Mirrorless vs DSLR

Started Nov 9, 2013 | Discussions
John Motts
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,020
Like?
Re: The same tiresome hype of mirrorless
In reply to PerL, Nov 11, 2013

PerL wrote:

as1mov wrote:

http://photographylife.com/mirrorless-vs-dslr

What is your opinion?

EVFs are inferior in the same way a big screen TV is inferior to a window - you can't improve on reality.

The best EVFs are likely to be closer to the final image, the OVF closer to the original image.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Motts
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,020
Like?
Re: Mirrorless vs DSLR
In reply to Duncan C, Nov 11, 2013

Duncan C wrote:

The big one for me is the electronic viewfinder. A digital screen is no substitute for an optical viewfinder. The contrast and colors are off, the image is much lower resolution, etc. It just looks ugly and I find it inadequate for composing a shot.

Leica don't have electronic viewfinders, neither do they have mirrors.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Motts
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,020
Like?
Re: Mirrorless vs DSLR
In reply to PK24X36NOW, Nov 11, 2013

PK24X36NOW wrote:

as1mov wrote:

http://photographylife.com/mirrorless-vs-dslr

What is your opinion?

My opinion is that the linked article is a steaming pile of manure.

His "disadvantage" list for DSLRs is a joke, basically consisting of size/weight/"bulk" "issues," which aren't "issues" at all.

You're obviously massively clever, but unfortunately incapable of seeing beyond your own self.

Size and weight may not be an issue for you, but it most certainly is an issue for some users. When you do this for a living, have a damaged right shoulder and carry 4kg of camera gear all day long, then size and weight is most certainly an issue. It's not an issue for everyone, but it is for some.

There are other issues such as noise, which isn't a problem for most, but a lack of noise is most certainly an advantage for some.

And by the way, since when did all mirrorless cameras have EVFs?.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
user_name
Senior MemberPosts: 2,807Gear list
Like?
Re: DSLRs with Hybrid OVF/EVF Viewfinders
In reply to Greg Lovern, Nov 11, 2013
 user_name's gear list:user_name's gear list
Leica M8 Nikon D700 Nikon D800
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Erik Magnuson
Forum ProPosts: 12,103Gear list
Like?
Re: Mirrorless vs DSLR
In reply to John Motts, Nov 11, 2013

John Motts wrote:

Leica don't have electronic viewfinders, neither do they have mirrors.

They do have mirrors & prisms - how do you think the rangefinder works?  The M240 has an EVF for an option which is why it can support R lenses.

-- 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
John Motts
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,020
Like?
Re: Mirrorless vs DSLR
In reply to Erik Magnuson, Nov 11, 2013

Erik Magnuson wrote:

John Motts wrote:

Leica don't have electronic viewfinders, neither do they have mirrors.

They do have mirrors & prisms - how do you think the rangefinder works?

I have no idea how it works. My apologies for being so stupid.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Marty4650
Forum ProPosts: 10,047Gear list
Like?
Apple vs Orange
In reply to as1mov, Nov 11, 2013

I like both, and I have both.

Precisely why is having more options available a problem for some people?

 Marty4650's gear list:Marty4650's gear list
Sony SLT-A55 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
haziz
Regular MemberPosts: 298
Like?
Re: Mirrorless vs DSLR
In reply to Daniel Bliss, Nov 11, 2013

Why are people almost gleefully hoping for the demise of the SLR? I, for one strongly prefer an optical viewfinder to anything electronic. Give me an SLR anyday over anything mirrorless. My fear is that with so many people harking on the death of the SLR, that it will become a self fulfilling prophecy.
--
Thanks.

Sincerely,

Hany.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TacticDesigns
Contributing MemberPosts: 786Gear list
Like?
Re: Apple vs Orange
In reply to Marty4650, Nov 11, 2013

Marty4650 wrote:

I like both, and I have both.

Precisely why is having more options available a problem for some people?

+1

-- hide signature --
 TacticDesigns's gear list:TacticDesigns's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix XP50 Pentax *ist DS Nikon D7000 Nikon D5100 Pentax Q +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TacticDesigns
Contributing MemberPosts: 786Gear list
Like?
Re: Mirrorless vs DSLR
In reply to haziz, Nov 11, 2013

haziz wrote:

Why are people almost gleefully hoping for the demise of the SLR? I, for one strongly prefer an optical viewfinder to anything electronic. Give me an SLR anyday over anything mirrorless. My fear is that with so many people harking on the death of the SLR, that it will become a self fulfilling prophecy.
--
Thanks.

Sincerely,

Hany.

+1

-- hide signature --
 TacticDesigns's gear list:TacticDesigns's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix XP50 Pentax *ist DS Nikon D7000 Nikon D5100 Pentax Q +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dual12
Regular MemberPosts: 352
Like?
Re: Mirrorless vs DSLR
In reply to as1mov, Nov 11, 2013

Cameras are tools, and no tool is great or best at everything, so I use both.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Zenjitsuman
Regular MemberPosts: 442
Like?
Re: Mirrorless vs DSLR
In reply to sandy b, Nov 11, 2013

When Nikon introduces a mirrorless that can take all my lenses...

A mirrorless means no reciprocating mirror ala DSLR.  Take away the mirror box and you have a different flange distance.   This means its no longer an F mount.

Nikon will need to offer an electronic and mechanical adapter to pass the mechanical couplings from the old AIS lenses and electrical info from the rest of the present lenses to the new mirrorless body.

So the promise of a much smaller FF Nikon that mirrorless promises to be will only take place when new lenses for the new mount are available.  Sounds like the situation Sony is in with the A7 a small camera body FF camera with a good sensor, but an empty bag without a system of lenses.

I hope Nikon is working on lenses because Nikon needs to have smaller lenses to balance well with the smaller body.

I wonder how much a sophisticated mechanical/electrical bridge adapter would cost $400 ?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jfriend00
Forum ProPosts: 11,131
Like?
Re: Mirrorless vs DSLR
In reply to Zenjitsuman, Nov 11, 2013

Zenjitsuman wrote:

When Nikon introduces a mirrorless that can take all my lenses...

The Nikon 1 takes all your lenses.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Zenjitsuman
Regular MemberPosts: 442
Like?
Re: The same tiresome hype of mirrorless
In reply to PerL, Nov 11, 2013

I have the latest EVR used in M4/3 Olympus cameras, its over 2mp and a very large display.

I wear glasses and have always wanted my OVF to be at least as good as on  my old Nikon F3HP.

I can tell you that the Olympus VF-4 EVR has not just a sharp bright vf, but you can through it into magnifier mode something you cannot do easily with a OVF, you need to ad a magnifier VF accessory.

Also, the latest VF-4 has a much faster screen refresh rate so while panning there is little or no lag or smearing.  I am sure Nikon can even improve on there EVR in the future.

My usage of the EVR indoors in low light or outdoors at night the EVR is much easier to see details than any OVF I have ever used.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
gear1box
Contributing MemberPosts: 716Gear list
Like?
Re: Mirrorless vs DSLR
In reply to stevo23, Nov 11, 2013

stevo23 wrote:

gear1box wrote:

So the real question in play is will mirrorless take over in those sensor sizes. For FF i sorta doubt it, but that comports with my view of FF's market role. it will never again be mass market; it is

Again? Was it ever truly mass market? Do you mean in the film days?

Ummm, yes Steve, i was referring to the film era.

The price sensitive APS/DX market will go that way it seems to me; all those entry level inter-changeable lens cameras in costco will be mirrorless soon i suspect.

They might, but a reverse consideration would be this - why would the Costco crowd care? If cost is low enough and they get what they want, I'm not sure the DX world will care. The camera lines are already minted and tooled up and would be very cheap to make.

Indeed, you and i agree, they don't care and it is all a matter of price.  SLRs have the advantage now since -- as you say -- the fixed, non-recurring, costs of their manufacturing infrastructure is paid for and they can be price on a more-or-less marginal cost basis.  This, however, is a transitory advantage and the vastly lower part count of the mirrorless designs will create a compelling cost advantage.

just how fast this will occur depends on a number of factors but, as i indicated, i lean toward thinking that it will be sooner rather than later.  Certainly in other areas of consumer electronics (and that is what photography is now, sigh) changes like this happen in just a few years once the handwriting is on the wall.  No firm wishes to be left holding a heavy stock of obsolete items.

And, just to be clear, i am on the  SLR side of things for my personal use.

-- hide signature --

gary ray

Semi-professional in early 1970s; just a putzer since then. interests: historical sites, virginia, motorcycle racing. A nikon user more by habit than choice; still, nikon seems to work well for me.

 gear1box's gear list:gear1box's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-200mm F4-5.6 OIS +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
cmo56
Regular MemberPosts: 102
Like?
Re: Mirrorless vs DSLR
In reply to dv312, Nov 11, 2013

More than 99% of current sales are of EVF only cameras. OVF do not make 1%. So this is not future, it happened a long time ago.

-- hide signature --

Clovis

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Greg Lovern
Senior MemberPosts: 1,565
Like?
Not fully compatible
In reply to jfriend00, Nov 11, 2013

jfriend00 wrote:

Zenjitsuman wrote:

When Nikon introduces a mirrorless that can take all my lenses...

The Nikon 1 takes all your lenses.

Not fully compatible.

It would be great to have a fully compatible adapter to fit DSLR lenses of a given brand to that brand's mirrorless bodies. But Sony has been doing it longer, and has four such adapters to choose from, and even the most expensive one, about $350, is still not fully compatible. It's also fairly heavy at 160g.

