Why go mirrorless ?

<p>I love the size of the mirrorless cameras. I have the sony nex - 5r. I went from a point and shoot and it is easy to work.<br>

I think it is the future. However, I did buy a nikon d3100 on sale to have both. What I am loving is that the Sony can fit into just about any bag. My next step is the lens adapter.</p>

<p>My son, who is 5, recently was promoted in Karate rank from yellow to orange belt. For the test and performance, I have a small bag and fit a 14mm, 20mm, 45-150mm, 12-50mm lens, a GF1 body, an OM-D EM-5 body, and accessories (SD cards, extra strap, etc). There are ups and downs with the m4/3 system but honestly I can't think of going back to lugging around all of my dSLR stuff anymore. The GF1 IQ was not as good as my dSLR was, but my EM-5 is as good in most respects and better in terms of DR and a few other things. Basically, I haven't invested a dime in dSLR or any other photographic system since I picked up a m4/3 system. So to me a better question is why waste time on anything else?</p>

<p>For the vast majority of people, new parents, travelers, casual shooters, etc, the IQ of the current mirrorless cameras is more than enough, and these cameras have some strength that most dSLRs lack. Why aren't we seeing more of these mirrorless cameras? I think this is in part due to the slightly higher cost of buying a mirrorless system vs a APSC system. The high cost associated with mirrorless cameras is partly a result of smaller production volume, higher R&D, and perhaps manufacturing/distribution efficiencies. Another reason we are not seeing more m4/3, IMO, is the terrible marketing from Panasonic and Olympus in the USA that many people don't even know they exist. </p>

<p>Not wanting to change lenses outdoors I opted to go with TWO mirrorless cameras on a recent outing, one with a 14-45mm zoom and one with a 45-200mm zoom. With the required larger bag it weights about as much as my D300 and 18-200mm Nikon zoom does, so I'm back where I started.</p>

<p>You could just put a superzoom on one of your M4/3 bodies...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Why aren't we seeing more of these mirrorless cameras?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I see them whenever I get out in an area that attracts people with cameras. And that is in US where they have a smaller market share. When you'll see them more often then this, you'll be asking why you are not seeing SLRs anymore.</p>

<p>I just recently moved from Nikon DSLR to the Olympus OM-D EM-5. I am still adjusting to the menu's and such but I like the camera. The EVF takes some getting used to but it's coming around. One good thing about it is if you make changes in your menu's it shows in the EVF. So if your WB is wonky you see it before you shoot. Great picture quality, great classic styling, It's affordable also. It has a lot of great things about it. The touch screen function is really neat when shooting from the hip as it flips out so you can look down. Also allows you to shoot from a low position easily. It has the option of shooting flash wirelessly of course. Looks like ISO 3200 is the limit for a clean image so far. A big step from my Nikon D200. </p>

<p>Anyway it's just another step in the world of technology. I am sure that a full frame mirrorless camera will be around soon. Probably not from Olympus but I think it will be a big seller and Nikon and Canon I am sure are working towards getting the model out. Oh the Oly OM-D shoots a 9fps for the spray and pray types. </p>

<p>Anyway I am sold and I am finished with the DSLR style camera. </p>

<p>I have been using my Pentax K100D since 2006. looking for an upgrade I was going to get one of those mirrorless cameras. I tried the K01 and am interested in a k30 then I started looking at a non ILC without giving up sensor size either there are a lot of choices.<br /><br />still not sure if I want to drop the DSLR completely I found a little gem the other day. Canon GX1<br /><br />seems like a nice middle ground camera<br /><br />thoughts?<br /><br /></p>

<p>For a long time I've been using digital for snapshots and film for "photography." My first digital was a Sony Mavica that shot 640x480 and write directly to 3.5" floppies and I upgraded every few years to better point-and-shoot digital cameras. 2 years ago I decided it was time to go all digital (well, I might use film for something special). I think the future of digital photography is smaller sensors. Sensor technology is constantly improving so I don't think we will need a lot of real estate to get the quality we want. I see full frame and APS size sensors as anachronisms. Due to needing room for the mirror SLR lenses are needless complicated; by necessity wide SLR lenses are projection lenses. The narrow flange distance in mirrorless simplifies lens development. To me the m43 format seemed to be the best compromise between size and quality. I ended up with a Panasonic DMC-G3. I did spend some time scaling its learning curve but now I'm quite happy with my results. I'm even enjoying working on my images on the computer and don't miss chemicals and darkrooms at all. My big concern now is the viability of m43. Now that Sony owns most of Olympus and Olympus is supplying lenses to Sony will Olympus jump ship and leave Panasonic as the standard bearer of m43? I have to admit that every time I look at gear at m43 I wonder if my body and lenses will be orphans one day soon.</p>

Doubtful. M4/3 sells. They have no good business reason to drop it.

<blockquote>

<p>So, they aren't all that small, some have odd ergonomics, and the prices are just as high as a DSLR and there are LESS lenses for them.<br>

So, what is the draw of a mirrorless camera ?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think you hit the nail on the head. I was about to jump on a Canon M deal for $300 with 22mm pancake lens. That actually would have been smaller than a DSLR and pocktable in a coat or cargo pants/shorts. The problem was I discovered a deal on a Canon t3i refurb for $450 with one year warrenty. I canceled my order on the Canon M and got the t3i. Make no mistake the Canon M with the 22mm pancake looks like a fun little camera but considering I could sell the lens in my t3i kit for $100 and bring the difference between the cameras down to $50 what would you do? The t3i has a fold out screen, built in flash, accepts all my EF lenses without a $150 adapter, and has a rock solid Magic Lantern firmware release available for my video shooting. There is no doubt I would have had fun with the Canon M. But as far as versatility and features for $50 more I went with the DSLR.</p>

<p>A Canon M would be perfect for my mom. I could give her a huge memory card and have her mail it to me a few times a year for me to edit and print her photographs for her. The lack of flash though would be a bit of a deal killer with her. I would want one that popped up automatically not a separate attachment.</p>