That big Metz doesn't do TTL. It has its own built in flash meter.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Your experience with mirrorless cameras - are you convinced or not?
- Thread starter Holger Bargen
- Start date
Phil A Martin
Veteran Member
This is nonsense. I'm not sure what you hope to gain by insulting DSLR users?
Phil A Martin
Veteran Member
So what?To be honest, I mainly just sit and watch...
.. although I would sometimes talk to my team about how nice the light would look coming through the trees...
.. or what we would have to do to try and re-create that look, should the weather suddenly change on us just before everyone had arrived...
.. which you can be sure it will probably do, especially over on the far side of Scotland in October ;-)
MacLeod House & Lodge .
--
Cheers
Ashley
Phil A Martin
Veteran Member
I own that Metz and you are wrong, it did do TTL and even P-TTL.
ashleymorrison
Senior Member
An example of how I am able to tell you something without using any words - which is basically what photography is all about.
Last edited:
Most SLRs "should" have automatic PDAF calibration using the sensor. It still has to create a profile for each lens but it could hardly even be described as an inconvenience at this point.
The old aesthetic of twisting a bunch of dials and knobs is what attracts many people to shooting Fuji so that's not just an SLR thing.
The main reason I appreciate an SLR is the system can be left "At The Ready" for days on end with practically no battery drain. With an EVF you have to remember to switch the camera on and off constantly.
EVF Proximity Sensors are a thing but those systems can't tell the difference between your face and your body so the EVF will still end up running most of the time, or worst if you pack the camera in its bag with the power on you will be be greeted to a dead battery next time you pick it up.
Quite frankly this is one of the points that makes me more likely to use the rear LCD instead of the EVF, it's difficult to not notice when the rear LCD on. And an OLED EVF will get burn-in if you leave it on constantly.
The only reasonable solution to EVF shooting is to assume you will have the LCD/EVF turned on for whatever period of time you're using it, I have a fleet of a dozen batteries to keep my camera going now.
Except last time I went travelling there was a "stated" restriction on the number of batteries you can have in carry on and I could only bring half my battery supply, and the entire plan was to have extra batteries instead of a charger. In the end an SLR would have been used exponentially more just because I knew with an EVF the batteries had to be rationed and most of the time I chose not to use the camera.
SLR bodies are usually designed to be quite large but they don't need to be, the Canon SL1 was 407g with battery. Put 90D specs in that body and it would easily be my preferred system.
Holger Bargen
Veteran Member
That's a great system! Thank you for sharing. However I doubt that it would fit for me (not taking into consideration its price) as my favourite objects would find place multiple times on a field of ths size of the sensor. When I started into photography about 40 years ago I had a mentor who was shooting Hasselblatt. He used it even for bird photography.
mamallama
Forum Pro
R&D costs do not count in manufacturing costs. EVFs are electronic devices; flipping mirrors are complex mechanical devices. Electronic devices are cheaper to manufacturer than complex mechanical devices.
Guy Parsons
Forum Pro
The Alpha One simply uses a faster readout due to their stacked sensor design, it in no way is a global shutter. The little Sony RX100M7 does much the same with its ability to shoot short bursts at 90fps at full 20MP, still will be some jello though despite being a way quicker sensor.Watch a few sony A1 utubes, to catch up with the times
Sony have some rather expensive video cameras that use global shutters, though their name for it is something else. Maybe it's the F55 https://pro.sony/ue_US/products/digital-cinema-cameras/pmw-f55
In their blurb they never say "global shutter" but do extol its virtues as having no jello effect or rolling shutter. Shutter speeds up to 1/6000 sec with 4K video seems to be a feature.
CCD sensors manage global shutter likeness, but development now is always CMOS and gradually they are getting the readout up to useful speeds.
Just found a nice page at https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/video/tips-and-solutions/rolling-shutter-versus-global-shutter to tell us more than my feeble mind knows about the subject.
