gavin
Veteran Member
How do you like the EVF? I think the mirrorless looks great except for this one thing.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Who here is sticking with DSLR's over mirrorless?
- Thread starter sothankful
- Start date
LaszloBencze
Leading Member
When I look through a camera viewfinder I want to see an optical image not a pixel screen recreation of it. It's that simple. It doesn't matter to me what other "advantages" an RF camera might offer. The pixel screen is a deal breaker.
hotdog321
Forum Pro
The new lenses do look amazing. But until I see pro-level mirrorless cameras that offer significant benefits over DSLRs, I'm sticking with my 5D IV bodies. Yes, it will happen one day--perhaps soon, but I haven't seen it yet.
richardperson
Leading Member
For low light theater I love it. For fast sports it gets in the way.
Best part is that you sort of see what your exposure is going to be, so if you have a bad manual setting, you see it in the viewfinder. Another great part is that you can access every control while keeping your eye on the viewfinder. 95% of the time I turn the rotating screen inward and don't use it, just doing everything through the viewfinder. Very nice for changing settings on the fly in dark environments. Also, if you need reading glasses to see the back screen, you don't in the EVF because of the diopter adjust.
Andy Blanchard
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,350
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 192
That more or less mirrors (pun intended) my position. The current levels of EVF lag and its tendency to make things seem sharper than they are making the EVF useless for fine DoF preview in real time are both showstoppers for me. The lack of 1-series level robustness is also a deal-breaker, but that's a marketing thing rather than tech - there's absolutely no reason why Canon (or Nikon, Sony, etc.) couldn't build that right now if they wanted to.
Simple physics obviously means that EVFs can never completely equal OVFs, but that doesn't really matter as long as they can reach the point of being "good enough". On that, my guess is similar to yours - it's going to take at least one more, and probably two or three, iterations before EVFs are going to be able to realistically address the issues above to the extent I'm looking for.
In the meantime, I'm definitely interested in seeing what RF-mount cameras Canon is going to release this year, especially if one has a reasonable level of ruggedness for use as a high-MP/backup body, but realistically I'm currently planning on (or maybe resigned to) going down the 1DX3 route. Barring writing off yet another body, that means circa 2025 before I'm serously looking at a new primary camera which will hopefully be long enough for mirrorless to sufficiently mature, and if not I'm sure the 1DX3 will still be available if needed. That said, I might still be tempted in the interim if Canon can pull off something special in the interim.
I don't see a problem with the lighter mirrorless bodies and heavier EF lenses though; once you've fitted the lens adapter there really isn't all that much difference, and percentage-wise it's even less if you're using a body+grip combo. With the big white telephotos I'd guess the centre of gravity shift would be so slight that any adjustment of the hand to achieve perfect balance will still leave your fingers firmly on the focus control ring.
Andy
Tannin
Senior Member
Good thoughts there Andy. One thing I want to take up from your post is this:
A sane Canon would produce a 5D-level mirrorless (let's call it an "R5" for convenience) with a sensible, hand-holdable body sized big enough for ordinary Westerners with normal hands to hold comfortably, with or without a big lens. Say, around about the same as a 7D or a 5D. But given the evidence of the ill-considered, user-unfriendly EOS R body and handling design, we have to wonder if that sane Canon I mentioned still exists.
Have their designers lost the plot? Well, actually no. We know they lost the plot (the unlovely EOS R is proof positive of that) the question is: can they find the plot again after losing it so badly?
Yep to all of that. However, with big lenses and the current crop of mirrorless bodies, the issue isn't weight - as you say, the difference between 600/4 II + 5D and 600/4 II + EOS R is next to nothing (and even with something much smaller like a 100-400 it's trivial) - the significant difference is size and handling. In a word, using an R with a big lens is awkward and unpleasant. The body is just too small and not properly shaped. I haven't tried an RP but it would obviously be even worse.
A sane Canon would produce a 5D-level mirrorless (let's call it an "R5" for convenience) with a sensible, hand-holdable body sized big enough for ordinary Westerners with normal hands to hold comfortably, with or without a big lens. Say, around about the same as a 7D or a 5D. But given the evidence of the ill-considered, user-unfriendly EOS R body and handling design, we have to wonder if that sane Canon I mentioned still exists.
Have their designers lost the plot? Well, actually no. We know they lost the plot (the unlovely EOS R is proof positive of that) the question is: can they find the plot again after losing it so badly?
tvstaff
Senior Member
Tough question. I'm sitting here reading the D6 vs. 1DXMKIII stats and up comes a Canon mirrorless with 47MP that shoots at 13fps or "something" like that.
