Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              11      
12
       13       end
  

Archive 2012 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?

  
 
kevindar
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #1 · p.12 #1 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


Its interesting how so many people fell so strongly about this. at the same time, ti was always funny to me when people continuously bad mouthed the rebels saying how small and uncomfortable they are for their manly hands. Cameras are like religion to a lot of people.
I find the Nex5n intriguing b/c of all of its features, and excellent sensor. i have owned and shot with many of the rebel cameras, and currently shoot with a 7d and 5dII. I am also anxiously awaiting the canon gx-1 review.
I do see the charm of nex 5n, with some small primes, as a light carry around. I live in Los Angeles, and dont wear clothing that would make this pocketable. though my wife can carry it in her bag/purse. I think if I could get a good system for under 1K i would. but given that at least for now, this will not replace my main camera, I am going to wait.



Jan 22, 2012 at 10:08 PM
Access
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #2 · p.12 #2 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


thw2 wrote:
I have to agree with Daan here. Once coupled with a suitable lens, the actual difference between a DSLR and EVIL camera is not very significant.

Except when they are. In practice, a big difference between a short portrait prime + camera (ie. GF1 and 45mm f/1.8; 5d2 w/ 85mm f/1.8). Big difference in having to carry one or the other, weight, or bulk.

And the pancake lenses are perfectly acceptable on the wide angle or slightly-wider-than-normal end. I've used them plenty for that. If I am taking three primes, wide angle, normal, and short portrait, that's three lenses and one body, the size/weight of the lenses become even more important relative to the body.

Someone mentioned flash, if I am using the mirrorless for portraiture, I typically don't use the flash. I just find half-decent lighting, and then fill or whatever is necessary beyond that, almost always I can handle that quickly in post. Having to take a decent strobe kinda ruins the whole small size / weight thing. Another compromise, but it is what it is.



Jan 22, 2012 at 10:21 PM
Lars Johnsson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #3 · p.12 #3 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


chez wrote:
Sven, I think you are missing the point. Smaller cameras are easier to take along with you everywhere. Better to have a small mirror less camera with you than have your 1d system sitting on the shelf back home. Yes, the DSLR would take a better photo...but NOT if it is at home because it would have been a pain to take along. This afternoon while x-country skiing, it was either the Fuji x100 or nothing. Now tell me, which of those two options would bring back the better photos?



chez,

You take for granted and assume that all people that have a larger camera than yours always leave it at home and never take it with them
I'm travelling on a 3 months trip in S.E.Asia at this moment with two series 1 bodies and a few rather big lenses. And I have done so 25 times before.
I would not bother to just bring a x100 But if I had your x100 instead
Tell me, which of those two options would bring back the better photos? the same question you asked before

Edited on Jan 22, 2012 at 10:26 PM · View previous versions



Jan 22, 2012 at 10:24 PM
h00ligan
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #4 · p.12 #4 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


Lasse Eriksson wrote:
You are wrong. A 5DII with a Voigtlander Ultron 40 produce excellent results. And there are also other non L lenses that does the same. And you don't need any adapter like you do with your lenses on the Nex


Yah, I should have specified most non L canon primes.

Anyway I'm checking out of this conversation. The points have all been made. Everyone has different requirements. The original question has been answered debated. Picked at. Etc. Continuing on with conversation or the sake of arguing may be your style. It's not mine.

You should get rid of the 5d 2 and move to medium format. That's going to give much better iq than full frame. If iq is all that matters wh dink with less than medium?



Jan 22, 2012 at 10:25 PM
chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #5 · p.12 #5 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


Lars Johnsson wrote:
chez,

You take for granted and assume that all people that have a larger camera than yours always leave it at home and never take it with them
I'm travelling on a 3 months trip in S.E.Asia at this moment with two series 1 bodies and a few rather big lenses. And I have done so 25 times before.
I would not bother to just bring a x100 But if I had your x100 instead
Tell me, which of those two options would bring back the better photos? the same question you asked before


I guess that is where you and I differ. When I go meet up with some clients I don't want to be bringing in my bag full of photo gear. Just not the time and place for it. But, an X100 burried in my briefcase, now that I can do.

