jhinkey wrote:
It seems then that you missed the "point" of mirrorless by a mile. I think you need to do some research on the advantages that a mirrorless camera body can have over a DSLR body and then come back for a constructive conversation.
Of course, my definition of mirrorless may be different than yours. Please forgive me. May I ask the point of mirrorless? My research was clearly wrong.
Well unlike my A7r, I will certainly not pre-order the A7rII. Hopefully when I am ready (maybe late in 2015?) the price of the new camera will drop below the initial list price of $3200.
Besides, right now I have an order to be delivered next week (hopefully) for a new much faster and much more powerful laptop computer to allow me to process my images much faster and to help to deal with the need for a much larger hard drive. So, much of my "free" money is locked up in the computer.
With the new 42 MP sensor for the A7rII and now seeing that Charles K is selling his modified sensor A7r, maybe I will hold off on the Kolari Modified sensor of my A7r. Unlike Charles though, if I purchase the A7rII, I do not intend to sell my A7r, but would instead use the camera as a back-up and also a lighter weight camera body when needed.
In the mean time, I just returned from Shenandoah NP where my A7r produced outstanding results on the 36 MP sensor; boy do I have a lot of images to process. After I have the new computer up and running, I am anticipating taking my A7r to Acadia NP in Maine within the next 2 weeks.
taran wrote:
Of course, my definition of mirrorless may be different than yours. Please forgive me. May I ask the point of mirrorless? My research was clearly wrong.
Your research isn't wrong. You have come to the conclusion that these cameras are not for you and there is nothing wrong with that. As you know, there are plenty of other options out there that may suit your needs.
jhinkey wrote:
It seems then that you missed the "point" of mirrorless by a mile. I think you need to do some research on the advantages that a mirrorless camera body can have over a DSLR body and then come back for a constructive conversation.
So what is the "point" (if there is such a thing, singular)?
EB-1 wrote:
I canceled one 5DsR preorder and rather regret it. After using the damned A7r for a few weeks, I'm ready to run back to Nikon and Canon.
EBH
You might want to try an A7II to get a feel for the "new" generation of these cams. Not sure it's very different but it might be worth it - everybody has their own preferences and small changes could make a big difference in a user's experience. I really enjoy my A7II but do find the less cluttered ergonomics of my Canon and Nikon DSLRs preferable. I'm more than willing to put up with the somewhat cramped A7 cams for what they offer tho: small size, less weight, great DR, IBIS, EVF, ease of manual focus, adaptability of alt lenses, etc.
Big trick with the A7 series is getting everything setup with custom buttons and the FN setup and try to keep yourself out of the menus at all costs. You start getting into the menus while you are shooting is a nightmare in itself. Want to try and avoid that. My biggest compliment is the FN function button. You can set up 12 different options for a quick change and if you keep everything there it helps a great deal. But the key is get out of the menus.
I like the new body style better as it fits my hands better but I known people that prefer the older body better.
taran wrote:
Of course, my definition of mirrorless may be different than yours. Please forgive me. May I ask the point of mirrorless? My research was clearly wrong.
You assert that the point of mirrorless was to be small - where did you get that from? I am saying that if you think the only advantage of mirrorless is small size, then you need to do some research.
jhinkey wrote:
You assert that the point of mirrorless was to be small - where did you get that from? I am saying that if you think the only advantage of mirrorless is small size, then you need to do some research.
Who's to say he's wrong? Certainly by eliminating the mirror box contraption at least one of the advantages compared with DSLRs is the more compact size.
Care to share the results from your research if you know so much?
jhinkey wrote:
You assert that the point of mirrorless was to be small - where did you get that from? I am saying that if you think the only advantage of mirrorless is small size, then you need to do some research.
You are of course right, I concede, because http://camerasize.com/compare/#509,579 indicates that A7ii is still smaller than the D3300! Sony should be rewarded for trying to achieve an image monster, and its hard to complain about a camera that pushes the envelope in every conceivable way. Perhaps my love of the NEX 7 really was a spoiler for cameras like the d3000 and subsequent series, and having liked the rangefinder form factor, well, had hopes for that in FF, along with a commensurate set of lighter, plastic, non Zeiss, slow aperture lenses. Again, something no one seems to be asking for, as you correctly point out. I will shut up now.
I also think that small size was one of the big attractions of the mirrorless. Sony did give us hope to have small cameras by releasing the NEX. I think they may still go back to the concept once technology allows it. At the moment they can not keep size down and still be competitive (well besides RX).
howard wrote:
Who's to say he's wrong? Certainly by eliminating the mirror box contraption at least one of the advantages compared with DSLRs is the more compact size.
Care to share the results from your research if you know so much?
Yes, I think I do know a few things. First of all I own A D800 (D700 before that, D300 before that, etc . . .), owned the A7R for 9 months or so, and I have a couple of m43 cameras - GX7 and EM1 (plus a GH3, and G5, but those are used for other things). I shoot landscapes, candids, plays, family, friends, and some technical imaging. No real sports or action-type stuff for the most part.
Mirrorless advantages, in my opinion, are:
- You can see what the sensor sees: DOF, ghosting/flare, actual FOV, etc.
- Very accurate AF with CDAF areas being just about anywhere in the frame
- More accurate PDAF since there is no mirror mechanism that needs to be highly precise
- Thinner camera bodies due to lack of mirror box (though the back sides of mirrorless cameras have gotten thicker with the advent of IBIS)
- Flexible display - you can put just about anything (or nothing) overlaid on the viewfinder image
- You can put that EVF just about anywhere you want on a camera now that you don't have to look through an optical path out through the lens
- And I've found that my mirrorless camera sensor stay far cleaner than my DSLRs do - likely due to the lack of flapping mirror which is a great dust-tiring device.
- Totally silent shutter (EFCS but also fully electronic on some models)
There are lots of mirrorless disadvantages too - to show just a few
- Power/battery life is generally pretty poor compared to DSLRs
- EVF refresh rates are lower than many need
- EVF dynamic range is not the greatest
- On-senor CDAF/PDAF is not as light sensitive as DSLR AF modules
- Focus tracking not as good as DSLRs
- EVF "tearing" for fast moving elements in the frame
- EVF optics/viewing experience not quite up there with DSLRs
- Sensor readout time delay to EVF
- Sensor heating and noise
- etc.
I guess I don't know anything about the "point" of mirrorless cameras - it must JUST be about the size.
wolfloid wrote:
Er.. it's been mentioned in just about every article I've ever read about the advantages of mirrorless.
It's a potential advantage of mirrorless but it's not necessarily the point of mirrorless.
When someone says that the "point of mirrorless is small size" that directly implies that that the ONLY point . . .
Heck, I'd take a mirrorless D810 right now - same size, weight, etc. to get access to all the other advantages of mirrorless that have nothing to do with size/weight.
Another thing to consider is that just because the camera body is small doesn't mean your whole camera + lens system will be that much smaller. It can, but not necessarily.
jhinkey wrote:
Yes, I think I do know a few things. First of all I own A D800 (D700 before that, D300 before that, etc . . .), owned the A7R for 9 months or so, and I have a couple of m43 cameras - GX7 and EM1 (plus a GH3, and G5, but those are used for other things). I shoot landscapes, candids, plays, family, friends, and some technical imaging. No real sports or action-type stuff for the most part.
Mirrorless advantages, in my opinion, are:
- You can see what the sensor sees: DOF, ghosting/flare, actual FOV, etc.
- Very accurate AF with CDAF areas being just about anywhere in the frame
- More accurate PDAF since there is no mirror mechanism that needs to be highly precise
- Thinner camera bodies due to lack of mirror box (though the back sides of mirrorless cameras have gotten thicker with the advent of IBIS)
- Flexible display - you can put just about anything (or nothing) overlaid on the viewfinder image
- You can put that EVF just about anywhere you want on a camera now that you don't have to look through an optical path out through the lens
- And I've found that my mirrorless camera sensor stay far cleaner than my DSLRs do - likely due to the lack of flapping mirror which is a great dust-tiring device.
- Totally silent shutter (EFCS but also fully electronic on some models)
There are lots of mirrorless disadvantages too - to show just a few
- Power/battery life is generally pretty poor compared to DSLRs
- EVF refresh rates are lower than many need
- EVF dynamic range is not the greatest
- On-senor CDAF/PDAF is not as light sensitive as DSLR AF modules
- Focus tracking not as good as DSLRs
- EVF "tearing" for fast moving elements in the frame
- EVF optics/viewing experience not quite up there with DSLRs
- Sensor readout time delay to EVF
- Sensor heating and noise
- etc.
I guess I don't know anything about the "point" of mirrorless cameras - it must JUST be about the size....Show more →
You actually listed it as one of your pros too (though you call it "thinner bodies").
You can't deny it is one of, and some may argue one of the main, advantages of MILCs. The person just tentatively said that "it seems ..." and the way I read it he didn't not necessarily meant the only point. To condescendingly dismiss it is unjustified, IMO.
jhinkey wrote:
Yes, I think I do know a few things. First of all I own A D800 (D700 before that, D300 before that, etc . . .), owned the A7R for 9 months or so, and I have a couple of m43 cameras - GX7 and EM1 (plus a GH3, and G5, but those are used for other things). I shoot landscapes, candids, plays, family, friends, and some technical imaging. No real sports or action-type stuff for the most part.
Mirrorless advantages, in my opinion, are:
- You can see what the sensor sees: DOF, ghosting/flare, actual FOV, etc.
- Very accurate AF with CDAF areas being just about anywhere in the frame
- More accurate PDAF since there is no mirror mechanism that needs to be highly precise
- Thinner camera bodies due to lack of mirror box (though the back sides of mirrorless cameras have gotten thicker with the advent of IBIS)
- Flexible display - you can put just about anything (or nothing) overlaid on the viewfinder image
- You can put that EVF just about anywhere you want on a camera now that you don't have to look through an optical path out through the lens
- And I've found that my mirrorless camera sensor stay far cleaner than my DSLRs do - likely due to the lack of flapping mirror which is a great dust-tiring device.
- Totally silent shutter (EFCS but also fully electronic on some models)
There are lots of mirrorless disadvantages too - to show just a few
- Power/battery life is generally pretty poor compared to DSLRs
- EVF refresh rates are lower than many need
- EVF dynamic range is not the greatest
- On-senor CDAF/PDAF is not as light sensitive as DSLR AF modules
- Focus tracking not as good as DSLRs
- EVF "tearing" for fast moving elements in the frame
- EVF optics/viewing experience not quite up there with DSLRs
- Sensor readout time delay to EVF
- Sensor heating and noise
- etc.
I guess I don't know anything about the "point" of mirrorless cameras - it must JUST be about the size....Show more →
I don't think anyone will deny that there are advantages of mirrorless cameras other than size. However for a large majority of users the primary motivator for them to get into mirrorless cameras is size. If my A6000 was as big as my D7000 then I would never have bought it. At least for me all the other benefits of mirrorless, while nice to have, are not significant enough on their own for me to give up the advantages of a DSLR.
After I have the new computer up and running, I am anticipating taking my A7r to Acadia NP in Maine within the next 2 weeks.
- it must JUST be about the size.