Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 87 of 87
  1. #1
    always licking the glass
    Reputation: stripes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    2,018

    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?

    After a non-biking trip and carting around 3 lenses and my DSLR for two weeks, I realized how much I like shooting with a nice camera over my phone. I'm not looking to upgrade my phone, but possibly change to a lighter camera setup.

    That said, does mirrorless camera make sense? I'm looking for:
    - Still the same functionality as my Canon 60D
    - The ability to switch to different lenses
    - Be lighter so I can actually carry it around more often, even possibly biking.

    I realize it's a bit of an investment, but before I even start going down the research of it of all, can someone who's done this give me the positives and negatives of doing this (other than the lighter part)? Thanks!
    Guerrilla Gravity BAMF, Colorado Front Range
    https://classifieds.mtbr.com/showpro...product=116154

  2. #2
    Young, Shawn Young
    Reputation: Redmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,151
    There is no getting around that mirrorless is smaller. Weight savings? I guess to a degree until you start carrying multiple lenses. I had the Nikon d50 I think it was and went Sony mirrorless and never looked back. I have the a6000 and the a6500 with about 7 lenses and love it . Also I carry a Sony rx100mva in my top bar bag that has the same sensor as above and takes great pictures! If you want to carry the a6000 you can. Throw the very. Small Sony 35 on there and you have a very small set up that your happy with all day!

    Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
    "Im just going to explore a little bit..."

    Dont make me be the bad guy...

    Do I need a pass to ride this trail?

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ocnLogan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    900
    I shoot with a Nikon D750 (full frame DSLR), but I only recently acquired it. I shot with a D7000 (crop sensor, similar to your 60D) for 6 years before that, but never took it biking (but have hiked on several multi-night trips with it).

    Mirror less is lighter... but not as much as you may think, if comparing apples to apples. The body is smaller, but many of the lenses have extra length to them (not all though). So depending on which mirrorless camera you are thinking, and which lenses, you may not save as much weight/bulk as you are thinking.

    Have you considered going micro 4/3? Itís a step below a crop sensor in sensor size, but still fairly large, and has a huge selection of lenses (since the standard is used by many manufactures, instead of just one).

    Full disclosure, Iíve never used a mirrorless ILC. But in my mind they have a few main advantages over a DSLR.

    No autofocus fine tune worries. A mirrorless always focuses exactly.
    WYSIWYG viewfinder. So what you see, in the viewfinder, is what the photo will look like so you donít have to check afterwards to see how exposed the photo is.
    Good at video.
    Wider autofocus area coverage than a DSLR (not always, but often).

    And a few negatives.

    Battery life
    Electronic viewfinder is imperfect, sometimes laggy
    Autofocus performance is not always up to the same level as DSLRs (though the high end ones now are very good. Just really depends on the model).

    And the ideal camera for you will likely depend on what you want to use the camera for.

    After a lot of research and thinking about it, I stuck with a DSLR (vs going mirrorless) when I upgraded to the d750, because I love long battery life, never take video, already had a lens or two that worked with it... and it worked with my version of Lightroom (pre-subscription version). Not sure if Iíd be ever cycle with it though, unless maybe if I was doing bike packing or something like that anyway.

    But mirrorless options are better than ever now. Just really depends on what youíre looking for.

  4. #4
    saddlemeat
    Reputation: bsieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,843
    Mirrorless is ideal for outdoor use, much smaller gear bag, still enough weight to produce good sharp images. I use an a5000 primarily, great images, tough as my impact driver, battered but not broken, utterly reliable, a digital shrunken M Leica.

    Do you use Photoshop for editing?
    I ride with the best dogs.




  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: johnnyspoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    969
    camera size is a website I've found handy. For instance, here's what your 60d would look like with attached 18-135mm lens, vs a M6 mark ii with 18-150mm lens. *************/37R1pQx

    HTML Code:
    *************/37R1pQx
    Ok, so sorry, I can't figure out how to attach a link. Anyway, camerasize.com Look for the tab cameras with lenses, and play to your hearts content.
    I'm looking forward to regretting this.......

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ocnLogan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    900
    The camera body of a mirrorless camera is always going to have the ability to be smaller (it doesn't have a mirror box), there is no way "around" that. And on the camera forums out there, this has been a topic of hot debate for years and years. Plenty of articles/forum posts out there if you want to dig deeper into that.

    But basically, lenses for any given sensor size, will always need to be fairly similar in size, because its the size of the image circle (and the aperture) that determines most of the lens size, not the size of the body it connects to.

    That said, in some cases, the shorter potential mounting distance of the mirrorless does allow for a different optical design technique, making for smaller lenses (wide angle lenses only AFAIK).

    So if depending on how many lenses you carry, and what type they are, the total system weight/size may not be all that much different.

    A flip side to the smaller physical size, is often times mirrorless cameras have less physical places for buttons, and are smaller/slipperier to hold, especially if wet. This is primarily an issue with larger lenses (large aperture telephoto lenses) that are weighty. Just because it gives the camera/lens setup an unbalanced weight distribution. Most smaller cameras are harder to use with gloves too (again, probably not an issue, but some people care a lot about that).

    Anyway, just pointing out that while there are clear differences, its not quite as clear cut as "mirrorless is better". Like most things, its better at some things, and not as good at others.

    If you're looking for smaller/lighter kit, the easiest way to do it is to shrink the sensor size. Because that shrinks the required size of lenses, and everything else.

    I'd seriously consider the Panisonic GX85 (or similar micro 4:3 camera) if you're looking for a small ILC (Interchangeable Lens Camera).

    https://www.amazon.com/PANASONIC-12-...2569274&sr=8-3

    It is listed in DPReviews most recent "Best bargain cameras of 2020" list as well. You can find a link there to their full review if you're interested.

    https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/buy...-bargains#gx85

    And here is a useful tool comparing sizes of cameras and lenses. You can see how much smaller the GX85 is than your 60D.

    https://camerasize.com/compare/#100,673

    Anyway, good luck with whatever you do .

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chrisx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    704
    Nikon Z mirrorless looks the best to me.
    https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-pr.../overview.page
    They have been out for a while now, so it should be about time for a sale of some kind.
    Be sure to get the lens adaptor so you can use over 300 Nikor lenses, while you wait for and save up for the newest Z line lens.

    I will get mine before to much longer.

    Best part of their sales pitch,
    weatherproof and robust.


    A couple of things to consider;

    Weatherproofing. This is a mt bike forum, not a photos out the window of a Cadillac forum.

    Sensor size. Bigger sensors take better pictures, for a price.

    Lens compatibility. Camera lenses are not universal. If you buy a Fuji camera body, you will be buying Fugi lenses. Nikon Body? = Nikor lenses. Get it?

    Choose your brand carefully. You get to expand on that brand for years to come.
    Lens adapters do exist, and have a down side as well as an up side.

    I resisted and thought about it long enough. Nikon Z is in the near future for me.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ocnLogan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    900
    Quote Originally Posted by chrisx View Post
    A couple of things to consider;

    Weatherproofing. This is a mt bike forum, not a photos out the window of a Cadillac forum.
    I can confirm weatherproofing being useful, even if you're not necessarily buying a camera exclusively for mountain biking photos. It really does bring some peace and mind.

    This last summer I hiked 35 miles of the "wonderland" trail around Mt Rainier. Three days/4 nights of hiking, and it rained ~75% of the time (including the entirety of at least one 12hr day of hiking).

    I carried my D7000 in my hand/around my neck for almost the entirety of the trip (I did put i in my pack a few times during more intense rain periods a few times). The D7000 has weather sealing, and while it got rained on a lot, it never once had a problem.

    Thats a more extreme example (4 days of constant rain, being out in the open, and stored wet). But its also come in handy shooting portraits of friends/family (a cloudburst when out at the park/etc).

    And I nearly went for the Z series. Its wonderful... but the lenses are very expensive right now. I went for an older DSLR, as it let me reuse my current SD cards, a lens or two, and not need to pay for a new editing program. But the next one after this one might be mirrorless.

    Anecdotally, the camera I HAVE carried with my on a few rides, has been my Panasonic ZS100. Its a 1in sensor non interchangeable lens camera. But it is very compact, has a 25-250mm equivalent lens, thats F2.8 -5.6, and has very accessible manual controls. If the Micro 4/3 cameras are still too large for the OP, this might be another type of camera to consider.
    Last edited by ocnLogan; 02-26-2020 at 11:38 PM.

  9. #9
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,716
    The only real drawback to modern mirrorless is the investment.

    If you can afford it, do it.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    23

    no more Canon EF mount lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by stripes View Post
    After a non-biking trip and carting around 3 lenses and my DSLR for two weeks, I realized how much I like shooting with a nice camera over my phone. I'm not looking to upgrade my phone, but possibly change to a lighter camera setup.

    That said, does mirrorless camera make sense? I'm looking for:
    - Still the same functionality as my Canon 60D
    - The ability to switch to different lenses
    - Be lighter so I can actually carry it around more often, even possibly biking.

    I realize it's a bit of an investment, but before I even start going down the research of it of all, can someone who's done this give me the positives and negatives of doing this (other than the lighter part)? Thanks!
    Keep in mind that Canon announced recently they will no longer be releasing EF mount lenses, the ones found on their DSLR bodies like 5D4, 1DX3, i don't think that means EF-S lenses on crop bodies like the 60D, but Canon and any major player has made the move to mirrorless. Eventually Canon crop system DSLR's might go away too, or at least get smaller. Nikon ditched 1/3 of its line up in DSLR cameras to mirrorless as well, hoping to bring back some much lost ground financially in their camera business. Mirrorless, It is where the companies are now spending the majority of their money and effort developing imaging tools.
    Sony ILC's like the A6400 is a really good compact aps-c format with excellent image quality, even their full frame bodies are smaller than some micro 4/3 cameras. You could consider this.....rent a camera and a few lenses from Lenserentals.com or borrowlenses.com and see what mirrorless is like.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chrisx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    704
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    The only real drawback to modern mirrorless is the investment.

    If you can afford it, do it.
    All full frame cameras are to expensive.
    A plan for the next ten or fifteen years is what a person needs. Choose carefully the brand and type of camera you want.

    Me. As I grow older I will spend less time riding my bicycle for weeks in the desert, or getting rained on in the pnw. And more time walking the hills of nw Wyoming, like I did as a child.

    Nikon mirrorless sounds like what I need to photograph animals around Clouds Home, Wy.

    Keep in mind where you travel to vs how much you spend.
    I am in Barranquilla Colombia. Home of the world's second largest carnaval. An industrial port town where cocaine is expensive and wages are low. (I drink water and smoke nothing at all.) I still have the rx100v I paid $900 and something for. I got a couple of bruises holding onto it with both hands as tight as I could. I stopped taking pictures of the parades and only take pictures of my little friend Venezolana Nikky the last few days.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    23
    Full frame is expensive, but like most things, you get what you pay for. If you want the best IQ, nothing beats full frame. Does crop have good IQ? Yes if executed well they can deliver the goods. Though Nikon might work for you, there are good and better choices out there depending on what a person wants or needs.

  13. #13
    psycho cyclo addict
    Reputation: edubfromktown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,873
    I'm still going strong with a Nikon D5600 DSLR. It is quite small (especially when I go out with just a prime lens). Also, the newer/lighter kit lenses have a lock position which is kina nice particularly on some of the rocky/rooty trails I ride.

    If I go mirrorless, it is definitely going to be a Fuji XT-4
    【ツ】 eDub 【ツ】

    Gravel bike w/ MTB tires
    Rigid steel SS 29er
    Rigid titanium SS 27.5
    Full suspension 29er
    Hard Tail 29er

  14. #14
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,716
    Quote Originally Posted by DeeGeeCee View Post
    Does crop have good IQ?

    Acceptable until you're talking low light, and then crop isn't even close to full frame.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ocnLogan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    900
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Acceptable until you're talking low light, and then crop isn't even close to full frame.
    As Mike said, that is basically true. To be more specific, a full frame sensor should always have ~1 stop better low light performance, as the sensor is twice the size of a crop sensor.

    The other factor though, is that it kind of depends on which generation of sensors we're talking about though. As newer sensors have better high ISO performance than old sensors.

    But if you're talking roughly the same generation, then full frame will pretty much always be better. And this is assuming you're using the same aperature lenses on both cameras.

    Also, for reference, a Micro 4/3 camera should be almost another stop worse than the crop sensors (its 30% smaller than a crop sensor). But its still 9 times larger than what you'd get with your stereotypical point and shoot camera/phone.

    If you look at the reviews on DPreview.com, they have a test scene they shoot with every camera. They let you do side by side comparisons with a bunch of different models all at once, at either the same, or different ISO values.

    https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d780-review/6

    The list of cameras in the tool isn't exhaustive, but its pretty good. You can easily compare a 70D(cannon crop sensor), to a micro 4/3 camera , and modern full frame pretty easily.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chrisx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    704
    Quote Originally Posted by DeeGeeCee View Post
    Though Nikon might work for you, there are good and better choices out there depending on what a person wants or needs.
    Care to elaborate on that?
    But kindly read what Logan posted first?


    Quote Originally Posted by ocnLogan View Post
    I carried my D7000 in my hand/around my neck for almost the entirety of the trip (I did put i in my pack a few times during more intense rain periods a few times). The D7000 has weather sealing, and while it got rained on a lot, it never once had a problem.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ocnLogan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    900
    I would assume that DeeGeeCee is just mentioning that what is important to you/I, may not be whats important to any other person. And maybe not just weather sealing, but I read that comment as mentioning other features as well.

    Weather sealing is something I'll look for in any ILC camera moving forward (personally), but if I still lived in CA/AZ... that may not be as much of a priority.

    I've been looking through my photos of that trip, trying to find some that do justice to how much rain/water there was... and its not working out. I wasn't taking as many photos in the truely wet bits (I carried it close to my chest, almost under where my baseball hat was, trying to minimize the water contact... as even though its weather sealed... it felt prudent to at least try to take care of it).

    Also, as I was the only person really taking photos... there aren't really any photos of me where you can see me holding the camera.

    Here is one photo from the trip I was fairly happy with though.

    It is a bit out of focus :/. But it turns out, if you round a corner, and then suddenly see a full grown bear 50ft in front of you, your hands aren't as steady as they typically are :/ (or, at least mine weren't). The next shot was technically better, but the bear looks much better in this one.


  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Klainmeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    666
    I'll chime in here:

    I used to shoot Large Format and Medium Format film (still do sometimes) and bought a D750 when it first came out and used it for a while. I eventually bought a Panasonic GX8 for travel reasons and really fell in love with the M43 format despite coming from the larger formats.

    Currently I use a Panasonic G9 with 7-14mm F4, 12-35mm F2.8, and 35-100mm F2.8. Benefits of this setup are: insanely fast FPS (both the 6k hybrid mode as well as e-shutter and lastly mechanical shutter), weather sealing, roughly 6 stops of stabilization, and people tracking continous autofocus. The size difference between a M43 35-100 F2.8 and a Nikon 70-200mm F2.8 is comical. I can carry the body + 2 lenses for the weight of just one of the FF lenses.

    Downsides: less subject seperation and poor low-light performance. Realistically, these aren't issues I find when riding/shooting, but they are worth noting.

    There's always pixel-peepers that will crap on anything M43, but in real life situations with good glass its a non-issue. I carry a camera more, which yields more pictures and being able to shoot a meaningful 2.8 vs stopping down to 5.6 because the subject is too thin is very useful.

    Here's a gallery of shots, 95% G9 or GX8: Mountain Biking - Kyle Klain Photography

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chrisx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    704
    Quote Originally Posted by Klainmeister View Post
    Here's a gallery of shots, 95% G9 [/url]
    Sensor Size 17.3 x 13 mm

    Good shots, worth a click.


    As far as ,
    good and better choices out there

    Could be different from one mind to another.
    With delusions of grandeur, wanting to see a 5 foot tall photo of mine on a wall somewhere. I clicked medium format mirrorless.

    100 megapixels, 150 megapixels. man oh man.
    About the price of a Dodge pickup truck.,

    Then I dropped a nickel on the ground and bent over to pick it up.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKxodgpyGec

    Change in my pocket wasn't enough

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    23
    Nikon is not for everyone, anymore than Sony, Canon, Panasonic, Olympus, Fuji and so on are. Sony works for me quite well, Olympus and Panasonic did not work out, Canon was ok, i rented and tried out both Fuji and Nikon before jumping to Sony. It is just a matter of ones needs. Everyone's needs are as different as the cameras themselves. Thats all i am saying. Do a decent amount of research before buying and you will end up with something good.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Klainmeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    666
    Yep, horses for courses. If i'm riding something properly technical like TWE or our local Rio en Medio trail, I'm carrying something small and light. Big glass can be a big PIA.

    OTH, also considering a A7R III with a few primes -- FF and hi-res with fast glass. Now that could work! But the entry price is pretty ridiculous.

    Rent if you can, sometimes ergonimics play a bigger role than most like to admit as well.

  22. #22
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,716
    I'm mirrorless curious, but I'll never go back to crop.

    I may only shoot a ~dozen of these per year, but you simply don't get this kind of detail with crop, regardless of lens.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-8a3a5167.jpg  

    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-screen-shot-2019-12-19-7.23.49-pm.jpg  


  23. #23
    saddlemeat
    Reputation: bsieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,843
    Awesome comments above, I too am looking to dip a toe into FX waters. I'll start with a used A7xx that can clunk around the mountain with me, nothing too nice, which adapts to my crop lenses, then start acquiring some primes. I like 'em wide and it's all about the lenses. I'm a print maker too, no such thing as too big of a file in my world.
    I ride with the best dogs.




  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mudguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,417
    I bought the Sony A6600 yesterday, a step up from my RX100IV, which has been brilliant once you navigate Sony's horrible menus.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    96
    The Sony A73 is an amazing camera. I have carried it at some very important events ,for me, with a 50 F1.8 and have not regretted it. You figure out how to work around the menu's. The Nikon sits, unless the lights come on and they start passing a football.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chrisx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    704
    The thing about using adaptors:
    They change the number of mm the glass is from the sensor.
    If a lens was made to be 7 millimeters from the sensor or mirror and you use an adaptor it might now be 11 or 13 mm from the sensor. people argue about the pros and cons for hours on end. Cons do exist with a non native lens.
    I recently learned that a crop lens only uses 44% of a full frame sensor. Few threads down this page is where I learned that.
    In for a penny in for a pound. Must be an old saying from waaaay back when a penny could buy something.

    ďthe best camera is the one you have with you,Ē and we truly believe that.
    https://www.creativelive.com/blog/us...aphy-settings/
    If I google best night camera, Nikon pops up most everywhere.


    Click here for a while
    https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ocnLogan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    900
    Thatís true about adapters, to a point.

    One of the reasons that the new Nikon Z mount is interesting, to native flange distance is very short. This means you can adapt almost anything hung to it, as there is enough space for the adapter, and make sure the adapted lens stays at its native ďlens to sensorĒ distance. Sonyís full frame mount is somewhat similar (just not as much space for adapters).

    And full frame sensors are designed around a known standard size (same as a 35mm piece of film). But crop sensors arenít the same way, so each brand is going to be a slightly different percentage of full frames sensor size. Offhand I recall that cannons crop sensors are smaller than nikons (1.6 crop factor vs 1.5). I canít recall any others at the moment, but they were all in the same basic area of 40-50% of the size.

    And again, itís primarily sensor size that determines lens sizes (at a given aperture/focal length). So mirrorless or DSLR, if youíre carrying a bunch of lenses, the overall difference in kit weight isnít huge usually. The actual camera itself comes down to what is most important to you, as both mirrorless and dslrs have their pros and cons (just like bikes ).

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    23

    A73 and A7R3

    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    I'm mirrorless curious, but I'll never go back to crop.

    I may only shoot a ~dozen of these per year, but you simply don't get this kind of detail with crop, regardless of lens.
    A73 Balloon shot at 5000 ISO, A7R Sunrise at 50 ISO. Both shot with the same lens, Sony GM 16-35 f 2.8.
    Just backs up what you said Mikesee.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-a7r00687-copy.jpg  

    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-a7305478-rhbf.jpg  


  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chrisx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    704
    Pale in comparison to the above star photos.

    rx100v
    A 1 inch sensor (13 x 12 mm), does not do well at a high iso or capture a lot of details at night.

    I seldom turn it up past iso 250.

    Some things just work better than others.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chrisx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    704
    Quote Originally Posted by ocnLogan View Post
    Thatís true about adapters, to a point.

    One of the reasons that the new Nikon Z mount is interesting, to native flange distance is very short. This means you can adapt almost anything hung to it, as there is enough space for the adapter, and make sure the adapted lens stays at its native ďlens to sensorĒ distance.
    This is what tips the scale in favor of Nikon.
    I mean other than the weather proofing.
    While other brands come out with a new lens to camera interface all to often.
    Nikon has a corporate policy.

    True to the lens.

    If you paid way to much for a Nikor lens every few years, You can still use them on your new Nikon 850 Camera, or whatever the latest and greatest is when the time comes.

    Most if not all other major camera makers switch things around,
    Quote Originally Posted by DeeGeeCee View Post
    no more Canon EF mount lenses
    the same way a 12 speed cassette does not fit your old bicycle. You need a whole new setup to switch to modern. ... .

    If you buy the z6, and a lens once a year for the next five or eight years, when it comes time to buy a z17 or whatever the latest and greatest is in 2029, Nikon is the only safe bet to still be using the same lens to camera interface. Other brands change the interface and you need all new lenses because the adaptor, well, is less than perfect.

    Nikon did not switch the interface until they removed the mirror from the camera.

    Looking to the future,
    Mirrorless will leave the single-lens reflex camera sitting next to the 26er.
    Don't get me wrong, I still ride my 26er, but my 29er is better for a number of reasons and most of the time.

    Quote Originally Posted by stripes View Post
    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?!
    Depends how much you like photography? Not a cheap hobby.
    All modern cameras take better pictures than the older models.
    Switching to full frame requires a strategy and plans for the future.

    Itīs your money.
    Most any late model camera can print out a 8 x 10 good enough.

    On a quiet street where old ghosts meet
    I see her walking now
    Away from me so hurriedly
    My reason must allow

    That I had loved not as I should

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dobt...8P_HoP&index=7

    There are other ways to spend all your money besides cameras.
    If you want to walk with Venezolana on a quiet street you need an airplane ticket to South America.

    The modern world has changed. Do all the electronic gadgets make us happy or keep us from happiness?

    Same Mayan girl 5 years ago.

    Five years ago she and her grandmother made belts and sold them in the park. She smiled at you until you bought one. No phone.
    Today she sells bags made in China. Maya chino. Few people know she ordered them on her phone. She doesn't smile anymore. Beep beep beep all day every day.
    Last edited by chrisx; 03-01-2020 at 11:21 AM.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    409
    lmfao @ "mirrorless is smaller and lighter"



    i mean, if i switch to the 10-18 lens, maybe =)

    granted, i went from a crop body (80d) to full frame (eos r), so not truly apples to apples

    rambling aside, size is the absolute last reason i went mirrorless. hell, the body now rocks the bg-e22 battery grip full tine as well, so if anything, i despise smaller camera bodies.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-20191023_160435-01.jpg  


  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    142
    I bought a Leica SL last year, so my answer is "Yes mirrorless is worth it."
    And the comments about full frame sensors costing more but giving better results is also true.

    The comments about lens being more heavy for a mirrorless body aren't necessarily accurate, it depends on which lenses you buy.

    The bottom line is and the correct answer depends upon the person behind the camera. Only you can say if the upgrade is worth the cost.

    My advice, don't shop based upon pixel count. More pixels do not equal better pictures. Large pixels offer advantages over small pixels. Many pros feel the large pixels render the image as more natural while more pixels may offer more digital data, but also, more digital noise as well. Similar to the cd vs vinyl debates.

    Go to the Leica forum and read the comparisons there. Every possible comparison has been made along with experiments using non native lenses so you can see what really works and what doesn't. Even though it is a Leica based and funded forum, the comparisons are genuine and many guys have other brands for traveling on Safari and other places that you may not want to carry $20,000 or $30,000 worth of gear due to security issues.

    There are great options out there, you just need to be open minded and educate yourself and avoid the marketing biases that exist.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chrisx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    704
    Quote Originally Posted by A/C in Az View Post
    Go to the Leica forum and read the comparisons there.

    educate yourself and avoid the marketing biases that exist.
    Got a link to the Leica forum?
    Seems there exists more than one forum talking about Leica cameras.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mudguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,417
    Quote Originally Posted by A/C in Az View Post
    I bought a Leica SL last year, so my answer is "Yes mirrorless is worth it."
    I just looked up what that camera costs here in New Zealand. Not sure I'd be putting that in my Camelbak!!

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ocnLogan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    900
    Anything Leica is going to be pretty pricey, itís just kind of how it works.

    For me, mirrorless vs dslr is mostly down to which pros and cons you want to live with. Price, bulk, battery life, image fine tune, etc. Pick whatever works for you and your budget.

    And then sensor size I choose to take on a specific outing is dependent on what Iím doing. If Iím going on the trip explicitly to take photos, then the big sensor, and nice glass are coming out, weight and bulk is a secondary concern. If Iím going out and just going to be taking Incidental photos, then a more compact camera is coming.

    My Panasonic ZS100 is easy to carry along, and is good enough quality to share online, or print in reasonable sizes (in good light). Iíd also seriously consider a micro 4:3 like the Panasonic GX85 for the same use case if I wanted to change lenses. Doesnít hurt that it is available with a lens for under $400 iirc.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Klainmeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    666
    Lenses are the biggest difference, it's hugely important, especially considering 2.8 is 2.8 no matter. Here's a direct comparison of the difference between the G9 and D750 with the same lens (as in focal length, f stop). Hence taking the G9 is much easier.

    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-lenssize.jpg

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ocnLogan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    900
    Quote Originally Posted by Klainmeister View Post
    Lenses are the biggest difference, it's hugely important, especially considering 2.8 is 2.8 no matter. Here's a direct comparison of the difference between the G9 and D750 with the same lens (as in focal length, f stop). Hence taking the G9 is much easier.

    Just wanting to make sure something is clear here with the comparison photo.

    The image is comparing lenses of similar equivalent focal length and F stop, for different sensor sizes. Meaning, the difference you see in the lens sizes is due to how large the lens must make the image circle, not due to the fact that one is mirrorless and the other is a DSLR.

    As I said before, lenses for DSLRs and mirrorless cameras are mostly equivalent in size, as long as youíre comparing the same sensor size, focal length and aperture. Meaning, you donít see a huge difference in the size of lenses between the two types. There are some exceptions to this (mostly wide angle lenses where mirrorless cameras I allow a different design to be used for the lens), but itís a pretty good rule of thumb, and its really just down to the physics of getting enough light in for the sensor.

    Some links showing what I'm talking about. For the record... this is a pain in the butt. MTBR destroys the links that camerasize generates, no matter how I link it.

    Like this.
    *************/2VMkpNp
    So I had to manually screenshot/save/upload .

    Sony A7 RIV (full frame mirrorless) vs Nikon D750 (full frame DSLR), both with their 12-24mm F4 native lenses.


    Same cameras, with their native 85mm F1.8 lenses.


    Now both with their native 70-200 F2.8 lenses.



    As you can see, the lenses themselves are pretty equivalent in size, because the light required to cover the sensor is the same, as its the same size sensor for both cameras. There are differences from lens to lens, so its not 100% equivalent for any comparison you care to make, but overall, they are very similar in size IMO. Which is why I say that if you're carrying multiple lenses, the size advantage of mirrorless camera bodies really isn't a big deal in most circumstances.

    However, once you start changing sensor size, you do start seeing dramatic differences in the size of lenses, like the comparison between the Panasonic G9, and the Nikon D750 shown in the post above. Because a 2.8 lens is a 2.8 lens, as mentioned. Itís just that a full frame lens needs to collect 4x more light, to create an image circle big enough to cover its 2x larger sensor with the same F2.8. So naturally itís lens is dramatically larger.

    Which is why many of us keep saying If the purpose is to drop the size/weight of the kit youíre carrying around, then the easiest way to do that, is to drop sensor size.

    A micro 4:3 camera like the G9/GX85 is a great compromise. You still get a wide array of lenses to choose from, and good image quality, with a much smaller and lighter load to carry with you. It just comes with some loss of image quality (mostly in low, to extremely low light conditions), and most (all?) happen to be mirrorless cameras, which may be a pro, or con, depending on your preferences/viewpoints.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-12-24.png  

    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-85.png  

    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-70-200.png  


  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Klainmeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    666
    That's my only problem with the Z series, the flange distance kinda negates the smaller possible lens size, so you end up with pretty darn large primes, even though it's mirrorless. They're twice the size of comparable Sony FE.

  39. #39
    Loud tyres save lives
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    505
    I find like for like mirrorless setups don't tend to be a significant weight or size saving and some of the lenses that look smaller are because they're a dimmer aperture like a 24-70/4 rather than a 24-70/2.8. There are some compact setups but it's usually from a non like for like build but definitely possible depending on what's needed.

    The main reason I feel for going mirrorless is for the capabilities as they have great video which is more convenient than a DSLR, better liveview and increasingly impressive burst speeds and AF performance with Sony's A9 series offering ridiculous speeds.

    I did like the 1in based Sony RX100 series cameras for my carry around camera but a couple of years ago picked up the Sony RX1r. It is old these days, lacks IS and decent video but it's fairly small overall and one of the smallest FF cameras, the 35mm F2 is sharp and the sensor is still good for dynamic range and high iso as well as usable shallow DoF.
    2014 Trek Fuel Ex 8
    2015 Trek Farley 6
    2016 Trek Stache 7

  40. #40
    saddlemeat
    Reputation: bsieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,843
    Just because you can go big doesn't mean you have to, be like Galen Rowel. If you need more detail there's always medium format, which stunts FX. It's about the picture... who makes big prints anymore anyhow?

    edit:
    I carry Sony a 16/2.8 and 55-210/4.5-6.3 OSS with my apsc a5000. Lots of bang for the package size.

    Most of my prints are 13x19 or less, anything larger doesn't sell. Few have much wall space it seems.

    Photoshop skills can be a significant part of the gear package.
    Last edited by bsieb; 03-05-2020 at 09:52 AM.
    I ride with the best dogs.




  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Hulka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    89
    I have recently ditched my faithful 7D after 10 years and purchased and EOS R. Camera is lighter, smaller by a smidge. Once you attach the 28-70 RF lens it is a beast. The 70-200 is a little lighter but my not be the focal length you want. It takes great pictures and the detail the RF lensís captures is amazing but the RF lens are pricey.

    No one mentioned it but why not rent a 28-300 lens and try it? Covers a bunch of the focal lengths of a few lenses. Downfall is f stop changes at longer focal lengths and pricey.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

  42. #42
    Loud tyres save lives
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    505
    Quote Originally Posted by bsieb View Post
    Just because you can go big doesn't mean you have to, be like Galen Rowel. If you need more detail there's always medium format, which stunts FX. It's about the picture... who makes big prints anymore anyhow?
    .
    It's curious I see this assumption all the time that the only reason to go for a larger format sensor is to print large, while this can be an advantage of larger format sensors there are many other advantages which are what people do buy FF sensors for particularly dynamic range and high iso. Medium format does offer better detail and dynamic range but still relatively niche and sensor development and general practicality lag behind FF, you won't find anything in medium format (or currently APS-C) which can match the likes of the stacked sensor in the A9 or the insane iso 102,400 in the S series.
    2014 Trek Fuel Ex 8
    2015 Trek Farley 6
    2016 Trek Stache 7

  43. #43
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,716
    Quote Originally Posted by bsieb View Post
    It's about the picture... who makes big prints anymore anyhow?
    Very few.

