gwilliams6

tdekany Loc: Oregon

Are you serious?

I know of 2 of Pulitzer winners, Jay Dickman and Larry Price. Both use the Olympus m4/3 system.

gwilliams6

Yes Pulitzer winners use them like two-times Pulitzer winner Larry Price (Olympus),Pulitzer winner Brian Smith (Sony) , other Pulitzer winners and countless award winners from POY and World Press like myself.

https://www.facebook.com/GSWilliamsPhotography/

During my nearly 29 years as a senior staff photographer at the Philadelphia Inquirer, I was the recipient of over 150 international, national and regional photo awards,including from World Press and POY. Between my Newsday and Philadelphia Inquirer tenures ,I have received seven Pulitzer Prize nominations. I have also been nominated for the Overseas Press Award in Photojournalism. I was honored to be elected to and served on the Executive Board of NPPA and its Board of Directors. During my four years on the NPPA board, I was the recipient of NPPA's Sam Mellor Award for Outstanding service to NPPA (The National Press Photographers Association).

Since 2009 I have been an Adjunct Professor at Rowan University teaching Photojournalism and Digital Photography, while continuing my freelance photography.

My work has been published in numerous books, newspapers, magazines including Time, Newsweek, Rolling Stone, Paris Match, Der Spiegel, Good Housekeeping, Car and Driver and others. Many of my photos have been distributed worldwide by Associated Press, and other Wire Services, and have been exhibited in museums and permanent collections in several countries. Some of my subjects included professional sports, breaking news, celebrities, heads of state, royalty, and five Nobel Peace Prize laureates among others. As a compassionate photojournalist I have covered the ravages of war ,and documented the human condition in several countries, with my photos making a positive difference.

. We are living it, not fake news.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

https://www.markmetternich.com - he uses a Sony A7r2. Ditched his Canon gear, but he uses canon lenses

https://www.joeedelman.com - another pro who ditched his b810 and lenses for the m4/3 system.

I could spend days posting pros who switched from dslrs to mirrorless.

But if you can post on uhh, you should be able to google this info yourself.

If you did your own research, you’d sound less ignorant.

I honestly can’t believe how uneducated you are about this topic.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

User ID

What silly ass argument. The vast majority of the
pictures that you're talking about were NOT made
with SLRs, nor with Live View cameras. So, WTF
has any of that got to do with the current thread
and discussion ? You built a straw man and I hope
you brought plenty hot dogs and marshmallows.

How many pulitzer winners or famous artistes
drove Kias ? See, none. So no one today seeking
success in arts and communication is gonna see
any progress or success if they drive a Kia. Also
soy milk. None of them Pulitzers or Royals drank
soy milk. If you drive a Kia, drink soy milk, AND
use a live view camera, you are not following in
the footsteps of the masters and elders, and so
you have no street cred and your future is dim.

And don't be dabbling with SLRs neither. Almost
none of them saints of photography used those,
and the few that did were conscripted, and their
families held hostage by the SLR manufacturers.
They despised those clunky awkward noisy Rube
Goldberg contraptions.

You can look it up.


`

dandi Loc: near Seattle, WA

Another excellent award winning photographer who switched to Olympus after using Nikon for 40 years.
He "shoots" people with the camera, of course- his quote.

https://www.getolympus.com/us/en/visionaries/joe_edelman

Check his webpage, it's really nice.

matty

I am a crass beginner who managed to start with a mirrorless camera, and I love being able to change a setting and see what effect the change will have before I press the button. This might not be important to someone who has done this for years and knows what effect changes will have, but for me it has been a real game-changer.

jcboy3

At a certain age, you just don't want to look in the mirror anymore.

matty

I'll drink to that. :)

