Frederik is a photographer, blogger and youtuber living in Denmark in the Copenhagen region. Outdoor photography is the preference, but Frederik can also be found doing architecture, product shoots and stills.
Normally you would expect a skilled photographer to deliver clean, well exposed images, but with intentional camera movement (ICM) the aim is to make the images look a bit more abstract by introducing a deliberate camera movement while the shutter is open.
There really are no rules when it comes to ICM and you can develop your own style and expression. The classic way of doing it however is to move the camera along lines in the subject, so that you emphasize these and blur details. For example, in a wood with tall trees you would move the camera up/down in a vertical movement, whereas a landscape image with a horizon, you want the movements to follow the horizon left to right or the other way round. You can also move the camera more freestyle, for example try to follow a wave as it comes to shore. The possibilities are infinite and you can really develop your own style and expression. In the example below I have moved the camera in circles to get the effect.
The way to do ICM is to make sure your shutter is open for say 1/2 to 2.0 seconds. You may want to go down to 1/10th or up to 5 seconds, but start with 1/2 to 2.0 second just to get you going.
You can do this by putting your camera in shutter priority mode and simply ask the camera to leave the shutter open as you see fit. The camera most likely will put the camera in base ISO (say 100) and minimize the aperture to whatever the lens allows, say f/22, but you may find that this will not do and the picture is over exposed. This could happen if your are shooting a sunset or a bright scene. In such cases an ND filter is needed. An ND filter is basically a pair of sunglasses you put in front of your lens to minimize the amount of light that gets through. I use a variable ND filter that takes between 3 and 11 (!) stops of light out of the equation.
Don’t be discouraged if you come home with a lot of images that are no good. This is only natural, also for experienced photographers. You may find that out of 2-300 images, there are only a few if any that works. Keep going and eventually you will succeed! Best of luck!
The answer is yes. However, there are a few things to be aware of, that can help your way into photography using YouTube as a teacher.
YouTube is a great pool of information about many things, also photography, but there is no guidance as how to use YouTube if you want to learn photography. In this blog post I share a few lessons learned from my own journey learning photography from scratch using YouTube. With a few awareness points, you can learn photography via YouTube both faster and more efficiently than what I did.
Know yourself
We all learn in different ways. Some like to read text, others to see pictures, yet others like practical exercises and hands-on experience. We learn in many different ways, and good school systems acknowledge this and make sure to cover different ways of learning.
YouTube obviously is a very visually oriented teacher, and only you know if this is a good way of learning in your case. If for example you know that your preferred way of taking in information is say via reading, you may want to vary the videos with blogs or other sources of information that presents the material in a different way. Many of the larger YouTube channels about photography also have a homepage with material and books available, often at a price, but it may be a good investment considering the time you may save .
Create your own structure
YouTube videos are often very specific. They compete with other videos about your attention, and to win that competition it is good to seek out a spot where others are not, and that tends to drive the content to be more and more specific. So overview and structure and helicopter view is not what you will find in the typical YouTube video. And it is difficult to know when you have covered all relevant ground to cover the basics of photography.
When you attend school there typically is a curriculum for the upcoming term. That tells you what you need to study, gives structure and also scopes what the final exam will be about. When you study on your own, you have to develop your own curriculum, otherwise you will be lost in the sea of information in the YouTube universe, and although you are making good progress, you lack some good yardsticks to measure your progress.
One way to make some structure is to narrow your searches for videos according to what type of photography has your interest. I know this is difficult when you are new to photography, but give it a shot still:
– Landscape photography
– Street photography
– Portrait photography
– Event photography (weddings etc)
– Product photography
– Abstract photography
– Architecture photography
– Wildlife photography, and so on…
Another dimension you can use bring some structure to your curriculum is to take the table of content from the manual of your camera! Yes, I know, this makes you want run away! But I am not asking you to read the manual (although it can be a good teacher), but just use the TOC as a guidance for your reading plan.
A third option is – yes I know it is old fashioned – to buy a book about the basics of photography. Joel Sartore has written a book that I find relatively easy to read: Photo Basics, published on National Geographic. Once you have read that book, you have a very good overview of the basics of photography and the TOC can be used to your YouTube searches to further deepen your knowledge.
Remember practice, practice and practice
It is tempting to binge watch YouTube videos in one long stream, and I did that as well. But remember to take a pause, to let the information sink in and for you to digest the information.
