# Buying new camera. DSLR or Mirrorless?



## pwm (Jan 19, 2012)

I've decided to buy myself a new camera. My current digital is 16 years old and quite a relic now. I don't have a smart phone so all my photos are taken with cameras, either mine or my wife's. I also have a Canon EOS Rebel K2 film camera, so I have experience with an SLR. My choices for a DSLR have come down to either the *Canon T6i* or the *Nikon D5500*. On the other hand, there are many options in the CSC realm. The Sony *A6000* for example, is very highly rated, and they are selling boatloads of those. I don't already have any investment in lenses of any brand, so that is not an issue. I'm a casual photographer, and I don't want to spend more than $900. All three of the units I've mentioned are very close to the same price and are in that range.

I've been doing a lot of research and there are many advantages and disadvantages of both DSLR and Mirrorless systems, which I won't attempt to detail here. This is a topic that is being hotly debated on YouTube and every photography web site in existence. It's the hot button discussion now. I still haven't decided yet whether I want a DSLR or Mirrorless. 

Has anyone here been through this dilemma? Which did you choose, or do you have both systems? Do you have real world experience with both camera types to share?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

From the reviews, I would consider an iPhone 7+ just because the photo processing options are so extensive as well as the add-on lens choices. I mention this because you have no investment in lens.

(I have retired my Canon and my Olympus SLR so cannot help with your basic question.)


----------



## Spudd (Oct 11, 2011)

The advantage of mirrorless is it's much smaller, obviously. I had a DSLR that I really liked, but I couldn't handle carrying it everywhere on vacation, it was so bulky and annoying. I went Keith's direction and just use my smartphone now. But if I wanted to have a proper camera, I'd either go with a mirrorless or a compact point & shoot. Mirrorless gives you more options as far as the actual photography goes, compact point & shoot is just handy and easy to use. If you always used the "green square" setting on your DSLR, then I think a point & shoot would do you.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I don't consider smartphone cameras to be anywhere near in the same league as 'real' cameras. They are fine for casual pics, selfies and the like, and obviously are the most convenient for uploads to FB, and other social media. For one, the sensor is not big enough (iphone7 has a 1/3 or 1/3.6 inch Sony sensor I believe) so no matter how many megapixels one has, it does not improve the photo. The lens and sensors are the operative pieces no matter how good the software is. 

In a compact point and shoot camera, the standard sensor is 1/2.3 inches and the bigger non-DSLR cameras have 1 inch sensors. It is only when you get into 1 inch sensors can one say they have a 'real' camera worthy of enlargements and semi-professional photography. Companies like Sony and Panasonic offer both the compact point and shoot (1/2.3 inch) with up to 30x optical zoom and maintain their <250gram weight and pocket sized dimensions, while they also offer the larger 1 inch sensor cameras with up to 10x optical zoom, which are about twice as 'thick' and heavier in weight. They cannot provide more zoom without increasing camera size and weight.

I was recently in the market for a new camera (my old point and shoot gave up the ghost as I finished an African trip) and opted for a Panasonic DMC-ZS50 (compact point and shoot) vs a Panasonic DMC-ZS100 (1 inch sensor) because I opted for more zoom and lighter weight over higher quality pic of the ZS100. I also opted for the smaller camera because most of my pic taking is when I travel and lightweight and small size is paramount. Also, I prefer more zoom to get better closeups. It would be nice to get everything (zoom, quality and size/weight) but it is simply not possible. I don't think one can go wrong with any of a Panasonic or a Canon or a Nikkon, but I like the Leica lens that Panasonic uses best. A matter of personal preference.

Personal Note: The Panasonic DMC-ZS50 is an early 2015 release, recently being replaced by the ZS60 at more than $100 more. The ZS50 may thus not be available much longer. I also bought the ZS50 because: 1) I wanted the separate eye viewfinder for use in bright sunlight, and 2) the couple we went with to Africa had bought the DMC-ZS50 and he took outstanding pics and closeups of animals.

Recommendation: Decide first what the camera will be used for and then zero in on the various makes and models of either 1/2.3 inch or 1 inch sensors.


----------



## TomB19 (Sep 24, 2015)

A few of the top smartphones have good cameras that rival the best p&s cameras of a few years ago. What's more, most people have their phone with them at all times so they are always with most people. The best camera is the camera that's in your hand when a photo opportunity presents itself.

I wouldn't scoff at a good smartphone cam.

The difference in mirror less vs dslr is that little less has phase shift focus. PS isn't as good for photography but is required for continuous focus during video.

Most DSLRs have both a focus sensor as well as phase shift.

I wont get rid of my DSLRs (I love them) but I hardly use them. The physical format is pretty gross to me. I don't want to walk around on vacation with a dslr.i only use them for landscape panoramas and shooting sessions.

Cameras are so good these days, I'd look at something that is convenient to carry. For me, that is the Canon g series. In winter, I can slip a g7 into my pocket. I would have a g1x but it isn't pocketable.

It is roughly impossible to tell the difference in quality between my g7 and any DSLR for 99.99% of shots under normal viewing conditions.

In fact, I used to upgrade all the time (I'm an enthusiast) but I haven't purchased a camera in two years. No need. Sure, new cameras are better but they have generally been so good for so long, the wise consumer disregards claims of any brand providing an edge in image quality.

Make sure the camera feels good, suits your needs, has the service you need (if it's an expensive camera... Cheap cameras are disposable) and carry on. Get a ton of cards for storage, a couple of batteries, and start taking a ton of pictures. Youll be amazed at how many great pics you will get with anything from a phone cam to a midformat. Any camera can take a good picture.


----------



## TomB19 (Sep 24, 2015)

To belabour the point, anyone who thinks their brand provides them with a competitive edge should go to dpreview and check out the photo challenges.

These challenges are not dominated by any brand or even high end cameras. It's a pretty random distribution of equipment, among the winners.

Any of the cameras mentioned will do an excellent job, when paired with appropriate lenses and reasonable level of skill.

... But i think it's a mistake to under estimate the benefit of convenience. The dslr is desirable, almost exclusively because it was primarily a professional tool until about 15 years ago. They look the business. These days, you would do just as well with a number of range finder style cams. Unless you need to shoot at 128k iso, there are tons of excellent cameras available.


----------



## twa2w (Mar 5, 2016)

I agree with Tom. The newer smart phone cameras take great pictures for the casual photographer. I have a Samsung note 3 smart phone ( several generations old now) and my spouse has a Canon Eos rebel dslr. 
I can take my phone out of my pocket and get 5_10 pictures before she has hers out of her case. 90% of my pictures are as good as hers even enlarged to anything 10x16 or smaller.
Of course her camera is better for specialty shots with long lenses, macro work, very large prints.

For landscape, panoramic, casual portrait snaps my phone camera is as good or better.

If the OP is truly a casual photogapher, there is absolutely no need to spend 6-900. 

Any modern point and shoot that is light weight with a decent optical zoom will be far better than his old digital camera.
Find something with good battery life, compact enoght to fit in your pocket, lots of storage and reasonable optical zoom.
You can find something in 200 to 400 range that will far exceed casual photographic requirements.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Am in full agreement that a wide variety of point and shoot cameras will do the job. Just saying that 1 inch sensors will be better picture quality (at least under some circumstances) than 1/2.3 inch sensors but as I noted upthread, I wanted more zoom and size/weight convenience and thus the 1/2.3 inch sensor was the right fit for me. The compact point and shoot is easy enough to take anywhere and is indeed easier to do so than a big screen smartphone which I find to be a real PITA (and don't care to have nor carry with me). Once smartphones got bigger than what would fit in my shirt pocket, they lost me.


----------



## TomB19 (Sep 24, 2015)

Hey red, there are two aspects to photography. One is the equipment and the other is the pictures.

Get the equipment that makes you happy. Seriously.

Get something you enjoy owning and are proud of. It will encourage you to use it more and you will get more pleasure when you do use it.

There is no correct answer here. Maybe go to a camera store and handle these cams. See what you think. Shopping is also part of the enjoyment, for some.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

pwm said:


> Has anyone here been through this dilemma? Which did you choose, or do you have both systems? Do you have real world experience with both camera types to share?


Yup went through the exact same dilemma a few years ago. At the time, I was very interested in mirrorless but found them a) overpriced because they are all the rage and b) still improving drasticly with every release. Whereas the DSLR were very very cheap and hardly change anymore because they've been around so long and the DSLRs also have nicer ergonomics and controls

I got a D5100 with 18-55mm on sale as it was being discountinued along with a case and some filters thrown in. An advantage was my gf has a D90 with 18-200mm zoom, 35mm prime and 10-24mm wide lens iirc. While my setup is much smaller and lighter it's still too large to pocket so we never choose to carry mine over hers. I'd chose mine for activities that might break it but now I just use iPhone for that..

The idea was I would learn the basics of photography settings on this entry level DSLR and then switch to a mirrorless as they improved and became more mainstream and affordable. If my gf is around I far prefer her D90 in every way over the D5100. Looking at the specs they don't seem much different to a casual photographer, but using them side by side the higher end models are so much more enjoyable to use

If I was going to buy a DSLR again, I would go on kijiji and buy one of the many hardly used higher end models complete with accessories for very cheap. So many people buy these things and then never really use them, or upgrade every year, or are switching to iPhone 7s and mirrorless etc etc. I think you are much better off with a used higher end model than a new entry level one

I think mirrorless and smartphones will eventually kill off most of the casual DSLR users. I have Lightroom, PS Express, PhotoshopFix, PhotoshopMix etc on my iPhone and 95% of my photography is taken, processed and shared from my iPhone (and automatically backed up in the cloud). Yes the DSLR takes better pictures but it is such a dinosaur to use in every way by comparison.

I really like the Olympus OM-Ds. They're smaller (micro 4/3) but still have the DSLR style controls and very high quality and rugged. I haven't used them and I haven't researched mirrorless in awhile, but Sony and Olympus were the known leaders of mirrorless. I used to be a big Sony fanboy but they have ruined so many good things over the years that I wouldn't touch them again right now


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

As commented above: i. It depends on how you will be using it, and ii. Convenience is huge. 

We travel light with a smart phone and an older point & shoot *Canon Powershot A1400* (I agree with the value of an independant viewfinder). The pictures capture our memories and are quite acceptable to us. Our trips are not primarily photo trips.
There is no way however that our pics can match the quality (colour, resolution, depth of field, macro/zoom capability, raw&jpg format) that my son achieves with his *Canon EOS Rebel T5i* (a SLR camera). He uses it during his daily rural commute, in teaching a photography course, on photo outings/events and some trips. He also has a smart phone that he uses when convenience dictates.

I know he did his research before buying but I'm afraid I don't know what swung him to the slr vs mirrorless. I suspect it was the still photo quality. 
If you are a dedicated photographer you will likely swing to quality over convenience - still worth considering an inexpensive p&s for those other photo ops though.


----------



## pwm (Jan 19, 2012)

Thanks for all of your thoughtful replies. As you all have pointed out, portability is a huge factor, and I agree. As a result, I'm starting to think that rather than a DSLR, a smaller camera would be my best choice. Sensor size is the most important factor in IQ, and I had originally thought that APS-C was what I should go for. However, if I add Micro 4/3 and 1" sensors into the mix, the list of possible choices expands enormously. I've spent a lot of time on DPREVIEW and other similar websites doing research, and now *my brain is starting to hurt*. One thing I know I should do is get a hands-on session with some of these cameras before making a choice. Also the Xmas season is near and there may be some great Boxing Week sales.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

AltaRed said:


> I wanted the separate eye viewfinder for use in bright sunlight,


This is probably the biggest reason to lug around a separate camera.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Will you carry the camera when you want to take the pictures.
Cell phones are great for casual photos, compacts are decent too, and you're more likely to have them on you.

dSLRs are awesome and can take photos others can't, but they're big.
In Marginal conditions dSLRs are clearly superior, in good conditions even cheap cameras are decent.


----------



## indexxx (Oct 31, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> I don't consider smartphone cameras to be anywhere near in the same league as 'real' cameras. They are fine for casual pics, selfies and the like, and obviously are the most convenient for uploads to FB, and other social media. For one, the sensor is not big enough (iphone7 has a 1/3 or 1/3.6 inch Sony sensor I believe) so no matter how many megapixels one has, it does not improve the photo. The lens and sensors are the operative pieces no matter how good the software is.
> 
> In a compact point and shoot camera, the standard sensor is 1/2.3 inches and the bigger non-DSLR cameras have 1 inch sensors. It is only when you get into 1 inch sensors can one say they have a 'real' camera worthy of enlargements and semi-professional photography. Companies like Sony and Panasonic offer both the compact point and shoot (1/2.3 inch) with up to 30x optical zoom and maintain their <250gram weight and pocket sized dimensions, while they also offer the larger 1 inch sensor cameras with up to 10x optical zoom, which are about twice as 'thick' and heavier in weight. They cannot provide more zoom without increasing camera size and weight.
> 
> ...


I second this view. I am a pretty serious photographer, earn a bit shooting side gigs here and there and have a website of nature and travel. I shoot with Nikon dSLRs, however I really feel that for the casual photographer, a 'bridge' type super zoom is more than adequate for what most people will ever need. My first 'serious' camera was a Panasonic FZ-10 (this was around 2003 or so) and it still takes great shots. As any photographer will attest, your camera really makes no difference in the quality of your images, and I feel this is true at least to a point. Unless you are really in need of super high frame rates for sports or something, why go to the expense and hassle of an interchangeable lens system? 

All the major manufacturers have amazing super zoom compacts that offer raw files, manual control, great feature sets, amazing image pipelines, ease of use, no dust getting on the sensor from lens changes, and you don't need to tote around a bunch of lenses to shoot pretty much any situation imaginable. If I did not have a need on a semi-pro level for a dSLR, I would simply have a top-end bridge camera and maybe a couple of small attachments like a screw-on macro or ultra-wide adaptor. I would not agree with the statement that you can't enlarge well from small sensors- I have shots from my old 4 megapixel FZ-10 that look great. I've sold prints through a fine art gallery in Europe that were shot on a 4/3 sensor Olympus E510- a pretty crappy camera really and they were blown up to 16x20 and could have gone larger. 

If an image is sharp, well-composed, well lit, and has little noise, it's a good candidate for a reasonable enlargement, bearing in mind that large prints are viewed from farther away, thereby negating any potential artifacts.


----------



## PSG (Nov 30, 2016)

m3s said:


> Yup went through the exact same dilemma a few years ago. At the time, I was very interested in mirrorless but found them a) overpriced because they are all the rage and b) still improving drasticly with every release. Whereas the DSLR were very very cheap and hardly change anymore because they've been around so long and the DSLRs also have nicer ergonomics and controls
> 
> I got a D5100 with 18-55mm on sale as it was being discountinued along with a case and some filters thrown in. An advantage was my gf has a D90 with 18-200mm zoom, 35mm prime and 10-24mm wide lens iirc. While my setup is much smaller and lighter it's still too large to pocket so we never choose to carry mine over hers. I'd chose mine for activities that might break it but now I just use iPhone for that..
> 
> ...




nice insights (bumb)


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

pwm said:


> Sensor size is the most important factor in IQ, and I had originally thought that APS-C was what I should go for. However, if I add Micro 4/3 and 1" sensors into the mix, the list of possible choices expands enormously. I've spent a lot of time on DPREVIEW and other similar websites doing research, and now *my brain is starting to hurt*.


Yea I'm not planning to get into mirrorless anytime soon but I like watching the progress and my next camera will most definitely be mirrorless. Lately I've been hearing "micro 4/3 is dead" because look how small the Sony cameras are with APS-C sensors. What confuses me though is why such a small camera body with sensor that requires such large lens anyways? The beauty of micro 4/3 is that the camera + lens is much smaller while the image quality and camera controls can still be at prosumer grade. I'm still on the fence between the 2 and will wait for the dust to settle a bit more. Things like DJI releasing professional grade drones with micro 4/3 sensor stirs the pot. As for the 1" sensor I think if you won't be carrying and interchanging multiple lens then that's the way to go.. today's 1" compact can easily compare to yesterday's dSLR with kit lens for the majority of amateur photographers


----------



## pwm (Jan 19, 2012)

I pulled the trigger! Yesterday I bought an A6000 at Best Buy. I had already ruled out a DSLR, and had narrowed my choices down to either the A6000 or potentially 1" sensor cameras like the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX10 or DMC-ZS100 or the Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100 III. I went with the A6000 because I decided I wanted an ILC, and the APS-C sensor. Also the price was actually considerably less than the other smaller power zooms. It seemed like I was getting more camera for less money. Granted, it is larger in size but not by much. It's still a very portable unit. I'm also intrigued by the fact that one can use old MF prime lenses on it with an adapter. That opens up a whole dimension that is not possible with the power zooms.

Anyway, I'm watching YouTube videos now and doing other reading to learn how to best use my new toy and I'm looking forward to experimenting with it. My interest in photography has waxed and waned over the years, and it's back again now in full force.


----------



## PSG (Nov 30, 2016)

*DSLR is the Best for me*

I was torn between Canon and Nikon. If you look at all the complaints about Canon in the last 1 or 2 years, you will see that they have been going backward or sideways, while other companies are making huge strides. The Canon 70D is a smooth fast auto-focusing camera that is silent, however, if you set it to auto mode and go take pictures they don't look as good as the Nikon D3300 on auto mode.


----------

