Any compelling reason to go mirrorless?

[davidfarquhar]

I bet the original poster has run a mile

after all these responses ;)

 

Bruce is right, the EOS M is the best

mirrorless camera for your EF lenses.

They can be fitted to other mirrorless

cameras with an adapter but I believe

you can't adjust aperture without

buying a very expensive adaptor

 

The M has mixed reviews so you

maybe better off with a Canon dSLR as

Bruce suggested

 

Both types of cameras have many

compelling advantages over the other

type. As with many things in life every

person will interpret these differently.

However given the information in the

original post I think a cheaper Canon

dSLR is the way to go. Perhaps go for

a second hand model from the last two

years - if you don't like it you could sell

it for roughly what you paid for it

[leslie_cheung]

<p>Ah, shoot whatever appeal to you personally, dslr, p&s, mirrorless, LF, MF or lomo...But please don't spew ignorant crap like</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>but they have no advantage other than size over DSLRs,</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's okay to not like EVF, small cameras or in-camera effects. But many do, even some professionals... </p>

[cc_chang2]

<blockquote>

<p>After years of study and experience in photography I am almost always able to identify a face.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>May be you are kidding, so forgive me if I take it seriously ...</p>

<p>The face detection works wonders when you need to "track" someone. This is particularly valuable for parents trying to photograph their toddlers as they run and play. GH1 is by now an old camera. However I was able to track my then 3 yr old running between streams of water coming from under ground (a common water feature in most of the parks in the US) and the keep rate was >90% — never once, the camera focused on the water or other kids. I would not take my D90 to do the same.</p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<blockquote>

<p>It looks weenie.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thanks for pointing out another advantage of the mirrorless, Rick. It doesn't scream "PRO PHOTOGRAPHER" yet yields professional results. Great when stealthiness is desired or you just plain don't want to call attention to yourself-cargo pants, bush hat and Domke vest not withstanding.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>I've owned cameras in three MILC systems, and SLRs. Currently I have a NEX-5n, an X-E1 and a D800 and I used to have an Olympus.</p>

<p>The D800 is worlds better than the others in almost all ways except for size. It AFs better in all circumstances. Face detection? It has that, and it works in the dark, works quickly, tracks motion - it's the same AF as a D4 and there are good reasons pros use that system. It doesn't do anything idiotic like taking the photo when it thinks people are smiling instead of when I press the shutter button. (Seriously, "smile shutter" is an advantage? The off chance that I could accidentally have that on makes any camera that has it less useful.) The optical finder with through-the-lens viewing is the best thing for any type of shooting where the camera can be held at eye level.</p>

<p>The MILCs are smaller, which is good. It means I'm actually more likely to be carrying one if I'm not leaving home with the goal of shooting something. </p>

<p>The Fuji is great because it combines the small size with very, very good lenses. The kit zoom is as good as most companies' pro zooms. The 35mm is as good as a German lens.</p>

<p>The Sony is the best camera I've seen for manual focus lenses on adapters because it has the flip screen, focus peaking and touch-to-zoom. This makes it ideal for things like handheld macro shooting. Actually, I prefer my manual focus Nikon macro lens on my NEX rather than my D800. Probably a higher model NEX would be even better because of the EVF and LCD options.</p>

[david_smith110]

<p>For anyone wanting to <em>seriously</em> shoot legacy glass (you know, like all the <em> professional photographers </em>did back in the day) Mirrorless blows DSLR's out of the water. Especially small, fast primes. Do big zoom lenses look goofy on mirrorless? Yeah. But I think big zoom lenses look goofy anyway.</p>

<p>Having said that, I am <em>this </em>close to picking up an old Tamron SP 300mm f/2.8 for my NEX 7. Yeah baby...f/2 on the speedbooster. I want only that birds <em>eye </em>to be in focus. :)</p>

<p>99% of my photography is with small, fast primes so I can vouch for the usefulness of the NEX cameras in this arena. Focus peaking is a life changing experience. It really has to be experienced.</p>

<p>EVF's are the future now. Being able to see real time changes in the VF as you make them makes it easier to get the shot. I was skeptical when I purchased my NEX over a year ago and made sure I bought it from a place with a return policy. No need. By months end all my Canon gear was gone.</p>

