Thinking of ditching my DSLR - am I mad?

Llamaman

Llamaman

Proud Addick
Messages
7,422
Name
Not an addick!
Edit My Images
Yes
OK guys and gals, need a bit of help with my thinking... I'm going to muse out loud (well in text), and I'd appreciate your thoughts/comments.

I've had my DSLR (Nikon D5000) for about a year now and whilst I'm delighted with the quality of the photos (and it's taught me the basics of exposure), I'm finding the size and weight a bit of a chore to lug about. A few months back I bought an 18-200 lens to use as a travel lens for a trip to Cuba, and to be honest it now lives on my camera whilst the 18-105 and 70-300 gather dust at home. I've also got a 35mm prime that squeezes into the camera bag for low-light situations. Most of my photography is outdoors, so I tend to use a CPL a lot.

I do have a compact (a Lumix TZ7) which I liked when I got it, but now I've had a DSLR it feels very limited. I don't like the lack of manual controls (you have to play "what scene am I in?"), especially in low-light where it refuses to stop-up forcing me to use a horrid high-ISO mode. I hate zooming with the little button because it has lag and no variable speed. The shutter lag is also a bit annoying.

To top it all off, I am about to become a father (in March), so I want to get a camera that will;
a) Be portable enough that I can carry it with me along with all the inevitable baby paraphenalia.
b) Still produce photos I can look at without thinking "should have used a better camera".

My preferred mode of shooting is Av (99.5% of the time, Tv the rest), so as a minimum for external controls I need one control dial to adjust aperture and an EC button. I could live with changing mode via the menu, but being able to change focus mode or drive mode with a button/touchscreen would be handy.

I'm struggling to decide whether to get a high-end compact (LX5, S95, XZ-1) or go m4/3.

I can't see much point getting a m4/3 and slapping a 14-140 lens on it (not very portable and I doubt it will handle all that well), so I'll probably have to get used to a more modest zoom range (14-45), and probably also get a pancake for when I want/need to be able to slip it in a jacket pocket or get extreme DoF.

But then I look at the compacts like XZ-1 or LX-5 , which cover at least the same zoom range as a m4/3 14-45 and are faster (which compensates for the loss of DoF in the smaller format). The problem with the compacts are having to put up with those yukky power zooms. Plus, the LX5 (which would otherwise be my compact choice due to 24mm wide lens) seems to be a right faff to put a polariser on, unlike the XZ-1 and S95 where you can use a Lensmate and not add too much to the bulk of the camera.

Urgh, what should I do? I reckon I can learn to live without a viewfinder (the D5000's OVF ain't nothing special anyway) so I'm thinking the GF3 (rather than the larger G3) + 14-45 would be the best m4/3 for me. But is it going to be significantly more capable than, say, a LX5 which would be a fair bit smaller?
 
There's the sony nex series. They use full sized aps-c sensors in smaller bodies. Also plenty of adapters available so you can use older minolta AF lenses on them. I don't know how much manual control there is with it though.

M 4/3rds aren't supposedly that great at fast action.

There are a few decent bridge cameras around like the Fuji HS20, Sony HVL100 and pansonic FZ45 or FZ100. Think the Fuji might be the only one with the non motorised zoom.
 
That's the only thing that annoys me about my 5100

Size is fine but the 18-200 makes it very front heavy. I leave it on though as it's just so conveniate :lol:
 
How about the new Sony NEX 7? :) A little pricey on release though, looks like it will be a contender for the Fuji X100.
 
Have to say, I don't really see much point of the Nex system. Yes, the bodies are smaller than an entry level DSLR, but once you add a few lenses (which surely is the point of an ILC), the benefit is minimal as the lenses are the same size and weight as an SLR!
That said, I think the dual-wheel control system on the Nex7 looks pretty good and I'd like to see something similar appear on other systems.
 
Llamaman said:
I'm struggling to decide whether to get a high-end compact (LX5, S95, XZ-1) or go m4/3.
Click to expand...

I nearly junked my dslr stuff but ended up just buying another dslr body. Now I expect to carry twice as much junk about but not worry about changing lenses. I expect I'll just get a compact for the times when carrying a big camera or bag is not suitable.

Do you want to travel around with camera and pocket or camera and bag? If its a bag, slightly bigger doesn't seem to make much difference. XZ-1 and LX5 aren't exactly jean pocketable. For me a small bag, is a small bag and m4/3 will travel just great and give you some flexibility later too.
 
