Do DSLR's still have a place

N

Nebular89

Suspended / Banned
Messages
422
Edit My Images
No
The only digital cameras I have ever used have been mirrorless, my first being the Sony a5000. At first I loved being able to see what I was getting before I took the photo but since I have used film, both SLR's and rangefinders, I much prefer seeing through glass than a screen.
Does anyone else find the same? I have a Fuji XT2 which I love. It feels like a film camera, the results are amazing but I just dont enjoy looking through it. I only use it for landscapes and when I must have auto focus, other than that I much prefer looking through a more traditional viewfinder

I have been thinking about picking up a cheap body and camera on ebay at somepoint. By cheap I mean cheap, Nikon D80, Canon 1000d level.
 
No. I'd only do it with a gun to my head but I do think that DSLR's could be the way to go for anyone looking to get a cheap camera if you can live with the limitations and the possible issues with lenses and MA or lack of it but even then I'd rather spend £100-£200 on something old and MFT or even an original Sony A7, which I have. RF's are nice and involving and tactile but I don't believe they can ever be as accurate as mirrorless and there's parallax and probably a long minimum focus distance. It all just mounts up.

After getting used to wysiwyg and being able to focus anywhere in the frame and with eye detect and to do this accurately and consistently and even being able to MF very accurately I wouldn't want to go back. Plus OVF's get dust in them and even sometimes creepy crawlies.
 
Last edited:
A good 100% FOV Pentaprism Optical Viewfinder does give a very 'immersive' experience, particularly with wider aperture lenses, however the same is not true of the much cheaper Pentamirror OVF (often only showing a partial image).
The D80 does have a Pentaprism OVF (with a reasonable 95% view and 0.64 magnificaion), but the 1000D has a Pentamirror OVF, with only 0.55x magnification.
By comparison, my old Sony A900 has a Pentaprism OVF with 100% coverage and 0.74 magnification.

If it's the OVF experience you are looking for in a digital body, I'd strongly recommand you look at an older FF DSLR - even from resellers like MBP prices are a fraction of what they were new, and there are bargains to be had.
 
Faldrax said:
A good 100% FOV Pentaprism Optical Viewfinder does give a very 'immersive' experience, particularly with wider aperture lenses, however the same is not true of the much cheaper Pentamirror OVF (often only showing a partial image).
The D80 does have a Pentaprism OVF (with a reasonable 95% view and 0.64 magnificaion), but the 1000D has a Pentamirror OVF, with only 0.55x magnification.
By comparison, my old Sony A900 has a Pentaprism OVF with 100% coverage and 0.74 magnification.

If it's the OVF experience you are looking for in a digital body, I'd strongly recommand you look at an older FF DSLR - even from resellers like MBP prices are a fraction of what they were new, and there are bargains to be had.
Click to expand...
The biggest hurdle would be lenses. I’d like to try it before committing but I don’t think you really get lens and cameras together with MPB do you?
 
woof woof said:
No. I'd only do it with a gun to my head but I do think that DSLR's could be the way to go for anyone looking to get a cheap camera if you can live with the limitations and the possible issues with lenses and MA or lack of it but even then I'd rather spend £100-£200 on something old and MFT or even an original Sony A7, which I have. RF's are nice and involving and tactile but I don't believe they can ever be as accurate as mirrorless and there's parallax and probably a long minimum focus distance. It all just mounts up.

After getting used to wysiwyg and being able to focus anywhere in the frame and with eye detect and to do this accurately and consistently and even being able to MF very accurately I wouldn't want to go back. Plus OVF's get dust in them and even sometimes creepy crawlies.
Click to expand...
I know what you mean. My Fuji is great for pretty much everything, I don’t think I would ever want a DSLR only, but I’m considering it to use along with it. I only use single point focus in the centre anyway. Apart from it being auto focus I use pretty much every camera the same way I use a manual SLR
 
Nebular89 said:
The biggest hurdle would be lenses. I’d like to try it before committing but I don’t think you really get lens and cameras together with MPB do you?
Click to expand...
They do sell plenty of both, but it's up to you to mix and match a bundle.
LCE is another option if you have one local - you do pay a bit of a premium by purchasing via a dealer, but get a warranty for peace of mind, and can be confident you're not going to receive a box with a brick instead of a camera inside!
 
