Contituation of the Versatility thread

Started Apr 5, 2013 | Discussions thread
plevyadophy Veteran Member • Posts: 4,258
Rubbish Part II Re: Contituation of the Versatility thread

vzlnc wrote:

Responses contd from above ..........

Mirrorless and other format :

1) Lack the AF speed - not suitable for sports, moving people etc.

Incorrect. You have been living on another planet.

The only area where mFT AF falters is tracking movement across the frame, and if you are skilled and/or determined you can overcome this.

2) Not as good in low light

yes you are correct but for versatility it doesn't have to be.

3) No optical viewfinder, awkward holding style with longer lenses, more prone to handshake.

An optical vf isn't the be all and end all. Let's see now, with an optical vf (OVF) you can't see what your White Balance (WB) settings are giving you, espeically if you would like to use this creatively; instead you have to chimp, take a shot, chimp, take a shot, chimp ............

Creative use of exposure is pretty hopeless on an OVF cam too becaue you have to take a shot, chimp, take a shot, chimp, take a shot, chimp ...............

Use a slow aperture lens and you end up with a dark OVF on a ff cam (other than Sony's new ff SLT cam) which ain't nice if light level are already low.

I am curious about your claim that cameras other than ff lead to an awkward holdings style with long lenses. I suspect more spurious claims on your part.

Yes, you are correct, the smaller bodies of mirroless cams do tend to transmit handshake more but if you have an Oly cam it isn't a problem because that has in-body image stabilisation and the only ff cams that offer that feature come from Sony (so what's that, just one manufacturer out of three!!)

4) less shots per battery charge. Not many offer battery pack.

Yep, less shots per battery but does that really matter if the number of shots one is getting with one's mirrorless cam is sufficient for the task at hand.

Yep not many offer a battery pack solution but two do, so if one wants that one buys those cameras. And for your imformation, one can now buy third-party battery packs for mirrorless cams that don't have them officially.

5) Not good enough flash system.

Oh really? Explain. Surely, you are banging on about your incorrect assertion that there are no wireless flash systems. Well, from almost year one of their entry into mFT, Oly has had a wireless flash feature on their mFT cams.

So please tell me what else ain't good enough?

6) Thin DOF not possible in situations when you need it.

Wrong. I address this point earlier. Thin DOF is possible ............. it's just that ff can be thinner.

7) Less external controls, less mature menu navigation, lots of fluff and gimmicks to selling to new photo enthusiasts.

In response to your points in turn: lie, nonsense, yes maybe so if you don't like such features.

8) High on novelty factor rather than practicality. Like manual focus by wire, instead of real manual focus. Its like the ridiculous semi-manual option in some automatic cars to advertise to manual car enthusiasts who are looking for a real manual gear. Just a gimmick.

Focus by wire is fine if implemented well. I could equally complain about Canon's electronic aperture control "gimmick" on their ff cams rather than "real" aperture controls on the lens for "enthusiasts"

9) More expensive than DX or APS-C cameras and much more ridiculously expensive external viewfinder attachments ( and other assorted nonsense items with no standardized connections yet) going into couple of hundreds of dollars, while you get a free optical viewfinder with the DX which is miles better anyway.

Hmm, here we go again.

Yep, some mirrorless options are more expensive than DX.

Not all mirrorless cams require expensive external vf attachments, and one mirrorless cam (the Fuji X series cams) have the best of worlds in their vf; optical when you want or need it and EVF if you so choose. Any, ff cam got that option other than the Leica M Type 240 cam? Oops, I shouldn't have mentioned the Leica because strictly speaking that's a mirrorless cam.

As for standardization, I have to laugh. Why? Because in ff land, you have Sony opting for EVF and Canon and Nikon opting for OVF and then you have have Nikon opting for XQD memory cards whilst Canon have stuck with Compact Flash. Contrast that with mirrorless land where you have TWO major manufacturers making camera bodies for the same lens, with another manufacturer recently announcing that they too would be making cameras for the mount. Erm, do you know of any ff cam system that allows me to use the camera body of another manufacturer (other than buying an old Fuji S3 or S5 for Nikon F mount)??

