• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

DSLR or mirrorless for wildlife photography (1 Viewer)

I currently use a Sony A6300. It uses an OSPDAF focusing system that does very well for bird-in-flight action, but also has a very small flex spot focus point - in its smallest size, I can thread it through tiny holes in foliage to pinpoint a bird's eye very easily - it's more accurate than the smallest spot focus point on my DSLRs...so I've actually come to rely on it for AF in those situations, whereas with my DSLR I've often resorted to manual focus.
 
I don't think so. The enlargement of the central part of the EVF on my m4/3 makes it easy (once you get used to that feature) and on newer models there are additional features to help you tell what is in focus and what is not when you focus manually.
This may be true for other (newer) mirrorless models. When I compared my Nikon V2 with a Canon DSLR, in most respects and overall I clearly preferred the V2, but manual focusing and isolating birds in dense foliage due to the thin DOF was a pleasure with DSLR + 400mm prime.
 
I think that's not quite universally accurate anymore - though still truthful in general. Many mirrorless cameras with more basic focus systems, and older mirrorless, indeed might struggle in low contrast to distinguish the bird from the background - but the latest batch of mirrorless have addressed those issues very well - focus in very low contrast situations has become much more reliable, much more capable, [...]
My Nikon V2 focuses well and fast. It doesn't have problems to separate birds from a background, it does that well even at BIF. What I meant was "isolate bird from background" as in "depth of field" - my Canon DSLR with the 400mm prime is doing better in forests when birds are hiding in a bush. This doesn't change the fact that in general the V2 is better for birding.

I agree that the EVF of a mirrorless (even the older V2) is so useful that I do not really miss the optical viewfinder of a DSLR.
 
I pulled the trigger on an Olympus E-M1 Mark II. To limit the cost of the initial setup, I will pair it with the Zuiko 75-300 mm lens. Hopefully soon I will some nice pictures to show :)
 
What I meant was "isolate bird from background" as in "depth of field" - my Canon DSLR with the 400mm prime is doing better in forests when birds are hiding in a bush.

Gotcha - thanks for the clarification - I misunderstood. Indeed larger sensors are always going to be better for shallow DOF and overall depth of field control as they give you that ability to go from extreme shallow - and helpful in dense foliage where the background can be more easily blurred out to be less distracting. My mirrorless is a bit better in that regard than your V1 since it has an APS-C sensor, but not quite as good as a full frame. There are of course full-frame mirrorless cameras - but so far, those haven't quite matched DSLR ability in continuous focus ability.
 
I pulled the trigger on an Olympus E-M1 Mark II. To limit the cost of the initial setup, I will pair it with the Zuiko 75-300 mm lens. Hopefully soon I will some nice pictures to show :)

Congrats! Should be an excellent light weight setup. It's marketed as a "pro" camera, so it has tons of features and the complexity can be a bit intimidating at first. In addition to this forum, you may also want to check the micro four-thirds forum at DP Review for more tips about using your camera. An author with a good track record has a book coming out about it, but it won't be available until August:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/168198254...UTF8&colid=UIAVDUI7CCED&coliid=I3BHFGBD78OKOE
 
I pulled the trigger on an Olympus E-M1 Mark II. To limit the cost of the initial setup, I will pair it with the Zuiko 75-300 mm lens. Hopefully soon I will some nice pictures to show :)
I've read many promising reports on that camera, it will be a big step forward from your superzoom - enjoy!
 
Good shot. For completeness, include the lens when you tell what equipment you use below the image.

Niels
 
Two more:

http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/578136/cat/500/ppuser/104472

http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/578058/cat/500/ppuser/104472

I'm still learning how to develop RAWs, so the quality of this shots may improve :)

It's definitely a big step-up from my Canon PowerShot SX700HS. Autofocus is much faster and resolution is better. There is of course much less noise at high ISOs.

I don't think battery life is a problem - I think I definitely made more than 500 photos on 1 charge
 
I pulled the trigger on an Olympus E-M1 Mark II. To limit the cost of the initial setup, I will pair it with the Zuiko 75-300 mm lens. Hopefully soon I will some nice pictures to show :)
I'll be intested to see how you like this combo. I've been using an EM5/II with that lens, and recently upgraded to the EM1 Mark II. The speed, battery life, and ergonomics of the EM1/II is a big improvement. I thought of switching to Nikon/Canon, given the cost of the EM1/II, but after trying their APS-C bodies, I still prefered the size & weight of M4/3. If it hadn't been for the (relatively) new Panasonic 100-400 & Olympus 300 telephoto lenses, though, I would have gone APS-C, for the lens options, and lower cost.
 
I like it. I would like the additional reach of 100-400 PanaLeica, but 300mm is enough to make some nice photos. Autofocus is really fast even if low light, although it sometimes hunts a little bit. I never had the opportunity to try a sports-targeted DSLR like Nikon D500, so can't compare.

The possibility of silent photography has proved to be very useful when taking photos of skittish animals like my house cats ;-)
 
As a professional photographer I can impart this tidbit of knowledge. Megapixels is important and a decent body, but in almost all cases it is the Lens. Canon’s 70-300 series of lens is OK but unless you get the L version of the lens you will probably be disappointed. I have used my Canon 70-200mmm f/2.8 L lens with a matching 1.4 & 2x converter and it was much better than the 70-300 4-5.6. Sigma makes great long lens zooms if you can find them cheap otherwise invest in a good name brand long lens over 300mm
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top