Thinking of getting a mirrorless

[pixmedic]

This is extremely silly.

Just try to find a photoclub or something in your area, to find other people interested in photography and try out their gear.

Dont split an already meager budget into half and expect to get any relevant kind of experience out of this. Yes there are excellent mirrorless out there, and stunning mirrorless glas. But not at a mere $500 which is hardly enough for even the simplest DSLR, and its by far not enough for a decent mirrorless setup.

So far I've invested about 8k€ into my DSLR setup and are still not at the point that I would say OK now it should get another camera system because this one cant offer me more.

Why would I be splitting anything in half? I'm not saying it's time for a new camera I'm saying I want to settle into a setup to build with weather it be Nikon cannon Sony... mirrorless dslr like I said in a previous post I have a few k to put into something. My girlfriend wants a camera and my d3400 is more than enough for her she's not that into photography and she as well as I do not feel as though it makes sense to get her something else. That leaves me needing a camera. I'm not very invested at all in Nikon so I felt as though now is the best time to figure out what route to go. Yes I realized getting a $500 camera does not make sense at all,was thinking just replace my d3400 aka $500 range. Now I decided I'm not going to do that and just wanted opinions on mirrorless. But now I don't think I'm even going to go that route

dont let the above missinformation scare you off of a mirrorless system.
$500 does not in any way shape or form keep you from getting a good mirrorless setup.

for $500 you can get a fuji x-e1 and one of the kit lenses if you shop around.
$500 would also get you a x-a1 or x-a2 and lens. (I own an x-a1 and its a great camera.)

much will depend on what type of photography you want to do.
I did my last portrait session entirely with my $150 fuji x-a1, and the pictures are as sharp as any DSLR.

 

[fmw]

Pixmedic is right. I recently bought a factory refurbished Fuji X-E2S (current model) with the 18-55 zoom lens for $630. Go back a model or two and you are under $500 for a used or refurbished one. Ebay is loaded with used mint condition older models for under $500, even with lenses included. Fuji owners, like Nikon and Canon users trade cameras when new ones arrive creating excellent bargains. If you prefer Sony or some other mirrorless brand, the situation is the same. My X-E1 body was $285 brand new a few weeks ago. I've almost finished my switch from Nikon to Fuji completely. Look around.

 

[beagle100]

This is extremely silly.

Just try to find a photoclub or something in your area, to find other people interested in photography and try out their gear.

Dont split an already meager budget into half and expect to get any relevant kind of experience out of this. Yes there are excellent mirrorless out there, and stunning mirrorless glas. But not at a mere $500 which is hardly enough for even the simplest DSLR, and its by far not enough for a decent mirrorless setup.

So far I've invested about 8k€ into my DSLR setup and are still not at the point that I would say OK now it should get another camera system because this one cant offer me more.

I'm even going to go that route

dont let the above missinformation scare you off of a mirrorless system.
$500 does not in any way shape or form keep you from getting a good mirrorless setup.

for $500 you can get a fuji x-e1 and one of the kit lenses if you shop around.
$500 would also get you a x-a1 or x-a2 and lens. (I own an x-a1 and its a great camera.)

much will depend on what type of photography you want to do.
I did my last portrait session entirely with my $150 fuji x-a1, and the pictures are as sharp as any DSLR.

very true but a $500 budget may be stretching it
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[Solarflare]

Strongly disagreed. If you really want to experience what mirrorless is able to do, you need to get the newest gen.

I'm talking at least an X-T20 for about $900, camera body only.

A X-E1 etc isnt even latest gen.

Mirrorless is still in development and still takes big steps to really compete with DSLR.

Mind you, no current mirrorless has even the glas to really compete with Canon and Nikon in this area.

 

[Jcederroth94]

Ok so I went a different route. It may have been a bad idea. For starters, I don't do any video at all I'm not a video type of person. My phone does plenty fine for the videos I need (pixel XL and she has an S8) so they have decent quality for my use. I'm mostly a still photographer landscape/macro and ended up getting a decent deal on a d800 paid $1,000 for a great shape body with 7k on the shutter. I've read alot about the issues with the d800 but I feel as though it's a decent way to get into full frame sensors with high resolution which I feel can come in handy for landscape and macro. Yes it is old and I could have made a mistake but i got it and still have room in my budget for a lens or 2. And yes size wise it's almost the opposite of a mirrorless but my now her d3400 is small enough and decent enough to be good on the go. And although it is not ideal she could still get use of any fx Lenses I get. Again it could have been a bad or amazing purchase I will soon find out

 

[chuasam]

get a new OMD EM10 II with the kit lens for under $500 and you're set

 

[pixmedic]

Strongly disagreed. If you really want to experience what mirrorless is able to do, you need to get the newest gen.

