C'mon let's wake this forum up

[MissionMan]

When it comes to mirrorless, it's actually one of the first systems I recommend to people. The reason I say this, is only a fraction of people I know (outside of ausphotography) who buy or have bought DSLR's are actually photography enthusiasts so none of them will ever really benefit from the advantages that a DSLR would offer over a mirrorless camera and the images produced are likely to be better because a mirrorless with higher quality lenses is more affordable than the DSLR equivalent so they could probably afford to get better image quality for the same price.

As for personally, I have two cameras, my Full frame which goes with me most of the time (excluding work, outings to movies etc) and my mobile phone which has a decent enough camera for what I need when I don't need a DSLR. I have a couple of small point and shoots, but if I am going to take them, I'd rather take my DSLR or I'll just take my phone.

[Mary Anne]

The E-M1 was going to be my Main Camera eventually that's why I bought the 60mm Macro Lens and Flash was also looking forward to getting the 300mm f/4 lens next year or when it comes out as I need a Birding Lens.
Also looked at getting the off camera flash bracket, extension tubes and a few other things, and is it expensive Yes it is, though all good cameras are.
Yet I have paid for a Pro Camera that has many faults remembering now its not my first E-M1 its my second one, perhaps an inferior batch was sent out to Australia who knows.

I liked the camera, especially the way it felt in my hands it was so light with the tiny macro lens and flash on it, weighing 1108gms against my DSLR Macro gear at 2380gms.
As I do a lot of holding the camera with one hand while holding a leaf with a Spider on it with the other hand so this E-M1 was ideal till things started to happen to it.
I do realise I still have a lot of learning to do with this E-M1 though I was surprised recently when I got that second camera back from being repaired how much I still remembered, considering I was learning my new DSLR also.
Regardless of what camera I use the DSLR gear produces better bokeh when it come to backgrounds, unless shooting 1.1 macro then its about the same as the DSLR.

[Arg]

Thanks Mary Anne. Some people have bad luck with DSLR reliability, yours was with DSLM. If you have any future trouble with your DSLR we will conclude that you are cursed!

Bokeh is the lens not the camera, (not to mention also a personal preference not a technical advantage and so others might prefer the opposite to you), so you can put your Canon lens on a DSLM and get the same bokeh. Or try a full frame DSLM!

[Mary Anne]

My Pleasure Arg.. Yes it may seem that way I forgot to write I was thinking of getting the 75mm f/1.8 as mentioned on line elsewhere the Bokeh is suppose to be good.
I have used the Kipon adaptor with my Canon 70-200mm f/4 Lens on my E-M1 and even so the BG is not as smooth and creamy, which I need when shooting Birds
The E-M1 with this adaptor does not like that zoom lens, I also tried it with my heavier 300mm f/4 found it hard to hold the gear and focus manually on Birds in Flight, that is an age thing.
Had a go with my MP-E 65mm macro lens and was very impressed with that combo though wont try it again, was looking to getting the the m4/3 Extension Tubes for getting that close.
I will see how the camera goes next year, I just cannot seem to get back into it right now sadly I have lost interest and a shame really as I have done quite a lot with this little camera.

[Arg]

No doubt, getting into mirrorless when BIF (birds in flight) is a current area of focus (pun ) with one's DSLR photography, is not something I would recommend. Not just yet.

[MissionMan]

Agree with the comments on bokeh. It is lens related so things like the shape of the aperture can have a big impact so it all depends on how the lens is constructed and how many blades it is constructed with.

[Nick Cliff]

I had wondered if the Metabones speed booster may improve bokeh for birding with M4/3 system if the lens is not particularly fast perhaps if manual focus is your preference.

[Ian Brewster]

Whatever is all the noise about here? Due to a calamity I moved from a Sony bridge camera, DSCR1 to a Sony A57 mirror less. If I could afford to output large prints a lot, maybe there would be a difference but as nearly all my enjoyment is in digital output, I am a happy chappy. If the newer small bodies had been around, for mobility I would have ditched the body-shape that has hung around from the reflex age.

[Ian Brewster]

No doubt, getting into mirrorless when BIF (birds in flight) is a current area of focus (pun ) with one's DSLR photography, is not something I would recommend. Not just yet.

Could you please explain this view a bit more? My understanding is that an advantage of mirror less is the much faster fps given that they also now have phase detection AF? What am I missing?

[MissionMan]

Could you please explain this view a bit more? My understanding is that an advantage of mirror less is the much faster fps given that they also now have phase detection AF? What am I missing?

In short, a mirrorless still won't match a DSLR with focus speed if you're using a pro lens. It's good by non-DSLR standards, but still not as good for focus tracking. Fps isn't everything, having 10fps isn't much help if the object isn't in focus. Also remember there is in focus and in focus. By that I mean the focus may lock on, but may not be as accurate.

[Boo53]

I think, perhaps, mirrors is not the appropriate description for a range of cameras anymore.

I'd match the performance of my A77 & A65 against any aps-c dslr anyway, including focus sharpness and 12 fps performance. I doubt they're in the same category as the 4/3rds systems some have, although on a technicality, they have translucent mirrors not reflex mirrors.

I'm also very happy with my A7r, completely mirrorsless and full frame.

At this end of the gear spectrum performance is more likely to be about users ability than gear.

[Arg]

...my A77 & A65 ... I doubt they're in the same category as the 4/3rds systems some have, although on a technicality, they have translucent mirrors not reflex mirrors.

Hi John, I agree, the Sony pellicle models are a unique sub-category of mirrorless camera. As you say, they do have a mirror!

Anyway, welcome! Diversity is strength!

- - - Updated - - -

No doubt, getting into mirrorless when BIF (birds in flight) is a current area of focus with one's DSLR photography, is not something I would recommend. Not just yet.

Could you please explain this view a bit more? My understanding is that an advantage of mirror less is the much faster fps given that they also now have phase detection AF? What am I missing?

Two things, Ian.

[1] DSLM cameras are indeed the fastest at auto focus, but that applies to subjects that are not moving extremely fast towards/away from the camera. In such situations, DSLM cameras are not yet as good as the best DSLRs. And that is a common need for birds-in-flight photography.

[2] Serious bird photographers have a saying "you can't have a long enough lens". Some birds are small and shy, and no amount of expertise will get you close enough for a 200 to 300mm (full frame) lens to do the job you need. These serious guys are willing to pay big bucks for specialist lenses and matching teleconverters that add up to 1000mm or more. At this point in time mirrorless cameras don't have 'native' lenses available in this class. Although, you could always take one of the above Canon/Nikon specialist lenses and adapt it to a mirrorless camera, you won't have AF. (Although, just between you and me, trying to do BIF with a 1000mm lens is akin to self-flagellation!)

[arthurking83]

......

[2] Serious bird photographers have a saying "you can't have a long enough lens". Some birds are small and shy, and no amount of expertise will get you close enough for a 200 to 300mm (full frame) lens to do the job you need. These serious guys are willing to pay big bucks for specialist lenses and matching teleconverters that add up to 1000mm or more. At this point in time mirrorless cameras don't have 'native' lenses available in this class. ....

So why not just crop the image?

[Arg]

Sure! I use my100-300 Lumix for all my bird photography when a long lens is needed, it works well for me, and crop when I need to.

Some bird photographers demand such high quality that they want to fill the frame without cropping, though.

[arthurking83]

......

Some bird photographers demand such high quality that they want to fill the frame without cropping, though.

And the issue is?

[CoolyCafe]

I have one of these.

http://www.videomaker.com/sites/vide...?itok=HF2SBoX_

Does that count?

Please do not post images that you do not own copyright to -- see forum rule 20

[Arg]

And the issue is?

What are you on about? State your position on the matter please.

[Arg]

I have one of these.

http://www.videomaker.com/sites/vide...?itok=HF2SBoX_

Does that count?

Please do not post images that you do not own copyright to -- see forum rule 20

I don't know much about them. What do you think? Do they take good still images or basically a camcorder? Cameras like the Panasonic GH4 are blurring the line between still cameras and camcorders. The future is going to open new doors for image enthusiasts IMHO.

[ameerat42]

...I think the quality of most of the main camera brands on the market exceeds the quality of the photographers using them so brand is not that important...

Good point you are making here, but the use of "most" should be something like, "of most photographers". I don't exclude myself from that category, either

[bcys1961]

Good point you are making here, but the use of "most" should be something like, "of most photographers". I don't exclude myself from that category, either

Nor do I , and its great to know that as you learn more and your skills grows your camera will allow you the opportunities to put it all into practice .