Switching from D5100 to Mirrorless?

[aphex]

As much as i love my D5100, i'm finding one thing that is keeping this camera from being perfect. I love to use Live View when taking pictures of my 12 week old daughter, but the time between pressing the shutter button and the picture being taken is just a tad too slow when using live view, as a result i regularly have missed/blurry shots of her.

As a result, I'm thinking about going mirrorless so i can use the live view all the time and snap quick pictures the whole time. I also wouldnt mind something a bit more pocketable (a reason i looked at switching a few months back as well), though some of the lenses can still be big.

Is this my best option? Would like to stay under $800 for everything, currently looking at the Sony NEX-5R

 

[jhansman]

This might help:
http://www.gizmag.com/mirorless-camera-comparison-2012/25247/

I love my D5100, but then I'm not photographing kids via live view, so I can't appreciate your problem. Any reason you can't get the shot you want from the viewfinder?

 

[Syborg1211]

I have no experience with mirrorless cameras, but how about you try to make do with what you have by using the viewfinder instead of live view? This will remove the lag and cause no missed shots at the cost of you having the hold the camera up to your face (like most photographers do anyways).

Also, blurry shots are not a product of live view. Blurry shots are a result of the shutterspeed being set too low. If your camera opens the shutter to expose the picture for too long then your hand shaking will cause blurriness. This is not affected by shutter lag, which is how long it takes for your camera to BEGIN exposing the picture after you press the button. The shutter lag is what's longer in live view mode.

What mode do you have your camera on? Auto? If you use the shutter priority mode and manually set your shutter to a shorter duration, your chances of getting a blurry shot will greatly decrease. The rule of thumb is 1/(focal length). So if your lens is set to 50mm, then you want to use at least 1/50 of a second for your shutter.

I believe for a crop camera like the D5100 you need to adapt this rule to use your effective focal length instead of actual, so you need to multiply your starting 50mm by 1.5 to get 75mm, which in turn leads to 1/75 of a second for minimum shutter to reduce blurriness. If you're still getting blurry shots, then cut it further.

You can also make sure that your subject is properly lit up. The more light there is, the shorter the shutter speed needs to be to properly expose the photo. This is especially useful in Auto mode because the camera is just trying to set the shutter speed to properly expose the photo and doesn't care as much about blurriness from movement. Try turning on more lights, opening the shades, or adding your own light with a flash (preferably bounced).

Also might take a look at how you are holding the camera. There are right and wrong ways to hold a camera to reduce camera shake and get sharper photos. There's a lot of information on camera holding on google so I won't go into that, but make sure that the camera is always properly supported, whether it be by your hands or other objects like a railing or ledge.

 

[blastingcap]

As much as i love my D5100, i'm finding one thing that is keeping this camera from being perfect. I love to use Live View when taking pictures of my 12 week old daughter, but the time between pressing the shutter button and the picture being taken is just a tad too slow when using live view, as a result i regularly have missed/blurry shots of her.

As a result, I'm thinking about going mirrorless so i can use the live view all the time and snap quick pictures the whole time. I also wouldnt mind something a bit more pocketable (a reason i looked at switching a few months back as well), though some of the lenses can still be big.

Is this my best option? Would like to stay under $800 for everything, currently looking at the Sony NEX-5R

If you actually use your DSLR for the optical viewfinder sometimes and need the fast PDAF autofocus there, then I'd recommend getting a second camera: a LX-7 or RX100. They are very similar, like how the LX7 has worse sensor, better lens, which is just the opposite of the RX100. But the LX7 is cheaper and wider. I don't regret getting my RX100 per se, but I do wish it went wider sometimes.

 

[aphex]

Sorry, i should have clarified a bit more. My eyesight has gotten progressively worse over the years (near sighted in one eye, far sighted in the other with a nasty astigmatism), so i've had to rely less and less on viewfinders as using them with glasses proves quite the challenge to see the whole image. I tend to slide them up when i use the viewfinder and just use my bare eyes, but even using the diaptor adjustment i can never get it clear enough that i feel comfortable.

 

[aphex]

Also, blurry shots are not a product of live view. Blurry shots are a result of the shutterspeed being set too low. If your camera opens the shutter to expose the picture for too long then your hand shaking will cause blurriness. This is not affected by shutter lag, which is how long it takes for your camera to BEGIN exposing the picture after you press the button. The shutter lag is what's longer in live view mode.

Just to clarify this as well, i'm using the Nikon 35mm f/1.8, the blurryness stems from my attempt to capture a wide open shot (~1.8 - 2.8) and my daughter moving just enough to fall outside the narrow depth of field i'm trying to capture. I agree that using the viewfinder would alleviate this, but its not ideal for me and she moves quite a bit (only 12 weeks old)

 

[AkumaX]

Congrats on being a dad!

I have a Canon DSLR and a Sony NEX-5N to capture my kid.

On your D5100, you could up the ISO and change your aperture to f/2.8 to maintain a higher shutter speed for capturing your daughter

 

[Munky]

What you're describing sounds like slow focusing, which happens because in live view the DSLR has to use contrast detect focusing, as opposed to the much faster phase detect focusing when using the viewfinder. Just to clarify, are you pressing the shutter half way to get it in focus before taking the picture? That would work better than mashing the button down all at once.

 

[blastingcap]

You know, a lot of mirrorless cameras do have faster focusing on the LCD screen, but still not up the levels of a DSLR's PDAF (using optical viewfinder). Exceptions:

Nikon 1 series has DSLR-like speed and accuracy

The most recent Micro Four Thirds cameras also have DSLR-like speed and accuracy but for single shots only, as they don't track moving objects that well

NEX is catching up and depending on the camera + lens combination, you can get some pretty speedy autofocus on them as well

 

[xSauronx]

If you actually use your DSLR for the optical viewfinder sometimes and need the fast PDAF autofocus there, then I'd recommend getting a second camera: a LX-7 or RX100. They are very similar, like how the LX7 has worse sensor, better lens, which is just the opposite of the RX100. But the LX7 is cheaper and wider. I don't regret getting my RX100 per se, but I do wish it went wider sometimes.

love my lx7....got it on sale for $300 a few weeks ago. pretty decent camera, the rx100 was on my wishlist but at half the price the lx7 was impossible for me to pass up. pretty quick shots, too.

 

[CuriousMike]

Can you verify your shots are taken at a reasonable shutter speed?

You could be at f1.8 with a 1/5 second shutter = blur.
A mirrorless isn't going to help.

Crank the ISO up to 1600 or 3200 with f2.8 ( or whatever it takes to get to 1/30 or 1/60 ) and see if you're still dealing with blurry shots.

That NEX ( while a great camera ) doesn't change the laws of photography = slow shutter speed is slow.

 

[Railgun]

Have you tried these?

http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?o...feature1=Nikon

 

[SecurityTheatre]

I would advocate the Nikon 1 series for good autofocus and comparable image quality to the Sony, but with limited experience on these systems, I'll leave it there.

Don't get too caught up in all the suggestions to keep the SLR. Get what you will/can use to capture memories, not what people think you should have.

 

[Throckmorton]

Get a Sony A37. The electronic viewfinder works fine with glasses, including polarized sunglasses. The field of view is perfect. You also get image stabilization with every lens including the 35mm f 1.8 prime.

 

[JohnnyRebel]

I really like my Nikon V1. Especially with the 18.5 f/1.8 and 10mm f/2.8 primes. The kit lens is very good and has especially useful VR.

By far, the best featurew is the superfast autofocus and intelligent shooting modes. Sharp snaps are are snap!

 

[nOOky]

I just picked up a Panasonic Lumix G5. It really had everything I was looking for in an entry level DSLR or dang close at a reasonable price.
I haven't used it too much yet due to time constraints, but I really love the speed of the auto-focus, the sensor that turns the evf on or off as you move your eye next to it, and the compactness of it even with the 14-42 lens.
I would say I'll end up buying at least one more lens for it, if not 2. The lens are more money than their comparable DSLR brethren, but not too bad.

 

[blastingcap]

I just picked up a Panasonic Lumix G5. It really had everything I was looking for in an entry level DSLR or dang close at a reasonable price.
I haven't used it too much yet due to time constraints, but I really love the speed of the auto-focus, the sensor that turns the evf on or off as you move your eye next to it, and the compactness of it even with the 14-42 lens.
I would say I'll end up buying at least one more lens for it, if not 2. The lens are more money than their comparable DSLR brethren, but not too bad.

