Reading mode: Light Dark

Who here is sticking with DSLR's over mirrorless?

Go to last post
richardperson said:
tommynikon said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
I think it was the combination of eye fatigue and the slight lag of the EVF but I only spent 10 minutes with them on a few occasions. Perhaps I found the EVF distracting in a way? Either way, I didn't like them at all. They just feel different....but to each their own.

Also there's the thing about changing lenses which I do somewhat often at a wedding shoot since I'm mostly using primes. I don't turn off my cameras when doing so and haven't had any issues, I'm careful......and I'd never change lenses on a beach wedding shoot. Period.

However, changing lenses on a mirrorless out in the field? Heck no!!

I've read up on that R 28-70mm f/2 and yes, I'm sure it's phenomenal....as most L lenses are!
 
Last edited:
Gave it some more thought. This is the dilemma Canon is struggling with:

They have a full line of trusted EF lenses they can sell for relative little money. The more they make the better.

But how many more EF lenses can they realistically expect to sell, when transitioning into a mirrorless line of cameras and R bodies - that everyone knows is the future?

Every time they get someone to buy a R camera body that person may still buy a few odd EF-lenses, but much more likely some of the new R lenses - especially as this line expands. Meanwhile people buying new DSLR bodies will likely be people holding a stock of EF lenses already. Or even worse - if they get an EF lens they will get a used lens - which soon enough will flood the market.

In practical terms this calls for the following for Canon;

1) Get the large and financially important enthusiast group to switch to R models asap also to start making money out of R lenses.

2) Keep a range of lower end DSLRs (topping off with the 6Dx) to get people cheaply into the Canon brand and sell a few of the most profitable EF lenses to them (remember buyers of low end DSLRs very seldom buy more than one lens! Its the enthusiast and pro group that buy several lenses.)

3) Keep a very high end DSLR for the one group that will need and want it: pro sports and magazine photographers that cannot rely on the R-series just yet and who still have a large stock of EF lenses that they are unlikely to replace because the business is in a general ongoing crisis. Canon will want these to stay brand loyal.

For the rest of us this leaves us with a likely choice: get the new Canon DSLR monster - or go with the R line. Canon will make a lot of money out of every one of those they sell as the high end models are the ones making the best margin. If you go with the R that's a win for Canon too.

Meanwhile Canon can let the 5DIV "ride on". It can easily go for another 2-3-4 years during the transition. Its cheap to make by now and an OK model for those enthusiasts not willing to go with the R yet and/or not willing to level up to the pro DSLR body.
 
I agree with your theory.

I guess there will be a new 6D mk3 later this year as I don’t think an R6 is coming so close to the release of the R5.

I thought there might also be a 7D mk3, but I’m not sure as there were also rumours of an R7 with fast readout apsc sensor and low blackout.

Canon have hinted that several sensor types are in production to go with their RF mount lenses. These might be :

45mp R5,

32mp R7

80mp R? - a high res / low speed studio & landscape camera.

Who knows? 😀
 
maiaibing said:
Gave it some more thought. This is the dilemma Canon is struggling with:

They have a full line of trusted EF lenses they can sell for relative little money. The more they make the better.

But how many more EF lenses can they realistically expect to sell, when transitioning into a mirrorless line of cameras and R bodies - that everyone knows is the future?

Every time they get someone to buy a R camera body that person may still buy a few odd EF-lenses, but much more likely some of the new R lenses - especially as this line expands. Meanwhile people buying new DSLR bodies will likely be people holding a stock of EF lenses already. Or even worse - if they get an EF lens they will get a used lens - which soon enough will flood the market.

In practical terms this calls for the following for Canon;

1) Get the large and financially important enthusiast group to switch to R models asap also to start making money out of R lenses.

2) Keep a range of lower end DSLRs (topping off with the 6Dx) to get people cheaply into the Canon brand and sell a few of the most profitable EF lenses to them (remember buyers of low end DSLRs very seldom buy more than one lens! Its the enthusiast and pro group that buy several lenses.)

3) Keep a very high end DSLR for the one group that will need and want it: pro sports and magazine photographers that cannot rely on the R-series just yet and who still have a large stock of EF lenses that they are unlikely to replace because the business is in a general ongoing crisis. Canon will want these to stay brand loyal.

For the rest of us this leaves us with a likely choice: get the new Canon DSLR monster - or go with the R line. Canon will make a lot of money out of every one of those they sell as the high end models are the ones making the best margin. If you go with the R that's a win for Canon too.

Meanwhile Canon can let the 5DIV "ride on". It can easily go for another 2-3-4 years during the transition. Its cheap to make by now and an OK model for those enthusiasts not willing to go with the R yet and/or not willing to level up to the pro DSLR body.
Click to expand...
Na.
 
Don't worry about it, by the time DSLR's go away for good, mirrorless cameras will be perfect, relatively speaking.

The new Canon camera that has been announced looks flat out amazing.

I shoot with the 5D Mark IV but when I did shoot with the Sony A7R for a year I rarely used the EVF. I found myself mostly just using the screen on the back, no different than how it feels taking a picture with a cell phone.

You only need to use the EVF on a mirrorless camera if it's bright outside and you can't see the back of the screen or if you're really shaky and you can hold it better that way.

I'd LOVE to not have to use view finders again except when needed. I much prefer just looking at a screen on the back. I feel like my compositions are better that way.
 
I am not sold on mirrorless. If mirrorless offered small bodies with small lenses like the Leica M bodies then I would be interested. The lenses are huge for the EOS R and I am satisfied with DSLRs already.

Not only that but the equivalent lenses are significantly more expensive. Ie EF 50mm 1.2 vs the RF mount version.
 
BlueCosmo5050 said:
You only need to use the EVF on a mirrorless camera if it's bright outside and you can't see the back of the screen or if you're really shaky and you can hold it better that way.
Click to expand...
No.

There are those of us with older eyes that cannot focus on both the live-view and the subject with the same glasses prescription. We would HAVE to use EVF all the time because it has the diopter adjustment.
 
BlueCosmo5050 said:
Don't worry about it, by the time DSLR's go away for good, mirrorless cameras will be perfect, relatively speaking.

The new Canon camera that has been announced looks flat out amazing.

I shoot with the 5D Mark IV but when I did shoot with the Sony A7R for a year I rarely used the EVF. I found myself mostly just using the screen on the back, no different than how it feels taking a picture with a cell phone.

You only need to use the EVF on a mirrorless camera if it's bright outside and you can't see the back of the screen or if you're really shaky and you can hold it better that way.
Click to expand...
Mirrorless or DSLR is irrelevant in regards to the most stable shooting method - which remains looking through the VF. I don't want to normally shoot with a ILC held out in front of me. I only use the rear LCD when tripod-mounted or for over- or under-hand shots.
BlueCosmo5050 said:
I'd LOVE to not have to use view finders again except when needed. I much prefer just looking at a screen on the back. I feel like my compositions are better that way.
Click to expand...
To each their own. I tried an LCD-only cam previously, didn't like it at all.

Mark
 
I always hated the EVF. But the EVF on the gfx is great. I dont like going back to the OVF on my canon, there's just too much guesswork.

And I was a real hater. But as time goes on its become indispensable. I get the shot in way less attempts.

I can imagine the RS or R5 or whatever will be second to none and they wont make a DSLR of the same caliber until they can do a hybrid OVF /EVF.
 
tommynikon said:
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.
Click to expand...
I switched from 2 Canon 1dx2’s to EOs r’s for my wedding and event photography and couldn’t be happier.

the rf lenses are spectacular and the accuracy of the r’s af at f1.2 cannot be matched by a DSLR.

Each system has good and bad points but saying you can’t use mirrorless for professional event and wedding shoots is very naive.
 
Magnumdarkstar said:
I am not sold on mirrorless. If mirrorless offered small bodies with small lenses like the Leica M bodies then I would be interested. The lenses are huge for the EOS R and I am satisfied with DSLRs already.

Not only that but the equivalent lenses are significantly more expensive. Ie EF 50mm 1.2 vs the RF mount version.
Click to expand...
My 5x7 mirrorless was made in 1926 and still works well. Still has the original bellows with no light leaks. Good negatives, relatively lightweight and there are more than 500 lenses that will work on it.
 
BlueCosmo5050 said:
I'd LOVE to not have to use view finders again except when needed. I much prefer just looking at a screen on the back.
Click to expand...
Not conducive for a heavy camera/lens or longer zoom lens
BlueCosmo5050 said:
I feel like my compositions are better that way.
Click to expand...
Not longer focal lengths. You must be using wide or super wide angle
 
Canon is in their first generation FF mirrorless, and figure another few generations will see things further improve to the point where you don't talk about it in the context of working around the limitations.

I want a 5D4 (well, 5D5) with an EVF. I don't want a 'mirrorless' camera, I want a professional DSLR with an EVF.
 
BlueCosmo5050 said:
You only need to use the EVF on a mirrorless camera if it's bright outside and you can't see the back of the screen or if you're really shaky and you can hold it better that way.
Click to expand...
Nonsense. Sorry to be blunt, but that is ludicrous. Any competent photographer knows that holding the camera properly is one of the vital basic skills. If you can't use a tripod, then you hold the camera close to your body, pay attention to your breathing, and take advantage of any opportunistic supports (e.g., lamp posts) to increase your steadiness. You do not hold the camera at arms length, especially not when the light is anything less than brilliant.

(Some cameras give you no option. My Powershot G9X II is an example. Naturally, it is very limited by the lack of a viewfinder and is useful only when the light is good. But it fits in a shirt pocket, so it still has its role. One should never make the mistake of confusing it with a real camera though.)
 
Last edited:
Tannin said:
BlueCosmo5050 said:
You only need to use the EVF on a mirrorless camera if it's bright outside and you can't see the back of the screen or if you're really shaky and you can hold it better that way.
Click to expand...
Nonsense. Sorry to be blunt, but that is ludicrous. Any competent photographer knows that holding the camera properly is one of the vital basic skills. If you can't use a tripod, then you hold the camera close to your body, pay attention to your breathing, and take advantage of any opportunistic supports (e.g., lamp posts) to increase your steadiness. You do not hold the camera at arms length, especially not when the light is anything less than brilliant.
Click to expand...
Using the back screen does not mean holding at arms length. It is usually 30-40cm from my eyes, with my elbows resting on my body, quite stable. I have not done "scientific" experiments but I have noticed that I am quite successful getting sharp shots at 1/FL speeds with my 35mm and 50mm primes.
 
sothankful said:
I am in a unique position that I am starting over with my camera system.

I keep wavering between a 1DX MK III / 5D MK IV combo or going with 2 R bodies.

I honestly like the DSLR'S better. I have shot mirrorless in the past and find that after shooting a long wedding day my eyes are shot from the EVF. My concern is that if I invest $30,000 in an SLR system it won't be supported in 10 years.

I really just don't like the R bodies. The RF lenses look amazing though.
Click to expand...
i know it is not gonna happen but if canon decides to produce a 5DsR2, i'd get one in a hurry and that would be my last dSLR for as long as i can hoist a camera/lens (i am in my late 60s). after that i couldn't care less. i think i am a DSLR guy because i have a slew of EF "L" lenses to boot ;-) never cared for MLC.
 
Magnumdarkstar said:
I am not sold on mirrorless. If mirrorless offered small bodies with small lenses like the Leica M bodies then I would be interested. The lenses are huge for the EOS R and I am satisfied with DSLRs already.

Not only that but the equivalent lenses are significantly more expensive. Ie EF 50mm 1.2 vs the RF mount version.
Click to expand...
The people CRIED for less aberrations and more resolution in an L series body! You can’t make a lens smaller but better optically and expect the price to stay the same. Part of that optical design to reduce aberrations was to make it big and reduce cost so it’s not a 15,000$ lens!
 
Pocket Lint said:
Magnumdarkstar said:
I am not sold on mirrorless. If mirrorless offered small bodies with small lenses like the Leica M bodies then I would be interested. The lenses are huge for the EOS R and I am satisfied with DSLRs already.

Not only that but the equivalent lenses are significantly more expensive. Ie EF 50mm 1.2 vs the RF mount version.
Click to expand...
The people CRIED for less aberrations and more resolution in an L series body! You can’t make a lens smaller but better optically and expect the price to stay the same. Part of that optical design to reduce aberrations was to make it big and reduce cost so it’s not a 15,000$ lens!
Click to expand...
Interesting I guess thats why Leica glass is so expensive a 50mm f/2 is almost 9k vs a 50mm 1.8 ef
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top