Mirrorless vs DSLR

Started Nov 9, 2013 | Discussions thread
blue_cheese Senior Member • Posts: 1,855
Re: The same tiresome hype of mirrorless

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.

That axiom would hold true only if your output is reality, but it is not, it is a digital picture viewed on a digital screen (or less popular, print), an EVF or TV would be superior if it closer showed what your capture of the seen reality is. I don't care to see reality, I care to see what is captured. optical viewfinders don't even come close to that.

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

You realize that phones, point and shoots, and what not are ALL mirrorless right? While high end ILC mirroless may be up there in price with DSLR, it is because they are using the technology as a differentiating factor such as more accurate contrast detect, faster fps, etc.... to keep price up once they become the de-facto standard and vlolume favors them, price will come down.

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.

That comment is out of left field, any mechanical device is subject to stress, wear and tear. Electronics are not.

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.

That I can't argue with. It makes little sense to make a small body and still slap a 3kg FF lens on.

-- hide signature --

"A creative man is motivated by the desire to achieve, not by the desire to beat others."
- Ayn Rand

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