burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Digital Mirrorless cameras may, or may not, have optical or electronic viewfinders. They do have LCD or OLED screens. They may, or may not, have interchangeable lenses. Even a smartphone qualifies as a digital mirrorless camera.

Digital MILCs (Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Cameras) may, or may not have EVFs or optical viewfinders. They do have LCD or OLED screens. The ones without viewfinders (with only a rear screen) are historically the LEAST desirable mirrorless cameras made. They are disappearing, because the screens aren't useful in daylight, and they must be held away from the face to use, increasing instability.

Digital EVIL (Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens) cameras are mirrorless, and have both EVFs and LCD or OLED screens.

MOST UHH discussions of mirrorless cameras from the past several years assume we are discussing Digital EVILs — cameras with EVFs, LCD/OLED screens, and interchangeable lenses. They are the ones most likely to replace dSLRs for various purposes.

Yet a certain number of UHH members still immediately think of the early MILCs without EVFs or optical viewfinders, any time we mention mirrorless. Most of those were horrible, slow, impractical, frustrating devices, and should never have been made, much less sold!

BebuLamar

I have only heard of the term "Mirrorless" since around 2010 so anything made before that isn't mirrorless regardless whether it has a mirror. If I am not mistaken the first camera ever made over 100 years ago didn't have a mirror. Nobody called them mirrorless.

hogesinwa Loc: Dalyellup Western Australia

😁true

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

True. But Epson announced their RD1 digital rangefinder in March of 2004, making it the first digital interchangeable-lens mirrorless camera to hit the market. It contained a 6 megapixel APS-C sensor, took leica M-mount lenses, and cost $3000. It made some sense to long time Leica users, but it didn't sell well.

The term, "mirrorless," came into popular usage after Panasonic introduced their first mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras in 2008. The Lumix DMC-G1 had more of an SLR form factor (look and feel), but, of course, had an EVF in place of the mirror, screen, and pentaprism system.

BebuLamar

I do not consider it mirrorless. Nobody called it so then.

User ID

Waaaaaaay too direct, simple, accurate
and to-the-point for this forum ;-)

Whether or not Canon's R-series will alter
the 4 year pattern for the 5D-series is an
interesting thought, but is unknown and
very much beside-the-point, a non-issue.
Acoarst, in these forums, non-issues and
unknowns are the "currency of the realm"
and the "nectar of the gods".

.

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

Your point? By the way, I make it a habit of not assuming anything.

b roll wanabee

I guess it is more about what it will do. If you have $4000 to spend on camera bodies why not get a 5ds and for video get a c series.

How much better is a 5dmkii vs a 5dmkiii at taking pictures. Not that much in my opinion.
Do you really need a 50mp camera?

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

I was not just responding specifically to you. Your post triggered a clarification for the broader community who reads these threads.

The term, 'mirrorless' wasn't a thing — or a spelled as a single word — before 2008. Yes, nearly all non-SLR and non-TLR and non-dSLR cameras are technically mirror-less. But the term, 'mirrorless' applies in specific contexts.

Kuzano

Good Luck. It's quite happenstance and your guess is as good as anybody on this or any other site. What will the finance division of your household say if you are wrong and the new model, if one is in the works comes out a week after you deduce you are good for a year.

Take your lumps like we all do. Most decisions are made on the fantasy that the next model will get me over the lumps to nirvana professional.

During the film days that fantasy camera often took 2+ years. With digital, the time lapse is often days or or weeks. A readily tappable home equity loan is in vogue in this era. Take your chances. I went back to film. I'm not fretting over the intro of the next level of film camera. The dissappointment in short waits for advances in digital never did give me a camera that would outshoot my best film days.

Many are going back, which is why I make most of my money selling film Camera's from days of yore on eBay.

Did you EVER shoot film. Ecstacy lives in that realm.

Kuzano

Off a bit on timing. Both Panasonic and Olympus introduced MILC, Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens camera's in 2006. I know because I purchase the Oly 4/3 pro DSLR in 2003 for
$2000 (body) and then moved to mirrorless with Oly in 2006. Smaller and lighter including the lenses and went on to amass the largest inventory of mirrorless AF lens in mirrorless history. Canon and Nikon waited to get seriously on that boat just a couple of years ago. Nikon offered up the "toy" Nikon 1 mirrorless camera perhaps 5 years ago.... an extremely laughable exercise.

The mirrorless movement history can really screw with your consideration of who is serious or not about mirrorless.

DanielB Loc: San Diego, Ca

The 5D's are built like tanks and are a good investment. You would definitely get your $$ worth out of it specially if you have the EF L lenses to go with it.

ronz Loc: Florida

I would consider buying a lightly used 5D III. I still believe it is the workhorse of the Canon family. My backup has almost 250,000 on it. I am waiting for the V and then make my #! my new backup. I have been using my 7D II for a lot of my work also and it is a great all around model. Liked my old DX but wouldn't go back to it. You can find a refurb at a great price you will not be disappointed, I promise.

BebuLamar

Which was your mirrorless Olympus in 2006?

Malena73

As a two-way radio technician I have to disagree with you on your comment about Motorola lifespan. They will stop supporting the higher end radios around 10 years to force the police and first respondes to replace or upgrade the software. If they are taken care of and not beat to hell then they will be able to repaired for much longer than you would think. The batteries are not usually the cause of having to get a new radio. There are always after market batteries out there, and I have seen some last longer than Motorola brand.

Just my 2 cents worth of knowledge. 😁