p.11 #1 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?
Daan B wrote:
Please stop trying to put words into my mouth that aren't written by me. I never said that NO ONE needs these systems. Or that the size difference will not matter for anyone. All I am saying is that in pratical terms there isn't much difference between carrying a DLSR system and EVIL system (beyond pancakes / alt glass) because both don't fit a pocket. This is MY OPINION. Others agreed with this. You don't... which is silly. But maybe you have really big pockets
I just finished x-country skiing with an x100 in my jacket pocket. Really did not notice the weight or bulk. Now I also own a few DSLR's including a t2i and there is no way in hell they would fit into my pocket...not even with a pancake lens. A big plus...I get better photos from my x100 than I could from my t2i.
p.11 #2 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?
Gochugogi wrote:
The coat pocket excuse is not really an option unless you live in colder climates. Half of the world's population lives in the tropics and don't wear coats, so you really need to use a messenger or camera bag (or geek out with a neck strap all day) to tote mirrorless. Summers in moderate climates are the same.
For walks and outings, I carry my E-P3, EVF clip-on & pancake in a Billingham Stowaway, sorta a camera purse with plenty of room for a spare lens or two, iPhone, flask and assorted knickknacks. When going to work, it resides in a small Crumper insert (Haven) in my Fossil messenger bag. Since we suffer from a lack of pockets in Hawaii, almost everyone carries a messenger bag or daypack, so toting a small camera all the time is no biggie....Show more →
Cargo pants or shorts have all sort of pockets that can carry a mirror less camera.
The combination is about 300g lighter than the 5DII body, and as you can see packs quite a punch. This is what excites me. IQ with smaller and lighter form. I look forward to the day I can give up my heavy camera backpack for a small light bag, without sacrificing too much IQ.
What does this shot prove? 300g is a pitiful and how much does that 35lux cost, far more than the 5D II! And why would that shot look any different if I used a 35L on a T3i and how much would the weight saving be then, 150g or so. Even though I'll be getting a mirrorless, be buggered if I'm going to spend obscene amounts of money of alt glass, which is now skyrocketing in price, for the convenience of a smaller package. However, if you wan't to get rid of your DSLR system to fund the likely much dearer mirrorless if you are going to using Zeiss or Leica alt glass, then sure you'll get nice IQ, but you give up flexibility for size. You only get a big advantage in size because you only carry one prime around with you. I can do that too with my 5D II or 7D and I only need a small shoulder bag, and you'll need a bag for the NEX if you use anything but their average pancake.
p.11 #4 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?
photoomaha wrote:
safcraft, That is one of my biggest concerns with all this. Image quality without any 'compromise'.
I am not expecting from mirrorless cameras the same as from my DSLR.
As others have pointed out, i am not expecting a compact camera (and that is the only advantage i see in a mirrorless camera) to perform at TOP notch in AF speed and accuracy, battery life, ease of use with OVF, etc ,etc.
What I AM expecting is a small camera, small lens with GREAT IQ sensor.
Nevermind if its sluggish, poor LCD, poor battery life and the kit lens is huge...if its small and great IQ, i'll take it!
I went for E-P2 too see what the fuss was all about. Nowhere near the 5D.
Some say the Nex 5N is only half stop worse than Canon 5D2. I find that hard to believe if we are talking ISO 1600/3200. I do not have the cash to trade my E-P2 for a NEX , so i'll keep waiting for FF NEX !
p.11 #5 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?
Lasse Eriksson wrote:
So it's ok with Sony here, but not Nikon
And the Nex is not even close to the 5D2. Compare it against a Rebel instead. And why should I have f/1,4 lenses on the Canon. But slower lenses on the Nex. Just so you can get a higher weight on the Canon. A voigtlander 40/2 for Canon is about 200 grams instead of the 35L that is 3x that. a 50/1,8 is 130 grams and still faster than any lens on your kit. And you need a couple of adapters for your kit also
Because non l primes on a 5d2 produce worse iq than Leica and Zeiss on a nex.
To the above poster. I can post ISO samples if you want.
I won't give up my 5d2 but I also dot take my entire nex kit most times. Just camera and one lens. Maybe a flash.
It's nice to have choices. And the weak link on most cameras is the photographer. Especially true for me.
p.11 #6 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?
I`m a professional wedding photographer from Switzerland and shooting only with 5Dmk IIs und L lenses. But recently i bought a Fujifilm X100 and used it beside my 5D for wedding work and personal travel porjects in Istanbul. I love the IQ, the silent shutter, the small package and the inconspicuousness of the X100. I am very excited about the Fujifilm X-Pro 1. Might replace my Canon gear at all. 2 X-Pro 1`s, some lenses, flash and a Domke bag is all you need for wedding photography. I am getting sick of my huge photogaphy bag with tons of gear. a Mark III is huge and heavy and the sensor is getting old.
Yes, Canon does bore me to. Why are they not showing a Fujifilm X-Pro 1 style of camera with either new small lenses or with en EF mount?What happend with Canon?? Once they were innovative.
p.11 #7 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?
chez wrote:
Cargo pants or shorts have all sort of pockets that can carry a mirror less camera.
Have you actually walked or ran with a camera in a cargo pocket? I tried with a S90 and it bobs and jumps around like a squirrel in a cage and get soaked with sweat. Extremely irritating. I'll stick with my Billingham or clip it snugly on my belt.
p.11 #8 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?
Pixel Perfect wrote:
What does this shot prove? 300g is a pitiful and how much does that 35lux cost, far more than the 5D II! And why would that shot look any different if I used a 35L on a T3i and how much would the weight saving be then, 150g or so. Even though I'll be getting a mirrorless, be buggered if I'm going to spend obscene amounts of money of alt glass, which is now skyrocketing in price, for the convenience of a smaller package. However, if you wan't to get rid of your DSLR system to fund the likely much dearer mirrorless if you are going to using Zeiss or Leica alt glass, then sure you'll get nice IQ, but you give up flexibility for size. You only get a big advantage in size because you only carry one prime around with you. I can do that too with my 5D II or 7D and I only need a small shoulder bag, and you'll need a bag for the NEX if you use anything but their average pancake....Show more →
Why is money being brought into the equation here? We all have different requirements, budgets and circumstances. You own superteles, and think spending that much on a 35mm lens is crazy, but the next guy may have your budget and does not need super teles and wants to buy the best kit for that budget. Who're we to judge?
As to that photo, I have a 5DII and numerous Ls and Zeiss primes, not too many shots have that look / rendering. If you can achieve it with the T3i and 35 L then great!
I gave away flexibility long back for IQ, I shoot manual focus primes only now.
The T3i plus 35L weighs twice as much as the combo above, and is significantly bulkier. I don't care for putting lenses in my pocket, bags are fine. For the weight of one DSLR and lens you can carry several lenses with a mirrorless type camera.
p.11 #9 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?
Daan B wrote:
Well... I guess it boils down to how big your pockets are
Possibly but I honestly don't believe the pockets of my garments are in some way abnormal. And given the fact that I own multiple jackets/coats, I would think it to be an odd statistical coincidence that they all happen to be big enough for a NEX but not big enough for a DSLR.
But...I am still curious about the the second question: why do we need to exclude pancakes/alt glass from the discussion when so many people are obviously making successful use of these lenses?
p.11 #10 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?
Gochugogi wrote:
Have you actually walked or ran with a camera in a cargo pocket? I tried with a S90 and it bobs and jumps around like a squirrel in a cage and get soaked with sweat. Extremely irritating. I'll stick with my Billingham or clip it snugly on my belt.
Depends on the cargo pants. Some new designs have pockets made to carry a cell phone. I have a pair that fit the x100 to a T. But yeh, I am also looking for a clip on bag that I can attach to my pants. Found one, nice but a little expensive. You have any ideas you can toss my way?
p.11 #12 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?
Daan B wrote:
Please stop trying to put words into my mouth that aren't written by me. I never said that NO ONE needs these systems. Or that the size difference will not matter for anyone. All I am saying is that in pratical terms there isn't much difference between carrying a DLSR system and EVIL system (beyond pancakes / alt glass) because both don't fit a pocket. This is MY OPINION. Others agreed with this. You don't... which is silly. But maybe you have really big pockets
But who says that being "pocketable" is the only goal for a small camera . Personally I don't even put an s95 into my jeans pocket let alone trying to fit a Panasonic G3 there (I can't imagine the 'wear and tear' . Though if I have a coat on then I do sometimes put either of these in my coat pocket).
But there are so many other places where a small camera can go - G3 slips easily into a side of my laptop bag and thats where it often resides. The GF1 often goes on a small pouch on my belt - very easy to flip the top open, have the camera in my hand quickly and back in the pouch again.It never gets in the way but it is always there when I need it.
The G3 sometimes even lands in my wife's handbag and so on.
Last I checked a 1DsIII and a 50mm 1.2 lens will have a very hard time fitting into any of these places by a rather long margin. And even a T1i with a 35mm f2 will not fit into any of these positions either. So yes for me the goal is not "pocketability", but the added "compactness" is very significant and allows me to take these with me almost all the time - something which I tried with my DSLRs but gave up pretty quickly.
And btw there is nothing wrong with pancakes, they are good optics - not L lenses but good nevertheless - I would rate my Pana 20mm as on par with my Nikon 35mm 1.8 and a bit better than the Canon 35mm f2 (on APS-C). And much better than the DSLR kit lenses.
p.11 #13 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?
h00ligan wrote:
Because non l primes on a 5d2 produce worse iq than Leica and Zeiss on a nex.
To the above poster. I can post ISO samples if you want.
I won't give up my 5d2 but I also dot take my entire nex kit most times. Just camera and one lens. Maybe a flash.
It's nice to have choices. And the weak link on most cameras is the photographer. Especially true for me.
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
p.11 #15 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?
curious80 wrote:
And btw there is nothing wrong with pancakes, they are good optics - not L lenses but good nevertheless - I would rate my Pana 20mm as on par with my Nikon 35mm 1.8 and a bit better than the Canon 35mm f2 (on APS-C). And much better than the DSLR kit lenses.
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)?
p.11 #20 · Mirrorless craze - Am I missing something?
Sven Jeppesen wrote:
So now instead of buying camera bags, we are buying all kind of strange trousers & jackets with extra large pockets just to fit the camera
And like Gochugogi wrote before, more than 50% of the people never wear coats
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?
?What happend with Canon?? Once they were innovative.