DSLR v Mirrorless
Jan 16, 2019 09:26:04 #
Newer technology??? I was using a mirrorless digital 20+ years ago. It had the same shortcomings that I find in today's mirrorless cameras, the EVF.
--Bob
--Bob
stevetassi wrote:
You’re also neglecting that since mirrorless is newer technology, then economies of scale come into play. Furthermore the diagram is accounting only for the optical path. Let’s add the viewfinder design comparison between DSLR and mirrorless into the mix. Optical(DSLR) is much simpler then evf(mirrorless).
Jan 16, 2019 09:35:38 #
Tomcat5133
Loc: Gladwyne PA
Strodav wrote:
My local camera shop here in Houston held a major vendor day event a few months back [the day I bought a D850]. Nikon was there and as an EE, I asked several questions about Nikon sensors from several different angles, especially sensors for the D7200, D500, D750 and D850. I was assured Nikon has its own sensor R&D group, they design all their own sensors, but contract out to various CMOS foundries for parts built to Nikon specs and quality standards. Was I lied to?
The only thing I read when I bought the Nikon D800 was the sensor was from Sony.
Jan 16, 2019 09:38:44 #
billnikon wrote:
Nice graph. And that's about it. I really don't understand the reason for your post. Most every photographer on the planet knows that.
A lot of newbies do not, and cannot visualize the complexity of the mechanics in their cameras. I find it near miraculous that DSLR's work as well as they do. They are truly remarkable machines.
Jan 16, 2019 09:42:34 #
rmalarz wrote:
Newer technology??? I was using a mirrorless digital 20+ years ago. It had the same shortcomings that I find in today's mirrorless cameras, the EVF.
--Bob
--Bob
The EVF may have been coming up short 20 years ago. Electronic devices have changed considerably since then. 20 years ago mobile phones were as big as bricks. Nowadays the EVF is the star of the performance.
Jan 16, 2019 09:46:23 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
Tom Daniels wrote:
The only thing I read when I bought the Nikon D800 was the sensor was from Sony.
That is true, Nikon is currently using many sensor's made by Sony. But I believe the newest sensor's employed in the Z's belong to Nikon. Their has been a real turn around in manufacturing since the Nikon Camera division had real problems about a year or so ago. R&D has been ramped up and new products are emerging. The new Z and the 500 FL are examples. I used to be a Nikon Rep. way back in the middle ages. But I still have contacts within the industry. Big changes are taking place. Lots of folks at the top have retired and are gone. Like I said, Nikon Cooperation is finally pumping money into the camera division. It will be interesting to see how this plays out over the next few years.
I would personally love to see a 400 f4 FL lens. Or a 600 f5.6 FL lens. Maybe soon? I can only hope and keep my ear open when I talk to a few of the folks I still know within the industry.
Jan 16, 2019 09:47:46 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
CatMarley wrote:
A lot of newbies do not, and cannot visualize the complexity of the mechanics in their cameras. I find it near miraculous that DSLR's work as well as they do. They are truly remarkable machines.
Agreed.
Jan 16, 2019 09:54:09 #
Tomcat5133
Loc: Gladwyne PA
I have been in my own businesses for years. Coming to the end of my cycle still getting a few projects.
i had an art studio with big corp. customers and a production company which is down to me now.
An employee who I considered smart ask me how much I wanted to charge on a product.
My answer was "as much as I can get." I think this is true of camera makers. And I respect the
skill and components are expensive to create. My customers were on a project basis. I would produce
Scott Papers National Sales Meeting staging and software. I always went for at least 100% markup.
My overhead was never in the estimate. But I had a nice office and 10 people. And some gear.
As for DSLR's which I like very much and had mirrorless has it's advantages.
It is hard for me to believe that Canon and Nikon took so long to create their mirrorless.
I don't think from what I read that they are better than my Sony's. The a7s II (I had original a7s)
was a game changer. Just like the Canon Mark (?) that a video was made on that started
the whole indie revolution. My cropped sensor a6300 just amazing me with its videos and stills
IQ. Sony and Panasonic jumped in with cameras that could be used for video (the monster) and
stills. Their are other great mirrorless haven't had experience with.
