Quest for a mirrorless for an amateur ugrading from point-and-shoot and iPhone

**mariosprt** · 3rd September 2015, 03:15 PM

Hi guys and girls.

I've been lurking for some weeks now, and I hate that my first post is the cliche: should I buy this camera?

First I'm Mario, 41 years old from Porto, Portugal. And I'm i love with photography since my teens.
I have a film Canon from the 90's that I haven't used for ages, the price of film, develop and printing was a nuisance. Fast forward to 2011, I got a Sony Cybershot DSC-HX5V point-and-shoot, and got into photography again, but bumped into the limitations of a compact camera. Then the iPhone (3GS and now 5S) with it's dedicated cam apps got me going again, specially the amazing Hyperlapse.

But I really want to take it to the next level, and I saw this sale on a local tech store (in Portugal):
- Sony a5000 with 16-50 lens for 350Euro (a bit more than 350USD) ( in a pack with a Sony bag and 8Gb card )

I know there is the newer a5100, but for close to 700Euro, and the a500 will probably be discontinued, but that's not a big deal.

So, I like shooting landscapes, river, and beach/sea, some city also. Definitely want to try night sky, stars and everything. My nieces running around

And Timelapses as well.
Maybe that's too much to ask for the kit lens in this, but that's the beauty of interchangeable lenses, I can just get what I need, when I need it.

Hope to hear your opinions and recommendations, even if it's only a: "you need more research, dude!"

Thank you all!
Mario

**chauncey** · 3rd September 2015, 03:27 PM

What draws you to Sony, other than the fact that it's on sale? As has been said here before, don't look at
bodies as they come and go, instead look at the plethora of lenses that larger manufactures cough out.
You should not buy just a camera...look to buy a system of a body and lenses for the future.

**mariosprt** · 3rd September 2015, 03:37 PM

Originally Posted by chauncey

What draws you to Sony, other than the fact that it's on sale? As has been said here before, don't look at
bodies as they come and go, instead look at the plethora of lenses that larger manufactures cough out.
You should not buy just a camera...look to buy a system of a body and lenses for the future.

Great question, I should have said that in the OP.

I get the system question, but from what I read seems a bit like the "Mac vs. PC" or "iPhone vs Android" discussions. Where there are great systems on both sides of the fence, it is a matter of preference. Let me know if I'm wrong.

I have one friend who owns a couple of film Nikons then he got a digital, not sure if it's a 6D. So, he's got lenses I could borrow from, so Nikon was my fist choice. But they are pricier, and I leraned that there are (cheap) adapters on Amazon to use Nikon (or Canon) lenses on E-mount Sonys, so I can try those lenses anyway.

Also it maybe familiarity (since I have a Sony Cybershot)

That said, I would like more buttons and dials and less menu stuff, but that comes with a price tag too, right?

edit: Thanks for replying so soon

**MrB** · 3rd September 2015, 07:27 PM

Just one point, Mario. The A5000 doesn't have a built-in viewfinder, so everything must be done on the rear screen. The latter can be useful for some subjects, but my preference is generally to use a viewfinder to compose most shots. So it's worth considering whether that aspect is important to you.

Cheers.
Philip

**mariosprt** · 3rd September 2015, 07:44 PM

Originally Posted by MrB

Just one point, Mario. The A5000 doesn't have a built-in viewfinder, so everything must be done on the rear screen. The latter can be useful for some subjects, but my preference is generally to use a viewfinder to compose most shots. So it's worth considering whether that aspect is important to you.

Cheers.
Philip

Thanks Philip

I've been researching this model in the last few hours and that's one of the things I don't like about it. Another is the lack of a rotary knob for changing programs. Everything seems to be done via menus and cursor.
The viewfinder is important to me as well, it's a definite must have for me.

I guess this may not be the camera for me.

Can you guys recommend mirrorless models with viewfinder and more buttons, on the budget side of the market?

My quest is only beginning (hence the change in the topic title)

Thanks

**dem** · 3rd September 2015, 08:10 PM

Have a look at the Fuji X-E1. It has been superseded by the X-E2 and can be bought quite cheaply paired with the XC 16-50. The EVF, nice dials but sluggish autofocus.

**dje** · 3rd September 2015, 11:12 PM

Hi Mario

You have a tough decision to make, there are a lot of models around in that range !

If you are keen on Sony (and why not), I would suggest considering the a6000. It has an EVF and a hot shoe that the a5100 doesn't have. I had a look at one in my local store just the other day and liked what I saw. You should also consider the Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic models too.

This link to dpReview gives a comparison of some of the contenders.

Dave

**rpcrowe** · 4th September 2015, 12:18 AM

Originally Posted by mariosprt

Thanks Philip

I've been researching this model in the last few hours and that's one of the things I don't like about it. Another is the lack of a rotary knob for changing programs. Everything seems to be done via menus and cursor.
The viewfinder is important to me as well, it's a definite must have for me.

I guess this may not be the camera for me.

Can you guys recommend mirrorless models with viewfinder and more buttons, on the budget side of the market?

My quest is only beginning (hence the change in the topic title)

Thanks

I agree with you. I don't like a camera that has only an LCD as a viewfinder.

I'd like to point out two areas of a photograph that will make that photograph look unprofessional... First is a cluttered background (especially trees and telephone poles "growing" out of a persons head), and second is "things" (tree limbs, parts of people, etc) intruding into the image from the top, bottom or sides...

Even using a relatively large LCD (the LCD on my Canon 7D is about 3 inches) a relatively small intrusion of say a tree branch jutting in from the side or a thin pole growing out of the subjects head is quite difficult to see, especially with the screen a distance from the viewing eye. AND ESPECIALLY when viewing in bright sunlight to your rear.

Many cameras have read outs stating the shooting parameters. These read outs are extremely small when viewed on a LCD being held a distance from one's eye.

Additionally, FOR ME, it is far easier to pick up a moving object with an eye level viewfinder and to follow that subject, than to pick up and follow using the LCD and holding it a distance from your eye.

Sure, many cameras that come standard with only an LCD viewfinder have accessory electronic viewfinders available. However these EVF's often take up the cameras hot shoe and IMO often not as clear and as fast as an optical viewfinder. The EVF in many cases is sold as an accessory at an extra cost as well as adding extra size to the camera.

I also far prefer buttons and dials to change my shooting parameters than using a menu driven camera. This is especially true when viewing the menus on an LCD in bright sun...

As an example, I prefer the Canon DSLR cameras prosumer cameras such as the 7D and 7Dii models far more than the amateur DSLR cameras such as the Rebel models because of the ease of changing shooting parameters on the fly!

**MrB** · 4th September 2015, 05:00 PM

I agree with Dave that the Sony A6000 is certainly worth considering. It is a quality camera with a good viewfinder, a mode dial, two control dials, several buttons that can be customised for functions to your liking, and very quick autofocus.

Cheers.
Philip

**mariosprt** · 4th September 2015, 09:23 PM

Originally Posted by dem

Have a look at the Fuji X-E1. It has been superseded by the X-E2 and can be bought quite cheaply paired with the XC 16-50. The EVF, nice dials but sluggish autofocus.

Thanks, dem
The X-E1 looks good with all the dials (not the "vintage" style

) but locally it's 530euro body only, will search online. The X-E2 looks nicer still.

**mariosprt** · 4th September 2015, 09:25 PM

Originally Posted by dje

Hi Mario

You have a tough decision to make, there are a lot of models around in that range !

If you are keen on Sony (and why not), I would suggest considering the a6000. It has an EVF and a hot shoe that the a5100 doesn't have. I had a look at one in my local store just the other day and liked what I saw. You should also consider the Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic models too.

This link to dpReview gives a comparison of some of the contenders.

Dave

Thanks Dave

The a6000 I have seen being recommended in this Forum and elsewhere, and I like it. But I also have to compare to Fuji, Panasonic, etc.

edit: Thanks for the link to dpReview

**mariosprt** · 4th September 2015, 09:29 PM

Originally Posted by rpcrowe

I'd like to point out two areas of a photograph that will make that photograph look unprofessional... First is a cluttered background (especially trees and telephone poles "growing" out of a persons head), and second is "things" (tree limbs, parts of people, etc) intruding into the image from the top, bottom or sides...

Even using a relatively large LCD (the LCD on my Canon 7D is about 3 inches) a relatively small intrusion of say a tree branch jutting in from the side or a thin pole growing out of the subjects head is quite difficult to see, especially with the screen a distance from the viewing eye. AND ESPECIALLY when viewing in bright sunlight to your rear.

Many cameras have read outs stating the shooting parameters. These read outs are extremely small when viewed on a LCD being held a distance from one's eye.

Additionally, FOR ME, it is far easier to pick up a moving object with an eye level viewfinder and to follow that subject, than to pick up and follow using the LCD and holding it a distance from your eye.

I also far prefer buttons and dials to change my shooting parameters than using a menu driven camera. This is especially true when viewing the menus on an LCD in bright sun...

Thanks, Richard
You point out all the good reasons for a viewfinder other than the LCD, can't see moving objects/animals/people in the sun with my Cybershot

I'm thinking I took wrong approach here....

**mariosprt** · 4th September 2015, 09:35 PM

Originally Posted by MrB

I agree with Dave that the Sony A6000 is certainly worth considering. It is a quality camera with a good viewfinder, a mode dial, two control dials, several buttons that can be customised for functions to your liking, and very quick autofocus.

Cheers.
Philip

Thanks, Phillip

The a6000 definitely looks sweet, and I had read about the fast focus.

I guess to have a viewfinder, and lots of dials, one gets into DLSR price range, right?

The more I read your opinions, the more I think I should start looking at a DSLR camera.

I had no special reason to go mirrorless, except for size, weight, maybe wi-fi and NFC (both not essential to me) and I read somewhere the electronics were more advanced on them than similar priced DLSRs.

The extra size/weight doesn't bother me actually. And also I have a friend with a Nikon and a half-dozen lenses I can borrow

edit: Also the mirrorless usually (at least the Sonys) can be remotely controlled via wi-fi with a smartphone App... but I much prefer the DSLR way of having a dedicated remote, and intervalometer for timelapse

**Manfred M** · 5th September 2015, 01:34 AM

Mario - a couple of additional thoughts for you. I own a full-frame DSLR, a crop frame DSLR (both Nikons) and a mirrorless (Panasonic).

I've shot many, many thousands of images with each of the cameras.

1. Chief advantage of a mirrorless camera is its size and weight.

2, Chief disadvantage of the mirrorless camera is its size. Having a smaller body to work with, camera designers have a very limited area to place controls, so these cameras need a lot more menus to control functionality, rather than the buttons on a larger body. I cannot adjust my shots as quickly of the mirrorless as I can on either DSLR.

3. Other significant disadvantages of mirrorless - in general the viewfinder is smaller and dimmer than one found on a DSLR, so it is harder to use in bright light conditons. Mirrorless cameras use an autofocus method known as "contrast detect". This is inherently slower than the "phase detect" used in DSLRs. I find that my mirrorless camera is terrible for action shots, whereas my DLSRs are very good.

4. Disadvantages of DSLRs (other than size and weight) - they are more complex, which in theory means they are not as "robust" as mirrorless cameras, but in practice, I have not found this to be the case. Because of the mirror movement (i.e. mirror slap), DSLRs tend to be noisier than mirrorless cameras. This also limits the maximum burst rate that can be achieved. My high end Nikon D800 can shoot up to 5 frames / second. My Panasonic GX7 can shoot at 40 frames / second (but this is a small image and the viewfinder refresh rate can't keep up, so you can't see what you are shooting).

**jcuknz** · 5th September 2015, 04:47 AM

The users of the bigger formats tend to cherry pick points where the smaller cameras suffer. It is quite possible that they are SLIGHTLY less but coming from a rather basic looking point and shoot camera you will find most M43 from Olympus and Panasonic are simply fantastic in their capabilities. that is if you can afford to avoid the simpler models in each's range.
I am a long standing Panasonic user and find those models I have used and still keep for their virtues [ Bridge, the FZ50 ] to be very capable and versatile once you learn how to use them. Quite a different camera from that which you wish to move from ... when I bought them many called them pro-sumers except then the DSLR makers took the title for their basic models.
These days I have a less than latest GH2 which has pretty well all the controls I need to use regularly available with external selector switches which I compare and warn you off my Olympus E-PL1 where I have work out the menu, which is a PITB compared to Panasonic menus. I bought it principly for its in-body stabilisation for use with my older lens from film days and fitted with my bug-eye lens is a fun small camera for snapshots.

What do you expect to output from the camera? Since I was making A3 prints for club competition regularly from my FZ cameras the MFT is a shoe-in and more than enough for posting on the web such as here at CiC.

I could ramble on but basically the DSLR of any size is an expensive, and you will only find out how expensive if you fall into their trap, over-kill for most people. As a film user I shot 'full frame' but in retrospect am very glad financial restrictions [ I didn't want to borrow at the time ] saved me from converting from SLR/MF to DSLR and I learnt the value and capabilities of a quality bridge camera, first a Nikon and then Panasonic.

So heed Manfred's warnings if the deficiencies are of any importance to you but while they disappoint him they wouldn't me and are rather amusing in their insignificance to serious work

Eventually I did buy a DSLR in addition to my bridge cameras but with the addition of MFT to my stable [ I do not sell cameras to get the next one, though have given away a few ] the DSLR, purchased so I could use my bellows and extension tubes for extreme close-ups, became completely redundant and was given away to a good cause

**jcuknz** · 5th September 2015, 05:16 AM

Originally Posted by mariosprt

I guess to have a viewfinder, and lots of dials, one gets into DLSR price range, right?

WRONG

MFT has them on most models though I wouldn't look at the GX range only G and GH

The more I read your opinions, the more I think I should start looking at a DSLR camera.

Hi Rockafeller

The extra size/weight doesn't bother me actually. And also I have a friend with a Nikon and a half-dozen lenses I can borrow

Both my Panasonic FZ 50's and now GH2 are the size and weight of a small crop DSLR, particularly the GH2 with its 014140 lens ... x10 zoom which gives me a larger sensored 'bridge' camera in effect.
I also have some legacy lenses which simply do not get used because having tasted the automatic I choose them ahead of messing around manual as you would need to do with your freinds lens ... a PITB IMO

edit: Also the mirrorless usually (at least the Sonys) can be remotely controlled via wi-fi with a smartphone App... but I much prefer the DSLR way of having a dedicated remote, and intervalometer for timelapse

All my Panasonic camera have had this facility for the past decade

I guess I am obviously a DSLR man who likes the features of the SLR but not how they are currently built to suit a basically conservative customer base. DSLR-Like not DSLR

combining the good features of the bridge and SLR.

**mariosprt** · 5th September 2015, 10:05 PM

Thanks, GrumpyDiver for your detailed explanation of the main differences between the two mechanisms.
1 and 2 I was aware since you guys pointed it out.
I had read about faster focus on DSLR, which could be useful for animals, sea birds or fast nieces

I hadn't noticed but I see it now, mirrorless cams ususally have faster burst rate indeed, interesting point.

Originally Posted by GrumpyDiver

Mario - a couple of additional thoughts for you. I own a full-frame DSLR, a crop frame DSLR (both Nikons) and a mirrorless (Panasonic).

If money was no object, I would get one of each and then compare them in real life

Thanks
Mario

**mariosprt** · 5th September 2015, 10:31 PM

Thanks, jcuknz for giving a different prespective on the issue. I was indeed looking at the budget side of the mirrorless universe.

And you're so right that anything I get will be lightyears ahead of my humble Cybershot

...we're almost splitting hairs!

I looked into Panasonic's current range (on Amazon, so I can also see the price range at the same time) and I have to say that the two models I looked at, FZ72 and FZ200 seem pretty impressive for a budget price tag, 600mm equivalent zoom, 12fps, could user a few more dials though... Are these models you would recommend as an example?