DSLR Vs Mirrorless

sfoster

sfoster

Staff Member
Moderator
I've been doing a little googling, this one guy seems pretty confident that mirrorless is better for video than DSLR

http://mirrorlesscentral.com/dslr-vs-mirrorless-for-premium-video-which-one-is-better/
but he also talks about things like auto focus and intelligent exposure, which I think for all of us here would not be a priority, since we want manual control


Another article I read said that opposite of him, that DSLR are better for video and that the only advantage of mirrorless is that they're smaller, lighter and a little more convenient for the 'point and shoot' crowd

What do you guys think?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
It's really a matter of personal preference and workflow. Personally I have no use for any of the auto features, and I've shot many, many interviews on a DSLR and never found the 12 minute (not 29 as stated in the article) time limit to be a problem. So beyond that it just comes down to the look of each camera - which is not determined by whether it's mirrorless or not.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The mirror is never utilized in a DSLR when shooting video, so its really a non-issue.

The choice between stills cameras for video should not consider the mirror. You might consider the decreased flange depth of cameras without mirrors as a "benefit" because more lenses are adaptable to mirror-less stills cameras.

Now, if your talking VIDEO\CINEMA cameras then none of them have mirrors.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
One certain downside of the mirror is that it blocks the viewfinder when you're shooting video.

And some DSLRs have 12 minute limits (e.g., Canon T2i/D550; T3i/60D; 60D; 7D; 5D Mark II) some have 20 minute limits (early Nikons) and some have 30 minutes (Canon EOS M, 70D, 5D Mark III, modern Nikons).

On the other hand, some mirrorless cameras can shoot for hours (e.g., Panasonic GH cameras and the G6)

I am a mirrorless guy, but it's not just the mirror that deters me from buying a DSLR for shooting video, it's that most (but not all) DSLRs lack the critical mass of video-centric features that I grew up with back in film and tape days, e.g., headphone jacks, frame rates higher than 30fps and viewfinders that actually work for shooting video.

This was my baby back in film school in the 70s - the Chinon Pacific 12 SMR - the next best thing to a Beaulieu 5008S (which I couldn't afford). It had manual audio gain, an audio meter, a headphone jack, frame rates beyond 30fps, power zoom with autofocus, a through the lens video viewfinder (ok, so it was like looking through a flickering soda straw :))


chinon_12smr_pacific.jpg

With a 14-42PZ or 45-175PZ lens, my mirrorless GH3 has all of these features straight out of the box - my T2i DSLR, not so much.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
wheatgrinder said:
The mirror is never utilized in a DSLR when shooting video, so its really a non-issue.

The choice between stills cameras for video should not consider the mirror. You might consider the decreased flange depth of cameras without mirrors as a "benefit" because more lenses are adaptable to mirror-less stills cameras.

Now, if your talking VIDEO\CINEMA cameras then none of them have mirrors.
Click to expand...

Exactly what wheatgrinder said. Sensor and the glass in front of it are the only things that matter about the camera.

Mirror is never an issue in video. Blocking the viewfinder? You don't even have a viewfinder on a mirrorless... Not a real one anyway.

Recording limits have nothing to do with having a mirror. The early cameras are limited because of the 4gb FAT file system limits (newer ones advance the file and keep recording), and all non movie cameras are limited to 30 min, or they face extra taxes.

The things you should base your decision on is the final image, the cost, and the suitability and ergonomics of the system providing what you need.

Current tech shows the 5D3 (DSLR) and the GH3 (MILC) have really good images. I really want to see some images from the Sony a7r.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
lets not forget that photography cameras are ... just that, photography cameras with video capabilities, so what if you can record audio on an slr, your either too poor or too stupid to use it and thats the truth.

get a real video camera, that was built for the purpose.. id rather a c100 than a 5dmk3 if i was a real filmmaker..
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
8salacious9 said:
lets not forget that photography cameras are ... just that, photography cameras with video capabilities, so what if you can record audio on an slr, your either too poor or too stupid to use it and thats the truth.

get a real video camera, that was built for the purpose.. id rather a c100 than a 5dmk3 if i was a real filmmaker..
Click to expand...
Well... Yeah. Hand me a Sony f55 any day. But the question is if there's a difference between MILC and DSLR. IMO, the only difference as far as the form factor is that one is slightly smaller. Everything else is what happens from the image until it's written out. Lens, filter, sensor, processing, codec. You might add in the ability to get clean, uncompressed HDMI output, too.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
stef said:
all non movie cameras are limited to 30 min, or they face extra taxes.
Click to expand...

According to the article, Panasonic is clever and has a non-EU version without the artificial limit of 30 min. That's cool, wonder why others don't do that. I've actually been bitten by limits of some kind twice now.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
8salacious9 said:
lets not forget that photography cameras are ... just that, photography cameras with video capabilities, so what if you can record audio on an slr, your either too poor or too stupid to use it and thats the truth.

get a real video camera, that was built for the purpose.. id rather a c100 than a 5dmk3 if i was a real filmmaker..
Click to expand...

That sounds like some harsh truth :lol:
Sadly fall into the poor camp these days.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Sony's two-way mirror thing is pretty sharp too. You get a great optical viewfinder like DSLR that works while shooting video like an EVIL camera. The only downside is the Sony lens mount haha, but it's not much difference adapter or selection-wise than MFT, all the same-ish options available.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
stef said:
Mirror is never an issue in video. Blocking the viewfinder? You don't even have a viewfinder on a mirrorless... Not a real one anyway.
Click to expand...

My mirrorless cameras have EVFs - as good or better than the viewfinder I have on my camcorder. For me, at least, a built-in EVF is better than having no video viewfinder at all (or having to buy a loupe or external EVF).

stef said:
According to the article, Panasonic is clever and has a non-EU version without the artificial limit of 30 min. That's cool, wonder why others don't do that. I've actually been bitten by limits of some kind twice now.
Click to expand...

I wonder that too. But until the other manufacturers figure out how to build different cameras for different markets, I'll stick with Panasonic. I only buy cameras and camcorders without artificial limits.

Cheers,

Bill
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top