Delderby Loc: Derby UK

But what about those who have switched to DSLR from Mirrorless (especially MFT)?

crappiefever Loc: Central Pa

Might depend on what you want to use it for . Don't know if I would put a 600 MM lens on a mirrorless camera and try to use it for action photography . Just my opinion !

tdekany Loc: Oregon

You can use an Olympus 300mm f4 on the EM1.

http://www.getolympus.com/us/en/lenses/pen-omd/m-zuiko-ed-300mm-f4-0-is-pro.html

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

Have two pros in my extended families would never go back. In addition, the quality, meaning the heavy R&D money is going into mirrorless.

LXK0930 Loc: Souh Jersey

Several years ago, I switched from a Sony DSLR to a Panasonic 4/3 system (used G1 and G2 bodies with 14-45mm and 45-200mm lenses). I went this route due to weight of my DSLR equipment, budget considerations, age of my body, and size of my gut. I use this equipment mainly for travel.

For anyone considering a mirrorless system, I would advise making sure the body has an EVF (viewfinder), either built in or as an accessory. I believe that the rest is pretty much a matter of personal preference, budget, or special requirements.

Note that I have 2 homes (snow-bird), and leave some equipment in each.
Up north (where my travel usually originates), I keep my Panasonic system and a tiny Canon SD1400, which gives surprisingly good results..
Down south, I keep a Canon G10 for more serious work, and a small Fuji F72 EXR (small and incredibly versatile).

Hope that this helps.

JPL

I have both systems and have no intention of dumping either system. The main reason for me to try mirrorless (Sony A7r) was the fact that you do not need the whole system. All you need is to buy the camera and and $9.99 adapter. If you want more you can of course spend endless money. But with a mirrorless camera and a cheap adapter you can use the lenses from your existing "system" on your new camera. So you can actually have only one system but 2 different types of cameras using the system.

Another reason for me to buy mirrorless camera is that I wanted to be able to photograph with manual focusing like I grew up with in the old days back in 1980. With mirrorless camera that is no problem and even easier than using the old split screen system and a lot faster, easier and more accurate than to use the green dot or live view in dslr cameras.

I also wanted a full frame camera but it was not important if it was that many megapixels. I was originally planing to buy the 24 megapixel A7. The reason I bought the model with the highest megapixels was actually that it was at a black friday deal that would have been stupid to ignore.

Both mirrorless and dslr have their advantages.

Dslr advantages over my mirrorless camera that matters for me.

- Fast autofocus is better for sports and active wildlife or kids photography.
- Battery life is usually 3-4 times better

Mirrorless advantages over Dslr that matters for me.

- More compact, I can get more stuff in my shoulder bag.
- Can use all my old lenses, be it manual or auto focus, no matter what brand.
- A dream to use with manual focusing and you never have to worry if your focus point is exactly on the eye you want to focus on.
- You do not need a whole system to use mirrorless camera, you can adapt your current lenses.

Both systems deliver excellent image quality, depending mostly on the lens you are using each time.
The weight of the mirrorless camera is less than the dslr, but it is really not important. What matters is that the camera is much more compact and if I am using old manual lenses they are also much more compact than modern bulky autofocus lenses so I can easily carry my camera and 5-6 lenses plus flash, memory cards and batteries in a small shoulder bag instead of 2-3 lenses if I am carrying the dslr.

Here I have been explaining my take on this. But if you can not use a camera unless focusing with auto focus this comparison is not valid. I just wanted a good camera to go back to the old manual focus way of photographing because I have never been very happy with autofocus systems and my mirrorless camera is perfect for what I wanted. Also it was important for me to have a full frame camera so I had no choice but Sony there in the mirrorless categorie. If I was doing this again with the experience I now have I would go for the new version of the same camera, the Sony A7rII. Not because of the megapixels, but because it has in camera stabilizing that works with any lens you put on it. But better with some lenses then others.

I hope this helps.

sueyeisert Loc: New Jersey

I really like my Fuji X-Pro2 and X-E2.

sr71 Loc: In Col. Juan Seguin Land

Quality of photos?l The Sony 6000 series use an aps-c sensor the big boys use the aps-c sensor and ff 35mm. Quality is all in the photographer use of said equipment.

https://visualsciencelab.blogspot.my/2017_01_02_archive.html


Take a look at the above link, Kirk Tuck is a professional out of Austin, Tx he uses the Sony series a7, rx10 ii & III, & 6300 go see what he does with the 1 inch sensors of the rx10 and the aps-c sensor of the 6300. Quality is there it just depends on how you use it....

Grnway Loc: Manchester, NH

I own a Canon 5DIII with various lenses covering from 16-200mm range. I also do a bit of traveling, so size and weight are also a consideration. I recently purchased a Fuji X-t2 with a few lenses covering 18-400mm range. I had tried various mirrorless cameras before, but found the controls too compact for me. Also, I wasn't pleased with the shutter lag, especially considering the speed of focus and complete lack of shutter lag I get with the Canon.

The X-t2 design is the closest I've seen to my old film SLR of anything out there. Lots of analog controls for everything on the outside of the camera. This retro design was a huge appeal to me. I was also encouraged by the rave reviews I read prior to purchasing. I sold a bit of some other Canon kit that I had and made the investment. I'm still getting used to the Fuji system. It's quite a bit different from the Canon.

I haven't done a side by side photo comparison yet, but plan to soon.

The positives of both systems:

Canon:

- lightning fast focus
- outstanding image quality
- great feel in my hands
- wide array of lenses and peripheral products available (third party studio lighting, etc.)

fuji:

- compact size
- outstanding image quality
- less $ for same/superior build quality vs Canon, both camera and lenses
- image preview right in the viewfinder without having to press a "preview" button.
- fast focus, though not quite as fast as the Canon (although I can't really imagine anything focusing as quickly as the Canon with L glass! Don't know anything about Nikon, but I suspect the same.)

Cons:

Canon:

- bulky and heavy
- a lot of tightly packed control buttons that my large fingers tend to press more than one of when going by feel.


Fuji:

- focus speed not quite up to Canon, but it's not far behind enough to be a deal breaker. We're talking a barely perceptible difference, so far that i can tell. Who knows? Maybe I'm not using the best focus tracking mode settings. Maybe other Fuji owners can comment.
- battery life vs. my Canon (a common problem with mirrorless, since power is used for virtually everything)

As far as a "dream" DSLR goes, I thing the 5D IV might be it, but I'm pretty happy with the III. It will continue to be my indoor/studio workhorse. My fuji kit will be my traveling companion, as well as outdoor events. I guess that most mirrorless folks would like the full frame Sony but I'm super impressed with my Fuji, so far.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

As tdekany mentioned, it appears the Olympus 300mm f4 (same angle of view as a 600 f4 full frame) should be handholdable. Approximately 8.9" long X 3.7" diameter and 2.9 pounds. I have only been able to try the lense in the camera store on an E-M5mrII, but this lense is fast and steady. This lense and the new E-M1mrII should make for a good sports/wildlife/action combination.

Alpix Loc: Cambridgeshire, UK

Very interesting topic.
I am a Nikon DSLR user considering adding a Sony ar72 body, mainly down to the 4k video it offers.

berchman Loc: South Central PA

I do most of my photography when I take a trip, either abroad or to NYC. I'm mainly interested in candid shots of people, but I do take the usual tourist shots of buildings and landscapes. I may be 79, but I'm perfectly capable of handling the weight of two FF Nikons. On two small group tours to SE Asia I walked around with a Nikon D800 and 18-35 f/2.8 on one hip and a Nikon D700 and 70-200 f/2.8 on the other hip because I didn't want to miss a shot and I hate changing lenses on the fly. It was awkward with those two bruisers dangling and banging into me, but there wasn't' a lot of walking and the guide helped get an extra chair in restaurants to put the cameras on. I did this too on a private tour of Burma.

A friend and I hired Joe Josephs to coach us in street photography in NYC and he suggested the Nikon 24-120 f/4 as a practical walk-around lens for street photography so I got that. My next trip was to Russia. I had heard all kinds of scary stories about thieves in St Petersburg so I took only the D800 and the 24-120. It was such a relief to be unburdened of the two beasts, that traveling without a tour to Berlin and Prague I once again took only the D800 and 24-120. Some time after that I decided to get my first smart phone, thinking that it might provide a solution to being inconspicuous while doing street photography.

Next came a non-tour trip to the Riviera and Alsace. Again I took only the D800. But this time I found myself often leaving the DSLR in the apartment and taking only the iPhone 6 Plus. What a feeling of liberation!

At this time the Fuji XT-1 came out and people were raving about it. I thought it might be a happy medium between the Nikon and the iPhone so I rented it to take Halloween pictures in NYC, liked it, bought it with the 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 lens. As Linda said in a previous comment, there was a lot of learning involved. My next trip was a small group tour to Sicily and Calabria with lots of walking. I found that I could keep the Fuji in my hand all day with only a Gordy wrist strap. At this time the Fuji XT-2 was announced with all kinds of improvements so I pre-ordered it from B&H from Sicily, hoping that I'd get it in time for my trip to Iran. It came in time and I was able to order a Rokinon 12mm f/2 to put on the XT-1 which would be in my bag while the XT-2 would be around my neck. This worked well so I had the same arrangement on a trip to Japan, but from now on I'll carry the XT-2 on a cross chest strap because around the neck is an invitation to the chiropractor.

The Nikons are ergonomically superior because of their size. I plan to keep the D800 for macro and for tethered studio portraiture. But for everything else, it's the Fujis (although I'm tempted to replace the XT-1 with another XT-2). I love the EVS which gives me a preview of the exposure; I love the focus peaking indicator; I love being able to see the shot I took in the viewfinder without having to use the LCD. It takes good shots at high ISO; the quality of the pictures is superb; the articulating LCD comes in handy, and, most importantly, I appreciate the reduced bulk and weight.

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

whitewolfowner, my dream mirrorless camera would be the Leica SL TYP 601 mirrorless with a Leica Vario-Elmarit-SL 24-90mm zoom lens. This body and lens is currently priced at $12,400.
By the way, this combo weighs almost the same as a Nikon D750 equipped with a 28-300mm zoom. The difference is only 1 oz. ~FiddleMaker

leftj Loc: Texas

Don 't forsee a desire to switch from DSLR to mirrorless but would love to have both. I would really like to get the Fugifilm X-T2.

bkellyusa Loc: Nashville, TN

I originally bought my A6000 to take pictures while traveling on my motorcycle. After the frist trip years ago I was also going to buy a new DSLR but the Sony A6000 convinced me that that was not necessary.

Most people point to the weight savings as the priary reaosn to buy a mirrorless but me I am not so sure about that. I think my camera is jus a tad too small sometimes. It's easy to travel with and it's easy to carry around but it seems just a bit too small to me. I think the later A6300 and A6500 might be slightly bigger and heavier. With my camera a full size flash feels top heavy. My daughters Nikon is laid out better than the Sony with more external buttons. I like that. However, I think the EVF on the Sony is the single best advancement I have seen on a camera in years. After using the Sony EVF I would never go back to an optical viewer.

The other appeal is the Sony company itself. They seem to be the most inspired camera company out there and have been making mst of the technical advances in camera technology the last few eyars with no sign of them slowing down.

Ultimately the thing that is going to hurt mirrored DSLR's is the expense. I just can't see most camera buyers paying the additional expense and living with the problems that go with a mechanical device like a mirror if you don't need one.