Keep investing in DLSR or jump to mirrorless?

[SpartanGTR]

I bought a Canon SL1 about a year and a half ago, it was a great deal and came with the 18-55 kit lens along with a 55-250m telephoto. I also picked up a 50mm f/1.8 shortly after. Lately, I've been noticing some shortcomings of my equipment and am wanting to upgrade a bit. The 2 kit lenses aren't good for low light(which I find myself needing more and more), and they aren't exactly the sharpest lenses either. So, lenses seems like a good place to start upgrading. But, at the same time, one of my friends wants to get into photography and would take this equipment off my hands for a very reasonable price. So, this leaves me some options, since i'm not totally married into Canon equipment.....

Things I want most:
-Portability is key. SL1 is already pretty small, but it's still regular EOS mount lenses which most of the time aren't. It gets thrown into a backpack a lot(while biking, etc...)
-Does well in low light
-Sharp lenses


I've been doing a LOT of reading about the Fuji XT-1, wondering if it's time to make the jump to mirrorless. It's got a hefty price tag since I'd have to buy some new glass for it. I'd probably do the kit 18-55 f/2.8-4 and 56mm f/1.2 to start. Body wise, it's not much different than the SL1, but i've read nothing but good things about these fuji X lenses. Or my other option is to start getting new glass for my Canon, but then I become more rooted into Canon gear, and the good lenses for a Canon could end up costing just as much as a new XT-1 depending on what I decide on. I figure if there's a good time to switch, it's probably now.

Anyone have experience with either or both of these cameras and have any thoughts? Or perhaps made the jump from DSLR to a mirrorless?

 

[Gary A.]

I have two XT1's. It meets all of what you want most.

Be aware that mirrorless is different than a dSLR. Not different good or different bad, just different. I have FF dSLR, MFT and APS-C (Fuji). The Fuji's are my camera of choice. The XT1 has lighting fast AF but will not track. While you certainly can shoot action with mirrorless, a high end dSLR is the best tool. Shooting action with the XT1 is harder and you'll end up with less keepers. After you learn to shoot action with Fuji, I don't think the difference between dSLR and Fuji mirrorless is all that significant. In extreme low light the Fuji's have trouble focusing on action. Additionally, at 8FPS the EVF doesn't keep up with the shutter. At lower FPS the EVF seems seamless.

You'll love the 18-55 kit lens. It is possibly the sharpest kit lens of all time. All of the Fujinon FX lens are extremely sharp, equal to or better than Canon L lenses. The XT1 is designed for Manual controls, nearly everything is on top functionally around various dials, no menu diving.

If you're in SoCal, hit me up and you can play with my XT1's. I am concerned about your purchase of the 56mm. That is a very expensive and somewhat specialized portrait lens. Depending of what and ow you shoot, you may want to reconsider you second lens.

Good Luck and Good Shooting,
Gary
The Fuji Fanboy

 

[Light Guru]

I recommend renting both the mirrorless camera and the dslr camera that you might upgrade to if you sold your sl1 and a nice lens for each and compare the two and how each of them fit into how you like to shoot and what you like to shoot.

A camera is just a tool. Pick a camera that works best for how you shoot and what you shoot.

 

[sashbar]

I jumped DSLR ship recently, shoot with Ricoh GR and FUJI X-T1 now, and both give me better image quality compared to my old Nikon glass. I can not comment on Canon lenses, but Nikon DX (cropped) range is quite compromised in my opinion compared to FUJI glass. On the other hand, as you have mentioned, FUJI glass is not cheap and the choice is limited.

If you are looking for a long term commitment, I think FUJI X-mount is pretty solid now. They lost money with their first X-cameras, like X-Pro1 and X-E1, but now their camera dept. are in profit due to good sales of X-E2 and even better sales of X-T1, so they are talking about long term commitment for high end X-cameras and the expansion of their lenses range. Their X-mount lenses are also highly profitable.

So, I guess, they will keep expanding their X-mount higher end line. Samyang is also investing in X-mount lenses as a cheaper alternative, and there were rumours about Sigma, but nothing came from them so far. There are, of course excellent Zeiss Touit X-mount lenses as well.

Top DSLRs are great and mature, but they have been improving only incrementally recently, whereas mirrorless were improving in leaps and bounds in the last two years, so the neхt X-Pro 2 looks like an exiting proposition.

 

[Solarflare]

If you want low light performance, you want

(a) LARGE sensors
(b) BRIGHT lenses, specifically prime lenses are good at this

Unfortunately, most mirrorless systems right now aim for

(a) compact body with SMALL sensors
(b) compact lenses which are typically also zooms, thus very dark

Then again the Sony A7s is probably the best low light camera in existence, and its actually a mirrorless. There is a manual lens, the Mitakon 50mm f0.95, for it, which is both affordable and very bright, unfortunately its manual focus only and thus not for everyone.

A DSLR will offer you superior Autofocus unless you compare much more expensive mirrorless cameras. The Panasonic GH4 is the currently best mirrorless Autofocus, but only if used with specific lenses. Sony A6000, Olympus OM-D M-E5 and Fuji X-T1 also have tolerable performance - they allow action in good light. The support for advanced autofocus features such as tracking is right now poor on all mirrorless cameras.

Also, a DSLR will offer you an optical viewfinder (abbrevation OVF) that will not have any of the potential issues with an electronic one (EVF), such as lag, flimmering under artificial light, low resolution, etc.


All in all I would rate mirrorless systems like this:

Leica M: Just to be complete. Recently turned 100. Yes, 100 years, a full century. Still offers no autofocus. Even the newest digital cameras can still use lenses from the 1920s (the 1914 original Leica was just a rather poorly working prototype), though they need an adapter. Very expensive system, very high quality lenses. This is a full frame system (the only exception is the Leica M8, the first digital Leica M - it is APS-H, aka crop factor 1.2).

Olympus/Panasonic Four Third: This is the most mature of all mirrorless systems. Plenty lenses to choose from, plenty camera bodies, high quality camera bodies and prime lenses available. The Archilles heel is the small sensor though. Excellent low light peformance ? Maybe tolerable to many people, but not its forte. Also expect some visible noise even at base ISO. This is for APS-C true, too, but only on critical subjects. Of course noise reduction can suppress that.

Sony E/FE: APS-C or full frame sensors. Main problem is the lack of lenses, and the quality problems with the lenses This is true both for the Sony E (APS-C) and Sony FE (full frame, which are currently A7, A7r and A7s) cameras. Especially with the Sony A7s you can pretty much adopt any lens in existence and use it manually. The Sony A7 and A7r are more selective in what they support as lenses; wide angle lenses might not work well on them. The Sony A6000 is an E mount, this is older and has more lens options, but dont expect to be flooded with good glas any time soon.

Fuji X: The X-T1 was another huge step for mirrorless, maybe a breakthrough. The lenses that are available are pretty balanced, though a high performance macro lens is still missing. Also the sensor is only APS-C and it seems this wont change any time soon. Fuji claims their APS-C sensor performs as well as a full frame sensor - but frankly thats just marketing. Also, Fuji uses a special kind of pattern for the color detection array (called X-Trans) and while Fuji themselves have obviously mastered it very well, they dont help others with this special technology. This means you either have to use JPEGs out of camera (a very popular option among Fuji X shooters) or you lose quality with any raw editing suite out there. The lenses for the Fuji X system are outstanding and offer many bright primes, but they are costy too. The cheapest camera for the Fuji X system is the X-A1, which uses a traditional Bayer instead of a X-Trans color array. Dont expect great autofocus performance out of that one, ever, though.

Samsung NX - APS-C system thats marketed very aggressively, but reviews are so far too sparse to know how good the system is in practice.

Leica T - surprisingly equal to the Canon EOS M in respect to specs. Also is limited to pretty dark lenses. Excellent image quality, very high price, poor autofocus, brand new with problems, innovative user interface (touch screen based). Also a very beautiful camera.

Canon EOS M - four lenses total available, three dark zooms and one dark "pancake" prime. Painfully slow autofocus. Can use EOS lenses for DSLRs with an adapter, but that doesnt help AF performance, either. Image quality no better or worse than the entry level DSLRs the innards have been taken from, user interface like a compact.

Nikon 1 - tiny sensor, best autofocus of all mirrorless as long as there is good light, definitely visible noise, diffraction quickly starts to turn into a general quality limiting issue, as with all small sensors.

 

[sashbar]

Solarflare summed it up nicely. Although his AF summary looks a bit outdated in my opnion

One can not say that DSLR offers a superior AF any more. It depends on a particular DSLR and a mirrorless model now. In my experience in normal light XT-1 AF is faster than many DSLRs. It does struggle in the dark, but so do many DSLRs. Sure, top DSLRs do better here, but we are talking about cameras that cost much more.

Then, if we talk about the support for advanced AF features - yes, Solarflare is right, DSLRs are tracking much better. X-T1 is tracking only if the object is moving towards you, not left or right. This is a big disadvantage. BUT.

If we talk about "advanced features" - a mirrorless camera focuses on the sensor directly, that eliminates back and forth focus issues. In my experience X-T1 focuses more reliably than many DSLRs. On a wide open lense some DSLRs are struggling, X-T1 is always dead on. It is much easier to focus qwith X-T1 than I expected having read all those AF horror stories. DSLRs are still using an outdated focus mirror system, borrowed from the film era. I guess it will be changing in the future.

X-T1 EVF is larger than OVF in many DSLRs including FF and has no lag. It has advanced focus assist features that DSLRs lack, like an instant closeup, or split EVF screen. OVF is still clearer and looks more natural in good light, sure. But EVF allows you to work in dim light, when OVF becomes just a dark window. You can see everything as in day light with EVF, never mind you see the picture as it will be shot. This is an instant metering which is great fun to use.

So I would be very cautious to talk about "more advanced" DSLR AF features. Mirrorless is a different camera and it applies to it's AF as well.

 

[SpartanGTR]

I recommend renting both the mirrorless camera and the dslr camera that you might upgrade to if you sold your sl1 and a nice lens for each and compare the two and how each of them fit into how you like to shoot and what you like to shoot.

A camera is just a tool. Pick a camera that works best for how you shoot and what you shoot.

Well, I wouldn't be upgrading the body. I'm still researching some of the lenses I'd want to try, the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 looks REAL promising but looks to be sized about the same as a brick(in terms of length AND weight) which is rather disappointing. Seems like both fast primes/fast zooms, even if I only picked up 2 more lenses, would end up being close to what i'd pay for the X-T1 with a seperate lens.

 

[goodguy]

Where to go to, what to invest in is all very confusing these days.
Technology is running faster and faster, each camera maker is trying to make his splash in the photography pond.
You got the bog classic Canon and Nikon and then the new guys with mirrorless, which is solid to invest in ?
Good question, everybody will pull you toward their favorite justifying the logic in it and they might be right.....or not.
Samsung is making a very big splash with their new NX-1
Sony is making amazing sensors and pretty good bodies but limited lenses
Fuji seems interesting to consider
Panasonic and Olympus both looks like solid bet if you ok with MFT sensor
And last but not least you are looking at Nikon and Canon that seem like they are frozen with DSLR but I doubt that very much, I think they cant produce a mirrorless system that will not be better then their DSLR and since mirrorless technology is still evolving fast they will keep it in their labs till they will have a mature product that will outshine their current DSLR technology.

I feel sorry for anyone that is on the fence looking at all the wonderful systems out there trying to decided what system to commit to, its all very confusing.

Good luck

 

[Gary A.]

Solarflare nicely summarized the present state of affairs but, (the big but), to refine Solarflare I have these remarks.

Everything we consider, good, bad or indifferent we must view through lenses called significance. While all specs are quantitatively available, we need to think "How significant is that spec to what I shoot and how I shoot...".

Low Light:
How low is your "Low Light"? For me Low Light starts at ISO 1600 and wide open (or close to wide open). Solarflare mentioned "bright" lenses and f/.95 is certainly bright/fast. For me bright/fast starts at f/2.8. Sure f/1.4 is better, but for what I shoot and how I shoot, f/2.8 on a long and ultra-wide lenses works for me. Another consideration for low light is IS. The EM5 and EM1 has the best IS I've ever used. Best of all, Oly packs the IS into the body (In-Body-Image-Stabilization/IBIS). IBIS works with every lens, even legacy glass.

Noise:
I find that the noise levels in both the Oly EM5/EM1 and The Fujis to be acceptable. Again this is a matter of significance. If I shot landscapes then noise would be more important. But in what I shoot and how I shoot, it is all about content and less about IQ.

No noise reduction applied whatsoever in any of the images:

OMD-EM5, 45mm, 1/6, ISO 1600

OMD-EM5, 45mm, 1/15, ISO 1600

OMD-EM5, @ 100mm, 1/750, f/2.8, ISO 1250

OMD-EM5, @ 25mm, 1/3000, f/2.5, ISO 1600

X-T1 w/ 55-200 @ 200mm, 1/250, f/9, ISO 3200

X-Pro1 w/ 55-200 @ 200mm, 1/250, f/4.8, ISO 1600

X-T1 w/55-200 @ 121.5mm, 1/250, f/8, ISO 3200

Solarflare mentioned lack of a high performing macro. If macro is your thing, Zeiss makes an excellent, AF, 1:1 macro. Solarflare is correct that the X-Trans is different from your typical Bayer sensor requiring 'special' RAW developers. Most major photo processors have master the X-Trans sensor, from Adobe to Aperture to PhotoNinja to Capture One, even free photo processors like LightZone have now mastered the X-Trans sensor.

 

[Village Idiot]

Olympus/Panasonic Four Third: This is the most mature of all mirrorless systems. Plenty lenses to choose from, plenty camera bodies, high quality camera bodies and prime lenses available. The Archilles heel is the small sensor though. Excellent low light peformance ? Maybe tolerable to many people, but not its forte. Also expect some visible noise even at base ISO. This is for APS-C true, too, but only on critical subjects. Of course noise reduction can suppress that.

The OM-D sensor is superb in low light and scores almost as well as the 7D MKII on DxO. Some of the lower quality sensors aren't as good, but the EM series has always been mentioned as having awesome low light performance for the size of the sensor. So saying it's "tolerable to many people, but not its forte." is more than a bit of an exaggeration.

Sony E/FE: APS-C or full frame sensors. Main problem is the lack of lenses, and the quality problems with the lenses This is true both for the Sony E (APS-C) and Sony FE (full frame, which are currently A7, A7r and A7s) cameras. Especially with the Sony A7s you can pretty much adopt any lens in existence and use it manually. The Sony A7 and A7r are more selective in what they support as lenses; wide angle lenses might not work well on them. The Sony A6000 is an E mount, this is older and has more lens options, but dont expect to be flooded with good glas any time soon.

And with the A7's, a company called Metabones makes an adapter so that you can use Canon lenses with AF. It's not as fast as being installed on a camera natively, but it allows you to have a huge choice of lenses for the A7 series of camera. It's been said that the best thing that's happened to Canon in the past year or so is the Sony A7.

 

[Solarflare]

Solarflare summed it up nicely. Although his AF summary looks a bit outdated in my opnion

One can not say that DSLR offers a superior AF any more.

Sorry, but you've fallen for marketing lies.

 

[SpartanGTR]

After a bit more thought, and comparison, I opted to try the Fuji X-E2. I don't think i'll miss any of the upgrades i'd get from jumping to the X-T1(minus phone remote control, which appears to be in the next firmware release). It is surprisingly light, haven't found much I don't like about it yet, but the fujinon XF lenses are definitely on the heavy side.

Do I need to be worried about using this in cold weather at all? I had no issues using my SL1 last year, took it out a couple of days when it was probably 20 F, maybe slightly colder. I know LCDs don't like cold at all though, is the EVF going to start acting funky in cold weather? The manual says it's usable down to 0 Celcius, but then again, most camera manuals say that.....

 

[sashbar]

Solarflare summed it up nicely. Although his AF summary looks a bit outdated in my opnion

One can not say that DSLR offers a superior AF any more.

Sorry, but you've fallen for marketing lies.

Sorry, but I use both and judge by my own experience.

 

[Gary A.]

After a bit more thought, and comparison, I opted to try the Fuji X-E2. I don't think i'll miss any of the upgrades i'd get from jumping to the X-T1(minus phone remote control, which appears to be in the next firmware release). It is surprisingly light, haven't found much I don't like about it yet, but the fujinon XF lenses are definitely on the heavy side.

Do I need to be worried about using this in cold weather at all? I had no issues using my SL1 last year, took it out a couple of days when it was probably 20 F, maybe slightly colder. I know LCDs don't like cold at all though, is the EVF going to start acting funky in cold weather? The manual says it's usable down to 0 Celcius, but then again, most camera manuals say that.....

The X-E2 is a very capable camera. The XT1's viewfinder is much larger than the E2's, I believe it's larger than a 5D. I really really like the XT1's battery grip, the extra power and ease of vertical shooting are important to me. I like the rangefinder-esque styling of the E2.