Thom Hogan: Seven Reasons Why I Shoot With (Nikon) DSLRs

[unfocused]

Technology is improving, eventually EVFs will be better than OVFs in most aspects. When that happens the DSLR will be like film. It may take a while but it will happen.

Possibly - eventually. As Thom says, probably not in his life time. The problem is that it is very difficult to beat harnessing simple physics to optically look through the lens, and it's free in energy terms. As he says, dslr technology is not standing still, and it may be that lcd overlays etc may enable some of the EVF benefits to be brought to OVF anyway.

Yes, this is something that many people don't seem to understand. My father was an engineer and one thing he used to say is that you should never substitute a complex solution for a simple solution, when the simple solution can do the job.

The reflex mirror is a simple solution that has been proven over and over again for nearly a century. Some people are fascinated by new electronics and believe that a complex, electronic solution must be better, but so far that hasn't been the case.

It's certainly possible that some day electronic viewfinders will be cheaper and better than optical viewfinders. Possible, but not certain. On the other hand, looking at the latest offering from Fuji, it seems increasingly likely that even if electronic viewfinders replace optical viewfinders, the basic appearance of cameras may not change all that much.

If and when electronic viewfinders replace optical viewfinders our cameras will likely still look very much like they do today, they will function much like they do now, they will use the same lenses that we all have now and it's likely that only technology geeks will be aware of the change.

 

[Tabor Warren Photography]

8 Hours...

It would take train B 8 hours to pass train A, at 11:00pm.

Am I the only one who sought out to answer the train question?
-Tabor

 

[3kramd5]

The biggest benefit of mirrorless was DSLR quality in a compact size.

For whom?

That may be true to some users. Personally, I wish my mirrorless camera was bigger (sonly a7r2). Hell, if they could take the innards and shove them into a body the size of a 5D I'd be thrilled.

 

[Don Haines]

8 Hours...

It would take train B 8 hours to pass train A, at 11:00pm.

Am I the only one who sought out to answer the train question?
-Tabor

Are you sure? I calculate that Train B never passes Train A

 

[Dylan777]

Dslr vs mirrorless again? ;D

To be honest, I lost my hope with Canon mirrorless. I have no plans nor wishes for Canon up coming mirrorless.

 

[TAF]

Technology is improving, eventually EVFs will be better than OVFs in most aspects. When that happens the DSLR will be like film. It may take a while but it will happen.

Possibly - eventually. As Thom says, probably not in his life time. The problem is that it is very difficult to beat harnessing simple physics to optically look through the lens, and it's free in energy terms. As he says, dslr technology is not standing still, and it may be that lcd overlays etc may enable some of the EVF benefits to be brought to OVF anyway.

Yes, this is something that many people don't seem to understand. My father was an engineer and one thing he used to say is that you should never substitute a complex solution for a simple solution, when the simple solution can do the job.

The reflex mirror is a simple solution that has been proven over and over again for nearly a century. Some people are fascinated by new electronics and believe that a complex, electronic solution must be better, but so far that hasn't been the case.

It's certainly possible that some day electronic viewfinders will be cheaper and better than optical viewfinders. Possible, but not certain. On the other hand, looking at the latest offering from Fuji, it seems increasingly likely that even if electronic viewfinders replace optical viewfinders, the basic appearance of cameras may not change all that much.

If and when electronic viewfinders replace optical viewfinders our cameras will likely still look very much like they do today, they will function much like they do now, they will use the same lenses that we all have now and it's likely that only technology geeks will be aware of the change.

The biggest problem with the reflex mirror is the very large and expensive prism and the micro-mechnical pieces required to make that cheap and simple mirror useful.

Eventually, it will be cheaper to get rid of all the moving parts and the expensive glass, and use an EVF. I expect that will occur much sooner than the author expects, because electronics continue to drop in price and increase in capability, while making large chunks of glass precisely (and precision micro-motors and gears) just gets more expensive (although it is always possible that something will happen to reverse that trend as well).

Just look at the history of the Rollei TLR. What really raised the cost to outrageous levels was the lack of availability of an affordable leaf shutter - the rest of the camera is fairly simple.


