tom0511 Posted December 28, 2019 Share #1 Posted December 28, 2019 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) I know - old discussion. But time moves on. And I am still wondering if mirrorless is really the solution. What I like... + dont have to worry about lens calibration. AF is accurate at all f-stops and all distances. + great for adapting vintage lenses or other non-native lenses, like M-glass etc. + face detection...(if it works) - I think it should work better than it actually does + easy to get the right exposure because you get a good feeling for exposure in the EVF but then... - - C-AF still far behind good phase-detection D-SDLrs like D5, it is not only slower but also going back and forth less accurate and more difficult to judge if you got the shot or if you didnt - you look on a limited DR EVF which does not show the real light and color - SL2 when using C-AF does show a slightly blurred image - this irritates me I am fully commited to SL system... but somtimes I wonder if mirrorless is really a step forward or a step backward Edited December 28, 2019 by tom0511 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 28, 2019 Posted December 28, 2019 Hi tom0511, Take a look here is mirrorless the solution for most people?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
thighslapper Posted December 28, 2019 Share #2 Posted December 28, 2019 (edited) Computational photography is the future and any deficiencies in the current mirrorless cameras are purely related to the processing power/power consumption/heat issues inherent in trying to shoehorn everything into a compact package with a largish sensor. Sensor and processor technology will overcome all of these problems ..... as long as the manufacturers decide to call a halt to the current megapixel war, which is already into territory where resolution is perfectly adequate for 99% of users. You will eventually get to a point ..... like with printers, where any improvements in technology really don't equate to anything of much benefit to the user and are just marginal gimmicks to con people into upgrading. Moving parts are basically old technology ...... DSLR is on the road to extinction. Edited December 28, 2019 by thighslapper Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted December 28, 2019 Share #3 Posted December 28, 2019 (edited) As long as DSLRs can do AFC tracking with long tele lenses and AF in low-light better than mirrorless, they won’t be replaced, IMO. I’m not sure this comes down to merely computational power or if there’s a fundamental advantage in having a separate PDAF chip rather than include PDAF points on the image sensor. See this article here: https://fstoppers.com/originals/why-mirrorless-autofocus-means-trade-offs-390040 Edited December 28, 2019 by Chaemono 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted December 28, 2019 Share #4 Posted December 28, 2019 I think the rangefinder is the best of both worlds: No slamming mirrors Optical viewfinder with no lagging 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caissa Posted December 28, 2019 Share #5 Posted December 28, 2019 (edited) I would not want to say this is a solution for these people and that for those. But I can say that if you want mirrorless, then there is no obstacle. And if you want DSLR I also see no obstacle, only maybe less lens choice. The big advantage of EVF I see in the possibility of preview and careful planning. The future will be easier for mirrorless because digital is advancing in big steps. (Better EVFs, faster sensors (for AF and global shutter), faster CPUs, better software, bigger buffers, less energy consumption, lower prices, etc. Most digital things develop rapidly. Film/video will thrive and completely replace stills (stills will be produced from films with a lot of software enhancements, see phones with 3 lenses). The analog parts (mirror, OVF) will probably not advance a lot. (Neither in speed nor in price) But in the wider future (decades) both will be replaced. (Maybe by phones, or by spectacles or as part of clothing or by body implants, etc.) More and more miniaturization (and probably no mirrors). But all is just a wild guess .... Edited December 29, 2019 by caissa Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RexGig0 Posted December 29, 2019 Share #6 Posted December 29, 2019 (edited) Lens calibration may be required, with mirror-less cameras. I experienced this with a Canon EOS M3 camera, and an EF-M 22mm lens. The camera worked well with at least one of my EF lenses, on an EF-to-M adapter. A misaligned mirror mechanism Is one thing that can require adjustment, but other things must, also, be within proper spec, for focus to be accurate. I do not remember whether it front-focused, or back-focused. My EOS M3 camera was ruined by water damage, before I had the camera and lens evaluated, so I do not know whether the camera or lens was defective. I still have the lens, stored in a cabinet, until I decide what to do with it. I am a sample of only one, certainly not ”most people.” I like rangefinder much of the time, DSLR some of the time, and mirror-depriveD interchangeable-lens-camera a small part of the time, depending upon my subjects, and mood. Edited December 29, 2019 by RexGig0 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.