DSLR versus Mirrorless

[vinodsood]

I am planning to buy a new camera. I am a hobbyist, has been using a compact point & shoot till now. Want to now upgrade. I am confused between DSLR and Mirror-less camera options. Would like some advice, pros and cons for both. Also any inputs on Sony mirror-less NEX series ?

 

[Dao]

I believe the main differences between the 2 systems are size and accessories support natively. If you do not like to carry bulky camera and lenses, mirrorless is the way to go. However, if you like to do more with the camera, DSLR system is great for that. i.e. You will find more lens selection for the camera.

 

[usayit]

You should compare specific models.... and specify budget if you want a valuable discussion.

DSLR and mirrorless are designs. DSLR users a mirrorbox to provide TTL viewing while mirrorless (as the name suggests) provides TTL viewing through other means without a mirrorbox. The most common mirrorless provides TTL viewing via electronic view finders that get input right off the sensor itself.

Mirrorless cameras encompasses a wide variety of brands/models each with their own set of advantages/disadvantages which is why specific models should be mentioned. To a certain extent, the same with DSLRs but most models don't vary from one to the other very much. Mirrorless also share a lot of components with DSLRs.. for example sensors and in some cases lenses (not much).


So my advice....

Don't shop around thinking DSLR or Mirrorless! Just shop around thinking CAMERA with interchangeable lens. Whatever camera you choose, should fit your needs and your needs only.... regardless of design. In the end, it doesn't matter if its a DSLR or mirrorless.... all that matters is that your are happy with your choice.


So start with a budget, post it, and go from there.... A budget is always a good point to start a discussion such as this. Next, what do you like to shoot? What you intend to use the camera for is EXTREMELY important.




PS> There are a few high end P&S cameras that are also very capable. Don't rule them out. From what I have seen, not everyone needs a camera with an interchangeable lens mount.

 

[robbins.photo]

Ok, in very general, basic terms - if portability is an issue a mirrorless system is hard to beat. They are very small and easy to carry. A mirrorless system will give you about as good of image quality as a DSLR, however a DSLR will have a faster focusing system so if your subjects will be in motion this is something to consider. The other thing to consider is that mirrorless systems are not going to offer you the kind of telephoto capability that a DSLR can - I think the largest telephoto lens I've seen thus far for mirrorless is like 210 mm - so if your looking at shooting things from a distance mirrorless is probably not your best option.

Bridge cameras or Superzooms - This are going to give you the advantage of portability. The IQ (image quality) is not as good as a DSLR or mirrorless, but it is good enough for most average peoples needs. These cameras will cost far less, you won't have to purchase separate lenses, and they do generally have lenses that will give you excellent telephoto capabilities. The downside is that the smaller sensors do not produce images of the same quality as a DSLR or Mirrorless (you won't be able to tell the difference unless you zoom in and "pixel peep" or unless your printing in very large sizes) and the other downside is that due to their smaller sensor they are not as good in lowlight situations.

DSLR will give you the most options for future expansion, they have great image quality and are good for most any type of photography you want when equipped with a proper lens, so the advantage of flexibility definitely goes to the DSLR. They are larger and generally a little higher dollar investment than the other two - but in the long run they do give you the ability to expand and add on as your interest in photography grows and you start taking different types of pictures.

Hopefully that was somewhat helpful. If you can give me more specifics about what you want to do with the camera I can probably make more specific recommendations for you.

 

[brunerww]

I would go with what usayit recommends. Think of them as cameras - whether a camera has a mirror in it or not doesn't matter. Contrary to what was said above, there are mirrorless camera types with 300mm telephotos (and sensor sizes that make them effectively even longer). There are full frame mirrorless cameras that are larger and heavier than the smallest DSLR. There are also mirrorless cameras with fast PDAF autofocus just like a DSLR.

First, decide how much you're willing to spend and then look for the image quality, autofocusing speed, lens selection, ergonomics and size/weight that you are comfortable with (in the priority order that fits your needs), and then get that camera - whether it has a reflex mirror or not.

Good luck with your decision!

Bill

 

[robbins.photo]

Interesting.. I hadn't seen the 300 mm lens for a mirrorless. I stand corrected. I don't suppose they make a 400mm or 500mm lens for them? Not being facetious - I'm actually interested in knowing.

 

[dsiglin]

How much manual control do you want on your camera? Serious question. Do you want to fire and forget it or are you interested in things like selecting your F stop?

 

[djacobox372]

In the end it's all about sensor size and lens selection. Most mirrorless cameras have smaller sensors which hurt low light performance and make it harder to blur the background (bokeh). Although there are some.exceptions there are even full-frame mirrorless cameras but they cost even more than a dslr.

 

[usayit]

Interesting.. I hadn't seen the 300 mm lens for a mirrorless. I stand corrected. I don't suppose they make a 400mm or 500mm lens for them? Not being facetious - I'm actually interested in knowing.

Four Thirds | Four Thirds | Micro Four Thirds | Chart(Lenses)

Here's one from a native autofocus capable 100-300mm shot at 300mm which is 600mm equiv.

Here's another from the same lens:

I also adapt a 500mm f/5.6 reflex lens too.. On micro 4/3rds thats equivalent to 1000mm. This is a test shot from it.

