Bruce Moore

I have a Canon 550d (T2i) and various lenses. I am considering swapping systems to a mirrorless set up and wondered what people's thought were in terms of the timing of such a switch and which system to go with. I have been reading about the Fuji xt3 and it intrigues me but I am an amateur photographer and it is more expensive than my Canon system. I am considering switching to reduce weight and because mirrorless looks like the future of hobbyist photography.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

If you are looking to reduce weight, look at both the Olympus and Panasonic 4/3rds cameras. They will save you the most in size, weight, and cost. I have the Olympus E-M1 mrII and it is a pro level camera. There are the GH4 and GH5 Panasonic cameras. Olympus offers the E-M10 and E-M5 also. Panasonic also offers other lower end cameras too.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

No question! - mirror-less is the future of photography. (Not yet maybe - but for forward looking photographers - yes now.) However , there is still the option of 3/2 or 4/3 format. As miniaturisation continues to gain ground in terms of technical excellence 4/3 has to be the way, and Olympus abandoned 4/3 -in favour of M4/3 for very good reason, with the advantages already well documented. But how important is miniaturisation to our brave new world? Just consider that one good lap-top computer today is as powerful as the total power of all the worlds computers 40 years ago! So for photography I would guess the transition will take no more than four years, let alone 40. So mirror-less combined with M43 has to be a very sensible choice.

daldds Loc: NYC

I switched several years ago to Olympus, and never regretted it. To me, the quality of the images is on a par with the Canon system I had. Having said that, it is because I do not use kit lenses, which are not the equal of the more expensive pro lenses. Although smaller than mirrored camera lenses, they are still heavier than kit lenses. So, weight-wise, you lose a little, but size wise, every thing you would need for a 10 day photo trip fits into one backpack.

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

The Fuji X-T3 recently released and coming soon to major photo gear dealers is an exceptional, world class camera with a well-established system of terrifically sharp lenses behind it. It is a definite upgrade over previous Fuji models and offers many creative options. Don't miss out by buying older cheaper technology. Go to website for B&H Photo or Adorama and check it out.

Bruce Moore

Thank you all for your reply soon so far. Really interesting and helpful.

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

I have no desire to move to mirrorless. I am pleased with my DSLR and lens collection. Weight is not an issue for me. People have GAS now over mirrorless.GAS equals Gear Acquisition Syndrome)

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Yes - If you are happy with your kit, then that is great. You are not trapped in the GAS. It depends on what one gets from the hobby. I have a friend who quite regularly changes his kit, but rarely takes a pic. He is most concerned with how sharp his pic might be if he should just happen to take one. But I cannot argue that he does not enjoy his hobby. He will talk tech at every opportunity and reads photo journals (on-line and off) avidly.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

If weight is the issue, then the suggestions here make sense. You have not said what type of photography you are interested in. This will influence your ultimate decision. Different cameras and makers have different strong and weak points depending on what you want to do. What your goals are is the first thing you need to decide.

Also, you do not mention you current investment. What glass do you currently own? Do you have mostly FF lenses? Do you have a lot of APS-C lenses. Are there adapters for your lenses to your new system?

If weight is not the only consideration and you think you want to go FF, you might want to hold off until the FF dust settles. Right now you have a Canon. Their new EOS R comes with an adapter that will work with all your current lenses. The next few iterations of the camera might be even better. I shoot a lot of action but the EOS R is not designed with action in mind and is not a good match for me. However, if you are a street or landscape shooter, it might be great.

And last but not least, what's your budget for the switch?

BebuLamar

Weight saving for mirrorless isn't significant. Compare the EOS-R and EOS-5D Mk IV which have about the same performance the mirrorless saves you a quarter pound.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

The quality of my images is now better than with a Fuji system I used to have. It is not about better kit it is about a better photographer (me). My M43 cameras ARE better (for me) - easier to use and carry and have great facilities, but I now rely more on my knowledge and not just on the cameras.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

The EOS R was not designed for weight reduction. However, switching to a M43 can significantly decrease weight.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

With Nikon and Canon joining Sony in full frame mirrorless camera, the question stops being about size, bulk or sensor sensitivity. It is not about micro four-thirds, cropped or full DSLR.

It's about what you want to see through the viewfinder. Do you want to see the "real" line of sight through the glass? Or do you want to see an electronic preview of what the camera will be processing? Do you want to look at a TV screen or through a glass window? With film SLRs it was different. We are not shooting digital images. Should we see what the shot will look like digitally before we press the button?

You also see what you shot after the button is pressed! I see lots of DSLR shooters lowering their camera to look at the screen. Is it called "gimping"? They want to see what the camera did with their composition. With mirrorless, you see the shot in the viewfinder. It will be replaced with a live view after a delay or as soon as you touch the shutter button again.

Early mirrorless cameras made that electronic preview a little weak. It could be slow, it could be of low resolution and could "tear" when panning. Current mirrorless viewfinders are a lot better.

An easy example is the slow shutter speed, blurry waterfall with ND filter shot. With a mirrored camera you have to set up the shot with the lens open and then put on the filter after making exposure adjustments. The viewfinder will get dark. With a mirrorless you will see a preview that will be of what you are shooting.

Another easy example is the difference in noise, especially with burst settings. Mirrorless cameras can be silent.

One remaining weakness of mirrorless may be sports shooting. Can a mirrorless camera process the preview image quick enough to keep up with fast moving athletes?

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

Unless of course the desired aim (as it is here) is: "I am considering switching to reduce weight...."

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

I absolutely agree that there can be a space and weight saving by changing to mirrorless cameras. It is one of the merits of mirrorless. My cherished M4/3 kit of body and two lenses weighs 6 pounds and fits in carry on luggage. It covers the FF equivalent view from 28mm to 800mm!

And, you are right. The title suggests the broader scope that goes beyond weight to mirrored vs mirrorless. The open post emphasises weight.

There have been many topics about "I want to travel, get good images and don't want to take my full frame DSLR and three heavy lenses". In fact, there is almost always a version of that running.

The answer to weight saving goes to cameras like the Panasonic LX100 series, the Sony RX100 series and the Sony RX10 series. None have mirrors.

There is no question of my bias. The last camera I owned with a mirror was a Nikon designed in the 50's and built in the 60s to shoot film. It had heavy lenses from 15mm to 500mm. Other than nostalgia, I'm happy that digital imaging does not need mirrors to see what you are shooting. My favorite travel camera weighs in ounces.