Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Thu Dec 18, 2014 10:07 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Mirrorless
PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 5:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:07 am
Posts: 1012
Location: North of the 49th parallel
It's no fiction that the mirrorless camera segment is by and large the most exciting in camera world.
As more people are embracing the convenience of a compact system that equals or betters it's conventional siblings, even mainstream thinkers are jumping on board the mirrorless train.

With the huge success of the a77 and NEX-7 it can only get more interesting and better from here on.

Here's a commentary from Thom Hogan's new site sansmirror.com
______________________

"I've been struck lately by the polarization in attitude about mirrorless cameras. There's one group that thinks they're the best things since sliced bread. There's another group that thinks they're simply not good enough and should be avoided like the plague.

I have a simple test to see whether you actually believe what you think you believe.

Let's teleport back to 2002. I'm going to offer you a free D100 with its then available lenses or a free Nikon V1 with its now available lenses plus FT1 adapter. I'm pretty confident that you'll pick the V1. It has faster and better AF, faster frame rates, better metering, 4 million more pixels, better high ISO capability, and a host of other improvements. Personally, I'd pick the V1.

Okay, fair enough, that was ten years ago, how about fast forwarding five years to 2007. Now I'll offer you a free D80 or a free V1. I'm still pretty confident that you'd take the V1. Okay, let's move a bit more forward, to 2009. You can have a free V1, D5000, or D90. Finally the choice gets a little more difficult, though I suspect that your answers would polarize towards the V1 and D90. (Let's check that. Here's a survey you can take to see if you agree.)

So here's a question: if today's smallest sensor mirrorless camera is better than all but the pro DSLRs of a few years ago, why would anyone construe them as being "not good enough?" Were the millions of DSLRs sold that year also not good enough? ;~)

We can play this same game with other brands, by the way. In 2003 I can offer you an Olympus E-1 or an E-P3; which do you take? It's a little tougher question, as the E-1 is a higher-end specification DSLR and the E-P3 is a rangefinder-style mirrorless. But if image quality is your game, I'm pretty sure you'll pick the E-P3.

If you're a Sony user, try this: we'll go back to 2004 and I'll offer you a Maxxum 7D or a NEX-7. I'm thinking most of you are going to pick the NEX-7.

I use the Nikon V1 versus D100 as my primary example in my testing for a reason: right now it's the only 10-year comparison where we have true DSLR versus DSLR-like mirrorless. But we're going to get more of these in the next few years, and I suspect the answer will remain the same.

So now I have to remind you that many pros were using and getting published with a D100 back in 2002. Has the image quality at your favorite magazine gone up significantly in 10 years? No, though they are now able to publish shots taken in lighting that their photographers couldn't shoot in 10 years ago. Would that have been true with a V1 ten years ago? Yes, I think it would have allowed shots you couldn't really take with a D100. Therefore a pro would have picked the V1, I think. (Ironically, both the D100 and V1 user would have had problems with truly wide angle lens options. Hey, Nikon, a lot of us use your equipment because of how great Nikon wide angle lenses are; where are the DX and CX wide primes?)

So just how bad are the mirrorless cameras? Uh, not bad at all, which has been my point for three years now.

DSLRs are now 16mp or more, with "a lot more pixels" coming right at our event horizon. We have shoot-in-the-dark pro models, plus more-pixels-than-most-actually-use prosumer and consumer models, all with more features than anyone really uses. If you had asked me back in 2002 what was the ultimate set of specifications and quality I needed in a DSLR, we're now passing that definition. For a lot of my shooting, the V1 is actually enough, and that's probably true of a lot of you, too. It's the same for m4/3 or NEX or NX or any of the other mirrorless cameras, too.

Don't get me wrong, I'll take any additional bit of quality, performance, or comfort I can get, but when I fail at something photographically today, it almost never is my camera that's the problem.

Note to camera manufacturers: You still don't get it, do you? One of the reasons why the mirrorless cameras are getting more popular is because they are as competent as DSLRs but are smaller and lighter--they're less trouble to carry. When a DSLR user decides it's time to upgrade and they have a choice of same-old-big-beast and a competent smaller choice, a lot of them are picking the smaller choice. Even more would do that if you'd just design the darned things for a serious user in the first place. That doesn't mean you have to stop building those entry models (GF3, E-PM1, J1, C3), it just means you need to make sure you have the upper end ready, too. The popularity of the NEX-7 and the likely popularity of the upcoming Fujifilm X-Pro1 and Olympus OM-D ought to get your attention. But just in case they don't: make more and better serious mirrorless cameras, please. I'm looking at you Nikon."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 6:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 12:48 pm
Posts: 8049
Location: UK
Thom himself in his other article Galapagos Focus Testing said only the the V1 comes close to a DSLR for tracking AF. If you need it, are you going to touch a m4/3 or NEX (without the alpha adapter)? Similarly, the V1's small sensor, while not a problem for myself, is a problem if you want to go for the shallow depth of field effects. Ok, other systems like NEX are not afflicted by that.

Mirrorless has potential. But it has a long way to go yet to replace DSLRs, not least no one has bothered to come up with a full frame one yet. Other than Leica...

And the other part of me still says, use the right tool for the job. Mirrorless has its place. DSLRs have their place. The lines between them might shift a bit, but they don't have to be mutually exclusive (yet).

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D2, 7D1, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 10-18, 15-85
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 50/1.4A, 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS
Compacts: Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 7:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:23 pm
Posts: 828
Location: Boca Raton, FL, USA
The article is a bit 'black and white' and misses the big grey area: I've been aboard the mirrorless revolution with my NEX now for nearly a year and I find it to be a fantastic camera, very capable, equal to a DSLR in many types of shooting, and fully a worthy replacement or stand-in for a DSLR for some occasions. But I don't fit into the 'best thing since sliced bread' nor the 'avoid like a plague' groups Thom mentioned. I suspect that the group I'm in may actually be quite large - those who find mirrorless cameras to be a great second body to a DSLR, or who find the advantages worth accepting the compromises.

My mirrorless (and in fact NO mirrorless) camera cannot replace my DSLR. It's that simple. But it can compliment it. It can occasionally stand in for it. It can offer me some nice advantages (size, portability) with acceptable compromises for some types of shooting.

Too often the argument seems to be between a 'pro-mirrorless' crowd that supposedly wants the complete replacement/annihilation of DSLRs, and the 'anti-mirrorless' crowd who thinks they are abominations that need to be sent back to hell from whence they came. Whereas a sizeable uncounted group sits in the middle, ranging from those who see a mirrorless system's potential but feel it isn't quite ready as a DSLR replacement to those who buy them as second cameras to compliment their DSLRs.

_________________
Justin Miller
Sony DSLR-A580 / Sony 18-250mm / Minolta 50mm F1.7 / Sigma 30mm F1.4 / Tamron 10-24mm / Tamron 150-600mm / Tamron 90mm F2.8 macro / Minolta 300mm F4 APO
Sony A6000 / 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 / 55-210mm F4-6.3 / 10-18mm F4 / 35mm F1.8 / 16mm F2.8 / via manual adapter, lots of Pentax K mount, Konica K/AR mount, and Leica M mount manual lenses

Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group