10) Being smaller with low power electronics/processor, smaller buffer etc, these cameras will usually be slow in operation, slow to focus, lot of shutter lag, cumbersome to change settings on the fly.

Hmm, some of the cameras in mirrorless land are exactly as you described, but the flagship cameras aren't.

Now ofcourse having gotten rid of so many features that made the FF cameras VERSATILE, the small mirrorless IS going to be light, but its not VERSATILE anymore. Its a design tradeoff. In any

Doh!! By definition versatility is a design trade-off. At one time any serious wedding photographer worth his salt would use a medium format camera; modern wedding photographers use other systems ............... as a trade off .............for ............... yep .............. I think you have guessed by now .............. size and weight.

case, if you want a good quality no-nonsense camera that is also light and small, there are many good point and shoots which will do EVERYTHING the mirrorless does and with less cost and with none of the gimmicks.

Yes, indeed there are many good point and shoots, the Canon G series springs to mind. But I think folks who opt for mirrorless do so for a little more image quality and the ability to change lenses whilst not going to the expense and bulk of a ff system.

Mirrorless cameras remind of the new class of cars that were invented by Mercedes couple of years back. The 4-door coupe. Its styled like a couple with low, sloping roof in the rear, but has 4 doors. Its neither here nor there. If you want space and practicality go for the sedan, if you want

You say,  it's "neither here nor there". Well, that automatically shouts VERSATILITY as it's trying to be many things.

style and performance go for the 2-door couple. The 4-door coupes are just he regular sedans styled differently but with a hefty price tag. Only thing you are getting is NOVELTY. And the company gets to create a new niche in the saturated car market. The car essentially didnt offer anything the cheaper sedan didnt and infact lost precious head room in the back seats.With mirrorless, esp the retro designs, you are paying for the design and the novelty factor, nothing else.

If you want small cameras that weigh less that are like do-it-all, they are the advanced bridge point and shoots, or the large sensor point and shoots. Mirrorless cams offer almost no advantage over those, but will be priced 3 to 5 times more.

I think your assessment is nuts. You earlier mention DOF control and are now suggesting that mirrorless offers almost no advantage over a point and shoot or bridge camera. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think you can stick an f0.95 on a point and shoot.

If you want ULTIMATE VERSATILITY and want to be ready for almost anything, go FF.

The use of the word "ultimate" implies best. Hmm, well let me see now, can you carry a ff camera, a flash for the camera, and three lenses for the cam all in you coat pockets? Or how about carrying a full backup system AND your clothing as carry-on luggage on a plane? And how versatile is your ff cam with a 70-200mm lens and lens hood attached if you get stopped from entering buildings by security?


Debatable. Not much hope of using a very wide variety of lenses there because you have got flip flop mirror in the way.

But of course you could opt for a NEX system ............. but you don't count that do ya coz that's mirrorles right?

Want everyday no-frills camera without significant learning curve which is also cheap, light and small - high end point and shoot or bridge camera.


Want novelty factor, want to try something new, want something retro looking which is cool nowadays no matter if it is expensive and not as fast as DX or FF and cuts down on many features while trying to look retro - mirrorless from Olympus or Fuji.

So are you saying Panasonic and Sony is OK?

Seriously, i think your statements are somewhat off-beam.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MOD Biggs23
MOD Biggs23
MOD Biggs23
MOD Biggs23
MOD Biggs23
MOD Biggs23
MOD Biggs23
MOD Biggs23
MOD Biggs23
MOD Biggs23
MOD Biggs23
MOD Biggs23
MOD Biggs23
MOD Biggs23
MOD Biggs23
MOD Biggs23
(unknown member)
MOD Biggs23
MOD Biggs23
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
MOD Biggs23
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow