Why Thom is wrong...

Started Sep 25, 2013 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 3,348
Re: Why Thom is wrong...

PK24X36NOW wrote:

Thom (and all of the mirrorless cheerleaders here) are wrong because the mirror provides something no mirrorless camera can EVER provide - a real time, lag free, eyestrain inducing flicker free view through the taking lens that consumes NO battery power. This unique aspect of the SLR/dSLR makes it a superior photography instrument that will not be bettered by the best electronic viewfinder in the world.

Flange distance? Not only a non-issue, but actually beneficial given the angles of incoming light caused by short flange distances, coupled with the nature of digital sensors.

Size/weight are only arguments because you're comparing smaller sensor cameras with larger sensor cameras for the most part, and becasue you're not comparing cameras with equal image capabilities (i.e., including DOF control). If they make a FF MILC, the lenses will be just as big as for FF dSLRs, and the FF MILC + lens will be an awkward, front-heavy combination when you have a small, thin camera body.

If you're willing to sacrifice the ability to isolate subjects from background, are willing to sacrifice (high ISO and overall) image quality, are willing to sacrifice tracking autofocus for moving subjects, are willing to sacrifice battery life, and are willing to suffer with akward ergonomics/poor controls because the camera bodies are too small to allow enough room for extensive on-camera controls (or because the controls are so small they can't be easily used), then mirrorless cameras may seem like a good "alternative," but when those limitations are taken into account, they provide no compelling reason to move away from dSLRs. Quite the reverse, in fact.

Given that we mostly view the images after they are shot on giant EVF's called monitors or televisions it seems to me that sooner rather than later a retina display EVF will come along that can actually be calibrated to match your monitor.

I shot for over 30 years with OVF's before getting a camera with an EVF and after a week I really preferred the EVF. I wear glasses and the OVF's today are much worse in terms of eye point than they used to be, so I cannot see the edges of a D3s VF whilst wearing my glasses at all. Thus there is no great benefit to it for me.

For any photographer whose work includes a high proportion of travel, the weight savings from M43 cameras and lenses are significant - especially when you travel by air. New lenses from Olympus and Panasonic match and exceed many SLR lenses in terms of IQ and cost half as much.

Finally an EVF allows you to shoot video (if you want to do that) with the camera to your eye. You cannot do that with a DSLR.

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