Keep the dslr. Other cameras really do not compare IMO. I often carry my d300 and 24-70 out with the kids (1yr and 3 hrs) without fuss. Will sometimes have the 70-200 too. I often use the top part of my lowepro rucksack for nappies, wipes, food, milk etc so it can double up!

At times it can be a pain, but I have managed to take a 2yo to london on the train, then bus to my Nan's house and back again with the setup as above. Not an issue for me.
 
Can you not sell the 70-300 and 18-105 and buy an LX-5 or similar,keeping the D5000, 18-200 and 35mm?
Assuming it's already paid for you'd probably lose more money and may as well hang onto it for the times when you need it- even if they are few and far between.
However, bare in mind this advice comes from a man with thousands of pounds in unused gear- e.g. I still have 2 pairs of rollerblades that I convinced myself I may as well hang onto as they would be worth little compared to the cost and I might use them again some day-mmm:lol:
 
I agree about the 4/3 cameras... Still too bulky to carry around easily. They seem half way between a DSLR and a top compact, which is pointless to me.

I bought my first DSLR in March for photos of my first baby (sorry, 'our' first baby :-)) which is due in a fortnight and have caught the bug.

I've also since bought an LX5 after deliberating, like you, between the S95, XZ1 and LX5. I went for the LX5 for the wide angle and picture quality. If the S95 had a 24mm i would have gone for that due to it's size. The XZ1 feels great but the lens cap put me off, and the 28mm.

The LX5 is great, but by no means a DSLR quality. I take it out but often still feel like I'm missing the potential quality of my Canon 500D.

If it was me, I would keep your Nikon with at least a portrait lens for baby shots and sell your other stuff to put towards an LX5 or S95 for carrying around. A baby's only a baby once and you don't want to feel like you compromised on memories in a few years time.

Only my opinion though :-)
 
I have an LX5 and couple of MFT... a GF1 and a G1.

I think that the LX5 takes ok shots, not great but ok for a whole image if you don't examine them too closely. I think that the GF1 with 20mm f1.7 takes much better shots, so much so that you needn't worry about being disappointed with the IQ which IMVHO is much better than that of the LX5 if looking closely, even in good light where the differences should be minimal.

A GF1+20mm is far too big for a trouser pocket and so is the LX5 but each will fit into the pocket of my lightest jacket or a small bag although the GF1 is heavier but not by a significant amount. Later GF models are smaller and will no doubt be a little lighter. These later models will have fewer knobs and dials and more touch screen controls but if you don't mind such modern things or using a prime instead of a zoom I think that a MFT would be the best option. Hang on... maybe the best option would be both?!?! I sometimes take both, the GF1 for low light and most shots and the LX5 for a wider angle. I've taken both abroad twice so far this year and will probably do so again next time.
 
you are becoming a Father ?

(1) congratulations
(2) KEEP THE DSLR

I bought a dslr because I became a father and wanter decent pictures that I can take quickly and how I wanted them

You wont get that with a point and shoot without faffing around with little screens and controls

the DSLR is great, and most baby shots will be in the house for the first few months, a nice fast lens is what you really need ... f/1.4

So there you have it ....... should you ditch the DSLR .... no you should buy a 50mm 1.4
 
Can you get a good compact and keep the DSLR for the time being, until you see how it works out for you? That would probably be my first choice.

I got my SLRs (F2 and FM) in the late 70s and still have them. I added lenses and a flash unit, the bulk/weight increased, and I found myself using a little Olympus 35RC rangefinder more and more; but I still used the SLRs when necessary.

I own a few digital cameras (old Dimage 7i, Canon A640, Panasonic TZ9 and a 30D) and my main interests are travel and related history. The DSLR is obviously the best choice for this, but photography is a secondary interest in many ways. I really can't be bothered carrying the bulk/weight, and having to worry about the security issues at times. The A640 and the TZ9 usually work well for me, and I'm willing to sacrifice some IQ for the convenience. I was actually going to go for an S95 when we bought the TZ9, but my wife wanted the big zoom range. I might still get one, for a true pocket camera.

You might want to keep the DSLR for now. Children get mobile surprisingly quickly and I don't think any compact can really come to the party for action shots. The DSLR and a decent - fast - lens just make it much easier.

