Should you buy a DSLR in 2024 (dslr vs mirrorless)

Picked up a 5dsr dirt cheap to live behind some ef tse glass…total steal for a great screwdriver.

I gave up photography all together. Boy did save a lot of money. 📷📷📷

I do like the feel of dslr. I currently use mirrorless apsc and the body feels a bit dinky and full frame is out of my budget. But I do a lot of video more than photo so I'll just stick with it

no way. DSLRs are not dead, there are still DSLR lenses selling for new prices.

Photography is done with film. Digital is for picture taking. You can train a chimp to shoot with a digital camera.

The real reasons are
1 weight
2 size
3 never missing or out focus again in photo mode

I don’t think the mirrorless camera have matched the operational speed or feeling that dslrs give you

same with dslr actually via live view
what are you talking a
about? aside from that, when you shoot raw it really differs because the image view from your camera is based on jpeg.

It's not a fair comparison when you compare a new Mirrorless camera with a DSLR from 2012

I am a photography beginner and I've been using a point and shoot (Canon PowerShot S110) for half a year now. I'm honestly fine with it. The resolution is quite limited at 3000×4000 but I don't make money off those photos. What's far more valuable to me is the compact form factor and the fact that I got it used for 80€. I think that if you're a beginner, having a camera be cheap and portable so you'll always have it with you (while it still allows you to learn all the important things) is the most important thing. If you have a really good phone, a camera like the S110 might not make sense to you but I don't care about spending more than 150€ on a phone so I wanted to have a camera in order to be able to capture dark stuff. Because it is so cheap and portable, I've been able to capture many things in situations where I would have never had an expensive, heavy camera on me.

I'm still confused Everytime I look through a mirrorless 😂

Mirrorless has no more killed DSLR than TV killed radio or CD's killed LPs. Even film cameras are finding new interest. If all the pros switch to mirrorless--and they won't--amateurs and hobby enthusiasts far outnumber pros and will keep "older" technologies alive. I wish so-called influencers would stop referring to going from DSLR to mirrorless or going from APS-C to full-frame as "upgrading." It's not an upgrade; it's just a choice to do something different.

You can still go to a camera store and buy a Full Frame AND a APSC camera new, both with Eye-tracking AF... for the price of one Full Frame mirrorless. To each their own.

To me the mirrorless cameras are good but new are not better is getting g the shot. I have been shooting for 50 years and getting the shot is more important.

One of the main advantages to have learned photography on a DSLR is how to meter your grays properly without relying solely on the realtime exposure of the screen to get the right exposure.

just bought a k3 mark iii, such a unique experience

Aside from the expense of a new mirrorless system, as a sports journalist I have noticed a big difference in my photographer’s image quality since he switched. And it isn’t good. So, personally I will stick with my DSLRs for now. And my film cameras TBH. Great video man 👍📸

I kind of have to disagree about dynamic range. Really there hasn't been a dramatic change for a number of years. If you look at the Nikon D850, the dynamic range of the Z7, Z7II, Z9, Z8 is barely any different (In fact the Z9 and Z8 have slightly lower dynamic range due to the removal of the shutter), even before the D850 you will see the D800 and D810, was within a 1/3 of a stop, to the D850. You sort of see a similar thing with Sony.

The big difference is Canon's dynamic range could not really compete with sensors made by Sony semiconductors (separate from Sony), who made sensors for Nikon and Sony. Even the 5Dmk4 whilst improved over the mk3, wasn't up to the level of Nikon or Sony, and really Canon only managed to bring their level up to the competition with the release of the R5 (which have very good dynamic range).

For me, the biggest advantage as a portrait photographer with mirrorless is eye AF and that you can now focus much closer to the corners, which could not be done with DSLR's.

As for the bodies. Yes, back in 2018, Nikon did try to copy Sony with having much smaller body designs, but with camera like the Panasonic S1, Nikon Z8, Canon R5 and even Sony now have bodies of a similar size to their DSLR's.

For video, a mirrorless camera is much more practical.

Really the big advantage DSLR's still have is battery life, which easily beats current mirrorless cameras.

I use a DSLR canon 7D MK 2 and haven't mastered that yet so the mirrorless can wait

Why are people selling their dSLR lenses when they work on a mirrorless camera with a simple adapter?

I like the instant responsiveness of a DSLR, also battery life as I never turned off my DSLR and it was always ready to shoot. After owning a mirrorless camera there is really no going back to that optical viewfinder. I know we all used to how a mirrored camera works, but it is really not intuitive.

I shoot with a Canon Powershot G6, can I count that as a ‘mirrorless’ camera?

one thing that i find interesting is that because the viewfinder on a mirrorless is a screen theres aalways gonna be a few miliseconds of delay, which coming from a dslr it feels a bit janky. im sure this is something youd get used to but for me has put me off using my friends' mirrorless cameras over my own old dslr

DSLR is my choice from 2001 I lived this change already from SLR to DSLR back in the day. Love my D850 and will keep it for ever. Use a Fuji XT3 for video but my photo work is reserved to my beloved Nikon D850, 750, 700, 600 through the years.

Mirrorless have abysmal electronic viewfinders compared to say, OLED smartphone screens or DSLR prism finder images. While I may appreciate that EVF images dim or brighten with settings changes, that matters little with camera sensors now routinely having 13+ stops of dynamic range. Where EVFs have a distinct advantage is in having no blackout at higher frame rates and video.

No.

Yes you should. I bought a 5D MK1 with a 50mm F1.4 for $150USD! In fact, I have used it for a couple paid gigs despite having a whole kit of pro mirrorless at home 😂

the Sony colors look crap. Also for just the cost of Sony body you can buy Canon DLSR with a couple of prime lenses

Dead? Well, no. I'll still shoot my DSLR as long as it keeps working. Not against mirrorless it's just that they are out of my price range. At 73, I really do not need to upgrade.... I won't live long enough to justify it.

I am a Pro Photographer, I own a 5D Mark IV and a Mirrorless counter part. I cannot find that a mirrorless is better than a DSLR and I have to give the quality of my images to my 5D4. The mirrorless is great for locking on the eyes for auto focus, but that's it. I hope that camera companies have at least one pro and one beginner DSLR in their arsenal being made for the future.

I recently sold one of my Canon R5s and bought a 5D mk3 in its place. I think Canon lost something in their image quality when they moved to the R series. They look too clean now. The 5Ds have a punch and just something really beautiful about the colours. I find the R5 uninspiring. The 5D feels more exciting to use. Also, I’ve shot so many weddings/portraits/events with this camera, it feels like an extension of my hand. I don’t even need to look at it to change settings.

I think about some of the greatest photos ever taken by photographers who knew how to setup the camera to get the proper exposure without all things a camera has today.

So the pros are that DSLRs are cheaper, they don't have many features and that they "feel" better?

All mirrorless aren't super expensive, many feel really nice and you can learn all those extra features so I really can't see why one would choose DSLR over mirrorless.

If you think a mirrorless is too small and light just buy a cage an get a heavy lens.

Nikon D700 used, 7 out of 10, low shutter count can be had for $400 or less. Then you can pickup a sigma 35mm 1.4 Art for $300 maybe a 85mm 1.8g for $300. You have a event or wedding starter FX setup for $1k. Throw in a few CF cards a decent camera bag to carry it all around, you are still $1200 in and a killer setup for being a savvy buyer.

Ok so you don't like the D700 because 12MP feels like not enough, well the Nikon D800 used is going for around $500 in 8 out of 10 condition again low shutter count. So we are still around the $1200 mark for a 36MP FX pro level camera and two fast primes.

For a beginner there couldn't be a better time to grab a good used pro level DSLR and a few fast primes and start making some amazing photos. Mirrorless is great, but you don't have to go $4k into this hobby to get a great setup.

You can usually choose Live View on a good DSLR and get what you have in mirrorless. A true optical viewfinder shows the real image.

I use my gear extensively for casual shoots, so the biggest plus of mirrorless to me is the small size and weight of the body and lenses. My Fuji XT30 is about ½ the size and weight of a DSLR with similar capabilities, and so I bring out very often, pairing it with the 18-55 kit or the 27 f2.8. It allows me to capture many memories with splendid photographic quality which no smartphone can match. When I go to event shoots, I pair it with a telephoto or a 16-55 f2.8 as well. Used Fuji lenses are quite affordable but their popular bodies unfortunately do not go down much in price.

I use both. 5DIII and R5 - the R5 is the work horseI but I will usually put a fast prime on the 5DIII and give myself options.

Yes, DSLRs are dead. Only buy mirrorless because it is the latest and greatest.

Haha, I use both. When I brought my camera to work to use when I got off a colleague looked at me confused and scoffed and said "Doesn't your phone take good enough pictures?"

I didn't know what to say ^^

I bought a second-hand entry level DSLR. Price has come down with people switching to mirrorless.

There's one more thing you should consider. Mirrorless cameras focus with their sensor. DSLRs only focus with the sensor in live view.

Sometimes, a lens will back or front focus on a body. The pro dslrs have focus adjustments but many of prosumer and entry levels don't so avoid those. My d5500 would back focus with my 35mm 1.8 so I could never get eyes in focus below 2.8. Its fine in live view but it's a much slower focus system than the ovf. Keep that in mind if you pick up a used DSLR.

Pros, surprisingly and for the most part, don't tend to change gear as often as they change their underwear, like many hobbiests. Hobbiests often crave the latest and the greatest, some thinking that new gear will breathe new life into their photography, while others crave bragging rights. Pros, on the other hand, constantly have the bottom line in mind. Constantly buying new gear cuts into that dramatically. DSLR or mirrorless will each produce fantastic results in the right hands.

Money...Money...Money😮😮😮

Let thiese problems to professionals, who have enough experience to tell theirselves. A newbie or an amateur should just enjoy whatever he prefers and affords. For me, mirrorless is more compact, quick, but tbh i like it just coz i dan use focus peaking with old manual lenses. Im so used to dslr and i love then so much that replacing them completely would simply turn off my passion. Less i look at the sfreen, more i enjoy my time. That's why i love looks throuh the lens. If you need to check every single shot the exposure, it's just that you dont know how your camera operates yet. I usually take two shots: first itry the exposure i feel is going to be good. Second shot i check if the adjustments were good enough. Then i go.
Plus: 5D mark Ii in perfect conditions is 250€ now. I challenge you finding a similsr quality mirrorless st the same price

learning on a DSLR is the way to go in my opinion.

And analogy I use often is like learning to drive on an automatic car vs a manual transmission car. The DSLR will not hold your hand. It can do auto exposure, but you still need to be mindful of your light meter, your exposure correction, the metering type you're using. It also doesn't hold your hand when it comes to autofocus. Yes DSLR have tracking focus modes when they are recent or highly specced enough, but you still decide where to put your tracking / focus point. In a way, you do the subject recognition and tracking yourself. On some older models, the lower dynamic range and lower high ISO noise performance means that it's less forgiving when you're processing the images in post and you need to be more careful about your exposure.

All of that is largely gone on most moredn mirrorless cameras. You have live exposure, so you just adjust the picture until it looks great. You have subject recognition features that will automatically see an eye, a face, a car, a bird,... and you don;t have anything else to do except keeping those in the frame and press the shutter. When it comest to the exposure, not only do you have a "what you see is what you get" view in the viewfinder and the screen, but you also have (generally) higher dynamic range and better high ISO noise performance so that mean that it's a lot more forgiving in post. You could mess up your exposure by 2 stops and still be able to completely recover your file and not loose any detail (of course that is also a thing with some DSLRs, as the mentionned Nikon D800 (and most full frame Nikons now that I think about it), but it wasn't really the case for Canon DSLRs, especially with APS-C models).

I learned photography on a DSLR camera. I am now shooting with a Nikon Z6, and I am of course I love the convinience of the eye tracking, live exposure view and overall better autofocus and DR than what I was getting with my DSLRs. But at the same time, that DSLR training allowed me to be able to use professionally cameras like the X-T2 and the X-H1 for sport and action for more than 2 years without any issues, despite the autofocus system being really lacking compared to other mirrorless stuff, especially on the subject detection features (there's basically none). That DSLR training also comes handy when using my Z6, in case of emergency I can always switch back to a classic zone focus mode and get perfectly fine results with it, if somehow the camera can't see the subject, I can.

And in my opinion, getting handy around all camera systems is a huge benefit even in the age of mirrorless cameras. On top of that that also allows to use cheaper equipment while getting the same results.

Positives all around

Good, balanced assessment. I shoot DSLRs and have never owned a mirrorless. The only times i've had mirrorless cameras in my hands has been when i've offered to take a shot for tourists at some beauty-spot so they could have a group portrait. My only impression, aside from my aversion to having a screen between me and the world, is that all these cameras felt somehow fragile. I'm sure there must be mirrorless that are built like tanks (?), but for the variety of shooting i do, and the environments i'm shooting in, being able to take a physical beating in all weather conditions is a high priority that my lumps deliver on. One thing i'll mention re having to chimp exposures... i do take test shots, but usually that's just to get my eye in for the day. Once i've got the light sussed i find that i can make the necessary adjustments as lighting conditions change - not a remarkable faculty, just a bit of experience in estimating and paying attention to transitions. Cheers from NZ.

Coming from the canon 5Dsr and moving to the R5. I found my rate of improvement increased so much by being able to see exactly what my photo would look like before I took it. at the time of the 5Dsr I only been professional for about a year or so... so I was still learning many things. But going mirrorless is a great option for anyone learning the trade. Also the FV mode which I still use for many of my high paying fashion shoots which is basically manual with selective auto in my opinion... has been a great tool for me with the R5 and R6.

Here in, L.A. C.A at community colleges they still ask for dslr with the 18-55 kit for photography classes

DSLR til I’m dead!

The only real difference between a DSLR is rather minor. One you're seeing a real-time view of your image as the sensor sees it, the other is through a mirror assembly. But when it comes to imaging, it almost doesn't matter and things like lenses and composition are going to be the biggest factors, not so much the camera or type of camera you use (ML or DSLR). In fact, I would say that it would be very hard (if not impossible) for one to tell the difference based on composotion alone (without having access to metadata or knowledge of the camera used). People shouild really focus more on composition and the art of photography, and less on this vs. that or which is better. Plus there are some great deals to be had that are still relevant today, even though they might be 10 years old -- for example, the Nikon D750 is still a great camera and still very usable even today... and it's almost 10 years old. Same for ones like the Canon's. But I mean if you're starting from scratch, yeah I mean ML would be a good way of "future proofing" yourself a bit as no new lenses will really be coming out for DSLRs (but there are plenty of used lenses on the market from people who have upgraded, so there are options). I'd say don't dismiss DSLRs as a viable option (At least for now) and especailly for people who are looking to get started on the cheap -- you can probably build a nice kit of used DSLR gear for under $1000, whereas a halfway decent ML body alone will probably cost you about $1000 by itself.

I shoot what works for me. No controversies, no preferences or bias. Mirrorless, MFT, DSLR, I have had many cameras in my journey. All great in their own way. Last of the cameras till I die. Canon 1DX, 1D mk.4, and Sony a7iii, a7rii. All running mostly Canon lenses. I landed on these as my system one and done. I grew up with SLRs. But the appeal of Mirrorless is size, and ease. The Canons are beasts. The 1DX especially. It doesn't care where, what, when, how long, it just goes like clock work. Everything here is used. Nothing bought new. The 1D mk.4 with the 1.3 crop and 10 frames a second, my plane spotter king. I use my 1DX for church social postings for them, also the a7rii has been for that too. My a7iii is the All arounder with excellent 4K UHD video, and speed demon AF, and great battery life. All my Sonys have battery grips. So shooting all day is easy with them. Just like the Canon's never die battery life. I think the Canons will out live me. They are just never quitters. My 1DX and L Lens 70-200mm for my church social gathering gets the most positive feedback from the production team, and congregation. My Sony also is winning friends. It isn't for me whether one is better DSLR, or Mirrorless it is a tool box and my purpose of use scenario. I am doing a museum shoot, and need to go smaller and fast. The a7iii is my go too in this case with a Canon mild zoom adapted. A nifty fifty, and a fast wide angle call it a day.