system cameras

Doese anyone have a system camera or have any experiance how they work?

Doese anyone know, are they better than normal DSRLs or doese anyone know the differents between them?

 

And another point, which ones are system cameras? I only know Nikon one (advertisement in TV)

A DSLR is a system camera, just like the new Nikon 1, Sony NEX, etc. Basically I believe as long as it has interchangeable parts (lenses!) it'll be classified as a system camera.

 

If you're wondering how well one of those new compact ones (Nikon 1/Sony NEX) stack up against a proper DSLR the simple answer would be "They don't". But I guess even that could be debated. I had a Sony NEX-3 and it was really terrible at even medium-low ISO levels. Something my Nikon D5100 manages quite well. ^^

A DSLR is a system camera, just like the new Nikon 1, Sony NEX, etc. Basically I believe as long as it has interchangeable parts (lenses!) it'll be classified as a system camera.

 

If you're wondering how well one of those new compact ones (Nikon 1/Sony NEX) stack up against a proper DSLR the simple answer would be "They don't". But I guess even that could be debated. I had a Sony NEX-3 and it was really terrible at even medium-low ISO levels. Something my Nikon D5100 manages quite well. ^^

 

The newer NEX cameras handle themselves quite well across the ISO range compared to the first models, and firmware updates help with that issue as well. The Nikon 1 series cameras don't hold a candle to the Sony NEX cameras, in image quality or in ease of use, and they're also too expensive for what features are in the camera. The NEX series cameras haven't won camera of the year awards for the last 2 years straight for nothing.

 

For ISO handling, practically nothing can touch the FujiFilm X-series mirrorless cameras, capable of retaining detail and color accuracy at ISO 12800 that many full DSLRs can barely pull off at ISO 1600, although the price tag on them is a bit steep for many people.

Systems are built around a mount: the place where camera bodies and lenses attach. You can change or upgrade both independently. They often have more accessories available than non-system cameras, like external flashes. Therefore, SLRs and "mirrorless cameras" are all system cameras. Many companies even offer multiple systems for different markets.

 

You can imperfectly estimate the performance and price of a camera by the size of its sensor. For the list below, each size up broadly means that:

• "usable" high ISO improves a stop (it literally gathers twice as much light as the size before)
  
• the depth of field is smaller (it is easier to blur out the background)
  
• the lenses are larger
  
• the bodies cost more to make

In practice, engineering and design differences between companies mean these generalities don't always hold and systems can sometimes be smaller than expected or "punch above their weight" in sensor size.

 

These mounts are in active production (for various values of "active") and are readily available. Some are DSLRs (in red), some are mirrorless (in black). Mirrorless systems are significantly smaller, slightly cheaper, and are expected to grow in popularity vs DSLRs as a result.

 

Compact: Pentax Q

CX: Nikon 1

Micro 4/3: Olympus & Panasonic; "Regular" 4/3: mostly Olympus

APS: Canon EF-S, Canon EF-M, Fujifilm X, Nikon F (DX), Pentax K, Samsung NX, Sigma SA, Sony Alpha (most models), Sony NEX

Full-frame/35mm: Canon EF, Nikon F (FX), Leica M, Sony Alpha

If you're wondering how well one of those new compact ones (Nikon 1/Sony NEX) stack up against a proper DSLR the simple answer would be "They don't". But I guess even that could be debated. I had a Sony NEX-3 and it was really terrible at even medium-low ISO levels. Something my Nikon D5100 manages quite well. ^^

 

Compared to a Full Frame DSLR, sure, the NEX etc don't compare, but I have to disagree otherwise. I have a NEX 5n, it has the same sensor as a Nikon D7000 and has won many awards. If you believe in the DxO Scores, the 5n has an overall of 77, the Alpha 77 has a 78 and a 5D has 81. My old Canon T1i is a low 63. If you compare the prices of those cameras, the 5n is a great bargain. Not only is it compact, it also performs on par to a high level APS-C DSLR.

