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.
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.
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
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.........
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.
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.
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.