Reading mode: Light Dark

News Reviews Articles Buying Guides Sample Images Videos Cameras Lenses Phones Printers Forums Galleries Challenges

Best cameras and lenses 2019

Now reading: Entry-Level Mirrorless Camera Roundup (2013) 94 comments

Entry-Level Mirrorless Camera Roundup (2013)

Published Nov 30, 2013 | Allison Johnson

1 Entry-Level Mirrorless Camera Roundup 2013

Entry-level mirrorless cameras provide a nice middle ground between fixed-lens point-and-shoots and lower-end DSLRs. It's an ever-growing category with options for photographers of varying skill level and intentions. The common factors in this class are the huge step up in image quality over most compacts and the friendly interfaces aimed at those stepping up from point-and-shoots.

The story of the entry-level mirrorless category is a tale of sensor sizes. Sony, Fujifilm and Samsung's mirrorless models use APS-C-sized sensors, the same larger-sized chips used in traditional DSLRs. Nikon's 1-series, on the other hand, use a 1"-type sensor that's considerably larger than that of an advanced point-and-shoot camera. Sitting roughly in between the two formats size-wise are the Four Thirds sensors used by Olympus and Panasonic's mirrorless cameras. Pentax's tiny Q7 is an outlier - it has a 1/1.7"-type sensor, as found in many advanced point-and-shoots. Accordingly, the camera itself is more point-and-shoot-like in size.

Large sensors present some benefits - they're able to gather more light and generally produce less-noisy high ISO images. Depending on the lens in front of it, larger sensors are also better able to produce the blurry background effect and a look that photographers moving up from point-and-shoots typically want. Here are the cameras we've identified as entry-level mirrorless models:

Beginners who are looking for better-than-smartphone image quality will definitely find it in this class, and may also like how lightweight and portable these cameras are as compared to a DSLR. They make great cameras for everyday, good light shooting and will generally take better low light images than a phone or point-and-shoot.

The way we see it there are two kinds of users who will consider cameras in this class - those who are looking for a point-and-shoot experience with better image quality, and those who are looking for a step-up camera with which to learn the ins-and-outs of photography without going all the way up to a DSLR.

Tags: camera-roundup, cameras, mirrorless, roundup

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Entry-Level Mirrorless Camera Roundup 2013
2 Olympus PEN E-PM2
3 Fujifilm X-M1
4 Sony NEX-3N
5 Samsung NX2000
6 Fujifilm X-A1
7 Nikon 1 J3

View Comments (94)

Comments

All (94)

Most popular (13)

Editors' picks (0)

DPR staff (6)

Oldest first

Kendunn

I have a EPM2 when the D600 is too heavy, really like it.

Dec 9, 2014permalink

aytackurtuba

Just for image quality X-A1 first !

Nov 27, 2014permalink

bigdaddave

In which universe is the Nikon 1 better than an Eos M?

Not this one, but then Canon have been the odd men out here for years

Aug 25, 2014permalink

Richard Butler

We don't say the Nikon 1 is better than the EOS-M. We say it's better as a family point and shoot. Which, thanks to its class-leading autofocus, it is.

Aug 27, 2014permalink

bigdaddave

Nonsense

Sep 1, 2014permalink

Photoman

The EOS-M is a nonsense camera, made by a company blind to the future. The mirror is dead. Long live mirrorless!

Sep 4, 2014permalink

Richard Butler

Photoman - I wouldn't be so extreme. If Canon can get the autofocus up to a reasonable speed, it'll be a very good camera. The interface is rather good - the main problem is that the AF is too slow.

Sep 4, 2014permalink

Photoman

It just seemed Canon panicked and said "We need to make a mirrorless camera!". Plus another lens mount, instead of a EF-S mount. Canon have the money to make a good camera, but maybe they don't won't to give up their DSLR sales.

Sep 4, 2014permalink

BPD7

Get the X-A1. It's so cheap now and the images are AMAZING. The kit lens is really pretty decent too. Even better if you plan to use RAW.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

The Nex 3n best thing?
If you can accept that your viewfinder is a tilting screen, it has possibilities. At waist-level your street view is closer to that of all children, and babies in prams and pets, and as with a rolleiflex, or Sony Dsc-R1, you experience this world from more of a child's viewpoint, and candids are a doddle, as nobody really notices you.

Additionally the screen is perfect for series of self-portraits, and my experience with the kit zoom lens this has on a Nex 7 tells me that on a 16MP sensor results will convince, except in corners at wide-angle.
Raw allows you to decide on distortion correction (lightroom etc does this) and vignetting yourself. You might want to keep the best lens resolution whilst getting rid of only vignetting and CA (nature, landscape etc).And there's always the completely corrected jpeg there as well for you.

Then there is the almost infallible AF, Face recognition and its 22millisecond shutter lag, so......

Jul 12, 2014*permalink

wazandreg

Peeve 1 clearly hasn't used both the XA1 and XM1. I have and the image quality of the XM1 is better, and noticeably so. If you know how to get the best out of a camera, the XM1 is a fantastic camera. I don't use auto settings, but did try them and even that produces great results. The XA1 just appears a little better because it is set up to look appealing to the point and shoot users. They just appear a little sharper, something easily changed in most cameras. Takes seconds to make the sharpness of the M1 match the A1. Add to that the better colours of xtran cameras compared to bayern, personal opinion echoed by many, and you have a great camera.

Jun 9, 2014permalink

AdamT

X-A1 is a killer for RAW fans, universally usable RAW files (with or without Adobe DNG converter ) I wish Fuji would do an XT1 with this non-Xtrans sensor , preferably the 24Mp Toshiba one from the D7100

May 11, 2014permalink

BPD7

I love my X-A1. Amazing RAW files

Jul 24, 2014permalink

aytackurtuba

I recommended Fujifilm X-A1 , it has very good image quality realy ...

Jan 25, 2014permalink

skytripper

Do you all think Fuji is likely to add wireless remote control to the X-M1's capabilities in the future? And if so, could they do it with a software upgrade? To me, this is one of the most interesting new features now appearing on some of the newest cameras.

Jan 13, 2014*permalink

jmellas

Unless there's a hardware provision already in the camera, highly unlikely, no. Much like the need to connect via a wireless router at home, if it's not there, there's no wi-fi. Besides, it'll be another feature to entice you with on the model that replaces it. :) It's ironic how most were mocking Samsung when they implemented this feature in their cams sometime ago...

Apr 19, 2014permalink

DIDEA

Wow, gutted. I'm looking for an entry level camera and what do I get? Two recommendations near EUR800. That's pretty much useless for me. Enry level should mean exactly that; very few people have the money to spend 800 on something to enter a hobby or niche. I guess the handful of words on the X-A1 is all I get to go on.

Dec 18, 2013permalink

dougjgreen1

Actually, the Olympus E-PM2 will give you what you need, for half the price of the Fujifilm.

Dec 21, 2013permalink

coolcity

Sorry, DIDEA, but you're wrong. "Entry level" doesn't mean a price that everybody can afford, but the cheapest price range for that class of product. For example, Ferrari's cheapest model might be their entry level model but it doesn't mean everybody can afford one.

Jan 5, 2014*permalink

richshep

How silly. Just get what you can afford! Don't whinge about DPR's judgement. They don't set the prices and they don't force you to buy anything.

Jan 6, 2014permalink

Timmbits

I followed the amazon links and it's only $600 with a kit lens.
that's what, about 430 euros?
order online.

Jan 7, 2014permalink

ghoops

I agree Didea I was thinking exactly that when I saw your comment. Some of these "entry level" cameras (entry to what?) are more expensive than decent SLRs. Entry level implies something both affordable and fairly simple and with basic facilities.

Jan 17, 2014permalink

Light Waves

I have always been a "full-frame" user, from Nikon F, F2AS, F4, D3, D800. Then I got tired and bought an Oly PM2. Amazing little camera. I admit that I purchased the 12mmf2 and 45mmf1.8 as well as the FL600R flash. This combo does the job for 95% of my needs. I'd start with the kit zoom lens and see if it fulfills your own needs, but the sensor and jpg's that can come out of this little camera are very good. It's good enough for me. Maybe it will be good enough for you. Check it out.

Jan 19, 2014*permalink

whitebird

NEX-3N certainly under-appreciated in this group because of the poor user interface. But IQ per dollar spent is probably the best of the lot as prices come down. Just picked up a brand new 3N kit for 300USD. Most pleased for the money spent.

Dec 9, 2013*permalink

Tony0211

For the price of these (except the Sony a3000) why would I pay $600 and up for a somewhat pro (?) camera that does not include a rangefinder? What am I missing?

Dec 4, 2013permalink

peevee1

Out of those, X-A1 is very good. X-M1 is the same thing (plus extra headaches if you shoot RAW) for extra $200 or more FOR NO REASON. Different pattern of color filter on the sensor is absolutely not worth it, especially given that it kills details in greenery (make no mistake, in OOC JPEGs too, it is not just RAW problem) and causes color bleed in small colored details (it is simply suboptimal in mathematical sense).

Well, X-A1 is great if you shoot only with the stabilized kit zooms. If you add primes, then E-PM2 is better because it has IBIS (so all your lenses will be stabilized, even legacy ones), its lenses, both zooms and primes, are smaller, lighter and cheaper, and there is a much better selection. And its AF is faster too. Although I would compare E-PL5 (or rather E-PL6 if available) at the same price as X-A1, E-PM2 is in a cheaper class.

Others here are simply not worth a second look for various reasons.

Dec 2, 2013permalink

LarryLatchkey

"The X-A1 offers most of the X-M1's benefits for a little less cash."
In Germany the kits are €500 vs €800. Still quite a difference I think.

Dec 1, 2013permalink

stanleyD22

yes it would be great to have comparison between A1 and M1 one to one..if it's worthy of that money

Dec 1, 2013permalink

Jeff Keller

The X-A1 test shots are now available.

Dec 2, 2013permalink

peevee1

Of course it is not.

Dec 2, 2013permalink

peevee1

In fact, X-M1 is worse than X-A1 if you shooting something other than black-and-white resolution charts.

Dec 2, 2013permalink

vivanchenko

M1 is not only slightly better in higher ISO than A1. It also reproduces colors differently. This is very noticeable side by side. M1 delivers the same IQ as the highest end. And it is also faster to focus than any of it. And so is A1. Both of the cameras have some advanced feature which most of the higher end doesn't.

Braking things up by levels is very confusing and misleading.

Dec 1, 2013permalink

peevee1

In fact, X-M1 is worse than X-A1 if you shooting something other than black-and-white resolution charts. With this pattern, color bleeding after demosaicing to JPEG is inevitable.

Dec 2, 2013permalink

Motorcycleboy1991

So why the Fuji X-M1 over the X-A1? The category is, "entry level."

I talked to a Fuji rep at a recent camera show. I was tired of carrying around bigger, heavier equipment when I travel. I am really impressed with what Fuji is doing. When I asked why I should go for the X-M1 over the X-A1, he said, "At high ISO it is a little better." That lines up with what I have seen in your comparisons, and comparisons on other sites.

Is it worth $200 more (28.5% more, if I did the math right) for a little better high ISO; in an entry level category?

This is a serious question. I ditched my DSLR and went with the X-A1 and a few lenses for a travel kit. I wasn't trying to cheap out. I just didn't see the extra value in the X-M1. What did I miss?

Dec 1, 2013permalink

peevee1

"Is it worth $200 more (28.5% more, if I did the math right) for a little better high ISO; in an entry level category?"

It is not REAL better high ISO, it is just higher level of noise filtering embedded into demosaicing process of this pattern because red and blue dots are on average further apart. For the same reasons, colors in small details tend to bleed into each other more than with Bayer pattern.

Dec 2, 2013permalink

b craw

List is a bit all over the road in terms of price, but it seems to me that, seeing as the Fujifilm X-M1 lists over the Samsung NX300, the NX300 should have been included. It is quite comparable to the X-M1. Both are very similar in size. The Samsung may be slightly behind in IQ (Bayer versus X-Trans APS-C sensor), but the MX300 has an articulating OLED display (better), NFC and WI-FI (better in terms of function), 20MP vs. 16MP, and, no doubt, a better build and better ergonomics. Kit lenses are roughly comparable. I suppose the Samsung doesn't have the cachet in terms of brand, but it is an excellent value, particularly right now.

Dec 1, 2013permalink

b craw

NX300 also has hybrid AF with phase detection, which the X-M1 does not have, although the difference is probably slight. The X-M1 does have two control wheels, but they are cramped, while the NX300 does have a iFn button on the lens.

I like the X-M1 - I've used it - but all in all I prefer the Samsung and am a bit confused about the calculus in making the list. But I won't lose any sleep over it; there are some excellent cameras on the list.

Dec 1, 2013permalink

b craw

Sorry, I just noticed the NX300 listed in the mid-range mirrorless. I suppose it does get confusing - I could make the case for the Fujifilm X-M1 being there as well (and sort of did) with the X-E2.

Dec 1, 2013permalink

qianp2k

No Canon EOS-M? Is it an entry-level mirrorless camera?

I bought $399 EOS-M package with body, two M lenses - 22/2.0 STM pancake, 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS STM kit zoom, and 90EX flash that can also be used an ETTL master on Canon DSLRs.

And it delivers very nice IQ, not less than all above ML entries in the list.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/sets/72157636482584245/

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Lawrencew

As far as DPR is concerned, the EOS M doesn't exist. Never reviewed, and not mentioned in any of their mirror less round ups. However it was launched in 2012, not 2013

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Richard Butler

As mentioned elsewhere in the comment section, the EOS-M's current pricing strongly suggests it's out-of-production and being sold-off cheaply. We want these roundups to retain their relevance for a couple of months, at least, by which stage the remaining EOS-M stock is likely to have run out.

Despite never being offered one by Canon US, we borrowed one and to shoot a samples gallery. I thought I'd also written my impressions of using it, but I can't find a link to that, if I did.

It's not a camera we could currently recommend. The interface is very good, though so, if the lens design isn't contributing too much to the slow focus, the next generation could be really good.

Dec 2, 2013permalink

inas

You should not make decisions based on suggestions as you say on your second line, but based on facts.
I just got an EOS M for $220 in a local shop, and it is the best deal NOW. In 2 months time, i do not know.
I think its the best not only for people who already own canon equipment, which is perfect for those, as you can use lenses and flashes, but for anyone who does not require fast focusing and might want to develop their photo skills further.
Video is also amazing, having mic in, though lacks headphone.
Oh, i forgot to mention, magic lantern is also available for it.... ;)
Cheers

Dec 16, 2013*permalink

Regueira Photo and Film

@inas, I am with you.
3 weeks ago I bought an M+2lenses+90EX to replace a 7D being used as 3rd videocamera on weddings.
Canon M is on sale aroud there, and can be found on different arrangments.
DPReview should have included it. May be adding @RButler forecastings on camera availability as well...
BTW, as today, Canon USA has the camera "in their production line". Pls check here http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_m_ef_m_22mm_stm_kit
Cheers

Jan 9, 2014*permalink

Paul1974

Sony Nex-3n actually has a USB/multi accessory port. This way, a wired remote control can be connected.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

DT200

Way to go Fuji! You can find deals on the Nikon 1 too which make it attractive.
IMHO, the Sony A3000 was a dud.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Robaire

Seems that many are writing the Sony A3000 off without trying it. B&H sells the 18-55 alone for $298. You can buy the A3000 with this lens now for $350. It's like buying the body for $50! What's not to like or make it a dud? I've been using the A3000 for about a month, also own a NEX7. The A3000 images match the output from the NEX7, and the 18-55 has pretty decent quality as well. Uses the same battery, e-mount lenses work fine. It's true the LCD and EVF are a compromise, but still quite usable. Focus peaking works fine, no problem focusing with adapted manual focus lenses.

Dec 1, 2013permalink

peevee1

A3000 is certainly a good value. Bad camera - but very good value. Total opposite of, say, Olympus E-M1, which is a good camera but bad value.
Some people seek value, utility, some people seek pleasurable experience. That is why there is something for everybody.

Dec 2, 2013permalink

Robaire

"bad" camera, "bad" sensor:

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Sony-A3000-review-Entry-level-body-high-performance-sensor

Dec 5, 2013permalink

zigi_S

You can get an Olympus e-pl3 with kit lens for 249€ in Europe. A current model the E-PM2 with kit lens for 420€. A fuji x-m1 the most cheap you can get with a kit lens is 799€. I don't see how these cameras are comparable. The fuji just doesn't belong into this group. For that money you can get a canon 60d and a nikon d7000. Cameras certainly not belonging to entry class.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

88SAL

Entry does not have to mean really cheap. The Fuji XM is expensive but it is the Fuji entry option after the enthusiast XPro and intermediate XE models.. Price is an issue in this category, but it might not be the 'forced to buy the cheapest' issue given that the user level of the camera is the other facet to the article.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

goblin

Well, they should have listed the entry model for the Leica M then ?

Nov 30, 2013permalink

peevee1

"The Fuji XM is expensive but it is the Fuji entry option after the enthusiast XPro and intermediate XE models.."

Their entry option is X-A1, not X-M1. X-M1 is the same as X-A1 with broken color filter which allowed them to save money by not including antialiasing (low-pass) filter - for the price of color bleeding and low color detail as the consequence (although better black-and-white detail which only matters for test chart). And the cheap trick eliminated only vertical and horizontal Muaré, but diagonal is still there. I would think such compromises for the missing LP filter should put value of X-M1 at $50 or so BELOW X-A1, but they want $200 more?!? Ridiculous. Only heavy marketing of "X-Trans" brand to those who do not understand how demosaicing works can explain it.

Dec 2, 2013permalink

edu T

A 1"-type sensor is NOT, as mentioned, "slightly larger in size than that of an advanced point-and-shoot camera."
It has TWICE the area of a 2/3" sensor (fuji X20, XQ1) and 2.7x the area of the more common 1/1.7" (G16, LX7, XZ-2, etc.)

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Combatmedic870

So then but the rx100 has a 1 inch sensor. ...so it's not even slightly. It's just as large.

Womp womp

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Marty4650

But the fact remains that the difference between a 1" sensor and the sensors in most enthusiast compact cameras is of a greater magnitude than the difference between a FF sensor and an APSC sensor.

And no one has ever called the FF sensor "slightly larger" than an APSC sensor.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

BKK Street

Nice write up. Most of the tourists I see lugging around DSLR's would be better served with one of these. (Or an RX100 for most situations). And GM-1 and Fuji's are just gorgeous. Do miss the availability of a fully articulated LCD on all the models listed though.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

marike6

Why would they be better served?

People don't exactly "lug around" a consumer DSLR like a T5i, D5200 or K-50. Those cameras are small, lightweight, offer bright, clear viewfinders for easier framing/composition and have available tons of inexpensive large aperture primes and zooms. And for IQ, it doesn't get much better out of all the crop sensor cameras.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

FrankS009

Nope, people do "lug around" a consumer DSLR compared to this group. Consumer DSLRs have lost their reason for being - people don't have to do that anymore and coming from cell phones and entry compact cameras, they don't want to.

The IQ of consumer DSLRs is no better than the m4/3rds cameras like the GM1 and EPM2 and probably worse.

Nov 30, 2013*permalink

rhlpetrus

Still, they keep buying dslrs, just check the best-selling list of all digital cameras at Amazon, a Rebel and the D3200 at top 1-2. Now try to find any of the DPR's choices or any ML, for that matter, among the top100. I saw 3, firstcwas the Pentax Q, very disounted. Of course, those peope are just ignorant folks fooled by the "bad guys".

Nov 30, 2013*permalink

BKK Street

To rhlpetrus: Love the photos on your Flickr page. Great!

Nov 30, 2013permalink

peevee1

marike6: "People don't exactly "lug around" a consumer DSLR like a T5i, D5200 or K-50."

Yes they do. After a several hours touring with one of these, they start to hurt neck and shoulders.

" Those cameras are small, lightweight,"

No they are not.

" offer bright, clear viewfinders "

Except for k-50, their viewfinders are just awful. Tiny, imprecise (not 100% coverage), and with consumer kit zooms, quite dim too (and the latter includes k-50). Except of course when you get sun in the frame by mistake - then they will hurt your retina.

Dec 2, 2013*permalink

Boissez

Why did you pick the X-M1 over the E-PM2? They have the same score but the Olympus is at a much more beginner-friendly price point.

Nov 30, 2013*permalink

ThePhilips

Ditto GM1. Entry-level should be easy to enter. Including expensive cameras like X-M1 or GM1 is simply wrong.

Yes, they are better cameras. But they are simply too expensive to be even considered by the people stepping in into the inter-changeable lens camera realm.

The low-end CaNikons established the price point: $400 for the kit. Anything deviating from it too far high should have been disqualified from winning.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Impulses

Why didn't the E-PL5 make the list? Four or five other brands got two models featured... I'm just curious really, no skin in the game. I've got a GF6 myself (though the choice was between it and the Oly, for the newer sensor). Nice roundup, dizzying array of good options really.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Le Frog

My guess is that it did not make it because it is just a slightly bigger and thicker PM2 with a PASM dial and a tiltable screen. But what do you need the PASM dial for, if, as soon as you leave the P mode, you must anyway rely on the touchscreen to set the shooting parameters? So, you might just as well forgo it and save yourself a 100 (USD, EU, or BP).

Nov 30, 2013permalink

NevilN

The tiltable screen of the E-PL5 is quite special. It can be flipped all the way up for self-portraits. And the current E-PL5 sales prices are exactly the same or lower than the PM2 prices.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Impulses

Is the E-PL5 really that reliant on the touchscreen? Somehow I doubt it but it's been a while since I read the reviews... I can adjust anything on my GF6 without ever touching the screen, if I wanted to (the screen is just quicker for certain things), and Panasonic usually has a more full featured touch UI. Pressing up on the rear dial lets you change between shutter and aperture for example...

Dec 1, 2013permalink

charliewallace1

I have the E-PL5 and I never use the touch screen. The super control panel is very easy to use instead.

Dec 2, 2013permalink

peevee1

"But what do you need the PASM dial for, if, as soon as you leave the P mode, you must anyway rely on the touchscreen to set the shooting parameters?"

Wrong, E-PL5 has rear dial/wheel too, so it is just as easy to use in S and A modes as consumer DSLRs like Canon Rebel and Nikon D3xxx/D5xxx series.

Dec 2, 2013*permalink

ploutakis

I have read some comments in the web about the huge distortions of theNEX 3N's 16-50 lens.They comment that the camera corrects the problem automatically when in jpeg mode.What about RAW.I dont use Photoshop ,so I wish I knew whether the Sony raw converter resolves the problem .

Thanks

Ploutakis

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Richard Butler

Digital corrections are commonplace in mirrorless cameras - in part because it's possible (since you couldn't preview the corrections through an optical viewfinder).

Any Raw converter that properly supports such a camera - be it NEX, Micro Four Thirds or Fujifilm - will apply the corrections.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Oleg Vinokurov

Oh, that's interesting point I didn't think about before. Corrected image in viewfinder is also important!

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Paul1974

Yes, free Sony IDC software does allow you to apply these corrections when converting RAW tot Tiff or Jpeg (shading, distortion).

Nov 30, 2013permalink

peevee1

Sites which test RAW lens performance (including maximum CA and vignetting) without correcting for distortion first simply do it wrong. Correcting of distortion simply pushes the worst offending regions of image frame (corners) beyond image frame (for barrel distortion - which coincides with FLs having bad vignetting etc), so those awfully vignetting corners (usually with high CA too) simply never make it in the final image - for the price of slightly lower sharpness at the edges of the frame ("awful" 5% distortion can be corrected for the price of as low as 5% reduction in sharpness, which for sharpness is nothing).
And most sites like DxO which started testing lenses before the corrections became standard (often parts of new lens mount electronic protocols for mirrorless where lenses store their own distortion profiles) do it wrong, so don't waste your time checking mirrorless lenses at them.
Lateral CA is just 3 distortion profiles - separate for each color channel. Easy.

Dec 2, 2013permalink

vivanchenko

Putting X-M1 in the same category as Sony NEX 3 is ridiculous. High end image quality in entry level cameras?

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Vinc T

This list is ridiculous. (The other five round-ups are fine IMHO.) This list just does' nt make much sense to me.

Take X-M1 for example. it is categorized in DPR's own review as an "Mid Range Interchangeable Lens Camera / DSLR" here:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-m1/12
And now it has become an entry level mirrorless?

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Gesture

Best list of the bunch. This one makes sense.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

mad marty

Entry level cameras should be cheap and two of the winners are just damn expensive.
The Samsung NX1100 and the Nex-3n are real entry level cameras with under 300 Euro.
I would never recommend a camera which costs twice as much to a beginner. That's just no entry level.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

tjwaggoner

Agree with you here. Just because the fuji is entry-level in relation to the other fuji models, doesnt make it an entry level camera in relation to the mirroless market. Why not pick the cheapest leica ILC and say it was the best entry level camera?
Not saying the fuji isnt a fantastic camera (the truth here is that any modern camera is pretty great), just that this roundup would be more helpful if it were: "Whats the best mirrorless ILC for X amount of $$$" Rather than what youve done here.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Revenant

I think the categories entry-level, mid-level, enthusiast and professional mostly refer to the feature sets, ergonomics and build quality of the cameras, not their price. Of course, there is (or should be) a correlation between these things, but still - if the NEX-3N had cost $3000, that wouldn't have made it a pro-grade camera; it would still be an entry-level camera, albeit a very expensive one. Likewise, had the Nikon D4 cost only $300, it would still be a pro-grade camera, but an extremely inexpensive one.
But if you define the camera categories mainly based on the price point, then I certainly understand your reasoning.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Impulses

I think what Revenant is saying makes sense, although they did pick a best in class + a value winner in some of the other roundups... (EM5 + G6, RX100 + S120) I guess the Nikon could be viewed as the value pick here, although it's probably not the strongest pick if action shots aren't the top priority.

A value pick in addition to the Fuji instead of singling out the GM1 for it's size might've made sense, it's size advantage is rather obvious anyway... Could've just left it as a honorable mention or whatever (along with the Nikon). I guess people just want more structure to these things.

I kinda like how the roundups took shape as is though, specially if it makes it easier to update them later (more rigid categories, price limits, etc would make it harder to recommend or highlight new and different models, i.e. something like the GM1).

Nov 30, 2013permalink

reginalddwight

The buy-in for 2 of the top 3 "entry level" mirrorless cameras is high indeed:
X-M1, $700
GM1, $750

Not sure how the typical smartphone user or point-and-shooter will see value here and go all in.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

rube39

What about the Canon EOS M? It is small, easy to use, has two excellent kit lenses, a nice touch screen interface, a large sensor, and after the latest firmware update, it delivers decent enough AF speed.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

tkbslc

2012 camera, so as was mentioned in other articles, not in the running. HOwever, with the recent price crash, the M has become extremely attractive - especially with the cheap 22mm f2 lens that comes with it. M4/3 charges $400-500 for essentially the same lens. NEX doesn't even have a fast pancake.

Nov 30, 2013*permalink

Richard Butler

Given how cheap they're buying sold off, we have to assume they're at end-of-life, so it doesn't make sense to include the EOS-M in a roundup we want to still be valid in a couple of months.

The EOS-M isn't a camera we could recommend. But there's a lot to like that makes us think the next generation camera could be rather good.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

caver3d

I have the EOS-M and I disagree with rube39. Even with the update , the AF is still not decent enough - it is sluggish. I agree that it does not belong on the list.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Revenant

@tkbslc
A 2012 (or older) camera is still in the running, if it's the current model. The E-PM2, for example, is a 2012 model, but it hasn't been replaced yet. Likewise with several cameras in the other categories, such as NEX-7 and E-M5.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

happypoppeye

The EOS-M has horrible AF even with the update and I wouldn't recommend it for any beginner.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Alastair Norcross

Horrible AF? Really? The AF on mine works very well. I think it's an ideal camera for a beginner, or for an advanced photographer, who wants a small companion to A DSLR. The image quality is superb, and the camera lets you do what you want to do. It's not a sports camera, but very few are. I'd recommend it to anyone who doesn't want to take fast action shots. The M with the 22mm pancake is selling for about $300 right now. That combination is far better than mirrorless options selling for more than twice the price. In fact, it's better than any other camera + lens combination for under $800.

Nov 30, 2013*permalink

Oleg Vinokurov

2Alastair Norcross
I guess depends on what you shoot, but after you compare focus speed and reliability with m43, eos m falls way behind. Current next cameras on the other hand are rather close to m43 level.

So really depends on what is good enough for you. Personally I really dislike sluggish devises even when I don't really need lighting fast response.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Alastair Norcross

I agree that the focus speed on the M isn't lightning fast, but it's perfectly fast enough for anything other than sports. I also have the 7D, so I know what lightning fast AF is. On the other hand, the M's AF is incredibly reliable. I'm actually enjoying shooting with the M more than with any other camera I've used. It really lets you concentrate on the photographic essentials. It's a perfect street camera and indoor camera. The results speak for themselves. I've seen many shots from NEX cameras, and they're pretty good, but not up to the M's. It's probably the lenses. The 22mm pancake is simply superb, and I'm comparing it with the 5 L lenses I own.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

RLBur

I purchased the M when the prices dropped and they came out with the new firmware update. I too have the 7D for sports and action shots. I also have the G1X which I enjoy immensely. I have absolutely no regrets purchasing the M. I recently received the 11-22 lens and find it is a jewel. Perhaps the M is of no interest to many, and I understand that, but I am extremely pleased with mine.

Nov 30, 2013permalink

Maczon

M has worse AF speed than my Panasonic G1 (release 2008) that was first mirroless model afterall. It tells quite much now slow AF it (EOS-M) has.

Dec 2, 2013*permalink

carlos4400

i think fuji xa1 is a very good choice.its noise performance is better than all other in its class and on par with some full frame cams. detail is a bit tricky but if you dial back sharpness and turn noise reduction to -2 then u have much better results. colorwise i think xm1 is a bit inferior to xa1 on its jpegs. i had both cameras and also a nex 5r at hand to compare them. at 6400 iso xa1 is much better than both the xm1 and the nex 5r.

Feb 17, 2014permalink

Latest sample galleries

Canon EOS M6 Mark II sample gallery (DPreview TV)

Tamron SP 35mm F1.4 Di USD sample gallery

Sony a6600 sample gallery (DPReview TV)

Sony a6600 sample gallery

See more galleries »

Latest in-depth reviews

The Canon G5 X Mark II earns a Silver Award with its very good image quality, flexibility and the overall engaging experience of using the camera. However, if you need the very best in autofocus and video, other options may suit you better. Find out all the details in our full G5 X II review.

Review: Vuze+ 3D Stereoscopic 360 Camera

360 photos and video can be very useful for certain applications (as well as having fun). The Vuze+ is an affordable 360 camera that supports both 2D and 3D (stereo vision) capture, and might be the best option for someone wanting to experiment with the 360 format.

Review: Mikme pocket wireless microphone with audio sync

The Mikme Pocket is a portable wireless mic with particular appeal to smartphone users looking to up their game and improve the quality of recorded audio without the cost or complexity or traditional equipment.

Canon EOS M6 II initial review: What's new and how it compares

The EOS M6 Mark II renews Canon's commitment to making small, enthusiast-friendly APS-C mirrorless cameras. With 4K video, 30 fps Raw bursts and additional controls, it's a big step forward from its predecessor. And perhaps more interesting than the EOS 90D.

Canon EOS 90D initial review: What's new and how it compares

The 90D is essentially the DSLR version of the EOS M6 Mark II mirrorless camera that was introduced alongside it. Like the M6 II, it features a 32MP sensor, Dual Pixel AF, fast burst shooting and 4K/30p video capture. It will be available mid-September.

Latest buying guides

2019 Buying Guide: Best compact zoom cameras

If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.

Whether you're hitting the beach in the Northern Hemisphere or the ski slopes in the Southern, a rugged compact camera makes a great companion. In this buying guide we've taken a look at nine current models and chosen our favorites.

2019 Buying Guide: Best cameras under $500

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

Whether you're new to the Micro Four Thirds system or a seasoned veteran, there are plenty of lenses available for you. We've used pretty much all of them, and in this guide we're giving your our recommendations for the best MFT lenses for various situations.

Check out more buying guides »


New kid on the block: YI M1 review Nov 29, 2016	Olympus PEN E-PL8 First Impressions Review Sep 19, 2016	Rebel in your pocket: Canon EOS M3 Review Aug 16, 2016	Nikon 1 J5: What you need to know Apr 2, 2015

Entry-Level Mirrorless Camera Roundup (2013)

Comments

You may also like

More about gear in this article

Latest sample galleries

Latest in-depth reviews

Latest buying guides


Lake Louise by MIRANDA1 from blue challenge	Looking for dinner!!! by Chairman1 from Wings	Peony by jalywol from Flowers up close.