Team-BHP - Mirrorless or EVIL Cameras

I am planning to sell my 6 year old Canon 600D and go for something smaller and newer.

I am confused about micro 4/3 or APS-C. Can you please advise?
One shortcoming with the Canon 600D is the lack of in-built HDR mode which results in poor image with bright background unless you do additional processing. Also, I am not a person to shoot in RAW and then do post-processing. I want the JPEG quality to be very good right out of the camera.

I went through a few reviews etc and shortlisted the following APS-C ones -
SOny a6000/a6300/6400
Fuji XE3/XT20

Any advice about the above or any other recommendations?
Please note that size is a big consideration for me. So, smaller the lenses the better.
I am planning to have an all purpose lens fitted and not change lenses often (might have a prime just for portraits). Since I like to shoot landscapes, the 16-50 lens on the Sony offers advantage over the 18-55 Fuji lens.
Also, the a6000 is available at a pretty low price. I understand it is 5 years old but seems to serve the purpose. Should I go for it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by adimicra (Post 4595412)

I considered long and hard about Sony A6000/A6300 and also Canon M50. Bit finally switched to Micro 4/3 i.e. Olympus EM10 Mk3. It's light weight, compact and gives you great JPEG out of camera. And it's lens collection is amazing - again compact! The design is cool with retro look and I find all the controls and dials spot on.
Do take a look at reviews online.

Everything changed with the advent of mirrorless. Olympus has the best models in this segment. I'm content with one of the first mirrorless introduced by Canon, and I'm not using a secondary lens till date. It's weather-beaten for sure! Regarding service, it was only a harness latch that I procured in Singapore, and it has not required any care. I need to stress here that my usage is quite heavy, and even the original battery has held up!

Quote:

Originally Posted by sgiitk (Post 4595422)

I may add that service of Nikon is far more common than for Canon & Olympus.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sgiitk (Post 4595422)

@adimicra; Both your options are not proper camera/lensmakers. I may add that service of Nikon is far more common than for Canon & Olympus. This what made mw switch back to Nikon. I had moved to Olympus / Canon quite a few years ago.

Doubts about Sony service may be valid, but the rest of your post certainly is not.

About a6000, which is increasingly good value for money as it gets older, I don't recommend the 18-50, which I just keep on the shelf. It makes for a neat package, and is probably fine for the sunny outdoors. Only.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmplog (Post 4595437)

I have also looked at the olympus cameras. I am wondering why you chose the Olympus EM10 Mk3. I am little skeptical of choosing a micro 4/3rd sensor as it is much smaller than the APSC and might not provide significant benefits over a flagship smartphone like a Pixel/S10. Which lens are you using/planning to use with the Olympus?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom (Post 4595730)

Which lens you recommend for the Sony a6000 as an all-purpose lens. As I said, I am looking for portability with acceptable image quality. I tend to shoot more at the wide angle. So the 16-50 lens for the sony (effectively 24-100) provides a great range for me and should cover 95% of my needs. I can have a fast prime lens later for indoors/portrait shots.

So far, I am leaning towards the Sony.

Quote:

Originally Posted by adimicra (Post 4595869)

I've only been using these cameras a couple of years, so don't feel that I have the experience to give a good answer. I moved to this kind of camera to get better results than I could get from my compact p&s: I didn't feel that the 16-50 delivered, in the environment of most of my photos. I bought an a6000+2-lens kit. the 55-210 I feel to produce better quality images, but it it not fast enough for me.

Both those lenses stay on the shelf. In my camera bag:

Sony 50/1.8 OSS
Sigma 30/1.4
Tamron 90/2.5, old and fully manual

I'm waiting until I can buy the Sony 85.

These are the lenses for my particular use. They don't really cover stuff like landscapes or wildlife. If want the most general-use lens, I put on the Sigma --- it's the closest I have to a full frame "standard" lens.

Quote:

Originally Posted by adimicra (Post 4595869)

Which lens you recommend for the Sony a6000 as an all-purpose lens.

I bought the Sony 18-105 f/4 -- and its a good enough lens, but its HUGE.

So I'd suggest sticking to the kit lens and getting an additional prime.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom (Post 4595889)

Sony 50/1.8 OSS

Awfully slow to focus, right? Which is extra frustrating on these Sonys that once upon a time not so long ago held the title of "fastest autofocus".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom (Post 4595889)

Sigma 30/1.4

Really lusting after this one myself!!

Thanks for the replies.
I am feeling considering my usage Sony 6000/6300 with kit lens should be good enough.
I will go to the store and check the size and handling.

I am open to m4/3 cameras from Olympus and Panasonic but I don't understand the benefit of those over something like a Sony a6000. I don't think there is a big difference in size/portability. Also, please note that I am a Canon 600D user for 5+ years and used to certain image quality which I would not like to drop significantly. I normally use the Tamro 17-50 F2.8 lens with my Canon 600D which is great but makes the camera bulky and difficult to carry.

On the other hand, if I want something really pocketable, the Sony RX100 makes lot of sense to me.

Another thing I have noticed that sometimes my Google Pixel or Galaxy S10 produce better or more usable shots using the built-in HDR when the background is bright. Does Sony/Olympus or any of these mirrorless cameras have in-built HDR mode and how good are those?

Would like to hear suggestions..

Quote:

Originally Posted by adimicra (Post 4596025)

Another thing I have noticed that sometimes my Google Pixel or Galaxy S10 produce better or more usable shots using the built-in HDR when the background is bright. Does Sony/Olympus or any of these mirrorless cameras have in-built HDR mode and how good are those?

Would like to hear suggestions..

Any HDR (JPEG) straight out of a phone or a camera is always a compromise. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t.

By just shooting in RAW and using some simple photo editing software you will be able to deal much better with different/high contrasts to start with. It makes a huge difference.

My Olympus Pen F and OMD E5 mk2 both have HDR options, you can adjust the various settings (number of different +/- stops, number of shots) and it produces a HDR JPEG straight out of the camera.

I do not make much use of it. If I do use the HDR setting I use the RAW option. It will take a number of shots with different settings and I merge/edit them in a dedicated HDR Program. Although they call it HDR, when using it in Raw it is just a bracketing function, obviously.

A better, but more expensive option, is to use good filters.

There is nothing wrong with shooting JPEG. But if you spend money on getting a proper camera, I would suggest looking into moving to raw. Yes, it does mean you need to process/edit each and every image. But with programs such as Lightroom editing is a breeze. It just takes a couple of mouse clicks to transform an image from average to good. For me post processing is an essential part of photograph. JPEG is nothing else than an average setting applied standard on each RAW file in camera.

On just about all cameras you can choose to have an image stored in both JPEG and RAW. If you are happy with the JPEG go with it. If not you can see what can be done with the Raw file.

I have been very happy with my Olympus cameraas for the last 6-7 years or so. Started with the original OMD E5 when it came out
I use the Pro-lenses which give very good results. (Good enough for my Royal Photographic Society Licentiate approval).

If I had to choose again I would give the new Sony's (unbelievably good auto-focus) and maybe the latest Fuji cameras a good look. However, I am not that big on kit. Even after some 45 years of photography I find myself being the limiting factor more often than my kit.

Jeroen

Quote:

Originally Posted by adimicra (Post 4596025)

I am open to m4/3 cameras from Olympus and Panasonic but I don't understand the benefit of those over something like a Sony a6000. I don't think there is a big difference in size/portability. Also, please note that I am a Canon 600D user for 5+ years and used to certain image quality which I would not like to drop significantly.

What kind of photography you are pursuing? Olympus is very good for portraits, landscapes and indoor shots. If you are into sports action or wildlife, keep away from Olympus.

I am a four-third sensor user since 2006, and have owned 5 different bodies and boat load of 4/3 or m4/3 lenses. All the current Olympus OMD models have 2 auto-HDR modes.

One of the most challenging shooting situation is motor show. Check out how 12-40mm lens handled it on my OMD EM5mkII in 2015 Tokyo Motor Show.