[iron]

i'm short on time to do proper research, so i'm hoping someone(s) can clue me in. i sold all my DSLR stuff last year following our trip last summer, thinking that my photography days are dwindling. now, i'm feeling the need for a camera and it seems mirrorless may be / is the way to go. some questions (current info for 2016 cameras appreciated): 1. any models that have good weather sealing approximately equal to DSLRs 2. any models with optical or fake optical viewfinders 3. are they good at high ISO? 4. i assume they have full frame and cropped sensors. huge differences in prices (including lenses) 5. is there a brand that's leading the way in the field? 6. is there a brand or lens that excels at semi-macro (e.g. kids)? 7 anything else i should consider when looking into these? thanks

[jcocci]

Hey Iron, Quick answer to some of your questions based on what I own. Also having no idea what you want to spend. I have an Olympus OM-D E-M1. Its a great camera and is their "pro" version body. It os weather sealed and there are a plethora of lens options. The nice thing about Olympus and Panasonic is that their lenses are interchangeable without the need for any adapters. The one thing about mirrorless that will take yo some time to get used to coming from DSLR word is the EVF (electronic Viewfinder), well for cameras that have them, which the E-M1 does. Just different than looking through a DSLR. The Sony mirrorless stuff is also supposed to be really nice and offers full frame, but U have never used them. Another good Olympus option is the OM-D E-M5 MKII. If you want he camera to have good video capabilities I would look at he Panasonic/Lumix line up. I could honestly give a crap about video on my camera so its not a big deal for me. Hope that at least helps a little bit. I sold off all my DSLR stuff and went Micro 4/3 and haven't looked back and glad I made the switch.

[Jim Dockery]

If I were going to have just one camera, and not worry about changing lenses the Sony RX10 III would be my choice. It's gotten rave reviews, esp. the lens which has incredible reach - would be nice for wildlife. Only downsides are the kludgy Sony menus (I live with them) and $$$.

[NacMacFeegle]

[iron]

thanks for the comments all. re: sony cameras: i thought when i looked at them a few years ago, thru their EVFs, it allowed a fraction of light to come thru their semi translucent mirror. this, in turn, resulted in really poor ISO performance at anything above ISO 400. am i misremembering?

[NacMacFeegle]

[boot up]

just remember, the bigger the sensor, the bigger the patch of light required, which by simple physics means the bigger the lens will be. Bodies can be made tiny for all of them, but the lens grows with the sensor. I like the M4/3 as a good compromise of portability vs image quality. YMMV

[mike]

[gb]

Iron, I posted my opinions on the thread about 4/3 recommendations for beginners with a link to images. As to high ISO, the EM-1 is supposed to have more noise than the EM-5, EM-5II. That said, for cloudy low light macro I will sometimes shoot ISO 1600 or ISO 5000 to get my speed up to 1/30th second or better at F11 or F16. With the complexity of vegetation the noise makes no difference - I can't see it. Where noise does show up is on a black background, the best example being Astro/landscape. Nonetheless, just using out of camera jpegs (without using RAW) I am generally fine for ISO's up to 2500 and still decent for ISO 3200. Astro is limited in that one can't generally shoot longer than 20 seconds for wide angle and 30 seconds (or less) for ultra wide angle. You need, to get enough definition on the Milky Way (or northern lights), to shoot wide open and boost the ISO. From experience, with the 12-40F2.8 (which is superb lens) I find that I shoot F2.8 for 15-20 seconds (depending on focal length) with an ISO from about 2000-3200 (max). I get, even without using RAW, what for me are very acceptable images. The best lens for astro/landscape in m4/3 is the 8mm F1.8FE, which is still a small, relatively lightweight lens. Because of the light gathering of this lens and it's aperture, I can shoot the MW (and landscape) wide open at F1.8 with an exposure time between 20-30 seconds and an ISO between 1000 and 2000 (really more like 1600). Here, I usually keep to 20 seconds to guarantee pinpoint stars. Noise is minimal. Again, on anything but a black background, the noise from ISO's I mentioned above is not observable without going to extremes.

[puzzlr]

I don't use a mirrorless, but thought I'd add a caution about any camera you pay significant $ for and use in harsh conditions. I have had 3 Panasonic cameras fail with lenses that "emerge" when turned on. The problem is always dust getting into the thin crack between sections of the telescoping lens case and preventing the lens from fully emerging (or retracting). I doubt the problem is specific to Panasonic. I like the auto-lens-cap feature that I get with this kind of lens, but I think I'll abandon it with my next camera. Some mirrorless have this kind of lens so think about that. It would be much less likely to happen with a conventional lens like you'd have on a DSLR.

[nojack]

The full frame Sony mirrorless (and two manual focus primes) will give you negatives (and prints!) to cherish long after you have aged, and moved to a super light photo rig. Manual focus lenses are much lighter and cheaper. And fun, too! $0.02.

[mike]

[mike]

Olympus Outlet sale 20% off. Stuff is going fast.

[NacMacFeegle]

[trestle]

Sounds more like reconditioned than refurbished. Reading this closely, it doesn't appear anything more than an inspection is done.