DSLR vs. Mirrorless Cameras: Which Is Better for You? (Archive)

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

bjornlo

Distinguished
Jun 16, 2008
12
0
18,560
@Matuka,
you should go try the Canon 60D in video before you buy it. Use the AF on moving things since few bother taking video of something standing still, a photo would suffice.

If you can barely afford the 60d, then buy a cheaper camera so that you can buy more lenses.
I am a former Canon shooter (currently shoot mostly Nikon and a little Olympus). I also shot Minolta before they were bought out by Sony. Every system has its strengths and minuses. My current favorite is Nikon but that is because it suits my needs for low light performance and fast focus in sports, and so on. I would not buy Nikon (or Canon) if I was shooting 50% video.

A little qualification so that the Nikon/Canon fanboys don't flame me too bad. Nikon and Canon each account for around 40% of camera sales. If you look only at those most knowledgeable camera purchasers (the camera Pros) then that market share. With that huge a market share the “big two” get a ton of support, lots and lots of upgrade options, a lens for every type of activity and so on. Also it is very important to remember that when you buy a DSLR (or mirrorless equivalent) you are not really buying a camera rather you are buying in to a system. The lenses matter more then the body. No matter how nice a body, if you are in to shooting sports then the lack of a suitable “sports lens” will really limit any other body. Consider the excellent semi-pro bodies from Pentax and Sony (a77 and k5IIs) both more or less match most of the capabilities of the competing Nikon and Canon bodies (d7100 and 7d) but sports shooters don't buy them. All four of the bodies are sealed, nice sensors, etc. It can be argued (and every model has a fan or three always willing to fight for their brand) that a Xyop camera is better in someway then Lrex camera. But this misses the point that unless both systems meet your needs now and in your future planned usage then the argument is pointless.

So what is the problem with Canon and Nikon that I won't recommend them for video? It is not their system. They have absolutely the best two systems around. The problem is your intended use hits a weak point with both of them (and Pentax too). That is video AF speed. Professionals use Nikon and Canon DSLRs to make movies and TV shows (for example House, Dexter and others). But the way they use their cameras probably does not match yours. For openers they invest in very high quality lenses. They use fancy steady-cam rigs. They use only manual focus. Most end users, even a few video professionals, need fast video auto focus. Most mirrorless cameras are much faster at video autofocus. The very best DSLR at casual video (auto-focus used) is the Canon 70D but it just plain sucks even if you compared it to much older mirrorless tech.

I strongly recommend the Panasonic GH2 or GH1. Both would have to be bought used as the current GH3 model is well outside of your budget. The reason is that it is much better at video. These are the best video-still image hybrid cameras. Also good is the Sony lineup. The a57, for example, can be had quite inexpensively and is very capable. But it trades away a little video performance for better still image performance.

Remember to consider the other things you will need. A decent tripod. (for video I suggest an oil-damped 3-way (aka tilt and pan). Oben is a good brand for a good price. There are better but they cost several times as much. A tripod is not something you should put off. Seriously nothing will help your end-results more. If you are looking at more action or environmental video then consider getting a decent ballhead instead. Again don't skimp. Get both a head and tripod which are rated well above what your gear weighs. In general the higher the weight rating the more stable. Also as you grow and add lenses you can keep your tripod longer. For still images / photos I find a tilt and pan very frustrating and only ever use a ballhead but it is a little too easy to lose axis control when doing videos. So in the end you will have two tripods.
Also leave budget for a couple of memory cards of a fairly large capacity (video takes a lot of room). I prefer Sandisk extreme (very fast speed rating).

Buy a cleaning kit plus a few decent extra cloths and a protective bag. I use mainly Lowe Pro (excellent selection, many types, good quality for a good price) but my favorite is my ThinkTank “Retrospective”. Yes you will end up with more then 1 camera bag. I have a snout bag for casual city walks, sling bags, backpacks, and shoulder bags. No need to explain what they are for you'll figure it out when you need them and shouldn't try to buy everything at once.

Get a good circular polarization filter.

Other resources:
Dpreview.com (largest photography review site)
dxomark.com (the defacto standard for evaluating sensor performance)

Do not listen to anyone who owns their first camera and is advocating you buy the same. They do not have the experience to give you good advice and are in fact just looking for you to validate their purchase by buying the same.

Do not listen to anyone who can't conceive of anyone buying anything but their favorite. These 'defenders of the brand' (often referred to as fanboys) do not have your interests in heart. They are just looking to add one more soul to the ranks of the faithful.

Finally remember your usage is not my usage. Your hands are not exactly as big or small as mine. Your idea of something heavy does not match mine either. You should try a few before you make the leap and buy what is best for you.

Some popular and safe places to buy would include KEH, Adorama, B&H Camera, Amazon.
 

bjornlo

Distinguished
Jun 16, 2008
12
0
18,560
... sure to do wish we could edit a post here...

A little qualification so that the Nikon/Canon fanboys don't flame me too bad. Nikon and Canon each account for around 40% of camera sales. If you look only at those most knowledgeable camera purchasers (the camera Pros) then that market share.

should have been:

A little qualification so that the Nikon/Canon fanboys don't flame me too bad. Nikon and Canon each account for around 40% of camera sales. If you look only at those most knowledgeable camera purchasers (the camera Pros) then that market share rises to very close to 100%.

