Considering mirrorless... is there a easy way in to try it out?

JohnN

JohnN

Suspended / Banned
Messages
6,359
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

Although I'm happy with my current setup it can be quite literally a pain to lug about (as I found out taking the "bare minimum" to Scotland recently), so I've been thinking about a mirrorless setup but really just want to try it out first.

I have considered renting, but short term trials aren't my thing - what I'd like is to find good older model that I could pick up for a couple of hundred (and suggest to my wife and kids a a suitable birthday pressie) and try it out in the real world without the rush.

Any suggestions or should I just not bother?
 
Last edited:
From my experience with m4/3rds, look for a 16MP model. Many people seem happy with the older 12MP models but I never though the IQ was up to a high standard.

Model wise, if you look around you should find something decent for under £200. I've just sold an E-PM2 and 14-42 for £185, as an example. Picture quality was absolutely excellent on it, but I've just decided to rationalise back to one brand for digital for now.
 
Cheers Dave and thanks for the tip
 
There's lots to choose from which all have their pros and cons but I'm absolutely delighted with my little Sony Nex-3n. Probably pick up one around the 200 - 250 mark as the new series of Sony's are out and folk want the newest model. Not missed the viewfinder as much as I expected (Nex6 has one) as if I found the sun getting in the way of seeing the screen I simply flipped it out and held the camera at waist level like a medium format! It's put the fun back into taking photo's. Currently messing about with old Olympus OM10 manual focus lenses because it's so easy and enjoyable. The kit lens is okay too.
 
Gotta disagree about the IQ of the 12mp MFT models.

I've had a GF1 and currently have a G1 and at low to mid ISO's the G1 produces images that are easily lost amongst shots taken with the DSLR's I've owned such as 20D and 5D, these are old models but they still make good images IMVHO :D I went through a phase of testing cameras and neither I nor people I roped in could pick G1 shots from 5D shots either on screen or in print up to A3 any better than by chance. IMVHO if you know what you're doing, use good lenses and shoot raw you should be able to get good images from these cameras and you'll very probably have to pixel peep at high magnification or go to the upper ISO's to see any significant difference.

Having said all that I now also have a GX7 and it is better than the G1 but you have to look very closely or use the highest ISO's to see the differences.

The only problems with the G1 are, IMVHO, the EVF which isn't up to night time shooting but for daylight and even evening use it's fine and the higher ISO's which aren't up to modern MFT/APS-C or FF camera standards. For daylight and evening shooting at low to mid ISO's though if you can't get good image quality from these cameras the gear probably isn't your issue IMVHO and for under £100 they're a pretty good bargain and good training wheels if you want to see if you can live with a smaller system. The lenses in particular are worth a look and then there's the ability to use legacy lenses to get you hooked :D
 
Plenty of Lumix G3's available for reasonable money. Lenses can be a bit pricier though, depending on what you want.
 
woof woof said:
Gotta disagree about the IQ of the 12mp MFT models.
Click to expand...

I know we've debated this before Alan ;), but in all the time I had a G1, G2, E-P1, E-PL2 I never took an image that looked good above an A4 print. The G3 was better and the newer E-PM2 was a step ahead of that again (of course, only IMHO).

I have A3 prints and canvases from my APS-C bodies, my EOS M, my G3, and my E-PM2, I really was never able to take a photo I considered of high enough quality with any of the 12MP bodies (perhaps I was just being more critical of things like uniform colour and sharpness when enlarged significantly).

From the point that a 16MP body like a G3 can be bought for £100, or the fact John could buy an EOS-M kit for under £200 (I must admit my first answer was less than full as I thought he was only after m4/3rds) means he doesn't really have to go for an older m4/3rds body at his budget.
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
Plenty of Lumix G3's available for reasonable money. Lenses can be a bit pricier though, depending on what you want.
Click to expand...

You get what you pay for. Some of the kit lens type lenses are IMVHO reasonably priced when you compare them to DSLR's lenses. Some of the MFT primes can look expensive compared to DSLR lenses but when you start to look at the quality of the product I think that the prices start to look a bit more reasonable. Yes, there are some cheaper DSLR lenses about but mostly... they crap :D
 
Dave1 said:
I know we've debated this before Alan ;), but in all the time I had a G1, G2, E-P1, E-PL2 I never took an image that looked good above an A4 print. The G3 was better and the newer E-PM2 was a step ahead of that again (of course, only IMHO).

I have A3 prints and canvases from my APS-C bodies, my EOS M, my G3, and my E-PM2, I really was never able to take a photo I considered of high enough quality with any of the 12MP bodies (perhaps I was just being more critical of things like uniform colour and sharpness when enlarged significantly).

From the point that a 16MP body like a G3 can be bought for £100, or the fact John could buy an EOS-M kit for under £200 (I must admit my first answer was less than full as I thought he was only after m4/3rds) means he doesn't really have to go for an older m4/3rds body at his budget.
Click to expand...

Yup. the proof is in the pudding/image and that's all that matters. I shoot raw and I don't have any colour issues beyond reds getting saturated and that's not uniquely a Panasonic G1 issue. Other people have claimed issues with blues but I've never seen that in my own shots, maybe because I shoot raw. I hardly print at all now and my own and images that go to other people tend to be in electronic format but when I did print A3 wasn't a disaster :D far from it. Not a disaster apart from the cost that is :D

If a G3 can be had for £100 it'll probably be worth looking at but there are those who don't like the shape and handling of the G3, I didn't when I tried one so the image quality would need to show an improvement to tempt me away from the G1/2 shape. I've just looked at Ffordes (other used dealers are available :D) and there are no used G3's today, G1's are listed for £60-70.

Personally I wouldn't put my money into a Canon M series, it seems dead in the water to me and I don't think I'd want to go down the route of using Canon DSLR lenses on an M body, actually I don't want a serious camera that hasn't got a VF. Sony CSC's look excellent but will almost certainly cost more.
 
Lots more info guys, thanks - to be honest despite having a decent lens selection I'd not really be wanting to use them as I never found the body itself to be the problem, its was the overall size once coupled with a lens, plus having to have at least one other lens in case of "X".

Part of the draw of mirrorless for me (from what I'd read) is that ability to scale down - sure I'll not be able to get that 400mm+ shot of a bird in flight, but I've done plenty of those and all the interesting stuff seems to be further away anyway.
 
I have just spotted a E-PM2 new for £170, but its body only or £250 with a 14-42mm II R - is that a good deal (and if so what should I look to go with it?) or should I look to something else?
 
Last edited:
JohnN said:
I have just spotted a E-PM2 new for £170, but its body only or £250 with a 14-42mm II R - is that a good deal (and if so what should I look to go with it?) or should I look to something else?
Click to expand...

It's a pity you missed my E-PM2 by 2 days, it was a full kit and only 3 months old, I sold it for £185.

It might be worth checking the various forums for a while before going for that body only, a 14-42 will probably cost you around £50 but they don't come up by themselves very often.

AVForums is probably worth a look as well before you hit the buy button.
 
If you currently use a Nikon, consider a 1 series and an FT-1 converter that will allow you to use your F mount lenses on the CSC body. Makes it a bit bulky but keeps the cost right down! My choice was the V1 since it has an EVF built in as well as the rear screen. IIRC the body with a 10mm prime (27mm EFL) cost me £200 and the adaptor was £125. My main CSC system is the Fuji X series but that's not a cheap way in to try it out!
 
lol, may be a moot point anyway - I just passed the idea of dabbling in mirrorless for my birthday and after the horrid question of how much and responding with £250 I got an :confused: so it may be out...

Still she may come round.
 
just go try some in the shops, its just a matter of hand feel, and if there class properties fit your needs (slower focus, not good with big heavy lenses)

but i do love my sigma dpm's, theres only 4 camera's that are "better" that are digital and mildly affordable, d800's and a7r
 
Last edited:
Currys have had the Eos M kit (with 18-55 STM and Speedlite 90) for £149 if you can track one down, another £60 for the EF adaptor to take your Canon lenses, it'll even take your Canon flashes.

If you can't find one at Currys then Argos have the same thing for £200.

I bought one as a backup camera and for times when I really really need to travel light and I am very impressed so far.
 
markmullen said:
Currys have had the Eos M kit (with 18-55 STM and Speedlite 90) for £149 if you can track one down, another £60 for the EF adaptor to take your Canon lenses, it'll even take your Canon flashes.

If you can't find one at Currys then Argos have the same thing for £200.

I bought one as a backup camera and for times when I really really need to travel light and I am very impressed so far.
Click to expand...

Argos currently have £10 back on purchases over £100 as well. You have to use in store, but still makes the EOS M £189.99 which is great.

Bought one yesterday :)

Dave.
 
I can see the point of the the EOS-M but I'm not really wanting to couple it with my existing lenses as having a 5D3 I've a pretty good (camera - not mine!!) body and would really be looking to loose bulk.. lol, now am I talking about a camera :D

Silliness aside I did find out the reason for yesterday eyeroll by my wife - its the fear of more lenses and another avenue for GAS - probably right though.

From what I've read the Olympus PL5 and PM2 have a very good sensor for the money and decent AF (for a mirrorless) - one idea that could bring this back is selling my Sigma 150-500 OS which I don't use that much and getting something like the PM2 body and another lens, but a decent(ish) one - no idea which thought.

My wife's flickr (link) shows the sort of images I usually take - worth a scroll down as I tend to work in cycles - as it may help with suggestions.
 
Last edited:
Before you buy any of the smaller Oly's, be very sure you are OK without an EVF (yes, I know you can add them to the Oly's but that puts the cost up). I tried it and it was a disaster.

My vote would be for a used G5 and whatever lens you want to try out.... Heck, that's only £300 new with the 14-42.

BTW: the more expensive bodies/lenses are much better at focussing quickly, so if you are after tracking kids running, you're probably barking up the wrong tree with a £200 budget...
 
Well given Andy's comment the 150-500 OS will be off to MPB tomorrow so more funds free'd up :) - Now £400 to spend which is a real boon.

I've been looking at the O-MD M10 (in classifieds and am waiting on a few details) - I quite like the idea that you have focus peaking with this one and am presuming that works through its EVF too - I also like the styling and customisation from what I've seen.
I've also seen the Oly PM2 with kit lens for £200.

Given I know I'll want at least decent AF and IQ is there anything else I should be looking at - or in fact any other general advice.
 
I have been running a GX7 along side a Canon 60D and have come to the conclusion that the file quality between the two is almost identical. The 60D just has the slightest edge so for me the GX7 wins as it's such a great system for quality and lightness. The lenses kill it for me with the DSLR and once fitted to the body is usually too heavy for me to feel comfortable so I just use the M4/3 gear now.
 
Cheers Andy - I've just gone for the O-MD M10 (in classified) and it looks like the GX7 may have been a little over my budget, plus I preferred the look of the M10 - which surprised my in two ways, firstly that I care at all as usually I don;t and secondly that originally when I first saw these retro style cameras I thought they looked daft - but hey tastes change I guess.
 
Managed to get the sony nex5t the other day for 279 from amazon with the kit lens. Also got a d3100 but not had the sony long enough to comment yet but loving the smaller form factor
 
the image quality should be just as good or better from the 5t, given equal quality lenses :)
 
Contemplating on what lenses to go for. Thinking about 50-210 and maybe a 16mm pancake. Not sure yet
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top