 

From tests I've done the NEX 5n has beaten my old DSLR in IQ. It handles low light much better and also has better AWB. But that's to be expected, it's a better sensor to my old Canon at the same size. Honestly, the kit lens doesn't do the NEX many favors (do they ever). Put a good lens on it and it will really shin.

 

Granted, the 5n lacks all the buttons my Canon has, sure, but that hasn't really hindered my ability to take pictures. And at the end of the day, I'd rather use a smaller camera since it's easier to handle than a larger DSLR just for the buttons, and, as far as I can see, that's really the big difference. Don't let the size fool you.

 

Just my 2 cents.

If you're wondering how well one of those new compact ones (Nikon 1/Sony NEX) stack up against a proper DSLR the simple answer would be "They don't". But I guess even that could be debated. I had a Sony NEX-3 and it was really terrible at even medium-low ISO levels. Something my Nikon D5100 manages quite well. ^^

 

Compared to a Full Frame DSLR, sure, the NEX etc don't compare, but I have to disagree otherwise. I have a NEX 5n, it has the same sensor as a Nikon D7000 and has won many awards. If you believe in the DxO Scores, the 5n has an overall of 77, the Alpha 77 has a 78 and a 5D has 81. My old Canon T1i is a low 63. If you compare the prices of those cameras, the 5n is a great bargain. Not only is it compact, it also performs on par to a high level APS-C DSLR.

 

From tests I've done the NEX 5n has beaten my old DSLR in IQ. It handles low light much better and also has better AWB. But that's to be expected, it's a better sensor to my old Canon at the same size. Honestly, the kit lens doesn't do the NEX many favors (do they ever). Put a good lens on it and it will really shin.

 

Granted, the 5n lacks all the buttons my Canon has, sure, but that hasn't really hindered my ability to take pictures. And at the end of the day, I'd rather use a smaller camera since it's easier to handle than a larger DSLR just for the buttons, and, as far as I can see, that's really the big difference. Don't let the size fool you.

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

For 2 more cents, the D5100 has the same sensor as those as well, also judging by the release date and approximate release pricing the Nex5n would be competitor on the d5100 level too. I agree though with you, its only a tool after all, the choice of which company's system is not much more than a personal preference with the other fiddly things based on what you want to do with it, these companies (particularly ones like Fuji, Nikon, Canon, Leica, etc) have been around as long as they have because they put out quality tools. And lets face it, we would have a LOT less choices if one company ever made significantly better cameras for a long enough time. This is not the case though, so they're all about the same as long as you compare approximately equal generations of cameras (which comparing the d5100 and nex3 isn't). Mirrorless =/= m4/3 (one speaks of the shutter/viewfinder mechanism, the other speaks of the sensor size)

 

Never forget, a camera is only a tool, its only as good as the operator, so to the OP, I'd say just go to a camera store, hold the cameras in your hands, test shoot them a bit, and don't let the salesman push you into anything, as he/she too will have their biases (usually but not always based on what makes them the most). Some people like how Canon cameras fit in their hands, some people like the compactness of mirrorless or m4/3 cameras, its all a personal preference, I'm pretty sure all camera makers have most of the lenses most of us use after all.

Well. I love Sony NEX. Wanting to buy one but I already have a DSLR.

 

okay.jpg

 

Sony NEX performance is amazinggggggggg

Also Sony just announced 3 new lenses, of which I can see all 3 being in high demand. I guess it's ok(-ish) to have little native glass if it's the right native glass.

They also announced the NEX-5R and NEX-6 this week, both with wifi and a new hybrid phase/contrast AF system. The NEX-6 also has the awesome EVF that's on the NEX-7, A77, and A99.

A friend of mine had a Nex and I couldn't handle it at all. Back to my 5D II it is, I prefer my big full frame over any compact camera. I need the extra weight (and I also don't like things like Liveview or seeing a digital picture when looking through the viewfinder)

 

Honestly, best way to find out which system you prefer is to actually go into a shop, grab a few cameras and try them out. Bigger camera stores have a wide range of available bodies and cameras and are usually very open when it comes to trying out cameras.

