I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.

Started 9 months ago | Discussions thread
tko
tko
Forum ProPosts: 10,454
Like?
well, here's the deal
In reply to drj3, 9 months ago

It's true that smaller cameras might satisfy many users. Cell users are probably happy w/many photos, especially with good lighting and non-action. Fixed lens, small sensor cameras can produce high quality, so can M43ds, so can crop, so can FF, so can medium format.

Actually, any format today can produce pretty darn good web size images in the right conditions.

So, why not replace your mirroless w/a Nokia cell phone? It's because under more demanding conditions, the cell phone falls down.

Now, that 40-150 lens is F5.6. On FF, that's an F11 lens. They don't make F11 lenses for FF, because they'd be regarded as toys. Way too slow for any serious photography.

You get what you pay for. There is no magic fairy dust. In cars, golf clubs, and stereo systems, there is always a sweet spot where you get 80% of the performance at half the cost. Trouble is, that reasoning leads you to drive a Yugo, and proclaim it the winner.

tko wrote:

Please list your $400 mirrorless kit with lenses, and lets compare performance.

Some might feel a bit perturbed by the thought of a sub $400 kit creating images that rival their $3K, $4k, $k+ investment in the gear race.... trashing it might make them feel a tiny bit better.

Except a free cell phone can (under benign conditions) create images that rival there $1000 mirrorless system. Where does it end

-- hide signature --

drj3

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow