First Camera: Mirrorless or DSLR? (Or just SLR?)

[usayit]

My two cents on the topic at hand,

the decision is being approach from the wrong direction in my opinion. The discussion is headed i the direction similar to someone deciding between two dslrs... brand, lens, cost, handling etc... What needs to be decided first is whether mirrorless or dslr is a better fit. If mirrorless, then consider the olympus, sony nex, and panasonic. If dslr, then consider nikon, sony, pentax, amd canon.

Comparing something like the D90 to the sony nex5 is like trying to decide between A canon 1series and a point and shoot. Until you have decided which market you belong to, discussing specific brand and models simply just muddies up the whole decision process.

heck.. we even brought up the x100 which is targeted to yet a third market.

 

[smeat]

My two cents on the topic at hand,

the decision is being approach from the wrong direction in my opinion. The discussion is headed i the direction similar to someone deciding between two dslrs... brand, lens, cost, handling etc... What needs to be decided first is whether mirrorless or dslr is a better fit. If mirrorless, then consider the olympus, sony nex, and panasonic. If dslr, then consider nikon, sony, pentax, amd canon.

Comparing something like the D90 to the sony nex5 is like trying to decide between A canon 1series and a point and shoot. Until you have decided which market you belong to, discussing specific brand and models simply just muddies up the whole decision process.

heck.. we even brought up the x100 which is targeted to yet a third market.

Well put.

 

[Garbz]

Garbz, you ARE crazy. And you illustrate what I'm talking about, brand loyalty over quality loyalty. You would send a new photographer after an inferior or equal but more expensive product simply because you own it or believe it should be supported.

Hardly. I couldn't care less what brand they go with. Just not Sony. This is because of product quality loyalty.

I am advocating buying from a company which treats its customers with respect, for what good is an awesome camera if right after I part with my money something goes wrong and I get kicked in the groin and my warranty voided because I dared to use the camera in anything other than a perfect 20deg 10% humidity room temperature.

This is no joke either. The roommate of a close friend of mine was actually told the warranty on his PS3 was void because it was plugged into a powerboard.

Then there's other funny stories: Such as this picture: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v325/shangi/misc/ruuvi_halvalla.jpg
In comparison my friend (same friend actually the one with the roommate who got screwed) snapped the plastic lensmount on the 18-105. Called Nikon for a replacement f-mount ring and paid a whole $12 inc shipping.
Side note: There's a fancy little upgrade for a cheap lens too. The screwholes are all the same and you can go from a plastic mount to the far more durable metal mount for the cost of 2 cups of coffee.


There's this thing call customer service which some people don't care much about, I do. If you do too, then don't go Sony, if you don't, then do go Sony and I wish you all the best of luck because it really does look like you may actually need it.



Oh btw there's morals and there's morals. Kill whales, pollute a river, yeah ok that kinda **** happens, get in the personal lives of some rich movie star who earns $1m for 30min work, yeah they had it coming, screw the very consumers who's money you're taking... not if I can help it.

 

[whitetshirtguy]

I agree with usayit. My main question here is exactly which market I belong to.

I want to get more serious about photography, so that eliminates point-and-shoots (that's why I called the topic "first camera". I've owned many point-and-shoots before, but was never too serious about photography).

The lack of full manual controls in most mirrorless cameras is really bothering me, so I guess I've stopped considering them too.

This leaves me with a DSLR or the x100.


Usayit, when you say the x100 is targeted to yet a third market, what market is that?

And when you say "street photogs" is all you mean "photos taken on the street"? Or is there more to that?

I don't think I'll ever shoot in a studio, so my pictures will be mostly taken on the street, if that's what you mean.

Besides, portability is kind of a big factor for me too, and if I get a DSLR I think I'll end up sticking to the one lens that comes with it.

Whether I choose the x100 or a DSLR though, if I'll have just one lens I want it to be versatile enough. If I got the a580 the lens would be a "18-55mm DT", which for me seems to be a little more versatile than the x100's one. On the other hand it's from the cheaper line of Sony lenses, while the Fuji one seems to be of very good quality. Is it worth the zoom sacrifice?
And what about the cool blurry backgrounds? Could I do that with the x100?




PS: I know the last question is more about lenses than cameras, but it's kind of related. Sorry if it's in the wrong place. And thanks for all the answers, everybody!

 

[thaiphotos]

I have a Sony a55. The main issues with it are:

1) It seems to overheat all too easily. I live in Bangkok, so that probably doesn't help but still, I've heard the same complaint from people living in slightly colder climates.

2) The autofocus can go a bit "crazy" sometimes, it seems to want to continually re-focus even when I'm not pressing anything.

3) The HDR stuff isn't particularly well thought out. It needs a firmware upgrade, nothing more than that though I think.

But if you are like me, and trying to upgrade from snapper to something more serious, its a good choice. With the right lens, it can produce stunning pics, and shooting 10 fps is great.

 

[Destin]

Those blurry backgrounds are called bokeh and caused by depth of field.

Depth of field is the depth of the area in a photo that can be in focus. the less depth of field you have, the smaller the depth of the field of focus. Here is a better definition.

Now that that is out of the way, larger apertures (smaller numbers) create less DOF, and therefore a blurrier background. Another factor that determines depth of field, and is often forgotten is the camera's sensor size. The larger the sensor the less the DOF, and the more the background can be blurred.

Since the x100's sensor is roughly the same size as an aps-c dslr (its within 1/10th of a mm) you should be able to get equally good bokeh with the x100 and a crop sensor dslr, in theory anyway.

 

[PJL]

In addition to what Destin said, with the 23mm lens on the X100, you're going to have to get much closer to the subject to get that kind of narrow DoF effect/bokeh than you would if you were using a longer focal length lens on a DSLR.

The X100 is definitely a "niche" camera and not very versatile, per se, because you're stuck at that 23 mm focal length.

 

[smeat]

I have a Sony a55. The main issues with it are:

1) It seems to overheat all too easily. I live in Bangkok, so that probably doesn't help but still, I've heard the same complaint from people living in slightly colder climates.

2) The autofocus can go a bit "crazy" sometimes, it seems to want to continually re-focus even when I'm not pressing anything.

3) The HDR stuff isn't particularly well thought out. It needs a firmware upgrade, nothing more than that though I think.

But if you are like me, and trying to upgrade from snapper to something more serious, its a good choice. With the right lens, it can produce stunning pics, and shooting 10 fps is great.

It does continually refocus, I think there's a setting though to make it stop doing that. At least that's the case in the 200 and 850.

 

[smeat]

Garbz, you ARE crazy. And you illustrate what I'm talking about, brand loyalty over quality loyalty. You would send a new photographer after an inferior or equal but more expensive product simply because you own it or believe it should be supported.

Hardly. I couldn't care less what brand they go with. Just not Sony. This is because of product quality loyalty.

I am advocating buying from a company which treats its customers with respect, for what good is an awesome camera if right after I part with my money something goes wrong and I get kicked in the groin and my warranty voided because I dared to use the camera in anything other than a perfect 20deg 10% humidity room temperature.

This is no joke either. The roommate of a close friend of mine was actually told the warranty on his PS3 was void because it was plugged into a powerboard.

Then there's other funny stories: Such as this picture: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v325/shangi/misc/ruuvi_halvalla.jpg
In comparison my friend (same friend actually the one with the roommate who got screwed) snapped the plastic lensmount on the 18-105. Called Nikon for a replacement f-mount ring and paid a whole $12 inc shipping.
Side note: There's a fancy little upgrade for a cheap lens too. The screwholes are all the same and you can go from a plastic mount to the far more durable metal mount for the cost of 2 cups of coffee.


There's this thing call customer service which some people don't care much about, I do. If you do too, then don't go Sony, if you don't, then do go Sony and I wish you all the best of luck because it really does look like you may actually need it.



Oh btw there's morals and there's morals. Kill whales, pollute a river, yeah ok that kinda **** happens, get in the personal lives of some rich movie star who earns $1m for 30min work, yeah they had it coming, screw the very consumers who's money you're taking... not if I can help it.

It's anecdotal evidence. I'm not saying no one has been screwed by Sony, but I'm not sure everyone is always happy with any customer service. I had an issue with an a850, auto-focus not quite like I wanted, I sent it in under warranty. They tweaked it per my request and put new firmware and did a complimentary cleaning. So I only know my experience and they've been cool with me. Granted I haven't done anything out of spec OR admitted to any possibilities of my things being broken my some other company's product (like the power strip) but you can always find horror stories.

 

[smeat]

I agree with usayit. My main question here is exactly which market I belong to.

I want to get more serious about photography, so that eliminates point-and-shoots (that's why I called the topic "first camera". I've owned many point-and-shoots before, but was never too serious about photography).

Whether I choose the x100 or a DSLR though, if I'll have just one lens I want it to be versatile enough. If I got the a580 the lens would be a "18-55mm DT", which for me seems to be a little more versatile than the x100's one. On the other hand it's from the cheaper line of Sony lenses, while the Fuji one seems to be of very good quality. Is it worth the zoom sacrifice?
And what about the cool blurry backgrounds? Could I do that with the x100?

The lens the 580 comes with is more versatile and it's not a "bad" quality lens. The fixed focal length lens on the x100 will probably give better results within its limited range. Though "molded glass" elements come in all ranges of effectiveness so this one isn't necessarily a peach. But most (not all) fixed focal length lenses will outperform their zooming counterparts. It depends on if you want to move the lens ring or move your body to get the shot you want whether the zoom is more important. The quality will be very usable from the Sony camera lens. I've used a far inferior lens to that for some stunning shots. I heard once, and I agree, that most lenses are better than most photographers. There's a lot to be said for learning to get the absolute most out of the camera in your hands.
As for the "cool blurry backgrounds" you should be able to do that with the x100 because it has a wide f2.0 aperture which should let you get some nice low depth of field shots. Though how smooth those out of focus areas will be depends on other aspects of the lens/shape of the aperture inside the lens and that I can't speak on.

 

[usayit]

The lack of full manual controls in most mirrorless cameras is really bothering me, so I guess I've stopped considering them too.

I know of no mirrorless cameras that do not include manual controls (double negative). Panasonic and Olympus are currently leading the pack with their m43 systems. AFAIK, all of their cameras have full manual controls in addition to "creative modes". I have a G1 and E-PL1, both have full manual control. From what I've read and hear, the NEX has a pretty horrible UI.

I'd slot mirrorless cameras above bridge cameras because their larger sensor and interchangeable lenses. At this time, I'd slot them underneath the DSLR because the format is so new; there is room for improvement before they reach the capabilities of DSLRs. There may be a time when m4/3rds catches up... got a crystal ball? Native lens selection is still small compared to the likes of Canon and Nikon even though m4/3rds lenses are catching up (Olympus and Panasonic lenses are interchangeable) Contrast AF is slower than those cameras equipped with a mirror box.

What they do give you is a very capable camera in a very small format. Not only the cameras but so are the lenses. The lenses are TINY. Zoom ranges are impressive and there are some pretty nice primes, the Panasonic 20 f/1.7 comes to mind. For me particularly, it also allows me to adapt dozens of lenses to the system because of the m43 short flange distance. Its loads of fun for a person who likes to collect old vintage glass. It also allows for a very lightweight alternate way of using my system of Leica glass as well. My primary system is a rangefinder. I'm also a long time Canon EOS shooter with a significant investment in professional level bodies and lenses. That was a time when I was heading towards a possible career in photography but a las we path took me a different route and its now simply a life long hobby. The next time I lug around that weight and bulk, I'd better be paid for it!

Here are a couple reviews that I wrote:

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...reviews/208822-my-thoughts-olympus-e-pl1.html

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...-my-thoughts-panasonic-g1-w-manual-glass.html


Now you know why I like the m4/3rds mirrorless system, perhaps you can get a feel if its the system for you. Of course, NEX systems are going to also have their own aspects to consider.

Usayit, when you say the x100 is targeted to yet a third market, what market is that?

And when you say "street photogs" is all you mean "photos taken on the street"? Or is there more to that?

Street photography as similar what you see photojournalists create. A focus on telling a story.

Street photography - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Its a niche camera with the likes of Leica M, Leica X1, Epson R-D1, etc You shoot completely differently with these cameras. Thought process is a bit different as well. You aren't looking through a tunnel (through the lens). To explain this can be a thread in of itself. If you see not-having-zoom as a "sacrifice", I hesitate to give my recommendation. If you are still set on the x100, i would recommend giving it sometime as the camera hasnt even hit the market yet... much of the hype is based on speculation and marketing material

What DSLRs have going for them is versatility..... its why they are popular.

 

[thaiphotos]

I have a Sony a55. The main issues with it are:

1) It seems to overheat all too easily. I live in Bangkok, so that probably doesn't help but still, I've heard the same complaint from people living in slightly colder climates.

2) The autofocus can go a bit "crazy" sometimes, it seems to want to continually re-focus even when I'm not pressing anything.

3) The HDR stuff isn't particularly well thought out. It needs a firmware upgrade, nothing more than that though I think.

But if you are like me, and trying to upgrade from snapper to something more serious, its a good choice. With the right lens, it can produce stunning pics, and shooting 10 fps is great.

It does continually refocus, I think there's a setting though to make it stop doing that. At least that's the case in the 200 and 850.

I found a menu setting which sets whether it focuses when you put your eye to the viewfinder. Turned that off. Couldn't find any other settings, except for the obvious one of switching from auto-focus to manual. Its a much quiter beast then thankfully.