On a separate thought - when will I be able to get an EVF that attaches to my glasses, so the camera can be independent of where my eye is - wouldn't it be useful to be able to shoot from above (or below) a crowd, or around a corner, or behind you?

 

[gregory4000]

I liked this article a lot.
I don't care if the writer is paid by nikon ( nikon does have a mirrorless system)
It was fair and honest.
I feel that many on this rumors are professionals at collecting expensive camera gear like a neighbor collect snap-on tools for his hobbies. And that the writer under estimated the evolution of photography a bit. Sure, DSLR will evolve and so will mirrorless. But the great majority of new photographers are using cell phones. Somewhere there is some kid that can smoke all of us as photographers just using a iPhone due only because he has imagination that equipment can't buy.
In ten years eyeglass/sunglasses will be equipped with cameras, after this Contact lenses will have the ability to record video and stills. And anyone in those future days will have cameras that will out-photo the tools we have today in size and features. I'm 56 years old. At 19 I had my first 35mm ( Nikon FM -remember those) If you had a little knowledge of light, you could take photos that the average person could only dream of. But today and the future is different. Only imagination will separate one with skill, not your fancy camera, why? Because "All" cameras will take photos good enough to display in a museum!

 

[Don Haines]

Technology is improving, eventually EVFs will be better than OVFs in most aspects. When that happens the DSLR will be like film. It may take a while but it will happen.

Possibly - eventually. As Thom says, probably not in his life time. The problem is that it is very difficult to beat harnessing simple physics to optically look through the lens, and it's free in energy terms. As he says, dslr technology is not standing still, and it may be that lcd overlays etc may enable some of the EVF benefits to be brought to OVF anyway.

Yes, this is something that many people don't seem to understand. My father was an engineer and one thing he used to say is that you should never substitute a complex solution for a simple solution, when the simple solution can do the job.
<SNIP>

The biggest problem with the reflex mirror is the very large and expensive prism and the micro-mechnical pieces required to make that cheap and simple mirror useful.
<SNIP>

Some things are easier with mirrorless.... like a 100FPS burst rate.....

 

[Tinky]

Concur with most of that.

I went down the panasonic route, mainly for video, I still use my Canon DSLR for stills.

The menu on the panasonic is horrificly convoluted, contratictory and riven with caveats. You can't use this mode if you use that mode, and if you use that feature the camera defaults to this unpleasant feature etc..

The jpegs are horrible (RAWs are fine though)

The headline feature for me though was the 4K video.

I adapt my canon lenses via a metabones XL, and shoot in 4K.

This has three effects: the lens image circle is compressed to s35 equivalence (in 4K mode) by compressing more of the lens resolution i get better sharper pictures, and the extra stop & 1/3 of light helps too.

At the editing end I also scale these 4K rushes to a 1080 timeline, again, squeezing in that resolution. I also have cropping options, but the 1080 output is vastly improved over the 1080 I was delivering from my canons.

Still grabs at 4K are pretty useful, as is the 1080 50i mode, if I'm doing anythng for broadcast.

To get a canon with these features would have meant at least a c300mk1.

If I wasn't doing video, I would still be with my DSLR fulltime.

The Panasonic promise much like 4K batch, and post focus, and the DFD theory is very clever even if the results don't match the hype.

Horses for courses.

If you don't care about video, stick with your DSLR. Even an older DSLR.

 

[hmatthes]

"For the record, I do shoot with a Leica Q mirrorless camera, and I think it’s the best small full frame camera out there for my uses"

I too use the Q for almost everything but carry the Canon kit for more challenging things.

Canon should look at the Q as the harbinger of what the FF M ILC series should be... Small FF/M lenses, mainly primes, designed in a new compact mount -- then sell an adapter for EF glass. HERE's MY MONEY...

 

[H. Jones]

Canon should look at the Q as the harbinger of what the FF M ILC series should be... Small FF/M lenses, mainly primes, designed in a new compact mount -- then sell an adapter for EF glass. HERE's MY MONEY...

I agree with that. I'm 100% sticking with my DSLR and am excited to pick up a 1DX mark II by the end of August, but I've been watching the Fuji X-T2 out of curiousity. I'd rather spend my money with Canon though and I don't have any business reason to buy outside of the system I've invested so much money into.

