Why Thom is wrong...

Started Sep 25, 2013 | Discussions
alexisgreat
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,316Gear list
Like?
Re: try again
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, Sep 26, 2013

image quality is from the photographer not the camera

-- hide signature --

http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

 alexisgreat's gear list:alexisgreat's gear list
Olympus C-7070 Wide Zoom Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR Olympus E-520 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
sigala1
Senior MemberPosts: 3,510
Like?
Re: Why Thom is wrong...
In reply to Chris Malcolm, Sep 26, 2013

Chris Malcolm wrote:

Just read this whole thread and discovered that while there's a lot of talk about pro cameras and pro systems there's been negligible discussion of mirror and shutter vibration effects on the image. Of course you can always lock the mirror up or introduce a second or two pause after mirror raise, but that's annoying or impractical for some kinds of photography. And haven't any of the expert pro photographers writing here noticed how very much worse a problem mirror vibration is for full frame compared to smaller sensor DSLRs? For me that's a significant advantage that crop sensor DSLRs have over full frame.

Once you've got rid of the mirror & mirror vibration there's the mechanical shutter vibration of the focal plane shutter. One of the first things I did when I got my hands on a camera which could switch between mechanical and electronic first curtain shutter was to do careful comparative tests. I was surprised and delighted by the extent of the difference. When going after high resolution with long lenses on a tripod it dramatically increases the range of usable shutter speeds. Which means that for some long lens work you no longer need to heave around a massive wide aperture long lens. You might even not have to buy one of those shockingly expensive monster lenses

-- hide signature --

Chris Malcolm

If anything, m43 cameras have had MORE problems with shutter vibrations than DSLRs have.

If you want to get rid of those problems, the answer is a leaf shutter, like most fixed-lens cameras have.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
peevee1
Senior MemberPosts: 6,247Gear list
Like?
Re: Why Thom is wrong...
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, Sep 26, 2013

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

If I were buying a new camera today, I would take a quick look at the OM5/EM1 and discard the notion based on not much weight or size savings compared to the D5200.

Totally different quality of bodies (magnesium ally vs plastic), control, viewfinder size, weather sealing, great IBIS, 9/10 fps sequential speed... If you don't need any of this, D5200 might be fine - of course it will be much heavier in your bag with lenses that E-M5 with lenses.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tbcass
Forum ProPosts: 19,043Gear list
Like?
Re: Why Thom is wrong...
In reply to Richard, Sep 26, 2013

Richard wrote:

And Mirrorless is dead. Now before you go getting emotional, ponder the logic.

Mirrorless does have certain advantages, mainly simplicity. Let's face it, the flipping mirror is a crude and complex holdover from the analog days. The only advantages the mirror gives is in the optical viewfinder so for now it remains an advantage for some, and in longer battery life. In the future however when EVFs match OVFs and the OVF advocates fade away the DSLR will nearly disappear because the customer base will be too small to support it. It will become a high priced niche product like analog audio is today.

-- hide signature --
 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony SLT-A77 Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Richard
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,839
Like?
Re: Why Thom is wrong...
In reply to ApertureAcolyte, Sep 26, 2013

ApertureAcolyte wrote:

Richard wrote:

And Mirrorless is dead. Now before you go getting emotional, ponder the logic.

1.DSLRs act like mirrorless as they are right now. They push the mirror out of the way when they go into live view. The first objection is that the AF is faster on mirrorless, sure using on sensor AF on a DSLR. Right now that is true but if you think Canonikon is going to sit on the hands and not improve live view to the point it is better than current mirrorless, I think they are smarter than that. It will happen or Canonikon will die. Mirrorless will lose the AF advantage in live view.

Canikon live view sucks, and yes, they have been sitting on their hands in comparison to the competitors in terms of live view for some time.

I agree Canon sits on their laurels more than the other brands. They do that because they can. I think they will have to start being more competitive now days.

2. Canikon already have EVF, on the back of the camera for live view. They also can use a laptop, tablet or smart phone as a remote. They have had this for some time. Mirrorless has no advantage there.

That's not an EVF. Can you put your eye up to your live view? NO.

Definition of viewfinder

view·find·er (vy f n d r). n. A device on a camera that indicates, either optically or electronically, what will appear in the field of view of the lens.

The screen on the back of any camera does that, you don't need to put your eye to it, your argument does not hold water because you don't understand the definition. If you feel that need to put your eye up to it, they make units that take the screen on the back of any camera and put a lens to it.

.

3. Canikon can make smaller dslrs with APS-C that will be able to compete with mirrorless or they can produce better EOSM and V1 units. Again, they cover Pro, Advanced amateur, beginner, small size DSLRs. (they both produce point and shoots too.)

Can they? Or do they just keep producing incremental nudges in the APS-C lines? Be honest...

They could do that but I think they would lose market share, I don't think they will do that.

At this point mirrorless has no advantage and has disadvantages compared to Canikon solutions.

At this point you've shown your ignorance.

Your post has nothing to support or refute anything I have said.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Richard
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,839
Like?
Re: Why Thom is wrong...
In reply to Chris Malcolm, Sep 26, 2013

Chris Malcolm wrote:

Just read this whole thread and discovered that while there's a lot of talk about pro cameras and pro systems there's been negligible discussion of mirror and shutter vibration effects on the image. Of course you can always lock the mirror up or introduce a second or two pause after mirror raise, but that's annoying or impractical for some kinds of photography.

But this is only if you use the camera in mirror mode. Yes, many camera have a lock up feature to eliminate vibration. BUT. When you put a DSLR in live view there is not mirror slap, it is out of the way and works the same way a mirrorless does.

And haven't any of the expert pro photographers writing here noticed how very much worse a problem mirror vibration is for full frame compared to smaller sensor DSLRs? For me that's a significant advantage that crop sensor DSLRs have over full frame.

Once you've got rid of the mirror & mirror vibration there's the mechanical shutter vibration of the focal plane shutter. One of the first things I did when I got my hands on a camera which could switch between mechanical and electronic first curtain shutter was to do careful comparative tests. I was surprised and delighted by the extent of the difference. When going after high resolution with long lenses on a tripod it dramatically increases the range of usable shutter speeds. Which means that for some long lens work you no longer need to heave around a massive wide aperture long lens. You might even not have to buy one of those shockingly expensive monster lenses

-- hide signature --

Chris Malcolm

I like the idea of an electronic shutter, my Nikon D70 DSLR had one. It allowed faster flash sync speed 1/500.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
DT200
Contributing MemberPosts: 835
Like?
Re: Why Richard is wrong...
In reply to Erik Magnuson, Sep 26, 2013

Erik Magnuson wrote:

DT200 wrote:

..and a lot of extra parts that can break

Mirror mechanism failures in DSLRs are quite rare.

They are more common in the cheaper entry level DSLRs.  They still are becoming needless mechanical parts that cause vibration, need adjustment, take up space, etc.

and have to be adjusted

This is the biggest issue.

and that add extra weight and cost.

Not much weight to a pentamirror or the moving mirror.

Pentamirror?  The OVFs people want are PentaPrisms.  Pentamirrors are like looking down a long dark tunnel .

And since right now anything with a decent EVF costs *more* than a number of DSLRs, asserting cost savings is not well supported.

Maybe today but not for long.  EVFs don't need as much assembly and don't need humans to adjust them.  I doubt most EVFs cost more than a PentaPrism, all the extra moving parts, sensors, and VF, and in a few years EVFs will be even cheaper.

Anyway, despite what old people say, just like the physical keys on cell phones, mirrors are going away.

-- hide signature --

Erik

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
DT200
Contributing MemberPosts: 835
Like?
But less functional
In reply to Richard, Sep 26, 2013

Richard wrote:

Chris Malcolm wrote:

Just read this whole thread and discovered that while there's a lot of talk about pro cameras and pro systems there's been negligible discussion of mirror and shutter vibration effects on the image. Of course you can always lock the mirror up or introduce a second or two pause after mirror raise, but that's annoying or impractical for some kinds of photography.

But this is only if you use the camera in mirror mode. Yes, many camera have a lock up feature to eliminate vibration. BUT. When you put a DSLR in live view there is not mirror slap, it is out of the way and works the same way a mirrorless does.

...and the camera becomes less useful.  If functionality is the same, then why even have the giant mirror and all the moving parts that can break and need adjusting?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Richard
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,839
Like?
DSLR, pure poetry
In reply to tbcass, Sep 26, 2013

When something comes out and is even better,

The old unravels like a cheap sweater,

But thats just not the case for the current mirrorless,

Its number of advantages are on the short list,

But if small size is your photographic bliss

Then go and buy the toy that many can't resist.

Written on the internet wide and far

Pros only buy the digital SLR

It's just a fact

You cannot deny that

And anyone that needs quality will always switch back.

tbcass wrote:

Richard wrote:

And Mirrorless is dead. Now before you go getting emotional, ponder the logic.

Mirrorless does have certain advantages, mainly simplicity. Let's face it, the flipping mirror is a crude and complex holdover from the analog days. The only advantages the mirror gives is in the optical viewfinder so for now it remains an advantage for some, and in longer battery life. In the future however when EVFs match OVFs and the OVF advocates fade away the DSLR will nearly disappear because the customer base will be too small to support it. It will become a high priced niche product like analog audio is today.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Richard
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,839
Like?
Re: But less functional
In reply to DT200, Sep 26, 2013

DT200 wrote:

Richard wrote:

Chris Malcolm wrote:

Just read this whole thread and discovered that while there's a lot of talk about pro cameras and pro systems there's been negligible discussion of mirror and shutter vibration effects on the image. Of course you can always lock the mirror up or introduce a second or two pause after mirror raise, but that's annoying or impractical for some kinds of photography.

But this is only if you use the camera in mirror mode. Yes, many camera have a lock up feature to eliminate vibration. BUT. When you put a DSLR in live view there is not mirror slap, it is out of the way and works the same way a mirrorless does.

...and the camera becomes less useful. If functionality is the same, then why even have the giant mirror and all the moving parts that can break and need adjusting?

Because a person wants to see what they are shooting, not a representation. EVF are not good, they may be good enough for some. Perhaps someday an EVF will look as natural as looking through glass, when that day comes, the mirror will go away. The camera does not become less useful, it does the same thing as mirrorless, and it will get better.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Richard
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,839
Like?
No one will cry when mirrorless is gone.
In reply to alexisgreat, Sep 26, 2013

alexisgreat wrote:

and no one will cry when these ancient 3:2 sensors disappear forever, and Richard along with them

-- hide signature --

http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

It is in a state of decline. It could rebound, if it is better, it would displace DSLR, but it is not better.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Erik Magnuson
Forum ProPosts: 12,103Gear list
Like?
Re: Why Richard is wrong...
In reply to DT200, Sep 26, 2013

DT200 wrote:

They are more common in the cheaper entry level DSLRs.

Other than some defective hinge pins in early Canon 300D's and some bad glue on some 5D's, I've not heard of many problems -- even among heavy users with 10's of thousands of cycles. Shutter problems are far more common and focal plane shutters are common to both designs.

They still are becoming needless mechanical parts that cause vibration, need adjustment, take up space, etc.

Just like EVF's are needless electronic parts that eat power, cannot be color calibrated, have flicker/tearing/lag, etc.

Maybe today but not for long.

The big question is how long is not long?

EVFs don't need as much assembly and don't need humans to adjust them.

Where does this come from? You've seen an EVF assembly facility?  Most of this work is simply done by the EVF subcontractor and not the body builder.

Anyway, despite what old people say, just like the physical keys on cell phones, mirrors are going away.

I agree that it's likely that one day the percentages will be reversed and only 20% of the ILCs with eye level finders will have mirrors and 80% will have EVFs.   But I also suspect that day may be further off than you think and it's not going to come via increased market share by the other camera makers.

-- hide signature --

Erik

 Erik Magnuson's gear list:Erik Magnuson's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 450D Sigma SD10 Sony Alpha NEX-5 Nikon D3200 +28 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ptox
Regular MemberPosts: 201Gear list
Like?
Re: What a load
In reply to marvin t martian, Sep 26, 2013

marvin t martian wrote:

What a load of hooey.

I gave examples. Would you care to refute them?

Well -- I'd prefer you came up with better ones, but okay!

M4/3 has shutter shock.

And DSLRs have mirror slap. But just as they have mirror lockup, MFT has an antishock delay option. Anyway, can you prove without a doubt that MFT shutter shock is worse? I have never noticed its effect in my photos, and I don't use the delay.

Olympus m4/3 has horrific IS in all but its 5-axis IBIS models.

Sorry, this is a "serious problem" that makes MFT "a disappointment"? What do you consider any camera without IBIS of any kind -- a Shakespearean tragedy?

Panasonic m4/3 has issues with record histograms.

Again, "a serious problem"? You're really reaching here.

Fuji X and the Canon M have bad AF performance.

Yes. It's true. And yet many, many people really love the X system. So for them, it's obviously not a serious problem. (Everyone knows the Canon M is a joke at anything but its recent firesale prices.)

Nikon 1 is overpriced and has a small sensor.

It may be overpriced, but it's a great camera for what it is. Small, excellent AF, and still massively better IQ than any compact.

NEX has the level of durability expected from Sony. Etc.

I'd say NEX's bigger problem is its poor lens selection and bad UX. But since you're pulling stuff out of your backside, whatever, we'll go with this.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Erik Magnuson
Forum ProPosts: 12,103Gear list
Like?
Re: Why Thom is wrong...
In reply to Richard, Sep 26, 2013

Richard wrote:

But this is only if you use the camera in mirror mode. Yes, many camera have a lock up feature to eliminate vibration. BUT. When you put a DSLR in live view there is not mirror slap, it is out of the way and works the same way a mirrorless does.

It's interesting that in live view mode, the better Canon DSLRs are actually quieter and have less vibration than most mirrorless.   Canon had electronic first curtain shutter and a "quiet mode" for shutter close/recocking way back with the 40D.

-- hide signature --

Erik

 Erik Magnuson's gear list:Erik Magnuson's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 450D Sigma SD10 Sony Alpha NEX-5 Nikon D3200 +28 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MichaelKJ
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,134Gear list
Like?
Re: Why Thom is wrong...
In reply to Richard, Sep 26, 2013

Richard wrote:

Definition of viewfinder

view·find·er (vy f n d r). n. A device on a camera that indicates, either optically or electronically, what will appear in the field of view of the lens.

The screen on the back of any camera does that, you don't need to put your eye to it, your argument does not hold water because you don't understand the definition. If you feel that need to put your eye up to it, they make units that take the screen on the back of any camera and put a lens to it.

An electronic viewfinder (EVF) is a camera viewfinder where the image captured by the lens is projected electronically onto a miniature display. The image on this display is used to assist in aiming the camera at the scene to be photographed. It differs from a live preview screen in being smaller and shaded from ambient light.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_viewfinder

One can always come up with a definition that suits their own needs.  Why quibble about semantics when you know that the EVF as defined in Wikipedia is central to the debate about whether FF mirrorless will someday replace FF DSLRs?

 MichaelKJ's gear list:MichaelKJ's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F31fd Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Erik Magnuson
Forum ProPosts: 12,103Gear list
Like?
Re: Why Thom is wrong...
In reply to Chris Malcolm, Sep 26, 2013

Chris Malcolm wrote:

One of the first things I did when I got my hands on a camera which could switch between mechanical and electronic first curtain shutter was to do careful comparative tests.

And which company first pioneered the electronic first curtain shutter?  I've had my hands on a camera capable of that (no vibration shutter release) for 5 years.

-- hide signature --

Erik

 Erik Magnuson's gear list:Erik Magnuson's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 450D Sigma SD10 Sony Alpha NEX-5 Nikon D3200 +28 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
paulkienitz
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,936Gear list
Like?
Re: When to be a hater that's gotta hate
In reply to MarkJH, Sep 26, 2013

MarkJH wrote:

I get the sense that you're just gonna think what you're gonna think, and that's cool.

All I said, if you recall, is that Canon's sensor is currently ahead of Oly's.  That's all.

Hate what you want to hate.

Not cool to label disagreement as hate.

you might think some experience with the gear you're talking about would be useful in formulating an opinion.

For me personally, experience with alternate bodies is surprisingly irrelevant at this time, because not a single one of the eight or ten mirrorless mounts out there offers the kind of lens I need.

 paulkienitz's gear list:paulkienitz's gear list
Pentax Q Pentax K-3 Pentax smc DA 55-300mm F4.0-5.8 ED Pentax smc DA* 300mm F4.0 ED (IF) SDM Samyang 8mm F3.5 Aspherical IF MC Fisheye +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rladd
Forum MemberPosts: 63
Like?
Re: DSLR, pure poetry
In reply to Richard, Sep 26, 2013

I used to have a Canon 5D II and a bunch of Canon lenses.  It took fabulous pictures.

I traded in my Canon stuff and bought a Panasonic Lumix G5 with a bunch of Panasonic and Olympus lenses.  It takes fabulous pictures too.  And it is much easier to carry around.

By the way, I used Canon SLR cameras for 30+ years.

bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
DT200
Contributing MemberPosts: 835
Like?
Re: When to be a hater that's gotta hate
In reply to paulkienitz, Sep 26, 2013

paulkienitz wrote:

MarkJH wrote:

I get the sense that you're just gonna think what you're gonna think, and that's cool.

All I said, if you recall, is that Canon's sensor is currently ahead of Oly's.  That's all.

I find this hard to believe.  I used a 70D for a week and found the focusing via the sensor to still be rather slow.  It was good for video because you don't want distracting rapid focus changes, but for stills it was slow.  This was with the STM lens too, so you can't blame the lens.

Canon is going to have to drop the mirror in some cameras soon too.  I found it more difficult to hold a large camera with large lens away from my body so I could view the LCD.    I hope the new EOS-M cameras come with an EVF option.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TrapperJohn
Forum ProPosts: 10,847
Like?
About those two 800 pound gorillas...
In reply to Richard, Sep 26, 2013

Mirrorless is not about taking a mirror out. Or trimming the sides and top down on a cheap dslr, but keeping the same large lenses, large film lens mount, and long film registration distance.

It's about smaller, lighter, less bulky, less attention drawing, less attention demanding. It's about taking a fresh look, a new approach with some very real benefits, new display and operation options that aren't possible on the more traditional systems. It's about slender bodies with short registration distances. It's about bringing dslr capability along, without lugging all that gear along.

It's also a market that, so far, is refreshingly free of the two 800 pound gorillas who became so preoccupied with each other that they were royally pwned when they came into the mirrorless market thinking that a Canon or Nikon label was all they needed, and each other was all they had to be concerned with.

In fact, I'll go so far as to say that one reason mirrorless has seen such an accelerated level of development is - Canon and Nikon are not a factor, so they're not holding it back with their duopolistic dominance. In this market, it's worth taking a chance on a new design, now that most of the buying public isn't stuck on one brand name or one design. Rather refreshing, actually.

Consider what happened when the market leaders took the public for granted...

Nikon designed a mirrorless system that was crippled so as not to compete with it's own DSLR. Unfortunately for Nikon, Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic and Sony didn't cooperate. They did design mirrorless systems to compete with Nikon's DSLR's. All Nikon did was legitimize the mirrorless concept to many Nikon faithful, who then found how much more capable the other systems are. Oops...

Canon designed a mirrorless system that would beat Nikon, because that's all they've been doing for the last 30 years. And so they did. Unfortunately for Canon, so did everyone else's mirrorless system, and by a wider margin.

Does it sound impossible that two market leaders would soak hundreds of millions of dollars/euros/yen into new systems that were obviously uncompetitive? Could it be possible that Canon and Nikon were so arrogant that they honestly thought each other were all that merited consideration? That the 'little guys' and their products weren't worth considering? Is that your idea of a 'market leader'? They'd have mirrorless plodding along at a snail's pace too, if they dominated it.

To top off this picture of unbridled arrogance, Nikon released that long tome not long ago on how the mirrorless market was not worth considering.

A few weeks later, the Olympus EM1, the most capable mirrorless system ever, comes out to rave reviews and unprecedented preorders. Plus the Fuji XM1. Plus the NEX A3000. Plus the Panasonic GX7. For a dead market, there sure are a lot of new bodies, more than all the DSLR makers put together.

It's an exciting new world. And a much needed dose of humility to Canon and Nikon, who have become far too arrogant in attitude, and far too stagnant in design. Take off the platform specific blinders, and experience what a really first rate mirrorless system can do. A lot more than you might think.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads