Mirrorless vs DSLR

Started Nov 9, 2013 | Discussions thread
MoreorLess Veteran Member • Posts: 4,472
Some differences and the appeal of mirrorless...

stevo23 wrote:

PerL wrote:

as1mov wrote:


What is your opinion?

EVFs are inferior in the same way a big screen TV is inferior to a window - you can't improve on reality.

There are no cost savings benefitting the consumer - just check prices of mirror less.

There is no reliability issue with mirror boxes worth mentioning - I have cameras that are 30+ years that works fine. Most problem with old cameras are failure of electronics.

The space savings are small if you compare the sensor size. A 200 mm lens is the same size on a DSLR and mirror less.

Actually, I think the weight savings is there. A Sony A7 with 24-70 Zeiss is about 2lbs while the EOS5DMIII with similar lens is coming in at about 3.5 lbs. For me, losing that much weight and more for backpacking trips would be a godsend.

I think Nikon and Canon could easily counter with smaller and lighter SLRs and I'm sure they can lighten the lenses a bit. This may be their solution for the near term There already is an EOS APS DSLR (SL1) that's a mere 14 oz. and quite compact. There is no reason this trend couldn't continue.

Theres also the 6D(or the new Df) of course than weights 200g less, it offers scaled back specs to the 5D but still arguably ahead of the Sony. PLus the Canon 24-70mm is also close to a true macro lens(albeit a short one) you factor in a future short Sony maco and I'd guessing that's at least 200-300g more.

Then theres battery life, the Sony has around 1/3 to 1/4 that of most DSLR's so your looking at 2-3 times as many batteries at 50g each. Personally I think CIPA's only factoring in 30 secs viewfinder use per shot is questionable as well(especially on a non sport/action camera) so the difference might actually be even greater.

Personally I feel the entire mirrorless market has been somewhat mischaracterised both by manufacturers and the users we see represented online. The image that's projected is of people who would have/did buy a DSLR previously now buying a mirrorless system. For the manufacturers this is obviously a good image as SLR's as viewed as something of a standard of performance with users you have to remember that gear forums are bias towards more serious ones.

I'd argue the reality of the mirrorless market is that its key growth area is aiming between the DSLR and the compact. Basically offering a larger sensor but with the useability of a compact, I.E. no viewfinder, fewer controls. This is afterall really where mirrorless short flange distance excels(at least at mid level sensor sizes, light angles seem to be an issue as you get larger) since it can build such a camera far smaller than one using the more typical DSLR flange distance.

I think this explains the way the mirrorless market has evolved as well, strong sales for a few years then a reduction in growth(before the recent reduction everyone suiffered). Basically it grew quickly because it was servicing a new market that had been largely ignored in the digital era, then when the market started to saturate its growth declined. If the market had been based on "stealing" DSLR users you would expect much more constant growth.

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