 

gemini7507

Honorable
Nov 8, 2013
1
0
10,510
I purchased the Sony NEX6 mirrorless camera and I find a significant difference in the image quality between DSLR and it. I also find that the stablisation is pretty poor, many of the photos are blurry despite using the anti-motion modes. Sports mode is way too slow for actually taking clear sports shots! I'm not a technical photographer but I must say I've been very disappointed and wish I had bought the DSLR. The lightness and size of the camera is pointless if the images are so poor, particualrly given the price was reasonably comparable
 

Vermil

Distinguished
Jul 22, 2009
47
0
18,580
I think the article failed to mention one, IMO, big difference: The readiness state and battery comfort. A DSLR can be turned ON, lens cap off, and then you can leave it like that, indefinitely. And at any time you can lift the camera and look through the viewfinder. At any time you can immediately take a picture. That's a lot of user friendliness.
The situation is quite different for mirrorless. That problem is convoluted by two additional things. The more the sensor works, the noisier the picture will be when you take it. And if you walk around without lens cap, the sensors color filter may become detoriated. In the DSLR, the sensor is protected. It's also better protected against dust and spatters during lens changes.
 

Vermil

Distinguished
Jul 22, 2009
47
0
18,580
At Janet_X_X_X:
The good point of that camera is hardly the price. On the contrary, it's an expensive choice for what you get in terms of a photo-machine.
The good point is that it's lightweight and compact, and so are the lenses. In that regard it's very nice.
 

Vermil

Distinguished
Jul 22, 2009
47
0
18,580
Regarding the comments on image stabilization, I must agree with those who say that in-the-lens as Nikon and Canon employ, is noticably better. However, in-house has one advantage. It can be used for all lenses. And thus also for fast lenses, while there are technical problems to make image stabilisation for lenses with large apertures.
 

Cwby

Estimable
Mar 12, 2014
1
0
4,510
Actually - I'll make mine simple and sweet.The graphics at the end of this article (big blue box) states the Canon Rebel EOS is 16MP.I personally like my information to be CORRECT in an article - ESPECIALLY when such an important editorial point is being made about a product.I commend the author on basic information (base-guts expected differences between DSLR and mirrorless), but .... come on guys, for all the time spent writing the article and to NOT fact check this basic information?<quote from Canon website>Type High-sensitivity, high-resolution, large single-plate CMOS sensorPixels Effective pixels: Approx. 18.0 megapixelsTotal Pixels Total pixels: Approx. 18.70 megapixels
 

perrobravo

Estimable
Mar 16, 2014
1
0
4,510
Image quality given that the sensor size is the same for both -> MirrorlessWhy? Very simple. If we remove the pentaprism (or pentamirror) the lens gets closer to the sensor and the lenses can be in the order of 0.7f. Not to mention the extra operture gained for wide angle since, again, sensor and lens are closer
 

mostro

Estimable
Apr 9, 2014
1
0
4,510
Image quality given that the sensor size is the same for both -> MirrorlessWhy? Very simple. If we remove the pentaprism (or pentamirror) the lens gets closer to the sensor and the lenses can be in the order of 0.7f. Not to mention the extra operture gained for wide angle since, again, sensor and lens are closer

That is, of course, if you can compare lens build quality and electronics of the camera, which makes a bigger difference than the distance from lens to sensor. I am not saying that the future is not for mirrorless. I certainly think that they are here for staying but it still has problems of its own, namely problem focusing on low light situations, battery consumption since an EVF is needed. For action sports shooting I dont see a mirrorless being used in the near future, say 10 years.
 

CNoir

Estimable
Dec 31, 2014
1
0
4,510
A lot of fun in mirrorless cameras is almost instantaneously killed by the over-electronic computerized concepts they have. Everywhere firmware sits in between and at the end, this 'all fly by wire' becomes far too unreliable for a serious, pro-user. Not to mention the battery-drain issues. I'm having a few Fuji X-series and Nikon DSLR gear, I prefer the last one still in almost every situation. Even more, I start thinking my early step into this mirrorless adventure has been a serious mistake, believing all those overhyping blogs and press articles, I'd recommend any serious photographer to stay away from this very much 'under development' market niche for quite some time.
 

mlstrickland

Estimable
Nov 26, 2015
1
0
4,510
I guess I am a purest. I LIKE the weight of my D5300 and Tamron 16-300. I think the weight helps with the image stabilization. Although not a pro I have had some extraordinary results with this combo that I probably could not have done with a mirrorless. I recently added a Tamron 1.4x converter and got some excellent sports shots from the grandstand but yes in full sunlight.

As a serious hobby photographer the Tamron lens give me the ability to instantly frame just about any shot with a single lens. This level of zoom and a 24MP camera can handle just about anything for me.

If the weight bothers you look at one of the shoulder straps like the Black Rapid.

Things change but new is not always better but old is not either. Probably 80% of a good photograph comes from the eye of the photographer. If you can't see the art in the image BEFORE you look through the viewfinder or screen then the equipment does not really add much to the final product.
 

Kevink1

Commendable
May 7, 2016
1
0
1,510
Good article, precise and concise.

Mirrorless will replace DSLR when and if

1)electric viewfinder (or preview screen) functions as well as optical view finder under all lighting condition, that takes time but it's coming soon.

2)few people own or care about using the old lenses, this may take a few more generations.
 

lesliedellow

Distinguished
Nov 30, 2011
1
0
18,510
For me, the advantage of a mirrorless camera would be not having to haul around the dead weight of a DSLR and its equally heavy lenses. The only mirrorless cameras which seem likely to hang on to that advantage are the micro four thirds cameras, but the price they pay for their light weight, and compact size is, of course, a sensor one quarter the size of that in a full frame camera.
 

JohnStefanko

Prominent
Mar 5, 2017
1
0
510
Article date is February 2017, but it recommends Samsung cameras. Samsung stopped selling cameras some time ago. Comments are from 2013. who are you trying to scam, Tom?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS