Is mirrorless the worst of all worlds? and FF the best?

Started Apr 25, 2013 | Discussions thread
Great Bustard Forum Pro • Posts: 42,574
'Tis indeed.

Ed Rizk wrote:

Smaller and lighter is still smaller and lighter even if it doesn't fit in your pocket.

Except, why not smaller and lighter still that will fit in your pocket?

If you travel by air, backpack, bike, or to a lesser extent camp or travel by car, every ounce and cubic inch saved counts

RX100, then?

I want a 6D too.  Still, I would like to keep my EFs lenses and my 60D, or replace it with a mirror less or SL1.  Even the larger of the smaller sensor cameras has a bulk advantage, especially with EFs telephotos.  Sure, the 100-400 on FF is better than the 55-250 on crop, but the 55-250 is tiny and weighs nothing by comparison.

How 'bout the FZ200, then?

The shallow DOF is a disadvantage for most of my shots.

Is it too much effort to stop down?

Landscapes and architecturals are worse off for it.

Then don't shoot landscapes and architecture with wide apertures.

High ISO performance on such shots is overcome by a tripod and DR is overcome by HDR.

Assuming no distracting motion in the scene.

In candid photos of multiple people, shallow DOF is also a disadvantage.

Not always:

Canon 6D + Sigma 35 / 1.4 @ f/1.4, 1/125, ISO 100

That said, you can always stop down:

Canon 6D + 50 / 1.2L @ f/2.8, 1/60, ISO 2500

You're trying to document the interaction of several people, but only one eye of one person will be sharp if you're lucky.

It always amazes me how many people can't quite seem to figure out to stop down if they need more DOF.  I mean, duh, in a light limited environment the greater DOF will cost you the noise advantage of the larger format for a given shutter speed, but so many here seem to be like the monkey with its hand stuck in the cookie jar 'cause it won't let go of a few cookies.  That is, they fail to understand the connection between DOF and noise in that both depend on the size of the aperture.

APSc and morrorless have their place.

Their place is based entirely on size, weight, and price.

I would like to try the 6D, first to use the 17mmTSE and second for its low light advantages.

Well, with a TSE lens, depending on the scene, you can use a wide aperture and still get a "deep" DOF.  Other times, however, you cannot, so you'll have to stop down.

Maybe after using it, I'll also find everything else useless, but I don't think so.

A 6D + 17 TSE will still be larger, heavier, and more expensive than APS-C and mirrorless for the same AOV.

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