Mirror vs Mirrorless (Page 17): Nope. Long exposure is immune to SLR mirrors. Any mirror slap is settled out at the very beginning and the majority of the exposure continues on...

User ID

Capn_Dave wrote:

You forgot to mention the mirror flopping and shaking the camera. It plays havoc with long exposures

Nope. Long exposure is immune to SLR mirrors. Any mirror slap is settled out at the very beginning and the majority of the exposure continues on unperturbed. Acoarst any paranoid geek with barely a lick of common sense would use a black flag to cancel the initial “shock” anywho.
.

Acoarst this solution is just waaaaay too easy for all the Hogsters who just live to complain and who think that picking nits enhances their street cred as “experts”.

(Download)

Capn_Dave

User ID wrote:

Nope. Long exposure is immune to SLR mirrors. Any mirror slap is settled out at the very beginning and the majority of the exposure continues on unperturbed. Acoarst any paranoid geek with barely a lick of common sense would use a black flag to cancel the initial “shock” anywho.
.

Acoarst you jest

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Capn_Dave wrote:

Acoarst you jest

User ID is correct. The longer the exposure, the less the impact of any vibration caused by either the mirror or the shutter. This is another entry pn the long list of inaccurate lore perpetuated by photographers who can't be bothered to stop and think about things.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

larryepage wrote:

User ID is correct. The longer the exposure, the less the impact of any vibration caused by either the mirror or the shutter. This is another entry pn the long list of inaccurate lore perpetuated by photographers who can't be bothered to stop and think about things.

If the exposure is long enough, even people moving through a scene during the exposure will be invisible.

redlegfrog

topcat wrote:

Mirrorless is the future of cameras. Even if you don't like it, it is still the future. There are so many advancements to the cameras.
If you can't afford the switch, and you are happy, great. But in the future, there will be no new DSLR's.

As of this moment Nikon will no longer make any F mount lens

BebuLamar

redlegfrog wrote:

As of this moment Nikon will no longer make any F mount lens

for now no new models for both cameras and lenses but existing models would still be made.

gwilliams6

Interesting video from Ted Forbes "Art of Photography" a well-respected youtuber/shooter/teacher

Yes, Sony Killed the DSLR (his title, not my words, so send any hate to Ted, lol )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7NZleCVlYs&t=2s

lmTrying Loc: WV Northern Panhandle

fforbes wrote:

Came back from a photo trip and noticed I was lugging 60 lbs of gear. Traded off my full frame Canons and lenses to go with the Olympus 4/3 system. Much lighter and smaller especially with lenses designed for this format. Great shots and solid capabilities, no regrets. I do think the Canon/Nikon folks, now that they are finally on the bandwagon are sort of missing the point with adapters to mount large, clunky lenses that were made for the DSLRs.

I fully understand that the new mirrorless lenses are probably better. Most of us do. And I'm sure Canon and Nikon would love that all of us would buy a stable of new lenses to go with that new mirrorless body. But the point you are missing is; not all of us can afford to go buy three or six new lenses with that new body. So for us with maybe more desire than money, or who "need" a new body, the adapter is a god send. For Canon and Nikon, it's a stepping stone to future sales, that otherwise may not happen.

Besides, not all mirrorless bodies are smaller and lighter, and not all mirrorless lenses are smaller and less clunky.

Nickaroo

lmTrying wrote:

I fully understand that the new mirrorless lenses ... (show quote)

You put things into context very well. I can afford the new equipment, but I do have concerns for the upcoming Photogs that are just starting. Although, if they are worthy, then they will acquire sponsorships.

lmTrying Loc: WV Northern Panhandle

Nickaroo wrote:

You put things into context very well. I can afford the new equipment, but I do have concerns for the upcoming Photogs that are just starting. Although, if they are worthy, then they will acquire sponsorships.

I am assuming that you are referring to situations leaning towards the professional realm. I'm talking about the hobbyist, the person working an unrelated job who is supporting a family, the person on a limited income. The person who likes to take pictures, but does not live with a camera in their hand 25/7. Sponsorships are not available to everyone. They are available only to the dedicated few.

Hip Coyote

burkphoto wrote:

If the exposure is long enough, even people moving through a scene during the exposure will be invisible.

Burke, I went on a led photo tour in Prague a few years ago and the leader loved using tripods and dark nd filters so that people were completely out of the shot. I thought it looked goofy and wanted people, at least blurry ones in the shots...I think it looked better. Also, I had no desire to sit there for long exposures, in a crowed square, guarding my tripod to get such a shot. BTW, if you ever get a chance, there is a photog who took shots of Auschwitz using NDs but with blurs of people in it...absolutely hauntingly good photos. When one looks at them, most people do not ponder if it was mirrored, mirrorless, film, Brownie...

User ID

Hip Coyote wrote:

Burke, I went on a led photo tour in Prague a few ... (show quote)

Acoarst most viewers would not ponder that. But for the user, new tech helps facilitate old techniques. Using a newish Olympus along with your black ND you can actually watch the image gradually “accumulating”. Aside from amusing the user who’s waiting out the exposure it’s prolly not a critically important feature, but it can be edumactional. Sort of like “the magic” of watching a photo print coming up in the darkroom.

Hip Coyote

User ID wrote:

Acoarst most viewers will not ponder that. But as the user, new tech helps facilitate old techniques. Using a newish Olympus along with your black ND you can actually watch the image gradually “accumulating”. Aside from amusing the user who’s waiting out the exposure it’s prolly not a critically important feature, but it can be edumactional. Sort of like “the magic” of watching a photo print coming up in the darkroom.

Excellent point...and I do have an Oly that will do that.

tgreenhaw

User ID wrote:

When you see what $$ a 5DS brings you might reconsider whether you still have some use for it. Do your $$ reality check and then decide.

Acoarst if you find you have no reason to keep it, some “stalwart” will get a really nice easily affordable hi rez FF SLR :-)

I actually love the 5Ds and hate to see it go. I should be able to get $1000-$1200 for it which pays for a DJI RS2 Pro Stabilizer kit and a Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM Lens I'd like to have.

The biggest reason is that someone without $4k who wants to upgrade to a high megapixel full frame camera has the option. This camera deserves to be used, and for me it would sit on my shelf.