Mirrorless vs regular cameras... Opinion
Rongnongno wrote:
The progress is in the sensor, nowhere else.
The idea of using a display instead of through the lens is reverting to old time when folks were looking from above to focus...
Issues with the display...
- LIGHT!!! If too bright, good luck using the display.
- Eyes issue If one needs glasses all bets are off, there is no way to adjust for that but use the tiny in camera display in the 'view finder'. Go check for accuracy on that since the display is made of tiny pixels vs 'a normal light' (analog)
- Weight unbalance. (Light body, heavy lens)
That is one of the few reasons why I will not upgrade to mirrorless, even if I do appreciate the new sensors.
The progress is in the sensor, nowhere else. br b... (
show quote)
If you look through an optical viewfinder, you will see what is out there. What you won't see is what the image you take will look like. Mirrorless cameras show you what you will get when you take the picture. I watch many DSLR shooters take pictures and then try to look at the image on the LCD to see what they got. With mirrorless, I see in the viewfinder what I'm taking, and what I took, and I can enlarge it and inspect it and not have to shade my eyes in the bright sunlight.
cjc2 wrote:
That doesn't happen in "real time" but it is after-the-fact. What happens if you take multiple shots? Best of luck.
After the fact if I don't have Live View on...
I have a live view option if I elect to use it.
It's extremely rare that I do though.
Now tell me that my live preview is not "real time"....
I don't need "real time", but it sounds like you do for some reason.
Yea, we each are different, or
SHOULD I be shooting in real time? If so, why?
What is so
magical about live view/real time???
If I take multiple shots, I cannot see the previous shot preview anymore. It goes away when I shoot another shot, just like mirrorless.
Thanks, but it sounds like you believe things work out better for you than they do for me.
Perception.....
TonyP wrote:
All the technical so called 'advancements' are interesting but no one has mentioned the output.
I consider the actual photo that a camera produces the most important factor.
I enjoy many of the advantages of a little Panasonic LX100II, mainly its convenience and pretty good pics it can produce, but for some reason the real pleasure I now get from making pictures is from using the less 'convenient' Nikon D750.
Mirrorless is just the latest step in the evolution of cameras. Doesnt mean everyone is going to, or should adopt it and become an evangelist.
All the technical so called 'advancements' are int... (
show quote)
Everyone will adopt it eventually, unless they shoot Pentax.
Does the so-called Mirrorless EVF advantage matter at all - that is assuming you haven't totally blown your settings - If you are shooting in raw????
ken_stern wrote:
What an obnoxious fellow you are
Because he pointed out the error in your statement?
ken_stern wrote:
Does the so-called Mirrorless EVF advantage matter at all - that is assuming you haven't totally blown your settings - If you are shooting in raw????
Yes, absolutely. Live-view exposure aids (highlight clipping warning & histogram) can remove all metering uncertainty -- perfect exposure every time no bracketing, no second guessing the meter, no need to chimp, just click the shutter and know you nailed it.
How many times has this subject (DSLR vs Mirrorless) been beaten into the ground here???
For what it's worth, the proof for me has always been on paper. I see no difference in IQ between shots taken by a D7100, a D850 or a Z8...I have used all three with the same FX mount lenses. The advantage to the D850 and Z8, I can provide a much bigger print if the customer is interested. How I get that image does not matter.
IBIS is a nice option to have, as is the live histogram, yet I survived before they were part of the camera system. One thing I do like about the Z8, I get to preview a black and white shot before I take it.
I challenge the comment that live view exposure aids can remove all metering uncertainty; what about ND filters which I have not used on a Z8 yet? I use the histogram as a guideline; it gets me close.
Longshadow wrote:
I have a live view option if I elect to use it.
It's extremely rare that I do though.
So that would not make me jump into mirrorless......
I made regular use of the LV mode of my SLRs, but SLR LV reeeeeally sux bad. Its klunky and its slow and acoarst its never viewable in the eyepiece. So, I made the obvious upgrade to full time LV cameras.
[quote=CHG_CANON]Please, it's more than newer, bigger, stronger sensors.
ken_stern wrote:
Does the so-called Mirrorless EVF advantage matter at all - that is assuming you haven't totally blown your settings - If you are shooting in raw????
I already responded to this but I had an opportunity and went ahead and snapped an example for you. The answer is yes, absolutely. See the photo below.
So I grabbed some odd items, put them on the couch and took a snap with my Z7. The raw file is a perfect exposure. My definition of a perfect exposure is an exposure that fully utilizes the recording capacity of the sensor. With that exposure I have the best possible SNR and the best possible data to work with. Note the upper right corner inset. You see a raw histogram with exposure stats and EXIF data. To get a perfect exposure I place the diffuse highlight in the scene at the sensor clipping threshold and click. Note the exposure stats column in the yellow circle. The red channel is not at clipping, the blue channel is not at clipping and the green channel has just made it there with less than 1% clipped. I have the green channel just barely touching the sensor saturation threshold. You can't expose with that kind of precision using a DSLR and I'll never go back to one. I can do what I did here with any subject in any lighting condition every time. NOTE the EXIF data and the EC value used. I set the camera to expose +2.3 stops above the meter reading. Using a DSLR how would you have known to do that with precision and certainty knowing the raw file exposure was perfect when you clicked the shutter release?
jcboy3 wrote:
If you look through an optical viewfinder, you will see what is out there. What you won't see is what the image you take will look like. Mirrorless cameras show you what you will get when you take the picture. I watch many DSLR shooters take pictures and then try to look at the image on the LCD to see what they got. With mirrorless, I see in the viewfinder what I'm taking, and what I took, and I can enlarge it and inspect it and not have to shade my eyes in the bright sunlight.
How did you cope I wonder, while waiting for someone to invent your mirrorless camera.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.