Quote: "While it may seem like all CMOS sensors have rolling shutter, that is certainly not the case. The Sony PMW-F55, Blackmagic Design Production Camera 4K, URSA 4K, and URSA Mini 4K, as well as the AJA CION, all use CMOS sensors with global shutter circuitry."
Super convinced. Won’t go back. Disclaimer - my only DSLR was a rebel Canon, so not a fair representation of the better optical viewfinders. However, what i adore, is the ability to add information to the VF and see exposure and DoF. Plus, focus peaking makes manual focus a breeze. Plus, eye AF is really helpful, so is having a fully covered sensor just about. My canon, plus the more expensive models actually, has a 45pt system only.
In my personal view, the viewfinder experience of my mirrorless camera is better in every single way than optical. Except, i could use my optical one to observe animal behaviour in reality, i.e. a lazy mans scope while waiting for a shot.
Another awesome feature is electronic shutter. Super quick, completely silent! (Note i still use mechanical for BiF etc)
In my personal view, the viewfinder experience of my mirrorless camera is better in every single way than optical. Except, i could use my optical one to observe animal behaviour in reality, i.e. a lazy mans scope while waiting for a shot.
Another awesome feature is electronic shutter. Super quick, completely silent! (Note i still use mechanical for BiF etc)
Last edited:
D
Donald B
Guest
You will have a hard time convincing me as my a7r2 shooting my daughters netball games shows practically no rolling shutter artefacts even on the ball traveling through the air at speed. the a1 would be on another planet.The Alpha One simply uses a faster readout due to their stacked sensor design, it in no way is a global shutter. The little Sony RX100M7 does much the same with its ability to shoot short bursts at 90fps at full 20MP, still will be some jello though despite being a way quicker sensor.Watch a few sony A1 utubes, to catch up with the times
Sony have some rather expensive video cameras that use global shutters, though their name for it is something else. Maybe it's the F55 https://pro.sony/ue_US/products/digital-cinema-cameras/pmw-f55
In their blurb they never say "global shutter" but do extol its virtues as having no jello effect or rolling shutter. Shutter speeds up to 1/6000 sec with 4K video seems to be a feature.
CCD sensors manage global shutter likeness, but development now is always CMOS and gradually they are getting the readout up to useful speeds.
Just found a nice page at https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/video/tips-and-solutions/rolling-shutter-versus-global-shutter to tell us more than my feeble mind knows about the subject.
Quote: "While it may seem like all CMOS sensors have rolling shutter, that is certainly not the case. The Sony PMW-F55, Blackmagic Design Production Camera 4K, URSA 4K, and URSA Mini 4K, as well as the AJA CION, all use CMOS sensors with global shutter circuitry."
Don
sportyaccordy
Forum Pro
Polls almost never go right
In any case my first ILC was a D40 but I've been shooting mirrorless since 2012 so............
It was always about timing and budget. When I bought my NEX-C3 there wasn't anything that compared for the money. When I bought my A7II I don't think there were any DSLRs with OSDPAF and flip out screens in my pricr range (for video). 6D2 kept me in Sony longer. When I bought my EOS R the Z5 hasn't been announced. Etc. etc.
In any case it has been good. If I could do it all over, I might have got an SLT-A67 or 77 with the 16-50 2.8 and maybe a Sigma 24 ART, then waited until 2017 or so to go FF.
In any case my first ILC was a D40 but I've been shooting mirrorless since 2012 so............
It was always about timing and budget. When I bought my NEX-C3 there wasn't anything that compared for the money. When I bought my A7II I don't think there were any DSLRs with OSDPAF and flip out screens in my pricr range (for video). 6D2 kept me in Sony longer. When I bought my EOS R the Z5 hasn't been announced. Etc. etc.
In any case it has been good. If I could do it all over, I might have got an SLT-A67 or 77 with the 16-50 2.8 and maybe a Sigma 24 ART, then waited until 2017 or so to go FF.
Guy Parsons
Forum Pro
A hand thrown large ball is hardly a test, maybe a very strongly kicked soccer ball or an F1 car going past at full speed would reveal the inadequacies of the usual rolling shutter.
Plane propellers of course are where the rolling shutter faults really stand out.
ashleymorrison
Senior Member
According to Phil w here:
WEAKNESS:
Big and heavy. No easy TTL without a plethora of absurdly expensive add-ons (Metz "SCA" TTL giving incomplete access to full camera flash functions) The instant hystogram from any digital SLR provides most accurate way of evaluating for correct exposure thus lack of TTL is no problem for me.
Personally, I never saw the need for it - but then again, it’s not something that I’d use that often or for anything that important, so limited knowledge - hence the questions.
--
Cheers
Ashley
WEAKNESS:
Big and heavy. No easy TTL without a plethora of absurdly expensive add-ons (Metz "SCA" TTL giving incomplete access to full camera flash functions) The instant hystogram from any digital SLR provides most accurate way of evaluating for correct exposure thus lack of TTL is no problem for me.
Personally, I never saw the need for it - but then again, it’s not something that I’d use that often or for anything that important, so limited knowledge - hence the questions.
--
Cheers
Ashley
Exactly.
EVF vs. OVF is often far from the top consideration when people buy a camera.
For the last 20 years Canon and Nikon have made a point of crippling the overall feature set of low end camera bodies, the Mirrorless market took advantage of that.
It used to be that you were forced to spend $3,000 just to have an extra dial and some custom presets.
If SLR as a format is ever going to die out, it will be entirely due to self imposed restrictions.
Last edited:
Phil A Martin
Veteran Member
This is the digital version not the one I own.According to Phil w here:
WEAKNESS:
Big and heavy. No easy TTL without a plethora of absurdly expensive add-ons (Metz "SCA" TTL giving incomplete access to full camera flash functions) The instant hystogram from any digital SLR provides most accurate way of evaluating for correct exposure thus lack of TTL is no problem for me.
Personally, I never saw the need for it - but then again, it’s not something that I’d use that often or for anything that important, so limited knowledge - hence the questions.
As far as I'm concerned, the SCA system was excellent and gave full functionality on the film cameras I used. I cannot vouch for digital cameras and obviously as camera TTL systems became more sophisticated, a flash of this age might not have kept up.
As for the complaints about the weight, this is nonsense. It takes six double AA batteries or an equivalent rechargeable unit, so what does he expect? If he thinks this is heavy, he should try the CL 60 version. Ergonomically it handles better than a hotshoe flash, if anything it supports the camera rather than making it top heavy like the latter.
I think thats a great point actually. My rebel DSLR annoyed me to death with 1 control ring and that was it, no custom functions..... For what was a used XT3 for about £799, i think similiar to the 850d rebel actually in price, i got dedicated dials, millions of custom buttons, custom AF features not available on the rebels, a big bright viewfinder, a joystick, 2 card slots, etc. I know its not fair to compare old used vs newer 850d, but i think even new, an XT3 for not that much more money, offers so so so much more for my money.
You have to get a 90d to actually get some controls with Canon. and to be fair, its not only DSLRs where they do this. Look at the m50 and the lack of controls versus an XT20 or even a Sony A6xxx.
tony field
Forum Pro
An interjection.... the general indication of the effect of a cameras rolling shutter is directly related to The Flash synchronisation speed and by my shooting I have noticed this. For example buy ancient Canon FTB had a flash sync speed of 1/60 of a second an could produce a rolling shutter effect rather easily particularly with shots that were significantly panned. In a similar way ancient thread mount Leicas had a flash sync speed of 1/25 of a second or thereabouts .When the flash sync speed increased to 1/300 sec the effect of the Rolling shutter significantly diminished in a visual context however is technically always present
Of course this is qualified by cameras with true Global shutters such as the Nikon D1 series in which the only function of the shutter was to get out of the way so the camera could directly control the Global shutter
--
Charles Darwin: "ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge."
tony
Last edited:
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum