Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


Christmas Prize Draw 2017

DSLR, Mirrorless or Compact?


someone 3 2 United Kingdom
10 Jan 2017 8:29AM
Hi,

I've shot a lot with mirrorless cameras, but recently been thinking you can get as good quality with a compact like a Sony RX100, and don't have to carry around something heavy. You can shoot raw as well, don't have to worry about other lenses or dust, so thinking of getting rid of my other cameras.



Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

joshwa Plus
7 826 United Kingdom
10 Jan 2017 1:16PM
Hi Someone,

You could get a compact lens for your mirrorless camera and then you'd have something small, but also have the option to change lenses if needed.

Josh
Chris_L Plus
3 4.2k United Kingdom
10 Jan 2017 6:07PM
There are definitely some killer compacts, Sony RX100 IV and Sony RX100 V have some serious power and can outperform many a mirrorless ILC with a kit lens.

The compact lens option might be better though. Depends what you shoot and what your existing bodies are?
Carabosse 14 41.0k 269 England
10 Jan 2017 7:18PM

Quote:recently been thinking you can get as good quality with a compact like a Sony RX100


The Sony RX100 series has a 1" sensor rather than the 4/3" sensor in your GH4. The main difference in quality you may see is low-light cropped photos. In daylight or bright interiors the difference is small-to-nonexistent. However the small range of the fixed zoom is a limitation.

I carry an RX100 everywhere with me - even down to the corner shop! clown-light.jpg




i would always go for an entry level dslr over a good compact something like a d3300 ov and speed of use cant beat it
Carabosse 14 41.0k 269 England
10 Jan 2017 10:18PM
The OP finds CSC too heavy - never mind a DSLR ! Tongue
someone 3 2 United Kingdom
11 Jan 2017 8:58AM
I meet a lot of people who think that to get better photos, or to get in to photography, they need a DSLR, but I'm not sure why? When you can get the same image quality from a mirrorless camera, and often the mirrorless camera's have smaller lenses.

The Sony RX100 has a brighter lens than most compact lenses on mirrorless or DSLR as well.
Chris_L Plus
3 4.2k United Kingdom
11 Jan 2017 9:52AM

Quote:they need a DSLR, but I'm not sure why? When you can get the same image quality from a mirrorless camera

I went from Canon to Micro Four Thirds, IQ wasn't good enough so I stayed mirrorless but went full frame mirrorless.

I still completely understand why many photographers would choose a traditional DSLR from Nikon or Canon.

Remember that there's more to it than just image quality. You have to capture the image you want in the first place. That might mean standing all day in the rain, confident about your battery life, knowing you have access to professional backup and fast repair, a speedlite system that lets you light anything from a meeting to a fashion shoot working flawlessly and hand-in-hand with your camera. Things like this can be very important to certain photographers. Deal breakers.

Not to mention access to some of the best glass that money can buy.

Whichever way you go there will be compromises. Sometimes you compromise on size and weight, sometimes on price, sometimes on flexibility.

Andy_Curtis 3 790 United Kingdom
11 Jan 2017 9:53AM
"When you can get the same image quality from a mirrorless camera, and often the mirrorless camera's have smaller lenses"

That's not quite true though is it? It comes down to which DSLR you buy. I know for a fact that my Nikon D610 has better image quality than my Fujifilm Xt1. Both with fast primes. The XT1 is still an amazing image, but if you really look... the D610 was better.

Having said that... for general photography, there won't be much difference Smile
Carabosse 14 41.0k 269 England
11 Jan 2017 12:30PM
If you heavily crop you may well see a difference between (say) full-frame and MFT, especially if using high ISO, e.g. over 1600.

For low/medium ISO and no - or mild - cropping the difference may be negligible.

Here's an article from a while ago called Crazy Comparison (MFT vs Full Frame DSLR)! Smile
JackAllTog Plus
8 4.9k 58 United Kingdom
11 Jan 2017 1:59PM
If you can live with slower auto focus and not need manual focus. Not need to blur background quite so much in camera, and not need the lens quality of a fixed lens over your compact's zoom lens; Or need a particularly super wide or long lens. Or don't need to control multiple flashguns. and still have a tripod mount on your compact then do give it a go. Without wanting to do all of that you are probably going to be fine, you already have a few lovely images on for portfolio from various cameras so seem quite able. I'd love to hear back in a few months on how you found the switch and if you miss anything. A few photo examples would be great too.
I know i more often take quick photos on my phone than my dSLR and am quite happy most of the time with the results for personal use/social media etc.
StrayCat Plus
13 18.9k 3 Canada
11 Jan 2017 8:44PM
I think you need to think about your priorities, and list what you want to do now with your photography, and in the future. Then start researching the equipment you will need to reach those goals. If you just want to try a high end compact and see for yourself what they can give you, see if you can get your hands on one. Remember, if you are going to rid yourself of everything you have, just to get the money to buy an expensive compact, forget several areas of photography in the future because you won't have the lens for it in those cameras. Most of them will have a close-up/macro mode which can do pretty amazing things in the right hands, but you will eventually want to expand into proper macro kit if you enjoy it. If you think wildlife may be on the agenda, you will need much longer reach than the Sony Rx100, more like their much more expensive bridge cameras, and much larger and heavier I might add. If you think what you want is to get away from buying and changing lenses, maybe a good bridge camera might be what you need, but most of them aren't small like an RX100. I've been using a Panasonic FZ1000 for quite a while now, and I have no desire to have anything else, but it's probably the size of a GH4 with a compact lens, definitely not pocketable. If I were you, I wouldn't make any rash moves, and I wouldn't get anything with smaller than a 1 inch sensor, speaking from experience.
DaveRyder Plus
3 2.1k 1 United Kingdom
11 Jan 2017 9:43PM
I had an Oly Styus 1 and E410.

Changed both for an E-M10 and not regretted. I dont have the 14-42 pancake but would imagine the pairing would be Stylus 1 size.

Didnt look at other manufacturers as always been comfortable with Olympus.
Carabosse 14 41.0k 269 England
12 Jan 2017 1:27PM
If you want a really small CSC outfit, it is hard to get more compact/light than the Panasonic GM1 with the 12-32mm lens. Add the 40-150mm for more reach when needed, you would have a flexible and lightweight outfit.

GM1 is no longer made so you would have to try and get a good one from eBay etc.
Chris_L Plus
3 4.2k United Kingdom
12 Jan 2017 5:57PM
When you get to a certain size you can be splitting hairs a little bit.

The deal breaker is usually "can I put it in my pocket and forget about it until I need it?"

Any pocket sized camera needs to shoot significantly better photographs than your mobile phone if it is to earn a place on your person.

If your choice is too big for a pocket and needs to go in a bag then it means you probably only take it out when your intention is to go and do some photography, why, if you have to carry a bag, would you then compromise with a compact camera?

The choice is then between equipment, such as DLSR and lenses (that needs its own big bag) or a small mirrorless with a pancake lens etc.

If you stick with an interchangeable lens system you can take a different camera with you just by changing the lens. One day it's a landscape camera, another it's for candid portraits at a pal's birthday party etc.

Invest in the best glass you can afford, it keeps its value better than the bodies and it's what brings the images in. Have two or three fantastic lenses instead of one or two jack-of-all-trades mediocre monsters.


Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.