Mirrorless cameras vs DSLR cameras. Mirrorless or DSLR. Which camera to choose

Mirrorless cameras vs DSLR cameras. Mirrorless or DSLR. Which camera to choose
17.10.2019

Previously, only two types of cameras were presented on the photographic equipment market: SLR and conventional digital point-and-shoot cameras. The first ones were aimed at professionals and so-called advanced users. But another type of camera was intended for a wider audience. Today, another type of camera has appeared: digital cameras with detachable lenses. They are also called system or mirrorless. You can purchase all of the above models in the cifrosvit.com store. The assortment is wide. To decide which camera is better, you first need to understand what they are.

Thus, a SLR camera is equipped with a viewfinder based on a mirror. There are two-lens and single-lens reflex devices available for sale. The mirror in them is at an angle of forty-five degrees, so through the viewfinder you can see a real, not digitized, picture. The light that enters through the lens is reflected by the mirror and rushes upward. There he ends up in a pentamirror. It gives the image a normal orientation. That is, if there were no pentamirror, the image would be upside down. It turns out that a distinctive feature of DSLRs is the presence of an optical viewfinder (photo 1).

A digital camera with interchangeable lenses does not have such a mirror viewfinder. A screen is used instead. Those devices that are more expensive use an electronic viewfinder. The already digitized image is visible on such a viewfinder. It looks like a small screen with a certain extension. It is always indicated in the specification that comes with the camera (photo 2).


Now let's look at the advantages of SLR cameras. Of course, their main advantage is the optical viewfinder, which shows an undigitized and raw image. It also delivers images without delay. In addition, such devices are also characterized by a phase-automatic housing. They have much better ergonomics. The mirror and pentaprism in the body take up a lot of space, so the DSLRs look very large (photo 3).


DSLR cameras are equipped with an additional monochrome display, especially large devices. Professional cameras have good access to different buttons and wheels, as well as other controls. All of them are on the carcass. The operating time of such cameras is significantly higher than digital ones. Batteries are most often capacious and long-lasting (photo 4).


Digital cameras that come with interchangeable lenses also have certain advantages. So, they are significantly smaller in size than their competitors. The optics are also compact. Cameras that come with an electronic viewfinder are suitable for nearsighted people. You can see additional information on the screen (photo 5).


Many manufacturers produce such cameras today. Thus, cameras from Olympus, Canon, Fujifilm, Panasonic, Sony, Samsung and others will be on sale. The price is completely different. Both SLR and mirrorless cameras are equipped with a good matrix. Also, these two types are also united by the fact that they are system cameras, that is, they have interchangeable optics (photo 6).


So, which of the two types of cameras listed above is better is up to the user to decide. Many agree that DSLRs are still superior to digital cameras with interchangeable lenses. When choosing a camera, pay attention to price, optics, turn-on and focusing speed. For important photography, it is best to use a DSLR camera (photo 7).

" But somehow they avoided the question of what is better, a DSLR or a mirrorless camera? Today we’ll catch up and talk about the differences between the two types of photographic equipment – ​​mirrorless and DSLR cameras. Go.

What is a SLR camera?

Reflex camera is a camera whose viewfinder is based on a mirror. In general, there are single-lens and double-lens SLR cameras. But since in the world of digital photography there is only room left for the first type, it will be discussed further.

The first single-lens reflex camera appeared in 1861. Yes, while serfdom had just been abolished in Russia, the camera had already been invented in England. That is, the history of the SLR camera began in the century before last, more than 150 years ago.

Of course, the first SLR cameras were very different from what we have now. One of the differences is the use of film. Today, film, as you all know very well, is practically extinct and exists only thanks to enthusiasts who fell in love with film photography once upon a time. Digital technologies have made it possible to replace the film in the camera with a matrix.

Let's return to the design of a SLR camera. Every DSLR has a mirror-based viewfinder. The mirror stands at an angle of 45 degrees and allows you to see a real non-digitized picture through the viewfinder. The mechanism, in general, is quite simple from the point of view of understanding. Through the lens, light (and the image, respectively) enters the camera body, where a mirror is installed at an angle of 45 degrees. The light reflected by the mirror rushes upward, where it enters a pentaprism (or pentamirror), which wraps around the image, giving it its normal orientation. Simply put, if there were no pentaprism, the image in the viewfinder would appear upside down. That's all. This is the optical viewfinder - a distinctive feature of any DSLR.

What is a mirrorless camera?

Mirrorless Just like a SLR camera, it has interchangeable lenses. But, as you understand from the name, it does not have a mirror viewfinder. Inexpensive cameras use a screen instead of a viewfinder, while more expensive cameras use an electronic viewfinder. In fact, unlike an optical viewfinder, such a viewfinder shows us a digitized image. We can say that this is a small screen. It has a certain resolution, which is indicated in the camera specification. Naturally, as with a monitor, the higher the resolution, the better.

