Why always a new SLR? (Page 5): Your choices are excellent and you may be a serious Nikon proponent but I would suggest that you might look at a Canon EOS M. Unlike other mirrorless...

gessman Loc: Colorado

DickW wrote:

Am old timer returning to photography as a hobby a... (show quote)

Your choices are excellent and you may be a serious Nikon proponent but I would suggest that you might look at a Canon EOS M. Unlike other mirrorless, it has the guts of Canon's workhorse DSLR, the 7D, APS-C, 18 megapixels & latest Digic 5 processor, and can, with an additional adapter, use all of Canon's complete line of lens meter and focus coupled, in a body not much larger than a cell phone. Reputed to be slow to focus by many reviewers, Canon is dumping it at less than 1/2 price and you can pick up one on Amazon with an 18-55 IS STM lens for $319+/- that gives you constant follow focus in movie mode in 1080p video. With support for the latest, fastest sdhc uhs-1 card, it isn't so slow as to deserve being dissed and it becomes a highly viable machine without the typical drawbacks of a 4/3 mirrorless - all the features of a DSLR minus a viewfinder but with a touch screen that provides full menu and full control function system including focusing and shooting.

It would be my assumption that Canon, a late entrant into the mirrorless arena, is most likely about to pop a 2nd generation unit on us which will likely far surpass any other mirrorless out there. This is a perfect companion for my Canon 5DMkII and allows me to utilize my L lens or slip the unit in my jacket pocket with the standard "M" lens. WOW! A a slightly throttled back 7D in my pocket that shoots up to 17 frames in burst mode at 4.3 fps for the price of a p&s: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Compact-Systems-3-0-Inch-EF-M18-55mm/dp/B00A2BVCO0/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1383676708&sr=8-2&keywords=Canon+EOS+M

TheDman Loc: USA

rpavich wrote:

Oh groan...very bad analogy Jerry...C'mon....the Mirrorless is akin to an electric car?

Evidently you haven't seen the shoot out between the X-pro1 and the D800 :)

Guess who won?...hint hint...

Seems like a very good analogy to me. Both are new to the market compared to SLRs and gas-powered cars. That's the extent of it.

herb99m Loc: Georgia, USA

Bob Yankle wrote:

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.

Well, take a look at this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/10274705/Nokia-Lumia-1020-smartphone-photos-to-appear-in-National-Geographic.html

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

TheDman wrote:

Seems like a very good analogy to me. Both are new to the market compared to SLRs and gas-powered cars. That's the extent of it.

Agreed. I thought he was somehow alluding to the idea that one is a "muscle car" reliable...workhorse...etc...and the other was an anemic shell of a vehicle that doesn't go very fast, isn't reliable, etc...

He cleared it up for me.

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

Bob Yankle wrote:

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.

I totally agree with Yankle! The strongest proponents of "manual only" seem always to be those newbies who only recently gained some familiarity with it. Having been in photography since 1947 and having taught classes, courses, seminars , and workshops since '67 I've paid my dues during the years when manual was all there was. I am firmly of the opinion that the most accomplished and reliable photographers are those who intelligently - and with image aforethought - make use of any and all of the "bells and whistles" and modes their kit provides as circumstances and needs of the envisioned image dictate.

Dave in SD

GreenReaper

Cameras are like cars, some folks like Mercedes and others like VW's. It depends on personal taste and the intended use. I have used Nikon's, Canon, and Fuji's. Film, digital and even some home brewed things in between with motion picture cameras thrown in for good measure. Right now my only digital camera is an Olympus C-5050 P&S. It has served me well through the years, but now I look forward to the purchase of a DSLR. I want to get back to using a complete range of shutter speeds and f/stops (i'm old school] but have used auto when needed. If a "newbie" feels they need the latest and greatest, then go for it, but learn all the ins and outs of using one. In the mean time keep smiling.

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

I may not always agree, but I have to side with you on this, it always seemed a silly argument to me of what kind of equipment you use for it is still the person behind the equipment with the knowledge to take a great photograph.

rpavich wrote:

Another reason they don't consider other Non-DSLR options is illustrated in the ill-informed opinions demonstrated right in this very thread!

*The idea that all mirrorless cameras are sub-standard to DSLR's.

*The idea that the light gathering ability of their lenses is always sub-standard when compared to DSLR lenses.

*The idea that no REAL pro shoots with anything BUT a huge DSLR and all the related lenses.

And on and on it goes. :(

TheDman Loc: USA

rpavich wrote:

*The idea that all mirrorless cameras are sub-standard to DSLR's.

How do they get around the fact that their sensors aren't as large?

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

TheDman wrote:

How do they get around the fact that their sensors aren't as large?

Both of my Fuji mirrorless cameras have APS-C sensors...

Why should I have to "get around" anything?

Is a Canon 7D substandard because it's not full frame?

Of course not.

No matter what sensor size they have, if they produce quality images why should anyone care what size they are?

?

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

Uuglypher wrote:

I totally agree with Yankle! The strongest propon... (show quote)

^^^EXACTLY!!!

And since you mentioned "Bells and Whistles", the AUTO+ mode on the Sony A65/77 has thousands of preprogramed settings and the ability to determine exactly what type of scene you are photographing and apply the right settings without any input from the photographer.

It works VERY well, especially for those quick, spur-of-the-moment grab shots.

I rarely use it... but it's nice to have just in case. :thumbup:

schuchmn

TheDman wrote:

How do they get around the fact that their sensors aren't as large?

By the fact that the sensors are large enough for many people's purposes.

Remember -- small doesn't mean bad. All else equal a big sensor is better than a small one but all else is never equal. A bigger sensor MAY give you better results IF your lenses AND your tripod AND your technique are up to snuff.

An APS sensor of today will likely give you better results than a 5-year-old FF sensor and in many cases you'd have a hard time telling which image came from an FF DSLR or an APS DSLR or a m4/3 camera.

We all pick the stuff that fits our own wants and needs, whatever they happen to be. Categorical statements like "bigger is always better" are at best limited in their application and as worst badly misleading to anyone who doesn't know better.

TheDman Loc: USA

schuchmn wrote:

By the fact that the sensors are large enough for many people's purposes.

Remember -- small doesn't mean bad.

It means not as good as large.

schuchmn wrote:

All else equal a big sensor is better than a small one but all else is never equal. A bigger sensor MAY give you better results IF your lenses AND your tripod AND your technique are up to snuff.

If those are not up to snuff, then they won't be up to snuff on a M43 either. This is like saying M43s are better than DSLRs if you point them at more attractive subjects.

schuchmn wrote:

in many cases you'd have a hard time telling which image came from an FF DSLR or an APS DSLR or a m4/3 camera.

The difference between my 5D III and a T3i is very obvious to me, but I guess I'm just more of a pixel peeper than others.

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

It is said that full frame sensors are better in low light shooting than crop frame at higher ISO and comparable resolution.

rpavich wrote:

Both of my Fuji mirrorless cameras have APS-C sensors...

Why should I have to "get around" anything?

Is a Canon 7D substandard because it's not full frame?

Of course not.

No matter what sensor size they have, if they produce quality images why should anyone care what size they are?

?

TheDman Loc: USA

rpavich wrote:

Both of my Fuji mirrorless cameras have APS-C sensors...

Why should I have to "get around" anything?

Is a Canon 7D substandard because it's not full frame?

Of course not.

No matter what sensor size they have, if they produce quality images why should anyone care what size they are?

?

My bad, I was thinking M43s.

schuchmn

TheDman wrote:

The difference between my 5D III and a T3i is very obvious to me, but I guess I'm just more of a pixel peeper than others.

Right -- pixel peepers have different wants and needs than more casual shooters.

Don't get me wrong -- I'm not about to give up my DLSRs. But there's room in the marketplace for other choices as well.