Bill P

But please lets bury the weight difference argument. That is valid only for m4/3 vs. FF. The most weight in just about everything than a Leica is in the lens. So, there will be little weight difference between a Nikon FF DSLR and a Nikon mirrorless.

But as I age, I find m4/3's a blessing.

jayluber Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Geeze Burkphoto - you know, you could have posted a series of responses to get a complete response in stead of the truncated and condensed one you posted........ : )

That's gotta be one of the most comprehensive responses I've seen here. Guess it's just a slow day.

But thank you. I enjoyed it.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Lots of positive comments about mirrorless.... but there are some negatives, too.

1. In general, mirrorless get far fewer shots per battery charge. The reason for this is the electronic viewfinder, which has to draw power continuously to work. A DSLRs optical viewfinder draws no power. It doesn't help that many mirrorless models use smaller batteries, too... in and effort to keep the camera as compact as possible. Also, "battery grips" are only offered for a few mirrorless camera models. This will mean having to buy and carry more spare batteries, having to pause to change batteries more often, and more challenges keeping batteries charged while traveling. How much it effects anyone depends upon their particular usage. If they only shoot modest number of images per day, it may be no big deal. But if they shoot a high volume of images it may be a problem.

2. The mirrorless camera's image sensor has to be active continuously, too, in order to provide an image to be displayed in the EVF. That draws on the battery too, but I also can't help but wonder how it will effect sensor life. Solid state electronic components wear out too. In comparison, when shooting still images with a DSLR it's image sensor is typically only activated for a fraction of a second at a time, accumulating active usage of those electronic components at a far slower pace. In a sense, using a mirrorless camera is similar to always using a DSLR in Live View or to shoot video. (Of course, the counter-argument to this is that the mirrorless camera doesn't have a shutter or mirror mechanism to wear out and fail.)

3. While we're still on the subject of sensors, in mirrorless they're far forward in the camera body, typically around 18 or 20mm (3/4" approx.) recessed from the lens mounting flange. And on most mirrorless, once the lens is removed, the sensor is fully exposed. It's not hidden behind a mirror and a mechanical shutter the way it is in a DSLR, where the sensor is also positioned deeper in the camera body, typically 40mm or more (1-1/2" approx.) from the lens mounting flange. I've seen a couple used mirrorless being sold with "scratched sensor" disclosures. I wonder if they will need more frequent cleaning, too. Maybe eventually we'll see a "protective shutter" arrangement in mirrorless. Or perhaps we could use a "dark slide", like we did with our medium format film cameras!

4. And... as some others have pointed out... while APS-C and Micro 4/3 format mirrorless tend to be smaller than comparable DSLRs, there's not much savings in size and weight with full frame mirrorless. Sure, the camera body may be a little bit smaller & lighter. But the lenses tend to be as large or larger than the same focal lengths on DSLRs.

5. There's also less native lens and dedicated accessory selection for mirrorless. DSLR systems have been around for 20 years now and have matured to a large degree. Plus, DSLRs evolved from and are to some extent based upon film cameras that preceded them by about 50 years, using the same or similar lenses in many cases. As a result, Canon and Nikon, for example, are each able to offer around 90 lenses for their DSLRs. Canon EF/EOS lens system goes back 30 years.... while the Nikon F-mount dates to 1959 (with somewhat limited modern compatibility). Each of them have just introduced full frame mirrorless models and, as of now, have fewer than 5 native lenses for each. Canon also has produced an APS-C mirrorless system for 5 or 6 years now, and so far has less than 10 native lenses for it. Sony and Fuji have between 30 and 40 lenses for their mirrorless... Sony was able to carry over or adapt some lenses from DSLRs and film cameras. The Fuji X-mount system was more of a blank slate, developed from the ground up specifically for mirrorless. Panasonic and Olympus share the same m4/3 format and lens mounting system and between them have similar number of lenses available for their cameras. Third party support with lenses and accessories is also presently a lot more limited for mirrorless than it is for DSLRs. That will change with time, though.

6. Adapters are available to allow DSLR lenses to be used on many mirrorless... as well as vintage manual focus lenses and adaptations between modern systems. This helps offset the lack of native mirrorless lens selection in any given system, but also adds cost, size and a little weight. Depending upon the system... what's being adapted to what... it may also effect lens performance: autofocus speed, image stabilization effectiveness, image quality.

7. Cost. Mirrorless are "the latest and greatest". It's now about 5 or 6 years since they began to be produced and marketed in earnest. As a result, generally speaking mirrorless cameras and their native lenses are more expensive than DSLRs and their lenses of comparable capability. You can get into an entry-level DSLR and kit lens for under $400. You'd have to search hard to find an entry-level mirrorless with an EVF and kit lens for less than 50% more than that. The closest in price you'll find are older "close-out" models that have been discounted. This is changing gradually, but enthusiasm and demand for mirrorless is growing so manufacturers are unlikely to lower their prices significantly. DSLR sales also remain strong, but aren't increasing any more. As a result, DSLR prices have been coming down.

8. Obsolescence. Mirrorless camera systems are still in the earlier stages of development. Competition will drive rapid innovation and that will lead to short product life cycles along with a lot of pressure to frequently upgrade to the latest and greatest model with new "gee whiz" features. We saw this during the first ten or twelve years with DSLRs, too. But now DSLRs have pretty much "settled", new model introductions are less frequent and "upgrades" are more incremental... putting less pressure on us to trade in our old cameras. I don't know about you, but I shot with a couple DSLRs for five years, updated to a newer model just over two years ago but don't anticipate needing to do so again for at least a couple more years. During that seven year period there have probably been for or five "generations" of mirrorless from some manufacturers, each with very significant improvements over the previous model, demanding an upgrade.

Don't get me wrong. I plan to complement my DSLRs with a mirrorless camera sometime soon. For me it will serve different purposes and won't replace my DSLRs. In time that might happen, but I'll still continue to use DSLRs primarily... at least for a while longer.... for some of the reasons above.

WessoJPEG Loc: Cincinnati, Ohio

Too much to read.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

No. He is right. You can clearly judge the current state by the old stuff. Heck, I was nearly run over by a chariot years and years ago. That whole "wheeled vehicle" thing is just not to be trusted! I will stick with my palanquin out in the garage! And of course this brings up the old immigration issues! Who is going to carry our palanquins?!?!

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

And you are basing your judgment of the EVF of 10-20 years ago? Do you use the same computer and monitor you used 20 years ago? Do you think perhaps there have been significant changes in electronics in the past 20 years? "It's improved a bit" does not quite cover it, and you, of all people here, know it.

repleo Loc: Boston

Read Burkphoto's reply. Bill is like James Earl Jones - he speaks with the voice of God. Best advice you will find here on UHH.

However, one thing Bill failed to mention ( I think) is that you don't have to 'chimp' to review your shots with a mirrorless. The preview will come up in the eyepiece just like a P&S camera. If you typically wear reading glasses you can adjust the diopter of the EVF to suit your reading vision and then do all of your settings, adjustments and previews in the EVF without having to put your glasses on to 'chimp' or check live view.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

HaHa! You THINK you will continue to use your DSLR primarily. You won't.

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Aside from less weight, the mirrorless cameras have one fewer moving part to wear out.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

Yes, I agree with you on the problems with battery life of FF mirrorless cameras. I'm aware this problem existed with the Sony full frame mirrorless cameras, such as the a7 series. Most Sony FF mirrorless owners, religiously carried an extra charged battery or two. Sony solved this problem by having a longer life battery for their a9 camera. And Sony plans to use this same longer life battery in their upcoming new crop sensor DSLT camera. The a77iii.

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

"Shovel, please...

I apologize for the rambling nature of this, but it's edited from seven or eight of my previous posts."

Great summation! Some people have mentioned the reduced weight of mirrorless. Might be the case if you go from a full frame DSLR to a Micro 4/3 BUT if you stick with the same sensor size there is not much, if any, weight advantage by the time you add the equivalent lens and head for the field. For instance, a Sony A7R II/III is not a light camera!

bwa

tdekany Loc: Oregon

The battery is not an issue with mirrorless. The older cameras with the smaller batteries may take less photos than a dslr, but how many photos do most people take a day? I go out every day to shoot and don’t have to recharge for a week. IF you happen to deplete a battery, how long do you think it takes to change it out? It is a non issue, plus the latest cameras are supplied with a bigger battery anyway so you are spreading the wrong info.

le boecere

Do you want the photography world to "bury the weight difference argument" because there is none?

And, if there is "some", how much must there be for that difference to become universally recognized and accepted by the community a "valid"?

PierreD

2010! This was the stone age as far as EVF technology is concerned and it's a whole different ball game out there these days. There are many good reasons not to purchase (or switch to) mirrorless, but the EVF quality (inc. lag, etc.) is no longer one of them... In fact, all the great features that modern EVFs offer are almost reason enuf to use mirrorless, IMO.

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

And particularly for low-light shooting!

bwa