Seven things nobody told you about switching from DSLR to mirrorless

“Yes, mirrorless cameras are smaller in size than the DSLR. However, it’s different with the lenses. They don’t get any smaller if you switch to mirrorless, so you won’t save a whole bunch of space in your camera bag.”

“Mirrorless lenses are a bit (or a lot) more expensive than DSLR lenses.”

It’s exactly the other way around

First, most APS-C mirrorless bodies are smaller than the APS-C DSLRs, but not all weigh less than the DSLRs.

All mirrorless I’ve tried, or own, can have their EVFs adjusted in brightness, to your personal liking (I have three mirrorless, my wife has four).

Evidently you know very little about mirrorless cameras, nor look in the manuals that come with them.

I very rarely look, have to confess, through the OVF with the camera off, as I want the AF to be on, but you do it all the time, do you?!

And I have had less problems with dust with my mirrorless cameras than the DSLRs, one of the latter (a Nikon FX) had to be sent to Nikon for cleaning, that led to a replacement of the shutter.

Cleaning a mirrorless sensor is child’s play, not nearly as easy with any DSLR I’ve owned, or own (at the moment I have four). On mirrorless cameras the sensor is much easier to reach, as it isn’t mounted nearly as far into the deeper body, making the job very straight-forward.

When it comes to battery life, the mirrorless results come all over the chart, with some barely managing 200, and I remember Thomas Stirr getting something like 3,000 shots with his Nikon 1 V1 in real life, not using the flash (which anyway isn’t integral with the camera). Some of the latest mirrorless get as many shots (CIPA style) as most DSLRs.

When it comes to lens prices, all of my mirrorless lenses cost, new, in the $200-500 bracket (except two, that cost a little more), while all of my F Mount lenses (new) cost between $300 and $2,800, but the majority cost me $500-1,500.

So depending what you buy, and if you avoid recently released lenses, that always cost more than they do after a while, you should be able to buy as cheap lenses no matter of the camera is mirrorless, or DSLR. Not even lenses for mirrorless MFs are more expensive than those for conventional MFs, but the selection available is much smaller, as they use mounts new on the market.

My wife uses m43, and her lenses are among the best in their class (she has sold off the cheap ones, and the not so good).

None of them is more expensive than an equivalent F Mount lens, of a similar optical and build quality. The lenses that break this pattern is the Nikon AF-P lenses, that gives the buyer a lot of lens for very little money, but no m43 look quite as tacky, on the other hand.

All the 100-400s cost about the same, whoever makes them, if you stick to original Fuji, Canon or Panasonic-Leica lenses — Nikon does not make one, nor does Olympus (The popular Sigmas and Tamrons, offer about the same quality in a cheaper package).

The Sigma 30 is an interesting lens, and comes in a lot of variations, for F Mount, E Mount and m43 (maybe Canon and Fuji as well, haven’t checked), and they also cost the same, delivering excellent optical quality for around $400, for the f/1.4 models, and quite a bit less for the f/2.8 versions.

So if the issue is lenses, there is not much to worry about, soon enough there will be plenty to choose from, but the issue is really which mounts and formats will survive in the long run?!

Did canon or nikon pay him for this? How backwards can you be lol

Who let this article be published? It does a great disservice to the site’s readers. Here are some counterpoints:

1. The lens, as a point of physics, can be smaller, as they cover a smaller image circle on smaller sensors (most mirrorless are smaller). For telephoto, the crop factor allows for much smaller lens for the same field of view.

2. Modern EVF’s are typically excellent and exhibit minimal lag. Their “exposure” (actually brightness, not related to the image’s exposure in this case) is typically adjustable, including automatically boosting brightness in dark scenes for easier framing, if desired.

3. I don’t ever recall looking through the viewfinder when the camera was off, but yes, it is true it must be on for you to see anything on a mirrorless.

4. Mirrorless cameras, led by Olympus initially, have terrific ultrasonic dust removal for their sensors. I had to clean my Canon non-mirrorless sensors frequently. I truly forget it’s even a thing with my current cameras.

5. Mirrorless cameras, partly because they initially had smaller batteries in smaller bodies and partly due to their constant EVF/screen use, have suffered poorer battery life. On an EM-1, I have gotten close to a thousand shots on a battery. While that battery is smaller than the 3000 shot Canon/Nikon machines, it would be nice to have their longevity. Throwing an extra battery in your pocket takes care of all but the longest days, though. And, I never skipped taking a backup battery with my Canon anyway.

6. Choice of lenses is extremely wide depending on your mirrorless system. Native lenses cover almost every conceivable need in micro four thirds, barring extremely wide (800mm equiv), and tilt shift. But, as with many systems, since the flange distance is less than mirrored systems, you can use almost any lens with an adapter. That simply can’t be done with mirrored, so mirrorless hax a greater selection of lenses.

7. There is a whole range of prices for mirrorless lenses, from $60 to $2000+. It all depends on quality, waterproofness, max aperture, etc. And of course, with an adapter, you can use those “less expensive” mirrored system lenses, too. And, near fact, you can even get adapters that make the lenses faster and wider. Cool.

DIY Photography needs to print an update/counterpoint to this article.

By the way, I have about 7 years experience with Canon, starting with Rebel, 40D, 50D, and the last few with a 7D and L lenses. I currently use Olympus (had one Panny) with an EM-1 and PEN-F as my main cameras, and a wide range of lenses. Ive used micro 4/3 for about 4 years. So I have solid experience in both camps.

Thanks for reading!
David