 

And I think Anouc used the term "System Cameras" since "Systemkamera" is usually the term used for mirrorless cameras here in Germany, even though it's not correct

I had Pentax DSLR's and an Olympus Pen E PL1 micro 4/3 camera, so have a bit of experience with both SLRs and mirrorless system cameras, though this is limited to my Olympus and a shot of a friendy Sony Nex (not sure of the model).

 

In my opinion for doll photography the Olympus was a great wee camera, even with the kit zoom in reasonable light the image quality was excellent and it produced really really nice colours. It was light and easy to carry and it was quite unobtrusive to use. Its major drawback of slow autofocus was not an issue as my girls were not likely to try to sprint out the shot. It was very light to carry and had full auto to manual settings like my DSLR. Some people have stated that nice Bokeh is not as easy to achieve due to the small sensor multiplication factor but again I could work around it.

 

To be honest the reason I got rid of the Olympus was I found that when taking pictures at almost arms length my hands shook, using my DSLR I found I could hold it much steadier. The person I sold the camera to had the opposite problem, they have issues with their hands and their DSLR was getting too heavy for them.

 

At the end of the day everyone has their favourites and the best thing you could do is try as many out as you can. Bearing in mind that as most pictures end up online or viewed on a monitor the difference in image quality between a full frame DSLR and Micro 4/3 camera will very often not be noticeable.

 

Anyway thats my take on things but as others have said the camera is only a tool and if you dont learn to use it then it does'nt matter what kind it is or how much it cost.

I think it's also important to know beforehand how much you want to do with your camera.

Last weekend I made several shootings at night, with cosplayers, and I really needed the good high ISO performance of my full frame.

But that's something extreme and most people won't ever use their camera in such a way.

If you are just interested in taking pictures of your dolls certain things are not as important and a "cheaper", smaller or whatever camera might suit your needs better and safe you a lot of money than going for a model with 32135464687 extra things you really don't need in the end, but had to pay for anyway

The newest generation of Micro 4/3 cameras are starting to hit high-ISO performance comparable to the 5DII, and some of the NEX line is already unbelievable in terms of it.

 

I really like my GF2 + 20mm for doll shots, if there's a passable amount of light.

The newest generation of Micro 4/3 cameras are starting to hit high-ISO performance comparable to the 5DII, and some of the NEX line is already unbelievable in terms of it.

 

Yes, but why get the expensive camera with unbelievable good high-iso performance if she can get an older, cheaper model that might still be awesome in all the other areas

i.e. why get a new generation one?

That's what I wanted to say, not "get a DSLR instead of a mirrorless or whatnot".

Haha no no i dont ask because i am thinking of buying a camera, i am asking about it, because i am thinking to change my system... (atm Canon 550D)

There's no point, imho. Get better lenses and more light, and master Your current camera.

Also, Your Camera Doesn't Matter

There's no point, imho. Get better lenses and more light, and master Your current camera.

Also, Your Camera Doesn't Matter

 

 

Haha yes i know ... But then i should buy a smaller one if it doesent matter

Because the Canon is so heavy to carry the whole day with the whole lenses and so on T____T

Well. if You want small & light & high picture quality then I think only NEX or micro 4/3 comes to mind.

Then again, 550D body is heavier than NEX-5N or E-PL3 (for example) only by ~250-300g.

And comparable glass has similar weight in both systems, because big sensor needs big glass.

Something really smaller will have to sacrifice the low-light performance, high ISO, noise etc...

You know, the laws of physics are rather stable in this matter...

Well. if You want small & light & high picture quality then I think only NEX or micro 4/3 comes to mind.

Then again, 550D body is heavier than NEX-5N or E-PL3 (for example) only by ~250-300g.

And comparable glass has similar weight in both systems, because big sensor needs big glass.

Something really smaller will have to sacrifice the low-light performance, high ISO, noise etc...

You know, the laws of physics are rather stable in this matter...

 

Fuji's X-mount cameras also fall into the small & light & high picture quality category as well, although they are slightly larger & heavier than the NEX or M4/3 cameras, the picture quality more than makes up for that difference. Noiseless ISO 6400 images, and ISO 25600 images with no detail loss and only some color noise (with noise reduction turned off), beats out many DSLRs for ISO and noise handling.

 

That 250-300g weight difference between a 550D body and one of the smaller mirrorless types more than makes up for adding the lens onto the mirrorless, which is also somewhat lighter than the lenses on the 550D.

Okay, let's compare the M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm f/1.8 - 116g, and Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II - 130g.

Not that big difference?

 

Question is - is the 300 or even 500g difference worth changing all the photo gear and spending extra $$$,

gaining almost nothing more in return?

Okay, You can throw additional few millimeters of smaller dimensions. But is it worth it for Anouc?

Imho not. If You want quality, then 550D is more than adequate. Just add a good lens and light.

And tripod. Don't forget the tripods

Edited September 20, 2012 by Guest

Personally I like the new Panasonic f/2.8 zooms, 12-35 & 35-100. They're almost exactly the size and weight of Canon's kit 18-55 and 55-250!

Okay, let's compare the M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm f/1.8 - 116g, and Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II - 130g.

Not that big difference?

 

Question is - is the 300 or even 500g difference worth changing all the photo gear and spending extra $$$,

gaining almost nothing more in return?

Okay, You can throw additional few millimeters of smaller dimensions. But is it worth it for Anouc?

Imho not. If You want quality, then 550D is more than adequate. Just add a good lens and light.

And tripod. Don't forget the tripods

 

Not a huge difference, but all the little differences add up. I never said it would be worth it to try to swap out all that gear, unless a particular person is looking to get out of a system they don't particularly like, there's no reason to simply jump ship on a whim. Especially if your gear does what you want it to do and you're comfortable with it.

 

Although comparing the M.Zuiko 45mm f1.8 (90mm equivalent) to a 50mm f1.8 isn't quite an equal comparison.

 

Personally I like the new Panasonic f/2.8 zooms, 12-35 & 35-100. They're almost exactly the size and weight of Canon's kit 18-55 and 55-250!

 

As is similar to this comparison, as the Panasonic 12-35 f/2.8 would be 24-70 equivalent and the 35-100 would be 70-200 equivalent due to the 2x crop factor of M4/3 sensors.

 

Compare the M4/3 lenses to their true focal length/viewing angle equivalents, and the size difference shows a little more.

 

 

Again, as has been said before, if your camera does what you need/want it to do, there's no real reason to change it. The phrase "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." fits this situation perfectly.

In my opinion, it really doesn't matter what camera you have to shoot dolls. My standards are such that I used to say almost anything better than a cell phone will do (too noisy otherwise), but even that is not quite true anymore. So I would say to choose your system's requirements on other priorities.

 

My other priority is travel and I have lost enough money in compacts that I won't go there anymore. I value small size, low weight and good low light performance, which m43 reached this year for me (see aforementioned f/2.8 zooms + noise performance of the newer 16MP sensors). I am not fond of razor thin DOF for portraits since I usually stop down to f/4 or more on APS anyway, so I am not bothered this relative disadvantage.

 

But for many, size is not so important, so they may not mind NEX's larger lenses. Also, I can understand the desire for an optical viewfinder; my sensibilities observe that an optical VF has no battery requirements and a refresh lag of the speed of light. Also a fair number of people actually want a camera to be huge and heavy. More power to them.

These images were one of the reasons I decided to get my NEX (among many others). It compares the NEX-5N to my old Canon T1i (500D) and the Lumix GF2.

 

 

 

 

Now, granted these are not the greatest shots and are all taken at 6400 ISO, an ISO most people wouldn't use, but still, I thought it was an impressive show of how far you can push the sensor.

 

You can see the rest of the comparisons here: http://kamlau.com/hardware/sony-nex-5n-vs-lumix-gf2-vs-canon-t1i/

Quite an impressive showing by the NEX-5N in those shots. I'm curious as to what lenses were used for each camera for those shots.