Why Mirrorless Rocks Complilation

<p>I'm sure people know that I'm partial to small cameras. But what is so great about mirrorless besides the smaller size? Let's put a list together, okay? I'm using mirrorless in a broad range including phone cams. I'll start... </p>

<p>1. Ubiquity: This helps often especially street shooting. If I want to be hip and get noticed, I'll bring out the widelux or F2AS maybe even buy a roll of film;)<br>

2. No more that crappy dust/dirt on the focusing screen crap<br>

3. I can frame precisely either in 4:3, 3:2, 1:1, 16:9 at the push of a dial or via menus</p>

<p><br /></p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p>OK, coffee can wait for a few moments...</p>

<p>IQ- Image Quality. Current larger image sensors (m4/3, APSc, ...), and their attendant electronics, offer better dynamic range, detail and better higher ISO images.<br />DOF- Depth Of Field - greater selective focus capability from larger sensors.<br />(Re-)Use of old lenses- Current AF lenses can be great, but many old MF lenses produce much better images.</p>

I've been enjoying m4/3 lately. Size is a big factor, and then there's cost (there are a couple of Olympus models that

are only about 2 years old but very inexpensive - I picked up the E-PL1 2 lens kit for $400). But the biggest one for

me is, use of my Minolta manual focus glass without optics in the adapter. A few of the lenses are just amazing on

digital.

<p>Oh joy, another, fanboy, pissing contest thread!</p>

<p>What exactly is a fanboy pissing contest thread, Bruce? FWIW this thread isn't brand specific...</p>

<p>Okay, if it's more appropriate...this thread is for discussing advantages of mirrorless cameras. I am sure most know reflex's advantages already. Bruce, you are welcome to join, of course. If not, don't piss here. Start up your own freaking thread:)</p>

<p>Easier focusing with manual focus lenses</p>

<p>Easier metering with manual focus lenses</p>

<p>Darn good video.</p>

<p>Tool of choice for macro work. No MLU needed</p>

<p> I keep thinking about a nice M6 classic but you know the money is an issue with kids in college. Just have to wait a few years. However I would like to goin the mirrorless world. Until then I will just keep shooting the F100. I must admit my focusing screen does not have a dust problem. If it did I could just take it out and clean it. </p>

<p>I have a camera bag with three lenses, an EVF, upgrade flash that weighs 3.5 pounds as opposed to my Canon bag that weighs about twenty pounds. I means that I carry it much more often.</p>

<p>If I go out with a pancake and just the body it weighs 11 ounces.</p>

<p>This light weight camera produces images co-equal to my 5D including high ISO performance.</p>

<p>I now do more than eighty per cent of my photography with this camera.</p>

<p>I can shoot with one hand with it.</p>

<p>The software is more capable in terms of face recognition, Anti motion blur (combining pictures to produce excellent high ISO pictures), panoramas, ten frames per second, etc.</p>

<p>People don't notice it on the street. The LCD can be used like a MF waist level finder and that combined with its relatively small size make it stealthy.</p>

<p>It has focus peaking and enlarges the pictures in the EVF while manual focusing.</p>

<p>I could say more but it also has its drawbacks. I have shot some action with it but when I shoot sports I go to my DSLR for focus tracking and faster telephotos in low light.</p>

<p>The LCD and EVF show depth of field and actual exposure as opposed to an optical VF which does not. This is because the the LCD and EVF take their information from the sensor rather than a mirror.</p>

<p>It is just more convenient all around. My particular camera has the same Sony sensor used in OEM DSLRs and the print quality at 13x19 is indistinguishable from my DSLR. So guess which camera I take when not pressed for only what an L lens can give.</p>

<p>Below taken with a point and shoot. Ugly.</p><div></div>

<p>Good responses, but they've all overlooked what I consider to be the biggest draw to small cameras:</p>

<p>They're fun!</p>

<p>(Not that large cameras <em>aren't</em> fun... but it's a different kind of fun. It's like driving a big SUV vs. driving a go-cart.)</p>

<p>For my landscapes there are 4 advantages: light weight of either a camera + one lens or a lens kit covering a good range of fl (huge advantage for long mountain days, and of course a lighter tripod is OK too); big dof; encourages play (this may sound daft, but if I want to try camera movement blurs, soft focus, etc etc it seems very natural on a M43); and excellent for close-ups (let's say anything from 0.2 - 2 metres across) where the contrast is limited (here the IQ difference between FX and M43 seems to me at its smallest). Unfortunately there are disadvantages too from the smaller sensor - limited dynamic range, and more obvious noise, are the big two. So as ever, it's compromise - but what a compromise!</p>

<p>I may have missed it, but what about "lack of mirror". The lack of a mirror slap is huge and leads to sharper images both on tripod and slower handheld shutter speeds.</p>

>>> But what is so great about mirrorless besides the smaller size? Let's put a list together, okay?

 

4. My mirrorless camera in addition to taking great pictures, can also take notes, record voices (including the ones in my head), show my

position on a map, take/display reminders and appointments, postprocess images, show photo portfolios

to people on the street, find the correct bus to go from point a to b showing real-time bus positioning,

browse the web, play music, supports texting, checks weather forecasts, find the best gas prices locally,

do email, buy crap from amazon, and take/make phone calls.

<p>I know the M4/3 is the goods for me, I don't need a Canikon type War to try and diswade me :-)<br>

Sorry Leslie [ what's the sign for going down on my knees seeking forgiveness?]</p>

<p>I have in mind only MILCs, not phones - the advantage of phone cameras is portability by far.</p>

<p>Some advantages vs DSLRs come directly from design - from dropping the mirror:<br>

- No need for mirror up, silent shutter, faster burst rates, ability to have smaller bodies (implying in turn portability), less calibration issues impacting AF (but slower AF for now too)<br>

- EVF vs OVF with all the extra helpful functionality it brings<br>

- With shorter registration distance designs, there are interesting opportunities for getting more compact wide angle lenses (portability again)</p>

<p>Some advantages are there for MILCs today, but they could make their way into DSLRs in the future (via improvements to LiveView operation):<br>

- Manual focusing aids<br>

- Ability to visualize DOF, WB, and exposure effects before taking a shot</p>

<p>I don't see sensor size as a difference because there are several systems based around APS-C sensors and the MFT sensor format is pretty close to that sensor size too. We will probably see FF sensors too in due time, but FF sensors are already representing just a tiny percentage of the overall camera sales and that won't change any time soon.</p>

There are zero advantages if one does not consider size. (My Nikon D700 has no mirror slap

when I shoot using live view with the mirror up.)

 

If one does consider size, the advantages are huge (!). Just got my 2nd m4/3 camera (G3) after

several years of enjoying my E-P1.

<p>Mirrorless rocks because it sells well and that's about all! </p>

<p>Nevermind. I'll take my mirrorless thoughts elsewhere...</p>

<p>Sadly Leslie that is what you get for starting this kind of thread :-)<br>

Instead of saying what people like, some take it as an invitation to say what is wrong with the item :-(</p>

<p>Yeah...too bad. It's like saying I like Igor Stravinsky therefore I can't like the Sex Pistols... </p>

 

<p>No noise, imagine taking a shot like this one I took three days ago <a href="http://hsswan.smugmug.com/Animals/Birds-in-the-Oaks/9736269_SH8Zxr#!i=1736047240&k=dcn4j35&lb=1&s=A">http://hsswan.smugmug.com/Animals/Birds-in-the-Oaks/9736269_SH8Zxr#!i=1736047240&k=dcn4j35&lb=1&s=A</a> and not have them staring back at the camera. How about no mirror slap or shutter noise. <br>

Add near instantaneous HDR bracketing and I'm developing a strong argument for canceling my D800e order....</p>

I think it gives more choice. Can it compete with my Canons for high ISO, sports or landscape (full frame) - NO but it is

not bad. My favorite mirror less bodies are my Contax and Leica rangefinders (including an M8) where the IQ is great and

the manual feel and big viewfinder beat the DSLRs. That said my G1 (Panasonic M4/3) allows me to use lots of lenses

and is cheaper than the alternatives. Maybe one day I will add a Sony NEX7 or Fuji X1Pro. I think mirror less is good

because it is a different set of trade offs (AF, size, IQ, price, viewfinder, handling). It is not a panacea however indeed no

camera is - even Leica has issues (mainly price, lens range and limitations of a manual approach)

<p>Nobody take you seriously so you can be unobtrusive-unless, of course, you want to be taken seriously. </p>

<p>I used to work with Leicas many years ago and I had forgotton how small a camera they are when I saw I think it was an 'M' a few nights ago. Definitely smaller than my G3 and 014140.<br>

My memory tells me that the M is larger than the IIIC etc I used.Or maybe it just looks bigger because of the squarish build?</p>

<p>I don't know first hand why "mirrorless rocks" but I intend to find out later this year. The Sony Nex 7 appeals to me with it's relatively small size and ability to take a variety of lenses.</p>

<p>I'm thinking that if the image quality of these little things is what it appears to be, they may very well be the ideal cameras for air travel.</p>

<p> </p>