Why always compare to DLRS?

I really like and use this forum for my camera.

I came from Nikon D3X -> Nikon 1V1 -> Sony NEX-7 -> Sony NEX-6. I did do that for a purpose: I didn't want to carry all that heavy equipment, wanted a good efv and no magenta-cast.

What I don't understand is the continious comparing to other sorts of cameras, like DLSR. I don't  see comparision to Hasselblad Why not?

If you want DLSR quality: buy it.

--
Willem.
Sony NEX-6

My NEX C3 has improved IQ over my D5000. However, both cameras have their place. One is not necessarily better than the other. Depends on what you are shooting. Same goes for those who want to know if a 35mm lens is better than a 24 mm lens. Again, depends on what and how you are shoot.

--
Canon A2E, Sony R1, Panny TZ5, Nikon D5000, & NEX C3/Zeiss 24mm E Lens

Because they have already been assimilated.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/09/18/hasselblad-launches-lunar-mirrorless-camera

Thank you
Russell

Because DSLRs are what many if not most of us would use if the high end mirrorless systems weren't an option.   We wouldn't be using a hasselblad.   And many/most of us want as close to DSLR image quality and performance as possible in a smaller package.  The comparisons are extremely relevant and make perfect sense.   Did you move from your D3X because of image quality or performance?

Well i see your point.

But...as a practical matter, many consumers want to know how much they are giving up with a MILC purchase.  Also, some camera makers (Canon, Nikon, Pentax, perhaps Sony) don't want the sale of MILC to cannibalize their DSLR sales, and seem to cripple them.  The success of Sony with Nex really serves a consumer wish to have the MILC be the best they can be.  It seems to be working.  The inclusion of an EVF in Nex6, improved controls, etc. seems to be pushing Sony in the right direction.

If one doesn't want to read the dslr comparisons, all they need to do is move one to the next thread

--
Phil B
Nex 5n, Pentax K5D

I agree with the original post.

As much as I love my NEX, it is not a DSLR.

--
Novice photobug, proud NEX-3 owner
http://davesnex-3photos.blogspot.com/

This always happens when there is big change from the well established standards. People used to make the same comparison between film and digital cameras but now nobody even produces film anymore. I would expect these questions will go away in 2 years when the evf  technology delivers, af is comparable, and there are full frame nex cameras. But then there will be other type of comparisons we dont know yet...

like when someone writes that AF speed is excellent, and yet in the very next sentence says that he never shoots any fast action, than the value of such "excellence" starts to hang on a thin air, etc. etc.

jpr2

--
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/
Comments and critique are always welcome!
~

Yes, NEX and DSLR are not comparable...because no way a NEX system, including NEX 7,6 can compete with DSLR...( from D5100 to D800..) both in IQ and AF speed. It pays off for the compact size. When we need a small camera, we need NEX. When we need a camera that can give the best IQ in all challenged situations,..then we get DSLRs. Saying a mirrorless camera can replace a DSLR is not realistic. The best is having both.

I use my NEX only when I walkabout to shoot landscapes or static subjects. For shooting my kids' activities, I always use my D90/D600. AF speed of mirror-less cameras are not fast enough for even kid's movings. I tried and missed to many shots.

Obvious: you didn't read my msg. Please do and retry.

--
Willem.
Sony NEX-6

I read your message and I answered your question....  you just didn't like the answer.    Your message is full of holes and inconsistencies.  You say if you want DSLR quality then buy it....  but the NEX 7 is a better quality camera than many of the DSLRs currently for sale so this makes no sense.  Are you referring to DSLR image quality, AF quality, build quality??

Based on your message you obviously moved to mirrorless primarily due to weight (if not you could have moved to the A77 to get the EVF, etc) and not because of DSLR image quality and performance which is precisely why mirrorless systems are and should be compared to DSLRs.   If you had D3X performance in a camera the size and weight of the NEX 6 you'd be one happy camper....   Oh wait, you wouldn't buy it until they added an EVF but you get the idea.

Not true. "It's no stretch to say that, at its best, the NEX-7 offers the finest still image quality of any APS-C camera, bar none". DPreview

--
Anatoli

Agreed. I upgraded from a Canon T2i to a NEX 7 and I got a camera capable of better stills and video all in a smaller package.  Many of the current mirrorless cameras easily match or beat APS-C DSLRs in Stills/Video.

Again, agreed.

--
NHT
while ( ! ( succeed = try() ) );

AF I will grant you.  IQ no.  Except maybe for the D800 and a few FF DSLR's the Nex's, especially the 7, will produce as good and in many cases better IQ that most DSLR's.  It smokes most APS-C sensors.

I did buy a DSLR, before there were "mirrorless interchangeable cameras".

Yes way it can compete.   The AF sometimes isn't as good, but sometimes is as good, and the IQ is the same (or really, better than my old DSLR, at least at higher ISO and in resolution).

For certain things, I'd want a DSLR, but if you have to have one camera, you can make a Nex work for most situations.  If you have specific needs, then it might make more sense to use a DSLR.  But, in many ways, you can compare and the Nex does well in the comparison.

The Nex does so well that I rarely bother to use my DSLR anymore.  A shame, I suppose, as it's still usable, and we do occasionally put it to use.

It helps to have a faster lens, even on my DSLR.  If indoors with kids moving, or sports, that can be a real challenge, and the DSLR might have an edge there, but this isn't the majority of the time.  But I suppose if you need to by the best camera for all situations, then perhaps you're forced to stick with a DSLR.

But in the meantime, I'll compare and live with the differences.  And IQ is definitely competitive.

--

Gary W.

I have no idea why people do this. I use my NEX to get what I want and to me, its better than a DSLR. It takes adaptors without glass corrections, it fires off a burst at 10 FPS, it has focus peaking, it does all manual controls perfectly, it adds nothing to the longer lenses in weight, simply brilliant for what I want. Then we have these people that want to compare it to m4/3, DSLR's, etc.

How about we compare DSLR's to medium format for a change. DSLR's are just P&S in that case. What is the point !!.

They all have their uses, but only if you have a use for it. A DSLR I don't have a use for. They are not capable of taking what I want with what I want to use. They might as well be a brick with a coke bottle sticking out the front.

So yes I agree 100%, a DSLR has a lot of uses for a lot of people, that's obvious, just for some of us, well we could find more use for that brick.

All the best. Old man ranting

Danny.

--
Birds and macro. NEX and m4/3
http://www.birdsinaction.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nzmacro/

Who are you pointing fingers at?  This is from the first few sentences on the Sony site, for the NEX-6:

"From the distinctive dials on top to the large APS-C image sensor inside, you'll get the quality and performance of a DSLR, minus the bulk."

???

Unless your a millionaire, most people have a budget when it comes to shopping for a digital camera.  First time buyers (coming from point/shoot) usually BALK at the idea of spending more than $500 for any camera.  It takes some convincing (from friends/family/sales people) to persuade an average Joe to spend $600 ~ 800 on any camera:

• to an Photo Enthusiast, $800 isn't much, but 
• to an Average Joe, that $800 is an extortion

He wants to get the most-out-of-his-money, that means the same tiresome APS-C DSLR-vs-Mirrorless debate.

Just remember, not everyone is a photo enthusiast willing to spend beyond $400. In my experience, $400 seem to be cut-off line for most people who isn't looking into become a photographer.

The way CSC are going it won't be long. I bet the first FF will come out this year.

Okay, NEX 7 can give similar IQ with D3100/5100 for landscapes, portraits... But no way it can compete with D7000/ D300( yes , they re APS-C) and D600/700/800 .

First, if you miss AF then how can you get good IQ ?

Second, please give me  a list of NEX lenses that are comparable ( both in AF speed and IQ) with Nikon lenses like 24-70, 85 1.4G, 14-24, 70-200, 35 1.4G..

Third, the design of a compact camera can not give you the best handling/composing while shooting as DSLRs do.

Last, show me any event photographers that use sorely NEX cameras? If they are comparable, why they have to carry a bundle of big/heavy DSLRs..?