I'm ready to make the jump to a mirrorless DSLR. Looking for suggestions
47greyfox wrote:
Paul, I’m disappointed and concerned. Are you starting to repeat yourself? 😳🤓
He repeats himself often, although as he said, not in the same thread. I’m pretty sure he has a file of these on his desktop and just does a copy and paste when the opportunity arises.
JohnnyRottenNJ wrote:
Hi;
I have been mulling around the idea of going to a mirrorless DSLR. I understand the consequences. It means buying all new lenses, etc. Currently, I have a Nikon D500 with only about 10,000 snaps on the shutter, and about a half dozen various lenses. Over time I went from a Nikon D200 to a D300 to a D7000 (I used that as a back up to the D300) and finally went to the D500. I can't say that I'm unhappy with the D500. It takes excellent photos and I have had no issues with it.
My thought is this: Going forward, in not too many years down the road, ALL new cameras will be mirrorless. When that day comes, existing cameras will be worth something less than what they are worth today.
Since going mirrorless will entail getting all new lenses, it frees me to look at other camera manufacturers.
The three top contenders IMHO are: Nikon, Canon and Sony. I do a fair amount of indoor photography where I can't use a flash, so I need a camera with a decent ISO rating.
I guess the only other deciding factor is what type of trade in I can get on my current equipment. I'm looking for suggestions, with pro and cons various models. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Hi; br I have been mulling around the idea of goin... (
show quote)
The answer depends on your photographic objectives. What are they?
CHG_CANON wrote:
BTW, a DSLR means it has a mirror flipping in front of the sensor / film aka the R in reflex mirror. Your new term will be MILC - mirrorless interchangeable-lens camera. Those mirrors are the chains holding back our photography.
I was thinking if the OP wanted to jump to a mirrorless DSLR,
he might like to hop to the corner of a round table.
Abo wrote:
I was thinking if the OP wanted to jump to a mirrorless DSLR,
he might like to hop to the corner of a round table.
Yeaahhh... "mirrorless dSLR" is an oxymoron. But I hear it often.
> SLR is Single Lens Reflex (for instance, original Nikon F 35mm film camera and similar — the reflex mirror enables viewing through the lens used for the photograph) SLRs have flappy-floppy mirrors that black out the finder at the moment of exposure, add vibration, fan dust and metal shavings and lube onto the film... But there is no parallax.
> TLR is Twin Lens Reflex (Rolleiflex 2.8 F 120/220 camera and similar — the camera has separate viewing and "taking" lenses, and a reflex mirror) TLRs inevitably suffer from parallax, the angular difference between the viewing and taking lens that may give you a false idea of what the camera will record on film.
> Rangefinder is a mirrorless film camera (Leica M3 35mm film camera and similar — the camera has a coupled rangefinder in a separate viewfinder that indicates focus as you focus the "taking" lens)
> dSLR is digital Single Lens Reflex. It replaces film with a digital sensor. Otherwise, it is mostly mechanically similar to a film SLR. dSLRs have flappy-floppy mirrors that black out the finder at the moment of exposure, add vibration, fan dust and metal shavings and lube onto the sensor... But there is no parallax.
> MILC is Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera (Fujifilm X-T4, Nikon Z 7II, Panasonic Lumix DC-G9, and similar APS-C, full frame, and Micro 4/3 cameras — These cameras have electronic viewfinders that capture an image from the sensor and merge it with setup and exposure status data) MILCs have a slight latency (delay) of the image you see vs the image in real time. This delay is getting shorter and shorter as time goes forward and processors evolve in new models. There is no black-out and little air movement between lens and sensor, and no parallax. Electronic AND focal plane mechanical shutters are found in most MILC cameras, each with advantages and drawbacks.
burkphoto wrote:
Yeaahhh... "mirrorless dSLR" is an oxymoron. But I hear it often.
> SLR is Single Lens Reflex (for instance, original Nikon F 35mm film camera and similar — the reflex mirror enables viewing through the lens used for the photograph) SLRs have flappy-floppy mirrors that black out the finder at the moment of exposure, add vibration, fan dust and metal shavings and lube onto the film... But there is no parallax.
> TLR is Twin Lens Reflex (Rolleiflex 2.8 F 120/220 camera and similar — the camera has separate viewing and "taking" lenses, and a reflex mirror) TLRs inevitably suffer from parallax, the angular difference between the viewing and taking lens that may give you a false idea of what the camera will record on film.
> Rangefinder is a mirrorless film camera (Leica M3 35mm film camera and similar — the camera has a coupled rangefinder in a separate viewfinder that indicates focus as you focus the "taking" lens)
> dSLR is digital Single Lens Reflex. It replaces film with a digital sensor. Otherwise, it is mostly mechanically similar to a film SLR. dSLRs have flappy-floppy mirrors that black out the finder at the moment of exposure, add vibration, fan dust and metal shavings and lube onto the sensor... But there is no parallax.
> MILC is Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera (Fujifilm X-T4, Nikon Z 7II, Panasonic Lumix DC-G9, and similar APS-C, full frame, and Micro 4/3 cameras — These cameras have electronic viewfinders that capture an image from the sensor and merge it with setup and exposure status data) MILCs have a slight latency (delay) of the image you see vs the image in real time. This delay is getting shorter and shorter as time goes forward and processors evolve in new models. There is no black-out and little air movement between lens and sensor, and no parallax. Electronic AND focal plane mechanical shutters are found in most MILC cameras, each with advantages and drawbacks.
Yeaahhh... "mirrorless dSLR" is an oxymo... (
show quote)
I'm sure he doesn't need a glossary to describe all the posibilities, just the difference between "DSLR" and "Mirrorless" (both Point & Shoot and MILC). Ya gotta leave some fun for the poster. Research is the thing.
That’s pretty dated so not very useful.
Those cameras are still being sold by the manufacturers.
The existing cameras and lenses will also keep their capacity and potential for producing worthy photographs.[quote=taxslave]
JohnnyRottenNJ wrote:
My thought is this: Going forward, in not too many years down the road, ALL new cameras will be mirrorless. When that day comes, existing cameras will be worth something less than what they are worth today.
I just bought a very old Pentax Super Takumar f1.4 50mm lens for $100. It is the same lens I used on my first SLR, a Pentax Spotmatic II which I got in 1972. The lens did not cost that much at that time. Good lenses retain their value both as a collectible and as a usable alternative to modern expensive lenses. What would we have to pay for a modern f1.4 50mm lens today?
All I am saying is do not change systems just because you think your current equipment is going to lose value. You will go broke trying to stay current.
br My thought is this: Going forward, in not too... (
show quote)
SuperflyTNT wrote:
So you actually had no reason to respond except to do your normal dissing of someone talking about getting a new camera.
Don’t know what your problem is but I’m not going to get in a pissing war with you.
[quote=taxslave]
JohnnyRottenNJ wrote:
My thought is this: Going forward, in not too many years down the road, ALL new cameras will be mirrorless. When that day comes, existing cameras will be worth something less than what they are worth today.
I just bought a very old Pentax Super Takumar f1.4 50mm lens for $100. It is the same lens I used on my first SLR, a Pentax Spotmatic II which I got in 1972. The lens did not cost that much at that time. Good lenses retain their value both as a collectible and as a usable alternative to modern expensive lenses. What would we have to pay for a modern f1.4 50mm lens today?
All I am saying is do not change systems just because you think your current equipment is going to lose value. You will go broke trying to stay current.
br My thought is this: Going forward, in not too... (
show quote)
Totally agree. Like cars and computers camera gear obsolescence and depreciation starts when it hits the market.
gvarner wrote:
It’s simply "mirrorless", not mirrorless DSLR because DSLR's have mirrors. What you’re looking for is a mirrorless digital camera.
I'm glad somebody finally mentioned that.
---
ronpier wrote:
Don’t know what your problem is but I’m not going to get in a pissing war with you.
The best way to stay out of a pissing war is to not respond at all.
---
John Hicks
Loc: Sible Hedinham North Essex England
There is only one thing I can add to this if you have set your heart on getting a certain make and model of camera you will never be happy if you don't get it.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.