I had a G3 and ultimately sold it because I wasn't too happy with the sensor on it. Even with sharp lenses, I could never get the kind of ultra sharp photos I wanted out of it due to the freaking AA filter. But the G5 has an upgraded sensor and hopefully more acuity/less AA meddling.

 

[gevorg]

I've had a Sony NEX-5N before and it had amazing image quality, better than Canon T4i and at least as good as Nikon D5100. The main downside of it, as well as any other mirrorless camera today, is the slow auto-focus performance. Sony tried to improve it with on-sensor phase detection with their latest offerings but most users report that its still nowhere near as good as even an entry-level DSLR.

For taking pictures of kids running around or playing with the dog in the backyard, consider a Sony SLT like A57, preferably with a lens that uses SSM technology. Its live view is light years ahead of any equivalent Canon or Nikon, the only time you might resort to a viewfinder is on a very sunny day.

 

[gus6464]

I got my wife a Nikon V1 and I have been using it more than she has. The AF is incredibly fast and the lenses are pretty good. I know people complain about the small sensor and high ISO performance but I got the NB-5 flash and have no problems taking indoor pictures. I am not one to take pictures in the dark so don't really care about very low light shooting.

 

[Invalid]

You should consider the Olympus OM-D E-M5. It's is one of the more expensive mirrorless but performance is right up there with the Nikon D7000 or even beat it in some areas. Auto Focus is lightning fast and small enough to take it with you..

http://www.photographyblog.com/articles/head_to_head_review_olympus_om-d_e-m5_v_nikon_d7000/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5

 

[cantholdanymore]

You should consider the Olympus OM-D E-M5. It's is one of the more expensive mirrorless but performance is right up there with the Nikon D7000 or even beat it in some areas. Auto Focus is lightning fast and small enough to take it with you..

http://www.photographyblog.com/articles/head_to_head_review_olympus_om-d_e-m5_v_nikon_d7000/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5

That's my camera and I like it very very much, BUT auto focus is not its forte.

 

[aphex]

Just to show an example of what i like to shoot, below is a video of my daughter i took late yesterday with the D5100, pretty sure i had it at f/2.2 and ISO3200.

https://vimeo.com/57496385

While i was using Live View to take the videos, i would randomly snap shots and the time lag between the shutter button depress and the actual shot was enough to cause many of them to be blurry as she moved.

 

[Invalid]

That's my camera and I like it very very much, BUT auto focus is not its forte.

Auto focus is plenty fast when combined with the right lens (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-WLvEvqMZE). Now tracking focus for sports is another thing.

 

[Ransonju]

Congrats on being a dad!

I have a Canon DSLR and a Sony NEX-5N to capture my kid.

On your D5100, you could up the ISO and change your aperture to f/2.8 to maintain a higher shutter speed for capturing your daughter

I have been all over the Internet looking for someone in your position (not to sound creepy or anything!). I am currently an iPhone/P&S user and am looking to upgrade to something better. My main goal is getting better shots of my kids (age 4 and 1) indoors and without flash. Also will be used for kids sporting events in the future. I have narrowed it down (I think) after much research to the canon t3i or the sony nex 5n or 5r. I like the larger sensor when compared to the m43 and those are in my price range. I know the canon will suit my need except for one thing...size. I'm afraid the DSLR will end up being a $600 dust collector.

My main question for someone in your situation is: are the low light autofocus capabilities that bad for the nex 5n? I have seen a couple instances but was wondering how much you notice it when taking shots of your kid. I can't really get a clear answer and don't want to end up getting out of focus shots. If it is going to be an big issue I will just get the canon. I would rather get the shot than miss the moment completely. I always have my iPhone for ahot in good lighting. It works pretty good in those situations.

Thanks for any feedback.

 

[twistedlogic]

time lag between the shutter button depress and the actual shot was enough to cause many of them to be blurry as she moved.

Not sure if your stating this right.

Are you saying that the shutter lag is causing the blurry photo or you are missing the opportunities of her being completely still because of the time between clicking the button and the photo taking.

It sound more like the Shutter Speed is too slow causing the motion blur, not the shutter lag. A new camera will have the same issue, unless you invest in a FF camera where you can boost the ISO even higher than 3200 and have similar noise.