Do any of our more experienced photographers have any experience with the Fuji X100, Nikon V1, or similar cameras?
I have young children, so I want something that can focus and take pictures relatively quickly. I’m wondering if these mirrorless options might be a good DSLR substitute for an amateur like myself.
I don’t know about other mirrorless cameras, but I have an X100 and it’s a very special-purpose camera - probably not what you’re looking for. I think it’s intended for artists and enthusiasts who like to control everything. If you loved using a manual-focus, manual-exposure film camera with a 50mm fixed lens and miss the experience, the X100 is the closest you can get to that experience with a digital camera. (And I don’t mean that dismissively; I loved my Nikon FM2 and I love my X100.)
Yeah, I’m okay with that, but I was thinking you could change lenses on the X100. No idea why I thought that.
I’m wondering if these cameras are going to allow me to mess with depth of field, how flexible the aperture is, etc.
All the mirrorless systems I’m familiar with are slower-focusing than DSLRs. They’re really not optimal for action photography (although they are good cameras in other respects).
That’s going to depend entirely on which lens you have on the camera (same as a DSLR). Optically, these systems resemble DSLRs (well, except for the Fuji X100, which is a fixed-prime-lens camera). They just focus a bit more slowly than a DSLR (although faster than the typical point and shoot), and they lack an optical viewfinder. Some models can be fitted with an optional electronic viewfinder, but using the electronic viewfinder generally precluded using a flash gun, which could be an issue if you want to photograph your kids indoors (where bouncing a flash off the wall or ceiling can really help).
That’s my understanding, though the V1 is supposed to be super fast in that regard. However, it only has 4 lenses and the 10mm is only f/2.8. The lenses just seem to be slow.
The newer ones are starting to have focus speed and image quality thats as good as entry DSLR’s, and sometimes better. Eg Panasonic GH1, NEX7, Olympus Pen 3. Same claimed for Nikon’s focus speed but havent read a review for them yet myself.
Their main limitations are the lens ranges available but if if you’re only looking to cover the standard ranges with a zoom lens or two, they’re pretty good now if you’re not looking for really high end lens quality, eg a 17-55mm 2.8 equivalent.
The only brand Id maybe avoid is Olympus because they’re having some pretty serious financial scandals hitting the news at the moment. Even they would be fine if you’re happy to risk not being able to upgrade in the future…
Otara
Thanks, everyone. I want to take a look at the Fuji LX that may be announced in the next couple of months, but I’m leaning towards pulling the trigger on a D7000. The size of the mirrorless cameras is just so damn attractive.
If you’re attracted by the size of mirrorless cameras but want the features of DSLRs, there are better compromises out there. The D3100 is 0.6 lb lighter than the D7000, for example.
The GH2 is currently the most DSLR-like of the of the mirrorless clan and it sports an adequate built-in EVF, top of the class focus speed ( for m4/3, anyway ) and a decent lens selection. However if rumors are true the new GH3 should be along in a few months, along with perhaps two new fixed aperture zooms.
The problem you may find with smaller cameras wrt depth of field is that they have so much of it. Smaller sensors have inherently more DoF and it can be hard to isolate the foreground from the background, if that is your thing.
That’s precisely my concern. I’m worried that I won’t be able to get it as shallow as I might want.
Tamerane, have you checked out the NEX-7 yet? I think it might top the GH2.
As a stills camera I’m sure it does. For one thing the Nex series use larger APS-C sensors. The problem with the Sony NEX system as it stands right now is:
a.) bulkier lenses, a result of that larger sensor and
b.) relatively fewer native lenses available.
Also for some folks form factor counts against them. Like I said the GH2 is closest to a traditional DSLR in design. Of course some people dislike that :). But the Olympus/Panasonic m4/3 is a more mature system, especially in terms of available glass ( though much of it is still fairly slow ). I have no doubt that as the NEX system matures it will become an excellent choice. And if you can live with what they have available now, it already is.
I’ve heard good things about Sony’s Translucent Mirror Technology. Two years in a row, these Sony cameras have won Popular Photography’s Camera of the Year.
From last year’s award from the a55:
The A55, Sony’s first DSLR camera to capture video as well as still photos, corrects the vexing problem of autofocus with DSLR video. A** tidy innovation from Sony allows users to track moving subjects and focus automatically when shooting video footage—an option that was previously unavailable or unreliable in DSLRs. The changes also allow the camera to focus and shoot still images much faster than any other camera in its class.**
The other problem with the NEX7 is cost and that its not really available yet.
The review says its about the same as other mirrorless for AF and sometimes worse than the Pan and Oly leaders. Great camera in many ways but not a sports camera.
Otara