I tried a mirrorless. Have you?

Hello KL Matt

KL Matt wrote:

So my brother-in-law had his new R6 along for Easter. He let me shoot a little with it and his L 85 1.4. Sweet glass, super nice ergonomics with the R6 body. Surprised that the R6 was definitely equal and maybe even superior build-quality wise to my K1.

Then I looked through the viewfinder. Tolerable at best. No dynamic range to the image at all. Everything looked like a cyber nightmare. Ok, so there was no perceptible lag, and I could even tell if something was in focus for the most part. And sure it was bright. Too bright actually. I just really hated it.

So I took his setup and my K1 II with DFA* 50 attached and shot the same scenes with both. The K1 was a joy to compose with. The scene looked beautiful through the lens like it always does. I could see the light.

My brother-in-law loves his new cam, and I do understand why. It's a great piece of kit.

about this:

But when he says he likes the electronic viewfinder because you see what you're going to get later as a file, I don't understand where that comes from. Those things have no dynamic range! It's not what you're getting in the file later IMO, not even close.

I think it's good for a JPG and when you will not PP it later. So yes, you see ca.what you get.

But the problem is: our modern cameras have such a great dynamic range which you use not when you simple get what you see via an EVF. We all know the examples where some post a black picture and when he did burn it in PP we see a scene. Ok, that's nice but the normal use is for me: I expose complicate dynamic range scenes to the bright areas and burn later the underexposed dark pats into the visibility. That could I start to do with my K5 and now with a KP and K1 anyway. The funny thing is: My eyes see such complicate dynamic range scenes absolute normal: I see the bright areas and also the details and objects in the dark areas.....but again, not my picture, where the dark areas are simply black. A simple example: you are in a room which have a lot windows. Your eyes see everything-outside and inside....but the dynamic range is too high for a picture. You can expose to the window scene and the room is than dark or black, or you expose to the room and the window scene is than pure white. I could use with my K5 or KP or K1 LV....but I see nothing in the dark parts on the monitor, when I set my exposure to the bright scene, same with my mobile or iPad or an EVF. So, all in all, I am happy that I can still use my eyes and there excellent dynamic range together with a mirror in a camera....for to see the scene, expose for the bright pars and burn the dark and underexposed areas later in PP. LV or an EVF is for high dynamic scenes not a good tool.

He says that viewfinder is supposed to be a very good one. If that's the state of the art, I may not have a mirrorless for a long time even though I have in fact been eyeing one.
Have you compared a mirrorless to your k1 or k3 III, and what's your take? If you regularly use both, how does the viewfinder thing work out in practice? Using the R3 had me longing for my K1. But I also long for a lightweight, compact 24 1.4 with eye AF. Looks like I'll never get that in K mount. Is it possible to enjoy both types of systems?

Matt

BTW: something I could never try out with a mirrorless in a shop is: What happens when you use a flash ? For example you use the camera in manual mode and the flash must do the exposure for the scene (in a litt Illuminate room) What do you see in the EVF than ? Or with backlit scenes, where you use the flash for fill-light for the person in this scene....what do you see from the dark person in the EVF ? This you could ask your brother in law.

best regards KPM2