Hello everyone, I hope you're all doing well. I'm interested in understanding the variances between DSLR and mirrorless cameras as my niece plans to buy a new camera for photography (not professionally). I'd appreciate some simple explanations about the differences and insights into which one might be a better option for the future.
DSLR or Mirrorless Camera, which one to buy ?
- Thread starter Awesomadin
- Start date
DSLR is old tech, mirrorless is the future.
Now that posted the radical statement, DSLRs aren't dead. A cheap dslr is a good platform for learning photography basics, about the camera, composition, lighting. But with most DSLR systems discontinuing lens releases/support, that's all they're good for (for new entrants into photography).
I often see beginners doing the same thing, buying a DSLR with the kit lens, for point and shoot style photos, and never going beyond that. An expensive phone can sometimes match (and beat with computational photography) basic cameras with kit lenses.
Photography with a camera takes time for the photo to look good, you won't get the intensely rich colors, or hdr, straight out of camera.
That said, if you have the budget, mirrorless is the current, and the future. Buy any of the Sony E/Canon Rf/Nikon Z series mirrorless bodies, they have cheaper crop sensor basic bodies as well. The lenses share the same mount with full frame cameras (Sony does, without restrictions, Canon has their Rf-s, not sure what shenanigans they're pulling this time to block lenses, and no idea about nikon z crop mount, please do your research).
This way, you can grow your lens collection, and if needed, upgrade without having to jump systems. Again, lenses are imo more important than the body, changing focal length can transform an image entirely, large aperture lenses are useful for portraits, low light shots etc..
Regarding differences, DSLRs have a mirror box, that lets the photographer view through the lens with an optical viewfinder. Focusing happens through a dedicated array of phase detect sensors off-sensor. Once you press the shutter, the mirror flips out so the sensor can now get the light instead of the viewfinder.
Mirrorless, as the name suggests, doesn't have this mechanism. The light falls on the sensor all the time, phase detect sensors are on the sensor itself, and the viewfinder is a tiny screen with optica for magnification. Once you press the shutter button, the shutter mechanism actuates, no mirror flip flopping required.
Due to these differences , mirrorless now has certain advantages, you get to see the shot before you've taken it, no more guessing the exposure. Because the focus sensors are on sensor, focusing is more accurate. There's no mirror slap (vibration due to the mirror assembly), and more.
Now that posted the radical statement, DSLRs aren't dead. A cheap dslr is a good platform for learning photography basics, about the camera, composition, lighting. But with most DSLR systems discontinuing lens releases/support, that's all they're good for (for new entrants into photography).
I often see beginners doing the same thing, buying a DSLR with the kit lens, for point and shoot style photos, and never going beyond that. An expensive phone can sometimes match (and beat with computational photography) basic cameras with kit lenses.
Photography with a camera takes time for the photo to look good, you won't get the intensely rich colors, or hdr, straight out of camera.
That said, if you have the budget, mirrorless is the current, and the future. Buy any of the Sony E/Canon Rf/Nikon Z series mirrorless bodies, they have cheaper crop sensor basic bodies as well. The lenses share the same mount with full frame cameras (Sony does, without restrictions, Canon has their Rf-s, not sure what shenanigans they're pulling this time to block lenses, and no idea about nikon z crop mount, please do your research).
This way, you can grow your lens collection, and if needed, upgrade without having to jump systems. Again, lenses are imo more important than the body, changing focal length can transform an image entirely, large aperture lenses are useful for portraits, low light shots etc..
Regarding differences, DSLRs have a mirror box, that lets the photographer view through the lens with an optical viewfinder. Focusing happens through a dedicated array of phase detect sensors off-sensor. Once you press the shutter, the mirror flips out so the sensor can now get the light instead of the viewfinder.
Mirrorless, as the name suggests, doesn't have this mechanism. The light falls on the sensor all the time, phase detect sensors are on the sensor itself, and the viewfinder is a tiny screen with optica for magnification. Once you press the shutter button, the shutter mechanism actuates, no mirror flip flopping required.
Due to these differences , mirrorless now has certain advantages, you get to see the shot before you've taken it, no more guessing the exposure. Because the focus sensors are on sensor, focusing is more accurate. There's no mirror slap (vibration due to the mirror assembly), and more.
Last edited:
That is slightly incorrect. Barring the top end cameras, Nikon Z9/Z8 and the just released Sony A9iii, all mirrorless (interchangeable lens) consumer cameras have mechanical shutter.
Naveen_Reloaded
Adept
DSLR if you are new.. and want to have feel of things , Mirrorless are bit costly , but are the future tech.
Incase you want a used DSLR , check my thread..
Incase you want a used DSLR , check my thread..
Thank you for sharing your perspective on this. I appreciate your insight benefits of mirrorless cameras and how they offer advantages such as accurate focusing and the ability to preview shots before taking them. It's also great to hear that mirrorless cameras like the Sony E, Canon RF, and Nikon Z series offer compatibility with both crop sensor and full frame lenses, allowing for flexibility upgrades without having to switch cameras. I will definitely take your recommendations into consideration and conduct further research to explore the options that best suit my niece's needs. Thank you again for sharing your knowledge and advice.
Although she may not be a newcomer to photography, I want to ensure that she purchases a midrange camera that will be future-proof and meet her needs. It is important to me that she does not regret my suggestion in the future. However, I am uncertain about the cost of a midrange camera and would like to explore the budget necessary for such a purchase.
Why does it need to be a fixed choice now, when you are not familiar with the differences and are not the user, and the user might want something else down the line?
If it's your niece, and not someone you don't regularly have contact with, buy her a basic DSLR, let her learn and do her own research and find out what she wants. You can give her the gift and let her know you'd be open to buying her something else in the future, rather than spending more now.
Buying something future proof doesn't really work if neither the buyer nor the end user have any knowledge/experience with what they're buying and dont know what to look for or what the end user's preference will be once she has some experience.
Didn't see this coming, but I wholeheartedly agree with you. I will definitely leave the decision up to her. In the meantime, I've come across a great video on YouTube which I am eager to share with her. Thank you very much for your input, my friend.
roadrash99
Disciple
I would like to differ and go all in on the mirrorless side. DSLRs in comparison are too bulky and outdated, which could be a factor in a young person deciding to stick with the hobby or not. I would only recommend DSLRs to someone who knew what they were getting into and wanted to save money.
Naveen_Reloaded
Adept
DSLR are pretty basic. All newer cams include better ISO , face tracking , eye tracking etc. If she wants to learn , then I would suggest a used one. she can meddle with it as much she wants and these DSLR (older ones) are pretty rugged. After she works with it for few years and then moving to mirrorless and prime lens will open world of wonders.