<p>Form factor. The camera is small, stealthy, easy to carry and I have yet once ever trudged to the car after hours of shooting "Man, I can wait to get all this gear home." I can fit an entire natural light setup in an old small Pro Albinar bag. Contents include...</p>

<p>NEX 7 with speedbooster and ML 50/1.7 mounted<br>

Yashica ML 28/2.8<br>

Normal C/Y to NEX adapter (this is for turning the 50mm Yashica into a 75mm portrait lens)<br>

Full set of Contax Macro tubes<br>

2 close up filters<br>

Petal hood for the 50mm<br>

Yashica FR I 35mm film body just in case loaded with film<br>

1 extra roll of film</p>

<p>So I have a 24mp, 10 frames per second digital back with a 28/f2, 50/f1.2 and 75/f1.7 prime set up with film backup. (Those odd f numbers are from the speed booster.)</p>

<p>Other benefits? Macro made easy. No longer do I have to maneuver some bulky DSLR around while trying to shoot little critters. The small size and tilting screen make capturing macro shoots easy as pie. When it comes to the narrow DOF you are dealing with in this type of photography any little movement can ruin a shot. It is much easier and less stress on the muscles to spend hours moving a tiny NEX around while holding your breath to get that shot just right. Much less fatigue then with a heavier, bulkier DSLR.</p>

<p>Street shooting? Small stealthy cameras better then big bulky ones any day of the week.</p>

<p>And as Leslie said, the speedbooster really is on the list of benefits. It basically makes your APS-C camera Full Frame. Which is a joy and wonder to behold. I forsee soon some manufacturer (Sony?) building one of these into the body of an aps-c camera. Bam, instant cheap full frame, with the added benefit being the sensor is now not exposed to the air during lens changes. I have noticed a much cleaner sensor since using my SB.</p>

<p>Overall, its all a personal choice. Is mirrorless the current end all photographic device? No, photography will always be about choosing the right tool for the job. But mirrorless is the way of the future, as are EVF's. I have said it before, but people railed against automatic exposure and circuit boards in camera, people railed against auto focus, people railed against digital...now people rail against EVF.</p>

<p>But AE auto focus digital cameras now make up the bulk of sales. Technology marches on. This particular cat is out of the bag and running.</p>

<p>BTW Leslie, self portrait? Nice.</p>

 

[joseph_wisniewski]

<p>OK, calmly and objectively, I hope...<br>

Here's the biggie - image quality.<br>

SLRS require a "back focus", the distance between the rear element of the lens and the focal plane, of 38-39mm. That means that any fast lens shorter than 55mm (and any slow lens shorter than about 45mm) has to be made as a retrofocus lens, a 55mm "normal" with a "wide converter" of alternating negative and positive lenses piled in front of it. So image quality is compromised, while size, weight, and cost are increased.<br>

This is not a requirement for mirrorless cameras, so 50mm, 35mm, even 28mm lenses can be made symmetrical, which makes high quality relatively simple. There's a reason so many rangefinder lens families (not just Leica) are so highly praised. Wider lenses are less "extreme", a 20mm wide could be a 28mm lens with a 1.4x wide converter, instead of a larger 55mm lens with a large, complex 2.75x wide converter in front of it. Andy just said "The 35mm is as good as a German lens." Well, that's why, and we can expect many more such lenses to follow, as mirrorless hits its stride.<br>

Here's a couple more:</p>

<ol>

<li>Shorter back focus and shorter registration distance mean shift and tilt lenses can have greater movement ranges.</li>

<li>You get to see the final picture. Modern SLRs only show you approximately f4 DOF. That is an effect of the scattering angle of the "bright" focusing screens that started appearing some 30 years ago. An EVF camera can show you f2 or f1.4 DOF. Heck, f0.95, if you've got the lens.</li>

<li>Want to work in B&W for a while? It's amazing to compose in it.</li>

<li>Some let you compose and shoot at your choice of 16:9, 3:2, 4:3, and 1:1 aspect ratios.</li>

<li>Your choice of finder markings and information, from a plain view of nothing but the subject, to jet-fighter HUD levels of information, and all sorts of markings, including architectural or rule-of-thirds grid lines.</li>

<li>Insanely accurate focusing. No worries about whether the mirror is aligned properly so that the focusing screen and image sensor are on the same plane, let alone the two mirror Rube Goldberg that gets the AF sensor on that plane, too.</li>

<li>The short register makes it easy to produce adapters for virtually any legacy lens system.</li>

<li>The short back-focus makes things like the Metabones 1.4x "wide converter" possible, so a low cost, compact APS sensor camera can get full coverage from "full frame" lenses.</li>

<li>Some mirrorless cameras (Nikon 1 series, Sony NEX 7 and 6, one Panasonic model I can't remember) have full electronic shutters, for zero vibration. That's a major boon to microscope, macro, and astrophotographers.</li>

<li>AF zones (or MF aids, like peaking) anywhere you want on the screen, instead of just in the central 1/3.</li>

<li>Fast response times. It takes 30ms to raise a mirror on a pro DSLR, and more like 100ms on an entry level. A mirrorless just shoots.</li>

<li>It takes almost 2kg of batteries, motors, and sturdy chassis to propel a DSLR like D4 or 1DX to 10-12 frames/sec. An almost pocketable Nikon 1 does 60fps bursts. That will only improve over time.</li>

</ol>

<p>And a few theoretical advantages.</p>

<ol>

<li>Someone mentioned effects on your night vision. An EVF could be switched to all red, which does not desense your night vision. That's why astronomers and night wildlife photographers carry red flashlights, and why you have red illumination in airplane cockpits, military equipment, race-car gauges, submarines, etc.</li>

<li>Cameras with main-sensor phase-detection AF (Nikon 1 series, some Fuji models) can simulate things like split-image focusing aids that pretty much went away because of the requirements of slow zoom lenses.</li>

<li>Zero response time. Finders get faster, the imaging pipeline gets faster, and finder latency keeps decreasing. But we can go past that, when the sensor and processor get fast enough to store an image say every 10-20mS, we can store a pipeline of images and grab the one that happened 200ms before the photographer pressed the shutter button, at the instant that the photographer thought about pressing the shutter button. This isn't sci-fi, Casio does it in a P&S camera already.</li>

</ol>

[dcstep]

<p>I'm looking forward to Canon's EVIL cameras maturing to when I can have a full frame version, with EVF with histogram, highlight blinkies et al in the VF and 30-fps potential to shoot wildlife with a 500 or 600mm lens. It may be five or so years away, but I think that's where we're head. Oh yeah, when I'm not shooting birds, I could mount a little pancake lens, smaller than my 40/f2.8 and really have a small rig for street shooting.</p>

<p>Improving the EVFs is the key and squeezing in a FF sensor will eliminate some key issues.</p>

[leslie_cheung]

<p>For future references...</p>

<ul>

<li>Ubiquity,</li>

<li>electronic shutter (silent / high flash sync) (extreme fast shutter for slow motion video)</li>

<li>split image focusing (newer fuji)</li>

<li>16x9 framing ratio</li>

</ul>

 

[Brad_]

>>> It looks weenie.

 

Insecure?

 

 

That aside, it's a real hoot how people are so concerned about how their camera looks to other people. Like it says

something about them if it isn't big and looking bad-ass professional.

[c_watson1]

<p>Funny but the rancor and enthusiastic offense shown anyone speaking up for mirrorless reminds me of the film/digital slugfests of yore. As puzzling as it is pointless, especially since the OP's question got highjacked and turned into an anti-mirrorless soap box.</p>

<p>Needless to say, "mirrorless" takes in a wide range of product. I know a half-dozen working pros who have ditched, sold-down or stopped buying into Canon and Nikon in favor of the Fuji X system. Why? Simply put, it suits their needs.</p>

[Rick Helmke]

Brad I thought the weenies and other

comments were pretty funny if taken

tongue in cheek as I suspect they were

intended. I can't tell you how often a

'real' camera has gotten me in a door

or through a police line when I needed

the access. It's true, a big ol' D4 or a

300 and a grip and big lens ID's you as

some type of pro and often opens or

closes doors. Yeah, I've been kicked out

of a few places too on the same quick-

glance basis. Given some time though

these little wonders will likely be added

to a lot of pro bags. Probably already

are. As for legacy lenses, I've been

using them since day 1 of digital.

 

Rick H.

[jamie_robertson2]

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>in camera filters</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So does the Canon 60D and many others</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>in camera panorama</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So does the Sony A580</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>in camera HDR</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So does the Canon 6D</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>in camera multiple exposures</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So does the Canon 6D</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>face focus</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So does the Canon 5D MkII</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>touch/smile shutter</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So does the Sony A550</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>Accurate auto focus (no micro AF adjustment needed, ever)</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So does any DSLR with live view and contrast detect AF</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>Video (much) faster AF speed</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>Canon 650D, Nikon D3200</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>Metabone Speedbooster</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>The same principle can be applied to medium format lenses on a DSLR.</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>Focus peaking (Nex, Ricoh)</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So does the Pentax K-30</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>IBIS (Pen)</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So do most Sony DSLRs</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>AF speed (Nikon 1, newer m4/3rd, RX100)</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>Canon 1Dx, 5D MkIII</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>adapting decades of legacy lenses</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>Most older lenses worth adapting work on either Canon EOS or Olympus 4/3</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>macro (p&s, for instance, 1cm working distance)</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>Shoot the same on a FF DSLR and crop = same result</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>LCD multi-angle viewing</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>Nikon D5000 and many others</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>EVF WYSIWYG viewing</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>Live view</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>Playmemories (Sony)</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>Canon Project 1709</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>Video mode manual control (GH3/2)</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>Most DSLRs with video function</p>

[leslie_cheung]

<p>JFC I gotta leave PN...</p>

<p>Pentax k30 is mirrorless and Sony's SLT isn't a dslr</p>

[leslie_cheung]

<p>It's also funny how canon 1dx, canon 5d3 and d800 are being brought up to be compared to mirrorless...freakin' defensive and hilarious, no?</p>

<p>Now, I gotta go dig up my RFF, serious compact, and getdpi passwords...</p>

<p> </p>

[david_smith110]

<blockquote>

<p>JFC I gotta leave PN...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>LOL!</p>

<p>The new NEX 7n that should be out in a month or so supposedly has a new dual layer EVF, each 1.9 million pixels only one pixel apart and work asynchronously. You can read a little about it here.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/ft3-nex-7n-now-scheduled-for-a-ma-release/">http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/ft3-nex-7n-now-scheduled-for-a-ma-release/</a></p>

<p> </p>

[john_h.1]

It isn't necessarily defensive. Since the issue concerns differences between the systems, its relevant to dicuss where

purported differences are not the case. I also note similarities with many advanced consumer cameras which is also of

interest in purchasing decisions.

[brian_m.1]

<p>Thanks for the wonderful info, friends. What went missing among all the discussions was the price. I did look up a few. Canon EOS M, Sony Nex etc. They are $600 cameras. There is no way they can bring $600 worth of utility and joy to my photography experience over and above what I have now. Anything under $300 and I might get tempted. </p>

[rick_m.]

<p>Thank you Rick Helmke. My comments were meant exactly as that.</p>

<p>I agree with you though on one important point. There are times when my big cameras waltz me past the gendarmes and other temple guards. In angst ridden situations it would not do to skip up to the swat team with a cheerful "highdy ho, you lovely hunk of official, I am a PJ and this is my cute little camera. And no its not a purse. It is a messenger bag....". </p>

<p>It appears that the sans-miroir folks have about as much sense of humor as do the film people. Inspired by how easy it was to kick the hornet's nest, I think I will drop by the film forum and post what a great doorstop an SRT-101 makes. </p>

<p>Now Leslie. I recommend a glass of red wine. The world always looks better through rouge colored glasses. </p>

<p>Maybe the reason we do not have a D4X or D400 is that Nikon sees the hopelessness of releasing these obsolete dinosaurs. </p>

<p> </p>

[laur1]

<blockquote>

<p>It's also funny how canon 1dx, canon 5d3 and d800 are being brought up to be compared to mirrorless...freakin' defensive and hilarious, no?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yep.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I simply do not understand this persistent meme about how wonderful it is to avoid retro-focus designs.</p>

<p>For 35mm, retrofocus designs go back to the Flektogon and Angenieux (1950) 35mm (and later wider) lenses. These are still considered primo lenses and their prices reflect that fact.<br>

How "terrible" retrofocus designs are is clearly demonstrated by how many premium lenses are in this form. Canon L lenses, Zeiss, others. By the way, the tilt/shift lenses are usually retrofocus designs....</p>

<p>Don't forget the ~2X factor too, as a consequence of the sensor size already mentioned.</p>

<p>I'm sure these mirrorless cameras have advantages, but going hyperbolic?</p>

 

[Member69643]

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=290903">Leslie Cheung</a> <a href="/member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub10plus.gif" alt="" /><img title="Frequent poster" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/3rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Apr 15, 2013; 03:40 p.m.</p>

 

<p>Ah, shoot whatever appeal to you personally, dslr, p&s, mirrorless, LF, MF or lomo...But please don't spew ignorant crap like</p>

<blockquote>

<p>but they have no advantage other than size over DSLRs,</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's okay to not like EVF, small cameras or in-camera effects. But many do, even some professionals...</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I own and like my mirorrless cameras (Olympus E-pl1, OMD, Pentax K01). They make nice images. But I stand by both of my initial observations that they possess no significant advantage other than size (excluding the K-01 which is as big as a DSLR) over DSLRs and were developed because the companies involved needed something to survive. They are NOT significantly better than DSLRs in image quality, which is what matters most to most people. Note that the giants, Canon and Nikon, didn't bother "inventing" mirrorless cameras. If you're thinking well, maybe they didn't *think* of mirrorless, I'm betting that's not the case. I'm pretty sure they thought of it and didn't see how it got them anything. Now turn to Olympus, and Sony. Both losing market share with conventional stuff, so they go mirrorless or SLT. Now they stand out, now they are different, and offer something that consumers can make a distinct choice over. That's what I believe because it makes sense to me. It may even be correct. </p>

<p>Opinions, how nice that we all have one, eh? :)</p>

<p>It all comes down to being able to capture what you as the photographer want to capture. If you feel the differences between mirrorless and non-mirrorless are significant, go ahead with whichever you feel is right for you, as Leslie points out. </p>

[c_watson1]

<p>"<em>Note that the giants, Canon and Nikon, didn't bother "inventing" mirrorless cameras. If you're thinking well, maybe they didn't *think* of mirrorless, I'm betting that's not the case. I'm pretty sure they thought of it and didn't see how it got them anything."</em><br>

<br /> You need to take a look at Nikon's last posted financials for sense of how they're doing. Just how well is the dud CX system working out? The Coolpix A? Another winner. Poor QC on the D600 followed up with denial/obfuscation? Recurrent sales/promotion on slow moving merch? Lower revenue, inventory glut...Not exactly preconditions for innovation.<br>

<br /> Funny but the market for Fuji X cameras and lenses seems to be working photographers who know it's their images that impress and make $--not the gear itself around their necks.</p>

<p> </p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>I'm in the camp that says the only significant advantage they have over the usual DSLRs is size. I like them, but small size is what they are all about. Retrofocus wide angle inferiority is in the past. So I agree with Patrick S. They are fun for using legacy lenses, but I surmise not that many new customers are buying them for that reason - it all about near DSLR quality in a small package.</p>

[cc_chang2]

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>in camera filters</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So does the Canon 60D and many others</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>in camera panorama</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So does the Sony A580</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>in camera HDR</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So does the Canon 6D</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>in camera multiple exposures</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So does the Canon 6D</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>face focus</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So does the Canon 5D MkII</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>touch/smile shutter</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So does the Sony A550</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>Accurate auto focus (no micro AF adjustment needed, ever)</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So does any DSLR with live view and contrast detect AF</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>Video (much) faster AF speed</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>Canon 650D, Nikon D3200</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>Metabone Speedbooster</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>The same principle can be applied to medium format lenses on a DSLR.</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>Focus peaking (Nex, Ricoh)</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So does the Pentax K-30</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>IBIS (Pen)</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>So do most Sony DSLRs</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>AF speed (Nikon 1, newer m4/3rd, RX100)</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>Canon 1Dx, 5D MkIII</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>adapting decades of legacy lenses</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>Most older lenses worth adapting work on either Canon EOS or Olympus 4/3</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>macro (p&s, for instance, 1cm working distance)</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>Shoot the same on a FF DSLR and crop = same result</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>LCD multi-angle viewing</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>Nikon D5000 and many others</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>EVF WYSIWYG viewing</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>Live view</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>Playmemories (Sony)</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>Canon Project 1709</p>

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>Video mode manual control (GH3/2)</li>

</ul>

<p>Most DSLRs with video function</p>

</blockquote>

<p>So I guess we can say that mirrorless <em>can</em> do AF-tracking as well, so why do we need dSLRs?<br>

</p>