Why DX mirrorless will replace FX DSLR (for most photographers)

Started Nov 3, 2013 | Discussions thread
sportyaccordy Forum Pro • Posts: 11,469
Re: observation
1

WD wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

WD wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

WD wrote:

I disagree. What significant gains are there in image quality with FX?

Ability to shoot cleanly at ISOs 1-2 stops higher than DX. There may be a short period where they are able to make APS-C BSI sensors but if they can get that tech to work at that scale FX won't be far behind.

Some folks want the ultimate. Hell, some folks NEED the ultimate for their work. Anything DX can do, FX can and will always do better as far as IQ goes. It's just a matter of the user determining whether it's worth the cost/weight. If I had my way I would go FX all the way all the time as the bulk of my shooting would greatly benefit from the added speed.

Well stated, and for those people (you, perhaps) FX is ideal and needed. The key word here is "significant" when placed in the context "for whom". The reality is, for the great majority of people willing to purchase a camera rather than relying on an iPhone or compact camera, the extra bit of minimal DOF or high ISO or extra resolution of FX is not worth the cost and the skill to utilize it isn't developed in order to attain it. For many, the compact size, lighter weight, and sometimes GREATER DOF of DX is an advantage!

You could take that logic even further. 1/2.3" is cheaper, more portable, can have much faster zoom lenses, much more extravagant sensor tech and be way more portable than DX. Plus basically has infinite DOF, since any kind of DOF control is overrated. FF is fine. Just because DX is a good fit for you doesn't mean it's the be all end all of photography.

I understand and agree, what is one man's bread is another man's candy. Actually, I don't mean to imply that DX is necessarily what I want but rather that I'm convinced, a smaller format form factor in a mirrorless design will soon replace the conventional FX DSLR as the ideal "top-end", highest performing, most desired "semi-pro" camera for true photography enthusiasts.

No, I still think you are projecting what you want as what is "most desired "semi-pro" camera for true photography enthusiasts". Not everyone wants a smaller format form factor. Not everyone wants a mirrorless design.

I think DX 3:2 dimensions allow for more capture dimensions (think 16:9, 3:2, 4:3 or square) w/o losing more of the cherished shallow DOF or total pixel area for resolution that 4:3 would, although the m4/3 cameras recently introduced such as the GX7 and EM-1 look like m4/3 is moving steadily toward my personal vision of the camera which will ultimately dethrone FX DSLRs.

DOF is probably FX biggest advantage. FX has a stop of DOF advantage over DX across the board, which, for certain types of photography is huge. FX also has about a stop and a half of extra usable ISO/speed, which again, for certain types of photography, is also huge. And these are not things that can be overcome with clever design- this is just inherent to FX having ~1.5 stops of extra sensor area over DX, which will always be the case. So for someone looking for the ultimate ultimate, FX and MF are really the only options.

One of the abilities of an EVF is to give a very accurate preview of what the sensor is capturing. With a flick of a switch one could frame accurately at different dimensions, personally, a feature which would be appreciated, especially with HD video.

-- hide signature --

Warren

Not really a huge deal. Most photographers know how to crop. Smart photographers will spend less time fidgeting with stuff they can fix easily after the fact and more at getting the best shots/image data possible.

Not to mention, there are millions of photographers heavily invested in quality FX glass. A walkaround zoom starting at 24mm is pretty useless on a DX body; do you really think folks will toss their $2000 Canon EF L zooms to reinvest into equally expensive and bulky lenses for less DOF, speed and IQ? And they can and are making mirrorless FX cameras too. I think there will be more mirrorless cameras in the future, and mirrorless cameras will be placed alongside conventional DSLRs in the hierarchy, but DSLRs are going to be around for a while. Personally, I do a lot of street/candid shooting so the tiny inconspicuous form factor of something like a NEX is great, and the availability of that form factor with FX flexibility and IQ in something like the A7 is great. But that's just me. Point is, no 1 form factor will dominate... choice and variety are the name of the game, and the broader a manufacturer's lineup the better off they will be.

 sportyaccordy's gear list:sportyaccordy's gear list
NEX-5T Sony Alpha a7R II Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG Macro HSM II Samyang 14mm F2.8 IF ED MC Aspherical +3 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
WD
WD
MOD Mako2011
WD
WD
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
WD
WD
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow