Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Mirrorless, Interchangeable Lens Camera Advice?
jehan60188 writes "I want a camera that's better than my phone, but I don't have the technical knowledge to fully appreciate a DSLR. I think the MILC style will be a happy compromise, but I'm concerned that it might be all 'marketing' and no 'technology.' I don't have a lot of demands, but I do like taking macro shots of things from time to time. Also, my sister is going to China in a few months, so a telephoto lens would probably be good for sight seeing (since I could employ optical zoom instead of the imaginary 'digital zoom')."
Get a Lumix from Panasonic, to be specific, get the DMC-LX5. Outstanding picture quality and if you need to shoot a video, it's not too bad too. The hardware flip to change from different resolutions is quite nice and the 16:9 format is just perfect for printout once back home.
You don't have the full technical knowledge to fully appreciate a DSLR?
Learn it.
Trust me, the basics are a lot easier than you think. The rest is experimentation, play and frankly, photography.
You'll thank me in the long run when you're not stuck with a million lenses for a camera you've outgrown.
I am a professional so I am a little biased here....I say get a DSLR. The mirrorless stuff is a neat idea but slow and lacks in quality compared to a traditional DSLR. All low end DSLR's have dummy modes that work exactly the same as a mirrorless....so you don't really have to have technical knowledge. Trust me on this, I have many family members and friends who bought low end DSLR's and they use them just like they used there compact NON DSLR's.
With a SLR you will get better quality (well most of the time), more control and usually a wider range of lenses.
Mirrorless basically gets you a smaller camera
I'm sure there are excellent 'mirrorless' cameras too, but a dSLR doesn't require any great technical expertise. Just pick up one of the entry-level Nikon or Canon models (which are pretty small, and typically come as kits with versatile standard zooms). You can start off shooting in program mode with the kit zoom, which is no more difficult than using a phone camera. If you choose, you can add dedicated macro and telephoto (or longer zoom) lenses later.
It really has to do with the size of the sensor. The bigger the sensor the better the picture is going to be. The MILC cameras you are referring to have almost the same sensor size as DSLR's and a way way bigger sensor then in your mobile phone. See the article below for more information:
Why your cameras sensor size matters
so you don't have the knowledge to appreciate a dslr, yet you're willing to buy a similarly expensive mirrorless camera with multiple lenses?
~~~ Paf. Le chien.
You are posting on a technical site, say you are very interested in camera technology, but say you don't understand DSLR? I suggest a good DSLR tutorial rather than this feeble attempt at a slashvertisement.
I wont own a Sony because I have personal issues against the entire brand, but the NEX5 NEX7 cameras are awesome at photos and video. The manual controls are easy to use, and the auto settings produce great photos. The only down side to the camera is that it feels like a cell phone that somebody turned into a camera. The sensor is world class tho, and there are adapters to mount old range finder glass onto it. The panasonic micro four thrids cameras are all great. The GX1 with the pancake zoom lens could be really appealing to you. You would also be happy with the GF3 if you want more auto features and features in general, and maybe the G3 if a more traditional dslr inspired design fits your hands better.
You want www.dpreview.com
"The best camera is the one you have with you" is a well known saying in photography. I have collected, and had the experience to work with, over the years, numerous cameras, lenses and videocams. Here are some of my learned truths:
1) Form factor matters - if you don't have the camera, you won't use it. My best pictures are from my DSLR with a big bounce-flash+diffuser and a nifty-fifty [1] prime lens. For close-ups and portrait style, this camera is really hard to beat... however, I almost never have this camera (or it's bukly flash) with me. I've resorted to taking some pretty decent pictures with my wife's point-n-shoot , and surprisingly my iPhone.
2) Video and Still pictures are two separate competencies. My best videos were with the aforementioned point and shoot, the next best with the iPhone. I almost never take video with the bulky DSLR, and when I do, the lack of auto-focus on video makes it difficult to do properly.
3) I've never tried the EVIL/MILC, but they seem like a great idea... just terribly expensive.
My recommendation would be to have several camera types (phone, P&S, DSLR) so that you can have availability and quality. the EVIL/MILC will never beat the bounce-flash equipped DSLR and prime lens (which would pale in comparison to a properly setup studio and multi-flash setup - but I can't afford that). In my world, the MILC would replace the point-and-shoot, and I'd still take the DSLR wherever I would normally take it (parties and events), but it'd be awesome to have almost-DSLR quality on my hikes. Recently I've been very impressed by my new iPhone4S so it might replace the P&S completely.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
If you can find one, get the NEX7, and pick a E mount lens that best suits your needs. Then, get an L to E adapter, and you can use 100's of Leicia L mount lenses. Most will only work in manual focus mode, but the peaking display makes focusing easy and accurate.
I just got an Alpha77, which is probably not what you are looking for. I love it, though, and the NEX7 shares a lot of the same technology and features.
They all have Full Auto settings....so you can start right off using it without 'technical knowledge'.
But over time, you will have the option to play with the settings and learn the tech behind the DSLR and then be able to use one to the fullest extent.
Again, they all have full auto...do that and start experimenting and learn more about photography...make it a learning investment.
