Topic Wiki

Copied From the Learn Photography Master Thread: Lesson 1


Choosing a camera: Point and Shoot vs. Mirrorless vs. DSLR


Before you even start thinking which camera model to buy, you have to decide something much more important: the type of camera. There are three main types of cameras on the market today, and they each offer some things the others don't. Let's take a quick at them and see what the differences are and why you might choose one over the other.


Point & Shoots (P&S): These are by far the most popular cameras out there. Usually extremely compact, they're all easy to use, relatively cheap, and deliver great images. The point & shoot ranges from tiny shirt-pocket cameras such as the Canon Elph series, to large superzooms (sometimes called all-in-ones or bridge cameras) such as the Panasonic FZ series, to 'advanced' P&Ss like the Canon G series or the $2800(!) Sony RX-1. All P&Ss have fixed (non-removable) lenses.


Point & Shoot pros:
--- Amazing selection: At the time of this writing, B&H has 328 cameras in stock listed under Point & Shoot. A basic Canon Elph-style camera usually has a 3-8x zoom lens, a 3" screen, 1080p video, image stabilization, and a million other features. Should you could choose a superzoom, you'd get a 24-50x zoom, manual controls, a viewfinder, and (usually) a hotshoe for flashes. Advanced P&Ss will give you even more control, better, larger sensors, and higher quality lenses. Want a camera your baby could drop into a bowl of cereal? There are currently 18 different shock and waterproof cameras [url=http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?ipp=100&Ns=p_PRODUCT_SHORT_DESCR|0&ci=8612&N=4288586279+35+4052359761&srtclk=sort]available
. Want a screen that swivels? Built-in GPS? WiFi? Check, check, and check. One screen not enough, you want two of 'em? Check!
--- Cheap: Even a $100 P&S will give you better pictures than a $500 camera from 5 years ago. You do not need to spend a fortune to get amazing pictures.
--- Light and easy to carry: No excuses for not shlepping the camera. If fits into your shirt pocket, a purse, just about anywhere.
--- Great video: Most current cameras are capable of recording 1080p HD video, or at least 720p. Combined with ubiquitous image stabilization P&Ss are capable of outputting awesome video.
--- Easy to use: Most P&S will only have an Auto or P mode, although some advanced or superzoom models will have full manual control. In Auto mode all you have to do is press the button. Some cameras even have an 'intelligent' auto feature where it could detect if you're shooting a flower, a portrait, etc. and adjust itself accordingly. This actually works pretty well on most cameras. In P mode you get a bit more control (you could turn the flash off, adjust the picture brighter or darker, etc.), but the camera still handles most of the decisions making for you.


Point & Shoot Cons:
--- Image quality relative to mirrorless and DSLRs: Yes, P&Ss will give you great picture quality - when situations are ideal. But if you plan to be shooting a lot in darker situations (indoors, your kids' school play) you will notice a considerable difference in quality compared to the other two. Sharpness will also not be as good as the others - the combination of a small physical lens, a small sensor, and over-zealous noise reduction (more on all of these later) is not a recipe for razor-sharp photos. These factors will be much less of an issue with advanced cameras such as the Canon G15, although a mirrorless or DSLR will still be far better.
--- Hard or impossible to achieve certain effects: You know that portrait look where the entire background is just blurred into creamy nothingness? That's one of the hardest things to create with a P&S (and conversely one of the easiest things to do with an SLR/mirrorless). Later on I'll show you some techniques to force this effect out of a P&S (to a degree), but the physics are simply not in your favor.
--- Speed: Compared to a DSLR, the P&S is practically a turtle. It takes a few seconds to turn on, zooming takes time, every setting change takes time. Most importantly though, is the speed at which the camera takes the picture. While a DSLR focuses almost instantly, a P&S could take a second or two. Once the image is in focus, there is a maddening delay called shutter lag, which is the time between you pressing the shutter button and the camera actually taking the picture. Between focusing and shutter lag, it could sometimes take 3 or more seconds to get your shoot, at which point the moment may be long gone. Later on we'll discuss some techniques for speeding this process up, but it'll still take far longer than a DSLR.
--- Not much control: The flip side to the P&S's ease of use it its lack of control. Want to lower your flash power so that people don't have that 'deer in headlights' look? Tough noogies. Want to change your aperture? Your shutter speed? Ain't happenin'. Of course some cameras do let you change all that, but a) they're in the minority by far, and b) since these are secondary features, you'll probably have to dig through 6 menu pages every time you want to make a change.
--- Limited expandability: A P&S is a closed system. Want a longer or wider lens? Want to use filters? No dice on most cameras. This is also a big issue if you ever want to dabble in lighting - it'll be quite difficult with a P&S.
____________


DSLRs: The big, black, "professional" looking cameras. Big, heavy, and (relatively) expensive, these have interchangeable lenses and optical viewfinders. The big players are Canon and Nikon, with Sony and Pentax having a small but dedicated market share. A typical 'starter' DSLR will have a 18 (Canon) or 24 (Nikon) megapixel sensor, come with an 18-55mm lens, and have actual buttons for only the most important tasks. As you move up through the lineup, you'll get more direct buttons and knobs, status LCDs, better focusing/metering systems, more lens support, metal or magnesium bodies, weather sealing, wireless flash control, higher frame-per-second rates, and more. You also get better kit lenses (that's the lens that comes with the camera) as you move up, and at a certain level (usually the third camera in the lineup) you'll also be able to buy the camera body by itself without any lens.


DSLR pros:
--- Image quality: This is the number one benefit of the DSLR - even the cheapest camera and lens combination will give you better pictures that any point and shoot, even if the P&S costs much more. (B&H currently lists 3 DSLR kits (camera and lens) for $450 - that's cheaper than some P&Ss.) Looking at pictures of a P&S and a DSLR side by side, you'll be blown away by the difference in sharpness, color, and dynamic range (explained later) of the DSLR. When it comes to low light, there's no contest; the DSLR wins hand down.
--- Control: In a DLSR you have control over every single shooting parameter. There are no limits to what you could create; everything's at your beck and call. Flash power, exposure, color, and most importantly, RAW shooting. (I'll get into far more detail on that last thing later.)
--- Special effects: Out of focus backgrounds? Easy peasy. Long exposures? Timelapse? You bet.
--- System expandability: DSLRs are sometimes called 'system cameras'. This is due to the fact that unlike P&Ss, a DSLR is not just a camera; it's at the heart of an entire system. Each brand has dozens of lenses available, plus many more from third-party lens manufacturers. You could get flashes, transmitters, remotes, and many other goodies and they will all work seamlessly and communicate properly to one another. BTW, this is why you should choose your first SLR very carefully: you're probably buying into a system. First you get a camera and lens, then another lens, then maybe another lens or a flash, and then the a new camera comes out so you buy that. It's quite the pain to switch to a different brand once you're bought in to the system.
--- Viewfinder: By definition, a DSLR is a single lens reflex camera; what that means is that inside the camera just behind the lens mount there's a mirror, which projects the image from the lens into a prism, which in turn shows up in the viewfinder. The big advantage of this is that when you look through the viewfinder you're actually looking through lens, and as such are seeing exactly what the lens sees. This gives you an extremely accurate and life-like view, which makes it easy to compose your shots properly. A viewfinder also lets you use the camera in bright light without worrying about not being able to see the screen.
--- Speed: A DSLR is ready to shoot almost instantly after being turned on. No matter where you are, be it a menu or playing back you pictures, a slight tap of the shutter button and the camera is instantly ready to shoot. Focus is nearly instantaneous, and shutter lag is pretty much a non-issue. Another speed aspect is continuous shooting - holding down the shutter button while the camera rattles off picture after picture. An entry-level camera  could easily do around 4.5fps (frames per second), while higher level cameras could do 7 or 8 (or 12, if you count the $6800 Canon 1D X).


DSLR cons:
--- Size and weight: There's no getting around it: DSLRs are big and bulky, especially if you're carrying more than one lens.
--- Price: DSLRs start at about $450, and go way up. One of the most common cameras, the Canon T4i, will set you back about a grand. And then you want to buy another lens. And another one. And another one... :D
--- Video: DSLR video is a really weird situation. On the one hand the quality is INSANE. Just look on Vimeo and see what people have been doing with the Canon 5DMk2 and Mk3 and you'll see what I mean. On the other hand, if you look at the behind the scenes video of one of those, you'll see that the camera is mounted on a rig costing $10K or more. The rig stabilizes the camera and provides support for the focus controls, the zoom controls, the sound system, and many other things. Why is all this necessary? Very simple - because the camera does a horrible job at all this if left to it's own devices. Focusing during video is horrible, especially if anything's moving through the scene. What this means is that if you're buying an SLR and are planning on taking videos of your kids running around in the park, you will be sorely disappointed - nothing will be in focus half the time, and when the camera finally does achieve focus, the built-in mike will have picked up every grind and whirr of the lens as it moved back and forth. Canon has made some progress on eliminating these issues with their new STM lenses, but for now that's only two cameras and two lenses, and even that isn't perfect.


__________


Mirrorless: Known by many different names (ILCs and EVILs for example), the industry has seemed to settle on Mirrorless lately. This was the brainchild of a joint venture between Olympus and Panasonic, and was aimed on creating an interchangeable-lens camera in with a P&S body and DSLR-like image quality, and has been wildly successful. Olympus and Panasonic are still the major players with their Micro 4/3s system, followed by Sony with their NEX line. Many others have tried to take over market share from the big 3, but have been largely unsuccessful mainly due to inferior products. Nikon 1, Canon, M, and Samsung NX are examples of fairly unpopular systems.


Most mirrorless cameras have a P&S form-factor, albeit somewhat larger. With the exception of Olympus and Panasonic, the lenses are not interchangeable between brands, but adapters are available to convert practically any DSLR (or old rangefinder camera) lens to just about every system. Most adapters will not autofocus the lens, so it's not exactly a perfect solution.


Mirrorless pros:
--- Size and weight: This is the main draw for most people. While not exactly pocket sized once a lens is in place, it it still a fairly compact kit and could be carried in a purse with ease. It's more like a large P&S than a small DSLR.
--- Price: Generally cheaper than a DSLR of a similar level. The Panasonics and Olympus (Olympusus? Olympi? ??? ) especially seem to be on sale more often than not.
--- Image quality: About as good as an SLR, simple as that.
--- Expandability: Like DSLRs, these cameras are part of a system. In the last couple of months more and more third parties have started to make lenses too. Micro 4/3s is a much more robust system then Sony NEX though, with many more lenses available.
--- Video: Video on mirrorless cameras is insanely fantastic. Similar in quality to an SLR, but with the ease of use of a P&S. It focuses quickly, perfectly, and fairly quietly.


Mirrorless cons:
--- Lenses: Far smaller selection than SLRs, although to be fair most important lenses are covered.
--- Image quality: A DSLR will still have slightly better image quality, especially in low light scenarios.
--- Viewfinders: Most don’t have viewfinders at all, which make it harder to use in low light. Some of those have axillary finders you could out in the hotshoe (usually at exorbitant prices or some reason), but these are just to give you a general idea of what the camera is seeing.
--- Batteries: Uses batteries like a P&S (200-400 shots), while a DSLR usually gets around 2000 shots per battery.
--- Speed: Focusing, while worlds better than P&Ss, isn't quite up to DSLR standards yet, but that's getting better every day.
--- Control: While mirrorless camera offer the same level of control as DSLRs, very often you'll have to dig through menus to get to where you want to. The main point of mirrorless being cutting down on size, buttons and knobs were eliminated without mercy.


___________


Lesson Summary:
--- Point & Shoots are great for most everyday shooting. Cheap, more options than you could ever want, great image quality and video. Quite difficult (but definitely possible - I'll show you how) to get the 'pro' look.
--- DSLR are king when it comes to image quality, control, and expandability. For the best pictures in any situation, go for a DSLR. Video, not so much.
--- Mirrorless cameras are the best of both worlds, with some caveats. Amazing image quality, the best video, and fairly small and portable. Less control and versatility than an SLR, though.

___________


For the full lesson series visit the Learn Photography Master Thread.

____________________________________________________

Links to additional Info:

Learn Photography Master Thread: Lesson 2: Camera specs - What do they mean, and which ones matter to me?

Canon's DSLR naming scheme
Nikon's DSLR naming scheme
« Last edited by Curlyhead on August 10, 2016, 11:42:18 AM »

Author Topic: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread  (Read 378877 times)

Offline Work-for-ur-muny

  • Dansdeals Presidential Platinum Elite
  • ********
  • Join Date: Dec 2014
  • Posts: 3086
  • Total likes: 326
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 34
    • View Profile
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1300 on: February 04, 2016, 01:41:55 PM »
Why did Sony drop the touch feature ? IIRC the A5100 has it.
Going backward in technology. Like Kodak.

Offline Mordy

  • Dansdeals Platinum Elite + Lifetime Silver Elite
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 640
  • Total likes: 4
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1301 on: February 10, 2016, 11:06:54 PM »
Whoa.
Someone private messaged me recently and I realized I haven't logged on in probably... better half of a year maybe? If not for the email inbox notification, I probably wouldn't be here.

Do I dare scroll back?? Who missed me. I know I missed disagreeing with Somethingfishy. But the internet is a big place. Plenty of people to troll in the sea. :)
Mobile Enthusiast Extraordinaire

Visit one of the Tech Blogs I write: http://www.techcitement.com

Online Something Fishy

  • Global Moderator
  • Dansdeals Lifetime Presidential Platinum Elite
  • **********
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 8707
  • Total likes: 6069
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 44
    • View Profile
    • Kosher Horizons
  • Location: Iceland
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1302 on: February 10, 2016, 11:45:26 PM »
Whoa.
Someone private messaged me recently and I realized I haven't logged on in probably... better half of a year maybe? If not for the email inbox notification, I probably wouldn't be here.

Do I dare scroll back?? Who missed me. I know I missed disagreeing with Somethingfishy. But the internet is a big place. Plenty of people to troll in the sea. :)

Welcome back ;D!

I missed disagreeing with you as well, let's begin:

I say the internet is a small place.



Your move.
Check out my site for epic kosher adventures: Kosher Horizons

Offline Dan

  • Administrator
  • Dansdeals Lifetime 50K Diamond Elite
  • **********
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 67598
  • Total likes: 16909
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 16442
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Location: CLE
  • Programs: UA GS, AA EXP, DL Dirt, Hyatt Glob, Fairmont Lifetime Plat, DD Diamond, Blocked By @NeriaKraus
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1303 on: February 10, 2016, 11:47:39 PM »
Welcome back Mordy :)
Save your time, I don't answer PM. Post it in the forum and a dedicated DDF'er will get back to you as soon as possible.

Offline Mordy

  • Dansdeals Platinum Elite + Lifetime Silver Elite
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 640
  • Total likes: 4
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1304 on: February 11, 2016, 01:14:49 AM »
I say the internet is a small place.
HA! I say it isn't a place at ALL!
Welcome back Mordy :)

Thanks, from the man himself!

Amazing how Sony keeps innovating in mirrorless while Canon and Nikon sit idly by...

Canon and Nikon actually have mirrorless options, and have for a while. The EOS-M is actually pretty nice, but they are keeping them suppressed as lower-end models. When you've invested as much as they have into the DSLR model being the "pro" camera, you don't necessarily want to shift gears so easily. It would be bad for business.

Meanwhile, Sony is in a unique position. Yes, they also have a DSLR/transluscent mirror line of Alpha cameras that they consider their pro offerings, but they have also been behind the scenes in the digital imaging world since, well, since digital was even a thing I'd guess. Look at how many cameras from other manufacurers use their sensors, from FF Nikons to Micro43s to cell phones... But Sony also wants to be a consumer brand to compete with imaging giants. That's why they've made contracts with Zeiss, bought Minolta's camera division in 2007... but they didn't really find their niche until this mirrorless thing. They have the guts and the infrastructure in place to shake up the market like no one else. And that's exactly what they are doing!
But their line still doesn't meet the quota for a photographer who wants to have a "complete set".
True. But you could get a nearly complete set once you consider the excellent third-party lenses from Zeiss, Sigma, Samyang, et. al.
In native E-mount, yes. But, remember, Sony's A-mount has a very healthy offering that is even backwards compatible with Minolta glass from the 80s (which was the first commercially successful AF system, and still in use today with Sony's SLTs).
Why do I mention this if we're talking about E-mount?
Because we all know (or should) that one of the pros of mirrorless is its unique ability to adapt virtually any other kind of lens mount to it (because of flange distance). However, unlike Micro43 or Fuji, Sony is actually owning up to that fact and ENCOURAGING you to do it!

Sony actually makes a few official adapters for their A-mount lenses. I bought the LA-EA4 for my A7S so that I could use Minolta glass, and since the adapter has its own PDAF system inside, the lenses focus as fast as they do on the cameras they came from!
Here's a video of me testing a 50mm f/1.7 that I bought for about $60 used:


You can adapt other DSLR lenses as well, such as Canon, with the Commlite or Metabones electronic adapters. However, since most of the E-mount cameras are primarily contrast-detect focus, the DSLR lenses hunt around a lot and sometimes give up before locking on focus (My A7S above with a Commlite sometimes takes 3-5 seconds to focus, which doesn't sound like a lot but is really an eternity if someone is posing. On the flip side, image stabilization works perfectly). If focusing manually isn't your thing, even with the aid of peaking and focus assiting zoom, they recently came up with a new advanced hybrid system that can prefer PDAF to drive DSLR lenses at very respectable autofocus speed. So far only the A7Rii has this new system, however rumor is the A6300 will get it too. Both claim to be able to focus with adapted DSLR lenses without PDAF mirrors in the adapter.

I've seen Canon lenses focus quite well on an A7Rii, and a prototype Nikon adapter looked rather promising as well. Not as fast as a native Nikon body perhaps, but I've seen mirrorless cameras that were much slower to focus with even native lenses. 

I guess what I'm trying to get at here is, while Sony's native E-mount is lacking, its actually got more usable lens options than any other mount on the market!
Why did Sony drop the touch feature ? IIRC the A5100 has it.
They didn't drop it. Yes, the A5100 had it. So did some of the NEX 5s. But the A5000 and A6000 did not. The A5100 actually came out after the A6000, don't forget. They've always had some models that included it and some that didn't- usually the smaller bodies that had less buttons and controls had it, while the more professional models did not. This isn't always the case, but its sort of a pattern. Generally, the more professional a camera gets, the less glitzy bells-and-whistle features show up that a serious photographer wouldn't care about anyway. Note that none of the A7 cameras have a touch screen. This is true of other camera companies as well- note how the Canon Rebel got articulating screens, and eventually added touch to them, yet the 5D never had either and likely never will. That's considered a silly consumer feature to them.

I guess it all comes down to who they expect the audience for a camera to be, and what they think they'd be interested in as far as included features.
The 6000 did?
Going backward in technology. Like Kodak.

Guys. The A5100 came out AFTER the A6000! Sheesh. ;)



Wow, and these are my comments from this page alone. I dare not backtrack, now I remember why I had to stay away!
Mobile Enthusiast Extraordinaire

Visit one of the Tech Blogs I write: http://www.techcitement.com

Offline EJB

  • Dansdeals Lifetime Presidential Platinum Elite
  • *********
  • Join Date: Sep 2012
  • Posts: 5409
  • Total likes: 254
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 15
    • View Profile
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1305 on: February 11, 2016, 01:17:42 AM »
Of course it came after, but my point is they didn't take away a feature. They just didn't add it.

Offline Zalc

  • Dansdeals Lifetime Platinum Elite
  • *******
  • Join Date: Nov 2014
  • Posts: 1785
  • Total likes: 157
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 0
    • View Profile
  • Location: USA
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1306 on: February 11, 2016, 01:19:22 AM »

Offline Mordy

  • Dansdeals Platinum Elite + Lifetime Silver Elite
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 640
  • Total likes: 4
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1307 on: February 11, 2016, 01:24:43 AM »
Ha. Lest me reputation be smeared.
Mobile Enthusiast Extraordinaire

Visit one of the Tech Blogs I write: http://www.techcitement.com

Offline Mordy

  • Dansdeals Platinum Elite + Lifetime Silver Elite
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 640
  • Total likes: 4
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1308 on: February 12, 2016, 12:41:47 PM »
And this just in, speaking of lenses you can use with Sony's E (or FE, in particular) system:
YOU CAN NOW AUTOFOCUS MANUAL FOCUS LENSES.

Yes, you read that correctly. They did this back in the 90's once with the Contax AX camera, which could physically move lenses back and forth to adjust focus by having a motorized mount. The idea was that you could keep all your old manual-focus lenses from generations ago and still use them with modern auto focus sensors. Looks like an Asian outfit has build the same concept into an adapter for Sony cameras!
It's set to release in about a month or so, and the first one coming out will only support Leica M lenses, but this is some amazing technology that I never expected to work as smoothly as it does! Check out this prototype demonstration!



Wow, I'd love to get me a 35mm f/1.2 Leica M and go to town with AF!!

With options like this, Sony can honestly afford to take their sweet time releasing native lenses. I don't need 'em!
Mobile Enthusiast Extraordinaire

Visit one of the Tech Blogs I write: http://www.techcitement.com

Offline whYME

  • Dansdeals Presidential Platinum Elite
  • ********
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 3213
  • Total likes: 1240
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 3
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1309 on: February 12, 2016, 01:38:43 PM »


With options like this, Sony can honestly afford to take their sweet time releasing native lenses. I don't need 'em!

The problem with relying on other lenses with adapters is you lose out on the biggest advantage of mirrorless, the size and weight advantage.


Offline Zalc

  • Dansdeals Lifetime Platinum Elite
  • *******
  • Join Date: Nov 2014
  • Posts: 1785
  • Total likes: 157
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 0
    • View Profile
  • Location: USA
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1310 on: February 12, 2016, 02:07:08 PM »



The question is if it can focus all old lenses well. Can all lenses be back-focused without any drawbacks in IQ?


The problem with relying on other lenses with adapters is you lose out on the biggest advantage of mirrorless, the size and weight advantage.

The adapter is quite small, and a full frame lens is the same size, regardless of if there is a mirror, no?

Weight advantage has to do with the construction, not the mount, no?

Offline Mordy

  • Dansdeals Platinum Elite + Lifetime Silver Elite
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 640
  • Total likes: 4
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1311 on: February 12, 2016, 03:21:05 PM »

The problem with relying on other lenses with adapters is you lose out on the biggest advantage of mirrorless, the size and weight advantage.



The size and weight of my camera is modular, which to me is the point of mirrorless. When I want it small, I can stick on a compact prime and fit it in my pocket. If I want to shoot with a 70-200, I can put one on it, but at that point we're dealing with a hunk of glass so large that it requires its own tripod mount. One made for mirrorless and one driven by an adapter is not really much of a difference at all, and the size/weight of the camera + adapter still isn't that of a DSLR with the same setup. No matter how you cut it, the mirrorless is still worth it. At least, to me.

Also? A lot of the Samyang and Rokinon lenses are actually the same no matter what mount- they just add the correct sized back to fit the camera in question. So a Samyang made for a Sony will be the same size as a Samyang for Canon + adapter.

I'd love to see more native glass, but they come at a premium price with any new system so I'm perfectly happy adapting. My A-mount lenses are amazing, I've had 3 shoots for Misphpocha magazine shot with that on my A7 this past year. And my A5100 with a Canon 50/1.8 on adapter is still a more compact package than that lens on any Canon DSLR. Options and choices are why I love this platform.
Mobile Enthusiast Extraordinaire

Visit one of the Tech Blogs I write: http://www.techcitement.com

Offline Dan

  • Administrator
  • Dansdeals Lifetime 50K Diamond Elite
  • **********
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 67598
  • Total likes: 16909
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 16442
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Location: CLE
  • Programs: UA GS, AA EXP, DL Dirt, Hyatt Glob, Fairmont Lifetime Plat, DD Diamond, Blocked By @NeriaKraus
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1312 on: February 12, 2016, 03:37:22 PM »
So, should I upgrade from A6000>A6300 or wait for the next generation?
Save your time, I don't answer PM. Post it in the forum and a dedicated DDF'er will get back to you as soon as possible.

Offline Mordy

  • Dansdeals Platinum Elite + Lifetime Silver Elite
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 640
  • Total likes: 4
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1313 on: February 13, 2016, 09:01:06 PM »
So, should I upgrade from A6000>A6300 or wait for the next generation?

Considering the A6000 came out in 2014, and they decided to skip a refresh in 2015 because it was still selling well enough (according to rumors, they planned an upgrade this past year but then decided against it), I'd say you probably have some time until the next generation comes out.
Mobile Enthusiast Extraordinaire

Visit one of the Tech Blogs I write: http://www.techcitement.com

Offline Dan

  • Administrator
  • Dansdeals Lifetime 50K Diamond Elite
  • **********
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 67598
  • Total likes: 16909
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 16442
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Location: CLE
  • Programs: UA GS, AA EXP, DL Dirt, Hyatt Glob, Fairmont Lifetime Plat, DD Diamond, Blocked By @NeriaKraus
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1314 on: February 13, 2016, 09:24:29 PM »
That didn't answer the question :)
Save your time, I don't answer PM. Post it in the forum and a dedicated DDF'er will get back to you as soon as possible.

Offline Mordy

  • Dansdeals Platinum Elite + Lifetime Silver Elite
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 640
  • Total likes: 4
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1315 on: February 14, 2016, 02:17:39 AM »
That didn't answer the question :)
Well, it depends. What does your current camera not do that you wish it did?
Remember, the camera market isn't like the cell phone market- cell phones come out with new models annually that keep kicking up the user experience another notch. It makes sense to skip a generation with cell phones because you know the next one is always around the corner and will be even BETTER.

But if your camera does what you want, keep it indefinitely! Why are you even looking at the "next generation" at all? Some of my friends are still out there shooting weddings with cameras 6+ years old.
Camera companies keep rehashing the same camera concepts to seem more competitive on the consumer market, but rarely are much of an upgrade to each other. Take a look at the refresh cycle for the Canon Rebel, for example- they rehash the same sensor and guts with a new body and new bells and whistles every year. But its the same camera capable of the same pictures, more or less since the original one.
Now, the A6300 has some great new features, especially in 4k video and autofocus with adapted lenses. But at the end of the day, your pictures will probably look the same taken on either- especially if you are using the same lenses. My answer above was saying they didn't update the A6000 as often as most other cameras because it was already a pretty awesome camera. They felt it wasn't worth upgrading last year, which says a lot. I say keep it and stop looking at what else comes out unless there is something in particular you don't like about it. Especially since at this refresh rate cycle, you might not see the "next generation" until somewhere in 2018!!

If you want to step up your game, buying a newer version of the same camera won't change much. Rather, spend that money on lenses! I always tell people to buy the cheapest body that does what they want, and spend the rest of their budget on good glass. That's the best advice I can offer. :)

If you can't get past the idea of needing a new camera body, look at the A7R2. THAT's an upgrade to the A6000! The A6300 is just a newer printing of the same novel.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2016, 02:23:31 AM by Mordy »
Mobile Enthusiast Extraordinaire

Visit one of the Tech Blogs I write: http://www.techcitement.com

Offline Mordy

  • Dansdeals Platinum Elite + Lifetime Silver Elite
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 640
  • Total likes: 4
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1316 on: February 14, 2016, 02:27:58 AM »
That being said, I want the A6300 because of that 4k video support, since I shoot video as a profession and my A7S is usually my primary camera, which just looks a lot sharper than my A5100 (same as A6000) in video, due to how the sensor resamples. The A6300 is a clean 4k from an oversampled 6k image, which will be an improvement to the way I plan to use my camera. Also, I primarily shoot with adapted lenses, which will also be an improvement due to the new hybrid focus that can drive full-time PDAF adapted glass.
But for a regular real-world camera to take pictures as a consumer, with the kit lens? The image quality and DR are likely going to be indiscernible from the previous model. The focus and other bells and whistles might be better than the A6000, but not enough that I'd care if I already owned an A6000.
Mobile Enthusiast Extraordinaire

Visit one of the Tech Blogs I write: http://www.techcitement.com

Offline Work-for-ur-muny

  • Dansdeals Presidential Platinum Elite
  • ********
  • Join Date: Dec 2014
  • Posts: 3086
  • Total likes: 326
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 34
    • View Profile
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1317 on: February 14, 2016, 12:21:13 PM »
And how about an upgrade to the a6300 from the nex7?

Offline CR

  • Dansdeals Silver Elite
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2014
  • Posts: 85
  • Total likes: 30
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 1
    • View Profile
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1318 on: February 15, 2016, 08:41:47 AM »
Looking to buy good underwater camera. Is the basic Go pro the way to go? Want to spend <$200

Offline whYME

  • Dansdeals Presidential Platinum Elite
  • ********
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 3213
  • Total likes: 1240
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 3
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Which Camera Should I Get? Master Thread
« Reply #1319 on: February 15, 2016, 11:57:22 AM »
The adapter is quite small, and a full frame lens is the same size, regardless of if there is a mirror, no?
That's what I thought as well, but I was checking out the a7 last week and the native lenses were all smaller and lighter than the Nikon full frame ones I'm used to.
It does seem to make sense to me that because it's closer to the sensor they can make it smaller.
That being said, Sony doesn't yet have the lenses that tend to be really big and bulky so it's not necessarily a fair comparison. One of the lenses I tried was a 24-70 f/4, I don't have a direct comparison for that so even though it's MUCH smaller and lighter than my Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 it's not really a fair comparison. I'm curious to see what the size & weight of the just-announced sony 24-70 f/2.8 will be.
OTOH, another lens I tried was a wide-angle zoom, (sorry, I don't remember exactly what it was) and it was significantly smaller and lighter than the Nikon wide-angle zoom I've used.