JD750 Loc: SoCal

Good article on DPS by Andrew S. Gibson about this subject.
(not posting a link here because the knee-jerk reaction from Admin would be to move this post to the links section or to the attic).

Note in my title I say STATIC focusing. Gibson did not differentiate static from dynamic focus in his article so I'm doing it here.

He cites 3 reasons for superiority of Mirrorless over DSLR for static focusing (below is not a copy this is my interpretation of the article):

(1) Direct focusing on the sensor. Lower complexity, no calibration or fine focus adjustments or adjustments for different lenses, are ever needed.

(2) Better manual focus tools. On DSLR's manual focus aids like split prism screens are a thing of the past. The little arrows aren't much help. Mirrorless cameras offer better manual focus tools; Focus peaking or image magnifying functions, viewable through the electronic viewfinder (ELF), which greatly aid in achieving sharp manual focus.

(3) Ability to display additional information like a Hyperfocal distance tool which displays information directly in the ELF.

All of the above rely on the ELF which shows exactly what the sensor is recording. DSLRs do not have an ELF. Some people still violently prefer seeing the scene through glass rather than a picture of a picture. However ELF's over many advantages over optical. Maybe in the future someone will offer a DSLR with a "live view" functions that is visible through the optical eyepiece and switchable from optical to live view.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

My view camera is mirrorless. I'd almost agree with the points the author made.
--Bob

JD750 Loc: SoCal

Ha ha very good point! Back to the future then! Not much good for basketball shots but great for landscapes and portraits.

MtnMan Loc: ID

I had an NEX-7 for a while and loved it's EVF (Electronic Viewfinder...the more common acronym) because "what you see is what you get" and the display flexibility including reviewing images in bright sun. I only got rid of it because flipping from Sonyspeak to Nikonspeak drove me nuts and my real camera is a Nikon D800. Plus a stable of Nikon lenses.

Battery life on the NEX-7 wasn't so hot.

I'd love to be able to set the focus on the hyperfocal distance for my landscapes. Wonder why they haven't done that?

BTW I think the Sony programming is better.

Waiting for Nikon to come forth with a DX mirrorless that takes my lenses directly. Or FX.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

Mirrorless is not going away. Period. Although I don't own one yet. All of the major camera manufacturers are investing in the technology. While they have not put the standard DSLR into obsolescence, it is obvious the two types will have to coexist whether you like mirrorless or not.

MtnMan Loc: ID

I think both mirrors and mechanical shutters will disappear eventually. The added mechanical complexity is failure prone and expensive compared to digital.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

How is this better or different than my DSLR on Live View @20x magnification?!?!
I MUST be missing something BIG?!?!
Please explain!! :lol: :lol:
SS

MtnMan Loc: ID

Live view sucks in bright sun.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

Its a trade off. Each does some things better than the other. Based on my experience with M4/3 cameras I'd say the odds stack in favor of EVF.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

So does the Ground Glass on Bobs view camera! You didn't seem to have a problem with that!!! :lol:
SS

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

This really has nothing to do with the DSLR vs mirrorless debate and is a common misconception held by many on UHH. It's really about how the technology is changing very slowly from optical to electronic.

Optical viewfinders are still considered superior to electronic viewfinders by many people. I've yet to see a decent mirrorless interchangeable lens camera with an optical viewfinder. That is a show stopper for some people.

On the other hand using live view in bright light is frequently challenging without loupes and so on.

As for the electronic focusing aids etc. mentioned, there is no reason why they can't be implemented in a DSLR form factor camera. I'm not aware of a major DSLR brand that has done that yet commercially, but all you need to do is put Magic Lantern on various Canon DSLR models and those functions are available. Which proves that it is possible.

Canon has recently published a patent for a hybrid viewfinder. http://www.dpreview.com/news/1155069571/canon-files-patent-for-design-of-hybrid-viewfinder-aimed-at-dslr-cameras.

The current debate about why either mirrorless or DSLR designs are better will soon be consigned to history. Technology advances are making it irrelevant. Clearly, you can't buy a hybrid camera from the manufacturer today, but I would guess it will be a few years at most.

My simple low-end Canon T3i with Magic Lantern addresses pretty much every function that a mirrorless camera can do, except for the EVF. As such, it delivers the best of both optical DSLR and mirrorless functions which a mirrorless camera cannot yet do.

We are in a tech transition tunnel right now, and are yet to see the light at the end of the tunnel.

DSLRs offer the easiest and quickest path to combining both optical and electronic capabilities, with the exception of an EVF, it's already been done.

EVFs don't yet equal optical viewfinders, hence the Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens category (EVIL)

Full frame mirrorless cameras are available, yet mostly expensive and not yet widely adopted, so the Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Full frame market (MILF) is yet to considered mainstream as well as being EVIL.

For now, pick your poison, nothing is superior for all of us. Electronics, optics and form-factors will continue to evolve for a few years yet.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

One complaint I've heard about the Sony premier cameras, such as the Sony a7r2 full frame, with 42 megapixels, is that it has an electronic viewfinder rather than the optical viewfinder. New users may accept this. OVP users not so much.

f8lee Loc: New Mexico

First, rather than the acronym MILF, I prefer Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens (EVIL). :lol:

So here's the thing. Unlike OVFs, EVFs require a computer to process the readings from the imaging chip and translate those into the rasterized images seen on the EVF. Until computer processors jump in speed by a few orders of magnitude (which is not to say this will never happen) then there will necessarily be a slight delay between the subject's action and the shooter's eye witnessing same through the EVF. Likewise, the resolution of an OVF is essentially infinite, far more than a few megapixels worth of screen - so while for static subjects focus peaking etc. can be of use, for action shooting not so much.

They both have their place - I like my Fuji X-T1 an awful lot but haven't gotten rid of my D600 - I use each tool when most appropriate. For instance, wince the EVF can take into account dim lighting and still present you with a more realistic view of the scene, putting a 10 stop ND filter on the Fuji and being able to frame a shot as if there were no filter there at all (!! - couldn't do that with the DSLR!) makes things way more convenient.

So, for static subjects, perhaps EVF is better (especially if you're using an ND filter or are in a darkened situation.

Haydon

My loupe takes care of that issue.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

What's wrong with MILF?!?! :lol: :lol: :lol:🙈 🙊 🙉 😈 😜 🙀
SS