Could FF mirrorless tempt 'never-mirrorless' FF SLR folks with features?

[Durf]

For those who have no interest in mirrorless, what would happen if any of the following items/features landed in the first FF mirrorless body?

• IBIS
• Tilty-flippy touch screen (in a higher than 6D2 feature set)
• A new variant of the 5DS sensor with on-chip ADC (i.e. something resembling the 5DS2 sensor)
• +3 fps over your current FF SLR (presume fully working AF throughout)
• Thin mount design affords enough space to rear-filter EF lenses that are not front-filterable (possibly through the EF adaptor)
• Eye AF
• Ultra-light body design (more than just from mirror removal and body size changes: say, with carbon fiber instead of metal)
• AF points that almost completely fill the viewfinder -- no more central core of AF points that SLR designs typically have

For those with no interest in mirrorless, Is there a killer app that will change your mind? Is anything above so attractive to you that if mirrorless was the only way to get it, you'd do it?

In other words, if a critical thing you are interested in drops in the new FF mirrorless rig, do you bite the bullet and get the FF mirrorless rig, or just wait/hope that particular tech/feature makes it into your preferred SLR slot?

(Again, I'm specifically asking the 'never-mirrorless' camp of FF shooters. If you are interested in getting an FF mirrorless rig, you are not who I am looking for with this, thx.)

- A

IBIS - could be had in a DLSR, not a mirrorless thing per se
Tilty-flippy-touchscreen - see above
New sensor - really?
more FPS - nope
Thin mount design - I assume you mean a short flange distance rather than a thin mount. And no. But an adapter that takes filters is a good idea.
Eye AF - no
Ultra-light body - no. I had the opportunity to check out an olympus M10.2 last weekend. It felt solid and nice. Then the Sony A6300. It felt like a cheap toy. The weight of my current camera body isn't an issue, it's the weight of the lenses that gets to be troublesome.
AF-points filling the viewfinder - no

and do stop talking about "apps" in cameras when talking about features.

The one thing I want in a full frame mirrorless that couldn't be had in a DSLR is a full-on silent mode. An electronic shutter with fast read-out. This could partially be had in a DSLR in live-view mode though.
The one thing a mirrorless can never give me is an optical viewfinder that can be used when the camera is off. I'm growing somewhat tired of WYSIWYG viewfinders really though they are sometimes useful (often enough they're just another distraction though)

Pentax K-1

 

[GammyKnee]

I'm not fervently against mirrorless, I just think that presently the disadvantages outweigh the advantages for me.

The list of features in the opening post don't particularly interest me, except for IBIS which I don't think is necessarily tied to mirrorless. For me, mirrorless has the following appeal:

- Fewer hassles with lens calibration
- Much better support (EVF) for manually focusing lenses, especially older and/or non-Canon lenses
- Mechanism-free shooting (mirrorless plus electronic shutter); silent shooting with minimal physical wear
- More flexibility over what info is shown in the VF

The drawbacks I see are:
- Inferior battery life
- Weight and ergonomics. Forget the idea that mirrorless has to be smaller/lighter and just give me a well balanced body with good ergonomics. Like a current DSLR.
- EVF. Despite all the benefits it can bring, can it really match an OVF?
- Potentially more frequent sensor cleaning

 

[ahsanford]

Thanks for the feedback, all. I think I tangled together a few different questions rattling around my brain:

1) For those with no interest in mirrorless, would feature X -- something either not possible in an SLR or 99% unlikely for Canon to deliver in an SLR (IBIS) -- weaken your resolve to not get mirrorless?

2) For those with no interest in mirrorless, do you want something that will eventually come to SLRs badly enough right now to snap up an FF mirrorless body if it is the first body to offer it? Examples here might be a 5-series spec body with a tilty-flippy touchscreen, a second-gen 5DS (high res + on-chip ADC) sensor before the 5DS2 comes out, wireless speedlite master control on board, etc.

I'm (clearly inartfully) trying to tease out if the never mirrorless camp can be 'feature-set bribed' into changing their mind, if their disdain for mirrorless can be trumped by something they've always wanted, etc.

- A

 

[cayenne]

A full frame EF mount camera with 5D4 features plus:
- silent shutter, not even a whisper
- accurate focus picking and
- accurate exposure setup indicator (e.g. Waveform). As a matter of fact, I don't trust the What-You-See-Is-What-You-Get on a mirrorless camera
would be welcome.

I'm curious...will they allow 100% "silent" mirrorless cameras (do they already)?

I mean, every modern cell phone I know of, makes a sound when it takes a picture, and I thought I'd read this was largely due to South Korea and maybe also Japan, requiring this to help prevent up skirt photos being taken.

Would this possibly also effect mirrorless cameras?

C

 

[ahsanford]

I'm not fervently against mirrorless, I just think that presently the disadvantages outweigh the advantages for me.

Solid list, and I agree strongly on EVFs being the next step after Canon took manual focusing screens away.

But you and I will both be shooting mirrorless someday, it sounds. We are not the droids I'm looking for. I want the 'you can pry my OVF out of my cold, dead hands' bumper sticker people with this query.