 

[usayit]

How much manual control do you want on your camera? Serious question. Do you want to fire and forget it or are you interested in things like selecting your F stop?

Most mirror-less cameras have just as much control as any other DSLR. They have support much of the same features including exposure control (aperture, shutter, manual, program, auto).

As for dials and easy control, it varies camera to camera. Micro 4/3rds for example has a multitude of camera bodies with different handling characteristics to choose from. One mount, two manufacturers (Panasonic and Olympus). In the Olympus line, E-PM# series is intended to be extremely small with with less dials while the E-M5 (and E-M1) have much better handling with built in viewfinders and dials. Panasonic has the GF#, GH# (specific for video) and G#.

This same goes for other mirrorless cameras from Sony, Samsung, Fuji etc...

 

[usayit]

In the end it's all about sensor size and lens selection. Most mirrorless cameras have smaller sensors which hurt low light performance and make it harder to blur the background (bokeh). Although there are some.exceptions there are even full-frame mirrorless cameras but they cost even more than a dslr.

Mirrorless cameras have all sorts of sensor sizes. If you count manufacturer lines, the majority lies in the APS sized sensor cameras which is also true in DSLRs.

From small (ex Nikon J, and Pentax Q)
To 2x crop (ex Micro 4/3rds)
To APS (ex Fuji, Sony NEX, Samsung NX)
To Full Frame (Sony and Leica)

As for lens selection, its more of a factor of the fact these are new systems. When Canon first released their EF mount cameras, they too didn't have a large lens selection. Nikon and Canon both have history behind their lens selections.. a history that is way ahead of most of the mirrorless cameras that just got started.

Micro 4/3rds has a very large selection since it has Olympus, Panasonic, Voigtlander, and Sigma all manufacturing for that mount. As such its the leader in mirrorless in terms of lens selection. Voigtlander for example has THREE f/0.95 aperture lenses at 17.5, 25, and 42.5mm. Its pretty amazing considering its still a relatively new system. Both olympus and panasonic have both announced more telephoto lenses. Take note of the number of primes that are available.

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/microft/lens_chart.html

Once you include the fact that the short flange distance inherent in mirrorless designs allow for adaptation of almost any lens, you are actually looking at literally 100s of lenses to choose from.

 

[usayit]

Wow.. lots of misconceptions about mirrorless posted....

:-/

Mirror-less is a design concept not an implementation....

 

[robbins.photo]

Nice.. thanks Usayit - At the moment I'm pretty happy with my DSLR but it's interesting to follow the new technology. So out of curiosity would you say it performs as well in low light as a DSLR?

 

[usayit]

Which one?

Try not to say clump all of the cameras under such a broad term; mirrorless. Fuji XPro1 certainly can and from early reports the Sony full frame should too... Remember, many of the sensors are shared between the two designs. Micro 4/3rds is probably on par with lower end DSLR models but then again, most micro 4/3rds users place a very high priority on camera AND lens SIZE and WEIGHT. It's an unbeatable system in providing a blend between small size versus sensor size. My E-M5 + 12-35mm f/2.8 + 35-100mm f/2.8 fits in a bag that couldn't even hold the equivalent Canon or Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 alone... All three weigh less too. Both the 75mm f/1.8 (150mm equiv) and 45mm f/1.8 (90mm equiv) are smaller and lighter anything available on APS or FF.

The biggest disadvantage is tracking AF. This is an issue between contrast versus phase based AF. So if you are into sports, I think the DSLR is still the best tool. The gap is closing though.... some of the newer cameras are hybrid AF.

Whatever camera you choose, it should stand on its own meeting your needs regardless of the design it implements. It doesn't matter if it has a mirror or does not have a mirror, it is simply a tool that fits you.

 

[robbins.photo]

Which one?

Try not to say clump all of the cameras under such a broad term; mirrorless. Fuji XPro1 certainly can and from early reports the Sony full frame should too... Remember, many of the sensors are shared between the two designs. Micro 4/3rds is probably on par with lower end DSLR models but then again, most micro 4/3rds users place a very high priority on camera AND lens SIZE and WEIGHT. It's an unbeatable system in providing a blend between small size versus sensor size. My E-M5 + 12-35mm f/2.8 + 35-100mm f/2.8 fits in a bag that couldn't even hold the equivalent Canon or Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 alone... All three weigh less too. Both the 75mm f/1.8 (150mm equiv) and 45mm f/1.8 (90mm equiv) are smaller and lighter anything available on APS or FF.

The biggest disadvantage is tracking AF. This is an issue between contrast versus phase based AF. So if you are into sports, I think the DSLR is still the best tool. The gap is closing though.... some of the newer cameras are hybrid AF.

Whatever camera you choose, it should stand on its own meeting your needs regardless of the design it implements. It doesn't matter if it has a mirror or does not have a mirror, it is simply a tool that fits you.

Sorry, I was actually inquiring about the camera you used to take the images posted above, I was assuming it was a four thirds and just kind of curious what the low light performance was like. Most of the photography I do is wildlife so fast autofocus and good telephoto are a must, but if at some point the hybrid systems come down in price enough to fit my budget it might be worth a look.