wrangler5 Loc: Missouri

Virtually all of my photo output is square format printed in B&W.

My early Nikon film cameras had removable focusing screens that I could mark to help with square composition, but the later film cameras didn't and neither did any of the Nikon digitals I used. But the Olympus and Panasonic micro 4/3 cameras that I now use all let me set the screen and viewfinder to show the full sensor (4:3), or cropped images in 16:9, or 3:2, or 1:1 formats. I capture RAW files and so get all the data from the full sensor in each image file, but I compose seeing only what will fit in a square crop.

I also set the screen and viewfinder to display a monochrome image. The RAW image files contain all of the color data, and I can print color if I want to. But when I'm capturing the image I can see what the exposure adjustments I make will look like in B&W.

I probably would have switched from Nikon full frame to micro 4/3 for the smaller and lighter kit in any event, but the ability to compose in my preferred output format and see (and adjust) what my exposure settings will produce BEFORE pressing the shutter release are the two biggest benefits TO ME of the switch to mirrorless.

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

Other than weight savings, which is not to be sneezed at, the mirrorless cameras (at least most) allow you to preview exposure in the eyepiece, negating the need to take the camera away from your eye.

bleirer

As you say that must vary by model. I experimented carefully with my camera Canon RP, using the focus peaking as an indicator. By assigning the depth preview function to the movie button, since it is near the shutter. When I stop down normally there is no change in what is peaked as 'in focus' but when I use depth preview button, there is a big change in what is in focus.

Try it on yours just out of curiosity, focus on something stopped down vs wide open, do you actually see the depth of field change? On mine I do only when I press the depth of field preview button. This makes sense because mine will only autofocus to f11, so if it was stopped down I couldn't auto focus at f16. The screen darkens to simulate brightness but not focus.

Orson Burleigh Loc: Annapolis, Maryland, USA

It rather sounds as though your a7ii is replicating the stopped-down match needle metering depth-of-field preview feature that my budget SLR (Canon TL) provided in 1970. Of course my younger eyes were better able to manually focus with the aid of the ground glass fresnel-like split screen. Forty-odd years later, though auto-focus and image stabilization are much appreciated, the EOS' extra step depth-of-field preview button does see frequent use.

wmurnahan Loc: Bloomington IN

Like I stated, mine always stops down to what the f number you are setting. I don't think there is even a way to open it up short of setting the f to the lowest number. With my Sony, I'm always seeing the exact picture I'm going to see when I get home and view on my computer.

wmurnahan Loc: Bloomington IN

Sony is not replicating anything, both my a7ii and a6500 stop the lens down as you or the camera changes the f number. There is not a stop down setting because it is always stopped down, so I'm seeing the exact same picture in my EVF that I'm going to see on my computer. The only thing the camera is replicating is the shutter speed before the picture is taken.

Keen

If your DSLR has a DOF Preview capability, and you use it on each shot, there really is not much difference. You will see the image as it will be exposed. If you don't have DOFP, or have it but don't use it, then the DSLR viewfinder shows the scene as the lens sees it without the aperture, etc, you have set...with the aperture wide open, before being stopped down to the setting you chose. The Mirrorless camera will show the image you get with the setting you have chosen...so the image will be a what you see is what you get thing.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

Some things many of us don't consider and yet should consider. I have only shot in B&W a few times. But it is interesting that one can easily do so with mirrorless, but not with DSLR without going to Liveview (the eye is away from the viewfinder and the action).

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

This is correct.

You mention using Live View sometimes... If using "Exposure Simulation" with Live View, that's very similar to what you can see in the electronic viewfinder (EVF) of a mirrorless camera: A reasonably good prediction of what the final image will look like. (This assumes the mirrorless camera has an EVF, as is the case with most that have a viewfinder. But some mirrorless don't have any viewfinder... rely on the rear LCD screen, just like Live View on a DSLR. A few mirrorless have an optical or "hybrid" viewfinder.)

Have you ever taken a shot that looked great in your camera's optical viewfinder, but then because you had something set incorrectly it comes out seriously over- or under-exposed?

That would have easily been avoided using a mirrorless with an EVF, where you see the poor exposure in advance and can make corrective adjustments before taking the shot.

Another serious advantage of an EVF is that it can really help if shooting in very low light situations. You may not be able to see what you're shooting without it, but the EVF can brighten things up a lot. I've noticed that some mirrorless have low light autofocus capabilities, to complement this. For example, the best a Canon DSLR can do is autofocus in -3 EV light (wpprox. "moonlight"). Some of the more consumer grade Canon DSLRs can't AF in less than -1EV. But their EOS R mirrorless is rated to be able to focus as low as -5 EV... and some users are reporting it doesn't stop there.

An EVF also can have handy features like "focusing peaking", which can assist manual focusing by highlighting what's in focus.

Of course, not all is rosy.... EVFs are also a heavy drain on batteries, so most mirrorless can take far fewer shots per charge than DSLRs with a the same battery and an optical viewfinder.

Older mirrorless also had a latency problem with their EVFs... what was shown on the screen had a slight time lag, so it was difficult to time shots of fast moving action. Newer mirrorless have reduced this delay and are much better.

n3eg Loc: West coast USA

With mirrorless, you don't have to look through a small peephole or ever have to focus with an annoying split screen again.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I have read the responses between your post and mine, and will tell you that my D810 and D850 offer a plethora of options and information from the live view screen.
Much of what has been mentioned here is available to me in Live View, not just a video picture of the framed view. This can include a rendered JPEG displaying what actual exposure will be captured if the shutter release is pressed. A number of functions and setup choices can also be set directly from the Live View screen without having to go through the menu structure. I do not find access to histograms, but the truth is that they are one <admittedly very useful> tool of many available. I do not find their absence to be a critical problem, although it is clear that they would be nice to have available.

I do not use Live View very much (mostly for verifying setup and focus when doing night sky photography), so I have to check the functionality to remind myself of exactly what is available each time I do use it other than just casually. I presume that the D500 offers very similar functionality, but can't check for certain, because mine is at Nikon right now.

Timmers Loc: San Antonio Texas.

Perhaps it is best summed up with a statement of 100 years ago, made by Henri Cartier-Bresson, he called it the decisive moment.

Vietnam Vet

Thank you for all your replies:
If I were looking to upgrade a studio camera I think I would get the Canon Mirrorless because it uses all of my current lenses. But Im not looking for a studio camera, I shoot mostly action.
Right now I get 1200+ shots per charge on a battery and I would lose that. I get 10 fps and would be stepping down to 5 fps. I never lose sight of my subject in the viewfinder, but with mirrorless the subject would probably run out of my viewfinder between shots. To get a vertical grip I would have to buy one. I have used them in the past and had problems with them, until I upgraded to Canon 1d bodies which have it built into the body.
For me there doesn't seem to be an up-side for buying a mirrorless camera until they change those things.

bleirer

you're right, he did shoot mirrorless.

bleirer

I do not understand how it can auto focus stopped down that far. DSLR's are generally limited to F8 I thought and mirrorless I thought to F11, but the Sony can auto focus at F22? You actually see the bokeh change in the viewfinder as you stop down without using the shot preview button? Pretty amazing.