n3eg Loc: West coast USA

I decided to start a new topic here rather than be snarky in the other two posts from absolute newbies here.

Why is the first thing new camera purchasers ALWAYS refer to a SLR? Have they considered if they really need the OVF, or the size, or the shorter DOF? Do they even stop to think about something like M4/3 Olympus and Panasonic, Fuji X series, Nikon mirrorless, and so on? Have they even heard of smaller formats?

Hopefully if they read this post, they will now.

Bubu Loc: Out of this solar system

Because sellers create the need and we follow. Our brains are re-wired to "want".

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

Been there; tried that. I like my APS-C DSLR.

I will continue to recommend DSLRs.

Bob Yankle Loc: Burlington, NC

National Geographic. No one there has EVER submitted a photo essay using am M4/3 Olympus and Panasonic, Fuji X series, Nikon mirrorless, or so on.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

Not yet but it will happen.

Photographer Jim Loc: Rio Vista, CA

I'm sure that some do, and some don't. Either way, I hope they get a lot of enjoyment out of their purchase.

n3eg Loc: West coast USA

And 99.9 percent of everyday DSLR owners will never submit a photo essay to Nat Geo. Do they really have to have one? More importantly, is it always their best (or most well-informed) choice?

Bob Yankle Loc: Burlington, NC

I shoot with a Fujifilm X-S1 too. Great camera, good reach, can do just about anything ..... but can never live up to Canon "L" series glass. And THAT's the thing .... most of those other cameras you spoke of are shooting through diameters of 15 to maybe 40mm while my Canon is shooting at 52 to 87mm of honkin'-light-admitting-real-estate. Don't try to tell me those others can compete with that.

Bugfan Loc: Toronto, Canada

It's marketing. It seems to be generally known for right or wrong reasons, that if you want quality you need an SLR. If you follow a professional photographer around that person is also using an SLR or, if s/he can afford it and justify it, a digital medium format camera.

As a result people tend to conclude that this is the way to superlative quality. And well, it is actually though not at the entry level of the SLRs, at that level the P&S cameras are just as good as are the bridge cameras in my opinion.

But to add to this baffling thread, what I don't understand fully is why people spend the money on an SLR and then proceed to take all their pictures in Auto. Why spend money to control exposure, white balance, ISO etc only to set the camera in Auto?

I realize a partial answer is they don't want to learn and auto is a lot simpler. But by not learning they won't achieve anything better by way of image quality than they can achieve in a high end P&S.

And as I try to get people to understand in my photography seminars ... the camera has no idea what it is you are trying to photograph and what kinds of mood and message you are trying to create. When you set it to Auto all it can do is average the image out. As a result another word for "Auto" is mediocre. So here they are spending a bundle on what's "best" and using it like a P&S. Go figure!

Bob Yankle Loc: Burlington, NC

Auto may be like training wheels on a bicycle. I went the other route. When I got my first DSLR, I shot in Manual Mode for a full two years, then I let myself use Aperture Priority, then Shutter Priority with a little Bulb mode thrown in for long exposures.

I think the one thing we can agree on here ..... you just can't generalize about the shooting modes of the participants on UHH. I'm sure we run the whole gamut, and then some.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

Hate to burst your bubble...but...
http://www.jaydickman.net/Information/Bio/1/

Bio photo is em5 and 75mm...a killer combo...now even better on the em1.

Pulitzer and National Geo...I'd say he's legit...as are m4/3 cameras.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

Olympus Visionaries are paid to promote Olympus gear. The latest bunch of photog's are merely promoting what Olympus has for sale. In the past, these Visionaries promoted 4/3. Visionaries of the experience, portfolio and caliber of John Isaac, who used the E-3 and E-5, gladly promoted these 4/3 cameras and the excellent lenses that Olympus makes for 4/3 DSLRs. John has retired. Hopefully the 4/3 concept has not been retired.

From Olympus's description of the Visionary program, a few of the requirements:

"Interested? We sincerely appreciate your interest in the Olympus Visionary Program. While Olympus is not actively seeking new members for the program, we typically identify new Photographers based on the following criteria:

Must exclusively shoot with Olympus gear
Must be involved with Olympus and share their work on the Get Olympus Facebook page. We highly encourage you to share your work in this manner.
Must be willing to attend public facing events as an ambassador of the Olympus brand and discuss Olympus products in your photography
Must be willing to submit regular, usable images to Olympus

If you meet this criteria, please contact ..." [Jennifer at Olympus]
per: http://www.getolympus.com/us/en/visionaries?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=intro

A person paid to espouse the opinion of a manufacturer is known as a lobbyist.

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

Well believe it or not, I have seen pictures from the Oly OMD-5 that riviled the image quality of Nikon D800 and was very impressed!

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

National Geographic Photographer Ira Block also uses the Panasonic Lumic GH-3 for her work.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

Because SLR's get a LOT of press and many people use them...so they are in the public consciousness...nothing more than that.

Until I investigated mirrorless cameras with the intent of purchasing one, I had no idea how many options were available that weren't DSLR!

No biggie...they just aren't aware of the many options and the DSLR has been (up until recently) the default camera.