dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

The new one that does not clump the paint.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Unfortunately (fortunately???) not mine....

Majority rules, I'm screwed.

jdmiles Loc: Texas

That is not quite correct. The 5D IV used the same sensor for focus. The problem was that it only covered the center of the screen. In the case of focusing, dsmeltz is correct that and it is just the march of technology.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

What YOU may be missing is the difference in speed between phase detection autofocus (used in DSLRs) and contrast detection auto focus (used in MILC). The advantage of phase detection is speed, which is why DSLRs traditionally have faster AF than mirrorless cameras using contrast detection. You might consider reading up on the two AF technologies.

As to the number of AF points, I think you’ll find that many pros use either a single AF point of a small cluster of points, so while having hundreds or thousands of AF points may make good marketing numbers, it’s a feature that while perhaps useful for BIF mavens photographing against an empty sky, it’s just not that useful for many uses. For balance, what is useful is AF that is usable at lower light levels, and both DSLRs and MILCs have improved in this respect as technology improves.

User ID

I really don’t think that was to be taken seriously. There’s just something about the way it’s written.

catchlight.. Loc: Wisconsin USA- Halden Norway

I recall loving my 8-track and being so disappointed in the bass response when hearing cassette for the first time back in the '70's. Same with Beta... I just loved my Beta machine.
I have owned a few mirror less now and do have a Fuji x100 I like... But, so far I am not so happy with the "cell phone" color and forensic detail when it gets down to editing. Megapixels are one thing, and pixel quality is another. When it comes to color, tone, detail, and accuracy, my hybrid 1DX MK3 is more than impressive when I compare it to other images I have worked with, and functionality of the camera body is perfect for me. There are pros and cons to everything, but I do think mirrors will be around for a long long time.

User ID

ILCs no longer rely only on CDAF. Your info was correct just a few years ago.

Usually it’s PDAF with the last micron tweaked by CDAF. The final tweak may cost a verrrry minor bit of fps, but it’s deadly accurate.

I prefer perfect focus on every frame rather than a few addition frames but with all frames imperfect.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

I believe Panasonic is the only manufacturer still making mirrorless cameras with CDAF. Everybody else has some sort of hybrid phase detect and contrast detect combo. The difference is the phase detection is done directly from the main sensor instead of a separate focus sensor. It’s faster, more accurate and works in lower light.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

The early 2000's were nice. But this is 2021.

User ID

The flipping mirror in SLRs to me is a distraction. I prefer to watch what’s happening in real time:

(Download)

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

All frames imperfect? Really? With properly calibrated glass, I think you’ll find that the best DSLR’s AF is by no means “imperfect” or inferior in any respect to MILCs. Correct focus is correct focus, and either technology can produce proper focus. You can extol all the advantages of mirrorless, and I agree with most, but faster AF is not one of them.
As you’re well aware, or should be, action shots have traditionally been the weakness of mirrorless - both AF and the infamous “rolling shutter”.

Mirrorless cameras are improving in both respects, and the best new MILCs are very close to the best DSLRs in that respect, and I expect them to continue to improve until they exceed them, but we’re not to there quite yet. And let’s remember - ultimately it will depend on how fast the lens AF motor can move the lens group, not how fast the body can drive it. We’ll see over the next couple of years how the Canon R1/R5, Nikon Z7/Z9 and Sony A1 are adopted by pros that shoot sports for a living, but again I wonder why the majority of pro sports photographers are still using Nikon D4,5,6s or Canon 1Ds/1DXs? Pretty sure they can afford to switch.

Btw, I own both DSLRs and MILCs, so this is not a “religious” issue with me, but accuracy is.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

ROFL!
Guess it matters much more to the "converts".

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Actually, an optical viewfinder IS “real-time” In fact, the opposite is true - there will always be a delay between the image captured by the sensor and that displayed electronically in the viewfinder. That lag has been an issue in the past for MILCs, but response has been improved markedly in newer cameras.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Want to find me an autofocus speed comparison between the fastest MILCs and the fastest DSLRs? Not in the 2000s, right now. Every manufacturer seems to be claiming the fastest AF, but please publish actual measurements by an independent source. And remember, the lens has to be specified as well as the light level and the body.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Hidden in this statement is an important key to the friction in this argument. Well...maybe it's not really hidden. The choice between "the best DSLRs" and MILCs is very close, and the overall battle is yet today not always won by the mirrorless choice. The choice between MILCs and "other DSLRs" is not nearly so close, and is rarely won by the DSLR. I would never say that the owner of an entry-level DSLR of any maker would not likely benefit from moving to a MILC. I am not aware of any of them that are entry level cameras, and I know that Nikon has announced that they are not going to introduce any more entry level cameras.

So I think there are actually two sub-arguments going on. I'd give more detail, but I've been accused of having bias against certain camera models, and I don't want to fuel that here. But I do think that comparing a pentamirror viewfinders to an EVF is a completely different thing from comparing a good pentaprism viewfinder to an EVF.