Secondly, it is important that you apply theory to practice and test what you have learned in real life. You think you know it when you understand it, but the practical appliance brings new dimensions to your knowledge and understanding. So don’t skip the “exercises” – apply what you have learned, and learn even more!
When you grow…
When you have been using YouTube for a while, you will find two things: (1) there are some YouTubers you like more than others and (2) suddenly you are thinking to yourself: I know this already! Both cases is a good sign that you have grown as a photographer and that you have learned a lot!
The few YouTubers that I enjoy may not be the same as those you have found or will find, but I share them anyhow to give you some search terms in case you are interested:
Jamie Windsor (very good perspective on things)
James Popsys (entertaining + you learn a lot)
Tony and Chelsea Northrup (basics and reviews)
Sean Tucker (street)
Steve Perry (wildlife)
Daniel Norton (flash especially)
Tech Gear Talk (reviews)
Omar Gonzales (Fuji + entertainment!)
These may not work for you, but then you will find others that do work for you.
Finally…
There will be good days and bad days. There will be days when you think “I shall never learn this!” – but don’t despair. Take a break. Go shoot some pictures instead, or do something else you enjoy.
Your brain needs time to relax and re-organize all the information you are feeding it, so see your down time as productive time in terms of processing and archiving all the useful information you are taking in.
With this, I wish you all the best on your journey to learn photography!
I guess anyone can read the specification sheet for both the Nikon D700 and the Nikon D750 and come up with a list of differences. But another thing is working with both cameras side by side for a long time. Then you get to know the differences from a real world experience. In this blog I want to share how it is to live and work with these two cameras, based on a few areas that I have selected as they mean a lot to me.
Nikon D750 to the left, D700 to the right. There is a reason why the Nikon D700 is mounted with a camera strap 3 times as wide as the one sitting on the D750…
The hype
The Nikon D750 is a much younger camera than the D700. It shows in many ways: the pixel count is higher, it does video, etc. But the D700 is a legend, and many consider the combination of sensor and processing logic to be unique, actually so unique that Nikon never since has made a camera with color rendition and micro contrast as good as the D700. Especially skin tones are known to be unrivalled and unique for the D700. I leave it up to you to decide if you want to believe the magic and hype related to the D700 – myself I have seen it periodically shine and have a 3D pop I have never seen with other cameras, and many of my landscape pictures look more like paintings than pictures, so yes, I can confirm there is something about the D700, but I am skeptical if all of the hype is justified.
Build quality
One of the things difficult to see from a spec sheet is the look and feel of a camera, and here the D700 and D750 are like night and day. Many say that the D700 is “built like they don’t make them anymore”, and I have to agree 100%. The D700 is – to use a cliché – built like a tank. A brick outhouse. You’ve heard the lingo. But it is. A Land Rover with a Range Rover on top. It is massive, made for endurance. If you don’t like a heavy camera and a bulky one too, then stay clear of the D700.
The D750 is more a camera like they build them today. It is more compact, lighter and has a much less solid feel to it. When you go from the D700 to the D750, you definitely feel like the D750 is more like plastic. Not that the D750 is of poor build quality – the D700 is just so much better. The grip on the D750 is deeper, but you quickly get used to the D700 if you – like me – have big hands.
Live view
You may not use Live View much, but if you do, then this is one of the areas where the D750 shines relative to the D700. I think the Live View implementation on the D700 was one of the first implementations Nikon did, and it is a bit quirky. There is no dedicated Live View button and you have to select between two different Live View modes. And the auto focus is slow when you opt for the “Tripod” mode, as it is called. Add to this that the D750 has a higher resolution rear LCD screen that tilts, and you will quickly enjoy the Live View implementation on the D750 with a dedicated button.
Nikon D750 to the left. Notice the tilt screen and the dedicated Live View button to the bottom right. The D700 has the vertical grip mounted, which of course does not make the weight difference between the two any less…
Pixel count
Many shy away from the D700 when they understand it “only” has 12MP. But I say: fear not, it is plenty! Unless you want to make very big prints that needs to be viewed very close up, or you want to crop your pictures heavily. If not, then 12MP is more than enough. And when you load your pictures into Lightroom or wherever you do your post processing, you will enjoy the smaller file size. And storage wise you will find that the D700 files take up less space on your hard-drive and backup storage facilities. So I will claim that the smaller pixel count makes living with the D700 much easier than the D750. And you will most likely never miss the 24MP resolution of the D750.
Viewfinder coverage
You may not think that the viewfinder coverage is a big thing, but to me it is, and actually one of the few areas where the D700 annoys me. I love that camera, but the fact that the frame is slightly bigger than what I see in the viewfinder is a nuisance. When I shoot, I frame very carefully according to the viewfinder and when I then get back home and open the file on my PC, I find it truly annoying to start my editing by cropping as I saw it in the viewfinder. The D750 does not have this issue.
Dynamic range
The D750 if notorious for its ability to do auto focus in low light situations – it literally sees in the dark. Truly impressive. The D700 not so much, and the dynamic range of the D700 is not as good as the D750. This may not be important to you – the ability to have both very bright and dark areas in the same frame is not important to all, and with exposure bracketing you can compensate a lot for lack of dynamic range. But I will say that in a low light situation – for example shooting in a restaurant without disturbing the guests with a big fat flash, my choice is the D750. Every time. Don’t believe the D750 has better dynamic range? Head over to DXO mark and see for yourself.
What to choose?
If you are about to choose between the D750 and the D700, then you are in for a tough choice. Boiled down to one sentence? You choose the D700 with your heart and the D750 with your head. The D750 is a more modern camera, lighter and easier to work with. But sometimes that is not what counts. Love conquers all, as they say.
If you heard that soft light is better than hard light, it is likely that statement came from a portrait photographer. Soft light is in general perceived as giving a more flattering look, where the light wraps gently around the subject.
But what is soft light? Soft light is light where the transition from bright to dark happens gradually, i.e. there is a lot of mid tones in the transition zones. Take a look at this pencil that I placed in my window space on an overcast day:
On a cloudy day, the sunlight is made into a massive light source as the light is spread across the vast area of clouds. In other words, the light source is huge! Notice the shadow at the tip of the pen? It is hardly there. You see a shadow where the pen rests upon the AirPod charging case, but the rest of the shadow is one big zone of tones of grey.
Now look at the next example, where I placed the pen under a reading lamp. A light source much smaller than the light from the clouds:
Suddenly you can now clearly see the shadow of the tip of the pen. If you look carefully, there still is a bit of grey zones where the white from the case transitions into the dark of the shade, but it happens much more abruptly than in the former example. The reading lamp as light source is simply much smaller.
Finally, the most harsh and brutal hard light I could think of: a flash held some distance from the subject with no diffusion at all! The bare bone flash activated here – you can see the flash light reflected in the yellow of the pen:
Notice the reflection of the flashlight on the pen.
In this final example, the transition from light case to shadow from the pen happens almost from one pixel to the next. Okay, maybe not so suddenly, but I hope the difference is clear.
It all comes down to the size of the light source, relative to the size of the subject. The bigger the light source, the softer the light.
So what should you use? As you may have guessed, my annoying answer is: it depends. Yes, for portrait photography you probably want to show the more flattering side of your subject and use flattering light. But hard light works fine as an artistic expression or to simulate a sunny day with no clouds at high noon. So use the softness of the light as a tool in your toolbox and use it deliberately, instead of just saying “soft light is the only light that works”.
Here at the brink of 2021, Nikon offers the enthusiast photographer more options than ever before. This is both wonderful and frustrating, as the obvious choice seems harder to find as the number of options increases. And there are no simple answers unfortunately, it all seems to come back to the classic counter question: “it depends…”. In this post I will try to distill the options Nikon offers in the 24MP range – typically aimed at the serious enthusiast and/or the freelance photographer.
On my YouTube channel I am a big ambassador for the Nikon D700, a classic and legendary DSLR that although “only” offering 12MP is probably one of the best DSLRs ever made for the enthusiast photographer. As it is no longer in production, it is only available used for around 400 EUR. This camera in terms of value is probably one of the best cameras for the enthusiast. However, many are not comfortable with the 12MP “only” and it seems like the camera producers center around 24MP as the sensor resolution for enthusiasts. If we go up higher to 48MP as found in the D850 or the Z7, then we are more into the professional segment, so in this post I will stick to the Z6, D750 and the D780 as they are all in the 24MP range.
The D750 is the oldest of the 3, but still today a very capable camera. The video specs are not up to what a modern hybrid camera can offer, but if you are into stills only, this can actually be an advantage as you are not paying for features you will not be using. The ergonomics of the D750 is excellent as we know it from Nikon, the menu systems are well organized and intuitive and the image quality is still today excellent. The body only price is around 1500 USD here in December 2020, but black Friday deals or other kinds of offerings can probably get the price even further down. And the camera body has a built in auto focus motor, meaning that you have access to a huge amount of used AF Nikkor glass available on e-bay and the like. In terms of value, the D750 is hard to beat when talking stills only.
The Z6 was the first mirrorless from Nikon, and they did their homework well and hit the mark pretty well with this first generation mirrorless camera. It is known to be a very good all round camera that does most things well, both stills and video. The critique of the camera was primarily that it only has one card slot and that there is no option to add a vertical grip, as the contacts are missing. This was fixed in the Z6 mark II, which in addition to fixing these shortcomings also added more computing power to the camera by adding an EXPEED processor. The introduction of the Z6 II gave rise to a price drop on the Z6, and the Z6 is around 1600 USD with an FTZ adaptor whereas the Z6 II is a 1000 USD more expensive than that. So if you are not nervous about SD cards failing and not planning to use a vertical grip, the original Z6 seems the value choice of the two. And both of them have in-body image stabilization (IBIS) to help you avoid camera shake when you need to keep the shutter open for an extended period of time.
The big disadvantage of going mirrorless is the fact that Nikon changed the lens mount system, so that is is no longer compatible with the notorious F-mount system. The motivation for this move yielding a shorter flange distance is – other than giving the IBIS room to work – that it gives new options for designing simpler and better performing lenses. It quickly gets technical, but that is the gist of it after reading Nikons explanation.
You have to buy an FTZ adapter, that can be had for around 100 USD when you buy it together with the camera body. But, there is a big but: The adapter does NOT have an AF motor, nor does the Z6 camera body, meaning that all the Nikkor AF vintage glass is now suddenly manual focus. This is where things to get complicated in terms of choosing between mirrorless or DSLR: The Z6 cuts you off from using mechanical auto focus on a lot of good vintage glass. And mind you that the glass that fits the new Z6 mount is expensive. You may be able to make a good deal if you buy a kit zoom lens together with the camera, but building your lens portfolio after that is VERY expensive relative to the DSLR options.
The Nikon D780 seems to try to bridge between the two worlds described above. It is a merger of the Z6 and the D750, so that in Live View mode, the camera is very similar to the Z6, whereas shooting via the viewfinder is very similar to the D750. So you get the best of both worlds, and maintain access to vintage glass with mechanical auto focus. And price wise the body alone is around 2300 USD, and hence significantly more expensive than the Z6, but that money could easily be saved when building (or re-using) a lens portfolio.
So what to choose as an enthusiast? “It depends…” – the most annoying answer of all, but unfortunately it is true.
The first thing I would ask myself in choosing between the 3 is: How important is video? One area where the cameras get better and better is video capability and if video is important to you, the D750 is struggling. But also think about how demanding your video requirements are – a GoPro next to your D750 could be a solution? Or maybe 1080p is all you need? Anyway, the more demanding your video requirements are, the less good and option the D750 is.
The second thing I would ask is: How important is auto focus? If you shoot things that are moving fast (sports and wildlife), then using vintage AF glass on a Z6 is a no go. You either have to buy F-mount glass with built in motors (AF-S) or go for glass that fits the new Z-mount directly. If you are on a budget and auto focus is important, your cheapest option is to go for the D750/D780 with vintage AF glass. But again, if face detection and eye recognition is important because you shoot a lot of portraits, then you have to use the D780 in Live View mode or go for the Z6. If auto focus is not important to you, then you are in luck: the Z6 will offer you the option to use cheap vintage glass via the FTZ adaptor and you will get focus peak assistance to help you obtain focus precisely and with great illustration of the focal plane.
The third thing I would ask is: How much vintage glass have I got to re-use? If you have a large portfolio of Nikkor vintage glass, and a good deal of this is with mechanical AF, then you can protect that investment with the D750 or the D780. Provided of course that you love your glass and want to continue to use if. If you are more meh-he, then the better option may be to sell your glass and go for the mirrorless Z6 or Z6 II. Your experience from building a lens portfolio then comes in handy, so you have a more focused mind when building your new portfolio.
What have I chosen to do? I am still with my D750. I shoot video on a Sony A7 RII so I have no need for better video capability currently. And the D750 with the mechanical AF motor built in, makes my collection of Nikkor vintage glass a joy to use. And as I seldom shoot anything fast moving, my auto focus requirements are all solved using single point focus. But mind you that this is what works for me given my situation and what I shoot – yours is different I am sure, so what fits me surely is no guarantee to fit you.
Thank you for reading this far! Comments are more than welcome!
One of the things I love about Nikon is the vast amount of cheap vintage glass that is out there on e-bay, plus their backwards compatibility – all the way back to 1950 or thereabout. Than means that most of the Nikon glass that they have produced since back then, can be used on a modern Nikon camera. And if you don’t like Nikon camera bodies, you can buy an adapter to fit the glass on the camera body of your preference.
Back in the film days full frame (FF) was the standard, as it was 35 mm film and not a digital sensor that sat in the cameras. That changed during the 1980’s and later, so that most cameras today have a digital image sensor. And for starters the digital sensor had the same size as the negative on a film – approximately 35 mm. What also changed was the amount of available sensor sizes. The so called APS-C and other reduced formats were introduced, along with new lenses. The advantage being that it was possible make lighter and cheaper glass, as the light would have to cover a smaller sensor. Although being smaller, the APS-C sensors could easily cram say 24 MP into the sensor despite the reduced size and hence a new fan base was created – people who do not want to carry heavy glass but on the other hand do not like the idea of reducing the resolution of the sensor.
Nikon made the APS-C cameras so that they used the same mount – the so called F-mount. That means that you can mount glass designed for APS-C on a full frame camera, and the other way around: mount full frame (FF) glass on a APS-C camera. It is the latter case I want to explore in this post, to see what happens.
In the best of worlds I would have shot the test shots with two Nikon cameras, say the D700 (full frame) and the D7500 (APS-C) or the D5600 (APS-C), but I lost my D7500 in a salt water accident and I have sold my D5600 to finance new gear, so I simply do not have a Nikon APS-C camera anymore. Luckily, I do have a Fuji X-T3 camera, which has an APS-C sensor size. And with an adaptor from K&F concept, I can mount the full frame lens on the Fuji camera:
Fuji X-T3 with a K&F adaptor to allow the Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 to be mounted
The disadvantage is that I now have to focus manually, and that the camera cannot control the aperture so I have to set the aperture on the lens itself. Further, the EXIF information that I get with the picture does not show the aperture anymore, as the lens and the camera cannot “talk” to each other – it is a dumb adapter. But for the purpose of this test, it is no big issue.
I am testing here with a wide lens, the Nikon 24mm f/2.8, and first I want to show you the picture taken on the Nikon D700 full frame body. The subject here is a little clay figure and I have put some items on the table to give some sense of the depth in the picture:
Nikon 24mm f/2.8 at ISO 400 f/2.8 – full frame sensorNikon 24mm f/2.8 at ISO 400 f/2.8 – cropped sensor
The second picture is taken on the Fuji X-T3 using the same lens with the adapter shown previously. As you can see, it seems like the little figure on the table has moved much closer and the frame is much less wide. For example, you cannot see the door to the right anymore and the stands to the right are almost gone.
This is known as the crop factor. When you use full frame glass on an APS-C sensor, then the picture is cropped because the sensor only uses the center part of the light from the glass.
The crop factor is typically 1.5 (for Cannon I believe it is closer to 1.6), and shooting with a 24 mm FF lens on an APS-C sensor as I have here, is the equivalent of shooting with a 36mm lens on a FF sensor. That explains why the frame is less wide and the subject appears closer.
Some say the crop factor is also to be applied to the aperture, so that the 24 mm f/2.8 is actually a 36 mm f/4. Below I have the two shots next to each other in Lightroom, where I have zoomed in on the FF version to the right, so that the clay figure has roughly same size. And then I have put some small lights that I normally use to test bokeh, to see if the full frame version would yield more background blur than the APS-C one. As far as I can tell, they are very similar:
The reason could be that f/2.8 and f/4 are both very wide apertures where the level of background blur does not change much, but from this test alone, I cannot conclude that you need to apply the crop factor also to the aperture to achieve equivalence.
Thank you for reading this far! Please don’t hesitate to leave a comment below or click the like button!
Unfortunately it is not possible to charge the battery grip via USB-C. You can see the top right green LED is on when I charge the camera itself via USB-C, indicating that the internal battery is being charged:
The two green LEDs bottom left that indicate the batteries in the grip are being charged only switches on when the dedicated charge cable for the grip is plugged in (the black cable bottom left):
Ever since the film days, SLR (Single lens reflect) cameras were built with a mirror behind the lens, that sends the light from the lens up into a pentaprism, that passes the light on to the viewfinder for the photographer to see. When the shutter is pressed, the mirror flicks up, exposing the film or the sensor behind it and the content captured will be the same as what the photographer could see in the viewfinder. During this process, the viewfinder turns black as the mirror blocks the light.
The traditional travel of light in a SLR/DSLR: Through the lens, hits mirror, sent upwards in the pentaprism and finally through the viewfinder to the photographers eye.
With the introduction of Digital SLRs, the film was replaced by a sensor that not only can read the light in a fraction of a second, but actually can do so constantly, which opens up for shooting movies. Further, many DSLRs today are equipped with a large screen on the back to present menus and options for configuring the camera, plus previewing the pictures.
Live view combines the sensor and the LCD on the back of the camera, so that the camera continuously shows on the screen what the sensor receives. As the mirror, when it is down, blocks the light from the sensor, the DSLR will – when it is put in live view mode – flick the mirror away to allow the light continuously to flow to the sensor:
Live view mode. Rear screen shows what the sensor receives.
The camera will – subject to the processing capacity – try to make what is viewed on the screen as close to real time view as possible, but for older cameras you will notice a lag or a bit of delay in what is shown in the rear screen.
Rear screen on the Nikon D700.
Some cameras allow you to flip the screen upwards or downwards, and some are even fully articulating, allowing you to swing the screen 180 degrees around to be viewed from the front of the camera. Many vloggers use this feature to view themselves when recording video. The rear screen on the older Nikon D700 depicted above is fixed and cannot be moved at all.
So what is the point?
So other than this now being technically possible, what is the point with Live View, if any? I think there are several:
First of all, sometimes the optical viewfinder is hard to use, for example when you try to shoot in a very low or a very high angle. You may want to shoot over a crowd at a concert, or shoot very low to get a certain angle of view. In those cases it can be difficult to put your eye to the viewfinder, unless you either have brought along a ladder an/or want to crawl on the ground. Especially if your camera has a tilt screen, then you will love this feature, but even with a fixed screen the Live View is a big help.
Second, the fact that the rear screen is a processed version of what hits the sensor, it is possible to combine what the sensor sees with various electronic overlays like a large virtual horizon indicator. I use that a lot to secure that my landscape pictures are level. Another example is focus peak indicators, where the screen shows which parts of the picture is in focus – it can be in the shape of say red colored dots. This is a great aid in obtaining focus when shooting with a lens without autofocus. A third example is to show picture in picture, i.e. the normal picture and then a smaller frame inside the picture where a zoomed in version of the picture is shown, again to aid focus.
Third, maybe a variation of the second, is that you can zoom in on the picture in the rear screen. Again this feature is super useful if you shoot with a manual focus lens and want to zoom in to make sure you have nailed focus.
A fourth benefit of Live View is that the camera typically does not use the dedicated focus system, but instead used the sensor and a bit of processing power to obtain focus. As many elder cameras have the focus points only in the center of the frame, you cannot obtain focus say in the corners. With Live View this limitation is gone and for single point focus you can use all of the frame to select your focus point. Especially macro photography shooters with elder cameras use this feature a lot.
Finally, when shooting into the sun, the light that you see on the rear screen is a processed version of reality and I doubt that the LCD screen is so powerful that it can blindfold you. When shooting into the sun using the optical viewfinder, I often find that I am blindfolded temporarily when staring straight into the sun. So I often turn to Live View in those cases. Notice that many camera manufacturers warn against shooting into the sun, both in Live View and using the optical viewfinder, so please consult the manual for your camera beforehand.
Any downsides?
The rear screen requires power to operate, and a lot more than the optical viewfinder where that part of the process is purely mechanical. So you will find that your batteries will be eaten faster than when shooting using the optical viewfinder.
For elder cameras, you may find that live view is sloooow. Very slow. It takes ages from you hit the shutter to the picture is done. On my Nikon D700 for example, the focus part alone takes several seconds (when in Tripod mode), where it for later models (the D750 for example) is much better.
And finally sunshine is not your friend if you shoot outside on a sunny day. It is like watching TV outside. It can be difficult to see the screen.
Thank you
Thank you for reading this far. Comments, questions and suggestions are more than welcome!
Credits
Illustrations used:
User: Kolossos – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=925806
I shoot both mirrorless and DSLRs and enjoy both of them. But there are differences, and in this post I want to share how I see them, and give you advantages of both types of cameras. My DSLRs are the Nikon D750, D700 and D5600, whereas my mirrorless are the Sony A7Rii, Fuji X-T3 and X-T20.
Nikon D700 in the background, Fuji X-T3 in front
Where mirrorless is better
Viewfinder options. The electronic viewfinder (EVF) gives some options for combining camera metrics and the traditional viewfinder in one screen, where the DSLR primarily gives the view through the lens, and allows a bit of data to be displayed beneath. The EVF can show you what hits the sensor alongside with vital metrics like the histogram , just to give one example, and the DSLR has no chance to do so, other than in live view mode.
Autofocus. The autofocus capabilities of a modern mirrorless are nothing but astonishing. It is probably debatable if the software in the camera is artificial intelligence or just very powerful software, but the result it delivers cannot be disputed. With continuous software updates the manufacturers can push new and better software to do face recognition and eye detection, and the recent Fuji X-T3 software update is a brilliant example of the progress made. Also, there is typically no limitation to where you can put the focus point for single point focus – on a DSLR that is more or less limited to the center of the frame.
Exposure preview. If you, like me, shoot at lot in manual mode, the exposure preview in the EVF is a huge help. What you see in the viewfinder emulates exactly the picture you will take when you hit the shutter, so if your settings underexpose the picture, your viewfinder shows a dark picture. I know that a DSLR has a metering scale that says the same, but I am often so occupied with looking at the subject, framing, etc that I forget to look at the meter. The “warning” that you get from the EVF has saved me some frustrations more than once.
Shooting with old manual focus lenses. The fact that the EVF allows you to zoom what you see in the viewfinder, is a huge benefit to manual focus, and this in combination with focus peak points makes manual focus on a mirrorless so much easier than a DSLR. In fact, these features in combination with a dumb adaptors, makes it possible to use vintage lenses from various brands on any mirrorless camera. So the huge amount of cheap but high quality vintage glass available has suddenly been brought to new life due to the features of the mirrorless camera bodies.
Silence. Maybe a specialized feature, but you can shoot absolutely silent with a mirrorless camera. No moving parts when you hit the shutter, if you switch on the electronic “curtain”. It is a very strange feeling when you try it first time, and I have my camera simulate the sound of a DSLR to give me feedback that a picture was taken. But I can see that wedding photographers taking the “I do” picture or the discrete street photographer enjoying the stealth mode of their mirrorless cameras.
Video capabilities. The mirrorless cameras get more and more computing power and this also makes it possible to process more and more resolution and frames per second. We have seen 1080p grow to 4K and 8K, the bit depth increases and the max frames per second also seems to double every second year. And this technology is primarily available in mirrorless, with the Nikon D780 being the exception to this rule. So demanding hybrid shooters probably only look towards mirrorless when choosing a camera these days.
Where DSLRs are better
The optical viewfinder (OVF). No matter how good they make the electronic viewfinder (EVF), it will never be as good and as fast as the optical one. There is no lag at all, and what you see is what you get (WYSIWYG). On the EVF, you are watching TV. Modern EVFs are fast and have a lot of resolution, but it will never be as fast and as high resolution as the real deal.
The battery life. Provided you don’t shoot in live view, the advantage of the DSRL is that it doesn’t have to fire up and power a TV screen (the EVF) that drains a lot of power. So the battery life of a DSLR is much longer than the mirrorless. You probably want to get a vertical grip for your mirrorless alone for the reason that it holds one or more extra batteries to compensate for the fact that a mirrorless chews your batteries like packman chews coins.
Ergonomics. I am of the opinion that a camera should either be so small you can carry and operate it with 3 fingers (like the Sony RX100) or so big and bulky that it fills your hand and has a good grip, like the Nikon D700. Anything in between is a mistake. Both Fuji X-T20, X-T3 and Sony A7Rii are unfortunately in the “in between” zone, and for all I have had to buy battery grips, not for the sake of more battery power, but to give me just decent ergonomics. I think it is fine that the body is more slim and the weight is a bit lower than on a DSLR, but please give me ergonomics like the good old DSLRs!
Price. DSLRs have been around for many years, and a good guesstimate is that more than 95% of the cameras out there today (October 2020) are DSLRs. And many cameras produced today are still DSLRs. So if you want to buy used or make a good deal on a black Friday, you will get much more camera for your money when it comes to DSLRs than a mirrorless. I am a big advocate for the Nikon D700, and although dated and only a 12MP camera, it produces absolutely amazing pictures and can be found for 400 EUR (used of course). And with a bit of luck, your copy will not be too beaten up and has a shutter count with plenty actuations left still. Be aware that the camera manufacturers stop producing spare parts after some years (how many varies) so eventually it will be difficult to have your trusty DSLR repaired.
What should you choose?
Camera choice comes down to personal preferences. You need a shoe that fits your foot. You cannot assume that because I like a certain shoe, that it will suit you. Feet and preferences are different. And so are photographers.
That said, I think that photographers shooting things that move fast like sports and wildlife will enjoy the AF features a mirrorless provides. But on the other hand the Nikon D500 (a DSLR) still has one of the best and fastest AF systems any camera can offer.
People photographers (wedding, portrait, friends/family) may enjoy the AF capabilities of the mirrorless, especially face detection and eye detection, to maximize the number of pictures in focus. It is a big relief that you can focus on other things than obtaining focus, and once you have gotten used to this comfort, I think it is hard to turn back.
Hybrid shooters will enjoy the evolution of the video capabilities in the mirrorless cameras. But a Go-Pro camera can also do astonishing things if your zoom/lens requirements are not too advanced, so a better option could be a cheap DSLR with a Go-Pro on the side.
And just to round off with a bit of perspective: Many of the pictures that are classic and that you probably have seen and admired many times, were made with technology far less advanced than the camera in your smartphone! Choosing a good camera body is vital, but subject, scene, colors, light, timing and composition are even more important. So maybe your good old DSLR is not so bad after all.
Memory cards do fail. It is as simple as that. But they do so very seldom, in fact very, very seldom. But it can happen, and therefore, with so many memory cards out there, it will happen.
Dual card slots on the Fuji X-T3
I have 5 cameras, shoot in the vicinity of 30.000 pictures a year (RAW format), and have never had a memory card fail on me. But you cannot use the past to predict what will happen in the future – the probability of a card failing on you is bigger than zero. It is as simple as that. It will happen, maybe not to you this year, but it will happen to someone this year.
So do you need dual card slots? It comes down to your risk profile. Most wedding or event photographers turn pale thinking about the conversation they will have with the client, when it turns out that some or all the pictures are lost. So many pros will be very risk adverse and demand dual card slots. And for a good reason: resilience is the cure.
For happy enthusiasts the situation may be a bit different. It is not necessarily a catastrophe if your pictures are lost, and that in combination with the paper thin likelihood of a card failure, leads many to settle for a camera with only one card slot. And the camera producers know this, and save some money making most camera models with only one card slot. And you can make your own version of resilience, and bring two 1-card-slot cameras where you alter between the two throughout the day – not as resilient as two cameras with two cards slots, but a lot better than only one 1-card-slot camera.
So my answer to the question is as annoying as when you ask your bank advisor for investment advice: the first thing they ask for is your risk profile. But it is really what it comes down to. With this reservation, my answer without knowing your risk profile is yes if you are a pro and probably not if you are an enthusiast.
Further, to preserve your data, you probably do backup the pictures on your PC to some alternate form of storage. But remember that it is not only the data that needs duplication to make a good backup, it is also the location. I once worked in a company that carefully did backup of their servers every night. Only to find that thieves one night ran with both the servers and the backup drives. So make sure that your backups are at a different location than the original, to counter both theft and fire. Cloud based backup solutions fulfill these requirements, so please factor this in next time you are to choose between a physical backup drive or a cloud based ditto.
Thank you for reading this far! Comments and questions more than welcome!
What also changed was the amount of available sensor sizes. The so called APS-C and other reduced formats were introduced, along with new lenses. The advantage being that it was possible make lighter and cheaper glass, as the light would have to cover a smaller sensor. Although being smaller, the APS-C sensors could easily cram say 24 MP into the sensor despite the reduced size and hence a new fan base was created – people who do not want to carry heavy glass but on the other hand do not like the idea of reducing the resolution of the sensor.
