Can I sell my DSLR and swap to Mirrorless?

Andysnap

Andysnap

Messages
16,290
Name
Andy Grant
Edit My Images
Yes
Just musing really but I am getting a bit fed up with the size and weight of my DSLR, especially as my wife and I are now doing much more hill walking than we used to.
So, basically I'm thinking that if I move on my Nikon D7100 and a few lenses I could probably have £1400 to £1600 to spend on a smaller, lighter system. But, are these systems going to give me the image quality and flexibility of my DSLR? I shoot mainly landscapes but some wildlife, can they cope with both? Are the longer lenses for them up to the job? Would I regret swapping?

So many questions. Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Andy
 
I think that the very latest batch of MFT, APS-C and FF CSC's should be able to match and in some cases exceed the quality you get from your APS-C Nikon and quite a few CSC lenses are getting very good reviews too. So, I wouldn't worry too much about image quality and if you simply must have an APS-C sensor you can have one from Sony, Fuji, Samsung and probably others too (I dunno :D) and if your manhood can withstand a slight reduction in sensor size to MFT there are good options from Panasonic and Olympus (and others) or you could go for a bigger sensor and get a Sony A7/r/s.

The main things that people seem to hold against CSC include focus tracking ability (the very best DSLR's are a smidgen better than the very best CSC's) and the OVF v EVF argument but on the positive side you wont have to worry about tiresome DSLR front/back focusing issues, micro adjust or bulk and weight.

Personally I can't see myself ever going back to a DSLR.
 
Last edited:
I have just bought the Fuji XT-1 havein used Nikon Dslr's for years. No regrets up to now.
 
flappy mirror doesnt effect image quality, heck if you look at leica you might say mirrors make it worse :p

how long a lens do you need? the dslr shape is basicaly the best for using a large lens
 
for landscapes a fuji system would be perfect ( i had the fuji X-e1 and it ws fantastic ) for wildlife it may be a little harder to accomplish over your nikon. quick check on fuji website and there longest lens is the XC50-230 F4.5-6.7 ( so not great in terms of F stop ). (76-350 mm equiv )
not saying it cant be done but you may find tracking moving wildlife a challenge to say the least .
there other lens
Focal length 55-200 mm 135 equivalent 84-305 mm
Max. aperture F3.5-F4.8

shorter but faster... but probably still to short for wildlife
 
when i go out now, i tend to take a sigma dp or two, and my a77 with either a ultrawide or/and telephoto
 
I sold my canon 350 3 years ago and bought a panasonic G3.
Was happy with the results, but focus could be slow, and limited 3rd party lenses were available, and the panasonic ones were expensive (for me).
I sold it a couple of months ago and bought a d7000.
No regrets other than if I had the money, I'd have kept it and used both. The size of the G3 and lenses was the attraction in the first place.
 
Thanks for the input guys and girls. I'm leaning toward a Sony A7 or one of the higher end Fuji X series at the moment. I think I need to go and fondle some examples, check out the size/weights.
 
i found the biggest hurdle to overcome when i switched from canon to a fuji was the viewfinder.. just couldnt get on with the EVF on the fuji but if they did the xe with an optical i would have kept it ( i know the xpro has the hybrid optical but was way beyond budget at the time ).
better support for RAF files too would really help.
 
The Sony A7s and A7r are such amazing pieces of kit. I'm seriously considering looking at getting one of them, but all the money invested in Canon glass and whatnot makes stop even thinking about it. I just want Canon to do the same with their mediocre csc line that sony have done with theirs.
 
The choice and quality of the mirrorless stuff looks amazing right now. If landscape photography whilst hiking is your thing then mirrorless sounds ideal. I've looked at various system many times but my main interests lie in motorsports and potraiture so I'm reluctant to lose the fast AF of the dSLR for the first and the shallow dof of the full frame sensor for the second. Never say never though, I reckon there'll come a time when I'll weaken and buy into a morrorless system. Maybe when Sony have fleshed out their lens lineup a bit more.
 
I moved from a Nikon D7000 with some quality glass onto the Sony A7.
No regrets. :)
 
I think you really need to have a play with the mirrorless.

I was replacing my D300 a few months back and had decided to go mirrorless. So I spent a hour or so in Jessops playing with my shortlist.
Unfortunately there also happened to be a Nikon rep in store and she suggested I also try the D7100 as a comparison.

Despite its shortcomings (compared to the D300) I walked out the shop with a D7100 ;)

It is a very personal thing but I just didn't like the EVFs on any of them plus the handing of the D7100 is just so much better because a) it is larger and b) it is a Nikon(*) :LOL:
(*) Nothing against canon etc, just I have always found Nikons (D50, D80, D300 and now D7100) just fit my hands better and I was a Canon man in the film age.
Oh, and, regardless of specs, the AF on the D7100 was so much better than any mirrorless I tried, and that included the A6000 and GX7 which are supposed to be very good. Not saying the A6000 were bad, just that for moving subjects DSLRs still win.
Not trying to put you off a mirrorless, if they feel confortable in your hands then why not?

A couple of other points:
1) If you go with APS-C size mirrorless check what lenses are available. If you go with 4/3s then there are more lenses, but still not the range you have with a NIkon DSLR.
Only you know if that is important to you.
2) I used to carry my DSLR kit in a backpack and moaned about the size and weight. The D7100 came with a free bag which just happens to be big enough for my D7100, 70-300, 18-200 plus a spare battery and memory. Ok, they aren't the best lenses in the world but probably a match for most mirrorless versions and the whole lot is the size of the average handbag. Not that I use handbags you understand!
My point being, is why not just carry less lenses? Then I would be suprised if your D7100 was too much for walking etc.
 
Hi Andy,

It's the SLR lenses that heavy. I'm severely disabled and found that I couldn't hold securely my Lumix G cameras......... so I tried different types and settled (surprisingly) on a Nikon D800e; but with the tiny, very light but solid (all metal), Voightlander SL lenses. A superb combination! I can carry my D800e complete with battery grip and four Voigtlander SL lenses in a Billingham Hadley Original bag; and with one of the three pancake lenses fitted.
 
Jamtea said:
The Sony A7s and A7r are such amazing pieces of kit. I'm seriously considering looking at getting one of them, but all the money invested in Canon glass and whatnot makes stop even thinking about it. I just want Canon to do the same with their mediocre csc line that sony have done with theirs.
Click to expand...
buy the adapter to use canon lenses... ;-)
 
I generally only carry the the d7100 and either the 24-85 or an 18-200 but we are climbing some big old hills/mountains and walking 8 plus miles and I am getting on a bit :D so I really want to knock the weight down. The Sony a7 is a third lighter than the Nikon and the Fuji's are even lighter and if I can get near to DSLR IQ I would be happy. I don't shoot as much wildlife as I used to so it wouldn't be a deal breaker if the AF is a bit slower.

All good info here folks, definitely helping me towards a decision.
 
Tried mirrorless when I first started on my photography journey (only about 5 months ago) found a passion for wildlife and struggled with the A6000. The DSLR I use now seems better for my type of photography (mid to fast moving objects at distance).

If you are not into that then mirrorless may work fine.

Dave.
 
If IQ is your priority you won't go far wrong with Fuji, I came from a D7000 with 28-75 f2.8 and other lenses and in my opinion IQ is superior to the Nikon D7000. There are even users ditching there full frame cameras for the Fuji's. I changed over for the weight difference for my disabilities.

With Fuji I had the XE1 a few years ago and I found it too slow with the EVF lag. At the begining of this year I thought I would give Fuji another go and bought the XPro-1 along with a range of lenses. The Xpro has an optical and EVF viewfinder, but I had difficulties with the EVF as I was also using manual lenses for the reach, I would get an arc eye effect if using the EVF for any period of time. The OVF is fixed and I didnt find it great for using zooms.
So I sold up with the plan of going to M4/3 but after trying some in the shop they didnt feel comforatble in the hand, so I decided to then buy the fuji XT1, as it had just come down in price. The Fuji XT1 EVF I believe is the best out there at the moment and is far superior to the Xpro. I also find the XT1 performs more like a DSLR, where I found with the XPro, it was a more layed back type of camera, if that makes sense.

As for Fuji lenses the quality is outstanding and every lens I have owned hasnt disapointed in anyway, the kit lenses are way above average and are comparable to some of the f2.8 lenses out there, it was the case against my Tamron 28-75. As for reach Fuji were supposed to be bringing out a supertele this winter, but it's been put back a year. It's widely rumoured to be a 120-400mm lens

As I always say, make sure you buy the camera thats comfortable in your hands.

Have a look at some of the threads on here for Fuji, Sony A7, Olympus OM1 etc...... and see what these cameras are capable of, I dont think you will be disapointed.
 
Last edited:
have to agree about the lenses.. quality was/is outstanding. i got my X-e1 on day of UK release ( cost me near on £1200 for the privilege ouch ) but yes the EVF on the newer X-e2 and Xt1 is supposed to be much better. just wich all manufacturers made kit lenses on a par with the fuji ones.
 
Andysnap said:
I generally only carry the the d7100 and either the 24-85 or an 18-200 but we are climbing some big old hills/mountains and walking 8 plus miles and I am getting on a bit :D so I really want to knock the weight down. The Sony a7 is a third lighter than the Nikon and the Fuji's are even lighter and if I can get near to DSLR IQ I would be happy. I don't shoot as much wildlife as I used to so it wouldn't be a deal breaker if the AF is a bit slower.

All good info here folks, definitely helping me towards a decision.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that an A7 will give better image quality than your Nikon but I believe that these days the betterness only shows up when printing very very large, when pixel peeping at extreme magnification or when shooting at the very highest ISO's.

I think that my A7 gives the best image quality I've had from any camera I've ever owned but if you go down the A7 route you'll blow your budget very quickly as the lenses tend to be aimed at the top end of the market image quality wise and that doesn't come cheap. I like using old manual prime lenses and the image quality of the A7+legacy lens combo seems to be very good so the A7 is perfect for me but what would you use for wildlife shots?
 
I'll repeat, having a mirror flap around does nothing for iq :), so mirrorless can match or surpass slr easily.
 
woof woof said:
I'm pretty sure that an A7 will give better image quality than your Nikon but I believe that these days the betterness only shows up when printing very very large, when pixel peeping at extreme magnification or when shooting at the very highest ISO's.

I think that my A7 gives the best image quality I've had from any camera I've ever owned but if you go down the A7 route you'll blow your budget very quickly as the lenses tend to be aimed at the top end of the market image quality wise and that doesn't come cheap. I like using old manual prime lenses and the image quality of the A7+legacy lens combo seems to be very good so the A7 is perfect for me but what would you use for wildlife shots?
Click to expand...

For the wildlife shots you would need to go the legacy route if using Fuji. As Fuji have put the supertele back by 12 months, I have bought a Tokina ATX 100-300mm F4 along with a x2 Tamron SP Teleconverter. The lens is excellent IQ wise and there is not much of a drop when using the Teleconverter. For lightness, I have also bought a Tamron 80-210mm f3.8 another excellent lens which only cost £15.00 for a minter.

If he went the A7 route and manual focus, in there some Sony lenses you can use with an adapter to keep auto focus etc, hasn't Chris UKASKEW just bought one???
 
Last edited:
Also, I should add, if you went the Fuji route their commitment to improving the bodies and lenses is fantastic, they are regularly issuing firmware updates to improve bodies and lenses. I believe the XE-1 is like night and day compared to when released.
 
As the chaps have said, go and pick them up and have a really good play before committing to one system.

I run FF and M43. When I was looking for a mirrorless setup I'd convinced myself that the Fuji system was the way to go. After playing with a couple at Park Cameras I just didn't like the ergonomics at all and ended up leaving with a G5 kit. It was just infinitely more intuitive to me.

I was so impressed with M43 that I quickly swapped the G5 for an E-M1. It's the most enjoyable camera to use that I've ever owned. And I can get all my M43 kit in a Hadley Pro.

All the 3 major CSC systems are excellent quality so a major deciding factor should be ergonomics.
 
I run a Sony Nex-6 alongside my D800 for when I don't feel like lugging it around and want something smaller or discrete. As you intimated in your OP Andy, having dragged my DSLR and some lenses up and down the lakes I decided something smaller and lighter was in order for those occasions. The Nex-6 and Sigma 19, 30 and 60mm 2.8 primes fit the bill nicely with great image quality.
 
Swanseajack said:
For the wildlife shots you would need to go the legacy route, if using Fuji. As Fuji have put the supertele back by 12 months, I have bought a Tokina ATX 100-300mm F4 along with a x2 Tamron SP Teleconverter. The lens is excellent IQ wise and there is not much of a drop when using the Teleconverter. For lightness, I have also bought a Tamron 80-210mm f3.8 another excellent lens which only cost £15.00 for a minter.

If he went the A7 route in there some Sony lenses you can use with an adapter to keep auto focus etc, hasn't Chris UKASEW just bought one???
Click to expand...

Ok, interesting. Do the legacy lenses autofocus on the Fuji? How much are adaptors? Do you need adaptors?

I really do not know a thing about this do I? :D

At the moment I'm thinking XT-1, XE-2 or A7 probably secondhand then I can afford to get a few more lenses.
 
Andysnap said:
Ok, interesting. Do the legacy lenses autofocus on the Fuji? How much are adaptors? Do you need adaptors?

I really do not know a thing about this do I? :D

At the moment I'm thinking XT-1, XE-2 or A7 probably secondhand then I can afford to get a few more lenses.
Click to expand...

No, you need to manual focus the lenses, so try and buy one with a fast aperture. I have f3.8 & f4 for my longer zooms and f2.8 for my shorter 28-105mm. You will get long f2.8 lenses but they can be pricey. You need an adpater from say M42 to Fuji these are about £12.00 or so. I stick to M42 and Canon FD legacy lenses if I can, to save having too many adapters.

With my XT1 you can use focus peaking / magnified view and split screen view to help with manual focussing, it makes life a lot easier.

If you can live with a 55-200mm lens the Fuji is fantastic, I sold mine as I found it a little short even with cropping for the smaller birds I try to photo in the garden.

Any of the cameras you are initially looking at will be fantastic, it's just down to how they feel in your hand.
 
Last edited:
The one thing I'd throw in is to make sure the system for viewing the scene works for you, whether it's a rear screen, offset viewfinder of electronic viewfinder.
 
pingu666 said:
I'll repeat, having a mirror flap around does nothing for iq :), so mirrorless can match or surpass slr easily.
Click to expand...

You are right, a mirror flapping around can only make the IQ worse. But I think it is clear from this thread that the performance of the sensor and processing isn't the issue here, any modern camera with a decent sized sensor should be ok in that respect.

It is handling, af performance and EVFs vs optical which is going to sway it and that is a very personal thing.
 
brman said:
You are right, a mirror flapping around can only make the IQ worse. But I think it is clear from this thread that the performance of the sensor and processing isn't the issue here, any modern camera with a decent sized sensor should be ok in that respect.

It is handling, af performance and EVFs vs optical which is going to sway it and that is a very personal thing.
Click to expand...

This is the conclusion I have come to as well. I think a visit to the big Jessops in Manchester is in order to fondle a few cameras. I'm not entirely convinced yet but I shall take a memory card and take a few evaluation shots (if they will let me) with the options on offer before I make a decision to sell.
The thing is that the D7100 is the best camera I've ever owned, the IQ is stunning and I'm really happy with the images it produces so anything that replaces it must be very close to that IQ, if not then I shall have to carry on lugging it up hills until something comes along that is a match.

Thanks again to everyone who has contributed to this thread, very helpful and illuminating.

Andy
 
I'd be a bit concerned some of these 'new' mirrorless systems might fall by the wayside after a few years, why not just get a good compact to complement the SLR which you will still get back to at times.
 
dean messenger said:
i found the biggest hurdle to overcome when i switched from canon to a fuji was the viewfinder.. just couldnt get on with the EVF on the fuji but if they did the xe with an optical i would have kept it ( i know the xpro has the hybrid optical but was way beyond budget at the time ).
better support for RAF files too would really help.
Click to expand...

A csc optical finder does not work with long lenses. An evf will always fill the screen.

Raf files are now excellently covered with the latest Adobe raw converter.
If you look at a Fuji file at 600% you will notice the different pattern its sensor produces, this is in no way a fault, you are just enlarging it beyond reason.
 
4wd said:
I'd be a bit concerned some of these 'new' mirrorless systems might fall by the wayside after a few years, .
Click to expand...

I think it maybe the opposite. The only thing letting down mirrorless, Fuji in my instance, is the speed of AF for Pro use, in some sports or wildlife.. With my XT1, I would say it's almost on par to my old D7000 for AF. IQ wise it's better.
 
I tend to agree with this ^^^^ It seems to me that this portion of the camera market is on the increase and the DSLR portion is getting smaller. I've been toying with down-sizing for a while but I feel that its only really this year that the smaller form of camera has reached a point where I can consider a swap and I see no sign of it doing anything other than getting better from a useability point of view.
 
I've been using a camera with an EVF for nearly a year now. The biggest weakness is that with bright sunlight coming from the side & hitting the eyeball that is looking into the viewfinder it can be hard to see the image. For me, the advantages are that it takes most of the guesswork out of exposure and when using a 10 stop filter or shooting in the dark the EVF will 'gain up' to let you see an otherwise invisible image.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top