Nebular89 said:
I know what you mean. My Fuji is great for pretty much everything, I don’t think I would ever want a DSLR only, but I’m considering it to use along with it. I only use single point focus in the centre anyway. Apart from it being auto focus I use pretty much every camera the same way I use a manual SLR
Click to expand...

As another camera in the collection I think it makes a lot more sense :D but as an only camera a DSLR wouldn't satisfy me.

I tried going back not to DSLR's but to film but in the end it didn't last long. If I was to try and go back again I think a range finder would be the thing that could tempt me the most. Just a RF with one lens.
 
Faldrax said:
They do sell plenty of both, but it's up to you to mix and match a bundle.
LCE is another option if you have one local - you do pay a bit of a premium by purchasing via a dealer, but get a warranty for peace of mind, and can be confident you're not going to receive a box with a brick instead of a camera inside!
Click to expand...
It is tempting. They have a 35mm 1.8 f mount for £70, 14 day return policy. The D80 is only £40 on eBay, can nearly consider that disposable at that price.
 
woof woof said:
As another camera in the collection I think it makes a lot more sense :D but as an only camera a DSLR wouldn't satisfy me.

I tried going back not to DSLR's but to film but in the end it didn't last long. If I was to try and go back again I think a range finder would be the thing that could tempt me the most. Just a RF with one lens.
Click to expand...
That’s how I would use it. I use film currently. I enjoy it but I don’t want to spend a lot on it. I have a rollei 35 and canon EF.
I’ve just found that since using film cameras I enjoy being as removed from the final photo as possible. I’m not really sure why but seeing a screen that has close to the finished photo on it doesn’t do it for me. In tricky light and times when I want to know for sure I’ve got, yearly holidays etc, then the Fuji is the only camera I’d use. But for myself it doesn’t make me want to go out and use it sadly, not in the way old film cameras do.

I had a Leica M2 and it kind of ruined cameras for me. Everything else doesn’t feel as nice. If film suddenly went away I’d do my best to save for a digital Leica
 
I think they have. They are probably a good way to get into digital photography these days. But I do like a good EVF. Possibly their main advantage, to me, is being able to see the effects of your exposure in real time. And that is worth its weight in gold.
 
Plain Nev said:
I think they have. They are probably a good way to get into digital photography these days. But I do like a good EVF. Possibly their main advantage, to me, is being able to see the effects of your exposure in real time. And that is worth its weight in gold.
Click to expand...
I like it but it’s not so important to me. I don’t like to fix mistakes in post but there’s so much latitude with the XT2 that if I’m off it’s not a big deal. I usually use the histogram anyway. There is one setting I tried using. You could turn off white balance and exposure in the viewfinder, it’s essentially like looking through an slr but it’s digital. However for some reason the histogram doesn’t work and that’s a deal breaker for me. I don’t like the plus/minus exposure scale
 
I still prefer DSLR's, I use the viewfinder to compose and the histogram on the rear screen as a 'light meter'. So, as I haven't yet found an EVF that is good enough (in my price range) DSLR's still have a place with me.
 
Hmmmm after several years and more than a few mirrorless cameras combos , I this year dipped my feet back into a dslr , after a couple of wrong choices I ended up with a Nikon D500 and it’s now coupled with a Tamron 150-600generation 2 lens and in all honesty bar a bit of extra weight I honestly can’t see any difference in results to my top of the range Olympus om1 and 300mm f4 . .
The only real time difference I can see is that DSLR cameras and lenses have now dropped to a very affordable level. Yes there are differences but in practice both do exactly the same job but differently
 
Nebular89 said:
I like it but it’s not so important to me. I don’t like to fix mistakes in post but there’s so much latitude with the XT2 that if I’m off it’s not a big deal. I usually use the histogram anyway. There is one setting I tried using. You could turn off white balance and exposure in the viewfinder, it’s essentially like looking through an slr but it’s digital. However for some reason the histogram doesn’t work and that’s a deal breaker for me. I don’t like the plus/minus exposure scale
Click to expand...

Ah, but the point being that if you adjust your exposure in the EVF, for the most part you won't have errors to correct. I have the exposure warning enabled in my XT3, so technically I shouldn't get any blown highlights.
 
the black fox said:
Yes there are differences but in practice both do exactly the same job but differently
Click to expand...

I think mirrorless does the job easier and more consistently, one issue with DSLR's being that there's more variation leading to lenses performing differently on different cameras or even from shot to shot. With mirrorless taking focus off the image sensor you should get much less of that. I remember at the time I had a 5D it said on the Canon website that if you took three pictures of the same thing you should expect to see differences between them and this was normal. Seems another world now.
 
Plain Nev said:
Ah, but the point being that if you adjust your exposure in the EVF, for the most part you won't have errors to correct. I have the exposure warning enabled in my XT3, so technically I shouldn't get any blown highlights.
Click to expand...
That is true. For really important stuff I would always choose an evf, I just find it less inspiring to use. I definitely take photos differently
 
Like most photographers, I started on 35mm film and when DSLRs came along I thought they were the way forward, I have had probably all Nikon up to the D810 then after about 1 year off I bought a used XT-2 and quite enjoyed it, so then I went beserk and spent a fortune on the XT-3 and loads of pro lenses when it came out, that was a massive mistake as I hated that camera after a few months and went back to DSLR with a D4 and roll on to 3 months ago I did the full circle and went back to 35mm and can honestly say, I have never felt happier behind a camera, each shot needs more thinking about, its the way I personally think it should be.
 
Dangermouse said:
Like most photographers, I started on 35mm film and when DSLRs came along I thought they were the way forward, I have had probably all Nikon up to the D810 then after about 1 year off I bought a used XT-2 and quite enjoyed it, so then I went beserk and spent a fortune on the XT-3 and loads of pro lenses when it came out, that was a massive mistake as I hated that camera after a few months and went back to DSLR with a D4 and roll on to 3 months ago I did the full circle and went back to 35mm and can honestly say, I have never felt happier behind a camera, each shot needs more thinking about, its the way I personally think it should be.
Click to expand...
Thats how I feel really. I would never do away with digital, if I had to have only 1 it would be digital. But I dont really enjoy using it as much. Probably 70% of the best photos Ive taken have been on film. When I know I can take as many as I want I'm less considered. But I do also prefer using an optical viewfinder. I did try the Xpro1. I really liked it but I got priced out when I wanted the next version, the XT2 was far more affordable
 
D80 is a great little camera. It has the most extreme colours of any Nikon DSLR/mirrorless. Bad things are there is a potential failure on the shutter mechanism that will kill it and it has no real latitude on overexposure. It is really easy to blow the highlights. Expect to have to work at managing exposure when you first get it. I really like my D80 but if you were only after one I'd get a D200/D300 (which will go on forever) or a D90 (similar to a D80 but better).

1000D is made down to a cost but has the most accurate colour representation Canon have ever done (scoring 88 on dxomark tests when most cameras do 75-80). You won't see it on the crappy back screen but the pictures look good.

Anyway, are DSLRs done? Not for what I do. The EVF lag on mirrorless is too long. I can see it. Eye detect probably doesn't work on people who are turning about 2 turns a second and travelling at the same time. WYSIWYG doesn't work in the dark when you want to get as much light onto the focus sensors as fast as possible. This means I want the aperture all the way open to focus and I think I want big phase detectors, not ones smaller than a pixel.

I don't think mirrorless are there yet for low light work.
 
Erty said:
D80 is a great little camera. It has the most extreme colours of any Nikon DSLR/mirrorless. Bad things are there is a potential failure on the shutter mechanism that will kill it and it has no real latitude on overexposure. It is really easy to blow the highlights. Expect to have to work at managing exposure when you first get it. I really like my D80 but if you were only after one I'd get a D200/D300 (which will go on forever) or a D90 (similar to a D80 but better).

1000D is made down to a cost but has the most accurate colour representation Canon have ever done (scoring 88 on dxomark tests when most cameras do 75-80). You won't see it on the crappy back screen but the pictures look good.

Anyway, are DSLRs done? Not for what I do. The EVF lag on mirrorless is too long. I can see it. Eye detect probably doesn't work on people who are turning about 2 turns a second and travelling at the same time. WYSIWYG doesn't work in the dark when you want to get as much light onto the focus sensors as fast as possible. This means I want the aperture all the way open to focus and I think I want big phase detectors, not ones smaller than a pixel.

