Mirrorless cameras vs dSLRs

~D~ · 20 Mar 2012 at 11:46

I saw a review today of the Samsung NC200 (http://www.digital-photography-school.com/samsung-nx200-review) and I was blown away by it.

Very good ISO performance, APS-C sensor and 20MP image size, as well as all the usual Aperture/Shutter priority and full manual.

Now to me this seems better than my Nikon D5100 and it is a bit cheaper too (£450 on average).

I know that there will hardly be any lenses currently available for the Samsung but that will surely change with time. I also know that there is no viewfinder, which may be annoying initially.

But is there any real reason to keep my Nikon D5100 and not get the smaller, cheaper, better ISO-performing Samsung?

D.P. · 20 Mar 2012 at 14:46

More to the point, why on earth would you want to get rid of your d5100 which is a fantastic camera with an amazing sensor. I don't know where you are getting your reviews but the d5100 is much much better than the samsung

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Ca...and)/Nikon/(appareil2)/662|0/(brand2)/Samsung

The Nikon has more colour death, a massive 3 stops more dynamic range and far better low light high ISO performance. The Samsung is actually pretty poor, at leat 1-2 generations behind Nikon ad Sony.

And don't bet on samsungs lens selection increasing at a fast rate. Look how long Sony have had heir nex out and how few lenses are around.

Demon · 20 Mar 2012 at 15:16

~D~ said:
I saw a review today of the Samsung NC200 (http://www.digital-photography-school.com/samsung-nx200-review) and I was blown away by it.

Very good ISO performance, APS-C sensor and 20MP image size, as well as all the usual Aperture/Shutter priority and full manual.

Now to me this seems better than my Nikon D5100 and it is a bit cheaper too (£450 on average).

I know that there will hardly be any lenses currently available for the Samsung but that will surely change with time. I also know that there is no viewfinder, which may be annoying initially.

But is there any real reason to keep my Nikon D5100 and not get the smaller, cheaper, better ISO-performing Samsung?

The ISO performance isn't better, it looks the same to me!
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/samsungnx200/18 (Set one of the camera's to your D5100, and compare various ISO's, be aware the samsung applies NR at ISO6400+)..

It's also got CDAF (Contrast Detection Auto Focus) which is generally not too bad in good light (equivalent to low end DSLR), but it poor light and especially moving subjects, it's not as good as a DSLR..

Then you have the lens choice which tends to be very limited etc.. and it's not exactly pocketable, despite being 'small'..

Although the newer mirrorless small cams are becoming more popular, so there is some merit for some people with the smaller size etc.. in which case I'd also look at the Sony NEX5N which reviews higher on DPReview and I also like the Panasonic GX1...

D.P. · 20 Mar 2012 at 16:07

Further to my last post, you never said why you really want to change. You seemed to think the Samsung had better IQ,it doesn't, the D5100 is top in its class (without going through frame I think only the Pentax k5 will better it, but it is the same underlying sensor with some tweaks).

Do you want a camera with better IQ? If so i think the only way is to go full frame, look for a second hand Nikon D700. Better yet, invest in good glass and learn better technique to maximise what you get from your camera. Are you using the histogram to nail the exposure, are your exposing to the right, are you using a UniWB to get micro-precision in exposure, are you using a good quality tripod + mirror lockup + remote release, are you using optimal apertures for the scene, are you using hyper focal focusing to increase Depth of focus (and perhaps increase aperture to prevent diffraction). And that is just some of the technical side, there are also artistic things. How good do you really think your compositions are. I bet 20 quid book could improve your photos much more than a change of camera bodies.

Second question, do you simply want a smaller camera system? If you like the sound of mirroreless then there are many different options out there. Sony wins with the IQ contest, but the lenses are pretty big relative to the body, especially if you want reach. But the smaller lens work great. A limited system so far. The micro-four thirds system (olympus/Panasonic) is the most extensive but there are still big omissions. The sensor size is a little funky middle ground size, and their sensor technology is a couple of generations behind. The Nikon 1 system is the newest but is very interesting. Very very good AF, very responsive, lots of processing power, fantastic sensor that is small and allows plenty of reach, should allow plenty of very compact prime lenses and telephoto options with time. Not much lens choice yet.

ShakenNstirred · 20 Mar 2012 at 16:16

if you already have the D5100 i really dont see a good enough reason to change it of that cam

~D~ · 20 Mar 2012 at 16:30

Ah well that clears that up then

Yea I guess I was under the false impression that the IQ would be on par with my D5100. I do want an MILC camera, mostly as a backup/second camera.

And D.P., that's interesting that you say that about the Nikon 1, I do want a smaller camera, mainly for portability (and wont get me told off at gigs!). It being a Nikon I assume I can get an adaptor for my AF-S lenses?

I've not heard overly good things about the Nikon 1 though, it seems mainly aimed at people upgrading from P&S cameras rather than a decent backup for a photographer - namely things like the PASM options being in the menu rather than having a hardware switcher.

D.P. · 20 Mar 2012 at 16:54

The Nikon 1 has the best adapter to handle the DSLR lenses. Nikon AF-S lenses work very well and focus fast on a Nikon 1. Put a 70-200mm VR on it and you have huge amounts of reach, very fast AF and top notch IQ, a lot of light gather, but of course a funky Frankenstein setup with a tiny camera and big lens.
The Sony NEX allows the sony Alpha/minolta lenses to be mounted but the AF is very slow compared to the Nikon 1 route.

The Nikon 1 camera don't offer as many physical buttons as a pro DSLR, but that is to be expected. a higher end Nikon 1 with some more buttons would be nice and is rumored to be coming this yearn, but I am not sure if this is a deal breaker. E.g., with the PASM selection i think you do ave to go to a menu to select which mode, but then when you are in that mode you have dedicated button to control aperture/shutter etc., so it really doesn't matter. I use aperture mode 95% of the time and in over a decade of semi serious photography I have never once needed to switch between A-S-M modes quickly.

What is important to me with a mirrorless setup if I was to buy one is IQ, responsiveness and fast AF, small size. The Nikon 1 scores in all 3 categories and is the outright winner in fast AF and responsiveness category. Sony NEX wins the IQ category but as soon as you want a little reach then the lenses get huge and you end up with no advantage over an entry level DSLR.

If I was to buy a mirrorless setup it would definitely be a Nikon 1, not least you can mount all the Nikon F-mount AF-S lenses and get fast AF.

But all the mirror-less setups have advantages and disadvantages. And if you really want a pocket camera then non of them work, although in theory the Nikon 1 could be made pocket-able if some god pancake lenses appeared.

bigredshark · 22 Mar 2012 at 12:53

D.P. said:
Do you want a camera with better IQ? If so i think the only way is to go full frame, look for a second hand Nikon D700.

I'd suggest the Fuji X-Pro 1 is better than any current crop DSLRs from the images I've seen, it's pulling the D800E trick of a much weaker AA filter for increased resolution and it's certainly sharp.

I'm not entirely convinced (it's damn expensive for starters), you'd have to really want it's compactness as you can get a 5DII kit for the same money...

koolpc · 22 Mar 2012 at 12:57

Heard good things about the Panny G3

D.P. · 22 Mar 2012 at 15:48

bigredshark said:
I'd suggest the Fuji X-Pro 1 is better than any current crop DSLRs from the images I've seen, it's pulling the D800E trick of a much weaker AA filter for increased resolution and it's certainly sharp.

I'm not entirely convinced (it's damn expensive for starters), you'd have to really want it's compactness as you can get a 5DII kit for the same money...

Well, could well be (the samples do look stunning) but it is a little niche and I was mainly referring to upgrading his Nikon setup. The OP never made it clear smaller was the most important thing, but IQ was important.

If money was no object and small+ great images was paramount, I would take a Leica M9 anyway, to get all that glass.

bigredshark · 22 Mar 2012 at 17:26

D.P. said:
Well, could well be (the samples do look stunning) but it is a little niche and I was mainly referring to upgrading his Nikon setup. The OP never made it clear smaller was the most important thing, but IQ was important.

If money was no object and small+ great images was paramount, I would take a Leica M9 anyway, to get all that glass.

Less niche than the Samsung I would say...it's going to sell well on style alone and if it's actually as good as Fuji say then it'll sell a heap more.

You could also raise the D7000, greater resolution and it's DR is better. I wouldn't upgrade on those grounds particularly but it's a worthwhile step from a D5100...

I see your point about the M9, I think it's a different option, for all that I love my old AI lenses and FM2 and my MF gear, there are times when I want something which will AF, I've seriously considered an M9 before but I just can't quite justify that much money on a 35mm camera with no AF.

ShakenNstirred · 22 Mar 2012 at 19:23

bigredshark said:
Less niche than the Samsung I would say...it's going to sell well on style alone and if it's actually as good as Fuji say then it'll sell a heap more.

You could also raise the D7000, greater resolution and it's DR is better. I wouldn't upgrade on those grounds particularly but it's a worthwhile step from a D5100...

I see your point about the M9, I think it's a different option, for all that I love my old AI lenses and FM2 and my MF gear, there are times when I want something which will AF, I've seriously considered an M9 before but I just can't quite justify that much money on a 35mm camera with no AF.

the D7000 resolution isnt greater than the D5100 they have the same sensor and processor

D.P. · 22 Mar 2012 at 21:38

bigredshark said:
Less niche than the Samsung I would say...it's going to sell well on style alone and if it's actually as good as Fuji say then it'll sell a heap more.

You could also raise the D7000, greater resolution and it's DR is better. I wouldn't upgrade on those grounds particularly but it's a worthwhile step from a D5100...

I see your point about the M9, I think it's a different option, for all that I love my old AI lenses and FM2 and my MF gear, there are times when I want something which will AF, I've seriously considered an M9 before but I just can't quite justify that much money on a 35mm camera with no AF.

I may be mistaken but I thought the D5100 had the same sensor as the D7000. The D7k is a much nicer camera but IQ will be about the same.

Skynet-T800 · 22 Mar 2012 at 22:02

One question, putting aside the dynamic Range difference why are the little EVIL cameras so sharp? do they add in camera pp? I can't fault the J1 apart from the high ISO on it!