p.5 #1 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
I owned a Canon 10D and then 5D2 for over a decade, and thought I'd never let go of a DSLR. But I had a chance to get a refurb NEX-7, and I had to admin, a mirrorless SLR is a joy to use. DSLR is cumbersome, heavy, and intrusive, and excels at picture-taking. With the NEX, I can go to places where I cannot with DSLR, its quieter, and more compact, and does not intimidate people when I'd take their photos. It's a dream for street and people photography. Using some RF lenses (and CornerFix) I was able to print at 24x36, pin sharp, and all using manual focus.
When I go on a major photo outing, I take 5D2 and NEX, and use 5D2 most of the time. L glass, full frame, low noise - it's great. But when I hit the streets, go to a concert, or just hang out with friends, the NEX is perfect. I think for serious hobbyists at least, there is room for both, and that may be the future.
If/when a full-frame NEX comes out - I will have to think hard about a DSLR ... I am hedging my bets a bit - I do not buy any E-mount (or 4/3) lenses, aside from the one that came with the kit, and only get full-frame RF lenses with adapters. Regardless of which mirrorless sticks around, I can use the lenses with new adapters.
p.5 #2 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
Stpix wrote:
No one individual needs all 123 but collectively Canon users do use them all.
Canon users have that choice, Olympus m43 users don't.
That is why Olympus cannot claim to offer a full "system"
Olympus ain't Canon but it whips Fuji, Sony, Samsung, Pentax and Nikon ILC in terms of lens choices. Once you add Panasonic and Sigma lenses, M4/3 pulls away even further from the other ILC choices. With all that said, I can't imagine any of these ILC seriously competing with FF or APS-C for sports, landscape, fashion, studio, commercial products, etc. First of all, they're too small to balance big glass and have tiny awkward controls. Nevertheless they have carved out a new niche somewhere between point 'n shoot and rangefinders, perfect for intimate moments and snaps. I can't imagine using my GX1 to shoot landscapes, travel, products or concerts with (save for emergencies). However I did install a RRS L plate on my GX1, partly to make it easier to hang onto. Damn it is a tiny tiny camera...
p.5 #3 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
Gochugogi wrote:
With all that said, I can't imagine any of these ILC seriously competing with FF or APS-C for sports, landscape, fashion, studio, commercial products, etc. First of all, they're too small to balance big glass and have tiny awkward controls. Nevertheless they have carved out a new niche somewhere between point 'n shoot and rangefinders, perfect for intimate moments and snaps. I can't imagine using my GX1 to shoot landscapes, travel, products or concerts with (save for emergencies). However I did install a RRS L plate on my GX1, partly to make it easier to hang onto. Damn it is a tiny tiny camera......Show more →
Don't speak too quickly about the supposed problems with these cameras until you have used one.
1. They cannot do the same things with image quality that full frame DSLRs can do, but the APS-C models perform as well as APS-C DSLRs in many, though not all, ways. The 4/3 models do better than I would have anticipated.
2. They are not going to be ideal for typical sports shooting, nor for things like birds in flight and similar, mainly because the AF systems don't work like those on DSLRs, though for some other reasons, too.
3. I've never bought the "can't use a big lens on a small body" mantra.
4. If you are the sort of shooter who might use an APS-C body for certain types of tripod-based work, especially if you use liver view, they can work just as well as the DRLR for a number of subjects.
5. The "tiny, awkward controls" are not really the way you describe them - at least not on my X-E1.
6. For street and travel photography, these cameras can be better than a DSLR in many ways.
7. The image quality, at least from my X-E1 with the Fujinon lenses surprised me by how good it is.
I'm not saying that one type of camera is "better" than the other, though both can be very good and each has both strengths and weaknesses by comparison to the other.
p.5 #4 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
gdanmitchell wrote:
Don't speak to quickly about the supposed problems with these cameras until you have used one.
1. They cannot do the same things with image quality that full frame DSLRs can do, but the APS-C models perform as well as APS-C DSLRs in many, though not all, ways. The 4/3 models do better than I would have anticipated.
2. They are not going to be ideal for typical sports shooting, nor for things like birds in flight and similar, mainly because the AF systems don't work like those on DSLRs, though for some other reasons, too.
3. I've never bought the "can't use a big lens on a small body" mantra.
4. If you are the sort of shooter who might use an APS-C body for certain types of tripod-based work, especially if you use liver view, they can work just as well as the DRLR for a number of subjects.
5. The "tiny, awkward controls" are not really the way you describe them - at least not on my X-E1.
6. For street and travel photography, these cameras can be better than a DSLR in many ways.
7. The image quality, at least from my X-E1 with the Fujinon lenses surprised me by how good it is.
I'm not saying that one type of camera is "better" than the other, though both can be very good and each has both strengths and weaknesses by comparison to the other.
Hmm, indeed I can vocalize forte about the "supposed problems" as I've actually used various ILC models nearly daily for a couple years. They replaced my S90/iPhone for P&S duty and I haven't looked back. I've been the proud owner of a couple generations of M4/3 ILC and currently tote an E-P3 or GX1 24/7. Got a half dozen Oly/Panasonic primes, an accessory optical finder and EVF. I don't use LiveView unless on a tripod in dim light.
My fav commuter combo is the Oly E-P3/17mm f/1.8. I briefly owned a Panasonic 100-300 telezoom but it felt extremely awkward and front heavy on the 272g GX1 body so I returned it. On the other hand, the GX1 with 14mm f/2.5 feels nimble and balanced in the hand, fits in a jacket pocket and is ideal for dinner, drinks and social gatherings. To me the main charm of such cameras is they are small and thus lens themselves to intimate situations so I eventually learned to stick to fast wide and normal primes. You're welcome to chant that wee camera big lens mantra while squeezing that tiny grip with three fingers!
The two prior Olympus I owned and the current one have tiny buttons and dials as did my two Lumix. And, unlike my EOS, I often miss when poking those wee buttons. As before mentioned, ILC are ideal for intimate up close situations like happy hour, train rides and snapshots from the hip. Not so much for the other things I like to do. If I win Megabucks this summer, maybe I'll man-up with a Fuji ILC system. The more the merrier!
p.5 #5 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
Gochugogi wrote:
... is ideal for dinner, drinks and social gatherings.
The best camera for that sort of informal thing is probably your smart phone camera, or perhaps an inexpensive P&S.
I'm on the road at the moment, but later perhaps I'll share some examples of non "dinner, drinks, and social situations" photographs from the X-E1 that have convinced me that this camera is useful for more than the happy hour shooting you describe. (It still won't replace my DSLR... for most things.)
Regarding small buttons and dials, I cannot speak for the specific cameras you selected. The controls on the X-E1 that I use remind me a great deal of those on classic rangefinder cameras such as those used for a wide range of photography including some very serious work back in the day. The positions of these controls are not always the same as on my full frame DSLR, and that was an issue for me until I learned to develop instincts for the different interface. I suppose if you have unusually large hands...
For a variety of reasons, I am more likely to shoot primes, or even a single prime, on the X-E1 than on my DSLR - perhaps because when the goal is to keep things small and light, the available primes tend to fit in better with that approach. On the other hand, Fuji has a very fine 18-55 zoom
p.5 #6 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
gdanmitchell wrote:
The best camera for that sort of informal thing is probably your smart phone camera, or perhaps an inexpensive P&S.
Dan
Unless of course you care about the images you are taking, and don't mind bringing something slightly larger. Cell phone cameras are terrible in low light. As are most inexpensive P&S cameras. (some of the more expensive ones are pretty good though, like the Sony RX100). Nothing like "Blast'o'Flash" to kill a good photo.
p.5 #7 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
I recently rented and EM-5 to compare head-to-head with my 5DII. I was absolutely astonished at how well that small sensor held up in comparison. Moreover, I am in the camp of those who are a little put off by Canon's recent pricing. I will waiting another generation of sensors, but I wold like nothing more than a small compact camera that uses top-notch lenses , which can also be had for a reasonable price.
p.5 #8 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
galenapass wrote:
I recently rented and EM-5 to compare head-to-head with my 5DII. I was absolutely astonished at how well that small sensor held up in comparison. Moreover, I am in the camp of those who are a little put off by Canon's recent pricing. I will waiting another generation of sensors, but I wold like nothing more than a small compact camera that uses top-notch lenses , which can also be had for a reasonable price.
Agreed. To me the most astonishing thing about the EM-5 is the speed and accuracy of its contrast-detect AF, including low-light situations where both the 5DM3 and D800's phase-detect take a few seconds to lock where the EM-5 is nearly instant. And no AF tune necessary
p.5 #9 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
lucas lumiere wrote:
Unless of course you care about the images you are taking, and don't mind bringing something slightly larger. Cell phone cameras are terrible in low light. As are most inexpensive P&S cameras. (some of the more expensive ones are pretty good though, like the Sony RX100). Nothing like "Blast'o'Flash" to kill a good photo.
Read the rest of the post I replied to - doesn't sound like particularly serious photography.
p.5 #10 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
It may not be "serious" photography. But that doesn't mean that the images aren't important. Some people cherish these types of moments and they might want something better than garbage cell phone snaps.
p.5 #11 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
lucas lumiere wrote:
It may not be "serious" photography. But that doesn't mean that the images aren't important. Some people cherish these types of moments and they might want something better than garbage cell phone snaps.
Then a small P&S of good quality - say something in the S95 lineage - would work quite well. I have some friends who shoot MF and LF landscape photography who documented their work in a book of their photographs and the photos of them at work were made with such cameras.
You don't need an interchangeable lens camera to shoot you and your buddies over drinks and dinner. ;-)
p.5 #13 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
Many, in this forum in particular, who speak out against smaller format cameras most likely have not used one, or at least one like the EM-5. For anyone who "believes" they have a notion of how superior the DSLR is to mirrorless, I would encourage them to try one out at lensrentals.com - if for nothing else just to have a little fun. Obviously, mirrorless is not going to be threatening the equipment used for sports photography any time soon, but for many venues it will do quite well.
What excites me is that the EM-5 sensor is 2X smaller than full frame, with great performance. I am looking forward to carrying an "EM-6" with a 300mm lens giving me a 600mm FOV equivalent for bird photography. By the way - stabilization is built into the camera body! I could see many bird photographers "flocking" to mirrorless for lighter and more portable alternatives to the much higher cost and weight of the DSLR alternative. We are not there yet, but....someday.
p.5 #14 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
gdanmitchell wrote:
Then a small P&S of good quality - say something in the S95 lineage - would work quite well. I have some friends who shoot MF and LF landscape photography who documented their work in a book of their photographs and the photos of them at work were made with such cameras.
You don't need an interchangeable lens camera to shoot you and your buddies over drinks and dinner. ;-)
Dan
Dan, I carry a G12 for just those reasons, easy, good IQ, there's nothing better then having still or a video of the goings-on, the silliness, and or treasured moments shared. The 'S' series are smallish, just right for a shirt pocket, perfect light weight carry-anywhere...and IQ is like the G series!
p.5 #16 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
What makes the Olympus/panny systems viable choices in my book at the fast primes. The pan 25 1.4 doesn't give you the DOF control of a full frame, but certainly gives you enough to work with in most situations.
As a family/travel, general purpose Camera it can't be beaten right now in my book.
If you're the type that wants to shoot landscapes, nature, or set up a full lighting system for studio work then of course a full frame is the way to go.
The first market is a hell of a lot bigger than the second. Fortunately at the moment, for Canon/Nikon, the perception right now is that a good camera is an SLR.
I'd also encourage anyone who hasn't tried one to give an OMD, possibly with the landscape grip on a go, pairing it with a fast prime. It's a hell of a lot of fun and the results will likely surprise you.
p.5 #17 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
Richie S wrote:
If you're the type that wants to shoot landscapes, nature, or set up a full lighting system for studio work then of course a full frame is the way to go.
I can understand full frame for landscapes (and maybe nature??) but please explain why a full lighting system in studio cries out for a full frame DSLR? I see no reason why the OM-D, for example, could not handle that at almost par to a comparable full frame 5D2.
p.5 #18 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
gdanmitchell wrote:
Then a small P&S of good quality - say something in the S95 lineage - would work quite well. I have some friends who shoot MF and LF landscape photography who documented their work in a book of their photographs and the photos of them at work were made with such cameras.
You don't need an interchangeable lens camera to shoot you and your buddies over drinks and dinner. ;-)
Dan
I think you miss the point for why I and others use ILC. It's not about need or assigning value to off the hip street or casino shots. I actually enjoy taking pictures and using a wide variety of gear. It's as much about the process or journey as it is about the end result, i.e., a satisfying image. Probably few of you have visited my website or seen my galleries. But no images of people actually easting or drinking. When I go out to dinner, drinks, casino, shopping, etc., I'm always looking for sense of place images with closeups of condensation on a brew, details of woodwork, interplay of shadows, signage, etc. I often do carry my 5D2 but sometimes you need to travel light and having a wee ILC is the next best thing to my DSLR. Oddly, I have to be a lot more mindful of shutter speed and technique with these tiny cameras as they're a lot harder to hold steady.
Dinner & drinks at Main Street Station Casino • E-P3/17mm f/1.8
p.5 #19 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
I love the look, and I'm sure I'd love the pictures too, of the fujifilm system. But, I've got a dslr, and didn't want to get sucked into another system. I know myself, I won't stop with one or two lenses. So I got the G1X. Yeah might not be that fast, but it's good enough for me, and I can use some of my current gear with it. There is nothing that comes close to it in compactness with such a large sensor, zoom range and price IMHO.
p.5 #20 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs?
Edward Castro wrote:
I love the look, and I'm sure I'd love the pictures too, of the fujifilm system. But, I've got a dslr, and didn't want to get sucked into another system. I know myself, I won't stop with one or two lenses. So I got the G1X. Yeah might not be that fast, but it's good enough for me, and I can use some of my current gear with it. There is nothing that comes close to it in compactness with such a large sensor, zoom range and price IMHO.
The GX1 is a great camera but believe me its wee size won't stop you from buying lots of lenses! It's currently on closeout--new model with Wi-Fi, GPS and same 16MP sensor must be near--and is going for only two bills at Adorama. Last year it was $700...