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Rather a specious argument at best. The Pulitzer winner is the photographer, not the camera. My guests do not enjoy my dinner because my cooktop is a GE. I can take a great photo with an old Brownie, or a terrible one with an 850. And the "mirrorless" is not new because it lacks a mirror, but because it is taking the best parts - the electronic and optical parts of the hybrid system, the DSLR, and ridding it of some of the mechanical components that have been handicapping it: i.e. the prism and mirror and the need for a separate focusing screen, a separate metering light path and the coordination and sequencing of all these mechanical work-arounds to make this intricate machine the DSLR. These have imposed a bulky body, and a long lens mount to focal plane distance that imposes limitations in turn upon lens efficiency, as well as very exacting mechanical tolerances to get the whole thing to work. Taking a whole lot of the intricate mechanical stuff out, expediting and simplifying the design while making it not just more efficient at the same tasks but allowing for even better performance is called "progress". Manufacturers are going to follow the yellow brick road, and the mirror and prism are going to relics very shortly.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Thank you. A rational argument.

anotherview Loc: California

Well put. Yet, I doubt your prediction: "the mirror and prism are going to (be) relics very shortly."

Too many functioning DSLRs exist in the hands of millions of photographers successfully producing worthy photographs using this camera for it to become a relic soon.

The process of transition more likely will happen incrementally. Some present users of DSLRs, a device now outmoded, will adopt the mirrorless camera for its advantages -- for example, a smaller size and lighter weight along with better control of results in camera. I sense that newcomers to photography will tend to go with the mirrorless camera. Obviously, mirrorless digital cameras improve significantly on the electro-mechanical apparatus of camera operation, by simplifying it while reducing the size and weight of this device.

That said, the history of photography involves improvement in technology. We might describe it as three eras:
(1) pre-film; (2) film; and (3) digital. Digital now divides into two branches: (A) DSLR, and (B) mirrorless.

Before the DSLR, film cameras dominated photography. Yes, film cameras later went passe quickly after introduction of the digital camera, but primarily because the digital camera along with computerized processing of images offered far more control to the photographer.

Experienced photographers also note the absence of the messiness of film photography as a plus of digital photography. They say goodbye to photographic chemicals with relief. They also appreciate the immediate review of an image presented by a digital camera. In addition, I note that unlike film images, digital images may achieve true colors. Film produced engineered looks. The list goes on. Meanwhile, film survives as a niche in the craft of photography.

Canon, Nikon, Fujifilm, and other camera-makers have switched to the mirrorless camera as the future of digital photography. In turn, photographers will follow this advance in technology. The DSLR in time will become passe just as film did.

I offer one caution in this transition to mirrorless cameras: Do not become an early adopter. Wait until the second or third iteration of the mirrorless camera. By then, this device will have incorporated various refinements giving better value.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

The adapter in the Canon case has no detrimental effect upon focus (Focus is on the sensor) ALL features work as well as added features like control ring adapter add features to the EF/EF-S lenses. All independent testers state the lenses actually work better on the R body than the EF bodies.
You seem to be confusing Nikon with Canon as to loss of features. With Canon ALL features work exactly or better on the R body as they do on the EF bodies. Collimation will not be a factor at all as the adapter by Canon is made to the same absolute precision as the body and lenses.
Your prejudice against Canon is coming through loud and clear. Review after review have shown and praised the EF to R adaptation and how excellent it is. So your lack of reading anything at all about the EF/EF-S to R is loud and clear and you are just talking from hatred for Canon like so many have done here with no basis of fact and outright deception and lies.

Bill_de Loc: US

I agree with most of what you said. But aren't we already at least at the second iteration of mirrorless? Just like with DSLRs both Nikon and Canon started with cameras that had smaller sensors and are now up to full frame. Other brands are way more advanced in many areas. I'm not suggesting that anyone or everyone should jump in now or ever. I am just reminded of the early days of personal computers. Year after year we heard 'wait for the next model' because it will be faster, etc., etc. Some folks grew old and died waiting for the next big improvement. If nobody buys the early models we never see a second of third generation.

I guess if enough folks save their money waiting for the next generation of camera, their next generation or maybe the generation after that will be thanking Grandma for leaving them all that money for their pretty new toys.



--