Zenon

I am a newby to DSLR and am about to invest in a new midpriced DSLR camera. I'm pretty clear about the features I will need and these seem to be met by the Nikon D3500 24MP DSLR Camera with AF-P DX NIKKOR 18-55mm or the Panasonic LUMIX DMC-FZ300K 12.1 Megapixel. But I was wondering whether to try out the Sony Alpha a6000 Mirrorless camera. Mirrorless is new to me and I wonder if someone could advise me on my choice. Thanks very much for any help. Zen

zug55 Loc: Naivasha, Kenya, and Austin, Texas

Zen,

Welcome to UHH. With a question like this you will not get Zen! (Sorry for the bad pun.) There have been mirrorless vs DSLR debates going on for a while.

The D3500 is a great entry-level camera. But the DSLR technology, in my humble opinion, has reached the end point of its technological evolution. I do not think that there will be significantly better DSLRs in 5 years. I think that the DSLR eventually will become a niche product like film cameras today.

If you never had a DSLR and do not own any lenses for DSLR cameras I would not buy a DSLR. I would opt for a mirrorless camera. I think that the Sony 6000 series (6000, 6300, 6500) is a great entry-level system. Pair that with a 18-105mm or 18-135mm lens and you have a great package for beginners. There are other good systems out there--do some reading, watch videos, go to your local camera store to get a sense what is out there and what works for you. Mirrorless technology is evolving rapidly which means that you will be able to use the lenses you buy now for other cameras in the future.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

The FZ 300 K is a compact camera with a very good lens. Sony 6000 series is also very good. The D3500 is a good DSLR. But all three fall into different categories - which is something you need to decide on first. The consensus of opinion is that mirrorless is the way forward. Either APS-C or M43. If you have no kit at present, then it might be better to go with the future - especially if you are considering building a collection of lenses for which ever category you finally choose.

CO

You could rent first. LensRentals.com is excellent. They clean every item after being rented - even the sensors in digital cameras. They include a pre-paid return shipping label to make returns easy. I just rented the Nikon Z6 for a week to see how it compares to my D500. I think the image quality is outstanding, equal to the D500 but autofocus is another story. The Z6 would often hunt for focus in dim light, zooming back and forth trying to acquire focus. My D500 would acquire focus on the same subject right away. The D500 is also better for continuous AF tracking.

If you plan on doing studio work using strobes you would be better off with a DSLR. This is because mirrorless cameras have a WYSIWYG viewfinder. We put the cameras in manual mode and use settings around ISO100, f/8, and 1/125 second. This results in a very dark viewfinder in a studio environment. I was able to boost the viewfinder brightness on the Z6 but it wasn't nearly enough. A DSLR camera will hold the lens aperture wide open until an instant before the shutter opens and the viewfinder is not affected by the cameras's ISO setting. This results in a much brighter viewfinder for studio work.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Would it not be possible to incorporate view lights before you strobe?

dave.m

Well as a newcomer you certainly asked a question that will possibly get temperatures arising!

Delderby has good advice - I just switched to mirrorless after years of DSLR, and a primary consideration on what to buy was my existing pool of lenses. Its one thing to lose money on a body when you switch cameras, another thing altogether if you also switch lens mounts in the future and need to p/x lenses at a loss as well. I am very happy with mirrorless and would not go back to dslr

All the cameras you mention are excellent in their market segment and will give more than enough image quality (IQ) for most peoples needs. Full frame is the most flexible in varied light quality, cropped body is an excellent balance between size/cost and quality, and M4/3 is by far the most portable with excellent quality in reasonable light, but some can struggle in very low light.

I would add to Del of Derby: decide how big you are likely to enlarge your images - the bigger the print/ screen view the bigger the pixel count you'll need (round figures - A4/ letter sized prints/ 20" monitor, even with a bit of cropping then 20Mpx is a good starting point.) Then decide if you are likely to take photos in extreme light (ie lots of night/ low light photography then the bigger sensors have better low light capability.

Also I would strongly recommend a body with a viewfinder - although outer LCD screens are improving all the time, they still struggle badly in bright light. Also if using a long lens then holding well away from your body to view and frame the shot only adds to the big problem of camera shake. A viewfinder counters both those problems.

Finally, and perhaps the most important, go to a local photography store (not a general/dept store - they may have the model but seldom the assistant expertise to advise you) and try the cameras you are interested in, even if that means several trips. Take your own SD card and look at the images when you get home. I know its stating the obvious but actually testing a camera - size, weight, bulk, and seeing some images is a whole lot different from reading reviews.

