Mirrorless or DSLR?

Blinkz · 17 Dec 2014 at 15:11

Hey folks

After a recent trip to Japan and having to rely on my iPhone to take pics I've decided it's finally time to get a decent camera. I've been wanting to get more into photography for a while now so it's not just a passing whim! I don't want to spend more then £1000, and my interests are mainly landscapes - city skylines, sunsets/rises etc as well as night photography.

I like the idea of a mid level DSLR, mainly due to the high image quality, lots of controls to learn and develop in the future. They have a large selection of lenses to use in the future. Of course the main concern is their size! I don't forsee myself having to carry it too far, as if I'm out and about it will probably for a few hours at a time. With a decent rucksack I imagine it wouldn't be a huge issue.

Mirrorless do also seem to be interesting, a new technology which seems to be improving all the time. The quality I'm sure would be more than adequate, as would the controls. My concern with them is the lack of selection of lenses, and the fact that if in the future I want to upgrade to a DSLR then none of the lenses I would have bought for the mirrorless would be useless!

At the moment I'm stuck in the middle about what to get! A friend has offered me his 40d for £60, without lenses. However even buying a new kit lens it is probably the cheapest way to get into it?

Any suggestions more then welcome!!

Blinkz · 18 Dec 2014 at 11:07

Wow thanks for the great replies, especially DP. Some awesome information there.

It really isn't an easy decision! I don't think the size of the DSLRs will bother me, and the mirrorless (especially the higher end ones) don't seem to be *that* much smaller. My trips only last a day or two so won't need to be carrying it for weeks. I suppose the only place that I might struggle with the size is in the flightdeck, as its a fairly small place!

As has been mentioned then DSLR is the best at what I want to capture, and better value for money. I'm leaning towards accepting my friends offer for his old 40d and buying a cheap lense for it. If I have no trouble with the size then I can always upgrade it in the future. It's probably the cheapest way to get into it, even though the 40d is missing a few features.

Blinkz · 19 Dec 2014 at 17:04

Thanks again for the grat replies folks. I went into Currys today and had a play with a few cameras, there wasn't a huge selection but I at least got an idea between the mirrorless and DSLRs. I have to say I didn't find the SLRs that big or heavy, although they didn't have huge lenses on. The mirrorless were a little smaller and seemed a little more modern. I wasn't sure how much I liked the EVF. It was a lot of information in it however the actual image wasn't very clear in it!

As a lot of you have said I'm leaning towards getting the 40d to make a start with and then I won't be spending a huge amount of money for something I might not like.

Blinkz · 4 Jan 2015 at 22:17

Hey folks,

Thanks for the awesome response to this thread, really appreciate the amount of information! I've done some reading of reviews for lots of different cameras (both dslr and mirrorless) and I've decided to go for the 40d. For £60 it's hard to go wrong and it will let me figure out what I want.

Issue now is that it doesn't come with a lens so I'm looking for a relatively cheap starter/all round lens. Any recommendations? I've seen a Canon EF-S 17-85MM IS for £180, it seems to be a good option?

Blinkz · 5 Jan 2015 at 08:45

The canon 17-55 is a little out of my price range (even with the £45 cash back!) I don't want to spend loads until I've actually used the camera and decided I want to stick to slr or switch to mirrorless.

The tamron seems a good lens, and whilst more then I was looking to spend (which is around £200 ish) it might be worth the extra.

Blinkz · 5 Jan 2015 at 19:11

I appreciate the viewpoints but the 40d for £60 is the cheapest way to get a decent camera. After I've used it for a while I'll be in a better position to decide whether stay sith dslr or change to mirrorless. Only thing to do now is to find a decent lens. That tamron 17-55 f2.8 seems to be a good start, unless there are any better options?

Blinkz · 6 Jan 2015 at 09:39

Chimp Paradox said:
I just get annoyed with low end dslr users being stupid

Everyone has to start somewhere. We weren't all born with the ability to know everything about photography :confused:

Blinkz · 6 Jan 2015 at 11:29

CGrieves said:
Bear in mind the 40D isn't a low-end camera, it's what Canon term "Prosumer". I had one for a good while and only upgraded to the 50D (which is very similar) when the shutter failed. It's a massive amount of camera for £60. Fast, too.

I also have the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS. The Tamron is a fantastic lens and a bargain, but the Canon is the better lens- faster/quieter AF and IS is a godsend.

There is an element of buy cheap buy twice here.... You can pick up the Canon for just over £300 secondhand- I bought mine on these very forums. Well worth saving up for.

Thanks for the info, and glad to hear its a really capable camera. Having read the reviews and played with a few dslrs and mirrorless in the shops I was leaning towards a dslr anyway, the 40d for £60 just makes it a no brainer.

I'm hoping that I love the camera in which case I can just use it and be happy, slowly learning and building up experience and increase my lens as needed. If I don't like it then I think even with an expenditure of approx £300 for the 40d and tamron lens shouldn't be hard to sell for around the same price I paid for them....hopefully I won't need too!

Blinkz · 12 Jan 2015 at 18:51

Hey folks, got my 40d now so need to get the lens and CF card to get it up and running. Cf card wise is there anything I need to look out for? I've seen a 64gb 266x for £30, it sounds a good deal? Or is it worth going for 32gb at 600x instead? Never used CF so don't know anything about them! The 40d manual doesn't help much either it just says over 2gb CF type 1 or 2 is supported!

CGrieves said:
I also have the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS. The Tamron is a fantastic lens and a bargain, but the Canon is the better lens- faster/quieter AF and IS is a godsend.

There is an element of buy cheap buy twice here.... You can pick up the Canon for just over £300 secondhand- I bought mine on these very forums. Well worth saving up for.

I'd be prepared to pay £300 for the canon lense but can't find it anywhere near that! Lowest is £400+

englishpremier said:
That tamron 17-50/2.8 is a good lens on all systems. The major issue you'll read about is the focus being out of alignment.

The one I had on my Pentax was, and my K5 didn't have enough adjustment to bring it line. Wicked sharp though when it was focused correctly.

I've not heard about any alignment issues? Is it common?

I also saw a Sigma 17-55 f2.8 which is optically stabilised, which I assume is a good thing? For £290. Anyone have any other good starter/all round lens suggestions for around £200 ish?

Blinkz · 12 Jan 2015 at 19:31

englishpremier said:
No real point in 64gb on a 40d unless you plan to use it in something else too. The 40d is 10mp, a 4-8gb card would do. It probably can't recognise a 64gb card anyway.

I always prefer smaller cards unless I'm doing video, that way if something happens to the card before I've backed up or got the files on my computer, I haven't lost everything.

As for the lens, here a round up of some zooms that might interest you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3UfbsdfUu8

Thanks, I'll check out the video. Godo news that it doesn't need a big card! I'll look for smaller, which I guess means go for a faster card? Is there any minimum speed? And what about compatibility with faster cards? Thanks!