My thought is all these cameras today DSLR & Mirrorless are just amazing.
i had an art studio with big corp. customers and a production company which is down to me now.
An employee who I considered smart ask me how much I wanted to charge on a product.
My answer was "as much as I can get." I think this is true of camera makers. And I respect the
skill and components are expensive to create. My customers were on a project basis. I would produce
Scott Papers National Sales Meeting staging and software. I always went for at least 100% markup.
My overhead was never in the estimate. But I had a nice office and 10 people. And some gear.
As for DSLR's which I like very much and had mirrorless has it's advantages.
It is hard for me to believe that Canon and Nikon took so long to create their mirrorless.
I don't think from what I read that they are better than my Sony's. The a7s II (I had original a7s)
was a game changer. Just like the Canon Mark (?) that a video was made on that started
the whole indie revolution. My cropped sensor a6300 just amazing me with its videos and stills
IQ. Sony and Panasonic jumped in with cameras that could be used for video (the monster) and
stills. Their are other great mirrorless haven't had experience with.
My thought is all these cameras today DSLR & Mirrorless are just amazing.
Jan 16, 2019 10:12:17 #
At present, so far as I can tell, the mirrorless camera design, while simpler, of course, still does not outdo the DSLR in image quality. A showing of superior IQ via mirrorless cameras will nudge me toward this advance in technology. Meanwhile, I find all I need with my Canon DSLRs.
Jan 16, 2019 10:13:17 #
rmalarz wrote:
Newer technology??? I was using a mirrorless digital 20+ years ago. It had the same shortcomings that I find in today's mirrorless cameras, the EVF.
--Bob
--Bob
Was it the Logitech Fotoman?
Jan 16, 2019 10:14:01 #
cool. now where's the graphic showing how the mirrorless drains all that battery life by having to power that digital viewfinder?
Jan 16, 2019 10:17:14 #
hammond wrote:
cool. now where's the graphic showing how the mirrorless drains all that battery life by having to power that digital viewfinder?
But oddly, real users are not finding this to be a problem. Most people with DSLRs have the screen on a lot for chimping. With modern EVFs and their WYSIWYG nature, the rear screen can be turned off since the need for chimping is greatly reduced or eliminated. I think the rear screen is a bigger battery drain than the EVF.
Jan 16, 2019 10:23:37 #
Jan 16, 2019 10:32:24 #
jackpinoh
Loc: Kettering, OH 45419
CatMarley wrote:
I found a very nice graphic comparing the guts of the DSLR to the Mirrorless MILC.
The DSLR diagram leaves out the focus sensor.
Jan 16, 2019 11:13:30 #
Black Elk Peak wrote:
... With a pellicle mirror there is no "black out " when the shutter is released allowing users to continuously track the object.
BUT, you will probably lose almost 1 f/stop of light which can reach the film plane ...
... THAT may-or-may-not be an issue for some people.
BTW. The Canon Pellix was NOT significantly quieter (if at all!?!) than a Canon FT despite not having the mirror slap ...
... yes, I made the mistake of buying one, so it's a first-hand observation!
Jan 16, 2019 11:43:28 #
Architect1776 wrote:
I had the same econ classes.
It's just that I see no real downward trend look at those who have been at it for years in mirrorless.
Sony regurgitates slight improvements but still no drop in price.
Yes once there is competition especially from Nikon seeing they use the same sensors there might be a drop.
But mechanically the simplicity still begs the question.
It's just that I see no real downward trend look at those who have been at it for years in mirrorless.
Sony regurgitates slight improvements but still no drop in price.
Yes once there is competition especially from Nikon seeing they use the same sensors there might be a drop.
But mechanically the simplicity still begs the question.
The pricing has absolutely NOTHING to do with cost to produce - the camera manufacturers are using market pricing - what the market can bear. Hype is used to put the particular camera in a bracket with peers (the higher the better) which also gives the pricing bracket. Then you monitor sales numbers and adjust pricing to stay in the game with that particular model.
Off course you are paying attention to manufacturing pricing but trust me here - the raw manufacturing price of high end cameras is probably only 20-30% of the retail price - the rest is marketing, distribution cost and profit + a little bit for warranty repairs/replacements
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.