What features have they wanted that either (a) mirrorless inherently can deliver more easily or (b) mirrorless has a shot of getting as a new platform in a way that the mature FF SLR platform would never get.

I want the 'Oh, damn. Mirrorless got feature X. I've always wanted that. Either that's never coming to an SLR or I don't want to wait for it to get there. I think I may have to get this mirrorless body.'

- A

 

[ahsanford]

I'm curious...will they allow 100% "silent" mirrorless cameras (do they already)?

The difference between mechanically quiet and completely quiet with mirrorless (I thought) was about a mechanical (quiet) shutter vs. an electronic (completely quiet) shutter. So mirrorless could shoot completely quietly if it puts an e-shutter in there and the lens doesn't have some horrific old squeaky micromotor AF setup or a 1st gen IS system (which could be turned off, in fairness).

As for legally mandated electronic shutter noises for privacy reasons, that's news to me. I thought that it was put into digital cameras ages ago for the added distinct 'moment feel' of a shutter button press. At least in the US you can defeat the iPhone shutter noise. So it may be a regional thing that can be managed in firmware.

But our Toyota Priuses still make that artificial whirring noise so pedestrians and cyclists don't get hit in traffic. ;D

- A

 

[Kit.]

I mean, every modern cell phone I know of, makes a sound when it takes a picture, and I thought I'd read this was largely due to South Korea and maybe also Japan, requiring this to help prevent up skirt photos being taken.

My Nexus 5X is silent.

Anyway, video recording usually doesn't produce extra sounds.

What features have they wanted that either (a) mirrorless inherently can deliver more easily or (b) mirrorless has a shot of getting as a new platform in a way that the mature FF SLR platform would never get.

Pocketability. One could even drop the back LCD screen and replace it with a parallax OVF like in the film P&S cameras (or, better, a combo OVF/EVF) to make it more pocketable.

 

[Mikehit]

A full frame EF mount camera with 5D4 features plus:
- silent shutter, not even a whisper
- accurate focus picking and
- accurate exposure setup indicator (e.g. Waveform). As a matter of fact, I don't trust the What-You-See-Is-What-You-Get on a mirrorless camera
would be welcome.

I'm curious...will they allow 100% "silent" mirrorless cameras (do they already)?

I mean, every modern cell phone I know of, makes a sound when it takes a picture, and I thought I'd read this was largely due to South Korea and maybe also Japan, requiring this to help prevent up skirt photos being taken.

Would this possibly also effect mirrorless cameras?

C

My Panasonic (Gx7, G80) and Olympus (E-M 5) all have totally silent shutters.

 

[Deleted member 91053]

So long as it has an optical viewfinder, pro body size and strength, very fast + accurate AF, built in vertical grip and large 3 cell battery packs then I would certainly consider one. Not sure how you get an OVF on a mirrorless - but that is for the manufacturers to sort out if they want my money

 

[Mikehit]

Not sure how you get an OVF on a mirrorless

rangefinder styling....

 

[Zeidora]

If the EVF becomes indistinguishable from an OVF. There are two issues: resolution and dynamic range. The human eye is astoundingly good at resolving detail (allegedly the equivalent of 576 megapixels: https://futurism.com/what-is-the-resolution-of-the-human-eye/) and dynamic range is on the order of 20 f-stops or 1M:1 (depends on conditions).
The first may be more limited by resolving power of lenses, so in the 50-100 MP range. The latter is not. It may happen, but not any time soon. I'd give it 10-20 years.

Until then, my other camera is a 4x5" view camera, with loupe on ground glass.

 

[sdsr]

Re: Could FF mirrorless tempt 'never-mirrorkess' FF SLR folks with features?

Only IBIS and very accurate focus peaking would tempt me and only because I have 36 legacy lenses with no AF or IS.

Like Steve, I much prefer an optical viewfinder. Hate EVF.

It's not just focus peaking, but focus peaking combined with x10-x15 magnification that makes mf so much easier via an EVF; there's no way you can do that through an optical viewfinder (is there?). The more mf you do, the more you might come to overcome your hatred of EVFs. (It's not only useful for mf - on an a7rIII (and perhaps other models - I don't know) you can, in single spot AF mode, magnify the focus point x10 or x15 to make sure that precisely what you want is in focus, which is especially useful with shallow focus on subjects that aren't moving much or at all.)

 

[RGF]

I'll go mirrorless if the camera works for wildlife photography.

Great EVF, works with my Canon glass, battery life is similar to 1Dx M2, feels good in my hands (not too small) - needs to work in both portrait and landscape modes, menu and buttons work well for photographers (especially Canon shooters).

In other words, if the camera works well and the price point is attractive, I will serious consider it

 

[scyrene]

If a mirrorless camera worked essentially the same as my DSLR then I wouldn't have a problem getting one when I next upgrade. I suppose the key feature would be body style - I use big lenses so I need a body that balances, so not much smaller than a 5-series. Otherwise, as others have said, an EVF as responsive as an OVF, good battery life, and EF compatibility would be important.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The Rumored Mirrorless similar to a 5D MK IV would not tempt me, because I can put my 5D MK IV into live view and use it that way. It would be nice if it retained native use of EF lenses, but I'm doubting that.

There needs to be a across the board improvement to interest me.

 

[Tugela]

For those who have no interest in mirrorless, what would happen if any of the following items/features landed in the first FF mirrorless body?

• IBIS
• Tilty-flippy touch screen (in a higher than 6D2 feature set)
• A new variant of the 5DS sensor with on-chip ADC (i.e. something resembling the 5DS2 sensor)
• +3 fps over your current FF SLR (presume fully working AF throughout)
• Thin mount design affords enough space to rear-filter EF lenses that are not front-filterable (possibly through the EF adaptor)
• Eye AF
• Ultra-light body design (more than just from mirror removal and body size changes: say, with carbon fiber instead of metal)
• AF points that almost completely fill the viewfinder -- no more central core of AF points that SLR designs typically have

For those with no interest in mirrorless, Is there a killer app that will change your mind? Is anything above so attractive to you that if mirrorless was the only way to get it, you'd do it?

In other words, if a critical thing you are interested in drops in the new FF mirrorless rig, do you bite the bullet and get the FF mirrorless rig, or just wait/hope that particular tech/feature makes it into your preferred SLR slot?

(Again, I'm specifically asking the 'never-mirrorless' camp of FF shooters. If you are interested in getting an FF mirrorless rig, you are not who I am looking for with this, thx.)

- A

Once Canon and Nikon start making MILCs on their high end product line, they will probably replace DSLRs very rapidly despite what any hardcore users might think. All of the future development dollars will go to MILCs. DSLRs might continue to be made for a while, but expect few upgrades going forward since the market will not be large enough to make it worthwhile.

 

[Deleted member 91053]

Not sure how you get an OVF on a mirrorless

rangefinder styling....

But that won't show me the framing I am getting unless it instantly adjusts to focal length the lens I am using and also instantly adjusts for parallax. Also it does not show me the through the lens view so that I can see if it is in focus.

Not much use, but rangefinders do look nice.

 

[ahsanford]

Once Canon and Nikon start making MILCs on their high end product line, they will probably replace DSLRs very rapidly despite what any hardcore users might think. All of the future development dollars will go to MILCs. DSLRs might continue to be made for a while, but expect few upgrades going forward since the market will not be large enough to make it worthwhile.

On replacing SLRs with mirrorless, yes, it's a certainty but the question is what product lines and when. I think it will start at the bottom and climb it's way up -- both for (what we presume will be) production cost X volume opportunities, but also b/c the consumer market at large doesn't seem to care as much about OVF vs. EVF and what not. Higher end crop and FF SLRs will be around quite some time, though.

As far as all R&D dollars quickly moving to mirrorless, that's going to be a company specific move:

• Sony: Soon / any time they want. SLT A-mount stuff isn't exactly setting the world on fire. All the momentum is with mirrorless for them.
  
  
• Nikon: They're screwed. SLRs keep the lights on for them so they can't abandon that market quickly, but a lack of a serious mirrorless platform is a huge future threat. I see them painfully juggling supporting SLR and mirrorless product lines over time.
  
  
• Canon: No one knows when they might migrate whole product lines to mirrorless or just obsolete certain SLR lines. They are uniquely big enough and profitable enough to keep everything afloat a long time. So my guess is we'll see a Mirrorless Rebel drop in alongside a traditional mirrored Rebel in ~ 5 years time, and if it fares well commercially, reliability-wise, etc. the next Rebel won't have a mirror at all. But 5-series, 1-series, etc. will keep their mirrors for a much longer period of time.

- A

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

• Canon: No one knows when they might migrate whole product lines to mirrorless or just obsolete certain SLR lines. They are uniquely big enough and profitable enough to keep everything afloat a long time. So my guess is we'll see a Mirrorless Rebel drop in alongside a traditional mirrored Rebel in ~ 5 years time, and if it fares well commercially, reliability-wise, etc. the next Rebel won't have a mirror at all. But 5-series, 1-series, etc. will keep their mirrors for a much longer period of time.

- A

The Canon M6 and M5's are already basically mirrorless Rebels, its a professional full frame thats next,. Apparently we will see it before the end of the year.
Sales will determine the future. Expect higher prices for mirrorless, more $$$ for less!

 

[Talys]

My real issue is that I don't want to make compromises inautofocus raw speed and accuracy especially with less light (meaning a combination of extenders, f stop and available light.

If i can get simple center point af at f8-11 in a room lit with a 60w bulb with and without af illuminator (a real flash one, not the Sony garbage), I will probably be pretty happy.


At f5.6-f8, if I can see it through the lens, I would like instant, hunt free jitter free autofocus.

Is that totally unreasonable as an ask from a ff milc?

What I do not care about very much is af tracking stuff and much intelligent af other than potentially eye af. But frankly, I would even give that up, preferring af point selection if I had to map a second button to engage. But give me good low light af and I could probably be a happy convert.