Still worth buying an dSLR?

Messages
1,513
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
Yes
#1
Looking to change my camera. Currently have a Panasonic G80 but not getting along well with it. Had a Nikon D7000 and tempted to get one again, not sure why I got rid of my last one. Partially fell for the marketing hype around mirrorless. One thing that has got me thinking is with all these recently released mirrorless full frame bodies, am buying into old technology which won't be worth anything in the near future?

Should I just ignore these worries and buy what suits my needs and I enjoy using. Or play the waiting game?
 
Messages
2,726
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
#3
Looking to change my camera. Currently have a Panasonic G80 but not getting along well with it. Had a Nikon D7000 and tempted to get one again, not sure why I got rid of my last one. Partially fell for the marketing hype around mirrorless. One thing that has got me thinking is with all these recently released mirrorless full frame bodies, am buying into old technology which won't be worth anything in the near future?

Should I just ignore these worries and buy what suits my needs and I enjoy using. Or play the waiting game?
No matter you buy it will be out of date and worth very little compared to what you paid for it very quickly. Buy for your own needs and requirements. Photography equipment isn’t an investment.
 
Messages
33,635
Edit My Images
No
#4
Yes it's still worth buyng a DSLR, mirrorless is relatively new technology but buying into everything new isn't necessarily the right way to go.
If you liked your D7000 you would love the D7200.
 
Messages
12,201
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
#6
What is it you dislike about the G80? It's what I'm currently using and have been considering an 'upgrade' - which would be more of a side-grade if I'm honest. My reasons are simply to try something else, always wanted to try some Canon lenses they have great options for the budget shooter. I wouldn't personally go back to Nikon, had 4 of their cameras and a tonne of their lenses through the years, I got really bored of the overall experience shooting with them. But, I did enjoy using them at one point. They might work better for you, we're all different and have our own personal taste.

I was looking at the 80D, I thought it might be much better at higher ISO [though I rarely go above 1600 with any camera] but it's not, they're very samey up to 3200 if you compare them. You wouldn't want to use either above 3200. The G80 is very comparable to APSC in general, don't let the hype about bigger sensors get to you. M43 files are often sharper, remember too the G80 has no AA filter on the sensor which helps with that. If you are going back to dslr you might want to go for one without that filter too, or you may well find your images a tad softer.

Fuji are great, I shot Fuji APSC for a couple of years and they are very good - better than most APSC offerings, at higher ISO BUT ... when there is noise it can be horrible, sometimes weird patterns and harder to clean up in post. I would wait on solid reviews on the XT3 before jumping at it. You could get a D7500 and a nice lens for the money.

Again, point out what you dislike about the G80 and maybe you'll get better suggestions. The camera is only the controls, good glass and your own artistry are far more important, though it is best if you're using gear that you can be comfortable with. You will be giving up IBIS, that brilliant touch screen and unless you go with Fuji's smaller bodies or Sony A6***, size and weight too. And with those options you're giving up comfortable grip. There will always be a compromise.

I think dslr has plenty of life left in it, there's pros out there using 10 year old dslr who don't give a fudge about flappy screens , 4K or evf and they get the job done.
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,371
Name
Soeren
Edit My Images
Yes
#7
DSLR’s aren't going away tomorrow but the writing is on the wall and within the next decade they are probably gone or at least most are. A DSLR is still a formidable picture taker and the only thing I would worry about is the inevitable system change and if I see it affect my future photography especially regarding lenses. But hey I'm still using afd lenses, medium and large format cameras and printing in a darkroom. I find both the Fuji X-T2 and the Sony A6000 to be powerfull picture takers more capable than most will need.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
ian-83
Messages
1,513
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
Yes
#8
Go and try the Fuji XT-3
Looks nice but well out of my budget. Budget is probably half what an X-T3 body is.

No matter you buy it will be out of date and worth very little compared to what you paid for it very quickly. Buy for your own needs and requirements. Photography equipment isn’t an investment.
This is very true. I think my needs definitely need to come before the latest technology.

Yes it's still worth buyng a DSLR, mirrorless is relatively new technology but buying into everything new isn't necessarily the right way to go.
If you liked your D7000 you would love the D7200.
Wouldn't mind a D7200 but will see if my budget can stretch that far. Am happy to buy used. Did look at the D7100 but doesn't seem to offer much over a D7000.

What is it you dislike about the G80? It's what I'm currently using and have been considering an 'upgrade' - which would be more of a side-grade if I'm honest. My reasons are simply to try something else, always wanted to try some Canon lenses they have great options for the budget shooter. I wouldn't personally go back to Nikon, had 4 of their cameras and a tonne of their lenses through the years, I got really bored of the overall experience shooting with them. But, I did enjoy using them at one point. They might work better for you, we're all different and have our own personal taste.

I was looking at the 80D, I thought it might be much better at higher ISO [though I rarely go above 1600 with any camera] but it's not, they're very samey up to 3200 if you compare them. You wouldn't want to use either above 3200. The G80 is very comparable to APSC in general, don't let the hype about bigger sensors get to you. M43 files are often sharper, remember too the G80 has no AA filter on the sensor which helps with that. If you are going back to dslr you might want to go for one without that filter too, or you may well find your images a tad softer.

Fuji are great, I shot Fuji APSC for a couple of years and they are very good - better than most APSC offerings, at higher ISO BUT ... when there is noise it can be horrible, sometimes weird patterns and harder to clean up in post. I would wait on solid reviews on the XT3 before jumping at it. You could get a D7500 and a nice lens for the money.

Again, point out what you dislike about the G80 and maybe you'll get better suggestions. The camera is only the controls, good glass and your own artistry are far more important, though it is best if you're using gear that you can be comfortable with. You will be giving up IBIS, that brilliant touch screen and unless you go with Fuji's smaller bodies or Sony A6***, size and weight too. And with those options you're giving up comfortable grip.

I think dslr has plenty of life left in it, there's pros out there using 10 year old dslr who don't give a fudge about flappy screens , 4K or evf and they get the job done.
I don't have the budget for anything more than say £600 for a body and lens for now.

As for the G80 I am actually finding the small size the most annoying thing recently it does actually feel too small to handle nice. I don't have massive hands but it still feels cramp to me. Overall it's a good camera I just feel my D7000 suited my hands better and also my needs. I tend to take photos of fairly static objects and don't tend to walk too far with the camera in hand so don't need anything lightweight really.

I got a bit sucked into the marketing hype and thought a MFT would be better for my needs intact quite happy to say I have decided it isn't.
 
Messages
15,589
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
Yes
#9
DSLRs will be here for quite a bit longer. I think mirrorless will do well but will take a while. The base FF Nikon is 1k more than the D750, and you then have to replace glass. Non DSLR wise I think Fuji have a great range, very good and if I was not doing paid work I may be tempted as they would be smaller and lighter, but in some ways I like the size of DSLRs especially with longer glass.

DSLR now sounds like the best option, don't know what DX go for used but I know D700 can go for as little as £350/400 and its still a great camera!
 
Messages
3,652
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
No
#10
I'm not sure I could go back to DSLR for day to day photography. The benefit of being able to preview the depth of field and exposure through the viewfinder is amazing. That immediate response when using exposure compensation is so intuitive and smooth.

I do think DSLR is on its way out. I think Canikon will try and resist it as long as possible, and as long as they keep on launching hamstrung cameras that protect their DSLR lines it'll be a slow drawn out death. Sony & Fuji in particular have got a good grasp of "doing mirrorless" properly and once Canokon commit to that I think we'll see a proper shakeup. The simple fact is though, that no-one knows for sure. So I'd say buy what meets your needs and enjoy your photography. The tricky bit is seeing through all the marketing guff to discover what it is you actually need... After all - as I heard on YouTube the other day - Ansel Adams didn't need 2 card slots :)
 
Messages
12,201
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
#11
On a strict budget you have to just go with your gut, the D7K and something like a Sigma 17-50 2.8 maybe and you'll be happier
 
Messages
33,635
Edit My Images
No
#12
Wouldn't mind a D7200 but will see if my budget can stretch that far. Am happy to buy used. Did look at the D7100 but doesn't seem to offer much over a D7000.
The D7200 is great, solves all the 'issues' of the D7000/D7100 and can produce some great images ... I regretted selling mine. :)
 
Messages
900
Name
Malcolm
Edit My Images
Yes
#13
The D7200 is great, solves all the 'issues' of the D7000/D7100 and can produce some great images ... I regretted selling mine. :)
Watch this space - I'm going to be selling a mint D7200 with under 400 shutter activations (I've gone full frame with a D810, and also have a D500)
Sorry about the unashamed plug!
 
Messages
4,875
Edit My Images
Yes
#14
I have, ATM, 5 Canon cameras from the 350D to a 1Ds MKII and, apart from the 350D, they are all "chunky" which I much prefer - even the 40D I bought 2 years ago has the battery grip.

They are all able to take excellent photos when coupled with a good Canon lens.

But up till now I have used the 1Ds MkII simply because of the larger filesize making it easier to crop the images to get the results I want.

But with the advent of AI Gigapixel from Topaz Labs I can now get 30-40MP from all of them, and over 70MP from the 1Ds.

Because of that I am now using the 1D MkIII (10MP) because of the faster FPS and very low noise more than the others.

Because of these latest advances in software if you have a good lens then almost any camera can now produce excellent results.

To anyone thinking of buying a camera I would say choose a small cheap format and the best lens you can afford.
.
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,914
Name
Stu
Edit My Images
No
#15
In 5 years time, both the dSLR you buy today and the mirrorless you buy today will be out of date relative to what's released since so I should't worry too much about that at the moment.

If you budget is around £600 you could get a D7200 and a Nikon 18-70 for not much more than that from MPB (depending how fussy you are on quality of the 18-70) or as someone else mentioned a D700 and something like a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8.

Both options above would give more bang for buck than £600 of mirrorless at the moment, IMO.
 
Messages
276
Name
Martin
Edit My Images
No
#16
I recently returned to photography, previously shot with a D7000. My brief was to find the best quality image, in the smallest body, for the best price, after much research both online and in store it came down to the Fuji X series & the Sony A6300. I decided to go with the Sony it’s proving to be a steep learning curve getting to grips with a new system but for me it was the right choice. Good luck !
 
OP
OP
ian-83
Messages
1,513
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
Yes
#17
Watch this space - I'm going to be selling a mint D7200 with under 400 shutter activations (I've gone full frame with a D810, and also have a D500)
Sorry about the unashamed plug!
Might be tempted by that, still haven't fully made my mind up what to get
 
Messages
2,251
Edit My Images
Yes
#19
Should I just ignore these worries and buy what suits my needs and I enjoy using. Or play the waiting game?
What other possible reason for buying a camera can there be? The camera is a tool - buy the tool that does the job you are doing. There is no point in buying the best screwdriver on the market if you need a saw. Same applies to resale value. If the screwdriver keeps its value better than the saw, you still need that saw.
 
Messages
20,527
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
#20
As for the G80 I am actually finding the small size the most annoying thing recently it does actually feel too small to handle nice. I don't have massive hands but it still feels cramp to me. Overall it's a good camera I just feel my D7000 suited my hands better and also my needs. I tend to take photos of fairly static objects and don't tend to walk too far with the camera in hand so don't need anything lightweight really.

I got a bit sucked into the marketing hype and thought a MFT would be better for my needs intact quite happy to say I have decided it isn't.
I think MFT cameras are very fast and responsive and the lenses and image quality are good too but it all falls apart if you don't like the handling.

Personally I'd only go back to a DSLR with a gun to my head... those big fat bodies and lenses and the adverse reactions and attention they can get... the iffy focus and MA fiasco... the fact that you can't see the exposure and DoF, no in view histogram etc... mirrorless is for me a huge step forward and DSLR's feel so last century to me now... but it all falls apart if you don't like the handling…

Unless this is just GAS or a feeling that the grass is greener on the DSLR side?
 
Last edited:
Messages
4,647
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
No
#21
... those big fat bodies and lenses and the adverse reactions and attention they can get... the iffy focus and MA fiasco... the fact that you can't see the exposure and DoF, no in view histogram etc...
The only advantage I've found with mirrorless is using the rear screen in liveview works better than on my DSLRs.

The 'advantages' listed above simply haven't applied in my experience. In fact in-view histograms are a distraction best switched off. :D
 
Messages
5,575
Edit My Images
No
#22
I think MFT cameras are very fast and responsive and the lenses and image quality are good too but it all falls apart if you don't like the handling.

Personally I'd only go back to a DSLR with a gun to my head... those big fat bodies and lenses and the adverse reactions and attention they can get... the iffy focus and MA fiasco... the fact that you can't see the exposure and DoF, no in view histogram etc... mirrorless is for me a huge step forward and DSLR's feel so last century to me now... but it all falls apart if you don't like the handling…

Unless this is just GAS or a feeling that the grass is greener on the DSLR side?
I would say having used the A7iii with 70-200 for the first time at a horse show today brought more attention with its white lens and more comments than I ever got with the D750!

Once you put a 70-200 on the body size seems to become quite irrelevant. I’m not sure I’m sold on the Sony just yet!
 
Messages
20,527
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
#23
I would say having used the A7iii with 70-200 for the first time at a horse show today brought more attention with its white lens and more comments than I ever got with the D750!

Once you put a 70-200 on the body size seems to become quite irrelevant. I’m not sure I’m sold on the Sony just yet!
I don't really see your point. If you use a lens like that you're possibly going to attract attention no matter what camera you have either because of the size or the added conspicuousness of the lens being white lens. I tend to use smaller cameras and primes like 35/50/85mm or equivalent and all I can say is that in my experience the bigger the kit the more unwanted attention I get. Even with just a 50mm prime something like a 5D is a big fat lump, IMO.
 
Messages
5,575
Edit My Images
No
#24
I don't really see your point. If you use a lens like that you're possibly going to attract attention no matter what camera you have either because of the size or the added conspicuousness of the lens being white lens. I tend to use smaller cameras and primes like 35/50/85mm or equivalent and all I can say is that in my experience the bigger the kit the more unwanted attention I get. Even with just a 50mm prime something like a 5D is a big fat lump, IMO.
Well you never mentioned what lenses you were using. You just described DSLRs as big fat bodies and lenses.

As for how good mirrorless are. I’m still not sure yet. I used the 70-200 with the A7iii today. Not only is the EVF pretty poor in indoor action situations making the WYSIWYG situation pretty irrelevant. The camera hunted more than my D750. The images better be good.
 
Messages
22,917
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
#25
Well you never mentioned what lenses you were using. You just described DSLRs as big fat bodies and lenses.

As for how good mirrorless are. I’m still not sure yet. I used the 70-200 with the A7iii today. Not only is the EVF pretty poor in indoor action situations making the WYSIWYG situation pretty irrelevant. The camera hunted more than my D750. The images better be good.
Interesting comments. Are you maybe talking about an indoor equestrian arena, lit by the usual two candles? If so, that would be a very testing environment for a mirrorless AF system vs DSLR. Be interested to know how things turned out :)
 
Messages
5,575
Edit My Images
No
#26
Interesting comments. Are you maybe talking about an indoor equestrian arena, lit by the usual two candles? If so, that would be a very testing environment for a mirrorless AF system vs DSLR. Be interested to know how things turned out :)
Haha by Two Candles!! This one was slightly better than the last one I was at but it was still quite dull!!!
 
Messages
14,274
Edit My Images
No
#27
I used the 70-200 with the A7iii today. Not only is the EVF pretty poor in indoor action situations making the WYSIWYG situation pretty irrelevant. The camera hunted more than my D750. The images better be good.
Very interesting. I keep reading how good the A7iii AF is and how it's better than DSLRs (the D750 often getting mentioned) but it would seem it's not infallible then (y)
 
Messages
12,201
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
#28
Haha by Two Candles!! This one was slightly better than the last one I was at but it was still quite dull!!!

Are indoor equestrian competitions really that dark? I would have thought the horses need to be able to see the jumps clearly [if any] so would be pretty well lit
 
Messages
14,274
Edit My Images
No
#29
Are indoor equestrian competitions really that dark? I would have thought the horses need to be able to see the jumps clearly [if any] so would be pretty well lit
They can see in the dark with all the carrots they eat :coat:
 
Messages
5,575
Edit My Images
No
#30
Are indoor equestrian competitions really that dark? I would have thought the horses need to be able to see the jumps clearly [if any] so would be pretty well lit
Its not that they are all that dark, its the type of lighting mainly!
 
Messages
5,416
Name
Trevor
Edit My Images
Yes
#32
Are indoor equestrian competitions really that dark? I would have thought the horses need to be able to see the jumps clearly [if any] so would be pretty well lit
Yep. I used to shoot a lot of indoor equestrian. Most venues, apart from those on tv require ISO above 6400 F2.8 @1/250
 
Messages
12,201
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
#33
Yep. I used to shoot a lot of indoor equestrian. Most venues, apart from those on tv require ISO above 6400 F2.8 @1/250
Same with any indoor sport I guess. I did shoot a couple of indoor football games in the past, and would have been in that region for sure. Same with concert photography, the stage can seem well lit when you are there, but the camera can struggle a bit
 
OP
OP
ian-83
Messages
1,513
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
Yes
#34
Well I have no intention of shooting equestrian events :LOL:

Unless this is just GAS or a feeling that the grass is greener on the DSLR side?
I think it might be, just going to wait a while before making a choice what to do to see if my mood changes or stays the same.
 
Messages
9,268
Edit My Images
Yes
#35
[QUOTE="woof woof, post: 8264124, member: 22277"

Personally I'd only go back to a DSLR with a gun to my head...
[/QUOTE]
that can be arranged ,especially if you dont describe the voices :p
 
Messages
9,268
Edit My Images
Yes
#37
Same with any indoor sport I guess. I did shoot a couple of indoor football games in the past, and would have been in that region for sure. Same with concert photography, the stage can seem well lit when you are there, but the camera can struggle a bit
the only indoor events ive shot at was a pool game :facepalm:
 
Top