I'm talking at least an X-T20 for about $900, camera body only.

A X-E1 etc isnt even latest gen.

Mirrorless is still in development and still takes big steps to really compete with DSLR.

Mind you, no current mirrorless has even the glas to really compete with Canon and Nikon in this area.

Silly. To put it mildly.
That's like saying the only way to experience DSLRs is if you buy a D5 or 1DX.

As for glass, your wrong there too.
Except for long tele lenses (for now) you can get exceptional glass from wide angle to mid Tele from fuji. Not to mention the zeiss options.
For what most people use their cameras for, and I mean the vast majority, both sony and fuji will stand toe to toe with both Nikon and canon. Professional Wildlife and sports photographers might be about the only exception.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

 

[WhaleDaughter]

Edit: I should read through a whole thread before posting. Disregard the following, but I'll leave it up for anyone searching this topic in the future.

I just bought an Olympus OM-D EM10 Mark II and I'm really loving it. I'm switching from a Canon Rebel SL-1 DSLR. But size and weight are hugely important factors to me. This might be a nice mirrorless to rent for a bit, see what you like and don't about this type of camera.


"Rule 408: Time is not the boss of you"

 

[photo61]

Ok, my plan is to navigate to 1 main system I just feel as though I should try out both before devoting more money into a DSLR when I may prefer the mirrorless system better. I got the dslr as a gift so it wasn't really a choice in where to start. But you may be 100% right that's why I'm asking if it even makes sense. I have a couple Grand set asside to get a good setup so before spending it I just want to make sure I put it to the right stuff for me

So much goes into "what the right camera" is for an individual. I would start by asking what you are using the camera for? I'm a believer in the right tool for the job. I use both mirrorless and DSLR but for different photography and different situations.

 

[fmw]

Strongly disagreed. If you really want to experience what mirrorless is able to do, you need to get the newest gen.

I'm talking at least an X-T20 for about $900, camera body only.

A X-E1 etc isnt even latest gen.

Mirrorless is still in development and still takes big steps to really compete with DSLR.

Mind you, no current mirrorless has even the glas to really compete with Canon and Nikon in this area.

I don't agree with any of that. If you can't get a comparable shot with a $500 mirrorless that you get with a $500 DSLR, then the problem is with the photographer, not the equipment. Sorry but mirrorless lenses are every bit as good as DSLR lenses. The product line isn't as broad but it is silly to think that the mirrorless lenses underperform. It simply isn't true.

 

[jcdeboever]

Strongly disagreed. If you really want to experience what mirrorless is able to do, you need to get the newest gen.

I'm talking at least an X-T20 for about $900, camera body only.

A X-E1 etc isnt even latest gen.

Mirrorless is still in development and still takes big steps to really compete with DSLR.

Mind you, no current mirrorless has even the glas to really compete with Canon and Nikon in this area.

I don't agree with any of that. If you can't get a comparable shot with a $500 mirrorless that you get with a $500 DSLR, then the problem is with the photographer, not the equipment. Sorry but mirrorless lenses are every bit as good as DSLR lenses. The product line isn't as broad but it is silly to think that the mirrorless lenses underperform. It simply isn't true.

I agree. Fujifilm glass is wonderful.

 

[beagle100]

Strongly disagreed. If you really want to experience what mirrorless is able to do, you need to get the newest gen.

I'm talking at least an X-T20 for about $900, camera body only.

A X-E1 etc isnt even latest gen.

Mirrorless is still in development and still takes big steps to really compete with DSLR.

Mind you, no current mirrorless has even the glas to really compete with Canon and Nikon in this area.

I don't agree with any of that. If you can't get a comparable shot with a $500 mirrorless that you get with a $500 DSLR, then the problem is with the photographer, not the equipment. Sorry but mirrorless lenses are every bit as good as DSLR lenses. The product line isn't as broad but it is silly to think that the mirrorless lenses underperform. It simply isn't true.

it's true, many mirrorless lenses are as good as DSLR lens but the good thing is a mirrorless camera can also use DSLR lens ---- it's great !!
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[jdag]

I will add my $0.02 with my experience with mirrorless. I so wanted to like it, but...