Also...more lens options with DSLR and it did sound like that was something he was interested in.
I'm not suggesting you go overboard like I'm saving to do...I'm looking to get a Canon 5D Mark II (unless the Mark III comes out soon and is better). But the lower level Canon DSLR's are all quite nice and a good place to start. I want the 5D so I can have the high end HD video too...wanting to try to shoot pro level stuff. I live in New Orleans, and there is work for people with this camera...so, figure after awhile I can earn some $$ enough to justify such an expense.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
The biggest issue I have with the mirror less / micro four-third camera families is with ergonomics. These cameras are:
1. Too big to put in your pocket/purse/etc. so you don't carry them around as much as a point-n-shoot or a cell phone.
2. Too small to hold for a good posture to take pictures (one hand under the lens) yet the weight dictates some sort of two-hands operation.
3. Additionally, the "advanced" controls are buried deep under layers of menus, make them less usable than some of the more advanced point-n-shoot (like the Canon S100)
4. Lenses are not interchangeable with SLRs, so there is no upgrade path for those investments.
I would recommend you look at an entry-level DSLR (since the price points are close). Started out with the "green square" (automatic) modes, then learn to shoot in "P" (programmed) mode, adjusting ISO and compensations. Then move on to Av / Tv / M modes.
What you learn using a DLSR will be applicable to all cameras, and your investments in lenses won't be wasted.
Don't get me wrong, I think the mirror-less stuff is great, but the current crop of cameras leave too much out.
You know...I don't know where this complaint comes from.
It wasn't THAT long ago..when pretty much all we had were 33mm film cameras, and no one bitched about carrying a SLR camera and a lens (or maybe two).
Growing up, that's ALL we had.....hell as a kid, I always was asking my Dad to be the one to carry the family camera...finally one year when I was like 19 or so, on a cruise they got me my own..a Nikon FA blackbody..I was thrilled.
That thing lasted through college and a LOT of drunken parties. Those party shots are still with us today.....(hoping someone in there runs for senator so I can remind him of the photos, and get a cushy govt job).
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I just bought the E-PM1. I like it. It's smaller and easier to carry than the bulky DSLR's but still has good depth of controls, fast auto focus and shutter. Image quality is not as good as the current generation of DSLR's but it's as good as most of these proponents photographs proving DSLR's are the best that were taken with previous generation of DSLR's for what that's worth.
Just keep in mind Olympus is currently on life support and it's not known at this time if it will survive or the camera division will be sold off to someone and what they would do with the product line and the 4/3 standard. The lenses at least are compatible with Panasonic should that happen...
I hate to break it to you but the FULL AUTO ZOMG setting will make your pictures look just as horrible as a cell phone.
Full auto is no substitute for knowing how to take photo and the OP is right for wanting a smaller compact camera that is actually designed to do the work for them.
Let me also dissuade you from the notion that there is money to be made for someone who has just picked up a 5D MkII and intends on holding down the shutter button until the money starts rolling in. Professional photographers have a name for people like that, and the nicest one is sucker. Simply having an expensive camera won't make you a good photographer. You may turn out shots that get you endless ego fellatio on facebook or flickr, but that doesn't make you money. What makes you money in photography is an excellent grasp of the technical aspects of the craft, and a good solid grounding in the foundation of visual arts. Color theory, composition, and lighting and shadow are the places to start, then its practice practice practice until you can consistently turn out well composed shots with good lighting and balanced colors. All the while, you're constantly working the business end, looking for opportunities, networking in many different industries, advertising, selling yourself, maintaining relationships with old clients, pounding the pavement for new clients, and making sure more dollars roll in than out. Once you get to that level, you're going to see why professionals cringe and roll their eyes when they read posts like yours.
If the OP reads this, and you want to burn DSLR money, look in to the Fuji X100. It has classic camera styling with amazing optics, an excellent sensor, and a very unique processing pipeline that will give your photos a very memorable look. The price is nearly $1000, but there is a reason a lot of pro photographers use this as their walk around.
I disagree. Buy the best lens you can afford and buy the lowest end body that will fit it. Expensive bodies are overkill for a novice but give them plenty of opportunity to learn and grow into the more advanced features. Bodies change and become obsolete "quickly", lenses are "forever".
What doesn't kill you only delays the inevitable
So, I was very recently in this scenario. I gave up and bought a Canon T3i. I don't think the mirrorless cameras have really matured enough yet, outside of /maybe/ the Sony NEX series. But then you're dealing with Sony. To be fair, I have some brand loyalty to Canon because (a) they have a solid service department and (b) have been decent about the amazing side-loading firmware that the folks over at CHDK and MagicLantern have put together. If you just want DSLR-ish features (and then some) of long exposures, motion detection, timelapse, and HDR auto-bracketing, then look at a CHDK-supported, high-end Canon point-and-shoot.
The huge benefit that MILCs and DSLRs have is an almost 10x larger sensor space (and the lenses required to deal with that). This gives you insanely better shots at a much wider range of light settings, as you need less light to enter to develop a good picture.
MILCs are also much, much smaller than their DSLR cousins. This is good and bad. The lenses (especially telephotos) are still going to be weighty and unbalance a smaller camera, but you could conceivably pop it off and pocket the body, which is handy for travel.
I lost my patience, and just bought a not-insane DSLR. For 830 I got the T3i, a 18-55mm lens and a 75-300mm telephoto. I love it, but I'd love something even more portable more. I actually just came across this blog post the other day, which gets far geekier than I am on the future of MILC-likes: stuckincustoms.com/2012/01/04/dslrs-are-a-dying-breed-3rd-gen-cameras-are-the-future/
(And yes, I've already rooted it.)
Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
While it's true that micro fourthirds and fourthirds (used on their consumer DSLRs, since higher end ones would be full frame) use the same sized sensor, and Sony's e-mount cameras also use an APS-C sensor similar in size to their consumer DSLRs, the optics are different, so you're not going to get the same properties out of them in terms of depth of field, for example.
This is a pretty good illustration:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sensor_sizes_overlaid_inside.svg
Cellphone sensors are smaller than anything on this chart, Point & Shoot cameras are the 1/2.5" to 1/1.6" sizes (typically closer to 1/2.5" these days), and the rest should be obvious. You only hit full frame on prosumer cameras, like the Canon 5D series or the Leica M9 (and others from Sony, Nikon, etc) nothing below that.
Seriously. Unless you have a very special need, it's mostly geek bling. Same with a good SLR.
Go with a compact superzoom (preferred, you'll carry it everywhere), or a regular superzoom if you have the patience to carry a bulkier camera. I've had probably a dozen cameras over the last 8 years. I am an engineer who has to evaluate buildings, so I'm outdoors, shooting stuff on roofs and up in attics, down in subgrade basement/steam tunnels. Good lighting, crappy lighting, close to stuff, far from stuff. I've got a Lumix ZS5 and a ZS7. I put a carabiner on the wrist-strap ring and clip it to my side belt loop. I get surprisingly good pictures - not perfect, but I never miss a shot.
FWIW, I also own a D3 and about $10k worth of glass, from a 14/f2.8 up to 300/F2.8. It takes fucking awesome pictures, and I get stuff that's just darned near impossible to do with almost any other camera. You know what I take on vacation? Yup - the ZS5. I don't want multiple pieces and I don't want a camera bag.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
I hate to break it to you but the FULL AUTO ZOMG setting will make your pictures look just as horrible as a cell phone.
I disagree, ...strongly
DSLR has a larger sensor and gets in more light. This will let you take pictures of things you simply can't take pictures of with a cell phone camera:
Things moving faster than a snail
Things not in a perfectly lit room
For taking pictures at dawn/dusk, to action shots of your kids&friends just playing around, simply: size of the sensor, decent optics will tear apart your cellphone.
There's pretty much no way that a decent DSLR on full auto won't beat the tar out of cell-phone photos, or even a reasonable point and shoot. Just the extra speed and accuracy of the phase auto-focus systems and the advantage of not having a dinky 1.75um pixel pitch in the sensor will give you cleaner photos, to say nothing of having a decent lens on there. The companies put a bunch of work into those automatic systems and they generally are fairly good. Good enough to charge for? Likely not. As good as a pro who knows what she's/he's doing? Certainly not. But still decent enough for a hobbyist and clearly better than anything someone with an iphone will capture.
Your second point is dead on. Lack of knowledge = unmemorable photos. That's fine if you just want to document the bird you saw or the view from the top of the hike you took, but it won't take you anywhere if you want to enter a field already filled to the brim with professionals and one hundred times as many people who think they are professionals because they bought a nice camera.
In the days of film photography I'd have agreed with you.
These days the sensor matters a lot. I agree entirely you still benefit from an excellent lens, and you're right on the longevity of lenses, but the "lowest end body" is too low end. Come in above the minimum bar and get a good sized sensor that can actually use all that light your excellent lens is giving to it.
Some of us like a large shutter speed range, good ISO mix and fast autofocus too, but that's a separate discussion.
Ignore the people telling you to get a DSLR because it has better picture quality.
There are a lot of factors that determine the quality of your images, but the most substantial is sensor size. The sort of DSLRs that you would buy (that is, the ones under $2000) use APS-C sized sensors.
Guess what the Sony NEX-5N (a MILC) uses? An APS-C sensor. And it's arguably the best APS-C sized sensor on the market.
The NEX-5N takes pictures that rival any APS-C DSLR, and it does so for a considerably lower price than many DSLRs.
There are still a lot of good reasons to buy an APS-C DSLR over the NEX-5N:
custom quick menu. Still, DSLRs typically have more buttons which means easier access to settings quickly.
And there are a lot of good reasons to buy an NEX-5N over an APS-C DSLR:
I love my NEX-5N. It is not perfect for everyone, or for every purpose. But if you aren't interested in buying a ton of lenses, you don't like using a viewfinder, and you prefer a compact camera without crappy picture quality, the 5N is a really good choice.
Can anyone recommend a good place (website / book) to learn more?
Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson. Best photography book I ever invested in.
Scott Kelby has a number of books that I've found very helpful on the specifics, too.