DSLRs and compacts don't compete, they complement each other.
 
Last edited:
Trust me you'll miss it.

Contrast AF systems suck balls (Queue m4/3 owner hate) and no matter how far they have come it just isn't the same as owning a responsive DSLR. Most will say it's fine for anything other than sports but I've found they can struggle to keep up with children playing. Indoors as the light starts to fail it gets worse.

I would say stick with what you have, with the 35mm attached.
 
Thanks for the comments. Think I'll sell the 18-105, 70-300, the ridiculous impulse-bought IR converted D70 (don't ask) and the Domke warehouse-bag.
That'll leave me with an 18-200 and a 35mm, and I can use the proceeds to buy a better compact.

I still don't get why they didn't put a filter thread on the LX5. The lens doesn't retract into the body so it would be pretty easy to do. It's an enthusiast camera and enthusiasts use filters! Grrrr.
 
Over the years I've carried two DSLR bodies around with me and I'm now getting fed up with the weight and packing problems.
Although I like to do wildlife mostly I've usually packed the 5D and wider lens in case I miss something.
Yesterday I took delivery of a second hand LX5 bought on here. In the brief time I've had it I'm very impressed by the quality, I took a macro that so impressed me i put it up in the macro section.

However, it's not going to be a complete DSLR replacement in terms of IQ. I would certainly advise buying one to give it a whirl, it may suit your style of photography but you may struggle with adapting to full control of settings.

It's not as intuitive as a DSLR (at least on the LX5) but I managed to arrive at satisfactory settings in the end.
 
gingerweasel said:
Trust me you'll miss it.

Contrast AF systems suck balls (Queue m4/3 owner hate) and no matter how far they have come it just isn't the same as owning a responsive DSLR. Most will say it's fine for anything other than sports but I've found they can struggle to keep up with children playing. Indoors as the light starts to fail it gets worse.
Click to expand...


You do know that a MFT is now the fastest focusing interchangeable lens camera? beating every DSLR? Right? :lol:

Ok. It's a specific camera and lens combination and according to some they still aren't great for action shots but IMVHO you're painting things worse than they are and living in the past.
 
My little 'un is now one, and I've very few shots of her on my compact (LX-3), other than ones taken when she's static, e.g. asleep. I found that babies and small children move quickly and suddenly, and the shutter lag and AF on the LX-3 just isn't up to it. Now I don't know how good the latest 4/3 cameras are in that respect, but if you've already got an SLR, I'd hang onto it, and stick with the 35mm to reduce the size.

I've also found that auto-iso is extremely useful when photographing kids - stick the camera in manual mode, select the shutter speed to freeze the movement, the aperture for the DoF, then let the camera sort the ISO out.
 
Just seen the announcement of the Fuji X10 - a small-form camera with a viewfinder, fast-ish lens and manual barrel zoom. Looking forward to seeing some reviews.
 
Llamaman said:
Just seen the announcement of the Fuji X10 - a small-form camera with a viewfinder, fast-ish lens and manual barrel zoom. Looking forward to seeing some reviews.
Click to expand...

I know it's a small-sensor camera but I don't care, I want one. Now!
 
I have been considering something like the Lumix G for a while... I doubt it would replace my DSLR's but its always good to have a third backup anyway.
 
woof woof said:
You do know that a MFT is now the fastest focusing interchangeable lens camera? beating every DSLR? Right? :lol:

Ok. It's a specific camera and lens combination and according to some they still aren't great for action shots but IMVHO you're painting things worse than they are and living in the past.
Click to expand...

You're talking lab tests under specific conditions, in the real world the Olympus PEN3 wouldn't touch a DSLR, especially for action shots.

Why not try turning down the lights, see how fast that contrast AF works then.

Next you'll be telling my I'm old fashioned because I haven't embraced electronic view finders (again, these suck balls).
 
woof woof said:
You don't know what you're talking about do you?
Click to expand...

That depends whether or not you consider actual hands on experience with several of these types of cameras a good enough basis to make an informed decision.

No one is saying the cameras are useless, far from it - I love the GF1. But you have to be honest with yourself and admit the limitations of the technology as it currently stands.

You're the guy arguing that sensor size makes no difference to DoF on another thread so the old saying about glass houses and throwing stones comes to mind.
 
Thanks for all you comments. Think I'll keep the DSLR (for now) and get a MFT/NEX.
 
Update:

I made a trip to my local camera store beginning with J and had a play with a number of P&S/ILS models from their limited selection - S95, XZ-1, E-PL2, E-P2, GF3, G3.

Quickly came to the conclusion that the really small bodies don't work for me - I want, as a minimum, manual zoom, a thumbwheel and an EC button (or the clicky wheel on the Panny MFTs). The EP-L drove me mad.

I quite like the look of the Nex7, but it's going to be really expensive and I'm not convinced by the range of lenses - apart from the 24mm f/2.8 (not that fast for a prime?) the only other option in the range I'd like (28-40mm equivalent) is an eye-wateringly expensive Zeiss one.

Which leaves me MFT. In principle, I like the Pens - the EP-3 handles well and I think IBIS is more appealing than lens-based IS. But it's so expensive! How can Olympus justify charging £200+ more than a G3?

So I think I'm going to get a Panny MFT. I'm not convinced the eVF of the G3 is worth the extra bulk, so it's probably going to be a GF1 or GF2. Handling on the GF1 seems better, but did they improve the GF2 in other ways that compensate?

Oh, and assuming a get a Panny 14-42 or 14-45, would there be problems using those on an Olympus body if they sort out their pricing (i.e. do the 2 IS systems not like each other)?
 
The GF2 should be about the same as the GF1 in terms of IQ etc. The GF1 is a more classic hands on camera, meaning they have the mode dial on top but took it away on the GF2. The GF2 is touch screen. The GF3 is a nice fast camera. IQ has been improved a little and the AF is lightning quick. The E-PL3 is also a very nice camera.

Good luck with your purchase.
 
Thanks. I couldn't get on with the control system for the GF3 and the Pen lites - feel too point-and-shoot-like for my tastes. I think at least one thumb wheel is a necessity!
 
I have the GF1 but I agree with the guy who said that the best thing for baby photos is a DSLR with a fast prime, and actually not that big a package.

The GF1 is lovely and is the camera that I carry with me in case I spot something but I wouldn't like to rely on it's autofocus when chasing babies around.
 
Thanks - on the basis of advice here I've decided to keep the SLR for at home (and occasional outings) and get a MFT for general use.

Just trying to decide between GF1, GF2 or selling a kidney for an E-P3.
 
Ditto. Gee, what a nuisance - DSLR weight and bulk. But ten years from now, when you look back ...
Keep the DSLR!
 
DON'T DO IT

When my kids were born (Back in the film days) I bought a decent AF compact to suplement the SLR and yet looking back over the shots from the last 26 years it's those taken on assorted SLR's and DSLR's that are by a mile the best,and what you lug around today is nothing compared to a Nikon FA with winder and Tamron 28-135 that I took many shots of the kids on
 
Keep the DSLR, get an iPhone :)
 
I already have an iPhone! As a camera it's bobbins - my old Sony c502 was better, especially in low light. But neither can be compared to even a basic P&S!
 
gingerweasel said:
Contrast AF systems suck balls (Queue m4/3 owner hate) and no matter how far they have come it just isn't the same as owning a responsive DSLR. Most will say it's fine for anything other than sports but I've found they can struggle to keep up with children playing. Indoors as the light starts to fail it gets worse.
Click to expand...

Well I've got a Canon DSLR and a Panasonic m43s set up and would entirely agree with you. I do love my GF1, with the 20mm it is a great take everywhere camera but I'd never choose it over a DSLR when going out to take photos. For me the m43 has replaced a compact, it is small enough to take out with a couple of lenses in a small bag or a big pocket - I do use mine a lot. However it does struggle with AF in situations where the Canon would have no problems, and I find tracking a real pain.
 
Thanks for your thoughts everyone - all good food for the mind stomach :)
 
Right, think I've come to a conclusion. The EP-3 seems just too expensive (ditto the Nex7), so it's going to be a GF1 or GF2.

Going to go and have a long play with a GF2 and see how well I get on without a mode dial etc. There's some good offers on twin 14 and 14-42 kits, although I'll probably also look at getting the highly-rated 20mm and maybe sell one of the kit lenses. If I don't get on with the GF2, I'll get a used GF1 from here.
 
I doubt you will find a new GF1 anywhere. We sold our last one over 3 months ago!

There are a few nice ones for sale in the For Sale section on this forum.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top