The Nikon 1 mirrorless cameras don't impress me and other folks seem to feel the same... I have heard that Nikon may be phasing them out and replacing them with new models that use a larger sensor.

Nikon's mirrorless are unique in that they use a so-called 1" sensor (13.2mm x 8.8mm). That's about half the size or less than Olympus'/Panasonic's micro Four/Thirds (mirrorless, 17.3mm x 13mm) or Canon APS-C (DSLRs and mirrorless, 22.8mm x 14.8mm) or Pentax', Sony's or even Nikon's own APS-C DSLRs (23.6mm x 15.7mm). And the 1" is sensor has only about one eighth the sensor area of so-called full frame (both DSLR from Nikon, Canon, Sony, Pentax... and mirrorless from Sony).

In fact, many manufacturers use 1" sensors, but only in their non-interchangeable lens "bridge" and "point-n-shoot" cameras. I think Nikon was the only manufacturer to put them in interchangeable lens cameras, probably to be able to make the cameras and lenses especially compact. But I suspect that was a mistake. A smaller sensor necessarily uses smaller individual pixel sites that are more crowded.... reducing resolution and increasing the potential for noise in images at higher ISOs. There's just too much image quality compromise with 1".

I also would be a bit concerned if the autofocus system Nikon has used in their mirrorless is up to the task of shooting kids and dogs (which tend to be quite active and much like sports photography). I really don't, so investigate this carefully. In fact, do so with any brand or model. AF performance will be important, when you're trying to get shots of those kids and pets.

If you REALLY want mirrorless, I'd at least look at models with an APS-C sensor. For landscape photography where great depth of field, and lots of detail from edge to edge, and normal to wide angle lenses would all be desirable... the best digital would be an even bigger "full frame" such as Sony or "medium format" such as Fuji GFX. However for action/sports (kids and pets) where higher performance autofocus, a usable viewfinder (either an optical VF or a highly responsive electronic VF), and more powerful, fast focusing telephoto lenses are all desirable... an APS-C DSLR is ideal, but some APS-C mirrorless might come close. There aren't a lot of powerful telephotos offered for mirrorless, but many of them can use DSLR lenses via an adapter.

Why do you want mirrorless? For the smaller size and lighter weight? If those are your primary concerns, you might instead want to look at some of the particularly compact DSLRs instead, such as the Canon Rebel SL2 (EOS 200D outside N. America). That's one of the smallest/lightest DSLRs on the market, though it still offers 24MP with an APS-C size sensor. Pair it up with some fairly compact, lightweight lenses such as the Canon EF-S 10-18mm IS STM (wide angle for landscapes), EF-S 18-135mm IS USM (fast autofocus for sports/action in good light) or perhaps instead an EF-S 17-55mm IS USM (for both lower light/indoor shooting and fast AF) paired up with a high performance zoom such as the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM. Of course, if needed there are even longer telephotos such as 70-300mm, 100-400mm, 300mm f/4, etc. from Canon and other manufacturers.

The biggest limitation of the SL2 is probably it's autofocus, which is rather simplistic with only 9 points, usable to -0.5 EV and has only the center AF point a higher performance "dual axis/cross type". Other bigger, heavier Canon DSLRs have as many as 65 AF points, all cross type and are able to focus in -3EV lighting, which is approx. "moonlight". While those may be more ideal for action photography, in years past I've successfully done lots of fast sports shooting with older models that used AF systems virtually identical to the SL2's.

Landscape photography and kids/pets photography are a bit at odds with each other in what each type of work ideally requires from camera and lenses. Taking size and weight concerns into account, to my way of thinking the above SL2 and lenses are a reasonable compromise that might serve both purposes very well, even if not the most ideal choices for either one. It's not going to be as small a kit as might be possible with many mirrorless, but is a lot lighter and smaller than most DSLRs... so it's a compromise in these respects, too.

Another reason to consider DSLR over mirrorless is that the latter tend to be pretty pricey. Due to their popularity, you won't find mirrorless for much less than $1000 for the body only. You can find a DSLR with similar specifications and performance for about half that.

BTW, Canon has been pretty slow to develop mirrorless cameras, too... It's taken them five years to get around to offering one with a built in viewfinder (electronic), so I've never even considered one before now. They still have a pretty miserable selection of lenses specific for mirrorless, too. Thankfully there are some third party manufacturers making some interesting lenses for them. I am considering a Canon M5 (also 24MP, APS-C) as a camera for street photography, for hiking and biking and the occasional portrait. But I definitely will NOT be giving up my APS-C DSLRs for sports/action... And for some occasional, serious landscape/architectural shooting, and a few other things I'll continue to use a full frame DSLR. The mirrorless camera will complement the DSLRs, not replace them.

P.S. You say your son is shooting with a Canon camera. That might be a reason to consider Canon yourself. Get something similar and be able to share lenses and other accessories... Plus he might give you some guidance while you're learning to use it.

Hi Peter,

I think you might be mixing up some terminology.

Canon calls Av, Tv, P and M their cameras' "Creative Modes".

When you say you never used them, I think you're referring to the "Icon Modes", which are sort of "super auto" modes: "Running Man" icon for sports, "Mountain" icon for scenic photography, etc. (As you say, some of the more advanced models don't even have the Icon Modes.)

There's also "Creative Auto" (labelled "CA") on many Canon cameras now. That allows you to adjust things, but gives you guidance on the rear screen of the camera, what the different settings will do. Might be a good learning tool for someone first picking up one of the cameras... but ultimately is likely to slow things down too much, so probably isn't a mode that most would want to use once they've learned all it can teach them.