Follow up - Demise of the DSLR
Dec 28, 2015 17:36:50 #
sirlensalot
Loc: Arizona
Mark7829 wrote:
You're right, mine only does 7 fps!!!!! OMG I am going to die!!!!!! Those 3 extra fps are going to make me the new Ansel Adams - not!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So you think the difference between 7 FPS and 11 FPS is 3 FPS? Quite the fantasy you've got going on two points! lol
Dec 28, 2015 18:06:16 #
INshooter wrote:
My gut feeling is that mirrorless is the future. I'm just hoping that Nikon makes a full frame version that will take the lenses I now have! :P
That is such an obvious, rational and sensible move the likelihood is it will happen is minuscule. Last time I read about an interview with a Nikon representative, his reply to similar question about Mirrorless in the future was that they are fully committed to the 1 Nikon series. I'm afraid that is an example of how existing dominant firms often die when faced with new technology that challenges the existing product.
Dec 28, 2015 18:59:47 #
INshooter wrote:
My gut feeling is that mirrorless is the future. I'm just hoping that Nikon makes a full frame version that will take the lenses I now have! :P
The whole point is to make the entire system smaller, with better optical performance, lighter weight, less bulk, and fewer moving parts. Using existing glass, made for that deep dSLR mirror box, would be counter-productive!
Dec 28, 2015 19:00:35 #
Peterff wrote:
A comment at the time was that "The paperless office is about as likely as the paperless bathroom!"
Yeah but a lot of the world uses bidets and gets their bottoms cleaner than we do. :lol: :lol:
Dec 28, 2015 19:03:14 #
MW wrote:
That is such an obvious, rational and sensible move the likelihood is it will happen is minuscule. Last time I read about an interview with a Nikon representative, his reply to similar question about Mirrorless in the future was that they are fully committed to the 1 Nikon series. I'm afraid that is an example of how existing dominant firms often die when faced with new technology that challenges the existing product.
The Nikon 1 is okay for what it is, but is at the bottom of the mirrorless heap.
Dec 28, 2015 19:33:34 #
kb6kgx
Loc: Simi Valley, CA
John_F wrote:
With respect to weight, poster is correct. But in terms of shape the occupied volume can be smaller. But in terms of moving parts, mirrorless presents one less moving thing to go haywire.
I understand about size and weight, but how is a mirrorless camera able to get higher continuous shutter speeds than a DSLR? Most DSLRs top out at 6-8 fps while some mirrorless will do 11-15 fps.
Dec 28, 2015 20:09:59 #
burkphoto wrote:
The whole point is to make the entire system smaller, with better optical performance, lighter weight, less bulk, and fewer moving parts. Using existing glass, made for that deep dSLR mirror box, would be counter-productive!
I can dream can't I? But, with an adapter I can use my FX lenses with their Nikon 1 cameras now. So it may be reasonable for a full frame mirrorless Nikon body to take FX lenses.
Dec 28, 2015 20:15:09 #
kb6kgx wrote:
I understand about size and weight, but how is a mirrorless camera able to get higher continuous shutter speeds than a DSLR? Most DSLRs top out at 6-8 fps while some mirrorless will do 11-15 fps.
They don't have the mirror. Back in the old days for example the Nikon F2 or F3 only can do 5-6fps but there is the high speed version with the pellice mirror that doesn't move can achieve something like 13fps.
Dec 28, 2015 20:24:26 #
INshooter wrote:
I can dream can't I? But, with an adapter I can use my FX lenses with their Nikon 1 cameras now. So it may be reasonable for a full frame mirrorless Nikon body to take FX lenses.
Sure, they could make an adapter, but why not make a whole new line of optimized optics for new mirrorless bodies? The old F mount is what, 56 years old? It's had a good run. It's been modified too many ways already.
Dec 28, 2015 20:55:55 #
burkphoto wrote:
Sure, they could make an adapter, but why not make a whole new line of optimized optics for new mirrorless bodies? The old F mount is what, 56 years old? It's had a good run. It's been modified too many ways already.
You may be correct. But I just stumbled across this which mentions a full frame with the "F" mount.
http://nikonrumors.com/2015/04/20/new-nikon-full-frame-mirrorless-camera-on-the-horizon.aspx/
Dec 28, 2015 21:08:11 #
INshooter wrote:
You may be correct. But I just stumbled across this which mentions a full frame with the "F" mount.
http://nikonrumors.com/2015/04/20/new-nikon-full-frame-mirrorless-camera-on-the-horizon.aspx/
http://nikonrumors.com/2015/04/20/new-nikon-full-frame-mirrorless-camera-on-the-horizon.aspx/
Yeah I saw that but a FF mirroless from Nikon? yes I think possible but not one with the F mount. The F mount negates most of the advantages of the mirrorless system.
Dec 28, 2015 21:25:39 #
James Slick wrote:
Not to mention those of us who prefer to use an optical viewfinder!
Agree!
The optical viewfinder on my DSLR is much better than the viewfinders on every point and shoot camera and the A6000 that I have used. The view is small and dark. If you can't 'see' your subject, how is the composition of your shot? Then there is the LCD screen used exclusively on phones and some point and shoot cameras that are totally is useless in daylight. Until the viewfinder improves on point and shoot or mft cameras, I know that I would never buy one.
And while some cell phone pictures can be great, for most of us, blow them up a bit and you will see that most cell phone pics have motion blur.
Dec 28, 2015 21:42:39 #
kb6kgx wrote:
I understand about size and weight, but how is a mirrorless camera able to get higher continuous shutter speeds than a DSLR? Most DSLRs top out at 6-8 fps while some mirrorless will do 11-15 fps.
From my experience there is a little more to it than just the FPS. When shooting in continuous mode you are often tracking motion. With an SLR the tracking is briefly interrupted each time the mirror flips up but I can handle this pretty well and stay on track. In a Mirrorless using the EVF instead of the science going black for a fraction of a second when the mirror flips, the image in the EVF freezes briefly. This is MUCH harder to cope with even when it is no longer than a DSLR mirror flip. When panning it isn't that big a deal to keep the camera moving while waiting for the mirror to flip down - all you see is a black viewfinder. But with an EVF there is a strong psychological to freeze the panning motion while the image freezes. You can overcome it but is not trivial to learn. With irregular motion to track ( my favorite is dog agility trials) it is easy to get confused and frustrated by the frozen image even when it it is very brief. Mirrorless designers need to address this - either finding a way to not freeze the EVF or to black it out while frozen. I don't thing merely speeding up the processing will really fix it.
A secondary issue which I think will get fixed pretty soon is that Mirrorless focus tracking is still not as good as DSLRs but has made improvements even in the last year or so. It may be a long time before it matches that of the D4 ( and D5, I presume), but then nothing else matches it either.
Dec 28, 2015 21:45:14 #
bdk wrote:
I was in BestBuy before Christmas. of course I ALWAYS stop at the camera counter. A woman was looking at a camera for her kid who was interested in photography and the sales guy was pointing her away from the DSLR that she asked about towards a mirrorless camera. Telling her its last years technology and this was so much better.....
A good reason not to get camera advice from Best Buy.
Dec 28, 2015 21:46:50 #
GoofyNewfie wrote:
A good reason not to get camera advice from Best Buy.
Probably had a better markup.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.