wattsy Posted September 17, 2018 Share #21 Posted September 17, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) The official reason given at the time by camera makers - including Leica regarding frame lines. Whether it was a smokescreen for cost-cutting I don't know, I wouldn't put it past them. However, how much price and size difference do those 3% make? I would venture - close to nil. It's not a "smokescreen". I rather doubt that Canon and Nikon claim that the less than 100% viewfinder coverage coverage of their low-to-mid-range DSLRs is to match the view of a cropped slide. I don't recall any manufacturer 'back in the day' making that kind of claim for their film SLRs either. 100% viewfinder coverage has always been the preserve of the more expensive, and better engineered, pro and semi-pro SLR models and that remains the case for DSLRs. Your point about Leica RF framelines is not relevant. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 17, 2018 Posted September 17, 2018 Hi wattsy, Take a look here Ming Thein on mirrorless. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
LocalHero1953 Posted September 17, 2018 Share #22 Posted September 17, 2018 (edited) Well, speaking as a dRF, dSLR and Mirrorless shooter (yes I do use all) I would disagree with all the the above perceived 'advantages'. I get as many/more viable 'keepers' from my Ms as I do from the other equipment. The 'problem' with mirrorless is, as I have stated before, that until someone comes up with lens solutions which yield small, light, fast lenses for them, then they will be size illusory. To date only Leica have tackled this problem by their use of offset micro-lenses. The main manufacturers who are now into the mirrorless concept have, for the most part, adopted the idea of 'legacy' viability and it is this alongside 'conventional' thinking on lens/(flat, no offset) sensor interaction which will dictate the size of lenses for the foreseeable future. A pity, because the option for utilising smaller, faster (and even, potentially a lot lighter) lenses, has proved viable in the M, and this might have been a way forward especially if lens/software integration had been utilised too. I should have said in my first post that it is my experience that I get more keepers with my CL and SL than I do with my M240. I don't doubt that others may find a different outcome, but I don't think my experience is particularly unusual either - others here have made similar comments. I agree with your comments on size. Edited September 17, 2018 by LocalHero1953 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted September 17, 2018 Share #23 Posted September 17, 2018 Take a look at some of Canon's 'pancake' lenses - they are small. Not familiar with Canon, you say small, what F stop; f2, f2.8? Couple of pictures comparing compact M and compact SLR lens; Summilux 50mm ASPH and Nikkor 50mm f1.4 AFD. Some distortion is due to phone camera wide angle lens. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/289535-ming-thein-on-mirrorless/?do=findComment&comment=3594541'>More sharing options...
mmradman Posted September 17, 2018 Share #24 Posted September 17, 2018 I should have said in my first post that it is my experience that I get more keepers with my CL and SL than I do with my M240. I don't doubt that others may find a different outcome, but I don't think my experience is particularly unusual either - others here have made similar comments. I agree with your comments on size. Keeper rate can be anything, sometime it is the camera and sometime it is the photographic occasion. In terms of focusing precision SL is difficult to beat. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted September 17, 2018 Share #25 Posted September 17, 2018 Not familiar with Canon, you say small, what F stop; f2, f2.8? Search for Canon 40mm f/2.8 STM - the lens is barely thicker than the back cap and yet it has an AF motor inside. Whilst its an f/2.8 lens it illustrates that small lenses can be AF. There are many other examples too. AF technology has progressed. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BernardC Posted September 17, 2018 Share #26 Posted September 17, 2018 100% viewfinder coverage has always been the preserve of the more expensive, and better engineered, pro and semi-pro SLR models and that remains the case for DSLRs. 100% coverage requires huge mechanical precision, so that's why it isn't offered in cheaper cameras. The viewfinder optical path needs to align precisely with the direct path (film or digital sensor) to within a fraction of a millimeter, at all temperatures, even after years of hard use. Back in the film days, you pictures would be cropped slightly by slide frames, and more so when printed. That means that 100% coverage was a disadvantage for almost all users: you could try to frame accurately, but the end results would be cropped. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BernardC Posted September 17, 2018 Share #27 Posted September 17, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) Ming is repeating one of the fallacies of mirrorless: that it necessarily leads to smaller cameras and lenses. That's a marketing line going back to the original micro 4/3 cameras, but it was rarely realized in actual product. Only a few "pancake" lenses and slow kit zooms were noticeably smaller (but not that much smaller than SLR pancake lenses). I find that the real advantages or mirrorless are (in order of importance) the ability to compose in black and white - this is an advantage even if your final images are in colour. the ability to view exposure in real time - great in high-ratio lighting (like shooting against a window) the ability to "see in the dark" the ability to focus at 1:1 for critical shots The main downsides are the viewing delay and the poor viewfinder performance in bright/contrasty lighting. 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted September 17, 2018 Share #28 Posted September 17, 2018 Ming is repeating one of the fallacies of mirrorless: that it necessarily leads to smaller cameras and lenses. That's a marketing line going back to the original micro 4/3 cameras, but it was rarely realized in actual product. Only a few "pancake" lenses and slow kit zooms were noticeably smaller (but not that much smaller than SLR pancake lenses). I find that the real advantages or mirrorless are (in order of importance) the ability to compose in black and white - this is an advantage even if your final images are in colour. the ability to view exposure in real time - great in high-ratio lighting (like shooting against a window) the ability to "see in the dark" the ability to focus at 1:1 for critical shots The main downsides are the viewing delay and the poor viewfinder performance in bright/contrasty lighting. I also glanced over the Ming's article but i thought he said not to expect reduction in lens sizes with compact mirrorless cameras. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BernardC Posted September 17, 2018 Share #29 Posted September 17, 2018 I also glanced over the Ming's article but i thought he said not to expect reduction in lens sizes with compact mirrorless cameras. Yes, but he mentions size several times on his way to that point, as if it were a critical factor. It's a non-issue. My hands are a certain size, and the camera has to fit that. A camera that is too small or too big won't be comfortable. The useful info from his blog post, which will not surprise to Leica users, is that you shouldn't expect top performance from adapted legacy lenses, and that UI is important. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted September 30, 2018 Share #30 Posted September 30, 2018 Ming will explain in his next post that he no longer works for Hasselblad. Here’s what he wrote in the comments section of his Z7 review.... “Tor says: October 1, 2018 at 12:46 AM For the same reasons you needed to inform your readers about joining Hasselblad, I think you should be clear on your current position: Are you working for Hasselblad or not? Reply Ming Thein says: October 1, 2018 at 7:09 AM No, and I’ll explain why in the next post.” That should be an interesting read. Jeff 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted October 1, 2018 Share #31 Posted October 1, 2018 Ming will explain in his next post that he no longer works for Hasselblad. Here’s what he wrote in the comments section of his Z7 review.... “Tor says: October 1, 2018 at 12:46 AM For the same reasons you needed to inform your readers about joining Hasselblad, I think you should be clear on your current position: Are you working for Hasselblad or not? Reply Ming Thein says: October 1, 2018 at 7:09 AM No, and I’ll explain why in the next post.” That should be an interesting read. Jeff It is either money or question of freedom of expression, i would assume the latter. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellfleet Posted October 3, 2018 Share #32 Posted October 3, 2018 Ming will explain in his next post that he no longer works for Hasselblad. Here’s what he wrote in the comments section of his Z7 review.... “Tor says: October 1, 2018 at 12:46 AM For the same reasons you needed to inform your readers about joining Hasselblad, I think you should be clear on your current position: Are you working for Hasselblad or not? Reply Ming Thein says: October 1, 2018 at 7:09 AM No, and I’ll explain why in the next post.” That should be an interesting read. Jeff Ming's explanation - https://blog.mingthein.com/2018/10/03/moving-on/ 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
meerec Posted October 4, 2018 Share #33 Posted October 4, 2018 Ming's explanation - https://blog.mingthein.com/2018/10/03/moving-on/ Thanks, mate for posting this link. Just bought his Hasselblad 50 mark II lens. Happy!! 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.