After moving through several Nikon DX cameras, from the D90 to D7000 to D7100, I jumped over to a Sony A7ii about 18 months ago. The lure of the small full frame setup was the main attraction.

While I loved the image quality of the A7ii, using mainly the excellent Sony/Zeiss 55mm f/1.8, I simply could not get used to the camera's operation. Small things like the Auto ISO configuration to more important things like the focus point selection confused and annoyed me.

So back in March, I decided to go a new direction, still attracted to the small/light form factor, and moved to the Olympus micro 4/3 system (EM5ii, 12-40 f2.8, 25 f1.8, 40-150). Fantastic looking products, exceptional build quality, and super light and portable (in fact, maybe too small, but that's subjective).

But like the Sony, the handling just was not right for me. I fumbled around constantly, had trouble with focusing, and just had to keep guessing at the right settings. Fish out of water type of thing. Yes, more time and use would have likely helped, but I gave the Sony 18 months and never bonded, I felt that the Olympus was going to be more of the same.

So I sold off that equipment too, and just ordered a Nikon D750 with 24-120 f/4. With the current sale price, plus the included grip, I think I got a great deal (any new model will likely be nearly 2x what I paid). In handling the D750, it felt virtually identical to my prior Nikons with all of the buttons where they are supposed to be, and I am excited to get back to the Nikon system, this time with an FX body.

I am certainly not asking for people to agree or disagree with my story. It does point out that what is right for some is not for others.

 

[fmw]

I will add my $0.02 with my experience with mirrorless. I so wanted to like it, but...

After moving through several Nikon DX cameras, from the D90 to D7000 to D7100, I jumped over to a Sony A7ii about 18 months ago. The lure of the small full frame setup was the main attraction.

While I loved the image quality of the A7ii, using mainly the excellent Sony/Zeiss 55mm f/1.8, I simply could not get used to the camera's operation. Small things like the Auto ISO configuration to more important things like the focus point selection confused and annoyed me.

So back in March, I decided to go a new direction, still attracted to the small/light form factor, and moved to the Olympus micro 4/3 system (EM5ii, 12-40 f2.8, 25 f1.8, 40-150). Fantastic looking products, exceptional build quality, and super light and portable (in fact, maybe too small, but that's subjective).

But like the Sony, the handling just was not right for me. I fumbled around constantly, had trouble with focusing, and just had to keep guessing at the right settings. Fish out of water type of thing. Yes, more time and use would have likely helped, but I gave the Sony 18 months and never bonded, I felt that the Olympus was going to be more of the same.

So I sold off that equipment too, and just ordered a Nikon D750 with 24-120 f/4. With the current sale price, plus the included grip, I think I got a great deal (any new model will likely be nearly 2x what I paid). In handling the D750, it felt virtually identical to my prior Nikons with all of the buttons where they are supposed to be, and I am excited to get back to the Nikon system, this time with an FX body.

I am certainly not asking for people to agree or disagree with my story. It does point out that what is right for some is not for others.

There is always a readjustment period when one changes camera systems. I went with Fujifilm and the operation of the cameras takes me back to the film days. The cameras have an actual shutter speed dial and the lenses (at least most of them) have aperture rings. Instead of the PSAM business both the lenses and shutter dial have an auto position. You choose PSAM by enabling or disabling these auto positions. I have to admit that I'm very comfortable with the system having used it for 80% of my photographic life.

The cameras are made of magnesium and aluminum and the lenses are made of aluminum instead of plastic. The image quality is spectacular.

I have no experience with the Sony mirrorless models but my assumption would be that operation is similar to modern DSLR's. Perhaps not. Obviously, there is nothing wrong with Nikon DSLR's except for the size and weight which was beginning to bother me. I'm just too old for them. About 1/2 an hour ago I went behind the house to shoot images of freshly baled hay rolls in the field. I put a camera around my neck and put a telephoto zoom in my pocket. I didn't even notice them as I ventured out into the field. For me DSLR's are a part of my past. Different strokes as they say.

The D750 is a fine camera. It should work very well for you.