Budget?
which mirrorless
- Thread starter sid-180
- Start date
Budget?
Soldato
7 batteries?! SEVEN?! How is that something that owners can be happy about.
Having moved across to the Fuji system, I'd have to agree with you ( although I still do own and use full-frame Nikon gear ). Very little trade off in IQ and performance, but the weight reduction for what I normally carry is nearly half. Makes such a huge difference when you're on a long hike, travel abroad etc. It also allows me to carry a lighter tripod. Every little weight saving adds up, and makes the photography much more enjoyable.
Indeed. Sadly you get people like a certain member above who are so anally obsessed with specs and their rigid perception of how physics dictates the size and performance of every lens that they quote it almost robotically without taking real life experience of a system into account. Like a growing number of people, I have come to Fuji from Nikon full frame and while the system has its quirks the trade off in elements of IQ are acceptable, the lenses are razor sharp, the results are great and the weight savings are significant. I am enjoying photography more than ever before.
Last edited:
I had a canon 60d, which i then traded up for a full frame canon 6d. I have now sold all my canon gear and got a sony a6000 with kit lens and a sigma 30mm f1.4 art. The difference in size and weight is night and day to me. It means i now take my camera gear out with me a lot more instead of it collecting dust.
Which is exactly why it is so significant.
Just pathetic rhetoric.
Your comparisons of semi-pro FF cameras to an APS-C mirror less are just ridiculous, irrelevant and completely flawed. You just seem very butthurt that your comparison was proved to be BS.
The debate has nothing to do with you g from FF pro and semi pro DSLRs to APS-C C mirror less. Something you have completed missed out. The due yssuon is on whethrt an APS-C mirror less has any significant weight and size saving.the facts clearly show otherwise.
Therefore anyone with a FF cameras looking to go lighter can equally look at an APS-C DSLR since the lenses can actually be much lighter than the Fuji system for example.
The next pertinent point is that if someone really wants something smaller and lighter they really have to sacrifice the sensor size. This is where the M43 system comes into its own and offers genuinely far smaller and lighter lenses.
No one has denied that a Fuji setup is lighter than a FF pro DSLR with pro lenses. If you want to debate that then that's fine but it has nothing to do with the point being discussed.
No one said differently but you could have picked up an APS-C DSLR and enjoyed the same or even more weight savings, or gone for a M43 setup and had an even smaller and lighter setup.Your comparison is just stupid apples and oranges affair.
What about the waterproof nikon 1
Slightly odd ball choice.
Definitely smaller.
Great if you want waterproof.
Can use existing lenses if you want long reach.
Do you really need interchangeable lenses at all?
What focal range do you want to cover?
If you want smaller and lighter I would look at the higher end compacts.
For normal daylight photos they are very good. Obviously somewhat limited in low light but still decent enough for medium sized prints.
When I went travelling I took a mid range compact that fitted into my trouser pocket.
Not a great lens or sensor but I always had it on me and got some brilliant images.
Plus I didn't mind if I lost or damaged it.
Slightly odd ball choice.
Definitely smaller.
Great if you want waterproof.
Can use existing lenses if you want long reach.
Do you really need interchangeable lenses at all?
What focal range do you want to cover?
If you want smaller and lighter I would look at the higher end compacts.
For normal daylight photos they are very good. Obviously somewhat limited in low light but still decent enough for medium sized prints.
When I went travelling I took a mid range compact that fitted into my trouser pocket.
Not a great lens or sensor but I always had it on me and got some brilliant images.
Plus I didn't mind if I lost or damaged it.
To the OP, I think you have 3 sensible choices.
1) Get a smaller Nikon crop DSLR. As shown above these can actually end up lighter than APS-C mirrorless systems. Much cheaper as well. You will have a camera that is fully compatible with your existing lenses, flashes etc. The images produced will have the same looks as your FF DSLR, you can use the same profiles in LR etc without needing a unique processing step. Men, Controls and dial are all familiar. Small lenses like the 35mm DC are a perfect match. You get a proper optical viewfinder. You have a few better battery life. Nothing more annoying than changing batteries every hour in the middle of some action potentially looking opertunities.
2) M43 camera of your choice. You truly get smaller and lighter lenses and cameras here, and a complete lineup of all the lenses. It is the only mirrorless system comparable to Nikon or canon. Very mature system, lots of choice, excellent autofocus for a mirrorless.
3) an actual point and shoot to keep things cheap and simple and the smallest possible size. Several good options now
1) Get a smaller Nikon crop DSLR. As shown above these can actually end up lighter than APS-C mirrorless systems. Much cheaper as well. You will have a camera that is fully compatible with your existing lenses, flashes etc. The images produced will have the same looks as your FF DSLR, you can use the same profiles in LR etc without needing a unique processing step. Men, Controls and dial are all familiar. Small lenses like the 35mm DC are a perfect match. You get a proper optical viewfinder. You have a few better battery life. Nothing more annoying than changing batteries every hour in the middle of some action potentially looking opertunities.
2) M43 camera of your choice. You truly get smaller and lighter lenses and cameras here, and a complete lineup of all the lenses. It is the only mirrorless system comparable to Nikon or canon. Very mature system, lots of choice, excellent autofocus for a mirrorless.
3) an actual point and shoot to keep things cheap and simple and the smallest possible size. Several good options now
Just pathetic rhetoric.
That is, funnily enough, exactly what I think when reading the majority of your incessantly repetitive posts. What nuggets of good information you do impart in your lengthy diatribes are overshadowed by your aspergers-like charm and stubborness.
Last edited:
Agreed. Getting really boring.
Personally, I could never go with a M43 set-up as the loss of IQ in my opinion isn't acceptable. No doubting the weight savings, however, if that is the absolute priority.
As for going with an APS-C DSLR ; it's certainly an option, but taking Nikon for example, the DX format has largely been abandoned with virtually no pro-grade lenses being produced, and most of the cameras are of lower performance with some ergonomic issues forcing the user to turn towards third party manufacturers to fill in the gaps. I'd rather go with the Fuji X system which actually has a future ....
Soldato
Buy a large sensor compact, imho m43 and apsc cameras are still too large tobe truly a holiday/walkabout camera. An rx100 will give you very nice shots while being pocketable. Since i got mine my sony a57 with 16-50 2.8 hasnt left the house, only thing i miss is a view finder for when its sunny.
Last edited:
I don't have the 18-55mm but I often see the same feedback.
Why does it have to be pocketable? Even a small rucksack will easily hold a Fuji/m43 with zoom when not in use, and not many people go out for a day without a rucksack. I think many people would not agree with your definition of a "walkabout" camera there.
Plus, the Sony RX100 has noticeably worse performance and image quality, so if that really matters to the OP then they may not be satisfied with it.
Soldato
Not everyone wants a camera dangling from their neck like some kind of optical necklace for all the holiday, for one its uncomfortable, it can get annoying bobbing about and it potentially targets you for theft. I used to carry my apsc camera in a rucksack when on holiday and tobe honest after a while getting it out and putting it away got tobe a chore it got to a point that i didnt take it out in the first place.
All this is academic really only the op knows what compromises hes prepared to accept in terms of size, weight and image quality. For my needs the rx100 is the perfect size and offers great image quality for the price is it perfect...... no its not then again no camera is.
Soldato
If the OP finds an RX100 noticeably worse than a mirrorless APS-C, then they'll probably find a mirrorless APS-C noticeably worse than their FF DSLR. It's about compromising.
The RX100 is perfectly decent up until ISO800. Even at ISO1600, it's competitive with Canon and Nikon DSLRs from generations earlier.
Spending £1000 to go from needing a rucksack to carry a large DSLR to needing a rucksack to carry a mirrorless ILC seems pointless to me. The D750 with 24-120 VR, for example, will take up basically the same space in a small rucksack as an X-T10 with 18-135. Sure, it'll weigh noticeably more, but maybe the 600g~ extra is worth it for the image quality and performance? Again, compromising.