I've never been more confused.
Like you, many of us want to work with a reasonable budget and with bodies, lenses, cards, batteries, readers and don't forget you need a back-up body..... Two systems are not in reach even at 30K.
I kind of feel like we've all been painted into a corner..
All I can do is wish you luck... As I'm just bewildered and uncertain where to spend my money.
I know I'm getting a 1DXMKIII to preview... If I don't see a "marked" increase in IQ... I won't be spending my dollars there....
I have a canon mirrorless and a dslr and both use the same lenses - why choose - get both
Tannin
Senior Member
How is that the case? I'm not disagreeing with you, at least not yet, but I'm going to outline the contrary view and invite you to reply. I'll wear the rose coloured glasses for this post, you show us where that is wrong.
Canon has introduced a whole stack of new product (two FF mirrorless bodies; quite a few RF lenses; three different EF bodies (sport, mid-range APS-C, and a budget cropper) and two or three EF lenses including the amazing 600/4 III), an M-series mirrorless cropper, and withdrawn .... nothing worth mentioning. That gives us a whole lot more choice.
What's more, all the present indications from Canon are that they will continue making EF bodies and lenses - and indeed continue bringing us updated models - for as long as the market for them is there. Never mind the doomsayers (many of them Sony trolls) that post here saying that the SLR is dead and chanting "mirrorless is the future" as if it was holy writ, look at the hard evidence:
New 90D (midrange APS-C)
New top-of-the-range 1 Series body
New entry-level crop DSLR on the way (rumour, but a good one)
What we are seeing here is a pattern: where it is practically feasible, Canon are releasing both SLR and mirrorless products, using as much shared technology as possible. (Best example, the 90D/M6 II twins). Where the mirrorless technology is too weak to make a competitive product, we just get an SLR (1DX III). And at the ultra-low end, where the cost advantage of mirrorless is strongest, we get mirrorless-only products with no SLR equivalent (EOS RP; the very cheap new R rumoured to be close to release).
Canon are happy to make whatever it is that customers are happy to buy. They will keep on making SLRs forever, if that's what we keep on buying. In the end, it's up to us.
(Disclaimer: I own four SLRs and an EOS R. The R is impressive in its way, but it's a bit of a toy and hands-down the most fiddly and annoying camera to use that I have ever owned. I remain open to mirrorless tech, but it's going to take a lot more than the half-baked EOS R to convince me.)
gavin
Veteran Member
OK pretty much what I expected. I will wait for next gen even though the new R5 sounds great.
tvstaff
Senior Member
I'm going to try the MKIII this week. I shot all week with my MKII at NYFW.
I shoot in horrible lighting at times. Like tourture!!!! Here I.must say the MKII gets shots no one else in the room does.
Then on the flip side in the best lighting the world I.get beautiful shots but lose out to anyone who is at 30MP and a competent photog. You would have to be blind not to see the difference. No matter my editing skills I can't get the resolution I want.
So I need something better than the MKII, and I think I'm a good judge of the camera.
All this would be moot, if Canon pulled the video out of the MKIII and just made it 30 to 40 MP at 12fps.
Solid body, OVF, great focus and no need to work about the restraints on a sensor for 30/60/120 video.
It would be a photographers camera for people like me and there are any of us and we would pay dearly for it.
That's right, take out the video, gives and I'll pay more for still resolution. $8,000+ and they would sell tons of them.
G Dickson
Senior Member
my ideal camera would have an ovf, with a hybrid screen overlay, as the only thing extra I would want to see is a histogram in the viewfinder... but not the image digitally.
Fully agreed. I am happy using m4/3 for travel and video, but for wildlife an evf (no matter how good) just disconnects me from the action.
Fully agreed. I am happy using m4/3 for travel and video, but for wildlife an evf (no matter how good) just disconnects me from the action.
seochris
Well-known member
- Messages
- 189
- Reaction score
- 71
I shoot weddings with both Canon and Nikon DSLRs depending on which lenses I want to use.
I had a look at the Z series Nikon and The R and can't stand the EVF so I'm sticking...for now....plus I had a bad experience with Fuji and again hated the auto focus and EVF.....
I have toyed with getting the R as a backup to my 5D4 but I think that I will just push ahead and try for another 5d4 or wait for the version 5 or get a 6DII....so I'm still on the fence with those choices...but I think mirrorless is out for me at the moment.
