Point/shoot, mirrorless, DSLR

[Scoot]

I'm thinking about a new camera to take with me on backpack hunting trips. I currently carry a "bridge camera" (either a Sony HX-1 or a Panasonic Lumix FX-150). I'm generally happy with those two cameras in terms of pics (they can take better pics than I am capable of taking), but they are big and heavy for a backpack hunting trip where weight is at a premium. Related to this, I'd love to get a DSLR for my wife, but there's no way I'll bring a DSLR on this type of trip. So, I'm thinking about a point and shoot option or a mirrorless camera.

First, I'd love to hear some pros and cons of each of these options. Second, general info about the mirrorless cameras would be appreciated. Any additional thoughts or suggestions would be great...

[Lusid]

Panasonic has a line of DSLR's that is in a sealed body (dust/splash proof, whatever that means), I think the model is DMC-GH3.. If i were to buy a DSLR I'd go with the more rugged solution.

[Dbl]

First off I am no expert on mirrorless cameras. One thing that I am familiar with is the not great performance on moving subjects and in low light. They use a different focus system that requires "contrast detection". They basically focus on a part of the frame, focus, test the focus for sharpness, refocus again until it gets it right. Obviously this slows the camera down.

Mirrorless is in its infancy. You could buy a couple high quality point and shoots before you could approach the price of one mirrorless camera. You obviously like a DSLR are buying into a system with all its lenses and accessories. At this point those systems are in their infancy and you may not get a system that is compatible with future systems. Hard to say.

There is some good information available through a search. Much more than I know! Good luck with the search and let us know what you find.

[Cicada]

My first digital camera was a Fuji point and shoot that I bought at Wally world mart for about $225.00.

Good:

*10x zoom, or about 38mm to 380mm camera talk

*timer, 2se or 10 sec delay. That's how I get almost all my fish pics.

*Normal, macro, and super macro. Focus to something like 1/4 inch away from the front of the lense

Bad:

*Lower pixel count. Good enough for great 8x10's, but most services wouldn't let me try to print anything larger. Not really much of a negative with my photography.

*Slow focus and recovery. I sometimes missed shots of nieces and nephews playing sports because it took too long to make up its mind and then missed another because it took a few seconds to processs the image to the memory.

Overall, a great camera once I figured out how to run it.

[pulsar_nx]

Mirror less is where it's all headed in my opinion. Electronic viewfinders show the exposure,digital filters, and "loss less" digital teleconverter in real time. They are much smaller and so are the lenses. The Olympus EM1 uses a hybrid PDAF/CDAF auto focus that should be about equal to DSLRs in speed and accuracy if you can afford it. Lens selection is nearly as good as cannon and Nikon in m4/3 cameras like Olympus and Panasonic. Check out Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, and Olympus for mirror less cameras.

I personally have a Olympus OMD EM5 and couldn't see going back to a DSLR unless I already had a bunch of DSLR lenses or needed a 400mm+ lens.

[eyeguy 54]

not familiar with the mirrorless so i did this to see. is it worth the extra bucks? i suppose in time the cost will drop.

Nikon-D5100-vs-Olympus-E-M5