That said, if Canon could make a full frame mirrorless, I'd be interested in it simply for lightweight primes. Not much interest here for small zoom lenses if they weren't fast, which is physically impossible. If I'm going to use big zooms I'm going with my SLR, but I'd like to have a set of fast 35mm, 24mm and 50mm primes on a small mirrorless that I could use as a back-up or just carry with me in my free time.

I do remember the rumor of a fixed-lens full frame camera with a 35mm f/1.4, which would be fine with me as well. I'd like the flexibility to use a wider/longer lens + use my own lenses with an adapter though.

 

[tron]

The only part of Thom's concerns I have trouble accepting is his lament over the current best-in-class 1/250 second lag of the viewfinder image in a mirrorless body. That is 4 milliseconds. He argues that if he misses a shot by even 1 ms. he has not captured the peak. Yet, shutter lag on his favorite D5 and D500 range from 40 to 50 ms when manually pre-focused. Add in AF and then you are well into the 100+ ms range. Not to mention human perception lag. Sure for all intents one can consider the OVF as having zero delay; however, to capture a shot within 1 ms one has to anticipate all the inherent lags in the system and compensate for them. 4 ms due to viewfinder image lag seems both trivial and a predictable fixed time lag when compared to all the other much longer and variable time lags.

+1000 You just prove he talks BS. That he makes errors with two orders of magnitude or even worse he has illusions of grandeur... (1msec, wow...)

 

[Tabor Warren Photography]

8 Hours...

It would take train B 8 hours to pass train A, at 11:00pm.

Am I the only one who sought out to answer the train question?
-Tabor

Are you sure? I calculate that Train B never passes Train A

I'm glad you questioned my answer!

After taking another look, I added back the first two hours when I shouldn't have. They meet up at 9:00.

1:00, both trains are at the station // Train A takes of at 75mph
2:00, Train A is now 75 miles away continuing at 75mph // Train B is sitting still // They are now 75 miles away from each other
3:00, Train B takes off at 100mph, however, at this moment they are 150 miles away from each other
4:00, Train A is 225 miles away from the station // Train B is 100 miles away from the station // 125 miles apart
5:00, Train A is 300 miles away from the station // Train B is 200 miles away from the station // 100 miles apart
6:00, Train A is 375 miles away from the station // Train B is 300 miles away from the station // 75 miles apart
7:00, Train A is 450 miles away from the station // Train B is 400 miles away from the station // 50 miles apart
8:00, Train A is 525 miles away from the station // Train B is 500 miles away from the station // 25 miles apart
9:00, Train A is 600 miles away from the station // Train B is 600 miles away from the station // 0 miles apart

Thank you again, and I hope this helps anyone else who's curious!
-Tabor

 

[Don Haines]

8 Hours...

It would take train B 8 hours to pass train A, at 11:00pm.

Am I the only one who sought out to answer the train question?
-Tabor

Are you sure? I calculate that Train B never passes Train A

I'm glad you questioned my answer!

After taking another look, I added back the first two hours when I shouldn't have. They meet up at 9:00.

1:00, both trains are at the station // Train A takes of at 75mph
2:00, Train A is now 75 miles away continuing at 75mph // Train B is sitting still // They are now 75 miles away from each other
3:00, Train B takes off at 100mph, however, at this moment they are 150 miles away from each other
4:00, Train A is 225 miles away from the station // Train B is 100 miles away from the station // 125 miles apart
5:00, Train A is 300 miles away from the station // Train B is 200 miles away from the station // 100 miles apart
6:00, Train A is 375 miles away from the station // Train B is 300 miles away from the station // 75 miles apart
7:00, Train A is 450 miles away from the station // Train B is 400 miles away from the station // 50 miles apart
8:00, Train A is 525 miles away from the station // Train B is 500 miles away from the station // 25 miles apart
9:00, Train A is 600 miles away from the station // Train B is 600 miles away from the station // 0 miles apart

Thank you again, and I hope this helps anyone else who's curious!
-Tabor

Not only that, but if they are on the same track, then B can never pass A

 

[Tabor Warren Photography]

8 Hours...

It would take train B 8 hours to pass train A, at 11:00pm.

Am I the only one who sought out to answer the train question?
-Tabor

Putting aside all of the awesome action movie scenes playing through my head right now, you have a very valid point! =)

Cheers!
-Tabor

Are you sure? I calculate that Train B never passes Train A

I'm glad you questioned my answer!

After taking another look, I added back the first two hours when I shouldn't have. They meet up at 9:00.

1:00, both trains are at the station // Train A takes of at 75mph
2:00, Train A is now 75 miles away continuing at 75mph // Train B is sitting still // They are now 75 miles away from each other
3:00, Train B takes off at 100mph, however, at this moment they are 150 miles away from each other
4:00, Train A is 225 miles away from the station // Train B is 100 miles away from the station // 125 miles apart
5:00, Train A is 300 miles away from the station // Train B is 200 miles away from the station // 100 miles apart
6:00, Train A is 375 miles away from the station // Train B is 300 miles away from the station // 75 miles apart
7:00, Train A is 450 miles away from the station // Train B is 400 miles away from the station // 50 miles apart
8:00, Train A is 525 miles away from the station // Train B is 500 miles away from the station // 25 miles apart
9:00, Train A is 600 miles away from the station // Train B is 600 miles away from the station // 0 miles apart

Thank you again, and I hope this helps anyone else who's curious!
-Tabor

Not only that, but if they are on the same track, then B can never pass A

 

[Otara]

Technology is improving, eventually EVFs will be better than OVFs in most aspects. When that happens the DSLR will be like film. It may take a while but it will happen.

Possibly - eventually. As Thom says, probably not in his life time. The problem is that it is very difficult to beat harnessing simple physics to optically look through the lens, and it's free in energy terms. As he says, dslr technology is not standing still, and it may be that lcd overlays etc may enable some of the EVF benefits to be brought to OVF anyway.

We will have a better idea once Canon unleash the DPAF sensor on the mirrorless market.

Being able to show the actual exposure outcome or amplify for night/low light are pretty big benefits for a lot of people. The main advantage of optical is its limitation as well - you only see what your own eyes can see, not what the sensor is really seeing.

 

[AvTvM]

Not only that, but if they are on the same track, then B can never pass A

hehe!
but at 9 o'clock train B has caught up and kicks train A in the butt.
just like mirrorless cams have caught up with and are kicking mirrorslappers in the butt in 2016.

 

[AvTvM]

Being able to show the actual exposure outcome or amplify for night/low light are pretty big benefits for a lot of people. The main advantage of optical is its limitation as well - you only see what your own eyes can see, not what the sensor is really seeing.

exactly!
plus no vibration, no noise, short X-sync times, no rolling shutter - as soon as mechanical shutters are also thrown out of cameras and replaced by electronic global Shutter.

solid state digital cameras are only 1 more step away from being better in every aspect and for any photographic task than mirrorslappers.
it COULD already happen with a Sony A9.
unless hit by a bus before, it WILL happen in Thom's lifetime. and mine.

 

[9VIII]

I finally actually looked at the article, it seems pretty clickbaity, the only point where I read the entire paragraph was the idea of "neutral" looking JPEGs. Except that subject has nothing to do with mirrors.

In general I have to agree with the sentiment, mirrorless systems are still under development. Canon and Nikon are practically the only camera manufacturers that make truly mature photography tools along with an advanced ecosystem around them.

Case in point, the Fuji X-T2 still doesn't give you a live feed of your subject beyond a 5fps burst rate... What's the point of having an 11FPS mode at all?
And you can probably count a dozen or so of these "quirks" on any given system outside of the big two (and even they still have a few things to iron out).
After hearing that the X-T2 is basically no better for BIF than my Rebel (probably a lot worse actually) that pretty much drops the perceived value down to just above entry level (ok, it has two card slots, and all those awesome dials, but it's going to be less usable than the A6300 in fast action).

Mirrorless manufacturers need to really step up their game if they want to look like anything more than a gimmick.

 

[davidj]

solid state digital cameras are only 1 more step away from being better in every aspect and for any photographic task than mirrorslappers.

Better battery life? I'm not holding my breath for mirrorless to be beating SLRs in this way.