I had a look at the Z series Nikon and The R and can't stand the EVF so I'm sticking...for now....plus I had a bad experience with Fuji and again hated the auto focus and EVF.....
I have toyed with getting the R as a backup to my 5D4 but I think that I will just push ahead and try for another 5d4 or wait for the version 5 or get a 6DII....so I'm still on the fence with those choices...but I think mirrorless is out for me at the moment.
Peter Gregg
Senior Member
The choices are all out there and allows each of us to choose. But since you specifically mentioned weddings by name, unless you do outdoor daylight weddings 100 percent, the choice for me is pretty clear.
The 1DX3 as a main camera along with your choice of an R or a 5D4 is the logical path. There are 2 key points here, and the weight or your eyes being tired are neither of those points.
The first key point in - there are NO - NONE - NADA mirrorless bodies from any company at all that trigger the autofocus assist IR light on the flash units. The mirrorless body focus systems are designed to filter out the IR light that the 580EX II or 600 EX emits so those lights simply to not come on. Rather than get almost instant focus in very dim light - you don't. So the first point is your highly developed flash system does not work to it's intended purposes. The cameras ARE in fact focusing in lower and lower light, but still have not come to the place where the help from the flash system in not needed. The 1DX3 and the 5D4 both will trigger the focus assist light. The R cameras will not.
Second key point - in my experience, the R camera with the adapter for the EF mount lenses is the best implementation of a lens mount adapter I have ever experienced. The EF lenses work on the R camera just as slick and smooth as if it were an RF mount lens.
So with a 1DX3 and the new R5 camera, you have the best of both worlds covered, with one gaining the RF mount, and the other staying true to what a DSLR was built for in terms of the flash system. Even an R would be appropriate with the exception of no dual card slots. So a 5D4 and an R together as a second choice is also a possibility for camera number 2.
Peter
The 1DX3 as a main camera along with your choice of an R or a 5D4 is the logical path. There are 2 key points here, and the weight or your eyes being tired are neither of those points.
The first key point in - there are NO - NONE - NADA mirrorless bodies from any company at all that trigger the autofocus assist IR light on the flash units. The mirrorless body focus systems are designed to filter out the IR light that the 580EX II or 600 EX emits so those lights simply to not come on. Rather than get almost instant focus in very dim light - you don't. So the first point is your highly developed flash system does not work to it's intended purposes. The cameras ARE in fact focusing in lower and lower light, but still have not come to the place where the help from the flash system in not needed. The 1DX3 and the 5D4 both will trigger the focus assist light. The R cameras will not.
Second key point - in my experience, the R camera with the adapter for the EF mount lenses is the best implementation of a lens mount adapter I have ever experienced. The EF lenses work on the R camera just as slick and smooth as if it were an RF mount lens.
So with a 1DX3 and the new R5 camera, you have the best of both worlds covered, with one gaining the RF mount, and the other staying true to what a DSLR was built for in terms of the flash system. Even an R would be appropriate with the exception of no dual card slots. So a 5D4 and an R together as a second choice is also a possibility for camera number 2.
Peter
sothankful
Active member
Good points Peter. I actually had watched your video about flash and mirrorless. Another reason for me to stay with DSLRs.
The R5 announcement sounds interesting but it will still be the same situation with flash.
The R5 announcement sounds interesting but it will still be the same situation with flash.
Chesapeake Imagery
Leading Member
This is me. You are a bit older than me, but nevertheless the mirrorless train came along too late for me. I have too much invested in EF and DSLR to change horses at this point. Maybe someday my kids can sell my gear to a museum and buy a mirrorless camera that gets installed in your eyeball or whatever will be out in the future! :-D
TJ Olympus
Forum Enthusiast
I'm a wedding shooter and I wouldn't even think of using anything else but Canon DSLRs.
Tried the latest full frame mirrorless wonders at Adorama recently....EVF's? Nah, no bueno. Perhaps for casual shooting but no way for weddings/events.
Tried the latest full frame mirrorless wonders at Adorama recently....EVF's? Nah, no bueno. Perhaps for casual shooting but no way for weddings/events.
richardperson
Leading Member
I agree with you, but am curious as to the main reasons. Eye fatigue, EVF delay? I have both, like my DSLRs a bit better, but my 28-70mm f/2 lens is fantastic for events, and only works on the Canon R, so I like the R because of the lens mainly.
Last edited:
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum