DSLR vs mirrorless: which do you prefer?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Digital Camera World community: the world's fastest-growing photography website, covering every aspect of image-making, from DSLR and mirrorless cameras to mobile photography, drones, post-production and printing.
Dec 17, 2019
8
1
15
I had a bunch of Nikon stuff (bodies, lenses, flash, etc) and found I wasn't using my D700 w/grip or my D7200 w/grip very much. What was being used was my Samsung S9+ phone or my point & shoot Nikon AW120. I sold all the Nikon DSLR's and bought a Sony a6300 & a7II. I also have a Panasonic ZS100 point & Shoot. Long story made short I prefer mirrorless over DSLR for the weight savings.
 
Nov 19, 2019
13
8
15
Also you can always lock your mirror up (especially if on a tripod) and shoot avoiding mirror slap and get super sharp images. The extra weight of (some) DSLRs can also help stabilization. However the large lens throat of (say) the Nikon Z series is allowing lens designers to produce some stunning lenses ......... tempting
im not super knowledgeable in optics but is this the reason i keep hearing / seeing about lenses with super low apertures like 0.95 ? is it the "lens throat" that you mentioned that allows this ? im also curious if because of the same size you mentioned if mirrorless would be better for low light ?
 
Dec 12, 2019
121
9
85
im not super knowledgeable in optics but is this the reason i keep hearing / seeing about lenses with super low apertures like 0.95 ? is it the "lens throat" that you mentioned that allows this ? im also curious if because of the same size you mentioned if mirrorless would be better for low light ?
Hello Canadian One,
I also am not that knowledgeable about optical design but am certain that I read somewhere that the size of the lens throat (on Nikon Z series for example) and distance from the sensor allow optical designers more freedom (or less constraints if you look at the other side of the coin). hence superior as well as faster lenses. I am dubious about the practical value of really fast lenses since the depth of field must be minute and this is very limiting for 99% of photography.
Mirrorless are not intrinsically better in low light than either DSLRs or Compacts. The number of photosites on a sensor and the size of them tends to be the governing factor in low light photography. The bigger the photosite the more light and therefore signal it can gather. Also better processing by the camera CPU can reduce the noise level and increase the signal. This is something astrophotographers take advantage of by taking many images and stacking them . the principle is the signal (what you are photographing) is constant in position but the noise is random, so by stacking the signal gets stronger (taller) and the noise being in different places each time tends to not grow as much and even cancel each other slightly. The result is a signal level is much higher than the noise level and a better image can be obtained.
A general rule is that for the same size sensor more megapixels = smaller photosites so for example for a full frame sensor (FX) a 24 megapixel sensor will have less noise than a 36 megapixel sensor. An additional factor is that newer cameras have better sensors and better processing engines builtin so general improvements are taking place all the time. The Nikon Z6 has less noise than the Nikon Z7 so if night or low light photography is your thing then the Z6 is better.
All that being said I am shooting on an older camera (Nikon D850) sometimes at 6400 ISO and I am getting great images with practically no noise after processing through Topaz Denoise AI !
 
Jan 6, 2020
11
1
10
Hi Artaius: I'm very new to the Nikon cameras and photography. I will purchase one once I have fully decided as to what type of camera that has all the things I want on it and the type as well. You have made some really great points related to the Mirror-less and DSLR's. I feel that info has made some very great points to my issues in learning. I'm leaning towards the Nikon Z 6. What is your take on this type of camera? I know that it doesn't have the 2 card slot, which I would like. I also find the lens choice, at present, quite minimal and very pricy. Any input would be great.
 
Jan 6, 2020
11
1
10
someone will laugh but for me my D3400 is a serious camera and truthfully if it wasnt for the lack of autofocus points id be happy with it but im a hobbyist so my upgrade will be to a D7500 i will not go mirrorless only because of the prices here in canada are ridiculously expensive (for me) and saving the $1200 for a D7500 on my wages is interesting enough :) maybe in a few years ill switch
 
Jan 6, 2020
11
1
10
HI Canadian One: I have the opportunity to purchase a D3000, which in all intensive purposes is a total antique in the realm of cameras but I've read some 437 reviews and don't think that you could get something for $350.00 any better. The camera and lenses have only been used several times. Yes, the camera is outdated it was brought out in July 2009, but with this camera comes the USB cord, Nikkor 18-55mm, and a Nikkor 55-200mm lenses. The battery and battery charger, cleaner, dust cloth and a case for everything to go in. The lenses are worth the $350.00 alone. The thing is that whatever the camera and bells and whistles that you can acquire are that it is used for the purpose of taking photos and enjoying it along the way. There's always new cameras, lenses, etc. that are coming out all the time and just perhaps a great deal can be snagged. By the way, this D3000 camera was replaced by the D3500. The D3000 in the reviews was enjoyed by beginners and pros alike. The thing is with this camera it is just for taking photos and no videos or live view screen. But what the heck for $350.00 you can't go wrong. There will be time enough to save for my new and desirable camera the Nikon Z6. By that time the price will probably have gone down enough as it is expensive and so are the lenses. Photography is not a cheap past time no matter what way you look at it.
 

Artaius

Staff member
Nov 13, 2019
52
33
60
www.digitalcameraworld.com
If you're just getting started in your photography, the Nikon D3000 will certainly get you going on your journey . However, even for the money, I would recommend aiming for something newer. The D3000 is very limited specs-wise, with a low-resolution 10.1MP sensor and only 100-1600 of ISO sensitivity. Not that you need loads of image resolution or the ability to shoot at ludicrous ISOs, but the D3000 will do a disservice to your photography in 2020 – for the sake of a few bucks, I don't think it's worth it.

The Nikon D3500 (review here), for instance, is a great camera – and it's currently only $358 including the 18-55mm lens (link in the review). For that you get a 24.2MP sensor and ISO100-25,600, both of which will make a huge difference to the pictures you produce (especially in challenging lighting conditions). The general advances in technology and image processor will also make this a faster, more accurate and generally better imaging machine in general.

Typically I'd say that lenses are more important than the body, but in this case I'd definitely advise opting for a newer camera like the D3500 with more modern tech.



HI Canadian One: I have the opportunity to purchase a D3000, which in all intensive purposes is a total antique in the realm of cameras but I've read some 437 reviews and don't think that you could get something for $350.00 any better. The camera and lenses have only been used several times. Yes, the camera is outdated it was brought out in July 2009, but with this camera comes the USB cord, Nikkor 18-55mm, and a Nikkor 55-200mm lenses. The battery and battery charger, cleaner, dust cloth and a case for everything to go in. The lenses are worth the $350.00 alone. The thing is that whatever the camera and bells and whistles that you can acquire are that it is used for the purpose of taking photos and enjoying it along the way. There's always new cameras, lenses, etc. that are coming out all the time and just perhaps a great deal can be snagged. By the way, this D3000 camera was replaced by the D3500. The D3000 in the reviews was enjoyed by beginners and pros alike. The thing is with this camera it is just for taking photos and no videos or live view screen. But what the heck for $350.00 you can't go wrong. There will be time enough to save for my new and desirable camera the Nikon Z6. By that time the price will probably have gone down enough as it is expensive and so are the lenses. Photography is not a cheap past time no matter what way you look at it.
 
Dec 16, 2019
23
10
15
My next camera body will be a mirrorless one, probably Canon since I have EF lenses. Since my current 760D is from 2016 I am almost due for a new one. Sadly, the R5 will be too expensive, if I wish to stay married, so probably the R replacement when it is out. Being in IT, I never go for the V 1.0 version :)
 
Feb 28, 2020
5
0
10
I can't afford to upgrade to a mirrorless system so I've been trying to make the best use of the the equipment I have available. I'm currently shooting a Pentax K10-D with a variety of Sigma and Pentax lenses and getting great results which have often looked better than images taken on much more expensive mirrorless systems. I believe that great pictures can be taken using any camera providing the person taking the picture knows how to compose a good shot. If I had the money I'd upgrade to a Pentax K1-II as I already have a large selection of 35mm manual and AF lenses I could use without having to invest in a new set of lenses. The original M42 Takumar lenses have superb optics along with the Zeiss Tessars and they can be picked up fairly cheaply although prices are rising. I also have the option of using the old Helios and Jupiter series Russian lenses as they can also be adapted to fit on the K-mount. I see no reason to switch to a mirrorless system with a limited range of lenses when I have so many options available to me and a much lower outlay.
 
Mar 23, 2020
2
0
10
I use lots of cameras... but still consider my Nikon D800 as my 'serious' camera. This is at least partly as I have lots of lenses for this, and I know the camera well (and it still shoots incredible image files). But I own two mirrorless cameras (a Fujifilm X-T1 and a Sony A7) that I will use when I am travelling light. I am not shamed to admit that my Apple iPhone 8 Plus gets used a lot too nowadays!
Hi
Like you I am using my D800 (wonderfull images) and also my D750 & D500 (BIF). Just a few months ago I bought a Fuji X-T2 (new and discounted), while I don't really like the mirrorless of the camera I love the look of my images with its" film simulation". I think lenses are much more important than bodies you use, I spend a bundle with this new camera buying the XF50-140 OIS + XF 14 F2.8+ XF18-55 OIS. I do mostly landscape and architecture, and BIF. Even the Fuji with the 3 lenses and backpack weighs over 8 pounds.... way too much for travelling and carrying for more than a few hours.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY