for higher image quality.

Thats why I'm looking for large sensors, and top notch lenses.

I will probably keep my DSLR either way. Maybe even stay 100% on it, if theres nothing around to tempt me.

With the A7s, though, Sony has made a very, very tempting offer. The 35mm f1.4 also looks more than only a little sweet. If they fix some more obvious issues (that butchered RAW image format, sensor based image stabilization like the A7 Mk II, and internal 4K recording), and give us more lenses on the same level (these new Bathis lenses look really sweet already), the A7s Mk II will probably my first Sony camera.

Obviously not a camera for everything, though, since autofocus is not exactly uber on them.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top