# DSLR or Mirrorless



## JonRon (Jun 6, 2017)

Hello,

I currently own a Nikon D3200 dslr camera. With a cheap screw-on macro lens. 

I would like to know. Should I just buy a better macro lens?
https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-p.../2177/af-s-micro-nikkor-60mm-f%2f2.8g-ed.html

Or

Should I try going Mirrorless? With a Sony Alpha a6000 with an E 30mm F3.5 Macro. or YI M1 and its macro lens?

Any advice on These products will help on my decision making. Maybe some pros and cons also!

Kind regards,

JonRon


----------



## Nubster (Aug 9, 2011)

I switched from from a Nikon D7000 to a Sony a6000 and don't regret it at all. I've shot Nikons for a few years starting with the D70, D80, D200, D300, and two D7000's. I also had a Sony NEX6 and now the a6000. 

Honestly...though I don't care for the D3x00 series of cameras...they still make great quality photos. You would likely see a huge improvement with the new lens over one of those "macro" screw on magnifying things. Of course the image quality from the a6000 is fantastic as well...but you'll be in the same boat still needing to get a macro lens for the Sony if your goal is to take macro photos. 

This is from my a6000 with a macro lens....








[/url][/IMG]

Bump: As far as the pros and cons for the a6000 that come to mind:

Pros:

Fairly inexpensive body.
Small in size, light in weight.
Easy to use.
Amazing quality photos.
Digital view finder which means what you see is what you get when making adjustments.
Easy and fun to use old manual lenses.

Cons:

Native lenses are expensive and not a huge selection yet (3rd party stuff isn't too bad but still limited availability).
No in body image stabilization. Never had that in any of my Nikons either so not something I miss.
Focus system is accurate but not fast. So not a great camera for fast moving subjects.
Not weather sealed. All my Nikons were weather sealed which was always peace of mind just in case I got caught out in bad weather or I was shooting near water.
No touch screen if that matters to you. Never had it before so I don't miss not having it now.


----------



## JonRon (Jun 6, 2017)

Nubster said:


> I switched from from a Nikon D7000 to a Sony a6000 and don't regret it at all. I've shot Nikons for a few years starting with the D70, D80, D200, D300, and two D7000's. I also had a Sony NEX6 and now the a6000.
> 
> Honestly...though I don't care for the D3x00 series of cameras...they still make great quality photos. You would likely see a huge improvement with the new lens over one of those "macro" screw on magnifying things. Of course the image quality from the a6000 is fantastic as well...but you'll be in the same boat still needing to get a macro lens for the Sony if your goal is to take macro photos.
> 
> ...


What would you think about the YI M1? Since you have experience with Both styles of cameras. You seem to know a lot about them. Would that be a good Investment? For macro photography?


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

If your goal is aquarium macro I would not go with a camera like the M1 Unless am mistaken it's going to have a small sensor which will make aquarium photography especially macro more difficult. The small sensor will not allow a much light and your will have a lot of noise (grain) in the pictures when you push the ISO (film speed) to compensate.


----------



## GraphicGr8s (Apr 4, 2011)

I'm not particularly fond of Nikons and Canons but in reality you already have a decent camera. 
The lens is the important part now. A great camera with a cheap plastic lens will yield blah results. A decent camera with a great lens will give good results. 

I've got two Pentax digitals. A 6 mp and a 10 mp. I can get great results, even panos, from my 6 mp. Why?Because I use great lenses. Put one of my cheap lenses on the 10 mp and it will look like crap. 

Spend your money on a good/great lens depending on budget. Spend your time learning the camera and how different settings work. 

One hint I give those that shoot with me. If you're playing with settings only change one at a time. See what it does and go from there. Changing all the settings tells/teaches you nothing.


----------



## IntotheWRX (May 13, 2016)

JonRon said:


> Hello,
> 
> I currently own a Nikon D3200 dslr camera. With a cheap screw-on macro lens.
> 
> ...



sony mirrorless is the best system

i have the 30mm 3.5 lens. it is slow, as in slow focusing. but you can get hella close up shots.


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

IntotheWRX said:


> sony mirrorless is the best system
> 
> i have the 30mm 3.5 lens. it is slow, as in slow focusing. but you can get hella close up shots.


I was thinking about adding a small camera to my collection. Can you post a pic of a fish macro using that lens?


----------



## Nubster (Aug 9, 2011)

I'd like to see some macro shots from it as well. I'd like to get a small macro for my a6000 for a hiking/biking kit. The Tamron 90mm I have now is great but it's big and hefty.


----------



## Surf (Jun 13, 2017)

I have done quite a bit of photography. I would just get a better lens. You camera already has everything needed for great macro photography. About the only thing you can gain by going to a new body is image stabilization but you can also get lenses with it built in. The big advantage of mirrorless cameras is the smaller size of the lenses and body. But the slower autofocus won't work for a very active fish.

Unfortunately a good lens will not be cheep. I would look at used camera equipment web sites such as www.KEH.com. Another company I used is www.bhphotovideo.com (used and new). Both are well regarded companies. I used B&H mostly and I never had any problems with what I purchased. You probably will be able to find a decent macro lens new or used from either company. The lens you linked to is a very good one but you probably can find something good enough for less. 

The key to good photography is to know what each function of your camera does and how to use them to get good results. It is entirely possible you would get better result for less money by taking a good camera class. Asking for advice from a camera club would also be helpfull While the automatic features of modern cameras are very good they are not perfect. In fact for my landscape photography I mostly used manual exposure and often manual focus. For the recent eclipse it was all manual.


----------



## dukydaf (Dec 27, 2004)

If you really buy it for the aquarium , get a better lens. Mirrorless is great when traveling or when not the prime photographer at events. 

You already know the camera, it will take you some time to get used to mirroless. And even the best interfaces are worst than having physical controls for your settings like you find in good DSLRs


----------



## Fishtanks (Nov 21, 2016)

IntotheWRX said:


> sony mirrorless is the best system
> 
> i have the 30mm 3.5 lens. it is slow, as in slow focusing. but you can get hella close up shots.


I would say too that a Sony A6300 mirrorless works great! It's even handy.


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

IntotheWRX said:


> sony mirrorless is the best system
> 
> i have the 30mm 3.5 lens. it is slow, as in slow focusing. but you can get hella close up shots.





Fishtanks said:


> I would say too that a Sony A6300 mirrorless works great! It's even handy.


Really interested in this camera. Can one of you show us some close-up macro shots?


----------



## JonRon (Jun 6, 2017)

Nubster said:


> I switched from from a Nikon D7000 to a Sony a6000 and don't regret it at all. I've shot Nikons for a few years starting with the D70, D80, D200, D300, and two D7000's. I also had a Sony NEX6 and now the a6000.
> 
> Honestly...though I don't care for the D3x00 series of cameras...they still make great quality photos. You would likely see a huge improvement with the new lens over one of those "macro" screw on magnifying things. Of course the image quality from the a6000 is fantastic as well...but you'll be in the same boat still needing to get a macro lens for the Sony if your goal is to take macro photos.
> 
> ...


What is the lens you are using for the Sony Alpha a6000?

Bump:


houseofcards said:


> Really interested in this camera. Can one of you show us some close-up macro shots?


Very nice tanks you have there!!! The Dune scape is very interesting.


----------



## Nubster (Aug 9, 2011)

JonRon said:


> What is the lens you are using for the Sony Alpha a6000?


I'm using a 90mm Tamron with an adapter. It's a lens I had from when I shot Nikon so it's Nikon mount.

Bump:


houseofcards said:


> Really interested in this camera. Can one of you show us some close-up macro shots?


Not the a6300 but from my a6000...they are nearly the same but the a6300 does have an improved sensor so look at these two shots and imagine possibly a slight increase in quality...



















[/url][/IMG]


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

Nubster said:


> Not the a6300 but from my a6000...they are nearly the same but the a6300 does have an improved sensor so look at these two shots and imagine possibly a slight increase in quality...


Thanks, those are very nice!!!

I also wanted to see how the Sony 30mm f/3.5 Macro Lens was. It's slower at f3.5 then your Tamron so light will be more of an issue.


----------



## Nubster (Aug 9, 2011)

Yeah...my Tamron is f/2.8 so nearly a stop faster.


----------



## IntotheWRX (May 13, 2016)

houseofcards said:


> Really interested in this camera. Can one of you show us some close-up macro shots?


sorry i dont have photos to share. i dont have them uplaoded on a flickr account or have space on my user to upload more pics

i like to look up lens' flicker groups to get examples: here a link:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/loubella/sets/72157642842902685/


----------



## Nubster (Aug 9, 2011)

Looks like a pretty nice lens. I'd love to get hands on one but already having 3 lenses in this focal range...a 24mm, 30mm, and 38mm...it's hard to justify adding another one even if it does have macro. I could stand to sell off two of the three but not sure I want to unload the 38mm...things it can do is pretty special.


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

IntotheWRX said:


> sorry i dont have photos to share. i dont have them uplaoded on a flickr account or have space on my user to upload more pics
> 
> i like to look up lens' flicker groups to get examples: here a link:
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/loubella/sets/72157642842902685/


General macro photos like in the flickr link you attached aren't much help, because taking pictures in an aquarium are usually light challenged especially since fish move quickly, that's why I wanted to see your pics in your tank with the lens. Too bad they're not in your flickr account. :grin2:




Nubster said:


> Looks like a pretty nice lens. I'd love to get hands on one but already having 3 lenses in this focal range...a 24mm, 30mm, and 38mm...it's hard to justify adding another one even if it does have macro. I could stand to sell off two of the three but not sure I want to unload the 38mm...things it can do is pretty special.


I hear ya. The one short coming I could think of with the 35 for aquarium fish macro is the f3.5 as discussed also the focal length. You would have to get very close to bring out good detail as opposed to your 90mm or my 60mm.


----------



## Nubster (Aug 9, 2011)

Yeah...I'd just like to have one for other than aquarium work. It would make for a nice walk around lens with the ability to do some macro if the chance presents itself.


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

Very true, It's a good focal length, and size for walk-around and as you stated you get the macro bonus as well.

Canon also just released a 35mm macro, but I already have a 10-18, 24, 60


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

JonRon said:


> Very nice tanks you have there!!! The Dune scape is very interesting.


Thanks much!


----------



## Kaiede (Sep 11, 2017)

I'm in the Sony system myself, but I don't think swapping from the D3200 to the A6000/6300 will buy you a whole lot. If you like the camera, just seek out a good macro lens for your mount. Odds are it will cost less than swapping ecosystems.

That said, if you were looking at going full-frame, then maybe it might be worth thinking about the Sony ecosystem with something like a A7II, bought used.


----------



## JonRon (Jun 6, 2017)

Alright,

I think I made up my mind on what I want to get. I would still like Feedback from anyone who would advise me different in my selection. Due to the lack of Information(or should I say photos) on the internet on Aquarium photography.

Choice of camera is - Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II Mirrorless Micro Four Thirds Digital Camera

Choice of macro lens is - Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm f/2.8 Macro Lens 

Why I Chose this camera 

1) utilizing a 5-axis VCM Image Stabilization that provides up to 5 stops of compensation
2) 2x crop- So basically the 60mm macro lens will act as a 120mm macro lens for a full Frame camera.
3) Video Quality is pretty good. I like that you can touch the Screen to Focus on where you want.
4) Wide choice of other Quality lens.

I am sure their are more positives about this camera, negatives as well. All though, I have to have Hands on experience to find These out.

Now all I need help with is Speed lights. I would like to go cheap on These for now. Though, I would like TTL( This is a Flash to use while in Auto Focus I think). Something where I can have two Flash bodies on top of the Aquarium, and maybe a small one mounted on the camera also. 

Can anyone give me some advise on the best cheapest ones' out there that can meet my Needs.

Kind regards,

JonRon


----------



## Nubster (Aug 9, 2011)

Better off with a Sony a6300 for about the same price. Quite a bit better in almost every way...where it counts anyways. I don't think the price difference is current and the longer exposure advantage that the Olympus has on the chart is also not accurate because the Sony does have bulb mode which allows it to have as long of an exposure as you want. But in my opinion...my money would be on the Sony. They are pretty much the leader in the mirrorless game right now and no way I'd spend my money on a micro 4/3 camera. 








[/url]


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

Between those two cameras I agree with @Nubster. In terms of aquarium macro photography your better off with a bigger sensor the APS-C is bigger than the 4/3 and will give you more light to work with overall. Unless you just want a smaller camera I still say keep your current camera and get the best macro you could buy.

The items on your list:

1) utilizing a 5-axis VCM Image Stabilization that provides up to 5 stops of compensation - _IS won't do much for aquarium fish photography because you need a fast shutter which usually negates the benefit of image stabilization at slower shutter speeds._

2) 2x crop- So basically the 60mm macro lens will act as a 120mm macro lens for a full Frame camera.
_Not sure what this does. It mean you can be further away from the subject, again not really necessary with macro fish photography in aquarium._

3) Video Quality is pretty good. I like that you can touch the Screen to Focus on where you want. _I actually think it's easier to move real buttons on the camera as you setup the shot._

4) Wide choice of other Quality lens.


----------



## dukydaf (Dec 27, 2004)

I have to say, I agree with what houseofcards said. 

1) utilizing a 5-axis VCM Image Stabilization - image stabilization with macros is a pain as the image jumps and it ruins your framing. Plus sometimes it does play well with glass. Nevertheless lenses are available with IS. 

2) 2x crop- So basically the 60mm macro lens will act as a 120mm macro lens for a full Frame camera- maybe, maybe not. the issue here is that the manufacturers often make lens specifically for a sensor size and not in general. You need to clarify this for every particular lens. For nikon for example a 50mm DX is an actual 50mm for the DX sensor

3) Video Quality is pretty good. I like that you can touch the Screen to Focus on where you want - That is nice but when taking photos of fish or anything mall and close, any touching of the camera will be obvious on the recording. 

4) can't have a wider selection of lenses than Nikon and Canon. Not only lenses but other accessories such as flashes with remote synchronization 

As I said in my first post. Invest the money in a nice lens. While I appreciate the clarity offered by the image included earlier in the post here is one taken with an old Nikon D90 with a 105mm f/2.8 macro


----------

