A point about the DSLR/.vs./MIRRORLESS

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
yray Senior Member • Posts: 2,418
Re: A point about the DSLR/.vs./MIRRORLESS

Bob Janes wrote:

yray wrote:

Bruce Ferjulian wrote:

So all the hype about mirrorless was for size and weight but so far all the mirrorless lenses are larger than their previous counterparts. This is not a scientific analysis but this is a 30k/ft comparison using a 50mm lens which shows the differences are still minor.

Yes, mirrorless is quiet, I'll give it that.

Unfortunately you may not be entirely up to date on this issue. Yes, if I recall correctly, in the beginning, years ago, mirrorless was marketed as a smaller and lighter alternative. I would call this bait and switch marketing, because it isn't. Well, if you stick with the APS-C size sensor, then the system like Fuji is indeed generally smaller and lighter. But anything with an FX size sensor will have lenses just as large as the DSLR lenses. The body might be indeed smaller and lighter, but with large lenses it is no advantage at all, the balance and handling are worse in my opinion.

Body sizes of full frame mirror less cameras have returned to dimensions similar to their analogue equivalents. We got used to the depth of DSLR bodies, but it was never an advantage.

Quiet it might be, but how quiet does it have to be for most uses? A D810 is pretty darn quiet too IMO.

There are a few things going for ML, sometimes it makes it easier to manually focus lenses, sometimes IBIS could be very helpful.

You can, of course use IBIS on a DSLR - both Sony and Pentax have done this.

But by and large you may spend a fortune "switching" and get the exact same pics you already get with the DSLR.

I do see real advantages of mirrorless on the supply side though. Purportedly ML is cheaper to make because of the dearth of moving parts and precision alignments compared to DSLR, but it doesn't mean at all that the sale price will be any lower.

But it does mean that production is more likely to be profitable - anything that encourages development should be welcomed.

Getting people to re-buy the same lenses because, well, they are supposed to be better is another advantage for camera companies. Whether these lenses are better in a way that will make your pictures meaningfully and visibly better is another question altogether of course. And, of course, it is an opportunity to sell new bodies.

The way I look at it, this mirrorless transition is of most interest to those who prize being on the cutting edge of technology, because mirrorless is where all the buzz is now. If this isn't a high priority, there is no there there.

Not at all. I was drawn to mirrorless for exactly the opposite reason - I wanted to use my old film era MF lenses on digital - mirror less allows this in a way that is far more satisfactory than an SLR.

Well, it so happens that I use old, film era MF lenses on ML too, only on a Fuji. Those retro-ish Fuji bodies fit well with the genuine retro lenses. Yes, APS-C sensor, but smaller, lighter, cheaper. I settled on X-T1 and X-H1 awhile back, and I don't see going any further in this direction, it is a corner case kind of use for me. Bought one Fuji lens, 18-55/2.8-4, a nice travel option, all other lenses I use on a Fuji are old Nikons. Works the same as on a Z, except it doesn't record the aperture, not a big deal.

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