Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Oh, I don't worry about the shutter being off at all. On 1/250th that might be .0012 seconds off. (.0003 seconds for 1/1000th)
I just use it.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Improvement begins with I - as in: I will buy a mirrorless camera today.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Based on all the advertising, always a good source of honesty, I believe that mirrorless cameras are the best kind ever made. That's my opinion, and I'm sticking with it. 😋

PhotoMono123 Loc: Houston, Texas

Your comments are no better than your math.

The photographer makes the picture. The camera is just a tool.

therwol Loc: USA

Every time this topic comes up, he makes sarcastic comments like that. He doesn't believe it. He's making fun of people who do believe it.

User ID

This is primarily an entertainment site.
Very good to see that youre enjoying it.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Some of us call it tongue-in-cheek humor.

Perception....

User ID

Ever notice that animals shun political press coferences, where the collective shutter and mirror noise is waaaay beyond ridiculous ?

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

No, never noticed.
Never really paid attention either.
But I can understand only two being able to do so.

RodeoMan Loc: St Joseph, Missouri

I,m just tickled that Rongongomo found a new subject for us to discuss and what a soft ball toss to Paul Sager.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

Rubbish. Tools can matter. Not in every instance but there are cases where there's a right tool for the job and it matters.

I bought my first mirrorless camera about a dozen years ago. I had been shooting with a Canon 5dmkII and I decided I was ready for a change maybe to something lighter. I started shopping the way I have always shopped for cameras -- looking at lenses. The first lens I knew I wanted was a super-wide in the range of 80 degrees angle of view (21 on and FF body). My goal in searching was to find a lens with as little distortion as possible. At that point I was still thinking I'd end up with a DSLR and so I knew the lens would have to have some distortion (the mirror requires it).

As I searched I ran across the Fuji 14mm f/2.8 and the reviews said the lens had zero distortion! What the bleep!! That's not possible I said, and then it hit me; of course it must be for a camera without a mirror! The more I checked the more I realized I needed to start with that lens. I hadn't planned to consider mirrorless bodies but that's what I ended up with. I had to pick a body that supported the lens I wanted.

When I got the lens I was really excited. I had done some commercial architecture work back in the film days. I had Hasselblads back then but didn't use them for architecture because the lenses sucked (that 40mm Distagon was a distortion dog). So I used roll backs on my Arca and non-retrofocus wideangle lenses. When I switched to digital one of the things that irritated me was my inability to get a low to distortion free super wide lens -- all my cameras had bleepin bleep mirrors in them.

Finally with my new Fuji lens and camera that problem was solved. I still have that lens and use it, it's great and with it I take photos that no DSLR user can take while relying on the mirror in their camera. I have the right tool for the job and DSLR users can't get the right tool. No amount of skill and experience can help a DSLR user wish their wrong tool to stop being wrong.

Jerry Coupe Loc: Kent, WA

Chg_Canon added a good list of features to the discussion.

No question too, that there are some extremely good DSLRs that meet many photographers needs and will continue to do so as long as the camera functions and/or can be repaired or replaced with a similar pre-owned model.

Additionally, no one today is forcing folks to discard their DSLRs and purchase mirrorless cameras. For some, mirrorless is an advantage while others will still continue to use their other models very successfully. It is all in the photos produced in the end.

bikinkawboy Loc: north central Missouri

I wonder what “improvement” will be next for cameras or are mirrorless the pinnacle of camera technology?

In times before SLRs, most improvements and refinements involved film.

After that the standard (as in the universal 35mm camera built by most manufacturers) was SLR technology; basically what you see is what you get in addition to easily interchangeable lenses. Most improvements involved optics. At the very end auto focus and exposure came about.

Then the industry standard became a SLR with a sensor instead of film. Auto focus and exposure were refined and “new” improvements involved sensors, processors, and image stabilization. Good optics had pretty much already been perfected and so called improvements were mostly in reduced weight, reduced cost and greater zoom lengths. No real earth shattering leaps in image quality due to improved lenses.

In recent years the mirrorless (SLR without the mirror) has become the industry standard. Unless I’m mistaken, most new mirrorless sensors, processors, auto focus-exposure, etc aren’t much different than their DSLR predecessors. The selling point seems to be no mirror and increased frames per second plus a few other things already mentioned here. It doesn’t sound like there has been any major leap in image quality between DSLR and mirrorless.

It seems to me that image quality because of optics has pretty much leveled out and can’t be made much better, at least in consumer grade products. Sensors and processor improvements may have leveled out as well. Unless someone comes up with some radical new concept in photography, mirrorless (to me at least) appears to be better at applying or taking advantage of current sensor and processor capabilities.

The point is that most things, especially mechanical items, can be improved upon only to a certain point. The time comes where you can’t make good any gooder because it’s as good as it’s ever going to get.

Anyone have any ideas of where consumer camera technology may go from here, at least without implanting a sensor and processor inside your brain?

TonyP Loc: New Zealand

'Anyone have any ideas of where consumer camera technology may go from here, at least without implanting a sensor and processor inside your brain?'

I think cameras have more and more, subtly, become computers posing as cameras.
So next step, gradually, more and more AI based 'in camera' software.

MtManMD Loc: Beaverton, Oregon

I suspect in another year or two I'll just be able to tell AI on my computer to create me a high-resolution photo of grizzly 399 and her cubs all standing up on hind legs and looking at me from a few yards away with the Teton mountains in the background. I won't even need a camera, expensive telephoto lens, or need to drive there to take the photo. I guess I'd better cancel that new telephoto lens I have on order.

Already, when you look on a site like Facebook, it is very difficult to determine what photos are real and what isn't.