I don't understand why it's apparently so hard to make them fully compatible, but as long as they are not, using them is a compromise.

Greg

-- hide signature --

Brand loyalty is a character flaw.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jfriend00
Forum ProPosts: 11,131
Like?
Re: Not fully compatible
In reply to Greg Lovern, Nov 11, 2013

Greg Lovern wrote:

jfriend00 wrote:

Zenjitsuman wrote:

When Nikon introduces a mirrorless that can take all my lenses...

The Nikon 1 takes all your lenses.

Not fully compatible.

It would be great to have a fully compatible adapter to fit DSLR lenses of a given brand to that brand's mirrorless bodies. But Sony has been doing it longer, and has four such adapters to choose from, and even the most expensive one, about $350, is still not fully compatible. It's also fairly heavy at 160g.

I don't understand why it's apparently so hard to make them fully compatible, but as long as they are not, using them is a compromise.

What do you mean fully compatible? Screw drive? Really old lenses (like the Df supports)?

At some point, you have to draw a line and say that the reason you went to mirrorless was to get smaller size so to realize the full benefit of the smaller size you have to go with a new mount that has a shorter flange distance and you have to leave out some things like a motor drive for old lenses.  Otherwise, you just switched to mirrorless, but didn't gain one of the main benefits (which is smaller size) if you drag along all the compatibility baggage of the past with you and stay with the old mount.

What is a practical example of a Nikon lens that the Nikon 1 doesn't support (via the Nikon adapter) that it would make common sense for it to support?

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Greg Lovern
Senior MemberPosts: 1,565
Like?
Not 99% of interchangeable lens cameras
In reply to cmo56, Nov 11, 2013

cmo56 wrote:

More than 99% of current sales are of EVF only cameras. OVF do not make 1%. So this is not future, it happened a long time ago.

That would have to include P&S cameras. I think the context of this discussion is interchangeable lens cameras.

According to this recent post from Thom Hogan, the mirrorless interchangeable lens camera market is more or less holding steady against the DSLR market, with some regional differences. If I'm reading that article correctly, mirrorless has about 20% - 50% of the interchangeable lens camera market, depending on region. About 20% in the USA, about 50% in some parts of Asia.

http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/mirrorless-market-news.html

Greg

-- hide signature --

Brand loyalty is a character flaw.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Greg Lovern
Senior MemberPosts: 1,565
Like?
Re: Not fully compatible
In reply to jfriend00, Nov 11, 2013

jfriend00 wrote:

Greg Lovern wrote:

jfriend00 wrote:

Zenjitsuman wrote:

When Nikon introduces a mirrorless that can take all my lenses...

The Nikon 1 takes all your lenses.

Not fully compatible.

It would be great to have a fully compatible adapter to fit DSLR lenses of a given brand to that brand's mirrorless bodies. But Sony has been doing it longer, and has four such adapters to choose from, and even the most expensive one, about $350, is still not fully compatible. It's also fairly heavy at 160g.

I don't understand why it's apparently so hard to make them fully compatible, but as long as they are not, using them is a compromise.

What do you mean fully compatible? Screw drive? Really old lenses (like the Df supports)?

At some point, you have to draw a line and say that the reason you went to mirrorless was to get smaller size

What I'm reading by many posters on this thread and others is that the main reason to go to mirrorless is because (they say) EVF is better in every possible way than OVF, and that OVF is a dinosaur with absolutely zero relevance today. No advantage whatsoever, to any imaginable kind of shooting, to OVF, according to many.

so to realize the full benefit of the smaller size you have to go with a new mount that has a shorter flange distance and you have to leave out some things like a motor drive for old lenses. Otherwise, you just switched to mirrorless, but didn't gain one of the main benefits (which is smaller size) if you drag along all the compatibility baggage of the past with you and stay with the old mount.

It sounds like you're saying there's no point in using the adapter anyway; that what we really should do is throw out our DSLR lenses and start over with mirrorless system lenses?

What is a practical example of a Nikon lens that the Nikon 1 doesn't support (via the Nikon adapter) that it would make common sense for it to support?

Features not supported by the Nikon FT1 adapter (about $200) for using Nikon F-mount lenses on Nikon 1 mirrorless bodies:

  • No continuous AF. Compatible with AF-S only.
  • Not compatible with multi-point AF. Compatible only with single-point AF, using only the center point.
  • With high-speed continuous shooting, focus is locked with the first shot. I'm not clear on what frame rate does allow each shot to be separately focused; this may not really be an incompatibility.

I don't think I'm the only one who would feel significantly compromised by at least the first two. For those who don't care about continuous AF and also don't care about using an AF point other than the center point to focus on, yes the adapter is the bee's knees.

Greg

-- hide signature --

Brand loyalty is a character flaw.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads