Mirrorless DSLR vs Point and Shoot?

[Ridge Ghost]

I have been using a Panasonic Lumix point & shoot for years, and it has been a great little camera. I love the size, and the Leica lens has been really nice. I now have quite a bit of dust inside the lens though, which I can't clean, so I'm in the market for a new camera. I'm wondering if this would be a good time to step up to a nicer camera.

I don't know a whole lot about DSLR's, other than that they have larger sensors than P&S models and have interchangable lenses. So I'm a total newbie in this area. I like taking nice pictures when hiking, hunting, fishing etc and playing with different settings, but don't see myself getting super into photography as a full time hobby. I never wanted to go the DSLR route before because of the size, but with mirrorless models like the Sony NEX and Nikon 1 on the market, that may no longer be an issue.

So my question is how much of a difference would I notice between one of these mirrorless models compared to a nicer point & shoot? As a DSLR dummie, what exactly are the benefits over a P&S? For someone who is more of a casual photographer but is willing to learn to more about photography, is it worth the jump in price?

 

[rye_a]

The important thing to remember is that sensor size determines image quality more than megapixel count. The latest generation of mirrorless cameras (whether the Sony NEX or Panasonic/Olympus Micro 4/3) will produce photos of similar quality to crop sensor (APS-C) digital SLRs. To explain this better, a full frame digital SLR (think upper end, $2k+ for a body alone) has a sensor equivalent to a 35mm frame of film (36x24mm) and lenses mounted on it will have a 1:1 conversion. The next size of common sensor is Advanced Photo System-Classic (APS-C) which has a sensor that is approximately 40% (~23x15mm) the size of a full frame which results in a 1.6:1 conversion for lenses, so a 100mm lens on an APS-C body captures what a 160mm lens would on a full frame.

Mirrorless Four Thirds cameras have 17.x13mm sensors and a 2:1 conversion, so a 100mm lens on an Four Thirds body captures what a 200mm lens would on a full frame.

Point and shoot sensors are significantly smaller than Four Thirds sensors, ranging from 5.76 x 4.29mm to 7.6 x 5.7mm.

Four thirds systems allow you to change lenses which provides more versatility than a point and shoot, but this comes at a financial and weight cost.

What you need to decide is whether you are more focused on the size and weight of the camera or on image/video quality, and whether the additional cost and weight of a Four Thirds system is offset by its added quality and versatility.

 

[Ridge Ghost]

Thanks Rye, that helps.

 

[bigmoose]

I have a Canon S95 that works very well. This is a near the top of line point/shoot camera. It is small enough to put in a pocket and I keep mine with me alot. It will shoot RAW and has most all the features of the bigger DSLR cameras. Of course Canon keeps up-grading their cameras and now it is a S100 with even more bells and whistles. This is a great little camera worth considering.

Moose