Do you non professionals still use DSLR's? And why?

Started Feb 14, 2013 | Discussions
Martin.au
Senior MemberPosts: 5,401
Like?
Re: Still use my 20D and 5D on travel
In reply to Lee Jay, Feb 17, 2013

ljfinger wrote:

You've got nothing but slow. If I just want range I can take my SX260 - 24-500 all with IS in a pocket and shoot panoramas for ultrawide. I often need the speed. I've shot at f/1.4 and only got 1/15th at ISO 3200. I've shot the fish at ISO 6400 and f/2.8 and managed 1.3 seconds. I've shot at 200mm and f/2.8 with ISO 3200 and only managed 1/10th.

It covers what I need. If I needed faster glass then I would get faster lenses. Eg the 35-100 2.8 and the 25mm 1.4. For my photography I rarely need more than the f2.8 (60mm macro and 12-60)

Switching out for the faster glass isn't going to change the size of my kit much anyway. The 12-60 is a big lens and weighs almost the same as the 12-35 and 35-100 f2.8s combined.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ultimitsu
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,437
Like?
Re: Living in the past?
In reply to Hatstand, Feb 17, 2013

Hatstand wrote:

ultimitsu wrote:

I am not imposing my standard or requirement on you.

With respect - from my point of view, everything that followed in that last post was you telling me what would constitute "acceptable" or a "keeper" for you. What you​ need, to get what ​you want.

No, I never said such. if you go back and check my very first post responding to you, I said this:

"600D can maintain "an SNR of 30dB while keeping a good dynamic range of 9 EVs and a color depth of 18bits" at iso 793 while FZ150 can only do the same at iso 132."

The benchmark has never been what I personally find to be acceptable. but rather, an objective standard - colour accuracy, DR, and SNR.

what is interesting though, is that even though you insist you have a different  standard and I have asked for you to show five iso 1600 keepers to indicate that your standard is much lower, four posts later you still have not got them.

You're telling me I have to be able to shoot at ISO3200 which is what you consider a requirement, to meet your IQ standards. (Actually, what would most likely happen is - I would use lower ISO and slower shutter speed... my image would then not be as sharp as yours and not perfectly frozen.

Look, that is fine too, then please show us some photos where you lowered shutter speed by 8 times to reduce ISO from 3200 to 400 and you consider it a keeper. My argument is that they do not exist. i am guessing and arguing that your "acceptable standard" is in practice much higher than you arguing them to be in this thread. You can easily prove me wrong by showing some examples.

ie. I took the shot, but your IQ is better, which I accept. What I don't accept is you telling me I simply couldn't shoot in the first place!).

As I have addressed this point in the very post that you quoted, what i meant is not that you are unable to pull the trigger, but unable to generate keepers. Again, it only takes you five example photos to prove me wrong.

You see, I never said FZ150 cannot shoot action.

You said: "your FZ does indeed prevent you from shooting action".

Does that not mean the same thing?

Perhaps that was not the best choice of words, but I am sure all my subsequent qualifications made it clear that the point is not "you cannot pull the trigger", but "you cannot get keepers" in certain conditions.

I said yoru list omitted high iso Iq which is a important attribute for action photography.

I listed the stuff that enable me to take action shots in the first place.

Not at all. People used to shoot action with manual lenses. In reality any camera with a working lens and shutter can shoot action. the difference comes down to keeper rate. with manual lens and long shutter lag, one may only get 1 keeper in every 100 shots. with good tracking AF and low shutter lag, one may get 50 in every 100. thus better AF, burst rate and all these things you listed are not essential for you to "take action shots in the first place", they merely improve your chances of getting good action shots.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Carsten Pauer 2
Senior MemberPosts: 2,949
Like?
Re: Do you non professionals still use DSLR's? And why?
In reply to gdourado, Feb 18, 2013

Hello,

Hello gdourado,

With the increase advancements in sensor technology and mirrorless cameras, I was wondering how many non professionals still use DSLR's as their travel cameras or just general usage cameras...

The Problem here is that the Mirrorless Cameras missing some Features that some old DSLR have.

If I was a payed photo professional, doing either event shooting, sports, nature or fashion shoots, a camera with maximum speed, precision and control would be a must.

Same for me as a Amateur or "Advanced Photo Shooter".

But if you are just an hobbyist or an amateur, do you still feel motivated to haul around a big DSLR with lenses all day?

Sure, so long i can not buy a better Camera + Lens System Today.
I use my Bike to carry the Camera + Lenses.

...but when I think about the fact that I left the hotel in the morning with a big and heavy camera bag, only to return at night, having a big camera always hanging from either my neck or my shoulder, I wish I had taken something smaller and lighter.

Just use a tiny Compact Camera.

What are your feelings on this matter?

I feel a bit that Your Passion for Photography is not enough Distinctive.
If the Camera + Lenses are to heavy for You, just use a rolling Camera Case or a Bike like Me (with Bags).

Regards: Carsten

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Hatstand
Contributing MemberPosts: 716
Like?
Re: Living in the past?
In reply to ultimitsu, Feb 18, 2013

I can't post shots taken at ISO3200, because I don't have any:
For airshows, I am rarely over ISO200. Propeller-driven planes need to be shot at slow shutter speeds, so that the propeller is motion-blurred. (frozen propeller looks unnatural, as if the plane has suffered engine failure and is about to crash). So, camera is set to shutter-priority mode, and usually ISO100 (Camera may vary the ISO somewhat though, to achieve exposure compensation)

Aerostars crossover

Mustangs in formation
In fact on sunny days I usually add a neutral density filter to allow slower shutter speeds. Especially for helicopters, since their rotor blades move more slowly than propellers.

Black Cats, rainy day
For jets at airshows, I'll use much faster shutter speeds - but I still rarely feel any need to go above ISO400.

Red Arrows

Indoor ice skating is more demanding... but my preference is shutter-priority again, to deliberately retain some motion blur in the background or even the subject themselves. This preserves an impression of speed and movement, which is lacking in a perfectly-frozen image (in my opinion). So while I consider this one OK:

Haircutter spin, typically 120 rpm or more

…The effect I'm really after is this:

Spin with desirable motion blur

The above are all obviously straight OOC - no cropping, or any of the PP that I would normally do before printing (NR, WB, Levels/curves).
Basically - I have by no means pushed the limits of my camera's ISO, in a quest for faster shutter speeds. I could freeze the action better, but I haven't even tried, nor have I felt any need to.
I therefore don't have any action shots taken at your arbitrary ISO3200 "requirement", and I doubt I could find any at ISO1600 either. This has not been imposed on me by my humble superzoom camera: I was doing the same thing when I had a DSLR.
And now that I've upgraded from FZ150 to FZ200 (faster lens when zoomed), I'm even less likely to take the kind of high-ISO shots that (I guess) you wanted to see.

I'm sure you are horrified by these, but whatever. A minute or two of PP, print at 6x4, looks good to me staring out of a photo album

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bill Force
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,607
Like?
Re: Still use my 20D and 5D on travel
In reply to Lee Jay, Feb 18, 2013

Very true and I'll go you one further.  If I'm serious about documenting or preserving images I still pack and carry my Canon F-1 and a couple lenses as I'm more confident in the preservation of film,  I scan and digitize for printing.  If just for my pleasure and the net I use my Nikon D2x and usually just one lens. (2X crop factor helps).

I have 4 P&S cameras but truthfully they all suck unless you are satisfied to compromise....great for pics of my wife's family. 

The idea of comparisons of cameras and systems is a futile endeavor, just try to do the best with what you have, there is NO perfect camera OR system.  All of the modern technology is basically aimed at reduction of size, weight and perhaps flexibility but in actuality the images are no better than the ones I take with my 1932 Kodak Recomar IF YOU KNOW HOW TO USE IT.

Incidently my Canon F-1 IS FF.

-- hide signature --

' You don't have to have the best of everything to get the best out of what you do have'.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ultimitsu
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,437
Like?
Re: Living in the past?
In reply to Hatstand, Feb 18, 2013

Hatstand wrote:

I can't post shots taken at ISO3200, because I don't have any:

That proves my point. Are these situations where iso 3200 is required to take a good keeper non-existent around you? I think not. they exist around all of us. so the only possible explanation as to why you do not have any is either you choose to take any pictures in these situations knowing they will not come out good, or you have taken them but got no keepers.

For airshows, I am rarely over ISO200. Propeller-driven planes need to be shot at slow shutter speeds, so that the propeller is motion-blurred. (frozen propeller looks unnatural, as if the plane has suffered engine failure and is about to crash). So, camera is set to shutter-priority mode, and usually ISO100 (Camera may vary the ISO somewhat though, to achieve exposure compensation)

I did not ask for examples where you deliberately wanted slow shutter speed. I asked examples where:

A, you used necessary motion freezing shutter speed and iso was 1600 or 3200, and you considered it a keeper.

Or

B, where you would have wanted motion freezing shutter speed but reduced it by 8 times to settle for iso 400.

Basically - I have by no means pushed the limits of my camera's ISO, in a quest for faster shutter speeds. I could freeze the action better, but I haven't even tried, nor have I felt any need to.

So airplanes and ice skates are the only action that you shoot?  If so that is fine. But you have to recognise that is not what the majority do. the majority action shooters shoot a lot more than that. and high iso IQ means a lot to those who do. Which goes back to my original point, your list was missing high iso IQ.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Hatstand
Contributing MemberPosts: 716
Like?
Re: Living in the past?
In reply to ultimitsu, Feb 18, 2013

ultimitsu wrote:

That proves my point. Are these situations where iso 3200 is required to take a good keeper non-existent around you? I think not. they exist around all of us.

They exist all around people who require action photos to be perfectly frozen.

I am not one of those people, my examples illustrated this.

It seems you will never understand this. Because even now, you are STILL trying to impose your standards and requirements on me.

I wish you well, in all future endeavors.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Christoph Stephan
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,649Gear list
Like?
Re: Living in the past?
In reply to Hatstand, Feb 18, 2013

Hatstand wrote:

It seems to me, many of the DSLR afficionados posting in this thread... have not been keeping up to date with what non-DSLR's are capable of these days.

Irrelevant for me. It is also about the user interface, the pleasure and ease of use - and for, a DSLR with good optical finder beats any mirrorless cam big time - now and in the future.

 Christoph Stephan's gear list:Christoph Stephan's gear list
Canon EOS 20D Canon EOS 40D Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Tamron AF 28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di VC LD Aspherical (IF) Macro +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Christoph Stephan
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,649Gear list
Like?
DSLR - for ever, all the time!
In reply to gdourado, Feb 18, 2013

I prefer the DSLR for its pleasure of use, and better user interface - a big optical  finder it very important for me. For macro photography I often also focus manually, and for this th optical finder is important - even the tiniest delay causes me to "overshot" - I need the instant feedback only an optical finder provides.

Even if these problems were overcome, there is still the question of additional power consumption - the sunlight you get for free, the electronic finder needs power. Battery life is an important feature for me, particularly in remoter areas were no power sockets are available.

In addition, I sometimes use the camera with telephoto lens attached as a binocular, and this would consume a lot of exra power if it were an electronic finder.

The mirrorless cameras withouta finder are even worse, I do not like framing with the screen at all. It is guesswork in bright less and the less stable position nullifies any advantage of image stabilisation.

 Christoph Stephan's gear list:Christoph Stephan's gear list
Canon EOS 20D Canon EOS 40D Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Tamron AF 28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di VC LD Aspherical (IF) Macro +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Martin.au
Senior MemberPosts: 5,401
Like?
Re: DSLR - for ever, all the time!
In reply to Christoph Stephan, Feb 19, 2013

Christoph Stephan wrote:

I prefer the DSLR for its pleasure of use, and better user interface - a big optical finder it very important for me. For macro photography I often also focus manually, and for this th optical finder is important - even the tiniest delay causes me to "overshot" - I need the instant feedback only an optical finder provides.

Even if these problems were overcome, there is still the question of additional power consumption - the sunlight you get for free, the electronic finder needs power. Battery life is an important feature for me, particularly in remoter areas were no power sockets are available.

In addition, I sometimes use the camera with telephoto lens attached as a binocular, and this would consume a lot of exra power if it were an electronic finder.

The mirrorless cameras withouta finder are even worse, I do not like framing with the screen at all. It is guesswork in bright less and the less stable position nullifies any advantage of image stabilisation.

Funny. IMO, a good mirrorless is an absolute beast for macro work.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ultimitsu
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,437
Like?
Re: Living in the past?
In reply to Hatstand, Feb 19, 2013

Hatstand wrote:

ultimitsu wrote:

That proves my point. Are these situations where iso 3200 is required to take a good keeper non-existent around you? I think not. they exist around all of us.

They exist all around people who require action photos to be perfectly frozen.

I am not one of those people, my examples illustrated this.

It seems you will never understand this. Because even now, you are STILL trying to impose your standards and requirements on me.

Lets take one step back. what i said originally is your list is missing high iso IQ, even if you can tell yourself that it is irrelevant to you (which I maintain is an illusion), you ought to recognise it is very important to most people for action photography.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Christoph Stephan
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,649Gear list
Like?
Re: dSLR can be themost cost-effective route
In reply to Midwest, Feb 19, 2013

Midwest wrote:

I like to bring this up when the subject of dSLR cost comes up... it does relate back to the thread topic so I hope you'll bear with me.

My first dSLR, a Canon XSi, was bought two years after introduction as a closeout at a department store. I think I paid $575 at the time including the 18-55 IS kit zoom. I bought a pair of new/unused lenses on Ebay that the buyer must have gotten with a 'kit' and didn't need (55-250 IS zoom, and 50mm 1.8). That was another $250 for a total of $825....

Last fall I snagged a deal with a Canon T3i, the 18-55 and 55-250 kit zooms, and a pro level Canon photo printer (plus another $100 worth of extras - 13x19 photo paper, SD card, spare battery, extra cable). Everything was new, no refurbs or anything. It cost me $999 and came with a $400 rebate, making the actual cost $599, no tax, no shipping. I sold off those two kit lenses (I already had them in perfect shape), sold my XSi camera body on Ebay (almost like new with box and all materials) and the net cost of upgrading my camera body and acquiring the printer, paper, and etc. ended up being $137 - including providing free shipping and paying seller's fees on Ebay. I've left nothing out. $137.

Buying lenses on eBay also savbed me a lot of money. I got the  EF-S 10-22 mm and the EF-100-400mm LIS at half their price - and was very lucky so far.

With regard to my Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 Macro, eBay was the only way to get it because Sigma had already discontinued production of this vertile gem of a lens.

My total investment after three years, in a dSLR system that I am very happy with, is under $1000 and I'm set for this year and probably next and maybe even the year after. I watch the bridge zoom and 'compact' users racing to get on line for the next $500 or $600 release of their camera, over and over (hoping for "dSLR-like" image quality they're not going to get) and it becomes clear to me that the dSLR is not always the expensive route in photography. It seems to me it's mostly the new-model-chasers who are the ones saying 'dSLR's are too expensive, you have to buy thousands of dollars and lug a bag of glass, etc. etc.' And while some poo-poo the kit lenses, Canon's are actually quite good performers.

I cannot heap enough praise on my EF-S 55-250mm IS. And its that lightweight - with me on almost every trip!

And I would agree that "chasing the latest model mostly is a waste of money. DSLRs have quite matured in the recent years - most relevant progress nowadays concerns the film feature - not important if your focus is still photos - and high ISO cleanliness, which can be handy at times, but is only important for moving subjects in dim light - if you are prepared to use a tripod.

In contrast The lenses you own is what pushes further the borders of your photography. Better be content with an older body and save money for the lenses...

And, for some reason, the Canon Rebel series (T3i, T4i, 600d, 650d, whatever) even appears to be less expensive than the indisputably less-capable M mirrorless model.

Even if the M mirrorlens were intrinsically as capable as the Rebel line, its lack of a viewfinder makes the "user-machine" system far less capable than the Rebel line. Framing with the screen - prone to camera shake and guesswork in bright light. Would you remove the steering wheel of your car just to save weight?

I prefer my older DSLRs with a good set of lenses to any next generation mirrorless big time...

 Christoph Stephan's gear list:Christoph Stephan's gear list
Canon EOS 20D Canon EOS 40D Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Tamron AF 28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di VC LD Aspherical (IF) Macro +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
papillon_65
Forum ProPosts: 17,239Gear list
Like?
I can't believe you even asked!
In reply to Christoph Stephan, Feb 20, 2013

of course, why on earth would I even consider any other camera! I use one for the following reasons:

1, Just being a "DSLR" ensures that my camera has magical IQ properties, as in the oft repeated statement "the IQ is not as good as a DSLR".

2, Being a DSLR means my camera has great C-AF capability, it means I can easily track a speeding bullet if I need to, whereas any other camera format would struggle to capture anything moving faster than a snail. This is a well known truism.

3, I can look like I know what I'm doing, because lets face it, if you don't use a DSLR you have amateur written all over yourself.

4, I can take still shots of my cat and org@sm looking at 100% magnification of said shot using a £2000 lens.

5, I have exclusive bragging rights over any user of a lesser camera, this means I can patronise users of smaller cameras until I'm blue in the face, happy days!

6, Even though people have been seeing clearly through a variety of optical devices for many years now, I can drone on endlessly about my huge optical viewfinder. I mean, what possible advantage could there be in seeing critical data in an electrical viewfinder, or a real time exposure, that's just crazy talk!

7, I can endlessly repeat the phrase "Yea but pro's use DSLR's....blah blah..." because lets face it, the user base of your chosen format completely dictates your ability to take a great photo.

8, The latest DSLR's have 20+ MP, you should see how great my photo's look on Facebook...freakin' awesome!

9, Size matters, I couldn't afford an expensive sports car so a big camera will have to do, aren't I right ladies

-- hide signature --

For the person who is good with a hammer, everything in life tends to look like a nail.....
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Fujifilm XF1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Christoph Stephan
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,649Gear list
Like?
Re: I can't believe you even asked!
In reply to papillon_65, Feb 20, 2013

Actually for me, the SLR is not about "bragging rights". Rather it is my personal preference.

I can understand that other peoples personal preferences are different, and they create lovely pics with their mirrorless. But I still prefer my "bulky" DSLR and its operation, even if its "sooo" yesterday....

Arrogant "bragging" people you will find on nay side. People that tell you that DSLR is "yesterday", that you are "Old school" and that you have to get accustomed to the thought that the time of the OVF is over, and that EVF is the future!

I strongly disagree, I found relying on electronic displays a pain (for me)... I want DSLRs - and also entry level DSLRs, not only EOS 1DS Mark bricks - te be around in the future.

The example of Olympus - who left their DSLR users in the dust in favour of micro-four thirds (unless they were to buy their flag ship model, which pretty much anihilates any advantage of 4/3) is shocking! And I considered jumping ship because they were the first to implement a functional sensor cleaner...

 Christoph Stephan's gear list:Christoph Stephan's gear list
Canon EOS 20D Canon EOS 40D Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Tamron AF 28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di VC LD Aspherical (IF) Macro +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Christoph Stephan
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,649Gear list
Like?
Re: I can't believe you even asked!
In reply to papillon_65, Feb 20, 2013

papillon_65 wrote:

2, Being a DSLR means my camera has great C-AF capability, it means I can easily track a speeding bullet

Luckily, we both don't live in the U.S., thank God, so this is not a feature necessary in everyday life..

Hopefully they come to their senses, although the "off-topic" forum leaves little hope. I hope they are not representative of the U.S...

 Christoph Stephan's gear list:Christoph Stephan's gear list
Canon EOS 20D Canon EOS 40D Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Tamron AF 28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di VC LD Aspherical (IF) Macro +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
papillon_65
Forum ProPosts: 17,239Gear list
Like?
Re: I can't believe you even asked!
In reply to Christoph Stephan, Feb 20, 2013

Christoph Stephan wrote:

Actually for me, the SLR is not about "bragging rights". Rather it is my personal preference.

I can understand that other peoples personal preferences are different, and they create lovely pics with their mirrorless. But I still prefer my "bulky" DSLR and its operation, even if its "sooo" yesterday....

Arrogant "bragging" people you will find on nay side. People that tell you that DSLR is "yesterday", that you are "Old school" and that you have to get accustomed to the thought that the time of the OVF is over, and that EVF is the future!

I strongly disagree, I found relying on electronic displays a pain (for me)... I want DSLRs - and also entry level DSLRs, not only EOS 1DS Mark bricks - te be around in the future.

The example of Olympus - who left their DSLR users in the dust in favour of micro-four thirds (unless they were to buy their flag ship model, which pretty much anihilates any advantage of 4/3) is shocking! And I considered jumping ship because they were the first to implement a functional sensor cleaner...

Chris, of course I was being slightly ironic, each to their own. However, I do tire of some of the arguments that unless you have a DSLR you can't do certain things. I find I can do pretty much anything with my E-M5 that I could do with a DSLR. The main difference is that I don't feel a burning desire to promote that choice to anyone and everyone 

-- hide signature --

For the person who is good with a hammer, everything in life tends to look like a nail.....
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Fujifilm XF1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
papillon_65
Forum ProPosts: 17,239Gear list
Like?
Re: I can't believe you even asked!
In reply to Christoph Stephan, Feb 20, 2013

Christoph Stephan wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

2, Being a DSLR means my camera has great C-AF capability, it means I can easily track a speeding bullet

Luckily, we both don't live in the U.S., thank God, so this is not a feature necessary in everyday life..

Hopefully they come to their senses, although the "off-topic" forum leaves little hope. I hope they are not representative of the U.S...

Ditto...

-- hide signature --

For the person who is good with a hammer, everything in life tends to look like a nail.....
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Fujifilm XF1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Christoph Stephan
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,649Gear list
Like?
Re: I can't believe you even asked!
In reply to papillon_65, Feb 20, 2013

papillon_65 wrote:

Chris, of course I was being slightly ironic, each to their own. However, I do tire of some of the arguments that unless you have a DSLR you can't do certain things. I find I can do pretty much anything with my E-M5 that I could do with a DSLR. The main difference is that I don't feel a burning desire to promote that choice to anyone and everyone

-- hide signature --

For the person who is good with a hammer, everything in life tends to look like a nail.....
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

I think there is a lot of personal preference - and its indeed about the photographer + camera as a whole unit. You may do everything you want with your E-M5 - I may do not with this camera. I smply experenced that manual focus with the 1/10 magnified liveview or even on a computerscreen (with a microscope camera) was a pain for me due to flickering and delayed display - while it was praised by everyone else here. I prefer an ancient split prism viewfinder with instant feed back anytime. I also met plenty of Sony and mirrorless advocates who just told me (or others) that our DSLRs were soo yesterday...

I still wish to have DSLRsa with optical finders around in the future....

 Christoph Stephan's gear list:Christoph Stephan's gear list
Canon EOS 20D Canon EOS 40D Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Tamron AF 28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di VC LD Aspherical (IF) Macro +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
papillon_65
Forum ProPosts: 17,239Gear list
Like?
Re: I can't believe you even asked!
In reply to Christoph Stephan, Feb 20, 2013

Christoph Stephan wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

Chris, of course I was being slightly ironic, each to their own. However, I do tire of some of the arguments that unless you have a DSLR you can't do certain things. I find I can do pretty much anything with my E-M5 that I could do with a DSLR. The main difference is that I don't feel a burning desire to promote that choice to anyone and everyone

-- hide signature --

For the person who is good with a hammer, everything in life tends to look like a nail.....
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

I think there is a lot of personal preference - and its indeed about the photographer + camera as a whole unit. You may do everything you want with your E-M5 - I may do not with this camera. I smply experenced that manual focus with the 1/10 magnified liveview or even on a computerscreen (with a microscope camera) was a pain for me due to flickering and delayed display - while it was praised by everyone else here. I prefer an ancient split prism viewfinder with instant feed back anytime. I also met plenty of Sony and mirrorless advocates who just told me (or others) that our DSLRs were soo yesterday...

I still wish to have DSLRsa with optical finders around in the future....

I don't think you'll have to worry about that, they're not about to disappear just yet 

-- hide signature --

For the person who is good with a hammer, everything in life tends to look like a nail.....
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Fujifilm XF1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lupti
Senior MemberPosts: 1,577
Like?
Re: Living in the past?
In reply to Hatstand, Feb 20, 2013

Hatstand wrote:

Shutter response: 600D 0.1 sec, FZ150 0.05 sec
Focus - wide, shutter response: 600D 0.2 sec, FZ150 0.15 sec
Focus - telephoto, shutter response: 600D 0.25 sec, FZ150 0.25 sec
Shot to shot - without flash: 600D 0.4-0.5 sec, FZ150 0.6 sec (~)
Shot to shot - with flash: 600D 0.6-0.7, FZ150 0.8 sec (~)
Continuous shooting - JPEG: 4fps, FZ150 5.5 fps
Continuous shooting - RAW: 600D 3fps (6 shots), FZ150 5.5 fps

These figures are from tests by ephotozine.com. I don't know how they measured those, but I can say subjectively, that I found little difference in performance between 600D and FZ150 for action photography. The image stabilisation on the FZ150 (subjectively again) is as good as I got from Canon lenses.

My only issue was the FZ150 rear screen and EVF are nowhere near as good as an optical viewfinder, but a cheap red dot sight fixed that for me.

I do not deny that DSLR's have significant advantages in several areas, and always will. But as a non-professional (as per topic!) who is happy with "great" results not "professional" results... those advantages are superfluous to my needs.

Wow, you really compare 600D and FZ150 based on the speed difference and your only issue is that viewfinder and screen aren´t that good? It seems you really don´t care about IQ. I had the FZ150 for some days and send it back because the IQ is really mediocre, not only compared to a DSLR but also a good P&S. Even when shooting RAW the image quality is just a shame. Not only when looking closer...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads