Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Mirrorless vs. DSLR Imaging
Page <<first <prev 5 of 9 next> last>>
Feb 12, 2018 13:31:39   #
gwilliams6
 
ltcarizona wrote:
Let's be realistic the camera mirrorless or not is not really the difference maker. The real difference makers are the photographer's experience and the glass he uses! To stress my point as far as cameras only are concerned - amateur photographers are winning photo contests all the time with the simplest of DSLR cameras or mirrorless cameras. But these are not consistent deal makers, it takes the photographer's experience to really win.


ltcarizona listen to three famed photojournalist and sport shooters including David Burnett (40 years a Canon DSLR user) talk about how switching to mirrorless have given them an edge in their work. Burnett is NOT sponsored by Sony nor was he ever sponsored by Canon.

https://petapixel.com/2018/01/23/photographer-david-burnett-switches-sony-40-years-shooting-canon/

https://alphauniverse.com/stories/sports-photojournalists-show-why-they-switched-to-the-sony-a9/

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 14:04:07   #
Kuzano
 
Wingpilot wrote:
It's been said a number of times here on UHH that a mirrorless camera just can't take images equal to those taken with a DSLR. I'm wonder how that is a valid supposition. It seems to me that once the image hits the sensor, the rest is up to the electronics to process that image, and it makes no difference how it got into the camera at that point.

So how is it that having a mirror and pentaprism in a camera makes its images superior to those taken with a mirrorless camera?


All other things being equal.... Mirrorless takes two problems out of the camera.

Mirrors cause Shake, which has a negative impact on the image quality.
Mirror boxes, linkage and the mirror adds additional mechanism to break or fail.

This was true of Real Rangefinders before the SLR came out. No mirror, no mirror slap, no mirror mechanism to fail.

The addition of the mirror to make the SLR was the biggest backward movement in image quality to hit the realm of photography. We worked with what we had, and mirror lockup mechanisms delayed mirror slap/shake but added more frail links and fail points, before it was recognized digital was a natural for "dumping" the mirror, prisms and a lot of other weighty junk.

Praise be for mirrorless camera's, particularly now that the sensor size available up to full frame is now embodied in the class of camera's called mirrorless. Pro's are figuring it out.

What's up with the rest of the crowd?


Reply
Feb 12, 2018 14:08:10   #
tdekany Loc: Oregon
 
gwilliams6 wrote:
I agree Panasonic ,Olympic and Fuji cameras are not getting the buzz they deserve for their great products as much as Sony.


Of course they are! Maybe not on UHH, but this is only one site.

Reply
 
 
Feb 12, 2018 14:09:35   #
Kuzano
 
My 4X5" large format camera kicks the but on every small sensor, full frame sensor, and Medium format sensor DSLR.

And it does NOT have a mirror. All my cameras larger than medium format film are NOT mirrorless. Where are youse DSLR guys coming from?

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 14:14:52   #
leftj Loc: Texas
 
Kuzano wrote:
My 4X5" large format camera kicks the but on every small sensor, full frame sensor, and Medium format sensor DSLR.

And it does NOT have a mirror. All my cameras larger than medium format film are NOT mirrorless. Where are youse DSLR guys coming from?


I know you realize that most photographers are not shooting with medium or large format cameras so what's your point? You just want to feel superior I suppose.

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 14:20:12   #
wickedsnappy
 
I declare my Nikon D750 DSLR the winner of this "Mirrorless vs. DSLR Imaging" competition! Because I paid for it.
There will be another "Mirrorless vs. DSLR Imaging" competition forthcoming, but that winner will again be, whichever one I paid for. My wallet is the judge in these competitions.

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 14:43:20   #
burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC
 
Kuzano wrote:
All other things being equal.... Mirrorless takes two problems out of the camera.

Mirrors cause Shake, which has a negative impact on the image quality.
Mirror boxes, linkage and the mirror adds additional mechanism to break or fail.

This was true of Real Rangefinders before the SLR came out. No mirror, no mirror slap, no mirror mechanism to fail.

The addition of the mirror to make the SLR was the biggest backward movement in image quality to hit the realm of photography. We worked with what we had, and mirror lockup mechanisms delayed mirror slap/shake but added more frail links and fail points, before it was recognized digital was a natural for "dumping" the mirror, prisms and a lot of other weighty junk.

Praise be for mirrorless camera's, particularly now that the sensor size available up to full frame is now embodied in the class of camera's called mirrorless. Pro's are figuring it out.

What's up with the rest of the crowd?

All other things being equal.... Mirrorless takes ... (show quote)


There are several things about mirrors and focal plane shutters that have always been a problem:

Both make noise.

Both can cause unwanted vibration of the body, leading to blurred images.

Noise is a BIG issue when photographing many kinds of subjects.

Mirrorless cameras make the most practical use of electronic shutters. With no mirror and no focal plane shutter movement, there is just the faint sound of the leaf diaphragm stopping down during exposure, and perhaps a faint sound from the AF motor in the lens.

I took over 300 images of a play last Fall, and no one cared. Most didn't know I was there. No one complained. The director was blown away — thrilled — when she saw the results. My GH4 is as quiet as an old Rolleiflex!

Reply
 
 
Feb 12, 2018 15:49:05   #
wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado
 
Wingpilot wrote:
It's been said a number of times here on UHH that a mirrorless camera just can't take images equal to those taken with a DSLR. I'm wonder how that is a valid supposition. It seems to me that once the image hits the sensor, the rest is up to the electronics to process that image, and it makes no difference how it got into the camera at that point.

So how is it that having a mirror and pentaprism in a camera makes its images superior to those taken with a mirrorless camera?


It always depends on the cameras and conditions. There are some advantages to a larger sensor in low light and there can be more resolution in a bigger sensor due to more pixels. But there is no increase in image quality due to a viewfinder. Just a preference as to which type of viewfinder.

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 16:04:24   #
Greatographer
 
Reyr wrote: “I think you should go to your local camera shop and pick up an Olympus OMD-EM1 Mark ll, and see and feel a pro level 4/3 mirror less camera, weather sealed, moisture sealed and freeze proof and experience 18-60 frames per second, and check the price.”

I'd love to trade my heavy Canon gear for an OMD-EM 1 MKII. But don't we all know that a camera alone is not a “system”. What's a camera without a lens? I'd switch tomorrow except for the lack of lenses that satisfy my needs and requirements.

Technology and IQ aside, everybody happy with Sony, Panasonic, Fuji-Film etc tech support? As a working photojournalist, and member of Canon's CPS program, I'm assured a 2-day turn around for service at Canon's Costa Mesa facility. Same day service if I visit the facility. Any other mirrorless camera brand offering similar service? Of what value is image quality yada... yada... yada... if it takes weeks for service should the camera fail? Just a thought.

Happy photoing.

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 16:15:20   #
tdekany Loc: Oregon
 
Greatographer wrote:
Reyr wrote: “I think you should go to your local camera shop and pick up an Olympus OMD-EM1 Mark ll, and see and feel a pro level 4/3 mirror less camera, weather sealed, moisture sealed and freeze proof and experience 18-60 frames per second, and check the price.”

I'd love to trade my heavy Canon gear for an OMD-EM 1 MKII. But don't we all know that a camera alone is not a “system”. What's a camera without a lens? I'd switch tomorrow except for the lack of lenses that satisfy my needs and requirements.

Technology and IQ aside, everybody happy with Sony, Panasonic, Fuji-Film etc tech support? As a working photojournalist, and member of Canon's CPS program, I'm assured a 2-day turn around for service at Canon's Costa Mesa facility. Same day service if I visit the facility. Any other mirrorless camera brand offering similar service? Of what value is image quality yada... yada... yada... if it takes weeks for service should the camera fail? Just a thought.

Happy photoing.
Reyr wrote: “I think you should go to your local c... (show quote)


Just as an FYI, Olympus does have a pro program. Not saying that you should switch because you shouldn’t.

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 16:43:39   #
juanbalv Loc: Los Angeles / Hawthorne
 
You tel 'I'm leftj.

Reply
 
 
Feb 12, 2018 17:22:04   #
PhotosBySteve
 
Wingpilot wrote:
It's been said a number of times here on UHH that a mirrorless camera just can't take images equal to those taken with a DSLR. I'm wonder how that is a valid supposition. It seems to me that once the image hits the sensor, the rest is up to the electronics to process that image, and it makes no difference how it got into the camera at that point.

So how is it that having a mirror and pentaprism in a camera makes its images superior to those taken with a mirrorless camera?


That's an interesting statement. For this is the first time I have ever heard that one. I have no idea what the intent of your statement is?
I have been using a DSLR since 2007. I started using a Mirrorless two years ago. I currently own a Canon 6D, a 7D and a Sony 7RII. I use all three all the time. Each body has it's pro's and con's. It just so happens, I shot a sporting event this weekend, which I usually use a DSLR for, however I decided to do an experiment and use all three bodies all equipped with a 200mm prime lens. I used the same settings on all and shot in RAW. The resultant image quality was very equal after processing in LR. The only issue I had was with the slow auto focus lock of the Sony, which caused a few missed shots. I was well aware of this drawback prior to conducting my experiment. Overall, all cameras performed well on average and all produced excellent and comparable results after processing.

As a side note: If any of you out there attempt to shoot a mirroless under florescent lighting, do not use silent mode (no shutter) for it causes multiple horizontal bars accross the image. The silent shutter mode was the main reason I purchased the Sony, because I shoot primarily pool (billiards) sporting events, where silence is a must. For that reason alone, I generally use my 6D, because it has the most silent shutter of all three, when the Sony is not in silent mode.

I love my Sony for Landscapes and Portraits, especially when focusing in manual mode. Mainly because of the EVF (Electronic View Finder).
My 7D is my goto for fast action and long reach.
My 6D is my main workhorse, however it struggles a little with really fast action.
Overall I love all three cameras and each has it's pros and cons.

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 17:28:40   #
mas24 Loc: Southern CA
 
Some interesting comments thus far on this topic. Mirrorless vs Mirror. I'm going to make an attempt to gain knowledge on the other mirrorless cameras, other than Sony. They are Panasonic, Olympus, and Fujifilm. All camera owners I associated with, are only owners of Nikon, Canon, and Sony mirrorless, both crop sensors and full frame. I have been told that Panasonic lenses (micro 4/3), are interchangeable with another (micro 4/3) Brand. I'm guessing Olympus?

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 17:37:52   #
jackpi Loc: Southwest Ohio
 
Wingpilot wrote:
What I will say is that I believe the professional level DSLR’s may be superior to the current mirrorless cameras in that they they are certainly more robust. They’re built for heavy duty use, and are priced accordingly.

There is a robustness test? What do they do? Drop from four feet. I once dropped a Sony A7R2 from around four feet. No problem; even the IBIS works fine (I wouldn't advise anyone to try it--I was probably lucky). But I suspect the mirror support system in a DSLR would be the weak link if you drop a DSLR. Also, if you drop any camera with a lens mounted on it, the lens will break before the camera.

Seriously, the structure of many mirrorless cameras is just as good as that in a DSLR. Take a look at the Olympus OM-D E-M! or the Fuji X-T2.

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 18:26:53   #
Architect1776 Loc: In my mind
 
billnikon wrote:
It has never been, or ever will be, about the equipment (TO A POINT). Just like EVERYTHING else in one's profession, it's about the person operating the tool, NOT THE TOOL DUDE. Never has, never will be.


Tell that to a sniper.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 5 of 9 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.