I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.

Started Mar 10, 2014 | Discussions
pew pew
pew pew Contributing Member • Posts: 775
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.
9

Well canon have the eosm and nikon has the v1, both are mirrorless and those are appreciated by canikon users.

The most annoying mirrorless crusaders imo, are the ones from the 4/3, not all, but the really annoyng ones are always 4/3 fanboys-

 pew pew's gear list:pew pew's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-3N Sony a6000
photoholiko Senior Member • Posts: 1,736
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.

I use mirror less aps-c, mirror less m/43 and DSLRs and I love them all. By the way, where is the OP?

 photoholiko's gear list:photoholiko's gear list
Canon EOS 400D Olympus PEN E-PL1 Canon EOS 70D Epson PhotoPC 850 Zoom Minolta DiMAGE 7 +25 more
Midwest Forum Pro • Posts: 17,161
Re: Same thing when PCs replaced Typewritters
1

Rossuziers wrote:

Midwest wrote:

Lab D wrote:

It may even be the same people.

I remember reading how MP3s would never replace CDs because they had inferior quality. Of course the DSLR guys hate CDs and think they will never replace LPs.

I don't know where you came up with that from but it's baloney.

Yeah, maybe so but ya got to admit it's pretty funny

Sad, lame and pathetic are not funny.

Midwest Forum Pro • Posts: 17,161
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.

Bill Robb wrote:

I think it is actually hatred for the Mirrorless Crusader types.

I hate to ask whatever happened to that yo yo.

hdkhang Regular Member • Posts: 169
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.
3

Pantyhose Bandit wrote:

SNIP...

Just need to reply to this because your username made me laugh more than it should have.

Mark B. wrote:

Just another Canon shooter wrote:

Lab D wrote:

I remember reading how MP3s would never replace CDs because they had inferior quality. Of course the DSLR guys hate CDs and think they will never replace LPs.

MP3s do have inferior quality.

No doubt to an audiophile. But for the majority of users the difference can't be heard. Besides, I can't imagine strapping a portable CD player to my arm at the gym instead of my iPod Nano I've also adapted to using the iPod conection in my car stereo instead of keeping a stack of CDs.

Mark

Your post further highlights what some people have been pointing out in response to OP. There is nothing stopping a person from loading their portable music player with lossless audio. Portable flash memory based media players (or hard drive based) does not preclude lossless audio, just as mirrorless does not preclude full frame sized sensors.

Dr Hal wrote:

First of all I must say that I am very happy with my mirrorless cameras but I could not care less whether or not other people are using DSLR's, Point and Shoots, Bridge Cameras, or even cell phone or I pad cameras. I hope that all of them thrive and that the manufacturers keep making them all better and better. I love photography and have been buying and using cameras from the time I was thirteen years old and my dad bought me a Retina IIIC in 1957. Photography has allowed me to see the world in special ways and has truly enriched my life and I dare say that most of us on this or any of the other forums feel the same way. Please calm down and stop all the stupid mean comments back and forth. Just because we live in a crazy "polarized" world, there is no need for us to get crazy about different types of cameras. These are merely choices.

Hal

I hope it is clearer from the responses that your post does not ring true. Those who decided mirrorless was not for them just post as such, that it does not meet their needs. Those who have fully embraced mirrorless tend towards posts such as:

rj conklin wrote:

fear and ignorance cause hatred.

Jaberwok wrote:

Canikon trolls and dinosaurs.

And a whole host of others... see posts by "Lab D", "Ontario Gone", "n3eg" all very familiar names whenever mirrorless (but more specifically m43) needs "defending" by someone who finds them not fit for their needs.

In fact, you are more likely to find mirrorless users hating on mirrorless cameras more than DSLR users. What I mean by that are the vocal m43 minority that slam Nikon 1 series, Eos M series, Sony NEX series, Fuji series. Either the lenses are not small enough for the sacrifice in quality, or they are too large for the small gain in image quality. This stems from their belief that only a goldilocks approach to photography is valid, any other preferences are based on fear, ignorance, hatred, stubbornness and delusion. It is these types that you should be directing your OP towards (as well as anyone who derides others choice/preference). It is fine to like what you like, just don't deny the realities. e.g. f/2 = f/2 = f/2 but somehow 50mm = 100mm???

 hdkhang's gear list:hdkhang's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Nikon 1 AW1 Nikon D810 Olympus E-PL7 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED +13 more
Mellowmark Contributing Member • Posts: 679
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.

Just another Canon shooter wrote:

I think it is not. First, there are super cheap crop solutions like the 18-55 and 55-250 lenses, which are at least as good as the 14-42 and 40-15 lenses mentioned earlier, and cheaper. Next, the fast m43 lenses are ridiculously big, heavy, and expensive; and only f/4 equivalent but the m43 forums are full of denial about that.

Expensive, yes but ridiculously big and heavy? (I assume you mean the fast [2.8] m43 zoom lenses - some of the primes are tiny). They may well be F4 equivalent in terms of depth of field (which can be an advantage and a disadvantage) but it's still F2.8 in terms of exposure.

Panasonic 35-100 f2.8 size comparison with Canon 70-200 f2.8:

http://camerasize.com/compact/#472.366,469.7,ha,t

(Although on a crop sensor the 70-210 does give you the equivalent reach of 300mm on full frame whereas the Panasonic is only the equivalent of 200mm on full frame). The new Olympus (75-150 f2.8) will be 300mm equivalent but I don't think the size and weight have been announced for that yet? It will no doubt be bigger and heavier than the Panasonic but I am not sure by how much..

Olympus 12-40 f2.8 size comparison with Canon 17-55 f2.8 (which are equivalent focal lengths on a crop [APS-C] sensor)

http://camerasize.com/compact/#469.303,289.412,ha,t

 Mellowmark's gear list:Mellowmark's gear list
Sony RX100 Olympus OM-D E-M10
Just another Canon shooter
Just another Canon shooter Senior Member • Posts: 4,691
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.
2

Mellowmark wrote:

Just another Canon shooter wrote:

I think it is not. First, there are super cheap crop solutions like the 18-55 and 55-250 lenses, which are at least as good as the 14-42 and 40-15 lenses mentioned earlier, and cheaper. Next, the fast m43 lenses are ridiculously big, heavy, and expensive; and only f/4 equivalent but the m43 forums are full of denial about that.

Expensive, yes but ridiculously big and heavy?

Yes.

14-35/2 (not even wide enough): $2,300, 900g. Canon 24-70/4 IS: $800 on Adorama right now, 600g, 3cm shorter.

35-100/2: $2,500, 1.65kg. Canon 70-200/4 IS: $1,200 right now, 760g (!), 3cm thinner and 4cm shorter.

(I assume you mean the fast [2.8] m43 zoom lenses - some of the primes are tiny). They may well be F4 equivalent in terms of depth of field

Make that f/5.6 FF equivalent.

(which can be an advantage and a disadvantage) but it's still F2.8 in terms of exposure.

Here we go! Why is the same exposure for two different formats even a consideration? The phone in my signature is even better then (f/2.5)?

 Just another Canon shooter's gear list:Just another Canon shooter's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye Canon EF 35mm F1.4L USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Canon EF 135mm F2L USM +4 more
Heaven is for real
Heaven is for real Senior Member • Posts: 2,320
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.

Dr Hal wrote:

First of all I must say that I am very happy with my mirrorless cameras but I could not care less whether or not other people are using DSLR's, Point and Shoots, Bridge Cameras, or even cell phone or I pad cameras. I hope that all of them thrive and that the manufacturers keep making them all better and better. I love photography and have been buying and using cameras from the time I was thirteen years old and my dad bought me a Retina IIIC in 1957. Photography has allowed me to see the world in special ways and has truly enriched my life and I dare say that most of us on this or any of the other forums feel the same way. Please calm down and stop all the stupid mean comments back and forth. Just because we live in a crazy "polarized" world, there is no need for us to get crazy about different types of cameras. These are merely choices.

Hal

It is buyer's remorse. They are kicking themselves for wasting  their money buying outdated bulky dinosaur DSLR cameras!

 Heaven is for real's gear list:Heaven is for real's gear list
Nikon D7000 Sony SLT-A77 Sony Alpha a7 Sony DT 16-50mm F2.8 SSM Sony FE 35mm F2.8 +2 more
Midwest Forum Pro • Posts: 17,161
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.
2

rj conklin wrote:

fear and ignorance cause hatred.

On the other hand, insecurity causes suspicion and a persecution complex.

Donald Chin
Donald Chin Veteran Member • Posts: 5,757
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.
5

Dr Hal wrote:

First of all I must say that I am very happy with my mirrorless cameras but I could not care less whether or not other people are using DSLR's, Point and Shoots, Bridge Cameras, or even cell phone or I pad cameras. I hope that all of them thrive and that the manufacturers keep making them all better and better. I love photography and have been buying and using cameras from the time I was thirteen years old and my dad bought me a Retina IIIC in 1957. Photography has allowed me to see the world in special ways and has truly enriched my life and I dare say that most of us on this or any of the other forums feel the same way. Please calm down and stop all the stupid mean comments back and forth. Just because we live in a crazy "polarized" world, there is no need for us to get crazy about different types of cameras. These are merely choices.

