Definitely check them out, they make several configurations, such as a chest harness or a dual side harness. Distributes the weight much more evenly, so much more comfortable. The price is great too. About 1/3 the cost of the black rapid system too, (which I'm sure is great, but just seems very expensive for what it is).
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
DSLR or mirrorless digital camera?
- Thread starter hulk2012
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you don't mind the extra bulk, I'd go with DSLRs. I like how you see exactly what will be recorded through the viewfinder, and the phase detection autofocus is really quick.
Then again, today's mirrorless cameras' contrast detection autofocus systems are starting to rival phase detection. And with cameras like the Fuji Xpro-1, viewfinders are certainly available on mirrorless cameras.
Mirrorless cameras also offer versatility, in that the super short flange distance allows for all sorts of adaptors to be used with them. Mirrorless cameras can be your testbed camera, and should you ever want a DSLR system to stick with, you can go test out the lenses using an adaptor. And in the case of E-mount to A-mount, there is an adaptor that even enables phase detection and turns your NEX into a SLT!
Then again, today's mirrorless cameras' contrast detection autofocus systems are starting to rival phase detection. And with cameras like the Fuji Xpro-1, viewfinders are certainly available on mirrorless cameras.
Mirrorless cameras also offer versatility, in that the super short flange distance allows for all sorts of adaptors to be used with them. Mirrorless cameras can be your testbed camera, and should you ever want a DSLR system to stick with, you can go test out the lenses using an adaptor. And in the case of E-mount to A-mount, there is an adaptor that even enables phase detection and turns your NEX into a SLT!
Big dawg gzzz's up big time
LOL, I think.
I actually dropped my DSLR and 24-70 on top of my niece's head once when she got too close in front of me while I was looking through the viewfinder. Cracked the front plastic bits of the lens, good thing I don't use the threads for filters!
DSLRs are versatile. That's their major asset. They can do everything well.
Until recently, mirrorless cameras either could not offer the image quality of a DSLR, or could not do so at a comparable price as a DSLR. That has changed. My X-Pro1 easily outshines my 5D Mark II in terms of sheer image quality. The XF 35 f/1.4 is far sharper than my 35L ever was (though the new Sigma 35 appears to be a winner), and is far smaller, to boot.
That's not to say that I pick the X-Pro1 for every situation. For macro, the XF 60 only does 1:2. For lenses >135mm (FF equiv), the EVF is far too unstable. But in that 21-90mm range, the X-Pro1 is simply better. Lens choice is not really an issue, because I can put virtually any lens I want on my X-Pro1.
And the X-Pro1 does all this in a far smaller package than the 5D2. There's really no downside. I give up a few pixels, sure, but the X-Pro1 images enlarge better because they are sharper and have less noise. I also lose a bit of DoF due to shooting shorter focal lengths for the same framing, but I can't say I've ever really missed this.
Even a year ago, I wouldn't have said these things. But cameras like the X-Pro1 and X-E1, Nex-6 and -7, and to a lesser extent the OM-D (m4/3 is really pushing it in terms of DoF control and ease of enlargement) have completely changed the game.
If I were starting out, I'd be going mirrorless, all the way, unless I had a very specific need for a DLSR.
Until recently, mirrorless cameras either could not offer the image quality of a DSLR, or could not do so at a comparable price as a DSLR. That has changed. My X-Pro1 easily outshines my 5D Mark II in terms of sheer image quality. The XF 35 f/1.4 is far sharper than my 35L ever was (though the new Sigma 35 appears to be a winner), and is far smaller, to boot.
That's not to say that I pick the X-Pro1 for every situation. For macro, the XF 60 only does 1:2. For lenses >135mm (FF equiv), the EVF is far too unstable. But in that 21-90mm range, the X-Pro1 is simply better. Lens choice is not really an issue, because I can put virtually any lens I want on my X-Pro1.
And the X-Pro1 does all this in a far smaller package than the 5D2. There's really no downside. I give up a few pixels, sure, but the X-Pro1 images enlarge better because they are sharper and have less noise. I also lose a bit of DoF due to shooting shorter focal lengths for the same framing, but I can't say I've ever really missed this.
Even a year ago, I wouldn't have said these things. But cameras like the X-Pro1 and X-E1, Nex-6 and -7, and to a lesser extent the OM-D (m4/3 is really pushing it in terms of DoF control and ease of enlargement) have completely changed the game.
If I were starting out, I'd be going mirrorless, all the way, unless I had a very specific need for a DLSR.
LOL, I think.
I actually dropped my DSLR and 24-70 on top of my niece's head once when she got too close in front of me while I was looking through the viewfinder. Cracked the front plastic bits of the lens, good thing I don't use the threads for filters!
Never mind that.
How's your niece??!! Edge, if you have time sometime, I'd love to see a few pictures shot at the same time from each camera.
The other factor is whether you need action. ISO performance. Dynamic range. Colors and rendering are fantastic on the rx1 and were on the x100 for a crop. But .... How many shots will you miss due to needing faster autofocus? The rx1 is way faster than the x100 was but its still not something I would use wide open in low light to capture moving subjects. Now if they add focus peaking without zoom. Maybe.
Point is. Different tools for different jobs. I hate lugging around my 5d2 70-200, 35l 430 ex and that's a light combo. Bit sometimes a single range prime isn't fast enough. Nor is changing them (like events)
Point is. Different tools for different jobs. I hate lugging around my 5d2 70-200, 35l 430 ex and that's a light combo. Bit sometimes a single range prime isn't fast enough. Nor is changing them (like events)
The nex 6 has a better vf. Better af. And is cheaper with better high ISO. But it has less Mp which should be fine. I'd take the 6 over the 7 any day.
Never mind that.
She was fine!
----------
As a former NEX-7 owner I wouldn't be too sure of that. The 24megapickle images are of dubious value. I personally can't make use of more than 12-16 on a regular basis for the types of photos I take and if you are shooting landscapes to print big you are better off with a D800 for pure clean pixel performance. I sold off my 7 and kept the 5n, which does everything I ask of it from a go anywhere cam. I'm tempted to move up to the 6 for a few reasons, but bigger images aren't one of them.
Again, my other camera is a D4 tho...
Edit; Or are you saying you went with the 7 already as your choice? If so, disregard the above, enjoy your camera, and don't look at any other reviews for 3 years or whenever you are ready to upgrade. Once the choice is made learn to love what you've got and don't mind what me or anyone else recommends! =)
I went with nex7 and Zeiss/Sony Vario Sonnar T 16-80mm f3.5-4.5 ZA lenses. As a learning photographer I must admit its a pleasure to be learning on such a camera where everything seems to be digital. I didn't like the learning curve and bulk of dslr. Guys talking about nex5 but nex7 is truly big step forward from usability point of view. Can't even compare. Accessible action buttons everywhere plus amoled viewfinder is of the hook. I am really happy with it to be honest. Already looking forward to few more lenses.
Last edited:
The viewfinder on Nex 7 and 6 are the same.
It's true that the NEX-6 is a great value.
You aren't going to be able to beat the image quality of the NEX unless you step up to full frame. Well, The Fujis are slightly better, but that's mostly due to lack of a moire filter, and they cost a lot.
Here are some sample NEX-5N shots with the kit lens, the last two pics are ISO 25,600 and 12,800.
![DSC03346-300x199.jpg]()
![DSC03352-300x199.jpg]()
![hdr3-1024x680.jpg]()
![DSC01961.jpg]()
![DSC02103.jpg]()
![DSC02980.jpg]()
![DSC02999.jpg]()
![DSC03077.jpg]()
![DSC03152.jpg]()
Here are some sample NEX-5N shots with the kit lens, the last two pics are ISO 25,600 and 12,800.
Beautiful shots. Love taking mine on planes.
Plus you can't beat the mirrorless cams for getting them into show.
![]()
11-JoeWalsh-0849 by Kadath, on Flickr
![]()
12-Orion-03540 by Kadath, on Flickr
----------
Awesome, don't look back. The Macro 30 should be in your kit for sure:
![]()
12-BeeMacro-04064 by Kadath, on Flickr
Plus you can't beat the mirrorless cams for getting them into show.
11-JoeWalsh-0849 by Kadath, on Flickr
12-Orion-03540 by Kadath, on Flickr
----------
Awesome, don't look back. The Macro 30 should be in your kit for sure:
12-BeeMacro-04064 by Kadath, on Flickr
Ioybond - some great shots. The kit lens is a lot better than credited. Though copy variation is a factor. I don't have any issues with it. By tue time people moan about it i don't need corner to corner sharpness at full zoom. At 18 it's good stopped down. Improves to 35.
The 50 is a good lens with slow af
The 5n is great for legacy glass too.
I think these are both in cam jog at 6400 with the contact g 45/2
![8421559413_76f7694bc8_b.jpg]()
The larger add on flash works very well for social events indoors and I love that I can set exposure with the flash down and see it then add the flash up and fill properly.
The 50 is a good lens with slow af
The 5n is great for legacy glass too.
I think these are both in cam jog at 6400 with the contact g 45/2
The larger add on flash works very well for social events indoors and I love that I can set exposure with the flash down and see it then add the flash up and fill properly.
Last edited:
Here are some photos from my old NEX-5.
![DSC00066.jpg]()
It was pretty dark in real life in this photo, the amount of detail the NEX-5 was able to grab was amazing:
![155407_516267260405_1353430_n.jpg]()
But I traded the NEX-5 in for a Sony SLT-A33. I loved the NEX-5 but I found it too limiting, it was hard to manually focus at times for example. If the NEX-6 with its viewfinder and select mode dial was available, I would've got that instead.
It was pretty dark in real life in this photo, the amount of detail the NEX-5 was able to grab was amazing:
But I traded the NEX-5 in for a Sony SLT-A33. I loved the NEX-5 but I found it too limiting, it was hard to manually focus at times for example. If the NEX-6 with its viewfinder and select mode dial was available, I would've got that instead.
Really great pics!
Fellow Canadian eh! Are you using vintage lenses? Why did you find the need to manually focus?
Fellow Canadian eh! Are you using vintage lenses? Why did you find the need to manually focus?