gwilliams6

Burkphoto you are a wonderful resource of knowledge ,and I always enjoy and appreciate your well though out posts. As a longtime Pro DSLR user (four decades) I switched to Sony mirrorless cameras, as some other top pros ,as well as many interested amateurs are doing.

I can say that with two cameras in particular, the Sony A9 and Sony A7R3 releases ,now there are no more real arguments that mirrorless can't handle any professional demands in terms of speed (20fps for A9), rolling shutter (A9s new exclusive sensor), image quality (the A7R2 and A7R3s 42+ megapixel back-illuminated sensor) , controls (A9 and A7R3 joysticks and control wheels and custom button functions), silent shutters (20fps A9, 10fps A7R3), mechanical shutter speed for high-megapixel capture (10fps A7R3), dual card slots (both A9 and A7R3), accurate and fast auto focus AF-C and Eye-AF (both A9 and A7R3), lens selection (now over 40 E-mount lenses available from Sony and Sigma), Pro support (Sony's expanding Worldwide Pro support network), video capture (top 4k capture from all levels of Sony mirrorless cameras, amateur to pro).

Not even mentioning great cameras from Panasonic, Olympus, Pentax and Fuji.

Cameras are just tools, but better innovative tools help us to create and expand our vision.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

Thank you.

reverand

Mirrorless cameras and DSLR's are comparable. Neither one is better than the other. The choice is going to depend on what features you need. Some have talked about the possibility of blur from the mirror moving, but I've never had any problems, . . . and that includes years of taking pictures on film with old SLR's, Nikon F, Nikon F2, all with mirrors. One of the clear advantages of the mirrorless cameras is that they're lighter, except once you add a top quality lens, the difference between that camera and a DSLR with a comparable lens isn't all that great.

Think also in terms of what "mode" you might be using. For instance, Nikon has a mode called "Vivid" that punches up the colors (rather like old Ektachrome film). Sony's mirrorless cameras have a different color palette, which you might prefer, but which, to me, doesn't look as good as Nikon's "Vivid." Having said that, I'll add that you can punch up the colors in post-processing.

Also, since the mirrorless cameras have an electronic viewfinder rather than a pentaprism, they should use up the battery faster than a DSLR, although I've been told that the latest mirrorless Sonys have much improved battery life. Again, not that much of a problem: put an extra battery in your pocket.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Not sure where you read it, or how old that information was, but it's simply not true.

jeffhacker Loc: Dallas, Texas

Ive used a Nikon D500 DSLR and an Olympus OM-D- EM5 MarkII with equivalent lenses, and think the Olympus generally takes as good pictures as my Nikon. The only difference that bothers me is that the electronic viewfinder is a bit slow for my tastes so I prefer the DSLR. But I think it is pretty subjective.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Interesting.
I thought it was the lens and sensor/software that form the image we see.
Not a mirror.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

It has never been, or ever will be, about the equipment (TO A POINT). Just like EVERYTHING else in one's profession, it's about the person operating the tool, NOT THE TOOL DUDE. Never has, never will be.

hookedupin2005 Loc: Northwestern New Mexico

I agree... Mirrorless cameras are "coming into their own", but, as it has been said before, it all boils down to the person behind the camera

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

Useless debate, just like the one of rangefinder vs SLR.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Thanks. That's a great summary of current Sony gear.

I think the main resistance to mirrorless gear is current lens ownership. Photographers, especially Nikon users, have been reluctant to switch to something new because they have a locker full of expensive glass. (Unfortunately, as I learned, Nikon lenses adapt LEAST well to other brands of mirrorless cameras, and for professional use, the Nikon 1 is, well, not very appealing.)

Canon EF lenses, on the other hand, adapt particularly well to Sony and Micro 4/3 (Olympus and Panasonic) cameras. By well, I mean that you can get smart adapters and speed boosters that retain all the automatic features of most Canon lenses. There are a few limitations, but at least that is an option for Canon lens owners.

Back in 2012, I looked around for ONE camera system that could do everything I needed to do for training project work. A lot of what I do is multi-media oriented. I need stills, video, and with the video, great audio. Eventually, in 2014, I found my solution, the Panasonic GH4. It was/is a very well-balanced set of tools for the "hybrid photographer." I have a MUCH more efficient workflow, with better results than I could achieve with my old two-camera (dSLR AND separate video camera) system. For what I do, I have needed nothing more. When I may need more, I can rent it.

Panasonic has since taken video to a whole new professional level with the GH5 (and GH5s, a special version made specifically for low light filmmakers) DPReview gave the GH5 their highest praise, a Gold Award, for video quality and features. They also chose it as their "best camera for video." Panasonic's newest camera, the G9, has capabilities similar to the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II. Both of those are oriented more toward still photographers, but still do a fine job with video. They each have some unique features that are simply not found on other cameras.

Meanwhile, Fujifilm has created some awesome gear. If you're mostly a stills photographer, it's worth looking at their whole line-up, especially the XT-2. It has great physical control layout, reasonably clear menus, and probably the best JPEG quality, straight out of the camera, of anything on the market. They put simulations of all their best films in their cameras, so if you like their film, try their digital.

The Big Four of Mirrorless all make some great glass, too. Sony partners with Carl Zeiss for their best. Panasonic partners with Leica for their best. Olympus makes their own PRO quality glass. Fujifilm uses Fujinon lenses, known in the graphic arts field for years as having some of the sharpest, cleanest optics on the planet.

The development of mirrorless cameras has been steadily accelerating since about 2008. Big Four of Mirrorless take it seriously, while Nikon initially considered it a fashion or lifestyle statement by introducing the Nikon 1 series, and Canon hasn't really supported their M series with native optics the way they could. Most of us who've been around the photo industry for decades are, frankly, a bit shocked at the complacency displayed by Canikon. It's a lot like watching BlackBerry (RIM), Nokia, Ericsson, and Microsoft cede the lion's share of the phone market to Apple and a few Android phone makers over the last decade.

This video is a good reminder of what that sort of complacency will get you. It's also hilarious to watch! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eywi0h_Y5_U

gwilliams6

Not quite true that neither one is better. There are features that mirrorless cameras have that NO DSLR can ever physically have. Modern top-end mirrorless cameras have caught up to the best top-end DSLRs and passed them in some areas. Check your facts and features. I switched from DSLRs to mirrorless, gained many features and would never go back to any DSLR ever again. That doesn't mean you cant make great photos with DSLRs. It is just the fact that mirrorless camera makers are now driving the bus when it comes to innovation, leaving older DSLR thinking behind and trying to catch up. Look forward to Nikon and Canon's upcoming high-end full-frame mirrorless system intros later this year.

gwilliams6

I agree Panasonic ,Olympic and Fuji cameras are not getting the buzz they deserve for their great products as much as Sony.

G Brown Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK

The camera only does some of the work!
People love to to suggest A is better than B and then discuss minutia.
Your images are better than mine.....only because I am still learning! Wasn't there, haven't got access to your magnificent country etc.

Having a camera is better than not having a camera!

have fun

gwilliams6

The photographer's skill and vision means the most, no argument on that. But better tools always advance and stimulate man's creative abilities.

ltcarizona

Let's be realistic the camera mirrorless or not is not really the difference maker. The real difference makers are the photographer's experience and the glass he uses! To stress my point as far as cameras only are concerned - amateur photographers are winning photo contests all the time with the simplest of DSLR cameras or mirrorless cameras. But these are not consistent deal makers, it takes the photographer's experience to really win.