Again, like I said before, this afternoon I went X-country skiing and took my X100 with me. I got a few nice photos. I would never think of taking a DSLR and lens with me. Too much weight and bulk.

It is for these conditions where I like the idea of a small mirrorless camera that is very capable of taking excellent quality images.

A trip like you describe, yes I would also bring along my DSLR kit...in fact I do. But during that trip when I go out to dinner, I most likely would leave my DSLR kit at the house and bring along my X100 just in case I come across something interesting.



Jan 22, 2012 at 10:57 PM
Lars Johnsson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #6 · p.12 #6 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


Yes that is where you and I differ. When I work or meet clients, then I don't do any photography. For me it's not the time or place to shoot when meeting customers/clients
But when I'm not working I don't mind to carry an extra kilo or two, if I belive it will give me better photos or more options



Jan 22, 2012 at 11:13 PM
chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #7 · p.12 #7 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


Lars Johnsson wrote:
Yes that is where you and I differ. When I work or meet clients, then I don't do any photography. For me it's not the time or place to shoot when meeting customers/clients
But when I'm not working I don't mind to carry an extra kilo or two, if I belive it will give me better photos or more options


I also don't shoot when meeting clients...but I usually have some time in-between clients and/or flights where I can spend some time taking photos. I find it very relaxing to do so...but I used to only have a P&S with me...now with the mirror less systems ( x100 ), I don't have to tradeoff camera size for image quality. The X100 provides a small package with excellent image quality. Overall a win-win.

Lars, as I see it, there are situations where you either have a small camera or you don't have a camera at all. I would rather have a small camera.



Jan 22, 2012 at 11:32 PM
melcat
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #8 · p.12 #8 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


..

Begone double posting!

Edited on Jan 23, 2012 at 02:00 AM · View previous versions



Jan 23, 2012 at 01:33 AM
melcat
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #9 · p.12 #9 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


Simple comparisons of mirrorless system weight as a fraction of EOS system weight aren't valid, because they need to be multiplied by a step function for each person. That step function will be different (the size at which it goes from 1 to 0) for each person. A woman with a large handbag can fit a bigger camera that a man wearing a jacket, and he can pack more than a man without even a shirt pocket.

One thing I did notice when going from my OM system (more the size of mirrorless than modern DSLR gear) to EOS was I could no longer leave the kit in a hotel room safe. This makes a big difference travelling.

You people stuffing cameras in outside suit pockets must not care about the hang of the jacket.



Jan 23, 2012 at 01:33 AM
Gochugogi
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #10 · p.12 #10 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


melcat wrote:
A woman with a large handbag can fit a bigger camera that a man wearing a jacket, and he can pack more than a man without even a shirt pocket.


Of course many guys carry man purses, sorry, messenger bags and thus the equal of any woman with a large handbag!



Jan 23, 2012 at 02:23 AM
Jeff Nolten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #11 · p.12 #11 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


I find this argument about pocket-ability amusing. I don't even like carrying a cell phone in my pockets let alone something as thick as a digital Elph. By the time I add the Lensmate adaptor and polarizer to my G10, its not even cargo pants pocketable. OTOH, it sure is a lot easier to carry around all day than my 5D + 24-105. And it sure fits in my minimalist REI rucksack a lot easier too. I even sewed a supplex and mesh replacement for the neoprene center section of the OpTech camera strap to use in Gochugogi type tropical places.


Jan 23, 2012 at 12:10 PM
safcraft
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #12 · p.12 #12 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


The portability is really very simple and different for each guy.
It relates to the MAX size and weight that a camera can have, beeing allowed in the woman's purse. For me, a E-P2+40mm leica is "just ok" with a noticeable discontent.

Anything bigger and i get "carry it yourself" type of sentence.


That is my definition of "pocketable".
Some men can convince their women to carry larger cameras, and other's can't even convince them to carry a P&S, so they carry purs...aahaahm...."man bags"



Jan 23, 2012 at 01:26 PM
Gochugogi
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #13 · p.12 #13 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


It also depends a lot on your fashion sense. If you're into slim cut or, worse, skinny jeans, an iPhone will convince your friends you're happy to see them. Even the smallest camera is a battle to extract from said dungarees. If you "bag it," you can fit a dog, squirrel and kilo of contraband in your trousers.


Jan 23, 2012 at 01:36 PM
curious80
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #14 · p.12 #14 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


thw2 wrote:
Not sure what you are smoking: Panasonic 20 f/1.8 vs Nikon 35 f/1.8 vs Canon 35 f/2. The last being a FF lens on APS-C mount EASILY beats out the rest in terms of optical quality... unless you have a bad copy (do you even own a Canon camera)?



Have you actually read the links that you posted? I was talking based on my actual experience having used all three of the lenses extensively. However the photozone tests that you posted are also in agreement with what I said.

Looking at the results the Panasonic is already excellent wide open at f1.7 with a center resolution of 2462 and border of 2059. Here is what your link says about the 20mm 1.7: "The center performance is nothing short of stellar straight from f/1.7 till at least f/5.6. If you'd really like to see the breathtaking resolution of the Panasonic sensor of the G-series this is the lens to choose at this stage. The border/corner quality isn't quite on that level but still very good."

Comparable apertures - Canon 35mm vs Panasonic 20mm:

f2:

canon 35mm: center: 2256, border: 2103
Pana 20mm: center 2495, border: 2072

f2.8

canon 35mm: center 2352, border 2130
Pana 20mm: center 2515, border 2132

So at large aperture panasonic is clearly superior in the center and comparable at the borders. And this is despite the fact that the 35mm f2 is getting the advantage of a higher resolution sensor (15 MP) compared to the 12MP sensor used for the panasonic tests. If you compare at equal sensor resolutions then the 35mm f2 will not be comparable even at the borders.

Even at f4 the canon 35mm barely catches up to the center resolution of the panasonic at f1.7! and passes ahead of the panasonic on border resolution (2205 vs 2082). And again thats with a higher resolution sensor. Try a website like slrgear which normalizes out the sensor resolution and you will see even more clearly the pana 20mm performs better than the canon 35mm at most apertures (specially at large apertures). Plus there are other aspects like contrast, where I found the pancake to be better. The only major flaw for the pancake is the higher vignetting, but then the canon isn't much better either.

Anyways, we have gone rather off topic. I don't want to create a thread within a thread, so I just leave it at that.



Edited on Jan 23, 2012 at 02:20 PM · View previous versions



Jan 23, 2012 at 01:48 PM
akin_t
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #15 · p.12 #15 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


Wow ...

10 pages on a subject that ultimately boils down to user preference and opinion. Stay busy FM.



Jan 23, 2012 at 02:13 PM
Jeff Nolten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #16 · p.12 #16 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


akin_t wrote:
10 pages on a subject that ultimately boils down to user preference and opinion. Stay busy FM.


Isn't that what most of these threads are almost exclusively made up of, user preference and opinion! Still 10 pages of opinion on pocket size is indeed amazing.



Jan 23, 2012 at 02:20 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #17 · p.12 #17 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


curious80 wrote:
Looking at the results the Panasonic is already excellent wide open at f1.7 with a center resolution of 2462 and border of 2059...


Good point. (I have no horse in this race, and happen to think that small cameras have interesting potentials.)

However, don't forget that lp/mm resolution values on smaller sensors result in lower lp/picture width than you would get from the same lp/mm on a larger sensor camera.

Larger formats virtually always have the potential to produce higher resolution across the frame. To be fair, in many cases the resolution produced by excellent lenses on smaller sensors is more than adequate and can be quite good for may purposes, especially those where the small size and weight are advantageous.

Take care,

Dan



Jan 23, 2012 at 02:51 PM
curious80
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #18 · p.12 #18 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


gdanmitchell wrote:
Good point. (I have no horse in this race, and happen to think that small cameras have interesting potentials.)

However, don't forget that lp/mm resolution values on smaller sensors result in lower lp/picture width than you would get from the same lp/mm on a larger sensor camera.

Larger formats virtually always have the potential to produce higher resolution across the frame. To be fair, in many cases the resolution produced by excellent lenses on smaller sensors is more than adequate and can be quite good for may purposes, especially those where the small size and weight are advantageous.

Take care,

Dan


The numbers quoted by photozone are not lp/mm, they are lp/picture height, so the larger sensor size is already accounted for.

However, to be honest, I only quoted the results because the tests were brought up by the other gentleman. I was primarily just saying that "pancake" does not necessarily equal mediocre optical performance. And I don't have any horse in the race either, I use DSLR as well as mirror-les for different purposes and don't think that either one is "better" than the other. They are just different tools with different tradeoffs.



Jan 23, 2012 at 04:06 PM
thw2
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #19 · p.12 #19 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


curious80 wrote:
The numbers quoted by photozone are not lp/mm, they are lp/picture height, so the larger sensor size is already accounted for.


From the site itself:

"Please note that the tests results are NOT comparable across the different systems! This does also apply for the new EOS tests based on the EOS 50D because of differences in the sensor system (e.g. AA-filter) as well as DIFFERENT RAW-CONVERTERS."

I hope you can read. One can only tell relative performance (say, edge vs center) within the SAME platform. You cannot go around quoting and comparing ABSOLUTE numbers from Photozone, and claim them as facts.

If you want to convince others you are correct, SHOW IT! Demonstrate side-by-side testing with identical lighting, set-up and camera settings

Addendum:
Even DPReview editors talk about this. In this case using lines per picture height, m43 actually has an advantage due to the 4:3 aspect ratio as compared to 3:2 on APS-C.

This is an interesting thread. Ultimately, the overall success of a new platform depends on the choice of the masses, not the opinions of a few in forums. To appeal to the masses, one needs to address ALL of the following: image quality, compactness and wide range of lens choices (BOTH zooms and primes). Current mirrorless platforms do not meet all the listed criteria. For example, to convince anyone to switch from APS-C to:
a) m43: show me improved dynamic range at low ISO and a stabilized 1:1 macro lens with f equivalent to 160 mm or more (in 35 mm terms)
b) v1/j1: show me a shallow depth of field, better image quality and more lenses
c) NEX and X-pro1: show me the lenses
d) X100: show me the lenses... ooops, it's fixed.
So, ultimately, Canon got it right: they need only miniaturize current interchangeable cameras and they have a winner.

I also find it amusing that many camera reviewers love to bash the Rebel cameras for being too small etc, but have no complaints about current mirrorless cameras. So much for impartial reviewers.



Jan 23, 2012 at 05:39 PM
curious80
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #20 · p.12 #20 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?


thw2 wrote:
From the site itself:

"Please note that the tests results are NOT comparable across the different systems! This does also apply for the new EOS tests based on the EOS 50D because of differences in the sensor system (e.g. AA-filter) as well as DIFFERENT RAW-CONVERTERS."

I hope you can read. One can only tell relative performance (say, edge vs center) within the SAME platform. You cannot go around quoting and comparing ABSOLUTE numbers from Photozone, and claim them as facts.

If you want to convince others you are correct, SHOW IT! Demonstrate side-by-side testing with identical lighting, set-up and camera settings

Addendum:
Even DPReview editors
...Show more

I am not the one who tried to use photozone to compare these lenses across different systems . It was you who linked to photozone results to support your statement that canon 35mm f2 "EASILY beats out the rest". I just pointed out that if you are using these tests as a basis then they are not supporting your statement. Personally I am not trying to "prove" anything. I had only said that being a pancake does not imply mediocre optical quality. And I shared my findings based on having used all three lenses extensively. My opinion is not a definitive statement and you don't have to believe it at all I would encourage you to try out the lenses yourself and make your own opinion!



Jan 23, 2012 at 06:25 PM
1       2       3              11      
12
       13       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              11      
12
       13       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.