Dear all,

I wanna learn photography (like aperture, shutter speed or ISO). My main interest is dslr. however, my concern is that it is too bulky..i dont think i will wanna carry a 0.5kg item around me in the city..then i come acorss mirror less camera like sony nex 5. is there any difference in terms of image quality? Can i use lenses for dslr on a mirorless camera (thats if i have the mount specific for my mirorless camera) ? In long term, i would like to take macro picture like bugs/flowers... will a mirorless give me a great picture?

basically, what are the main difference between these 2 type? why would ppl choose a bulky dslr over the mirror less camera ?

Just the way they capture stuff being different.

Mirrorless are great!

I would go for mirrorless too if I were to buy a camera now. DSLR are bulky, even the smallest DSLR is still bigger than most mirrorless.

Mirrorless can capture pictures as well as DSLR I would say.

But there aren't many great Macro lenses for Mirrorless yet, other than m43 (oly and pana both have macro lenses). One thing that a mirrorless would lose to DSLR is the slow focusing in darker environment, slower focusing to track moving subject (useful if you plan to shoot concert/ sport) and also fast telephoto zoom (panasonic has it, but neither NEX/Fuji have a 70-200 f2.8).

I'm a fan and user of mirrorless

This post has been edited by DarkEmotion88: Mar 28 2014, 07:24 PM

dslr is bulkier than mirrorless? really? 1855 non collapsible lens is still bulky and does not make any difference.

huh what are you talking about? the first sentance you sound like you don't agree but the last sentence you agreed?

Mirrorless always the best. You can look for Olympus, Lumix and Ricoh brand.

there will be die hard users from both side of the field having different views that will argue their views until the cows come home..

Best you feel what is great in your hands. Some like to be see with big bulky camera and big lens.. make them look good and appear pro.. I prefer to be incognito.. but a 620mm Novoflex do make you look good esp with the double rapid pistol grip and shoulder pod.. but in the wrong place, you can get shot for being mistake as a terrorist with a bazooka..

I move from film SLR to Sony NEX - APSC sensor to be specific.. How much you have to burnt will determine your end product..

Irrespective of which type - start with the sensor size.. Full frame or NOT.. then progress to how deep you want to dig into your life savings..

I am a die hard manual lens user.. so I have plenty to choose from the rich legacy of macro lens.. at fair price. In specific I have a 50mm Macro Nikkor f2.8 but I will not stop there.. One of the advantage of NEX is I can convert practically any lens or converging lens and turn it into macro... actually pinhole also can work.. How big or close a magnification is another issue.. One of my more interesting lens I have is a Wollensak Dumont CRO- 75mm f1.9 Reptor that can give a 1:0.9. They are all fully manual lens and may not be everyone cup of tea .

This post has been edited by ChinWY: Mar 28 2014, 09:48 PM

if ur still using HUGE lens, mirrorless still wont make any difference. huge lens as in non collapsible 1855 and bigger. yes i dun agree that mirrorless will be SIGNIFICANTLY less bulkier, if u use the wrong lens.

yes, I know. but the term mirrorless includes M43/ APSC/ FF, so you can't really say all of them are small or all of them are bulky. But the body only already will be around the half or less of the weight of a DSLR. And a lot of mirrorless can use legacy/ classic lenses which are a lot smaller compared to the DSLR equivalent.

1) which legacy lens have small back flange distance? dun talk about c-mount coz c-mount MOST of the time wont perform well in APSC/FF environment. c-mount most of the time cant cover the whole APSC/FF sensor.
2) then if u use legacy lens on a mirrorless, u STILL need to use adapter rite? which makes it bulky TOO.
M43 arent that SMALL too, except nikon 2X crop.

AND if its not collapsible, big sensor normally uses big lens. u cant change the physic, so yes. i can safely say that FF lens is BIGGER than strictly APSC equivalent lens.

im not stopping u from using mirrorless, but if u want big sensor, the lens will be big except collapsible lenses/mirror lens.

sony alpha 7

yes you need adapter, but those are just some plastic joints and the lens itself it still small. let's not focus on FF mirrorless, since only sony has it and not everyone is using that. and talking about mirrorless, take a look at panasonic 12-35/ olympus 12-40 f2.8, and comapre with the weight of canon/nikon 24-70, the size itself already differ a lot, not to mention the weight. and if you take a look at the 70-200 equivalent of m43, you will see why. look at the primes too (don't talk about those 0.95 or 1.4 prime), m43 still has much smaller size of lenses.

m43 is smaller than apsc. but if u like m43, then its a totally diff ball game

the word mirrorless includes too many formats now, so unless TS makes a clear statement of what format he wanted to get, we can't really give detailed suggestions. still a mirrorless body will be smaller than a dslr equivalent body any day.

If I could go back years in time, I will surely, 100%, invest in a Mirrorless System today with the money I spent with my DSLr couple of years ago.

Today's Mirrorless is really as good as a DSLR, I would say, better in some aspects. Try to read reviews on Sony NEXs or Fujifilm They're really really good

mirrorless camera very suitable for user who looking for DSLR quality picture with compact size body. although mirrorless camera employs Contrast Detection AF as primary AF system, yet the accuracy is precise

most of DSLR user they had committed into photography as career. they often invest lenses more than body, as different lenses suitable for various kind of situation, or different kind of photography

if u just want enjoy photograph, go for mirrorless camera. there's few brand of camera quite reliable - Sony, Fuji, Olympus. their IQ quite impressive

I'm one of those that just swapped (sold) off my DSLR and recently got myself an Olympus O-MD E-M10. While not really that cheap (cheaper than DSLR of cos), I was highly doubtful of its performance till I used it. Lightning fast focus, lighter than DSLR (well, it does feel heavy cos I had expected it to be as light as feather.. LOL), looks great, feels good in the hands, love the touch screen focusing, etc.

Haven't really looked clearly on the image quality but from screen, it looks good.

DSLR for more manual control, mlc for convenience

Correct me if I am wrong. If you like manual lens. The ability of some Mirrorless EVF or life view to zoom in to specific area of focus interest, is an asset. More so if lens are long, maximum aperture opening is not really that great, and lighting is poor.

But do bare in mind EVF may cause problems to some people suffering from serious vertigo issue under certain conditions..

Best you try it out using a very long lens and pan the camera.. you will get the effect almost immediately. I somehow cope with it .. doing it slowly.