Also see what 'kit' lens options are available. Typically (although by no means universally) the kit lens is a) a mid range, shortish zoom lens and b) cheaper as part of a kit than buying a body and lens separately. With a single lens in your armoury to start with look for a longish zoom. Zoom ranges vary by manufacturer but a 10x optical zoom is a great range for a first lens. 24-105 (4x zoom) if full frame, 24-140 (5+a bit x) or better still, 20-200 cropped body, 14-140 or better with M4/3. This way you have a good kit to get started.

Good luck

repleo Loc: Boston

'I second that emotion'.

BebuLamar

You should try it out. You may or may not like it but certainly you should check it out because if you change your mind later it would cost you.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

Welcome to UHH. All three of the cameras are capable of taking terrific pictures. It is more dependent on your skills than the camera. And at this time, you will be buying the basic mid body and a reasonable lens. But still, at this time, it doesn't mean you are tied to a particular brand. It is only one body and lens. As some have pointed out, mirrorless will be more prevalent in the future than DSLRs, but that doesn't mean you can't start with a DSLR. The Nikon D3500 is a tried and true camera. So are the other two. That makes you a winner no matter which you choose.

Having said that, I would look at buying into a system and what it can offer. Image quality is only one item to look at. There is also storage, portability, and affordability. There you will find that the full frame end tends to be the largest, heaviest, and most costly. The 4/3rds will be the smallest, lightest, and least costly. APS-C is in between the two systems as far as size, weight, and cost. Full frame usually will have the best low light ability and the narrowest depth of field. 4/3rds will have about two stops less in low light ability and about two stops greater depth of field for the same f-stop. Again, APS-C is in between the two. And then there is mirrorless and mirrors. Mirrors offer a optical view but have a hard time going faster than 10 or 15 fps. The mirror introduces vibration. And unless on a tripod and in live view, you can not see time exposures. Mirrorless can shoot well past 15 fps and show you what you are shooting as you go, including exposures of 1 or 2 seconds. If you would get too cheap a mirrorless, there will be too much image lag. But most mid body cameras and up do not have noticable lag. You get to see the image in the optical viewfinder before and after the image you take but the electronic viewfinder of mirrorless shows you the image you took.

There are many pros and cons to both mirror and mirrorless. And there are pros and cons to full frame all the way down to 4/3rds. Personally, I think the physical location of the controls on the camera makes more of a difference on how one takes a photograph than necessarily the camera itself. The three cameras you have mentioned will serve you well. But if you have not looked into the size, weight, and cost aspect, especially concerning future purchases, you may want to examine the full frames, APS-Cs, and 4/3rds cameras a little more.

CO

The view lights would need to turn off when the strobe fires. I'm not sure how that would be implemented.

ka5ysy

Welcome to the group. I was a 45 year Nikon user that got seduced by the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mk II last year. What an amazing camera system with the Pro series lenses, some of which have the Lens image stabilizers which also communicate with the in-body image stabilizer and allow for amazing hand-held images in low light long-exposure situations.

As recommended above, before you purchase anything, rent what you are considering. I highly recommend the Olympus system as it is much smaller, very light weight and takes amazing images both still and video. I recently spent three weeks in Italy and Greece and carried the camera with the 7-14mm and 12-100mm pro series zoom lenses and covered 98% of all the situations I wanted to photograph. I did not regret leaving the 40-150 zoom at home. This is an amazing, lightweight camera system that will last you a very long time. All this from a 45 year (former) Nikon system user.

cdayton

You need to try out the Nikon vs the Sony - there is a real difference in “feel” that has little (nothing) to do with capabilities of the cameras. I have 2 Nikon dslrs and a recent Sony a600 that I have yet to get comfortable using. I don’t like the menu system and it feels like a toy after having the sturdy grips on the Nikons.

Glenn Harve

A good choice includes a most important aspect, what do you want to photograph?
And how it feels to use it relates too how much you will use it. A camera unused has the worst image quality.

chrisg-optical Loc: New York, NY

If you are just starting out why not go mirrorless? Compare the offerings of Olympus, Fuji, Sony, Lumix, etc., and see what you like best.

IDguy Loc: Idaho

I tried a Sony NEX7, the predecessor to the 6000 series. It was excellent hardware, great features, and took great images...but I could not deal with going from its menu system to my Nikons. Perhaps if it is your first or only camera their menu approach will be OK. The challenge is it takes a while of trying to use it with a few days idle and different image settings to learn if it works for you.

I now have two Nikons and a Panasonic Lumix. The Nikons have the same menu systems and feel. The Lumix menu system differs but for some reason it doesn’t confuse me like the Sony one did. But I do have some refresh time if I don’t use it for a while.

I too prefer the Nikon feel but my Lumix is a teeny thing for when small and light weight matters most.