DSLR vs mirrorless cameras: which one should you choose?

The “DSLR vs mirrorless cameras” debate is nothing new, and it has changed a lot over the years. The first DSLRs appeared at the end of the 1990s, with cameras such as the Nikon D1 (1999), the Canon EOS-1Ds (2002), and the Canon EOS 300D (2003), one of the first DSLRs designed for the general public, with a 6.2-megapixel sensor. In short, DSLRs have been around for a long time. And maybe you also want to know which DSLR to choose according to your needs, right?

Mirrorless cameras arrived much later, with the Panasonic G1 in 2008, followed by the GH1 in 2009. Other brands soon followed, more or less, with Sony releasing its first APS-C mirrorless cameras in 2010. In 2013, Sony shook up the mirrorless world with its first full-frame mirrorless cameras (24 x 36mm). The two DSLR giants, Canon and Nikon, only followed this full-frame mirrorless path in 2018 with their first models.

When mirrorless cameras first appeared, I would have summed up the “DSLR or mirrorless camera” debate like this: if you wanted a high-quality digital camera, a DSLR was usually the safest choice. If you wanted something more compact and lighter, a mirrorless camera made sense. Today, the debate is much more nuanced. Full-frame mirrorless cameras, especially from Sony at first, have narrowed the gap between the two systems considerably.

In fact, the market has now shifted very clearly toward mirrorless. Back in 2019, mirrorless interchangeable-lens cameras were already starting to overtake DSLRs in some sales figures. Today, that shift is even more obvious: mirrorless cameras dominate new releases and most future development, while DSLRs are increasingly a second-hand or legacy-system choice. That makes the question even more relevant if you’re getting started in photography today: should you buy a DSLR or a mirrorless camera? Come on, let me explain everything!

In fact, we recently published a full article detailing the best cameras we recommend this year! We cover mirrorless cameras, bridge cameras, and expert compacts.

Before getting into the broader debate, let me explain the main difference between a DSLR and a mirrorless camera in simple terms. It all happens inside the camera body. I’ve also written a complete article on the best mirrorless cameras if you want to go further.

DSLRs (Digital Single-Lens Reflex cameras) are built around several mechanical elements, the main one being the mirror. To keep things simple and avoid getting too technical, when you look through the viewfinder, the light passes through the lens mounted on the camera body, reaches a mirror, and is reflected up through a pentaprism to the optical viewfinder, where you see the image. When you take a photo, the mirror flips up and the light reaches the sensor directly to record the image. With a DSLR, what you see through the viewfinder is quite literally the real optical scene. And if you want to go further with DSLRs, I’ve also written a complete article listing all the current Canon APS-C models, with everything you need to know about these cameras and how I would guide your choice.

Mirrorless cameras simply do not have a mirror: the light passing through the lens reaches the sensor directly. Most mirrorless cameras today (though not all of them!) have an electronic viewfinder (EVF). The sensor sends a digital preview of the image to the EVF. In other words, what you see through a mirrorless viewfinder is a screen-based version of reality. Below are examples of mirrorless cameras, the X-T4 from Fujifilm and the 6D Mark II from Canon (DSLR).

Now we get to the heart of the matter, and to what I consider the most important point. If you’re wondering whether a DSLR and a mirrorless camera can produce the same image quality, I would say yes, as long as you compare cameras with the same sensor size. As always, you have to compare like with like. I won’t repeat everything I wrote in the article about the different camera sensor sizes, but here is a quick summary.

I often see people on forums comparing several bodies, DSLR or mirrorless, without taking sensor size into account. Yet this is essential. Sensor size affects several key aspects of the final image: field of view (the famous crop factor), ISO performance, depth of field (linked to aperture), sharpness, and dynamic range.

Simply put, DSLR bodies generally use two sensor sizes: full frame (24 x 36mm) and APS-C (15.7 x 23.7mm), although Canon APS-C sensors are slightly smaller. With mirrorless cameras, the most common formats are full frame, APS-C (as on DSLRs), and Micro Four Thirds (13 x 17.3mm).

So if you’re hesitating between a DSLR and a mirrorless camera, make sure you compare the same sensor formats. This is where “full-frame equivalence” comes in, for focal length, ISO, and depth of field (so aperture). For example:

• Focal length always stays the same, but the field of view changes depending on sensor size. You cannot compare the look of a 300mm lens on full frame with a 300mm lens on Micro Four Thirds, which gives a field of view equivalent to about 600mm.
• For ISO performance, larger sensors generally have the advantage. For example, an image shot at ISO 6400 on full frame is roughly comparable in quality to ISO 3200 on APS-C or ISO 1600 on Micro Four Thirds.
• For depth of field, I won’t go into all the details here (everything is explained in the article linked above), but equivalence also matters. A 25mm f/1.4 lens on a Micro Four Thirds sensor gives a similar field of view and depth of field to a 50mm f/2.8 lens on full frame. So you can’t really compare “large aperture” or “maximum aperture” across different sensor sizes without context. The same applies to background bokeh.

Knowing this won’t change everything, of course, but at least you now know why it’s important to compare what can actually be compared. I’m not saying full frame is always better.

This is one point most people agree on, at least in broad terms. In most cases, a mirrorless camera will be slightly smaller and lighter than a DSLR. Once again, though, you need to compare like with like, meaning cameras with the same sensor size. With entry-level mirrorless cameras, the difference is real. But with full-frame mirrorless cameras, the gap between them and full-frame DSLRs is not always huge. Take a Nikon D750 and a Sony A7 III, for example (both 24MP): the weight difference is only about 100g, and the mirrorless body is only around 1.5cm shorter. That’s not a massive difference.

In reality, the biggest differences in size and weight are especially noticeable with professional DSLR bodies. It also has to be said that there are very few truly simple, lightweight entry-level DSLR bodies left today.

When it comes to lenses, if we don’t take full-frame aperture equivalence into account (which can be debated), a mirrorless lens will often be lighter than a DSLR lens. As an example, here are three standard zoom lenses with a field of view equivalent to about 24-70mm, all opening at f/2.8:

• On a Micro Four Thirds sensor: the 12-35mm (Panasonic) weighs 300g
• On an APS-C sensor: the 16-55mm (Fujifilm) weighs 650g
• On a full-frame sensor: the 24-70mm (Canon) weighs 900g.

Clearly, the Micro Four Thirds mirrorless lens wins in terms of weight, even if the final image will not be identical to what you get on full frame at the same aperture. To compare things more fairly and get the same image from the same position, we can look at it this way.

As we can see, when we compare for the same final result, full-frame lenses are not necessarily bigger or heavier than lenses designed for a sensor half the size, such as Micro Four Thirds. Again, this really matters if you shoot full frame and often use very large apertures. The reality is that there are not many full-frame lenses with truly “small” apertures. The same goes for camera bodies: there are very few entry-level full-frame bodies designed to be genuinely light and compact, except for a few rare pancake-style zoom kits.

To simplify, a camera’s autofocus system mainly relies on two technologies: phase detection and/or contrast detection. A few years ago, DSLRs still had a clear advantage over mirrorless cameras, which often relied only on contrast detection. That is no longer really the case today. Many modern mirrorless cameras use hybrid systems that combine both technologies.

When it comes to AF points, the advantage increasingly goes to mirrorless cameras. Most of them now offer autofocus points spread across a large part of the image, or even almost the entire frame. Entry-level DSLRs (even full-frame models like my 6D, which is old now) often have only a few AF points grouped near the center of the viewfinder, which makes composition harder, especially with moving subjects. Of course, some DSLR bodies still have excellent autofocus, such as the Nikon D5 or the Canon 1D Mark II, but they are not affordable for most people.

That said, not all mirrorless cameras use the same AF technology, and performance varies a lot from one model to another. Panasonic, for example, long relied heavily on contrast-detection systems. But overall, modern mirrorless cameras have made huge progress and are now often ahead for subject tracking, eye detection, and video autofocus.

I already mentioned the main difference between a DSLR and a mirrorless camera in the introduction. In my opinion, this is one of the biggest advantages of mirrorless cameras.

DSLRs use what is called an optical viewfinder. The main advantage is that you see the real scene directly, without any digital processing. The optical viewfinder is also independent from the screen, which saves a lot of battery life (see below). Live View mode on a DSLR (with the mirror up) is not great either, especially for video, and is often slower. Another point is that you don’t see the final exposure through the optical viewfinder the way you can on a screen that previews the scene with your settings applied.

On the other hand, some mirrorless camera bodies (not all of them, so be careful) have an EVF, or electronic viewfinder. The real advantage here is that you can preview the exposure directly in the viewfinder and adjust ISO, shutter speed, or aperture while seeing the result live. You can also display highlight warnings directly in the viewfinder. Once the photo is taken, you can review it in the EVF, zoom in, and so on. Finally, you also have focus peaking, which highlights sharp areas when focusing manually.

However, electronic viewfinders also have drawbacks. First, not every mirrorless camera has an EVF, while every DSLR has an optical viewfinder. Some EVFs can also struggle when the subject moves quickly or when the light becomes very low, making the image appear jerky or less clear. Finally, an optical viewfinder is still naturally instantaneous because the camera does not need to convert the scene into a digital image first, even though latency on recent mirrorless cameras has been greatly reduced.

One last point, in my opinion, is depth-of-field preview. On a DSLR, it is not always easy to use because the viewfinder can become too dark and hard to read. With an EVF, you can preview depth of field without darkening the viewfinder, and you see the result directly. EVFs also let you preview “image looks” in the viewfinder, such as black and white, before taking the shot.

I won’t spend ages on this point. If you’re looking for the largest possible lens selection, especially second-hand, Canon and Nikon DSLRs still have an enormous advantage thanks to decades of native and third-party lenses.

That said, the gap has closed a lot. Today, mirrorless systems such as Sony FE, Fujifilm X, Canon RF, Nikon Z, and Micro Four Thirds offer much stronger lens ranges than they did a few years ago. Mirrorless cameras also have another advantage: removing the mirror allowed manufacturers to design shorter mounts, which makes it possible to use adapter rings and mount lenses from other systems, although there are often restrictions.

For very specific fields such as sports and wildlife, the choice of mirrorless lenses is now much better than it used to be, especially in high-end systems. Still, the used DSLR lens market remains extremely attractive if budget is a major factor.

Finally, just as with lenses, the range of accessories for DSLR bodies is still very broad, although mirrorless systems have now caught up in many areas.

This is a point on which almost everyone agrees: mirrorless cameras often feel more discreet to many photographers. Since there is no mirror mechanism, the bodies can be very quiet. This is particularly appreciated for street photography, weddings, and similar situations.

When it comes to size and weight, as mentioned earlier in the article, it all depends on your setup. A full-frame mirrorless body with a telephoto lens is almost as noticeable to me as my 6D + 70-300 L IS.

This is another area where things clearly differ between DSLRs and mirrorless cameras. On a DSLR, the mirror mechanism limits the shooting speed (as does the shutter curtain in front of the sensor). On a mirrorless camera, the electronic shutter can reach higher shutter speeds and faster burst rates. The Sony A9, for example, offers 20 frames per second.

Not having a mirror also reduces the risk of breaking mechanical parts. You may smile, but I had an issue with the mirror on my 6D (probably a manufacturing defect). That said, the mirror does have one small advantage: it helps protect the sensor from dust when you remove the lens. In practice, even though mirrorless sensors can be more exposed to dust, dust spots usually only show up in specific shooting conditions. And you can always clean the sensor with a blower or a dedicated cleaning swab.

Generally speaking, most DSLRs do not offer in-body stabilization (Pentax is the main exception) and instead rely on optical stabilization, meaning you buy either a stabilized lens or a non-stabilized one. This is mainly because, on a DSLR, even if the sensor were stabilized, you would not benefit from it through the optical viewfinder. You see what the lens sees, not what the sensor sees. On a mirrorless camera, however, whether you compose on the rear screen or through the viewfinder, you are always seeing what the sensor sees.

In mirrorless cameras, in-body sensor stabilization is increasingly common, often on 5 axes (for example with Sony, OM System/Olympus, Panasonic, Nikon, and Canon). Olympus built stabilized bodies very early on. Nikon chose to stabilize its sensors from the start with the Z6/Z7, and the Z5 also includes in-body stabilization. Some Micro Four Thirds mirrorless bodies (Olympus/OM System and Panasonic) can combine body and lens stabilization, often called Dual IS, just as Canon full-frame mirrorless bodies can now combine in-body and lens stabilization with models such as the R5/R6.

Example of a camera with built-in 5-axis image stabilization, the Sony A7 III
Check the price of this mirrorless camera on Amazon

There are two points I think are worth addressing. The first, and probably the most important, is battery life. Here, DSLRs still have a clear advantage over mirrorless cameras. Because mirrorless cameras constantly power electronic components, especially the screen and viewfinder, they use more battery. And because these cameras are often designed to be compact, their batteries are usually smaller too. It depends on the model, of course, but 300 to 500 shots per battery is common on many mirrorless cameras, while an entry-level DSLR can often manage 500 to 1,000 shots, sometimes more than 1,500. Professional DSLRs can even exceed 3,000 shots with their large batteries. That is a major difference and an important point if you need a lot of autonomy, for long exposures, cold-weather shooting, or multi-day hikes, for example. That said, manufacturers have made real progress, and some recent mirrorless cameras now approach much better battery life. This will almost certainly continue to improve.

The second point is robustness. Overall, I would still say DSLRs often feel like tougher, more rugged machines. Early mirrorless cameras, even high-end ones, were not always as weather-sealed as professional DSLRs. Today, the situation is more nuanced: many high-end mirrorless bodies are now very well built and weather-sealed, even if combining DSLR-level ruggedness with compact size and low weight remains a challenge. In the end, most mirrorless cameras are more than robust enough for the majority of uses.

Choosing a camera is not that simple, and you should not assume that a mirrorless body will necessarily cost less than a DSLR. Again, you have to compare like with like. In my opinion, there is not always a huge price difference between entry-level mirrorless cameras and DSLRs. You can find basic kits from around €400/€500. Even with high-end bodies, the gap is not always huge if you compare a Canon 1D X or Nikon D6 with a Sony A9 II or Nikon Z7. For similar performance, sensor size, and market position, prices often remain in roughly the same range. So the debate is not really “mirrorless or DSLR,” but rather what sensor size and system you want.

When it comes to lenses, the real difference is more often between entry-level and high-end lenses than between DSLR and mirrorless systems. For example, a 25mm f/1.8 from Olympus can be more expensive than a 50mm f/1.8 from Nikon/Canon/Sony in full frame, …

On the other hand, for the same sensor size, full-frame mirrorless lenses are clearly not cheaper, and sometimes the opposite is true because the systems are newer. A Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 costs about €2,700 compared with around €2,000 for a Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS III USM. Also note that in the DSLR world, it is easy to find older second-hand lenses that are still excellent. With mirrorless systems, the ranges are newer, so second-hand lenses can still be harder to find, even though the market is growing.

This remains a real advantage for mirrorless cameras, at least with brands that actively improve their bodies through firmware updates, a bit like updating a phone. I’m thinking in particular of Fujifilm, which has long offered firmware updates that improve performance, add autofocus points, refine AF-C tracking, or improve image stabilization. Sony also does it, and Nikon and Canon have followed the same path. And, between us, it was simply impossible to add software features to an optical viewfinder on a DSLR body!

Sony, for example, often releases a new body while keeping the previous one in the catalog as a more affordable option. In fact, many brands now do something similar. Nikon also offers firmware updates for its Z cameras. For me, this is a real plus compared with DSLRs, whose updates were often limited to fixing bugs or adding compatibility with new products.

Last point in this long article: video mode. Clearly, I’m not a video specialist, and I bought my 6D almost entirely for photography. But many people now do both. Mirrorless cameras are undoubtedly more advanced for video. DSLRs have always been less comfortable when filming, partly because manufacturers originally designed them around optical viewfinder shooting. On a DSLR, video is only recorded in Live View, which is roughly equivalent to using a mirrorless camera with the mirror locked up. Today, with compact bodies, easier handling, swivel and/or touch screens, and strong autofocus, mirrorless cameras are excellent tools for capturing beautiful moments on video.

To conclude, most people now agree that mirrorless cameras are the future of photography. But I’ll say it again: if you are comparing cameras, compare bodies that actually make sense to compare. Comparing an Olympus Micro Four Thirds camera with a Canon 6D Mark II, for example, does not tell you much.

Clearly, mirrorless cameras now have more and more advantages, but don’t fall into the trap of thinking they are always cheaper, lighter, and smaller. It all depends on what you compare. High-end mirrorless bodies and lenses are expensive, and they can be just as big as DSLR setups.

So, on the famous “DSLRs or mirrorless cameras” debate, I would say it depends on your needs and, of course, your budget. If you do not care about video at all and want the widest possible choice of lenses, especially second-hand, a DSLR can still make sense. This is also true for photographers who are already heavily invested in DSLR gear and do not want to replace everything. For everyone else, choosing a mirrorless kit is rarely a bad decision today. The goal is to buy equipment that suits you, helps you get started, and lets you become comfortable with photography. Once you progress, you will naturally feel when it is time to move up a range. In any case, many mirrorless cameras offer very good value for money, especially when compactness matters, as with Micro Four Thirds, for example.

If you’re interested in choosing your next camera, I also invite you to read my article on advanced compact cameras. This type of camera may be a great fit for many of you, especially since some of these models can outperform certain DSLRs and entry-level mirrorless cameras.

See you soon,

Written by Sylvain PONS

I've been passionate about photography since 2010, learning as I went along. Today, I dedicate myself to guiding others in their choice of camera gear and sharing a variety of tips to improve their photography skills.

Despite our care, a mistake may have slipped into this article. If you find any, please don't hesitate to let us know so we can correct it as soon as possible and keep our information up-to-date!