I don't think mirrorless are there yet for low light work.
Click to expand...
If I decide to stick with it I’ll just use and abuse the d80 until it dies and look at something else. Only cost me £40 for the camera, in apparently full working condition (eBay!), and I got the 35mm lens for £50 from MPB. So worst case I return the lens and sell the camera on for a small loss. Plus I was curious to try a CCD sensor. I found some raw files online to have a look at. The colours are what everyone talks about, they look fine to me, but I was more impressed after converting them to black and white. I know high iso isn’t what they’re known for but one photo at 1600 when converted to black and white looked really nice.

I wouldn’t want it replace film if I do like it but sometimes I want to use an optical viewfinder and not have to develop and scan film.

The lag on my XT2 is very bad unless you use boost mode which pretty much gets rid of it. You lose battery but unless I’m sat in the same spot for an hour at sunset with a tripod I have to use it to get rid of it.

I don’t really do low light much. At least not low enough to challenge the xt2.
 
Regarding older cameras, if they could take good pictures once (not necessarily a given) then they can still take similar pictures. Be aware too that lenses are every bit as important, and an old camera with a poor lens will seem even worse now.

You should also be aware that they aren't made equally. I've had a couple of Nikons: D610 build quality was about the same as an entry level Sony A58, and the D70 is a piece of Flexi plastic junk. Be aware of what you're buying. Finally on viewfinders, pentamirrors can be small and dark, and some of the lower-mid range DSLRs can give a rather miserable view of what you're trying to photograph. Small aperture zooms make this much worse.

No reason not to buy a DSLR, but choose carefully for a good outcome.
 
I still have the DSLRs I used before I got my first mirrorless camera. back in Feb. 2013.
If I just want to grab a basic camera the Pentax K5ii will often be the one I go out with.
This is partly from familiarity but probably mainly from the range of lenses I have available in the PK mount.
I don;t have AF lenses as long as 750mm equivalent for any of my mirrorless cameras & few can reach 180 degrees at the other extreme.

I have to admit the earlier K7 & K100d LR models I own haven't been out in years (last used when loaned to my kids).
 
At those prices, and with how you are talking, you should have already bought to try it :)

Photography, for the majority of us, is about enjoyment in one way or another. If you think looking through a viewfinder of a DSLR will work for you then go for it. Especially if it's as a second camera.

I have 5 bodies in total, a complete mix of 4 different styles and formats. They all get used, some more often than others, and they are all very enjoyable to use for what I use each camera (system) for :)

I could easily put them in an order of enjoyment, but that can obviously change depending on what is being photographed at the time ;)
 
ancient_mariner said:
Regarding older cameras, if they could take good pictures once (not necessarily a given) then they can still take similar pictures. Be aware too that lenses are every bit as important, and an old camera with a poor lens will seem even worse now.

You should also be aware that they aren't made equally. I've had a couple of Nikons: D610 build quality was about the same as an entry level Sony A58, and the D70 is a piece of Flexi plastic junk. Be aware of what you're buying. Finally on viewfinders, pentamirrors can be small and dark, and some of the lower-mid range DSLRs can give a rather miserable view of what you're trying to photograph. Small aperture zooms make this much worse.

No reason not to buy a DSLR, but choose carefully for a good outcome.
Click to expand...
Yeah I'm not sure about the lens I got. Generally 50mm is the longest focal length I like so I found the cheapest working 35mm I could that allowed returns. I think is a 35mm 1.8 Dx, if that means anything. It'll be fine just to try it.

The prism is something that didnt occur to me at all. But seeing as pro level DSLRs seem to be pretty cheap I can always spend a little more if I want. Though the only thing that puts me off is the bigger size, so maybe staying at APSC would be better
 
Replying to @Petrochemist good point. I still have a Sony A58, IR converted D70, Minolta 7000, Nikon F301, Bronica ETR. All except the Bronica have been used in the last 5 years alongside my usual Sony A7III system.
 
LeeRatters said:
At those prices, and with how you are talking, you should have already bought to try it :)

Photography, for the majority of us, is about enjoyment in one way or another. If you think looking through a viewfinder of a DSLR will work for you then go for it. Especially if it's as a second camera.

I have 5 bodies in total, a complete mix of 4 different styles and formats. They all get used, some more often than others, and they are all very enjoyable to use for what I use each camera (system) for :)

I could easily put them in an order of enjoyment, but that can obviously change depending on what is being photographed at the time ;)
Click to expand...
I have :). We shall see!Sadly a DSLR is harder to hide from the other half!
I was in 2 minds, more as I've been on a bit of a camera kick at the moment. A Rollei 35, Canon EF and Ive just ordered a Canon Barnack copy to try! The Barnack accepts returns so I'll have to see about that one. It wasnt what I would call expensive really, £200 in good condition, Ebay good condition again!, with a Canon 50mm 1.8 but I also play guitar, all my hobbies are a GAS nightmare!
 
Last edited:
Nebular89 said:
Yeah I'm not sure about the lens I got. Generally 50mm is the longest focal length I like so I found the cheapest working 35mm I could that allowed returns. I think is a 35mm 1.8 Dx, if that means anything. It'll be fine just to try it.

The prism is something that didnt occur to me at all. But seeing as pro level DSLRs seem to be pretty cheap I can always spend a little more if I want. Though the only thing that puts me off is the bigger size, so maybe staying at APSC would be better
Click to expand...

The 35dx is a decent lens, just limited to crop cameras only.
 
Nebular89 said:
I have :). We shall see!Sadly a DSLR is harder to hide from the other half!
I was in 2 minds, more as I've been on a bit of a camera kick at the moment. A Rollei 35, Canon EF and Ive just ordered a Canon Barnack copy to try! The Barnack accepts returns so I'll have to see about that one. It wasnt what I would call expensive really, £200 in good condition, Ebay good condition again!, with a Canon 50mm 1.8 but I also play guitar, all my hobbies are a GAS nightmare!
Click to expand...

Cameras and Cars for me :)

But in all fairness, the cars been restored quite a few years now so the aggro and main expense is done with :)
 
Erty said:
D80 is a great little camera. It has the most extreme colours of any Nikon DSLR/mirrorless. Bad things are there is a potential failure on the shutter mechanism that will kill it and it has no real latitude on overexposure. It is really easy to blow the highlights. Expect to have to work at managing exposure when you first get it. I really like my D80 but if you were only after one I'd get a D200/D300 (which will go on forever) or a D90 (similar to a D80 but better).

1000D is made down to a cost but has the most accurate colour representation Canon have ever done (scoring 88 on dxomark tests when most cameras do 75-80). You won't see it on the crappy back screen but the pictures look good.

Anyway, are DSLRs done? Not for what I do. The EVF lag on mirrorless is too long. I can see it. Eye detect probably doesn't work on people who are turning about 2 turns a second and travelling at the same time. WYSIWYG doesn't work in the dark when you want to get as much light onto the focus sensors as fast as possible. This means I want the aperture all the way open to focus and I think I want big phase detectors, not ones smaller than a pixel.

I don't think mirrorless are there yet for low light work.
Click to expand...
I don't know which mirrorless cameras you have tried, but your experience does not match mine.
I was sceptical of EVF for a long time, coming from the big, bright OVF on my Sony A900 FF DSLR. None of the EVF in the A-Mount DSLR Sony's was good enough, the EVF in my A6000 was OK (rather than good), but that camera was fro when I wanted small and light, for travel, so accepted it as a compromise.
I now have a Sony A7iv, and while I don't feel the EVF is as 'immersive' as the OVF on my A900, it is certainly good enough for photography, with no perceptible lag for any of the photography I have done (it kept up with Red Kites feeding at Gigrin Farm), and the benefits of seeing the exposure in real time.
It terms of low light, I find it's superior to my old A900, with no hesitation in the AF, and the improvements in ISO handling mean cleaner shots with more dynamic range.
 