Hal

It is buyer's remorse. They are kicking themselves for wasting  their money buying outdated bulky dinosaur DSLR cameras!

It's more likely for those who buy those over priced, under performance mirrorless camera.
--
http://www.fotop.net/DonaldChin

Leonard Migliore
Leonard Migliore Forum Pro • Posts: 14,816
You forgot to put in a smiley

Heaven is for real wrote:

Dr Hal wrote:

First of all I must say that I am very happy with my mirrorless cameras but I could not care less whether or not other people are using DSLR's, Point and Shoots, Bridge Cameras, or even cell phone or I pad cameras. I hope that all of them thrive and that the manufacturers keep making them all better and better. I love photography and have been buying and using cameras from the time I was thirteen years old and my dad bought me a Retina IIIC in 1957. Photography has allowed me to see the world in special ways and has truly enriched my life and I dare say that most of us on this or any of the other forums feel the same way. Please calm down and stop all the stupid mean comments back and forth. Just because we live in a crazy "polarized" world, there is no need for us to get crazy about different types of cameras. These are merely choices.

Hal

It is buyer's remorse. They are kicking themselves for wasting their money buying outdated bulky dinosaur DSLR cameras!

I choose to believe that, in combination with your user name, you are a master of irony.

-- hide signature --

Leonard Migliore

 Leonard Migliore's gear list:Leonard Migliore's gear list
Canon PowerShot G12 Sony RX100 III Nikon D300 Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +12 more
CharlesB58 Veteran Member • Posts: 8,429
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.
4

Photography is heavily gear-dependent. I've been involved in photography for over 35 years and there have always been people who argue for their preferred gear (I once endured a 15 minute rant by someone trying to prove that his beloved Petri kit was better than the Nikon F2 system). People can become emotionally invested in their choice of gear for various reasons, including my next point.

Photography is also an artform in which technical proficiency carries a lot of weight (it's hard to accuse a painterbof technical failure if his style produces paintings that "lack sharpness"). However, for some, the technical aspects supercede or completely displace aesthetic concerns. The results given gear achieves becomes a goal in itself. This results in some people directly associating their success as photographers, and thus their personal worth, with their gear. Some with this attitude can understandably become defensive if they encounter something which makes it seem like their gear is inferior because to them, that means their photos are inferior.

Then, some people are just elitist whankers who always have to put others down to feel good about themselves.

My take: go out and enjoy making photos with your gear of choice.
--
If, in my lifetime, I will have produced just one image that makes a real difference in the life of another, I will have achieved my highest goal as a photographer.

http://ikkens.zenfolio.com/

http://sarob-w.deviantart.com/

Mellowmark Contributing Member • Posts: 679
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.

Just another Canon shooter wrote:

Yes.

14-35/2 (not even wide enough): $2,300, 900g. Canon 24-70/4 IS: $800 on Adorama right now, 600g, 3cm shorter.

35-100/2: $2,500, 1.65kg. Canon 70-200/4 IS: $1,200 right now, 760g (!), 3cm thinner and 4cm shorter.

Those are not m43 lenses!   So you have totally ignored my comparison using m43 lenses and made your own one with non m43 lenses?

And an f2.8 lens is an f2.8 lens in terms of exposure. As regards DOF F2.0 or F2.8 on m43 does not equal f5.6 on APS-C.   I use both a m43 camera and an APS-C dslr - the main advantage of the former is the smaller size and weight while for some situations a dslr is a better choice - hence I have both. If I thought m43 did everything I wanted I would only use m43, but it doesn't - so I don't.  Depth of field difference between APS-C and m43 is fairly small and image quality is also fairly similar. If narrower depth of field is required and budget allows then that is what full frame is for. I don't see either m43 or APS-C as 'better' - both have their disadvantages and advantages.

 Mellowmark's gear list:Mellowmark's gear list
Sony RX100 Olympus OM-D E-M10
Houseqatz Forum Member • Posts: 74
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.
1

Mellowmark wrote:

And an f2.8 lens is an f2.8 lens in terms of exposure.

t-stops are not f-stops

Just another Canon shooter
Just another Canon shooter Senior Member • Posts: 4,691
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.
2

Mellowmark wrote:

And an f2.8 lens is an f2.8 lens in terms of exposure.

So? You ignored my question why is that of any interest.

 Just another Canon shooter's gear list:Just another Canon shooter's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye Canon EF 35mm F1.4L USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Canon EF 135mm F2L USM +4 more
Mellowmark Contributing Member • Posts: 679
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.

Houseqatz wrote:

Mellowmark wrote:

And an f2.8 lens is an f2.8 lens in terms of exposure.

t-stops are not f-stops

Yes but on a good prime lens the t-stop should be close to the f stop - regardless of whether it is a m43 lens or an APS-C lens. In practical terms if I am for example taking photos of a gig, I get pretty much the same f2.8 1/125 and ISO 1600 exposure when I switch between using my dslr and m43 camera - which is all that matters to me as I want the shutter speed to be 1/125 and to keep the ISO at 1600 to get the shot(s).

 Mellowmark's gear list:Mellowmark's gear list
Sony RX100 Olympus OM-D E-M10
Just another Canon shooter
Just another Canon shooter Senior Member • Posts: 4,691
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.
2

Mellowmark wrote:

Houseqatz wrote:

Mellowmark wrote:

And an f2.8 lens is an f2.8 lens in terms of exposure.

t-stops are not f-stops

Yes but on a good prime lens the t-stop should be close to the f stop - regardless of whether it is a m43 lens or an APS-C lens. In practical terms if I am for example taking photos of a gig, I get pretty much the same f2.8 1/125 and ISO 1600 exposure when I switch between using my dslr and m43 camera - which is all that matters to me as I want the shutter speed to be 1/125 and to keep the ISO at 1600 to get the shot(s).

Why would you want to keep the same ISO on both?

 Just another Canon shooter's gear list:Just another Canon shooter's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye Canon EF 35mm F1.4L USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Canon EF 135mm F2L USM +4 more
Mellowmark Contributing Member • Posts: 679
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.

Just another Canon shooter wrote:

Mellowmark wrote:

And an f2.8 lens is an f2.8 lens in terms of exposure.

So? You ignored my question why is that of any interest.

Because I agreed with you - it isn't of interest, but my earlier reply was to your comment that "the fast m43 lenses are ridiculously big, heavy, and expensive; and only f/4 equivalent" - to which I replied that a) they are not ridiculously big and heavy and that the f4 equivalent related to depth of field but not exposure.

 Mellowmark's gear list:Mellowmark's gear list
Sony RX100 Olympus OM-D E-M10
Just another Canon shooter
Just another Canon shooter Senior Member • Posts: 4,691
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.
2

Mellowmark wrote:

Just another Canon shooter wrote:

Mellowmark wrote:

And an f2.8 lens is an f2.8 lens in terms of exposure.

So? You ignored my question why is that of any interest.

Because I agreed with you - it isn't of interest, but my earlier reply was to your comment that "the fast m43 lenses are ridiculously big, heavy, and expensive; and only f/4 equivalent" - to which I replied that a) they are not ridiculously big and heavy and that the f4 equivalent related to depth of field but not exposure.

The exposure argument is as relevant as saying: they have f/2 printed on them.

 Just another Canon shooter's gear list:Just another Canon shooter's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye Canon EF 35mm F1.4L USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Canon EF 135mm F2L USM +4 more
Mellowmark Contributing Member • Posts: 679
Re: I do not understand the HATRED for mirrorless cameras on this forum.

Just another Canon shooter wrote:

Mellowmark wrote:

Houseqatz wrote:

Mellowmark wrote:

And an f2.8 lens is an f2.8 lens in terms of exposure.

t-stops are not f-stops

Yes but on a good prime lens the t-stop should be close to the f stop - regardless of whether it is a m43 lens or an APS-C lens. In practical terms if I am for example taking photos of a gig, I get pretty much the same f2.8 1/125 and ISO 1600 exposure when I switch between using my dslr and m43 camera - which is all that matters to me as I want the shutter speed to be 1/125 and to keep the ISO at 1600 to get the shot(s).

Why would you want to keep the same ISO on both?

Sorry should read 'keep the ISO at 1600 or less' - as in not wanting to go higher and increase noise. I am just saying if I point the 2 different cameras both with 2.8 lenses at the same scene I get the same exposure.  So in the hypothetical example given I get the same 1/125 f2.8 ISO 1600 photo. It matters not which one I use as both will pretty much do the same job aside from a small difference in depth of field.

 Mellowmark's gear list:Mellowmark's gear list
Sony RX100 Olympus OM-D E-M10
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads