Why is Mirrorless Failing in the USA?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rattymouse
  • Start date Start date

Midwest wrote:
Jorginho wrote:
Midwest wrote:
Jorginho wrote:
AF: not one way. AF tracking is clearly better on good DSLRs.
Isn't the phase detect AF of just about any DSLR better? For those who don't need it, it's not an issue. Some of us do.
No. PDAF has focussing issues. It is less accurate.
On the other hand if contrast detect fails to begin to focus before the shot opportunity is gone, the accuracy of contrast detect is not such an advantage.
Well, I can only say that Gh2 and EPl5 focus instantly. So I wonder where you get this impression that i would fail there. My Gh2 focusses in virtual pitch dark actually.



I shoot action stuff sometimes and slow autofocus of something moving rapidly across my field of view just won't work.
Aha. Agreed. Fast movement as said is better, if not much better with PDAF. Also note that there are clear differences here among DSLRs too.
DSLR cannot do a lot in the video department, cannot show you live what the sensor sees, only what your eye sees.
No, my T3i shows the live video on the LCD - that inferior thing that is stuck on the back of the camera. Thank God I don't have to use it for actual photo shooting!
Yes, not in the viewfinder. You are hampered there. Does not work well in bright light. Also, there is no Autofocus possible.
I think some DSLR's DO autofocus video, but I bought a DSLR for what it brings to taking photos, not for video. If someone needs video a whole bunch then maybe mirrorless is the better choice. I need instantaneous viewfinder and fast autofocus 1000x as much as video which I almost never use.
Oke. That is personal. Simply what it can or cannot do. Look at the bitrates of GH3. Specialized lenses for video. IT is much better there. I understand you do not use it, but it is a different thing.
I avoid using the screen on the back unless I use the articulated screen to get an odd angle shot. 99.9% of the time I use the optical TTL viewfinder, which is at least 50% of why I bought a DSLR.
Understood.
Again, I don't know, but I thought I heard that a whole episode of a TV program was shot with a Canon DSLR. Can't be too shabby.
It is not too shabby at all. Just look the differences in almost any review. You'll need to be very good with MF to get these results. The differences can to some point be overcome.
Of course nothing can do what it cannot do. I do not need nor want my camera to be smaller, so that means nothing at all to me.
But his is not about personal preferences. I am not trying to tell anyoen what he or she should prefer.
and my camera's not all that big and heavy anyhow.
I think it is compared to a m43s, but I guess you already knew ;-)
Ecch, I'm stlll a healthy guy, I can handle the extra pound or whatever.
I am actually well trained and healthy, but I also go on 8 hour hikes in rough terrain and you notice it easily.
I've seen more than a few jerky EVF's in my life and none of them are real-time. I expect they are improving but they can never be as smooth and real-time as reality itself though.
You give your eyes too much credit. They have their limits. Do you see lags on a comouterscreen or anywhere else? If so: why look at videos? They must be falling short too? Not? So the same is true for EVFs.
Some people need or want all the extra info of an EVF i.e. brightness clipping or white balance etc. and that's why it works better for them. I shoot RAW and always touch up my white balance.

For me the DSLR is about the viewfinder and the autofocus more than anything else. Video is nice. I have barely even cared to try it, it's just not my thing.

To each his or her own. Most of the debate about why one camera will 'finish off' the other kind is really just jousting. I expect both to be around for a long time.
 
rattymouse wrote:

According to Thom Hogan, mirrorless camera sales are down hard in the USA (-31%). But he does not say why. Does anyone have some guesses as to why mirrorless is not gaining traction in the US despite continuous improvements?
It's impossible to find one! I think many enthusiasts may have bought theirs online, but most people want to get their hands on one to try it first, or don't even know it exists. When you live in a medium-large city of a million people like I do and no camera store carries them, this becomes a problem. Here, Sams Club carries an EPM-1. Target used to have a GF3, but they have dropped them. They do carry a bottom end NEX and a Nikon J series. None of the best buy's have any m4/3, they carry the lower end J series Nikons and two NEX cameras. At these same Best Buy's (We have 5 of them here) you can buy D800's and 5D3's though, and even some descent EOS glass. EOS-M is non existent.


If you are interested in mirrorless systems, especially higher model m4/3 or Fuji... It doesn't exist. No bodies, lens, flashes, or accessories. You can get an NEX-7. But even though you can find an NEX-7 at the local Best Buy's, you can't get any real lenses for it.

The people who are interested but hesitant, want to touch it and try it first. Nobody else even knows they exist due to lack of retail store penetration. The only places you can find this stuff is the very largest few megacities. If I wanted to try out an OMD or GH3 I would have to drive 5 hours to do so.

I've often contemplated dumping most of my EOS FF gear for an OM-D. But until I can see one in the flesh, I will not. You cannot sell it if it's not on the shelf. I would suspect that the majority of the sales of mirrorless in the US has been to enthusiasts who appreciate the flexibility, small size, and ability to easily adapt just about any lens, primarily purchase online, and this enthusiast market is probably becoming saturated. I think many people looking at DSLR's would consider things like m4/3 if they had the chance to see and use a better model. But when all you can find are the plastic toy models in a million different colors geared for for soccer mom's like the Nikon J cameras... DSLR people write them off. I think most of the people in the $400 range look at things like EMP1 and GF3 and pass it up because they can buy a superzoom bridge cam for the same price, and the size is similar. Most of these people don't care about sensor size. They want lots of lens range, MPixels, one package, and don't plan on buying lots of additional items for it.


Cameras like the better mirrorless ones are a great concept and pack a lot of value in a small size. But until there is retail penetration for these companies so that people can experience them.. They will always be held back here.
 
Midwest wrote:
EinsteinsGhost wrote:
GeraldW wrote:

I've been to a few local camera shows at a local chain's home store. Everything available in the USA is there from pocketable poimnt and shoots to the premium fixed lens cameras, ILC's, consumer DSLRs and Pro DSLRs. If you stand around and listen you get some clues. Everybody wants to try the latest ILC's; but as soon as a larger lens is mounted, the atendees all say pretty much the same thing. "by the time you add a decent lens, the value of the small body is lost" Adding a Sony G series 70-210 f/2.8 to a NEX7 with the adapter got a lot of laughs.

:

I know it's egocentric; but I really do think that my views are typical of the majority of US buyers out there.
I'm afraid that would be the crowd you alluded to in the first paragraph, that believes that there is no life or purpose of a camera besides something like 70-200/2.8. Someone like me, would be smiling back.
I myself wouldn't think those folks believe there's only a need for long lenses, but there is some strange satisfaction the small-camera crowd seems to get by hanging a big honkin' lens off the front of it (thus making a joke of the benefits of a 'smaller' camera).

I expect Freud would have had a field day analyzing the small camera / honkin' lens deal.
What might appear to be a strange satisfaction to these many, is amusement to those few who know better. They miss the point, largely due to them simply being unaware or being misled (often by the strong forces of sticking with the norm). And the rest succumb to denial.

I can always find a lens that is way too big for a body, regardless of it being mirrored or mirror-less, and format. Obviously, I am not among those who refuse to acknowledge that flexibility is a GREAT thing.
 
Midwest wrote:
rjjr wrote:
ljfinger wrote:
Jorginho wrote:

It is asetting, it shows you motion blur. Simple as that. I find all these settings and features very usefull. I can only say these features are helpfull.
Still sounds like vf lag.
It isn't lag, it's the fact that the shutter speed for the live video shown by the evf is often very different than the effective shutter speed for the final photo. Even if they were the same the evf is far too small and low res to show an accurate display of the motion blur that will be in the final photo, and even if it could do that you couldn't detect it in continuous motion video.
So essentially you're saying it's BS.
Does this mean that if the user sets the camera to use 1/2000 second the display at all times is crystal clear and sharp, while if set to 1/2 second it looks like a smeary drug haze?
No.
I had an EVF on my old bridge camera and it didn't care WHAT the shutter speed was set at. Neither does the live-view LCD of my Canon T3i. It showed me what was striking the sensor.

...eventually.
Pretty much explains your personal experience.
 
Midwest wrote:
Jorginho wrote:
goetz48 wrote:

As I already said:

If I look into a viewfinder, I want to see what my camera is going to see.
Your OVF lets you see what yoru eyes can see, but it does not let you see what your camera sees. Yoru sensor, yoru eyes, are far superior to the eyes of the cam (the sensor of course). Just like someone with very good eyes can see the very same image a whole lot better than someone with bad eyes. If you want to know what he sees, you'll need to see things through his/her eyes.
If I want to know what my eyes are going to see, I put the camera apart, sit down, look, listen and smell.
Fine. If you want to see what your camera is going to see, you need an EVF.
But when I press the shutter, I want to do so based on the real-time my eyes are seeing, not the view that has already gone past in the behind-the-times EVF. No, not important for flowers or ducks, but very important for fast-moving action especially which must be kept framed as well as possible.
Like this?





8344721578_995f12517a_c.jpg
 
What can I say. I would be suprised if it wasn't an American to write what you just wrote down. There is not even a beginning of an answer to that piece. And then to think that you are in fact a bright and reasonable individual. How can you in all honesty be so lost in what the world really thinks about America in general and why. Well. at least us Europeans in general...

Let me try: in Europe we think Americans are ultra conservative, in constant state of fear of their neighbours, their gouvernemnt, the rest of the world etc. Rather tend to think that violence is a good way to solve problems. Narrowminded. Turned inward, selfrighteous. Gunproblems. Religious rightwing bigots are the majority. We pity you, not envy you.


We honestly and completel;y do not envy you at all. We would like it a whole lot if you would become a lot more modest, less violent (in the world and amongst yourselves) and open minded. In short: take an example from your northern neighbours which we like a whole more.

I agree this vision of ours on you is not correct. I know of many kond and openminded Americans, that are no biggots etc. But that is the way America comes across to most. We tend to laugh about the lack of knowledge and openmindedness in your country. We feel sad for the christian ultraconservative influence and the lack of freedom there seems to be as opposed to what you see as freedom.

America's speciality seems to be rightwing religious shortsighted nationalistic bigotery according to most. Not out of envy, but that is just what we see see and here over here. You seem ot have no clue as how America comes across here. On many journals and papers we can fiind reportes having a laugh of how Americans see the world.

Like you seem to do.

Marty, this is not personal. This is to the point. I have read many bright things of yiu, kind things etc. it is really beyond me how a person like you can truely believe what you just wrote down. It does show the schism that has developped between especially white Americans over there and us over here: we are very different in many ways. You prbably can't think like we do and we cannot think the way you do.
 
Last edited:
There are essentially only two ways to buy a camera.

Most well informed buyers will visit a camera store (and there aren't many left) or order their camera online. Everyone else will see a camera in Walmart, Target, Sam's Club, Costco, or Best Buy and buy it on impulse, or because a friend recommended it.

And I suppose there is a third category too.... people like you, who are well informed but want to see and touch a camera first. And this is probably the most sensible way to make a buying decision.

Of all the stores I mentioned above, Best Buy is the only one that has any MILC cameras on display. And they are always the low end Nikon 1 or M4/3 or NEX models, and never the better stuff. And you can completely forget about high end MILC camera lenses, even in most camera shops.

You simply cannot underestimate the power of display at the point of purchase. Like you said, if people can't see it, they can't buy it. People might buy books and records online, but they will not buy shoes online. They want to try them out. They want to see what they look like. And in that regard, high end cameras are like shoes.

Consider how powerful retail display is. All 4,000 Walmart Stores in the USA display a entry level Canon and Nikon DSLR. If each store sells just 2 per week that means 400,000 units for Canon and 400,000 more units for Nikon will be sold each year.

walmart_cameras_cs.jpg


Consider this... who would buy an entry level DSLR? Those customers would would very likely be new users, because an existing users would want a Canon 60D or a Nikon D7000 to step up. That means 400,000 new users for Canon and Nikon. 400,000 more people who are potential customers for upgrade lenses and accessories.


Olympus, Pentax and Sony simply cannot compete with that, no matter how great their prices are at Amazon.com and B&H.

"Being there" counts a lot in sales.


--
Marty
my blog: http://marty4650.blogspot.com/
Olympus E-30
Olympus E-PL2
Sony SLT-A55
 
My best collegue is married to a Republican and now livces in Mezsuite, Dallas, texas. I know him quite well, I know here very well. I am always welcome there, I can stay there as long as I like.

Bryan, here husband is a Republican. Hates Obama, every house that has an American flag gets the comment " good people". He is loves America, typical American guy. he started to date my friend Marga in 2007. He took some stuff with him for me (cheaper ion the US). So, in 2012 august she left to live with him. But it wopn;t be for good. The only reason they will stay in the US i because he is 49 and he will retire at age 55. And than it is bye bye. He has changed his mind on the many stays he had in Holland. He is not so much in love in America anymore. he told me personally he was fed up with the aggression in traffic for instance, the total lack of genuity in the people. Evben his own familly, according to him, were fake. "Big smile and how are you doing!!" He finds the Europeans, not only the Dutch, much more genuine, kind and was amazed by the food, the cities, the culture, the much calmer way of living, the lack of seeing poverty anywhere. That he coudl go anywhere without having to fear for his life in some neighborhoods.

He told me people were mostly going to Church to do some networking. Business!


Etcetc. If America was clearly so superior, how come he is not the only American I know of that has fled your nation. He had similar thought to yorus when he first came, I remember it very well. he is bright and we got along fine. I do not judge him at all, we just had very different thoughts on some things. I simply do not discuss these as we only will get into some argument we will not solve ever. Just repsect our differences. But know he has made quite a turnaround after he KNOWs europe rather than thinks he does. He is just an individual and other may come to other conclusions, I know. But this hater of the social wellfare state was pleasantly surprised as what it meant in reality...Whihc you would not suspect if America's superiority eas a real thing.

I am fine you are happy with where you live. I am fine wiht Americans or any people being well in place in their own country. But we might all well be wrong about why and how others think of our countries.
 
rattymouse wrote:

According to Thom Hogan, mirrorless camera sales are down hard in the USA (-31%). But he does not say why. Does anyone have some guesses as to why mirrorless is not gaining traction in the US despite continuous improvements?
 
forpetessake wrote:
The PDAF on the sensor will be perfected, the inexpensive FF sensors will be developed, the high quality EVF will be a norm, the prices will go down and SLRs will have no reason to exist.
If your action or your camera is moving, I doubt an EVF will ever get to the fps and lack of lag needed to give the user the view of what is actually happening in real time. Right now panning or action with an EVIL camera isn't possible because of the slow fps and lag. OVF gives you the view as it happens in real life!
 
Below the fout functions buttons is the shutterspeed button. When I psuh it and there is neough light, the EVF simply moves fast as without it on. when there is not enough light, the evf shows that it hampers and it blurs somewhat as indication your shutterspeed is too low.
 
Sometimes good old fashioned things work just great.

And remember, the present is now. Meaning that it's useless to speculate more than a few years ahead. Sure, we may all be driving electric cars one day, but if I need to buy a car right now I can only pick from what's available. Remember, sometimes its the technological disputations that vanish. Lots of inventions that look good on paper have gone the way of the Dodo as well.


Decisions made on wants and dreams aren't viable.

One day they might get rid of the lens. It's possible, I can think how. But I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.
forpetessake wrote:

Mirrorless is not necessary about the size, they may be as small and light as Sony NEX series, or as big and heavy as Panasonic GH3, the absense of mirror box is providing more flexibility, not less.

There is no doubt that mirror goes the way of dodo bird. But as it often happens during technological disruptions, the old technology puts up a good fight. SLRs were designed and engineered for ages, they are perfect in many respects, and Canon/Nikon releasing smaller lighter bodies at lower price points make many prospective SLM buyers think twice before parting with their money. And the first generation of SLM users might have been as well disappointed with imperfections of mirrorless cameras and decided to go back to SLRs.

But technology is improving rapidly, there is no magic in having that flipping thing inside the camera body, in the long run it's a liability, so it will have to go away. The PDAF on the sensor will be perfected, the inexpensive FF sensors will be developed, the high quality EVF will be a norm, the prices will go down and SLRs will have no reason to exist.
 
It simply shows a blur and hamperiong EVF when you move or the subject moves. So it indicates your shutterspeed is too low.
 
If you use it is pretty clear looking through the EVF you are getting a blurry picture and need to set the ISO higher or F value lower.
 
Midwest wrote:
rjjr wrote:
ljfinger wrote:
Jorginho wrote:

It is asetting, it shows you motion blur. Simple as that. I find all these settings and features very usefull. I can only say these features are helpfull.
Still sounds like vf lag.
It isn't lag, it's the fact that the shutter speed for the live video shown by the evf is often very different than the effective shutter speed for the final photo. Even if they were the same the evf is far too small and low res to show an accurate display of the motion blur that will be in the final photo, and even if it could do that you couldn't detect it in continuous motion video.
So essentially you're saying it's BS.
Does this mean that if the user sets the camera to use 1/2000 second the display at all times is crystal clear and sharp, while if set to 1/2 second it looks like a smeary drug haze?
Yes it is more like that You see people not moving fluently at all if you use it with that setting and the picture becomes a bit blurry.
I had an EVF on my old bridge camera and it didn't care WHAT the shutter speed was set at. Neither does the live-view LCD of my Canon T3i. It showed me what was striking the sensor.

...eventually.
 
RedFox88 wrote:
forpetessake wrote:
The PDAF on the sensor will be perfected, the inexpensive FF sensors will be developed, the high quality EVF will be a norm, the prices will go down and SLRs will have no reason to exist.
If your action or your camera is moving, I doubt an EVF will ever get to the fps and lack of lag needed to give the user the view of what is actually happening in real time. Right now panning or action with an EVIL camera isn't possible because of the slow fps and lag. OVF gives you the view as it happens in real life!
Have you used a current EVIL? Panning and action are both fine.

There's quite a few people happily using the m4/3s gear for BIF, sports, etc. You just have to practice a bit and bump up your skill level. You may be at a disadvantage against a DSLR, but to say that they are not possible is just wrong.
 
Midwest wrote:
rjjr wrote:
ljfinger wrote:
Jorginho wrote:

It is asetting, it shows you motion blur. Simple as that. I find all these settings and features very usefull. I can only say these features are helpfull.
Still sounds like vf lag.
It isn't lag, it's the fact that the shutter speed for the live video shown by the evf is often very different than the effective shutter speed for the final photo. Even if they were the same the evf is far too small and low res to show an accurate display of the motion blur that will be in the final photo, and even if it could do that you couldn't detect it in continuous motion video.
So essentially you're saying it's BS.
Does this mean that if the user sets the camera to use 1/2000 second the display at all times is crystal clear and sharp, while if set to 1/2 second it looks like a smeary drug haze?

I had an EVF on my old bridge camera and it didn't care WHAT the shutter speed was set at. Neither does the live-view LCD of my Canon T3i. It showed me what was striking the sensor.

...eventually.
 
























The problem with these kind of shots has never been the EVF, but the less than stellar AF tracking o the GH2....
 
Te USA is a big place. And any place this big will have all sorts of extreme behavior. You can certainly find it in Europe too, if you look hard enough and keep an open mind.


Everything you said is true somewhere here. But I think you are drawing your conclusions from a very narrow viewpoint. Things you have read, and a few people you personally know. And you are choosing to believe things that reinforce the biases you already hold.

Like you, I have my own biases, that are based on my own experiences. I have found that many Europeans are constantly preaching to America about how much more intelligent they are, and how much more compassionate, and how much less violent they are. And mind you, these are the descendents of the same people who invented feudalism, colonialism, imperialism, communism, fascism and racial genocide.

We are constantly denounced for having slavery 200 years ago, while it was the Dutch and the Portuguese were the slave traders who brought slavery to this continent. It seems to me no one was innocent, except the slaves themselves.


Of course, those things happened a long time ago, and it would be foolish to hold anyone in Europe responsible today for all the ills Europe imposed upon the world. But it does illustrate that many Europeans have no understanding of their own history.


You rarely see Americans behaving that arrogantly. We don't think we are superior to anyone. We just know we are different. Someone asked a question as to why our culture was different, as if being different was a crime in and of itself. I tried to explain why, and you took offense at my response. For that, I offer my sincere apology. I won't let it happen again.

As far as people fleeing the USA, the facts seem to support the exact opposite case. While people will always travel to and from the USA for jobs, there was a whopping total of 1,800 American citizens who actually renounced their citizenship last year. And this was from a population of 315,000,000 people.

On the other hand, last year around 700,000 foreign born people became naturalized as US citizens, and another 1,000,000 or so became permanent residents. And this doesn't include the illegal immigrants who are estimated to be between 500,0000 and 1,000,000 more each year. Around 13% of our population is foreign born right now, so if anyone is fleeing the USA, they are dwarfed by the numbers who come here to take their places.

People do move back and forth between Canada and the USA for various reasons, but when it comes to actually immigration, the percentage of Canadians who move to the USA is three times higher than the percentage of US Citizens who emigrate to Canada. Of course in absolute numbers, those "fleeing the USA" is greater, because our population is ten times larger. But the rates tell you that there is no mass exodus from the USA,. Just the opposite, in fact. Canada loses a higher percentage of their population to the USA each year than the reverse.


While you probably read my post as some sort of xenophobic rant, I suggest you re-read it. I was trying to answer the question honestly, without supplying any criticism of any other nation, and plenty of criticism for the USA. I mentioned that we are wasteful, and that we spend money that we don't have, and that it will lead to no good end. Why you took this as an affront to the Netherlands escapes me completely.
 
JulesJ wrote:
rattymouse wrote:

According to Thom Hogan, mirrorless camera sales are down hard in the USA (-31%). But he does not say why. Does anyone have some guesses as to why mirrorless is not gaining traction in the US despite continuous improvements?
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top