Need advice on mirrorless camera.

Forums › Digital Imaging › Need advice on mirrorless camera.

1 | 2

drakmalrazali

40 posts

Geek

#884090 25-Aug-2013 00:41

regius: It may pay you to check the camera on offer (NX200). This camera does not have a built-in electronic view finder, only an excellent AMOLED 3" dislay.

Samsung's DSLR camera is the NX20. I have owned one of these for just over 1 year and have found it to be an exellent camera in all respects. It is the 3rd version of Samsung's NX** series and is supported by a good range of excellent, lenses. For a DSLR it is light, compact, easy to use and produces great shots - highly recommended.
Google "Samsung NX20 review" for some expert opinions and you will see that it generally rates very highly, on par with other highly praised cameras such as the Sony NX7.
Here is a link to one of the reviews: http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/samsung_nx20_review/

whoa your right. and its just around $500 with lotsa features. but yea probably thats just the problem of being a smaller mirrorless camera

drakmalrazali

40 posts

Geek

#884091 25-Aug-2013 00:42

Inphinity: Just to point out, a mirrorless camera (MILC), is not a DSLR, though both have interchangeable lenses. Typically a MILC will be an intermediary step between a compact and a DSLR interms of features & quality - though in practice, they're much the same as an entry level DSLR in terms of image quality anyway.

hmm how does it differ from mirrorless? from what i watched its pretty much the same. though i dont know whether what is told in this video is all true:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhYao-Tp5uc

hangon

397 posts

Ultimate Geek

#884402 26-Aug-2013 02:18

drakmalrazali: Hi, im quite a newbie on dslr. Im planning to buy a DSLR and currently my friend is selling his Samsung NX200
I wonder if i should take it. This is my first DSLR. I have no idea on such camera. But i really love the image quality of a dslr picture which make me considering it.
My main question is should i buy a mirrorless DSLR or a standard DSLR?
and does anyone here have experience with Samsung NX200?

For any one new to this topic, Dave's pick is worth a read

Here's a link to Consumer SLR
http://www.imaging-resource.com/WB/WB.HTM?view=dp_slr_consumer

You may also want to check out some other categories, like all around
http://www.imaging-resource.com/WB/WB.HTM?view=dp_all

You don't need/have to buy a DSLR/mirrorless, unless you are prepared to invest into a line of lenses. And in that sense, Samsung doesn't a strong line up of lenses. NX300 is a strong contender though.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#888263 2-Sep-2013 13:10

I just spent 10 weeks shooting work in SE Asia carrying 2 $8,000 Nikon bodies, $15,000 worth of Nikon glass and a Panasonic Lumix GH3 with 2 zoom lenses.

I used the GH3 a lot more than the Nikons because it weighs a whole lot less and the images are AT LEAST as good if not better than the D3s I use.

The GH3 is M4/3 and the two zooms I use are constant f2.8.

The only time the Lumix is worse is when high speed AF is required with accurate subject tracking or when low light levels are an issue because the smaller sensor in the Panasonic makes a horlicks of poor light compared to the full frame Nikons.

The next generation or two of M4/3 will more or less kill conventional DSLRs for most users I suspect.

timmmay

20580 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#888267 2-Sep-2013 13:15

The D3s is 3 years old, hardly an old camera, but technology moves quickly. I'm surprised the images are comparable, in good light sure, low light and challenging situations that's where the full frame should pull away. My little Sony RX100 is pretty impressive, but no match for my 5 year old D700s from ISO1600 up. However I don't be taking the big cameras on holiday any more, the little camera's good enough and fits in my pocket, the big one requires a dedicated bag.

One thing small sensors can't do easily is very narrow DOF, so full frame and larger will still have a place in future.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#888667 2-Sep-2013 22:31

timmmay: The D3s is 3 years old, hardly an old camera, but technology moves quickly. I'm surprised the images are comparable, in good light sure, low light and challenging situations that's where the full frame should pull away. My little Sony RX100 is pretty impressive, but no match for my 5 year old D700s from ISO1600 up. However I don't be taking the big cameras on holiday any more, the little camera's good enough and fits in my pocket, the big one requires a dedicated bag.

One thing small sensors can't do easily is very narrow DOF, so full frame and larger will still have a place in future.

The D3s is a Morris Traveller when compared to the D4 or the EOS 1Dx. The AF tracking in the EOS 1Dx is almost impossibly good and if it wouldn't cost me so much I would be flicking all my Nikon gear and switching to Canon just for that and the 16-35 f2.8 (which is a more useful lens than the Nikon 14-24 f2.8 although optically not quite as good).

Yes, as I said, the GH3 is no good in really low light. However in Daylight and with relatively straightforward focus requirements, with the two new f2.8 zooms, the images are easily the equal of the D3s and I have used the GH3 for paid work quite happily. I was speaking to Ian Berry, a Magnum photographer, a few months ago and Ian is now often using the GH3 in preference to the Leica M cameras he has been using for decades.

I could show you two images from the Nikon and the GH3 side by side and if you can tell which camera shot each one I would be astonished. Picture posting does not seem to work very well on this forum so I can't really do it here though!

timmmay

20580 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#888705 3-Sep-2013 07:40

Interested to see, can you post a link to a server? Or I can PM you an email address.

I switched from Canon to Nikon because of focus. Strangely Canon was always great in dark rooms with moving subjects, but static subjects on a bright day it had trouble with (40D/7D). I never liked the 5D series, too slow, and 1 series are overkill for wedding photographers.

I use the Nikon 16-35 F4 VR, I find that a great lens and I don't need F2.8 even in dark churches - ISO6400 is fine.

Wise

Send money globally for less with Wise - one free transfer up to NZ$900 (affiliate link).

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#888892 3-Sep-2013 12:26

timmmay: Interested to see, can you post a link to a server? Or I can PM you an email address.

I switched from Canon to Nikon because of focus. Strangely Canon was always great in dark rooms with moving subjects, but static subjects on a bright day it had trouble with (40D/7D). I never liked the 5D series, too slow, and 1 series are overkill for wedding photographers.

I use the Nikon 16-35 F4 VR, I find that a great lens and I don't need F2.8 even in dark churches - ISO6400 is fine.

PM me and I'll send you some files.

dman

953 posts

Ultimate Geek

#904732 29-Sep-2013 20:01

drakmalrazali, what is your planned purpose for the camera?

It makes a lot of difference in what to recommend :-)

I feel mirrorless is a great choice to make, it certainly is the way of the future, unlike those antique dinosaurs which still have an extra mirror within their big bulky bodies ;-)

While there is still a small performance gap in some areas (although in others areas like video mirrorless has surpassed traditional DSLRs, and when it comes to size and value for money they level DSLRs in the dust for dead), they mostly are good enough for 99% of people. Only in small niche areas like working professional sports photographers does DSLRs still remain essential.

Now the question is, which mirrorless system to choose?

To me the top two choices are clear:

1st Place) Micro Four Thirds, it has been around the longest of all the mirrorless systems, has by far the most manufacturers backing it. With Panasonic, Olympus, Kodak, and Blackmagic Design all planning cameras for the system (unlike all the other systems, which only have *one* camera manufacture backing each of them). Plus many more third party manufacturers (such as Sigma making Micro Four Thirds lenses).

Micro Four Thirds is being widely used by professionals in a number of areas, for instance with video production, watch this:
http://www.zacuto.com/shootout-revenge-2012
The Panasonic GH2 beats out cameras costing more than your BMW car costs!

Many bargains can be found from the Micro Four Thirds system when they're on sale, for instance Panasonic G3/G5/GX1/GF3/etc and Olympus E-PL2/E-PL2/E-PM1/etc

I purchased my Panasonic GX1 for new for only US$199! It is a great camera :-D And I got my Panasonic GH1 second hand also for only US$200! Which is fantastic for filmmaking.

2nd Place) Next up I'd suggest the Sony NEX range, they perform very well, their range of cameras and lenses is not even close to as expansive in breadth as Micro Four Thirds but they are still much more well rounded out than any other mirrorless system, which deservedly helps put them in second place.

From the Sony NEX range the NEX-5R, NEX-5N, and NEX-3 are really good value for a newbie photography.
http://rungunshoot.com/the-350-docu-filmmaking-kit-depreciation-is-wonderful/

https://www.youtube.com/c/SoundSpeeding

timmmay

20580 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#904750 29-Sep-2013 20:39

dman: While there is still a small performance gap in some areas (although in others areas like video mirrorless has surpassed traditional DSLRs, and when it comes to size and value for money they level DSLRs in the dust for dead), they mostly are good enough for 99% of people. Only in small niche areas like working professional sports photographers does DSLRs still remain essential.

Professional wedding and portrait photographers also benefit from the focus speed and accuracy in low light, narrow depth of field, and generally better image quality from the larger sensor. The gap is closing, but I don't think it's quite there yet, and with the smaller sensors you'd need F1.1 type lenses to get similar depth of field to a larger sensor.

drakmalrazali

40 posts

Geek

#907247 3-Oct-2013 16:02

Hi guys, probably off topic but im selling my Sony Nex 5. Just upgraded recently. Have a look =) thanks

http://www.geekzone.co.nz/forums.asp?forumid=77&topicid=130951

dman

953 posts

Ultimate Geek

#907565 4-Oct-2013 00:22

After watching "Upstream Colour" at the NZ Film Festival this year, which was shot with a Panasonic GH2 and in my opinion had waaaay too much extreme shallow DoF, I feel it is hard to seriously criticise Micro Four Thirds for lack of narrow DoF :-P

As for wedding photographers and such (which most buyers are not, 90%+ of buyers have less demanding needs I'd bet), any current generation Micro Four Thirds camera matches and beats DSLRs from a few generations ago. So for instance, if a Nikon D300s was sufficient for a wedding photographer only a few years ago (and many wedding photographers would still be using to today!) then an Olympus E-M1 is sufficient for today's wedding photographer too!

Then you take into account other factors like price (you might argue if a wedding photographer can't afford the extra cost of say a 5DmkIII over a Panasonic GH3 then they're not a true professional or whatever, but you do need to run at a profit and when you're multiplying the costs by two or three or even more bodies then it quickly adds up the difference) and weight (again, would you rather carry around 3 full frame Canon/Nikon cameras or 3 Micro Four Thirds cameras and their lenses?) then it becomes an even harder decision as to which is right!

I'd say the gap between traditional DSLRs and Micro Four Thirds are now so close you can arguably say either one is in the lead, and choosing either is a worthy choice that people need to make for themselves.

https://www.youtube.com/c/SoundSpeeding

1 | 2