A long time away..

[Pvapour]

Its been a while since ive had enough time for induldging in photography properly, last time was a canon eos 450 which i used mainly for macro, though had an ef 100-400 for wildlife but wouldnt want something so cumbersome this time, ended up using a tamron 100-270 instead as it was so much more convenient.

Thing is, more time now and a looming safari holiday i want to get back into things so do i go dslr again or mirrorless?

Have mirrorless moved on to the point where they are now better than my old eos 450? I loved dslr but it was a hell of a thing to cart round..

If yes, is a decent compact (canon prefered) with three lenses available for under £1k? (Tele, wide, macro)

My perspective is i’d like to move on quality wise from the eos 450 but want it to be more manageable.

id like bluetooth conectivity to iphone, wifi direct to flickr an even bigger plus but i dont even know if this tech is out there! not looked at anything tbh as here was always my first port of call for adivice

Any pointers?

[StevieBee]

Not many cameras have Bluetooth but most from the mid-range up have WiFi and or NCF (Near-field communication) so you can ping photos direct to your phone or tablet. Access to Flickr from thereon is dependent upon mobile connectivity or wifi availability.

I've no direct experience of Mirrorless but my feeling is from reviews and comments is that the jury's out on everything other than size and weight. Also, unlikely you'd get what you'd want for a sub £1k budget. And as you're off on a safari you'll be needing a reasonably meaty telephoto so adding an extra few grams at the other end isn't really going to make much difference.

[Pvapour]

Thanks Stevie, a good balanced insight that saves me trawling reviews..

So, the main reason for getting back in at this point is for the safari and i dont think im going to get the results i want with mirrorless for the money i want to spend basicaly..

DSLR and the best zoom, tele lens i can get for 1k budget, have lenses moved on much in 6 years? I reallynliked my tamron 18-300 (from memory) but i see they do an 18-400 now, is that well respected or are there better options?

And a decent entry dslr to go with it, canon prefered as i can remmeber the controls, assuming they are up there tech wise on connectivity..

[RobDickinson]

StevieBee said:

I've no direct experience of Mirrorless but my feeling is from reviews and comments is that the jury's out on everything other than size and weight.

Modern mirrorless (sony, fuji, canon) are very capable tools that do very little poorly

[Pvapour]

RobDickinson said:

StevieBee said:

I've no direct experience of Mirrorless but my feeling is from reviews and comments is that the jury's out on everything other than size and weight.

Modern mirrorless (sony, fuji, canon) are very capable tools that do very little poorly

How would you say they compare to a dslr set up of 6 years ago then? On a 3-400 zoom basis?

Eta: . Fisrt look at bridge and theres the Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV, saying its in a league of its own, is that right? 24-600! For £1200

Edited by Pvapour on Saturday 23 February 09:30

[Derek Smith]

I've gone mirrorless, a G7. The drop in weight is not as much as you might think, but the reduction in bulk is significant.

My only complaint is that some controls are easy to activate inadvertently. Despite having the camera for some 18 mnths now, only last week I tripped the autofocus off and didn't realise until too late.

However, it suits me. I've got a 100-300 lens and that is quite a bit smaller than I expected. With the standard 14-140 it's all I need.I can control it from my android phone and I believe I can download the images to it, but never tried.

I went to Park Cameras and tried a range of cameras, DSLR and mirrorless. This one 'fitted' nicely. I think feeling good in the hands is an essential.

[RobDickinson]

Xt3 or the new sonys etc should be fine, decent performance etc.

older or lower end stuff then a dslr of similar level will do better.

[TheRainMaker]

StevieBee said:

I've no direct experience of Mirrorless but

Probably shouldn’t comment on it then

The budget of 1k won’t get anywhere near a mirroless system.

Older DSLR will be the only option.

[RobDickinson]

Pvapour said:

Eta: . Fisrt look at bridge and theres the Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV, saying its in a league of its own, is that right? 24-600! For £1200

Thats not a mirrorless its a heap of crap posing as a camera.

[Pvapour]

RobDickinson said:

Pvapour said:

Eta: . Fisrt look at bridge and theres the Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV, saying its in a league of its own, is that right? 24-600! For £1200

Thats not a mirrorless its a heap of crap posing as a camera.

Go on, educate me.. they describe ot as ‘in a league of its own’ obviously within its bracket, and you say its crap, can u fill in the gaps?

[Pvapour]

Derek Smith said:

I've gone mirrorless, a G7. The drop in weight is not as much as you might think, but the reduction in bulk is significant.

My only complaint is that some controls are easy to activate inadvertently. Despite having the camera for some 18 mnths now, only last week I tripped the autofocus off and didn't realise until too late.

However, it suits me. I've got a 100-300 lens and that is quite a bit smaller than I expected. With the standard 14-140 it's all I need.I can control it from my android phone and I believe I can download the images to it, but never tried.

I went to Park Cameras and tried a range of cameras, DSLR and mirrorless. This one 'fitted' nicely. I think feeling good in the hands is an essential.

thanks, read your post on the other thread to https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

i'm thinking a good 1" sensor bridge camera is hard to ignore for simplicity and convenience, the lure of 600mm in a small package that takes an image as good a quality (if not better) as my old eos450 is really hard to ignore for what i want.

i would prefer Canon for the OS as the sony nex 3n i borrowed recently is awfull to navigate and i suspect all sonys are the same judging by reviews, shame because the sony ranks top in all compact reviews and canon doesn't do so well, maybe look at the Lumix or Nikon if there software/menus are any better, any views?

[Derek Smith]

Pvapour said:

thanks, read your post on the other thread to https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

i'm thinking a good 1" sensor bridge camera is hard to ignore for simplicity and convenience, the lure of 600mm in a small package that takes an image as good a quality (if not better) as my old eos450 is really hard to ignore for what i want.

i would prefer Canon for the OS as the sony nex 3n i borrowed recently is awfull to navigate and i suspect all sonys are the same judging by reviews, shame because the sony ranks top in all compact reviews and canon doesn't do so well, maybe look at the Lumix or Nikon if there software/menus are any better, any views?

It's easy to forget how much more pleasant it is to spend a day with a mirrorless round your neck. As soon as you borrow a full frame, it all comes back. I'm pleased with my G7.

I've had quite a few Panasonic cameras over the years and have got used to their interface. I would not suggest that it is better or worse than any other.

I've also used bridge cameras and found them excellent at what they do. I've got a friend who shows me his latest images of the Moon, taken with the 900 (I think) lens on his Nikon bridge. You can see too many though but the quality is remarkable.

Enjoy the process of picking a camera.

[DibblyDobbler]

Hi PV.

I've an RX10iii - very similar to the RX10iv but a lot cheaper (especially if nearly new - I think you can still buy it new)

The lens is really very good - amazingly so IMHO. You need decent light (I don't tend to go much beyond ISO400) but it really does the business


Kingfisher by Mike Smith, on Flickr


Robin by Mike Smith, on Flickr


Dunnock by Mike Smith, on Flickr

[RobDickinson]

Pvapour said:

RobDickinson said:

Pvapour said:

Eta: . Fisrt look at bridge and theres the Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV, saying its in a league of its own, is that right? 24-600! For £1200

Thats not a mirrorless its a heap of crap posing as a camera.

Go on, educate me.. they describe ot as ‘in a league of its own’ obviously within its bracket, and you say its crap, can u fill in the gaps?

In comparison with others in its class it might be ok, but its a small sensor using contrast af with a mega zoom lens in a body that only looks like a grown up camera.

Compared to an ageing dslr and average zoom lens it will be poor

[Pvapour]

DibblyDobbler said:

Hi PV.

I've an RX10iii - very similar to the RX10iv but a lot cheaper (especially if nearly new - I think you can still buy it new)

The lens is really very good - amazingly so IMHO. You need decent light (I don't tend to go much beyond ISO400) but it really does the business


Kingfisher by Mike Smith, on Flickr


Robin by Mike Smith, on Flickr


Dunnock by Mike Smith, on Flickr

Hi DD

Thanks for that, your images are quite convincing..

I don’t think I need the better quality offered by mirrorless or DSLR tbh as everything has moved on so much in 6 years, I don’t mind upping budget to get something I really need but I don’t now looking at these.

I’m stunned by how good these are, far better quality images than my old DSLR and with stunning zoom capabilities and reasonable wide angle, (done any room shots?)

Two things tho, how bad is the menu navigation (as the 2013 Sony I have here is horrible) compared to canon which I liked? And what’s its physical size like to handle due to lens? It’s sunday here and nowhere is open to take a look

[DibblyDobbler]

Pvapour said:

Hi DD

Thanks for that, your images are quite convincing..

I don’t think I need the better quality offered by mirrorless or DSLR tbh as everything has moved on so much in 6 years, I don’t mind upping budget to get something I really need but I don’t now looking at these.

I’m stunned by how good these are, far better quality images than my old DSLR and with stunning zoom capabilities and reasonable wide angle, (done any room shots?)

Two things tho, how bad is the menu navigation (as the 2013 Sony I have here is horrible) compared to canon which I liked? And what’s its physical size like to handle due to lens? It’s sunday here and nowhere is open to take a look

Cheers. It's a dilemma I guess - I have a Fuji X-T20 which I use for 'proper' photography (ie lanscapes + filters, tripod etc etc) but for wildlife and general snaps I use the RX10iii. The upside is the lens is freakishly good especially at the long end (even wide open) - downsides, well you do need good light as it gets noisy quite quickly when you add iso and also it's pretty big - about the same as a 6D with a medium sized lens maybe (a lot bigger than my fuji). So as ever there is a trade off
I have tagged all the shots I have with it in my flickr stream so feel free to have a dig about if you are interested.

[Pvapour]

Freakishly good has me sold

Just watched a pretty good in depth review of the iv that went through all its functionality, features etc but most importantly its menu operation, and what he saw as a negative ie very little can be done through the touch screen, i see as an advantage, knobs, buttons and dials i prefer and it all looked very easy to manage on screen, very different to the sony i have here.

So, question is do i buy a iii from a shop in london for £850 or get an import new iv for £1100, the review really raved about the iv’s new AF which would be very handy on its first outing catching wild animals at distance, plus we’re talking a difference of £250 for something thats the later model, i think if the iii was £500 for a good used one it’d be an easier decision to go used but ikm leaning toward the iv heavily..

Dont think size of it is an issue now ive seen one handled.

Edited by Pvapour on Sunday 24th February 16:36

[DibblyDobbler]

I'd go for the IV if it was me - might as well have the up to date version.

I don't find the menus an issue... because I never use them! There's a 'Fn' button which opens a quick menu of drive mode, focus area, iso, metering etc - all the stuff you'd need for day to day shooting and it's dead easy to use.

The only alternative to positively rule out would be a crop sensor DSLR (eg Canon 200D) and something like a Tamron18-400 - I used to shoot with a similar combination and although not the last word in sharpness the lens gave perfectly decent results with massive flexibility. See below which was shot with 100D and Tamron 16-300. The total size and weight would be about the same as the Sony I reckon.

Probably depends what you like the feel of I guess - either would do the job


Tamron 16-300 Test Shot 1 by Mike Smith, on Flickr

[Pvapour]

Bought one (a iv)

Getting on with it fine but having trouble transfering 4k video to latest ipad pro..

Can transfer everything else, even hd video via wifi but 4k doesnt want to know, any ideas?

[DibblyDobbler]

Well done on the purchase

No idea myself on the video transfer issue - try this https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4141690