Why is a DSLR camera better than a mirrorless camera?

Let's first talk about why a DSLR is better than a mirrorless one.

  • Optical viewfinder- not only a feature of a DSLR camera, but also its advantage over a mirrorless one. There are several reasons for this. First, the optical viewfinder shows the image in real time, raw and undigitized. That is, as your eye would see it without a viewfinder. Secondly, when using an electronic viewfinder there is a slight delay in the image, which is not present with an optical viewfinder. Those. with the latter you always see the picture in real time.
  • Phase detection autofocus– it is typical only for SLR cameras. The latest models of mirrorless cameras have learned to use phase sensors on the matrix, thereby giving birth to a hybrid focusing system, but today it still does not reach the focusing speed of a SLR camera.
  • Ergonomics DSLRs are better. This is due, among other things, to the fact that the mirror itself with the pentaprism takes up quite a lot of space in the carcass. Because of this, in fact, these cameras are so large. But this minus turns into a plus when you need to control the camera: especially professional cameras have excellent access to all important functions using buttons, wheels and other controls located on the body. Particularly noteworthy is the additional monochrome display, which is found in large SLR cameras and is never found in mirrorless cameras. This display is very helpful in professional photography, and it is never superfluous for amateur photography.
  • Huge optics park. Remember when we said that SLR cameras have been produced for a century and a half? Nikon began producing cameras in the 50s of the twentieth century. Today, Nikon's optics fleet is huge and continues to grow. Of course, mirrorless cameras are still far from achieving such richness.
  • Price DSLR cameras are generally lower. Specific example. There is a Nikon D5100 with a Nikon 35mm 1.8G DX lens. This is a very inexpensive kit, costing less than 20 thousand. To get similar quality with a mirrorless camera you need to spend a lot more money.
  • DSLR camera turns on much faster than mirrorless. In a split second, while mirrorless cameras can turn on in 3 seconds.
  • Working hours DSLR cameras' battery life is significantly higher than that of mirrorless cameras. And the batteries themselves are usually more capacious. Thus, amateur cameras like the Nikon D7100 can shoot one and a half thousand frames on a single charge. Professional equipment, like the Nikon D4, can take more than 3 thousand pictures with a single battery charge.
  • DSLR cameras more reliable. Some of them have dust and moisture protection. This is why you are unlikely to see a photographer with a Sony A7 in the savannah. But with Canon 1Dx there is nothing to do. There are more of them there than lions and bison...

So, the main thing: for today professional photography almost impossible with a mirrorless camera. A DSLR camera is preferable for commercial photography. And the amateur must decide for himself whether the advantages of a DSLR are important to him, or whether what a mirrorless camera offers is enough. More on this below.

Why is a mirrorless camera better than a DSLR?

Yes, but are there any advantages to a mirrorless camera that a DSLR camera doesn’t have? Eat. And now we will talk about them.

Olympus technology is one of the most popular mirrorless cameras on the market

  • Size. This is the most obvious. Mirrorless cameras are smaller. The optics for such cameras are also more compact. As a result, you can get a mirrorless system that will be smaller than a DSLR, but will allow you to get the same high-quality images.
  • Electronic viewfinder. Electronic viewfinders also have their advantages. Firstly, they can display various additional information. Secondly, such viewfinders will be more convenient for nearsighted people. You need to use the optical viewfinder with glasses or use the diopter correction function, which is enough for vision of -2.5, but if the minus is greater, then alas. The electronic viewfinder, as we said above, is a screen. And, of course, when used by a nearsighted person, there are no problems with it.
  • Big choice manufacturers. Mirrorless cameras are now produced by the following companies: Nikon, Canon, Sony, Panasonic, Olympus, Fujifilm, Samsung. But affordable DSLRs are produced only by the first 3 companies plus Pentax.

What do DSLR and mirrorless cameras have in common?

There is one thing that these cameras have in common.

  • Matrix. The most important part of a digital camera. Just a couple of years ago, I would have said that mirrorless cameras do not have a full-frame sensor. But Sony corrected this by releasing the A7 series cameras. They have matrices that are not inferior to those used in SLR cameras. We have already talked about matrices more than once; there is no need to repeat ourselves.
  • Systematicity. For some reason, many people call mirrorless cameras system cameras, forgetting that DSLR cameras also belong to this class. This is the similarity between DSLRs and mirrorless cameras - these are system cameras that feature interchangeable optics.

What's better? DSLR or mirrorless?

There is no clear answer to this question. Everyone must make their choice based on their needs. My opinion is that DSLR cameras today are still too much superior to mirrorless cameras. For me personally, when choosing a camera, the most important criteria are speed (focusing, switching on), a wide selection of optics and price (both for the camera and lenses). Yes, you don’t always want to take a huge mirror set with you. It's better to have a choice. For example, for large (long, important, etc.) filming, have a DSLR, but for the soul - something small, maybe not even a mirrorless camera, but a compact camera like Fuji x100s or the like. But if you choose one single camera, then again, I would choose a DSLR. But that's just my opinion. What would you choose?

Articles

Each of us has admired beautiful photographs more than once while looking through websites on the Internet or magazines. This inspired many to try their hand at photography. And many questions immediately arise. Which photographic equipment should you choose? DSLR or mirrorless, which is better? What are the pros and cons of different camera systems?

The modern photographic equipment market offers many options that are easy for an inexperienced user to get confused about. To understand the variety of offers, let's first find out the main differences and principles of operation of DSLRs and mirrorless cameras.

What is a DSLR camera?

When looking through camera models, it is logical to ask yourself the question: “What is a DSLR camera?” So, the design of the DSLR has not fundamentally changed since the days of film photography. Today, in the digital era, this principle is widely used in both amateur and professional cameras.

A special feature of a digital SLR camera is the viewfinder design, which uses a mirror. When a photographer looks through the viewfinder of a DSLR, he sees an image that hits the mirror through the lens, and then, through a special optical device - a pentaprism, onto the focusing screen.

Thus, the photographer accurately sees the composition of the frame. When you press the shutter button, the mirror lifts up, allowing light to enter the sensor, where the image is formed.

What is a mirrorless camera?

Everything is very simple, a mirrorless camera is a camera whose design does not use a mirror or other optical viewfinder systems. Instead, the image is displayed on an LCD screen.

Essentially, you see a picture constructed for you by electronics, which does not always correctly convey reality. Many of these devices have an electronic viewfinder, but this is not necessary. Sometimes there is only a screen. Like DSLRs, mirrorless cameras have interchangeable lenses. But the choice of lenses for a particular model may be very limited; you need to be prepared for this right away.

Pros of DSLR cameras:

  • The optical viewfinder is an undeniable plus of SLR cameras. This system allows you to compose the frame most accurately without missing important details.
  • Autofocus system. It is in DSLRs that the phase detection autofocus system is implemented. Without going into unnecessary details, we note that this system was invented specifically for this type of camera and is fast and accurate, although it requires additional sensors. Fast focusing, even in low light, is indispensable for reportage shooting, when a successful shot is separated from a bad one by a fraction of a second.
  • Size. Yes, yes, the rather large size of DSLRs can be a plus. The pentaprism and mirror take up a lot of space, which makes the device large. This becomes convenient when the camera has to be reconfigured - the size of the body allows you to move the main controls to places convenient for the photographer. Don't forget about additional screens. They are usually located on the top panel and below the main screen. They display various service information.
  • A huge selection of optics for every taste and budget. DSLR cameras have been in production for several decades and the number of optics available for them is truly impressive. It is worth remembering the legendary Soviet lenses that can be installed on the camera using adapters.
  • Many DSLRs turn on instantly, while mirrorless cameras may take a few seconds. And because of this, you can miss a good shot.
  • A DSLR can be simply cheaper than a mirrorless camera with similar characteristics, especially if you look at used cameras.
  • Many available accessories made specifically for DSLRs: tripods, filters, straps, hoods, bags, remote controls, etc.

Pros of mirrorless cameras:

  • Small size. An obvious advantage of mirrorless cameras, especially if you need to take a high-quality photo and not attract too much attention.
  • Quiet operation. You will not hear the characteristic mechanical shutter sound like with DSLRs.
  • The quality of the images is at a sufficient level.
  • Fewer moving mechanical parts and therefore less wear.
  • The matrices on modern mirrorless cameras are not inferior in quality to the matrices of amateur and semi-professional SLR cameras.
  • Mirrorless cameras can also shoot in RAW format.
  • Many mirrorless cameras have a larger number of shots during continuous shooting.
  • Many mirrorless cameras charge via USB, which means that they can be charged, for example, from a solar panel while camping.

Cons of DSLR cameras:

  • The mirrors are big. This can be a disadvantage, especially if you are a fragile girl and have to carry a camera, lenses and accessories.
  • The optics for DSLRs are large. There are small SLR cameras, but the optics for them do not get smaller, which is due to many design features. Sometimes the lens can weigh several times more than the camera itself.
  • As a consequence of this, a person who decides to shoot and buys an expensive DSLR, as well as optics for it, simply does not take it out of the house. I’m too lazy to carry heavy things with me, and I also don’t want to take them on trips, in case they steal them. It’s scary to go outdoors in case it rains. As a result, he continues to take photographs with his mobile phone.
  • The focus sensors are located closer to the center of the frame, so it can be difficult to get objects near the edges into focus.
  • The movement of the mirror during shooting is transmitted to the camera. This is especially noticeable on devices with high resolution and during long continuous shooting. There is a risk of getting blurry pictures.
  • Mirrors are too noticeable and noisy.
  • Autofocus speed in LiveView mode is frustratingly slow.
  • The design and operation of DSLRs and their lenses may seem complicated to a beginner; as a result, a novice photographer will carry three kilograms of equipment, but take photographs only in automatic mode.

    • Cons of mirrorless cameras:

    • Sighting system. As we said earlier, the electronic viewfinder on mirrorless cameras may seem like a disadvantage to many photographers due to the not always reliable picture.
    • Small body, on which it is difficult to place all the controls. Therefore, to change the settings you have to search for a long time for the desired parameter in the menu.
    • Limited choice of optics. Since mirrorless cameras are just beginning to conquer the market, accessories for them are not available in as many quantities as for conventional DSLR cameras.
    • Focusing speed is slower due to the use of a special autofocus system.
    • As you get further into the art of photography, you may find that many mirrorless cameras lack some important advanced settings.
    • Rapid battery consumption.

    What can you recommend? Which camera should you choose? There is no universal advice. As we see, both systems have strengths and weaknesses, pros and cons. You can take good pictures with any camera.

    Masters of yesteryear shot with bulky film cameras, the technical capabilities of which were in many ways inferior to modern ones, but their works are still exhibited in museums.

    There can be only one piece of advice here: look at the world more broadly, absorb its wonders with delight, look for the beautiful in everything and try to pass it on to others. This is the whole secret of beautiful photographs.

    Also, read on our portal useful articles about and about.

During a recent stream “Algorithms for choosing photographic equipment”, dedicated, as the name suggests, to the peculiarities of choosing cameras and lenses, I raised the topic of “DSLRs versus mirrorless cameras”. Well, I picked it up and raised it, just as a step in the same algorithm for choosing photographic equipment... To be honest, I thought that we would skip over this topic quite quickly, it has already been discussed up and down, from all sides, so to speak. Ah, that’s not the case! It turns out that there are still a lot of prejudices against mirrorless cameras among photographers! A rather heated discussion ensued, as a result of which I decided to write this post in order to try to dot all the “e”s in writing. For clarity, I decided to format the post in the form of questions and answers or in the form of remarks and comments to them. Almost all questions or comments are real, those that were voiced either during the stream itself or after, in the discussion.

"There are many photographers who fell for the manufacturers' marketing tricks and their sweet advertising promises, switched to mirrorless cameras. And then they quickly returned to their DSLR cameras."
Perhaps, of course, this happened to someone. But there is a nuance here. It often seems to us that if something happens in our environment in a certain way, then everything is exactly the same everywhere. However, this is an illusion. Several acquaintances who returned back to DSLRs are not an indicator. Moreover, I can give a similar counterargument - many professional photographers I know are switching to mirrorless cameras.

Moreover, global sales statistics show that for many years now there has been a decline in sales of mirrored systems and an increase in mirrorless systems. The approximation of these two graphs suggests that literally next year there will be parity, and then there will be more mirrorless cameras sold in the world than DSLRs.

Indeed, even now, as a photographer, I see no reason why I should advise buying an entry-level DSLR as my first camera. In all respects, except perhaps price, these cameras are inferior to entry-level mirrorless cameras. That is, DSLR cameras still hold the lead in the top segment when shooting reportage. And even then... For landscape photography, for object photography, for interior photography, architectural, studio work, for portraits, and for many other relatively calm types of photography - a mirror is no longer needed even in the top segment, this is a fact. Moreover, it’s simply superfluous! SLR systems do not allow you to constantly control the depth of field, which is very important in product and portrait photography, they will not show ready-made colors, contrasts and brightness before pressing the shutter button, which is useful in landscape and architectural photography, and so on and so forth.

“But mirrorless cameras are slower!”
Actually never like that. For example, I just took handheld shots of a car with wiring on the street with a mirrorless medium format camera. If someone had told me a couple of years ago that I would shoot 3 50MP frames per second with AF tracking on a mirrorless medium format on the dynamics of a car passing by, I would have simply laughed in his face! No, really! Even if the mirrorless medium format is fast, what can we say about more compact systems?!..

For example, the FUJIFILM X-T2 feels like a very lively camera in your hands, and the Olympus OM-D E-M1 mk2 is generally super fast! And it’s not even about how many frames per second this or that camera can shoot (although the same E-M1 mk2 is completely out of reach for this parameter - up to 60 20MP RAW per second!), but about how it feels in operation - delays when pressing the shutter, when operating AF systems in mirrorless cameras, are minimized and almost shooting feels exactly the same as with SLR cameras. So it's not like that, it's not slow anymore.

"Mirrorless cameras have very slow autofocus!"
There is a lot to be said about AF. Previously, he really was that Achilles heel. But now the autofocus of mirrorless cameras is no longer slow. Both frame-by-frame and tracking - everything is already at the level of good professional DSLRs, albeit not top-end ones, but still.

Moreover, contrast (or, what is more common now, hybrid AF) is much more accurate than phase-detection autofocus of DSLRs: here you have neither back focus nor front focus! In backlight it works more stable than phase detection. In the dark, contrast AF works better than phase detection. The focusing area can be of any size, even very tiny, even half the screen. The focus point can be located anywhere, even in the very corner of the frame. This point can easily be linked to exposure metering (which is only available on top-end DSLRs). The focus area can always be instantly increased for more precise control of sharpness. You can use focus peaking and with a little training you can achieve focus with manual glasses at the same speed as with autofocus lenses. Detection of faces, eyes, tracking of objects, all this with contrast AF is implemented much easier and with greater capabilities.

"And the digital viewfinder is a minus!"
Vice versa! The electronic viewfinder (EVF) is a huge plus! If it gets dark outside, what do you do with your optical viewfinder (OVF)? That's right, stop shooting and go home, because you can't see anything through that peephole, especially if the optics are not fast. And EVI shows everything! At the very least, noisy, but it shows! At dusk and in the dark, it works as a night vision device, shooting is much more comfortable, and the scene is better visible.

At the same time, EVI immediately produces a picture the same as you will receive later, without the need to mentally calculate b/w, for example, or the colors of the final frame. You can immediately see the depth of field, which, by the way, cannot be seen at all on DSLRs, and which is terribly annoying in subject photography. Yes, here in the comments they remember about DOF-Preview for DSLRs... Well, imagine that you are shooting a subject at f/11 and a long shutter speed, what will you see there on the DSLR? A beautiful dark rectangle instead of a frame. Further, in the EVI you can display a histogram for yourself, you can see focus peaking, you can instantly, with one click of a button, enlarge the image for more careful aiming, you can view the footage in the EVI if the sun is blinding or it’s drizzling.

At the same time, the EVI on top mirrorless cameras like the FUJIFILM X-T2 or on the Olympus OM-D E-M1 mk2 is almost the same in size as on the Canon EOS 1Dx! After these viewfinders, entry-level and mid-level JVI DSLRs are like a small peephole on a door. Even the JVI of a “penny” doesn’t look particularly cool after a good EVI.

“If you can’t see something in the viewfinder on your DSLR, turn on life view.”
This is absolutely funny! =:) No, really! Buy a large SLR camera to use as a mirrorless one! At the same time, with live view, the speed of even the 5Dm3 immediately becomes like that of an inexpensive mirrorless camera from five years ago... No tracking AF, no focus peaking, no all of the above-mentioned goodies... And the screen does not rotate even on the 5Dm4! Why do you need such a crutch?! To be at least somehow similar to a mirrorless camera?!.. =:)

“On my 5Dm3, I used lifeview only when I was shooting from the floor, so as not to lie down. And then, only to frame the frame. And I was shooting with the mirror already lowered.”
Well, listen, this is all reminiscent of talking about phones when cell phones first appeared! Everyone kept saying that mobile phones are expensive, inconvenient and the quality of communication is poor, but you can always call from home or, in extreme cases, by taxi, the sound is much better, and much cheaper! =:)

There are obvious advantages of mirrorless systems; a lot has already been said about them here. They are, perhaps, understandable to everyone who films a lot. I will not argue that all problems can be solved with SLR cameras, just as before all problems were solved with film technology. But the digital came and where is the film now? Although at the beginning, many people also said the same things. It’s just that someone has already built their own workflow and doesn’t want to change it, everything suits them. It may be difficult, it may be absurd in places, as in your case about life view, but everything is already known, why change? I understand this, sometimes I’m the same...

"The Canon 5D Mark IV now has a touch screen, by the way."
Wow, cool!!! Less than five years have passed since such screens appeared on mirrorless cameras, when this technology finally reached the top Canon model (so far only up to the “five”, the “one” still cannot boast of this)! Look, in another 5 years the screen will become folding or rotating! =:) If Canon is not in the ascendant by then, of course...

“It’s actually funny about the possible demise of Nikon or Canon!”
Time will tell whether Canon or Nikon is funny or not. In the meantime, I recommend that you look at the financial reports of these companies and market trends; there may be food for thought. At one time, no one believed in the inglorious end of the era of Nokia's dominance in the phone market... And what do we see now?

“Mirrorless cameras have enough batteries for 300 shots!
I assume that the number 300 came from a crude joke about “tractor drivers” =:) My experience says that I don’t shoot less than 800 frames on one battery, even if I don’t turn off the camera at all. My colleague Stanislav Vasiliev On one charge, my Olympus shoots 1500 frames or more, if my memory serves me correctly. Many photographers who shoot with mirrorless cameras claim that the battery is enough for them to last a day of shooting. But even if not, then taking an additional battery and/or a portable charger is not a problem at all, they are now very compact.

In fact, manufacturers have a measurement method that produces 300-400 frames, and they indicate this data in the camera specifications. In real life, one battery allows you to remove much more. So this is not a problem at all.

“It’s very inconvenient to use mirrorless cameras in studio shooting!”
Why?!.. Where does this belief come from?!.. I shoot a lot with mirrorless cameras in the studio. Personally, I find it much more convenient to shoot there. I put the picture on the screen - and it becomes much easier to control and frame the frame. It’s not for nothing that photographers in the studio usually shoot “on a computer” (the camera is connected with a cord or via Wi-Fi to the computer and the image can be immediately viewed on the monitor screen, in high resolution). In general, purely psychologically, it is much easier to construct an image on the screen than through the viewfinder shaft. I’m not talking about low angles, which are not at all uncommon in the studio and when shooting which a photographer with a DSLR will have to spend many hours either squatting, kneeling or sitting on the floor.

If we are talking about the fact that when setting the typical parameters of studio shooting with pulsed devices (closed aperture, low ISO, shutter speed) nothing is visible on mirrorless cameras, then, in fact, this is an option and can be turned off. Then the screen will be like a DSLR - everything is bright, even with these aperture-shutter-speed-ISO settings.

“Even more so, mirrorless cameras are useless in reporting!”
For as long as I've been filming reports, I haven't experienced any problems. Well, perhaps, sometimes there are moments of particularly rapid development of situations where top-end DSLRs really rule, I agree. But in a relatively calm reportage, everything is fine with mirrorless cameras. Moreover, the ability to shoot hand-held on the folding screen from the top or bottom angles always aroused the envy of the photographers shooting nearby on DSLRs.

“Roughly speaking, at this stage of development, a mirrorless camera is a camera for photographing cats, for a home photo shoot or for travel photography, where masterpieces are not needed...”
Well, the professionals who are now switching to mirrorless cameras do not agree with you. They film weddings, film in studios, shoot videos - in general, now there is a massive transition of videographers to Sony A7 * or to mirrorless cameras from Panasonic... I have already spoken about interiors, about nature too, I am generally silent about the subject - here the mirror only gets in the way, this is already clear to everyone.

I don’t quite understand how, well, let’s say, a Sony A7R II camera, which has absolutely the same matrix as the Nikon D810A, to which you can attach good Zeiss optics, or through a Metabones adapter the same Nikon lenses as this camera will, for example, photograph a landscape worse than the D810A DSLR?! What has to happen, well, except perhaps for crooked hands, for a shot on a mirrorless camera to turn out bad? I don’t understand... But, for example, mirror shock (camera shake from the triggered mirror lifting mechanism) - I understand this very well and I know that this often leads to micro-smearing, which is immediately very noticeable in a 36.6MP picture. Here everything is very clear.

“You talk a lot about the compactness of mirrorless systems. But if you take several lenses with you, then the size of the camera is no longer very important. The weight of the lenses itself is sufficient.
If we talk about mirrorless cameras, then the constructive ability to “move” the lens closer to the matrix due to the absence of a mirror allows you to make the optics itself much more compact and, as a result, lighter. On mirrorless cameras, a similar set of lenses will, as a rule, be one and a half to two times lighter than similar lenses for DSLRs. All this with exactly the same quality, or even better, because the optics of mirrorless cameras were developed directly for new matrices, and not for film or old sensors, as was the case with most lenses in SLR systems. And a similar set will most likely cost less. And if you stop, for example, at crop size 1.5, then even more so! And your wallet, back and neck will thank you very much, believe me! =:)

"As for the size of the matrix... The larger the matrix, the better (this is the law of optics). This is about crop."
Agree. That's right. But if we approach it from the customer’s side, then many of them are not interested in our problems and difficulties at all, what matters to them is whether they will then have a good picture or not? And if people often cannot distinguish at all what was shot with FF and what with 1.5 crop, then we, photographers, can actually carry less weights.

This, by the way, does not mean that customers are fools and completely do not see the difference between full frame and crop. This means that the camera contains not only a matrix, but also optics (which contributes even more to the quality of the photo than the matrix, by the way), and also electronics. Taken together, it turns out that good optics + a new matrix + advanced signal processing often give better quality at 1.5 crop than the old matrix + film optics + old signal processing algorithms on many full frames.

“SLRs have better convenience and ergonomics!”
I completely disagree with this! From year to year, from model to model, DSLRs bring with them all the ergonomic miscalculations... uh... peculiarities, starting with the first cameras of this class. Nikon still requires you to press a button and spin a wheel at the same time to change many settings. Oh yes! Of course, you can easily get used to this, it’s protection against accidental turning of the wheels, yes, yes... I have no doubt that it is very necessary in reportage shooting, when the camera hangs either on the stomach, then on the side, or somewhere in backpack or trunk. But not everyone needs this; not everyone is a reportage photographer, unfortunately. And for me personally, this “press-hold-twist” thing is wildly inconvenient. For lovers of Canon ergonomics, I always ask, well, for example, to change ISO blindly without looking up from the viewfinder. Even long-time fans of “Pyataks” perform this “exercise” once out of five attempts, not to mention the owners of younger models. =:) The ergonomics of DSLRs are traditionally BAD. It is designed more for octopuses than for people.

But it's not even that she's bad. This is not so bad... The worse thing is that it has NOT CHANGED for years. Yes, mirrorless cameras are not always convenient, some things are not obvious, some are downright bad, I agree. But engineers are constantly experimenting, trying new ergonomic solutions, trying to fit ALL control elements into a compact body, and now all controls are much more convenient to operate than those offered by DSLR designers from year to year. So I don’t agree with you that “the DSLR “fits” better and more conveniently in the hand.”

“This is not only my opinion or that of my friends, but also, for example, Alexei Dovgul.
Sorry, but in this matter I don’t see the opinion of Alexey Dovgul as being of any importance, with all due respect to him as a photographer and as a colleague. Of course, he can express any opinion, it is not even questioned. But I presented my arguments and they look much more convincing to me than the opinion of one good photographer, forgive me.

UPD! I’ll add Alexey’s own comment:

"Ho-ho-ho!!! :)))) ahhh mirrorless cameras are coming!!! Since I’m mentioned, I have the right to speak out. I won’t get into an argument, I’ll just say that I’m not against mirrorless cameras for amateurs and some categories professionals. But so far, most mirrorless cameras are useless for me. I have developed a style of working in reportage photography for years, and this is 50% of my work, I work with two cameras and almost never hold the camera with both hands, so a wide camera grip is important, here it is smaller. the size is a detriment for me. I have 2 programmable shooting modes on one camera and 3 modes on the other, and I use all of them in reporting and change them with one finger. As for the viewfinder, it seems to me a matter of habit, but trying to shoot beauty with a mirrorless camera. I ended up in failure - slowly, maybe this issue has been resolved at the top ones. About the aggressive reporting, I’m even afraid to think about it, to be honest. I work a lot with two flashes, but not every manufacturer makes good flashes and synchronization tools for them, probably only Sony will help. The list of little things goes on, this is the first pain I encounter. But on a tourist trip, I will definitely choose a mirrorless camera. And even when my friends ask me which DSLR to buy, if I see that the person is not a pro and does not intend to be one, I send him in the direction of Sony Oli Fuji. So the opinion that I am against mirrorless cameras is false, perhaps it was formed under the influence of my specific pain. My result: the destiny of amateurs and professionals of leisurely shooting with rarely changing conditions is a mirrorless camera, my destiny is a large DSLR. But that's it for now. I completely agree that over time the mirror will go away. By the way, I will be grateful if someone gives me a pair of mirrorless cameras with fast lenses from 17 to 200mm and a pair of flashes for a full test of wedding photography, then I will be able to constructively fend off Anton’s arguments or vice versa :)))))"

"This post is paid for, it's all jeans!!!1"
Dooooo!.. Of course! And in general, Churchill came up with all this in 1918! =:)

But seriously, this post was written simply on the basis of common sense and real-life facts. It's hard for me to understand how this could not be obvious? =:)

Updated: 08/03/2016 Oleg Lazhechnikov

121

Those who follow me on social networks may have already seen that I had a kind of revolution in consciousness and switched to a mirrorless camera. It became the Sony Alpha a6000. Unfortunately, the post was not paid for, since they did not respond to my letter about cooperation, so I had to buy it with my own money. But now the post is not about the camera, but about the sensations after the transition, so Sony still has time to come to its senses :)

Also, the post will not contain test comparison shots, because I don’t have a DSLR with me now, I didn’t take it to Warsaw. After all, initially everything was started to reduce weight, otherwise nothing fits into my hand luggage. In short, a mirrorless camera is a simple salvation!

Previously, I was completely skeptical about mirrorless cameras; they did not suit me in various respects. But time has passed, and now mirrorless cameras are no longer technically inferior to their mirrored counterparts. It seems to me that a little more and there may be nothing left of the class of amateur DSLRs at all, there will be no point in them. Although for now they are a good alternative simply because of the price, since mirrorless cameras are more expensive. Actually, that’s why I would still advise beginners, just because of the savings. But, if price is not an issue, then you can safely take something Nex-o-like from Sony or other brands.

After I realized that technically I was getting almost the same camera (meeting my needs), the minus came to the fore as ergonomics. Although I’m not a reporter, you get used to the ease of control very quickly. Looking through the viewfinder, you can change settings in a split second by blindly turning the various wheels. Also, the Canon 7d camera focuses very quickly (and almost no blurring), and is instantly ready for use after turning it on. It seems, just think, a fraction of a second, but it’s difficult to give up what you’re used to, especially since the new camera is in a similar price category. It's like a phone, if it starts to slow down and you wait for several seconds for an application to load, then such a phone quickly begins to irritate. This is what I feared here.

About six months ago I twirled the Nex-5 and Nex-6 (previous models) in my hands and liked everything. Lightweight, compact, the pictures are also good. The A6000 is even better, it has faster focus, more convenient controls and menus. Therefore, before my next trip, I made a sharp decision (one day) and bought it, having received the box the day before departure. In fact, it was only at the airport that I used the camera for the first time.

Reasons for the transition

The main reason for the transition was that I was tired of carrying heavy things with me, and it was no longer possible to take something large with me. Even though I only have a Canon 7d body and two lenses for it, 24-105 and 11-16, it still came out to 2 kg. Plus additional batteries, chargers, remote control, filters, tripod (1kg), that is, a total of about 3-4 kg minimum. My hand luggage on the plane usually weighed under 10 kg, including the laptop and other things. In general, all this no longer fits normally in the car with which I usually travel.

In the end, I just faced the truth and realized that I haven’t taken the whole set with me for a long time, since most often we go somewhere together, and in my backpack I also have Egor’s toys, some food, his clothes and etc. Or even if I take a DSLR with me, then it’s inconvenient for me to dig it out of my backpack, and I take pictures with my phone. This is no good.

The second reason for the switch is that I mostly have photographs for my blog, and the width is only 900px, sometimes more. I also printed it a couple of times in two years, and the 15x20 size doesn’t require much. Thus, it is quite possible to reduce your requirements for a camera for every day (for a travel camera), not a wedding owner.

What did I get

The weight of the Sony a6000 camera with an 18-105 lens is about 0.9 kg. It seems to be quite a lot, but it’s still unusually easy. In addition, you can put a smaller lens, down to a small pancake, and you can even put the camera in your pocket. But for now I don’t plan anything else, one lens will suffice as a universal one. In fact, it covers almost all the focal lengths I need when traveling, but sometimes the width of 10-18 is not enough. Also, I won’t buy any additional filters or remote controls for now, and I’ll change my tripod to something very miniature and light. In general, it turned out very compactly, I am satisfied, the main task was completed. All that remains is to sell the DSLR with accessories and all purchases will pay off.

The camera is crop 1.5, that is, the matrix is ​​the same size as I had. It shoots in RAW, then everything lends itself well to processing in Lightroom. The dynamic range seems to be good too, I won’t say that I see a noticeable difference, to be honest, I don’t see it at all. ISO is working up to 1600-3200, but 3200 is already a bit noisy for me. The picture is nice, but different, the color rendition is different. The bokeh has changed.

In general, if it were not for speed, then there are no complaints at all, even about ergonomics, because after all, it is rarely needed. But speed is also a problem, you just have to remember to set the burst mode, like a machine gun then.

Life hack 1 - how to buy good insurance

It’s incredibly difficult to choose insurance now, so I’m compiling a rating to help all travelers. To do this, I constantly monitor forums, study insurance contracts and use insurance myself.

Life hack 2 - how to find a hotel 20% cheaper

Thanks for reading

4,77 out of 5 (ratings: 64)

Comments (121)

    Eugene

    Mila Demenkova

    Natalie

    Alexander

    Andrey

    land_driver

    Tatiana

    Paul

    Kotovsky

    Kostya

    Julia

    Kachubey

    Mikhail Schwartz

    Alexander

    Angelina

    Ovsyannikovs

    Anton Zh

    Ruslan

    Andrey Lunyachek

    Andrey

    Kildor

    Victoria Camilleri

    Marybe

    Andryusiks

    forworldtravel

    Victoria Zlata

    forworldtravel