It definitely is a refreshing release from the daily life of having to stare at digital screens for almost entire day, reason why I carry out my eos 70d instead of sony a7r3 for daily street photos.
My Mirrorless made me a better photographer. I miss less shots due to the wrong exposure or F stop. Focus peaking and focus points are simply amazing. They are simply faster than a DSLR and when you care trying to capture a single moment anything to make that quicker helps.
While I do love a DSLR's optical viewfinder, I have to say that the added benefits of IBIS, seeing exposure changes within the viewfinder, and eye AF tracking made it all worth the switch. The lighter camera body is also a nice touch, and battery life improvements in mirrorless have come a long way since they first came on the scene. Combined with extremely high resolution EVFs, it's almost a no-brainer.
I was just speaking with a guy at a camera store. He's a lot older and more experienced, and he says that he regrets switching from DSLR to mirrorless. He said that it forced him to spend a lot of money that was unnecessary, because it cost so much more to shoot mirrorless for no reason.
@@penner_gluckmirrorless are newer, so they cost more and lenses too, but is like switching from an old pc to a new one with all new technology in it, that makes your monitor, mouse and keyboard not compatible or need to be adapted, but with a lot of more potential than before cos, you know, it's newer and more powerful. probably the guy who regrets bout his switch do only studio shooting or didn't had a real reason to switch to a more powerful camera. not everyone needs the last thing on the market
Running a Nikon d200 right now because I'm poor, but I'd like to upgrade to a z5. Budget full frame, enough megapixels for learning the ropes, and through b&h you can get a z5 and an ftz adapter to use f mount lenses. Seems like a no brainer to me but, everyone has their favorite flavor of ice cream
I do love my ae-1 (I know I know basic) I was gifted like 15 years ago. I set it down for a loooooong time for other film bodies, but it’s just perfect, ya know?
@@bingumsbongums i think that ae-1 is one of the (if not) the best looking analog slr ever made. I personally always wanted that camera but it's too expensive and because i live in middle europe we have a lot of soviet and gdr (eastern germany) cameras and i have praktica super tl1000 and Fed 5.
The difference is that mirrorless cameras are a lot more expensive for very few benefits and some drawbacks. But consumers have bought into the mirrorless hype and are making camera manufacturers richer.
I much prefer a good SLR, however I like to use canon FD lenses which don't fit on any DSLR I know of, so I'm stuck using a mirrorless, they're nice but I just much prefer the feel of a DSLR, I find myself using my analog SLRs way more because it's just so much nicer to use than my Sony A72
I'm getting a DSLR (canon 77d). It's much cheaper where I'm from and I could get multiple high quality used lens for the price of just one lens on the mirrorless system. I will miss some modern features but I don't think I need them really as a casual shooter.
Just switched from my 5 year old 80D to an R6 recently and it is definitely way better. Though I thought it would be lighter since the R6 is a mirrorless camera but I guess a jump from APSC to Full Frame can add weight to it. So basically it's almost as big and heavy as my 80D but with better sensor performance and IBIS.
i started on mirrorless, and i've shot with film and now i want to try shooting with a dslr for a bit and see what i prefer. at the moment mirrorless seems lighter and more advanced which i find advantageous for work. Im curious what equipment i don't have access to shooting mirrorless
I also started on mirrorless (Nikon 1 v2) (and when excluding the CCD samsung pocket cameras), currently on sony a7r3 with tamron lens. I also recently got a eos 70d (85k shots) from a friend, along with 40mm f2.8 pancake. The two cameras differ from the core so I don't think it's fair to compare them in the first place, but while the sony a7r3 has been absolute blast with its performance, I actually became fond of the dslr as well. I think one big factor is the comfort from not having to constantly look at the lit-up screen, only except for using swivel display for touch af and videos. Constantly having to look at digital screens - from study, work, hobby, social, playing, etc and etc, having only to look at a mirror and a small control panel instead has been an incredibly comfortable experience. I did have many instances of finding out my pictures dead from exposure blown out or dynamic range gone wrong after photoshoot, but it's something I (kinda) got hang of after about a week of practice. In canon dslr case, I think ones with dual pixel cmos af (iirc starting from canon eos 70d's release) is something that can be a joy even for mirrorless users. My sister's eos 60d was neat but the af speed and accuracy was too stressful even just to use it for spare time, sub-body, etc. Will say the eos 70d gave me a refreshing retake on photography.
Mirrorless have many other advantages too: You can see the depth of view, you can configure different formats like square in the viewfinder, you can configure the viewfinder to show black&white, you can zoom into the viewfinder, the autofocus is more accurate, as it is measured on the sensor, and not with a mirror and separate sensor array, which need to be adjusted extremely accurate (I am talking about you Nikon). Mirrorless cameras can use focus peaking. Autofocus points are all over the viewfinder, compared to a small region in DSLR’s. Eye autofocus works only on mirrorless. If you take pictures in dim light, the viewfinder will brighten up an show you what the image will look like. Mirrorless cameras are also much quieter and don‘t have the mirror mechanism as an additional point of failure. Finally, video on DSLR‘s sucks. Already for half of those advantages I would ditch a DSLR.
You can get optical viewfinders for some mirrorless cameras. Makes them operate much like a rangefinder. You can get overlays for some SLR cameras. Technology predates digital cameras.
You can add rule od thirda or 4x6 grids or whatever to OVFs. You just can't have exposure preview and battery status and stuff, just the exposure meter4
My class when on a photo trip for about 4-5 hours. I had a dslr and another classmate has a mirror less camera. About three hours in, the mirror less camera was basically out of battery while my dslr was still going very strong.
It is better and ideal to use a DSLR for in studio work as most of the controls are on the outside. However for out and about vacation and trips, mirrorless is light and small and ideal. You should own both if you are an advanced user.
The major difference maker in the mirrorless camera especially when this specific tech came out in the Sony A77m2, is the face recognition and tracking which evolve into animal face detection and so on. The tech specifically special was the processor which in a sense is a computer that has algorithms programmed by the manufacturers to detect exactly what to focus on. As time went on faster processor evolved and is now able to do this function at ultrafast speeds. This was really the tech that allowed the mirrorless to flourish and became an upward trend for pro photographers. It allowed them to concentrate on the subject and streamline their workflow to never or almost never miss a shot out of focus.
Canon 600D with 17-55 kit Sigma apo dg 70-300 macro Yongnuo 50/1.8mm Why i use dslr? Because i have No money XD its funny and sad It was 1300zl or 320 USD
A DSLR viewfinder is what you see live a mirrorless camera sees what the sensor sees and sometimes can be false. I’ve use SLR and DSLR for the last 40 years with not many problems, I recently tried a Sony mirrorless camera, although quite good I found that in fast burst mode it wasn’t as good as my dslr, I know the EVF screens are getting better and faster but I ended up with a headache, it left my eye aching!! And it burned through quite a few batteries. I have to much money invested in canon glass so I’ll stick with a dslr for the foreseeable future.
I have been a photographer since I was 13, I have always been open to new types of cameras, my favorite will remain the DSLR but I have had excellent experiences with mirrorless cameras which I recommend to my friends that wanted a camera but with a small budget and the experience
DSLR all the way. Mirrorless cameras feel like toys compared to proper DSLR cameras. Also can’t stand EVFs as they make me feel like I’m not shooting a camera. The ergonomics and fun factor also makes DSLRs beat any mirrorless camera for me
I have both those cameras. they're both great, but the Sony is waaay ahead. IBIS, use any lens anywhere to some degree, except Sony Glass is world-class. low light, way ahead, clean high ISO,
Mirrorless is quicker, but actually I really like the speed and accuracy combined with dslr ergonomics of the old sony SLT cameras. No flip mirror but some light loss.
If you're already into photography, it's probably not unreasonably to suggest you're in the DSLR ecosphere. Changing up is likely to cost a fortune and your ROI is going to take a millenium or four
dslr had one major problem, lens and body calibration, very often the focus point on the mirror would offset a bit from the sensor plane, resulting in slightly off focus image and this varies from lens to lens, complicating matters
it kind of is when dealing with such small weights. 200g is not a huge difference when talking about something that weighs 10 lbs. It's a pretty big difference when talking about something that weighs less than 2 lbs
200g is a MASSIVE difference what’re you talking about? Try different bodies at different weights, you’ll find even a 50g difference is substantial to feel and potential fatigue when shooting for long periods of time
@@itsdomtoo oh seriously? my working setup is 1DMkIV + 24-70 2.8, i really don’t care about camera weight. If camera has a normal grips and normal ergonomic weight doesn’t matter. For a long time i worked with 5Dmk2-3 and 1D is more comfortable asfm
Il y a vraiment deux avantages majeurs qui ne sont pas remplaçable dans un reflex, le bruit du miroir et la visée optique, mais les mirror less permettent plus de photos et plus facilement
I like that my DSLR is chunkier, I find it more comfortable to hold. I also prefer the heavier weight to counterbalance my telelens. Although I’m tempted by mirrorless now that I find myself doing some more videography every now and then.
I own both but love my dslr. As my mirtirles camera is very small. Canon eos m10. My m10 is for taking with me every where I go and my 6dmk2 is for my pro work. And with the battery grip it is big and a bit heavy. But love my dslr.
To be fair, you’re comparing a cheap entry level mirrorless with a higher end professional grade DSLR, not really a good matchup obviously the DSLR wins
I have never seen a mirrorless camera with the LCD viewfinder "on top" of the camera as stated here. Unless, of course you purchase a 3rd party monitor and mount it to either a camera cage (or the camera's hot-shoe mount) on top of the camera. Mirrorless cameras have an LCD screen at the back of the camera, not "on top" of the camera.
Go for Sony. The colors are unbeatable. I switched from canon DSLRs to Sony mirrorless cameras. Trust me, once you realize you can see how the picture will look before you take it, there is no going back.
@@Deca.Knight same story here, but my main issue with DSLRs is that they were very slow to use, the menu was crap, button layout was weird, autofocus was slow and noisy, lenses were rough and plasticky. colors werent really the issue for me as im still gonna edit the image, video capabilities sure improve drastically
the only usage difference between them are no continuous autofocus and the ovf that i NEVER understand why someone still prefer to NOT KNOW what is going on with the real photo the sensor is capturing. so there are basically no difference in usage, what's your talking about? fastest and continuous autofocus? or the ovf that most photographers never used and finally can cos now have a sense? (not considering the 100% of videographers that can't simply use ovf anyway). maybe the low light performance? in my experience if you are a bad photographer you can shoot with an A1 and still shooting shit, if you're a great photographer you can shoot with a 1st gen iPod touch and make an entire book out of it
All point and shoots are mini mirrorless cameras so nothing new here. All camera styles are awesome if it makes you want to pick it up and use it, so get off your you know what and take some videos and pictures.