LeeRatters said:
Cameras and Cars for me :)

But in all fairness, the cars been restored quite a few years now so the aggro and main expense is done with :)
Click to expand...
I couldn’t stretch to cars lol. My dad’s side was into cars, a lot. He and my uncle both built a Caterham 7 style kit car. He did banger racing as well. I like cars but from afar, I just want them work, I’m not a tinkerer.
 
ancient_mariner said:
Replying to @Petrochemist good point. I still have a Sony A58, IR converted D70, Minolta 7000, Nikon F301, Bronica ETR. All except the Bronica have been used in the last 5 years alongside my usual Sony A7III system.
Click to expand...
All my IR converted cameras are mirrorless. It;s one place where I find DSLRs limited. With a full spectrum converted mirrorless I can see through any filter & keep full flexibility.
My K100d did record IR, but framing was guesswork & focus a little unpredictable.
My A7ii is FS converted & must be my most used nirrorless camera now.
 
I currently use a Nikon D600, a couple of Sony SLT-A65s, half a dozen assorted M43 cameras and various small sensor cameras.

They are all capable of providing images that please me, if I choose the right subject from the right position at the right time. At the end of the day a camera is just a light tight box with a lens at one end and a sensor at the other, the real work occurs in the squidgy stuff behind your eyes and between your ears.

That said, cameras are fun things to play with and there's more than enough different designs to keep most of us happily occupied for a long time.
 
Petrochemist said:
All my IR converted cameras are mirrorless. It;s one place where I find DSLRs limited. With a full spectrum converted mirrorless I can see through any filter & keep full flexibility.
My K100d did record IR, but framing was guesswork & focus a little unpredictable.
My A7ii is FS converted & must be my most used nirrorless camera now.
Click to expand...
I've got several IR converted DSLRs and mirrorless beats them because the DSLR viewfinder focus system is not designed for infrared light. Some cameras can find tune the focus to compensate but it isn't perfect on zoom lenses (who cares at f/9) I sometimes use live view for focusing, which is effectively the same as mirrorless.
One good thing about DSLRs in infrared is lots of the best lenses are older F mount ones so I get autofocus on them.
 
Erty said:
I've got several IR converted DSLRs and mirrorless beats them because the DSLR viewfinder focus system is not designed for infrared light. Some cameras can find tune the focus to compensate but it isn't perfect on zoom lenses (who cares at f/9) I sometimes use live view for focusing, which is effectively the same as mirrorless.
One good thing about DSLRs in infrared is lots of the best lenses are older F mount ones so I get autofocus on them.
Click to expand...
IR AF is unreliable on DSLRs to the extent that conversion companies offer to re-calibrate AF to your preferred lens. All of the focus aids in my converted mirrorless cameras work just as well in IR as in visual. Using the A7ii with my Techart pro I can even get AF with manual focus lenses. I think the only F mount lens I've used for IR is my Zenitar fisheye which I use on the Techart. :)
 
All the top end Nikon DSLRs from about 2010 have AF fine tune which you can set for about 10 lenses. It which works reasonably well in IR for at least one focal length on each lens. I tend to set it on my preferred focal length in a zoom range. At F/8 it'll have the entire range in focus.

It is pretty easy to recalibrate the focus system on a Nikon DSLR. You just take off the bottom and turn the allen key which moves the focus point forward and back.

But mirrorless or live view don't need that and are better.
 
Erty said:
It is pretty easy to recalibrate the focus system on a Nikon DSLR. You just take off the bottom and turn the allen key which moves the focus point forward and back.
Click to expand...
Surely you have to wind up the clockwork motor first though , and bifirculate the reverse aligned spring hmmmmm
 
The d80 turned up, as did the lens. It feels surpassingly competent. I expect the autofocus to be terrible but it’s actually pretty good. The dynamic range is pretty bad, I expected as much though. ISO 800 is probably the highest you’d want to use really. I like it though, for £40 you can’t moan
 
Nebular89 said:
The d80 turned up, as did the lens. It feels surpassingly competent. I expect the autofocus to be terrible but it’s actually pretty good. The dynamic range is pretty bad, I expected as much though. ISO 800 is probably the highest you’d want to use really. I like it though, for £40 you can’t moan
Click to expand...

IIRC Older Nikon enthusiast AF tended to struggle as light levels dropped. I had a D610 for a while, and with a 50 f1.8 wide open it could never lock focus in a dark pub, even though the focus confirmation light worked perfectly. Hope you have fun with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top