craggycrossers Loc: Robin Hood Country, UK

Mac- here's one (of many) British pro-photographer who made a "major equipment switch" some years ago to Fuji X-Series cameras ...... he seems quite good, don't ya think ! He who dallies ..... !!

http://www.lovegrovephotography.com/

http://www.prophotonut.com/

Bob Smith Loc: Banjarmasin

I have been using a fuji xt1 just for a while after ditching my Niton D90 some time ago for a point and shoot and realising I made a mismistake. I can't fault it it's quick with fantastic control and the big advantage over the DSLR is the EVF because you see what the end result is through it.

John Howard Loc: SW Florida and Blue Ridge Mountains of NC.

I just ordered the Sony A7R with only 1lens but with two adapters so I can use my good glass from other cameras and travel lighter due to the small camera size. It took days of research to decide which of the A7 versions to select. And I am still not certain I got it right. Each is for different uses and I like to shoot everything. I am really interested to see it the low capability is as good as reported.

drmarty Loc: Pine City, NY

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

bkellyusa Loc: Nashville, TN

I forgot one other very important issue and that is cost. The SONY NEX A6000 goes for about $700.00. Other models and brands of mirrorless cameras are in about that range and higher. To beat the quality of that camera in a full size DSLR you'd have to spend quite a bit more.

I think the biggest advantage to a full size DSLR is that due to it's increased size the controls are better laid out and the features are easier to use. My camera uses a lot of software that is only accessible by way of a touch screen.

I guess the best test of the mirrorless designs is that if I am out with someone with a full-size DSLR they will tend to view my camera with a certain amount of disdain. After about an hour they'll ask "Do you mind if I look at the "thing?" Next thing you know they've got one.

Jcmarino

I think built in flashes are only there
for emergency sake.

HarryBinNC Loc: Blue Ridge Mtns, No.Carolina, USA

The Fuji X100s have leaf shutters.

bkellyusa Loc: Nashville, TN

One more thing in favor of the mirrorless designs is that you can mount them stably on a lightweight, travel style, $150.00 tripod (bought online at a discount) but you'll need to spend a lot more for a tripod if you want to mount a full-size DSLR and especially if you use a telephoto lens.

MW

The biggest shortfall of Mirrorless cameras is the viewfinder. They are getting better but DLSR's optical viewfinders work better in some cases. Most specifically fast action situations like sports. However, I think this shortfall will disappear within the next five years.

BTW, it's not impossible to photograph sports with Mirrorless, it's just more awkward.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

The answer is found in a question: "Better, compared to what?"

Most mirror-less cameras are lighter and smaller than dSLRs. Micro-Four-Thirds cameras, in particular, can be one third to one fourth the size of dSLRs, with much of the same capability. This makes them particularly inconspicuous, and extremely easy to backpack or travel with. You can carry the same amount of gear with much less fatigue. A bag with two bodies and a "holy trinity" of zooms, plus a portable flash, batteries, and a monopod, can fit under an airline seat.

There is no reflex mirror to flip up. So mirror-less cameras don't black out the viewfinder at the moment of exposure.

They can — and at the higher end of the market — do have very good electronic viewfinders integrated into the body in "dSLR style." The advantage is that you see a live JPEG rendition of what the camera will save. The disadvantage is that there is a tiny lag. With each generation of camera, the lag is getting shorter.

The Sony A7s and the Panasonic Lumix GH4 feature outstanding video performance, better than the Canon 5D Mark III. The A7s wins in low light, and the GH4 wins most everywhere else. Dave Dugdale has a comparison video on YouTube that is quite enlightening!

The A7 Series full frame Sony cameras have some of the highest dynamic range sensors you'll find on the market today. Their low light performance is great, and their daylight performance has great color depth.

Micro-Four-Thirds cameras have access to the largest body of lenses on the planet. The native lens line (from Panasonic, Olympus, Leica, Voigtlander, Samyang, Tokina, Sigma...) is extensive.

http://hazeghi.org/mft-lenses.html

With appropriate adapters, your existing Nikon, Canon, Pentax, ciné mount, and other lenses can be attached to Micro-Four-Thirds cameras, although functionality is usually manual.

Fujifilm's cameras feature excellent dynamic range, and some very accurate film simulations are built right into the camera. Their JPEG output is very, very nice.

On the flip side:

The mirror-less offerings from Canon and Nikon are paltry. Canon's EOS-M line has received generally mediocre performance reviews and luke-warm enthusiasm. The Nikon-1 series has a tiny little sensor that disappoints in low light. Adapting these cameras to longer Canon and Nikon lenses can be pretty humorous, as the cameras are very small.

Sony and Fujifilm are slowly building their lens lines for the A7 and X-series cameras. While their optics are quite good, they aren't as full-featured, as fast, and as plentiful as many photographers would like.

Micro-Four-Thirds sensors are about one fourth the area of full frame (35mm size) dSLR sensors. This reduces the potential maximum ISO by around two f/stops, and increases the depth of field by two f/stops, by comparison. The difference is only about one stop for ISO and DOF when you compare m43 to APS-C or DX.

So far, m43 sensors are mostly limited to 16MP. That's enough for most purposes, until you want to crop huge prints from small sections of the frame, or render maximum detail in very large prints that will be viewed from a few inches.

High end full frame and APS-C dSLRs are still king when it comes to raw speed. Sports and "bird in flight" nature photographers still should be hesitant to adopt mirror-less cameras.

So, again, the answer is that it depends upon what you want to do. If you are getting older, and want a camera system that travels well, maybe an m43 of some sort is in order.

If you want the best video bang for the buck, take a close look at the A7s and GH4.

If you want to make images that remind you of Fujichrome Velvia, try one of the X-series cameras.

If you photograph landscapes, try the Sony A7 series.

If you spend most weekends on the sidelines of a sporting event, keep your high-end dSLR gear. If you photograph animals in flight or on the run, keep your dSLR gear.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

They came out with your Df so they wouldn't have to.

The only advantage of introducing a full frame mirror-less camera that uses existing lenses is the huge issue of compatibility with lenses that folks already own.

But that's really a problem, because you can make smaller lenses with MUCH MUCH better performance by eliminating that old mirror box, and shortening the lens flange to sensor distance! If you do that, you truly leap forward in quality, but you make your existing lenses obsolete, and you lose your market... or so the manufacturer fear goes.

Nikon would probably be the last company to go full frame mirror-less with a new lens line. That's precisely why they SHOULD.

dynaquest1 Loc: Austin, Texas

Perhaps Nikon should work harder at making a full frame DSLR that maintains the mirror box and f-mount.....but that is much smaller and lightweight. Would be nice to have a D900 (?) the size of the D3300.

eviemyoung

I recently bought the sony 6000 and the nikon 7200. I still like my nikon better for most shots and I have many lenses for that camera. However, when it comes to taking street shots, the small mirrorless cannot be beat. It is unobtrusive, has a swivel screen so the people do not know they are being photoed, and is fast. So I use both and have no problem carrying the small one around even though I am not as spry as I used to be. So each kind of camera has it's own purpose for me.

ssymeono Loc: St. Louis, Missouri

I wonder why no one has commented on the Nikon 1 system!

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

No they are not.
Still slow reaction time compared to DSLRs.
Many proponents on this site hate to hear that and are in denial. But some day they might catch up but it will be a while. There was a rumor about a Nikon mirrorless but it also said it had the F mount which negates completely the smaller theory as the lens to sensor distance must be maintained for compatability or additional degrading optics would need to be added or something.