    But they're so much more preferable to smaller!
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-img_0578.jpg  

    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-img_0577.jpg  


  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ocnLogan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    900
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnMcL7 View Post
    It's curious I see this assumption all the time that the only reason to go for a larger format sensor is to print large, while this can be an advantage of larger format sensors there are many other advantages which are what people do buy FF sensors for particularly dynamic range and high iso. Medium format does offer better detail and dynamic range but still relatively niche and sensor development and general practicality lag behind FF, you won't find anything in medium format (or currently APS-C) which can match the likes of the stacked sensor in the A9 or the insane iso 102,400 in the S series.
    The IQ advantages of a FF sensor are more apparent under close observation, and often (not always), FF has more megapixels, making it more ideal for larger display anyway. Usually close observation is "pixel peeping", but also happens when printing large, and usually most apparent when you were shooting in poor light (high ISO noise usually shows up the most in deep shadows).

    My purpose for going to FF was for low light, and depth of field. I tend to shoot mostly candid portraits (going to family reunions and just walking around getting photos of kids/siblings/etc), and the family reunions official photos. Both of which benefit from those traits.

    Beautiful photos Mike .

    I've just barely started printing stuff as I finally have a house, and we can use the stockpile of old photos we took to start decorating. I usually just wait and print when I see that mpix has a good 25-50% off sale.

    This is my biggest print at the moment. I have a 20x30" of this waiting on me to make a frame. Shot with a 16MP, 10 year old D7000. Viewed up close, its not quite as crisp as I'd like, but no one other than me (or maybe a DPReview pixel peeper) will ever really notice/care.

    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-wonderland.jpg

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chrisx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    704
    Quote Originally Posted by Klainmeister View Post
    That's my only problem with the Z series, the flange distance kinda negates the smaller possible lens size, so you end up with pretty darn large primes, even though it's mirrorless. They're twice the size of comparable Sony FE.
    This is a good thing!
    The larger opening lets in more light!

    Nikon says
    ®wider than any full-frame mount available (as of 8/23/18).
    NIKKOR Z lenses are able to deliver improved low-light performance and edge-to-edge detail in both stills and video®
    https://www.nikonusa.com/en/learn-an...nt-system.html

    This is a good thing.

    If I order a 240 hub from componets de it costs a lot less than it does at the lbs. $426 vs 200.84Ä. A Tubus Airy rack is $260 vs 116.81Ä direct from Germany.
    Are Leica cameras the same_? Anybody know a German camera vendor to find out? If a $7,000 camera cost 3,500Ä in Gremany, you have enough money left over to Visit Berlin.

    Ask your self a question. When was the last time I made a print? How big are the prints I make? If you made a couple of 4 x 6 prints last year. You do not need a full frame camera. A 1 inch sensor prints nice clear photos at 6 x 8 inches, but at 12 x 16 inches a person might notice a slight decline in quality. For large prints you need a large sensor.


    Someone might care about the quality of a print?

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,393
    I recently sold my m4/3 (Olympus OM-D E-M1) setup to buy a used D750. The E-M1 was probably good for biking, but I wasn't about to go carrying around a pricey camera and lens like that while i'm out biking. It was a pretty light setup for the pictures it could produce, but in the end it wasn't that small and the pictures weren't that much better than what I can get out of my cell phone (Pixel 3), and I sure didn't need the extra weight in my backpack. And nevermind what would happen to it in a crash...

    I really hated the low light performance of the m4/3 as well, which isn't going to be as much of a problem with a mirrorless. Watching my camera hunt for focus repeatedly while trying to get a picture of my daughter on Santa's lap made me unreasonably angry.

    The D750 is a bigger camera with many of my lenses, but actually still respectably small with some others. For example my Nikon 50mm 1.8g (~$150) makes the entire camera hardly any bigger than my E-M1, and I can always crop to make up for some of the zoom it's missing.

    Anyways, you guys keep buying mirroless and I'll just keep snapping up these cheap used FF lenses. I'm having fun.

  47. #47
    saddlemeat
    Reputation: bsieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,843
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Very few.

    But they're so much more preferable to smaller!
    You have an enviable amount of wall space, nicely done.

    Is this your gear room?
    I ride with the best dogs.




  48. #48
    saddlemeat
    Reputation: bsieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,843
    Quote Originally Posted by chrisx View Post
    This is a good thing!
    The larger opening lets in more light!

    Nikon says
    ®wider than any full-frame mount available (as of 8/23/18).
    NIKKOR Z lenses are able to deliver improved low-light performance and edge-to-edge detail in both stills and video®
    https://www.nikonusa.com/en/learn-an...nt-system.html

    This is a good thing.

    If I order a 240 hub from componets de it costs a lot less than it does at the lbs. $426 vs 200.84Ä. A Tubus Airy rack is $260 vs 116.81Ä direct from Germany.
    Are Leica cameras the same_? Anybody know a German camera vendor to find out? If a $7,000 camera cost 3,500Ä in Gremany, you have enough money left over to Visit Berlin.

    Ask your self a question. When was the last time I made a print? How big are the prints I make? If you made a couple of 4 x 6 prints last year. You do not need a full frame camera. A 1 inch sensor prints nice clear photos at 6 x 8 inches, but at 12 x 16 inches a person might notice a slight decline in quality. For large prints you need a large sensor.


    Someone might care about the quality of a print?
    Lol... so only FX shooters care about the quality of a print? That's the realm of gear geeks who can't make it on their images, usually. Lots more to quality prints than pixel or dot count.
    I ride with the best dogs.




  49. #49
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,716
    Quote Originally Posted by bsieb View Post
    You have an enviable amount of wall space, nicely done.

    Is this your gear room?

    It's the front half of my shop. Ostensibly the "sales floor" or retail area, but because most of my business is online I've never had a use for that ~400 sq feet. Sat empty and unfinished for years before I had the 'aha!' moment to finish it out as such.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chrisx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    704
    Quote Originally Posted by bsieb View Post
    Lol... so only FX shooters care about the quality of a print? That's the realm of gear geeks who can't make it on their images, usually. Lots more to quality prints than pixel or dot count.
    Actually, I was thinking Magdalena's grandmother might care about the quality of the print. When she finally gets it 49 weeks after I took it. And no, there is no print shop with a machine made this century within a 100 miles of her house.

    I was told that the white straw caused the camera to over compensate and make her face to dark.

    Yep, since I did not know that, I have to buy a better camera with a bigger sensor to hide my mistakes.

  51. #51
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,716
    I wonder how long ago the OP checked out of this gear-sturbation.

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    41
    Iím just here for the gear-sturbation party.

    Iím just excited for mirrorless 300mm/400mm F2.8 lenses to come out so I can buy F2.8 lenses for cheap.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chrisx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    704
    I had to find an old card with a photo of stars.
    Because I gave up on the idea of star photos with a 1 inch sensor.

    iso 1600 and 30 seconds. hard to tell the difference between stars and noise.

    If you want better night photos you might have to pay for a better camera.
    Did he say to dream on
    or
    dream until your dreams come true?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHCt...rt_radio=1&t=0

    The fiddle player don't stop playing after dark. You might stop taking his picture after dark depending on which camera you have though.


    OP asked is it worth it?
    The answer is,
    how much do like photography?

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Klainmeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    666
    To answer your question Chris, my typical commissioned prints are between 18-42" longest edge. Last year the largest print I produced was 90" long edge. I print probably 30-60 a year depending.

    I've never once had someone question the camera that created the image, which I think underscores the difference between pixel-peepers and real, on the wall prints. That, and learning various photo software is probably worth 10x any gear acquisition!

    Either way, hard to go wrong with any camera these days. IBIS and video quality, if you're a hybrid shooter, really narrows the list. If you need low-light, get fast glass, if you need zoom, get a better higher-iso camera to compliment the lower f-stop. It's all compromises.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chrisx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    704
    Quote Originally Posted by Klainmeister View Post
    learning various photo software is probably worth 10x any gear acquisition!

    It's all compromises.
    He is not the only one saying that.

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ocnLogan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    900
    At the extremes of low light, sensor size, ISO perf (almost the same as sensor generation, as newer sensors are usually much better), and lens aperture really do make a huge difference.

    If the OP is wanting to do Astrophotography, take candid portraits of musicians playing in jazz clubs, photos of actors in plays, or athletes playing night/interior sports, then a full frame sensor (or larger), and some nice fast primes are in order.

    A full frame sensor camera with the same aperture lens, will have at stop advantage over a crop sensor, and a 2 stop advantage over a Micro 4/3 camera. That can make the difference between getting/not getting a shot in those conditions, and it is why most pros use them in those situations.

    As light gets better (more available), and the speed of movement goes down the amount of gear it takes to get a good quality (non-noisy or motion blurred) photo goes down.

    Most cameras (including phones) these days take pretty good photos in good light of non moving subjects.

    Its the "in between" where its not amazing full sunlight, and "its almost black in here" where you get to decide how much you want to spend, and/or carry to get the quality of photos you're comfortable with.

    In my experience so far, sharp photos worth printing have more to do with technique and setup than sensor size. Its just that larger sensors can help you capture shots you may not be able to get at acceptable quality levels with other gear.

    To each their own of course though .

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chrisx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    704
    Quote Originally Posted by ocnLogan View Post

    In my experience so far, sharp photos worth printing have more to do with technique and setup than sensor size. Its just that larger sensors can help you capture shots you may not be able to get at acceptable quality levels with other gear.

    To each their own of course though .
    Maybe I am trying to convince myself to buy something I really can not afford but want. Am I the only one who waits for a storm so I can set my camera on old phone box and stand in the rain holding an umbrella not over me, just over the camera?

    Or the only one who walks up the creek instead of the trail?

    Be careful what you wish for. When I said I wanted to take pictures of waterfalls, it rained, everyday for 10 days.



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4ltLp30KVs


    S hit; while I was typing this,
    "13 mins ago - President Trump said he would be suspending all travel from Europe for the next 30 days "
    We might be getting more time in the forest with our cameras than we bargained for! If this keeps up.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ocnLogan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    900
    Beautiful photos .

    I understand gear lust, and as I mentioned before, I did recently upgrade to a D750 (cheap full frame), so clearly Iím one to talk.

    But, both of those shots are easily done with a tripod, and a sensor of pretty much any size. Itís when youíre taking photos of similarly dark areas but with trying to capture the moving bits without blurring that the light advantage of big sensors start to help out.

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chrisx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    704
    Quote Originally Posted by ocnLogan View Post
    Beautiful photos .

    I understand gear lust,... .. ... D750 (cheap full frame), .
    My rx100 v1 slowly faded away, as is my rx100 v5 doing now. V1 lasted 3 years. The manual focus went, the auto focus slowly declined. Then one morning the screen was just fuzz like a 1938 tv screen.

    V5 has a much better autofocus than the v1. I hear that v7 is even better still. After 2 years, the pop up viewfinder has stopped working. The internal battery charger is fading. The non weather sealed Sony takes good pictures. But , may not be the best for a person that walks up creeks in the rainy season, or spends weeks cycling on gravel roads.

    I am reading the mirrorless thread because, well, soon the want will fade to need. Those little pocket cameras are not robust.

    My tunnel vision can only see the Nikon sales pitch of a robust weather sealed camera. They have a $1,000, $2,000, and $3,000 model to choose from. Naturally: I lust after the most expensive one.

    Gear lust. I walked into Best Buy with enough money in my pocket to buy the A7--- 42 pixel $3,000 camera, non weather sealed. I chickened out and bought the rx100v instead. With the $2,000 I still had in my pocket I bought some tickets for Peru, Colombia, etc. Could have been a better choice.

    As I read this I am also looking at some Vittoria Mezcal III G2.0 tires. And looking at Bikepacking Roots routes page.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chrisx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    704

    Wo, oh, what I want to know, how does the song go.

    What about the Nikon z8 with 61 mega pixels? should we be saving up for that one?


    How does the song go?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SiURXMrVrc

    I typed that right Sixty one pixels just around the corner. Sounds better than a new bike.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    431
    It comes down to priorities. My go to (almost)everyday carry has been m4/3. Of course its image quality does not match even the APS-C of my Canon, although the Olympus OMD M5 I just got is impressive. It also is proving the mirrorless development has matured enough where it gives up little to DSLR now. My previous m4/3 was a Panasonic GFX and it definitely suffered in comparison on many fronts. Mainly it was compact and light while maintaining pretty good IQ and control functions.
    The Olympus has closed up many of the gaps, the hybrid AF is excellent and fast now, although in tracking mode my Canon still beats the Oly. The electronic viewfinder resolution and rate is fast enough I hardly notice and is now good enough for me to use for action and my occasional whale watching. FPS on electronic mode is ludicrous, I do not run it at max rate, that buries my Canon. Even on mechanical I think it beats it.
    The in body IS on the Oly is also impressive, it seems to approach almost gimbal like levels.
    It also does some cleverness to get 50 mega pixel images for static shots using the sensor shift.
    Oh, and one of the reasons I went Oly was the weather sealing, I'm pretty sure dirt and moisture intrusion is what did my Panny in, it still works but control dials are all wonky and barely work.
    My go to for riding pics is Nikon AW1 with 1" sensor, IQ is decidedly medicore, manual control PIA and not really used. But the thing is built like a tank and works despite pouring rain, mud, snow, being tossed around, dropped, slammed in van door, crashed on.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    23

    61 mp

    Quote Originally Posted by chrisx View Post
    What about the Nikon z8 with 61 mega pixels? should we be saving up for that one?


    How does the song go?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SiURXMrVrc

    I typed that right Sixty one pixels just around the corner. Sounds better than a new bike.
    Depends on your needs vs wants. As far as 61 MP goes, I have shot with the 61 MP Sony A7R4, and chose the 42 MP A7R3. IMO, 61 MP is far overkill for most shooters except for the concerning professional photographers going for ultimate detail for clients needs, gallery sized prints, or massive cropping ability. If that is you, then go for it. But wait in 3 years and we will have 50+mp cameras everywhere.....maybe.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-a7r01349-dci.jpg  


  63. #63
    saddlemeat
    Reputation: bsieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,843
    Quote Originally Posted by DeeGeeCee View Post
    Depends on your needs vs wants. As far as 61 MP goes, I have shot with the 61 MP Sony A7R4, and chose the 42 MP A7R3. IMO, 61 MP is far overkill for most shooters except for the concerning professional photographers going for ultimate detail for clients needs, gallery sized prints, or massive cropping ability. If that is you, then go for it. But wait in 3 years and we will have 50+mp cameras everywhere.....maybe.
    I think resolution is reaching the point where more is not necessarily better if it is not needed. From my perspective as a fine art printer, more detail is not always beneficial to an image from a visual perspective, and there are some practical real world size limits beyond which it's gets awkward and pricey, especially if it's not a permanent installation.

    On the other hand, I've never wished for less detail when editing an image, so at what point does more data, and the overhead that inevitably goes with it, get to be awkward for you, is the answer. I have a dear friend who is a published fine artist and career photography professor, who can use whatever gear he chooses, and he is using a Leica D-Lux as daily carry. Says it gives him everything he needs for his 24" Epson. https://www.amazon.com/Milan-Sklenar.../dp/0968236219
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-dscn3907.jpg  

    I ride with the best dogs.




  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    23

    exactly

    Quote Originally Posted by bsieb View Post
    I think resolution is reaching the point where more is not necessarily better if it is not needed. From my perspective as a fine art printer, more detail is not always beneficial to an image from a visual perspective, and there are some practical real world size limits beyond which it's gets awkward and pricey, especially if it's not a permanent installation.

    On the other hand, I've never wished for less detail when editing an image, so at what point does more data, and the overhead that inevitably goes with it, get to be awkward for you, is the answer. I have a dear friend who is a published fine artist and career photography professor, who can use whatever gear he chooses, and he is using a Leica D-Lux as daily carry. Says it gives him everything he needs for his 24" Epson. https://www.amazon.com/Milan-Sklenar.../dp/0968236219
    Exactly. I prefer the detail of the 42 MP A7riii, over my other cam the A7iii. But the lesser gets it done quite well at 24 mp. A decent apples to apples comparison.

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    58
    xxx
    Last edited by UpTheAnte; 4 Weeks Ago at 07:28 AM.

  66. #66
    the half breed devil
    Reputation: shekky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    4,061
    the main focus of my photography is trains in scenic locations. thus, when it comes time to purchase a new camera mirrorless will be a consideration, based on what i've read in this thread.

    however, i see the cost of an F to Z mount adaptor is well north of two grand. if i end up selling my D-7100, i'd like to use my 18-200 on whatever new camera i buy.

    as for carrying a brand new mirrorless with me on rides, i'd probably stick with toting around my trusty d-80 with an 18-105 kit lens. that's enough camera to get me shots like these:

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/770831...posted-public/

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mudguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,417
    Wow that was a nice photo

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    41
    I will take as much resolution as possible, until it negatively affects something that I consider more important (FPS, processing speed, etc). For printing on my Pixma Pro100 I find anything above 10mpx to be fine.

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    86
    To answer the OP's question, yes it does. A modern 20MP micro 4/3 camera will comfortably walk right over your 60D. I went from Canon 18MP APSC to 36x24 (6D), & now happily shoot m4/3. I miss nothing about the DSLR's. Nothing. Pop some tiny light little large aperture (f/1.4-1.7) primes on a modern m4/3 body, & you have a VERY capable little setup. I cart mine around all over the place on my hardtail, without a second thought. A picture (or two) tells the story.
    Johnny Rea at about 200 km/hr
    Nice soft background
    A little bit of panning

    Playing ultrawide

    Can do low light easily with tiny little light primes
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-rea1.jpg  

    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-royalty.jpg  

    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-161.jpg  

    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-indian28-1-.jpg  

    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-25866595747.jpg  

    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-mkii.jpg  

    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-33744041891.jpg  

    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-rode-rage.jpg  

    Last edited by speedygz; 3 Weeks Ago at 04:24 AM.

  70. #70
    psycho cyclo addict
    Reputation: edubfromktown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,873
    Quote Originally Posted by ocnLogan View Post
    At the extremes of low light, sensor size, ISO perf (almost the same as sensor generation, as newer sensors are usually much better), and lens aperture really do make a huge difference.

    ...

    Its the "in between" where its not amazing full sunlight, and "its almost black in here" where you get to decide how much you want to spend, and/or carry to get the quality of photos you're comfortable with.

    In my experience so far, sharp photos worth printing have more to do with technique and setup than sensor size. Its just that larger sensors can help you capture shots you may not be able to get at acceptable quality levels with other gear.

    To each their own of course though .
    I continue carrying a Nikon D5600 with a prime or zoom lens when I want to capture Raw images. It is quite a compact little DSLR. If I were to go mirrorless, I'd probably get the Fuji XT3. One thing that has kept me from going there is that Lightroom 6 perpetual doesn't support the Fuji and I don't want to pony up for a monthly Adobe subscription.

    Along the lines of what ocnLogan stated, I've caught some awesome shots with less than top notch equipment a surprising number of times. Most often during a spontaneous moment when it was quicker to get my phone or (in the old days) a pocket camera out or the lighting just "clicked" straight away with what I was shooting (instead of missing the moment having to fiddle with settings).

    This was shot on a very treacherous trail that as it turned out, was actually closed (sign was posted on one side but not the other!).

    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-screen-shot-2020-05-15-7.24.35-am.jpg
    【ツ】 eDub 【ツ】

    Gravel bike w/ MTB tires
    Rigid steel SS 29er
    Rigid titanium SS 27.5
    Full suspension 29er
    Hard Tail 29er

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    86
    Some more bicycle related photography from my baby m4/3 camera. Itís one of my favorite things to do. Chuck camera in kids size school bag/backpack, go for a pedal, and see what interesting sights I find to snap.Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-1481f3fd-e796-4603-8df5-2c422f363ca3.jpg
    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-8d92de31-5d85-4558-87ac-a08b346a5af5.jpg
    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-e5165ea9-b442-425a-80e7-ad673d404bd9.jpeg
    Does it make sense to go from a DSLR setup to Mirrorless?-52cccd62-de93-4b4b-8bd5-9e1e16725560.jpg

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    8
    I'm a big Fuji fan, I carry my X100F everywhere. Works perfect for me. I know I won't get any tele shots and I'm ok with that. Before Fuji, I shot Sony. IMO Sony has the best auto focus but the WORST menu system. I moved over to the X100F due to the great color profiles. I want to spend less time editing raws and the jpgs are very very good as long as you get it right in camera. Also the hybrid view finder is awesome.

    As mentioned many times. If you are shooting a lot in low light or astro get a full frame. Everything else a crop is more than enough. M4/3 is good however anything above ISO800 or 1600 it can get noisy fast. However, a little noise doesn't matter if you are telling a good story with the photo's.

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by OutdoorsBen View Post
    I'm a big Fuji fan, I carry my X100F everywhere. Works perfect for me. I know I won't get any tele shots and I'm ok with that. Before Fuji, I shot Sony. IMO Sony has the best auto focus but the WORST menu system. I moved over to the X100F due to the great color profiles. I want to spend less time editing raws and the jpgs are very very good as long as you get it right in camera. Also the hybrid view finder is awesome.

    As mentioned many times. If you are shooting a lot in low light or astro get a full frame. Everything else a crop is more than enough. M4/3 is good however anything above ISO800 or 1600 it can get noisy fast. However, a little noise doesn't matter if you are telling a good story with the photo's.
    Fujifilm make some really nice gear. They, & m4/3 are the only manufacturers that do a proper job of making a complete line of smaller format specific lenses. That's the thing I like about m4/3. You can buy tiny, light & fast aperture lenses from f/1.4-f/2, that don't break the bank, & you can actually use those apertures & get more than a cm in focus. Combine that with m4/3 excellent image stabilization/IBIS, & you get a really really competent, small, portable kit. In any light. If I was shooting night time sport/fast action, I'd more than likely go one of the full frame bodies & suitable lenses, but I don't. So m4/3 works really well for me. Fuji has made a big step I think, by now including IBIS in their latest body.

  74. #74
    always licking the glass
    Reputation: stripes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    2,018
    Quote Originally Posted by speedygz View Post
    Fujifilm make some really nice gear. They, & m4/3 are the only manufacturers that do a proper job of making a complete line of smaller format specific lenses. That's the thing I like about m4/3. You can buy tiny, light & fast aperture lenses from f/1.4-f/2, that don't break the bank, & you can actually use those apertures & get more than a cm in focus. Combine that with m4/3 excellent image stabilization/IBIS, & you get a really really competent, small, portable kit. In any light. If I was shooting night time sport/fast action, I'd more than likely go one of the full frame bodies & suitable lenses, but I don't. So m4/3 works really well for me. Fuji has made a big step I think, by now including IBIS in their latest body.
    Thanks is there a particular model you like? Iím debating between Fuji and Nikon.

    Right now, Fuji is in the lead.
    Guerrilla Gravity BAMF, Colorado Front Range
    https://classifieds.mtbr.com/showpro...product=116154

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by stripes View Post
    Thanks is there a particular model you like? Iím debating between Fuji and Nikon.

    Right now, Fuji is in the lead.
    Well, it all depends on budget, as well as your subject matter, & how you like to shoot. Personally, I like large aperture, fixed focal length lenses. This lets me use a smaller & lighter body. If you want to shoot say birds, motorsports & the like, youíll need to buy some longer focal length lenses. Generally, a physically larger body works better for this.
    As for which Fujifilm bodies I currently like, money no concern, Iíd go for the new XT4. It has IBIS (in body image stabilization) to help with slower shutter speeds at longer focal lengths. A more budget oriented option would be the older XH1. It also has IBIS. The XT3 is basically the same camera as the 4, with no IBIS.
    For a general purpose walk around shooter, I really like the look of the new XT200. A bit of a bargain really, thereís nothing premium about it, but it just has a nice feature list for the price, & is small, light & compact. Which suits my preferred smaller fixed length prime lens style.

  76. #76
    saddlemeat
    Reputation: bsieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,843
    I don't know if you make prints, but m4/3 doesn't have enough resolution to make crisp prints for gallery display. I hang my apsc prints next to m4/3 prints and there is no comparison. M4/3 is closer to 35mm film prints, which look pretty soft compared to higher resolution apsc or full format. It's fine for internet or screen display, but so are cell phone images.
    I ride with the best dogs.




  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by bsieb View Post
    I don't know if you make prints, but m4/3 doesn't have enough resolution to make crisp prints for gallery display. I hang my apsc prints next to m4/3 prints and there is no comparison. M4/3 is closer to 35mm film prints, which look pretty soft compared to higher resolution apsc or full format. It's fine for internet or screen display, but so are cell phone images.
    That's simply not true. I shoot both 20mp Canon full frame & 20mp m4/3. If I stripped the EXIF data, I bet you couldn't pick which shot what most of the time. Even at full resolution. Sure, in certain situations, one format will have advantages over the other, & vice versa. If I was printing billboards, I'd probably go medium format. Night sports, 36x24. You can't make blanket statements about one particular format.
    And yes, some phone cameras are getting pretty good.

  78. #78
    saddlemeat
    Reputation: bsieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,843
    Quote Originally Posted by speedygz View Post
    That's simply not true. I shoot both 20mp Canon full frame & 20mp m4/3. If I stripped the EXIF data, I bet you couldn't pick which shot what most of the time. Even at full resolution. Sure, in certain situations, one format will have advantages over the other, & vice versa. If I was printing billboards, I'd probably go medium format. Night sports, 36x24. You can't make blanket statements about one particular format.
    And yes, some phone cameras are getting pretty good.
    What size prints do you make?
    I ride with the best dogs.




  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    86
    28-30 inches. My 20mp m4/3 is better than my 18mp APSC Canon.

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    86
    No need to take my word for it. Plenty of people have done tests. This one goes a sensor size up from your APSC, & still no real difference.
    https://youtu.be/OGn3yPl59ZM

  81. #81
    saddlemeat
    Reputation: bsieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,843
    Quote Originally Posted by speedygz View Post
    28-30 inches. My 20mp m4/3 is better than my 18mp APSC Canon.
    What paper are you using? What printer?

    edit... I did watch the video, interesting, details of the process/workflow would be nice to know.
    I ride with the best dogs.




  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    86
    Don't know. I just sharpen the files a touch more than screen viewing requires, noise tends to blend in better in prints, the wife then just takes the files to the printer. (Shop) That's their job.
    I think you're focusing (pun intended) on the wrong things. m4/3 requires good lenses for good results. I shoot Panasonic Leica, and Sigma prime lenses personally. As long as you have a nice sharp lens, the focus and exposure is excellent, you'll get great results whatever the viewing medium. Pretty basic stuff.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OzarkFathom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    520
    I have a Canon G9X MK2 that fits perfectly in a Pelican 1010 case. Great low light and video performance in a tiny package. Excellent mountain biking option.

    Freedom is a shield against the negative consequences of the Foolishness of others.



  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by stripes View Post
    Thanks is there a particular model you like? Iím debating between Fuji and Nikon.

    Right now, Fuji is in the lead.
    It really comes down to your needs and budget. My daily camera is an X100F. Super small, sharp, fast, love the dials on the top so I can pre-set to get ahead of any picture I may want.

    Outside of the X-T4 and IBIS, the main difference in all the models is updated algorithms for AF. Certainly nothing wrong with going a used camera from a reputable dealer and a used X-T3 is a good buy. However if you don't need weather sealing and can scale back on video a bit you can get the X-T30 and save a couple hundred bucks. If the budget doesn't go that high then X-T2 is still a very solid camera and the consumer version is the X-T20. Generally speaking the 0 at the end often would be the "consumer" version. I would use cheaper but I don't want it to come off as it's a cheap POS. It's just scaled back a bit on features but would generally share the same sensors.

    The X-T200 I have heard good things about. It's got the Bayer sensor instead of the X-Trans. A lot of people seem to like the color of the bayer. I would suggest renting what you want to get before getting it. Borrowlenses.com or Lensrental.com are good resources. I have personally used borrowlenses in the past with good results.

  85. #85
    always licking the glass
    Reputation: stripes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    2,018
    Quote Originally Posted by OzarkFathom View Post
    I have a Canon G9X MK2 that fits perfectly in a Pelican 1010 case. Great low light and video performance in a tiny package. Excellent mountain biking option.

    Im pretty sure thatís not a mirrorless camera but a pocket camera. I have the previous generation of it, and itís not what Iím looking for.
    Guerrilla Gravity BAMF, Colorado Front Range
    https://classifieds.mtbr.com/showpro...product=116154

  86. #86
    always licking the glass
    Reputation: stripes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    2,018
    Quote Originally Posted by OutdoorsBen View Post
    It really comes down to your needs and budget. My daily camera is an X100F. Super small, sharp, fast, love the dials on the top so I can pre-set to get ahead of any picture I may want.

    Outside of the X-T4 and IBIS, the main difference in all the models is updated algorithms for AF. Certainly nothing wrong with going a used camera from a reputable dealer and a used X-T3 is a good buy. However if you don't need weather sealing and can scale back on video a bit you can get the X-T30 and save a couple hundred bucks. If the budget doesn't go that high then X-T2 is still a very solid camera and the consumer version is the X-T20. Generally speaking the 0 at the end often would be the "consumer" version. I would use cheaper but I don't want it to come off as it's a cheap POS. It's just scaled back a bit on features but would generally share the same sensors.

    The X-T200 I have heard good things about. It's got the Bayer sensor instead of the X-Trans. A lot of people seem to like the color of the bayer. I would suggest renting what you want to get before getting it. Borrowlenses.com or Lensrental.com are good resources. I have personally used borrowlenses in the past with good results.
    Thanks Ben .

    Budget depends on if I need to replace lenses too.

    I would really like to use a Canon mirrorless, especially since I have DSLR lenses from them and it supports both the types (EF and EF-S mounts). My D60 is really heavy for me to carry around, and this includes trips to Japan (we went on a photography trip for Japanese cranes this time) and mountain biking. I love the idea of not needing more lenses and uses what I already have at least to get started. However, the D60 is a pretty heavy camera, and Iím pretty sure the camera tech has improved over time. My husbandís got the full CCD version of it, and that thing is even heavier.

    My only issue is Canon is pretty new to mirrorless, and I havenít seen any reviews or comparisons to them, as they seem pretty sparse. This is why Iím looking at other brands. Usually with DSLRs, it was usually Canon or Nikon, but Sony really changed that with the mirrorless tech.

    Iíve also tried the little pocket cameras like the G9, but crap, theyíre grainy.
    Guerrilla Gravity BAMF, Colorado Front Range
    https://classifieds.mtbr.com/showpro...product=116154

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ocnLogan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    900
    Quote Originally Posted by stripes View Post
    ...
    Iíve also tried the little pocket cameras like the G9, but crap, theyíre grainy.
    The G9x is not a particularly good example of the 1Ē sensor compact cameras.

    They prioritized the size of the body with that camera. So while the sensor is the same as some other good 1Ē cameras, the lens is just really slow, and pretty soft. So low light takes a hit compared to the nicer specimens of the genre.

    The Canon G7X mkIII, Sony rx100 series, Panasonic zs100, LX10, and LX100 are all better examples of that small form factor.

    I have carried my ZS100 in my camelback before, and it does well for incidental stuff (unlike a phone camera, it has a good zoom on it). But if I was going out to try to get actual good photos of a buddy riding (actual action shots) then Iíd for sure bring more substantial gear (my only other camera is a D750). But thatís half because where I live, youíre riding in deep shade and cloud cover most of the time. So Iíd need all the low light help I could get to not get a blurry (either because of ISO, or too low of shutter speed) mess.

    I feel like micro 4/3 kind of splits the difference between both of those cameras. It might just be the perfect compromise for you.

Similar Threads

  1. Canon M5 Mirrorless - Short Term Review
    By smmokan in forum Photography for mountain bikers
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 01-25-2019, 08:38 AM
  2. any of you all into Mirrorless cameras?
    By Boomchakabowwow in forum California - Norcal
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 04-16-2018, 11:34 AM
  3. Sony A9 mirrorless camera introduced...
    By bsieb in forum Photography for mountain bikers
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-20-2017, 05:35 PM
  4. Mirrorless or DLSR Camera For My Wife?
    By Legbacon in forum Photography for mountain bikers
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 04-09-2017, 11:59 PM
  5. Four thirds/mirrorless sytem cameras anybody?
    By hardtailkid in forum Photography for mountain bikers
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 01-25-2012, 12:22 PM

Members who have read this thread: 96

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.