Benefits of a mirrorless FF?

[J.R.]

Others mentioned not having to deal with mirror slap, but that is very minor issue and can be easily handled via mirror lock-up for shots where it causes problems. Also, the mirror helps protect the sensor from dust.

Agreed. With most DSLRs you can simply shift to live-view which makes the mirror slap irrelevant.

I strongly prefer OVF's over the latest EVF's (I've tried the latest Sony and Leica ones). At some point EVF's may evolve to where they are as good or better than OVF's, but they are not that close yet.

I have never used EVFs. Do they work well when you are tracking moving subjects in changing lighting conditions?

 

[J.R.]

FF mirrorless advantages:
great lens adaptability (including rangefinder optics);
EVF (yes it does have many advantages over OVF);
manual focus (EVF + focus peaking);
easier sensor cleaning procedure;
no mirror - less vibration, longer life;
size and weight;
lower price (than FF DSLR);
perfect for landscape, portrait, macro, astro and video.

Many consider EVF to be a disadvantage;
For focus peaking - look no further than ML;
The 5D3 is rated for 150,000 shutter actuations - for me (not for all) it is life enough
size and weight - agree
lower price - agree
depending on the lenses agree with the last statement.

 

[J.R.]

Whether or not it is a cropped sensor or 35mm format does not matter in regard to 'benefits' of a mirrorless camera.

List of mirrorless benefits:
Access to mount/use just about any lens ever made.
-End of list:


Just about everything else involved with mirrorless cameras is a work around or detriment, sorry..

HaHa.

I'm someone who doesn't agree with the use of adapters on high MP bodies given the inherent issues while using adapters so for me it is not a substantial benefit. Ok, if you have some idle glass which has compatability issues, you may be able to use it.

As I mentioned in my original post, the major benefit remains smaller form factor and weight.

 

[J.R.]

One benefit would be is that there would be no slapping mirror. This makes the camera more stabilized and well, smaller.

You can achieve the same on a DSLR by shooting live view (even though I fail to see what would be the point a DSLR to only shoot LV )

And AF is much slower in live view. The 70D just made it decent enough but it's still a slowpoke compared to non-LV AF.

You could AF faster in live view using the quick mode.

 

[AvTvM]

Benefits of a mirrorless FF?

+ all IQ benefits of FF sensor = technically better images in any shooting situation (except Macro); more appealing pictures when shallow DOF is advantageous (e.g. often in portraiture)
+ significantly smaller and lighter than FF DSLR = easier to take along and to travel = more pictures at interesting places
+ significantly smaller and lighter than FF DSLR = less conspicuos = more and better images in any "non-staged" shooting situation
+ significantly cheaper to produce and service than any DSLR = = more profit for manufacturer and/or lower cost to customers
+ no mirror slap, less or no vibration = more sharp keepers, especially in tough shooting conditions/low light
+ no mirror = shorter / no viewfinder blackout possible
+ silent operation at full speed possible (with silent shutter; unfortunately not A7R) = huge advantage in noise-sensitive shooting conditions
+ no hard-to-clean oil-debris-splatter on sensor from flapping mirror mechanism (-> Nikon D600)
+ EVF better than any OVF (soon to come) - all shooting relevant information overlayed, camera can stay on eye and image displayed exactly as it will be captured = better images, more often capture "at decisive moment"
+ shorter flange back = use of almost any previous lens via adapter possible (but not always with good results)
+ AF performance inclduing tracking moving subjects will surpass capabilities of today's best DSLRs (soon), because no mirror in lightpath = more keeper action shots

Disadvantages:
- new lenses needed for optimal image quality and system performance, with less bulk and weight
- operation with 600/4 lens still requires sturdy tripod for optimal results

 

[J.R.]

Hi,

I do photography for a hobby and am not too updated on the technical aspects of the latest lineup of cameras these days.

I'm just wondering as to what exactly are the benefits of a mirrorless FF? The only benefit to my mind is a shaving off of approximately 600-800 grams from the bodyweight. And yes, maybe with a dedicated lens lineup, a bit more.

Thoughts?

Cheers ... J.R.

Suprisingly few benefits and a lot of take-aways.

Weight- no major reduction, the lenses are as big and heavy as ever, a FF requires big lenses.

EVF - most of us hate them, but they are getting better.

Autofocus - slow and slower. Tracking - forget it.

The main benefit is the elimination of the moving mirror, but it comes with a loss of capabilities.

Agree... It's still a work in progress at best. The mirrorless cameras need to evolve much more to replace DSLRs.

 

[J.R.]

Hi,

I do photography for a hobby and am not too updated on the technical aspects of the latest lineup of cameras these days.

I'm just wondering as to what exactly are the benefits of a mirrorless FF? The only benefit to my mind is a shaving off of approximately 600-800 grams from the bodyweight. And yes, maybe with a dedicated lens lineup, a bit more.

Thoughts?

Cheers ... J.R.

Suprisingly few benefits and a lot of take-aways.

Weight- no major reduction, the lenses are as big and heavy as ever, a FF requires big lenses.

EVF - most of us hate them, but they are getting better.

Autofocus - slow and slower. Tracking - forget it.

The main benefit is the elimination of the moving mirror, but it comes with a loss of capabilities.

Agree, I would add it is not as durable as dslr

I wonder :... have you guys ever hand-on or shoot with RX1 before?

I have... IQ was great but the AF performance left a lot to be desired.

Lens on the RX1 is light enough but I come to interchangeable lenses, esp zoom, they will be heavy.

 

[J.R.]

Hi,

I do photography for a hobby and am not too updated on the technical aspects of the latest lineup of cameras these days.

I'm just wondering as to what exactly are the benefits of a mirrorless FF? The only benefit to my mind is a shaving off of approximately 600-800 grams from the bodyweight. And yes, maybe with a dedicated lens lineup, a bit more.

Thoughts?

Cheers ... J.R.

Suprisingly few benefits and a lot of take-aways.

Weight- no major reduction, the lenses are as big and heavy as ever, a FF requires big lenses.

EVF - most of us hate them, but they are getting better.

Autofocus - slow and slower. Tracking - forget it.

The main benefit is the elimination of the moving mirror, but it comes with a loss of capabilities.

Agree, I would add it is not as durable as dslr

Agree. What about weather sealing? Adapters + third party lenses + swivel screens

 

[J.R.]

Benefits of a mirrorless FF?

+ all IQ benefits of FF sensor = technically better images in any shooting situation (except Macro); more appealing pictures when shallow DOF is advantageous (e.g. often in portraiture)
+ significantly smaller and lighter than FF DSLR = easier to take along and to travel = more pictures at interesting places
+ significantly smaller and lighter than FF DSLR = less conspicuos = more and better images in any "non-staged" shooting situation
+ significantly cheaper to produce and service than any DSLR = = more profit for manufacturer and/or lower cost to customers
+ no mirror slap, less or no vibration = more sharp keepers, especially in tough shooting conditions/low light
+ no mirror = shorter / no viewfinder blackout possible
+ silent operation at full speed possible (with silent shutter; unfortunately not A7R) = huge advantage in noise-sensitive shooting conditions
+ no hard-to-clean oil-debris-splatter on sensor from flapping mirror mechanism (-> Nikon D600)
+ EVF better than any OVF (soon to come) - all shooting relevant information overlayed, camera can stay on eye and image displayed exactly as it will be captured = better images, more often capture "at decisive moment"
+ shorter flange back = use of almost any previous lens via adapter possible (but not always with good results)
+ AF performance inclduing tracking moving subjects will surpass capabilities of today's best DSLRs (soon), because no mirror in lightpath = more keeper action shots

Disadvantages:
- new lenses needed for optimal image quality and system performance, with less bulk and weight
- operation with 600/4 lens still requires sturdy tripod for optimal results

Agree with most of the above but what you refer to as "coming soon" is a good bit of conjecture - but who knows, technology changes faster than we expect. However, absence of exceptional AF, the limitations of EVF and a lack of dedicated ML lenses are a potential deal breaker for most (including me). For the moment, DSLRs are still more functional.

Also, I'm not convinced that when all this is made available, the price of the FF mirrorless will remain the same.

 

[bholliman]

Benefits of a mirrorless FF?

+ all IQ benefits of FF sensor = technically better images in any shooting situation (except Macro); more appealing pictures when shallow DOF is advantageous (e.g. often in portraiture)
+ significantly smaller and lighter than FF DSLR = easier to take along and to travel = more pictures at interesting places
+ significantly smaller and lighter than FF DSLR = less conspicuos = more and better images in any "non-staged" shooting situation
+ significantly cheaper to produce and service than any DSLR = = more profit for manufacturer and/or lower cost to customers
+ no mirror slap, less or no vibration = more sharp keepers, especially in tough shooting conditions/low light
+ no mirror = shorter / no viewfinder blackout possible
+ silent operation at full speed possible (with silent shutter; unfortunately not A7R) = huge advantage in noise-sensitive shooting conditions
+ no hard-to-clean oil-debris-splatter on sensor from flapping mirror mechanism (-> Nikon D600)
+ EVF better than any OVF (soon to come) - all shooting relevant information overlayed, camera can stay on eye and image displayed exactly as it will be captured = better images, more often capture "at decisive moment"
+ shorter flange back = use of almost any previous lens via adapter possible (but not always with good results)
+ AF performance inclduing tracking moving subjects will surpass capabilities of today's best DSLRs (soon), because no mirror in lightpath = more keeper action shots

Disadvantages:
- new lenses needed for optimal image quality and system performance, with less bulk and weight
- operation with 600/4 lens still requires sturdy tripod for optimal results

Agree with most of the above but what you refer to as "coming soon" is a good bit of conjecture and a potential deal breaker for most (including me).

Also, I'm not convinced that when all this is made available, the price of the FF mirrorless will remain the same. For the moment, DSLRs are still more functional.

+1. Many of these mirrorless advantages are speculation about what is possible with the system rather what is available and working now. I think eventually mirrorless will be able to achieve most of these benefits, but it might take years.

I do not buy the smaller/lighter/less conspicuous argument unless a pancake prime is mounted. An A7 with a zoom lens mounted is still going to be somewhat bulky.

 

[AvTvM]

+1. Many of these mirrorless advantages are speculation about what is possible with the system rather what is available and working now. I think eventually mirrorless will be able to achieve most of these benefits, but it might take years.

I do not buy the smaller/lighter/less conspicuous argument unless a pancake prime is mounted. An A7 with a zoom lens mounted is still going to be somewhat bulky.

Looking at the A7/R we are not quite there yet, but every well on the way.
Starting "very soon" we can get get 2 cameras that are significantly smaller than any Canon DSLR with either a sensor (and presumably IQ) that tops anything available from Canon [36 MP - A7R] or with on-sensor hybrid CD-PD-AF which is not (yet) available from Canon on an FF sensor [A7R], WiFI (and NFC) built-in, which is only currently only available in one Canon FF DSLR (6D). And best of all, these cameras can be ordered at launch for only USD 1698 and 2199. If Canon had something comparable, it would definitely cost more than USD 4000 [A7R] and well north of USD 3000 [A7].

Lens availability is limited at launch, but both the SonyZeiss 35/2.8 and the 55/1.8 are very expensive but apparently very high-specced and very compact lenses. So it is possible to go "small, light and high-quality" if desired. Even with one of the two zoom lenses 28-70 kit and Sony Zeiss 24-70/4.0 the camera an A7/R will be a lot smaller, lighter and less conspicuous than even a 5D III with the EF 24-70 on it. Not to mention a 1-series body.

Yes, not all of the mirroless FF goodness is here today, but some of it is.

 

[J.R.]

+1. Many of these mirrorless advantages are speculation about what is possible with the system rather what is available and working now. I think eventually mirrorless will be able to achieve most of these benefits, but it might take years.

I do not buy the smaller/lighter/less conspicuous argument unless a pancake prime is mounted. An A7 with a zoom lens mounted is still going to be somewhat bulky.

Looking at the A7/R we are not quite there yet, but every well on the way.
Starting "very soon" we can get get 2 cameras that are significantly smaller than any Canon DSLR with either a sensor (and presumably IQ) that tops anything available from Canon [36 MP - A7R] or with on-sensor hybrid CD-PD-AF which is not (yet) available from Canon on an FF sensor [A7R], WiFI (and NFC) built-in, which is only currently only available in one Canon FF DSLR (6D). And best of all, these cameras can be ordered at launch for only USD 1698 and 2199. If Canon had something comparable, it would definitely cost more than USD 4000 [A7R] and well north of USD 3000 [A7].

Lens availability is limited at launch, but both the SonyZeiss 35/2.8 and the 55/1.8 are very expensive but apparently very high-specced and very compact lenses. So it is possible to go "small, light and high-quality" if desired. Even with one of the two zoom lenses 28-70 kit and Sony Zeiss 24-70/4.0 the camera an A7/R will be a lot smaller, lighter and less conspicuous than even a 5D III with the EF 24-70 on it. Not to mention a 1-series body.

Yes, not all of the mirroless FF goodness is here today, but some of it is.

Sony is presently using the lower prices in order to penetrate the market. I don't doubt it for a second that the introductory prices for the A7 and A7R are deliberately set lower to lure the FF crowd into their new mirrorless system. The lens path stated by them will be changed depending upon the sales. Unless these cameras start selling in great numbers, you can easily expect them to delay the lenses.

Sony is running a loss on its electronics division and is considered an also-ran in the DSLR market. It has to resort to innovation, lower pricing and various offers simply to be able to be considered a serious player in the race. Canon on the other hand can set the prices higher because most people are much too invested in the Canon lens system. The bodies come and go but the lenses remain. People who have $ 25K invested in glass don't mind shelling out a 1K extra with a time horizon of 4 years with a body.

In any case, cameras these days are pretty competent for a very vast majority of the crowd and it is only a small percentage of people who actually need every incremental upgrade to their camera system.

I don't think Canon will feel any pinch for now. They didn't when Nikon came out with the extra MP + DR combo of the D800. They make too much money selling to the APS-C crowd and their moves will only be determined by the market.

 

[AvTvM]

yes, Sony has priced the A7/R deliberately low, hoping to lure in buyers into their new "FE" eco-system in order to - hopefully - reach "critical mass" and market share.

However, I do not believe Sony is losing money on the A7/R evven at these prices. I rather believe they are still making a healthy profit even at these prieces. Of course, they need ot sell a certain number of units, to recoup all deveoepment costs etc.]

While I don't care that much for Sony's financial well-being, I am thankful for their competition. They have clearly demonstrated to all of us - the entire market - that reasonably well-equipped FF-sensored mirrorless cameras cameras can be made today and be sold at "reasonable" prices, rather than north of € 4000 - which would have been and possibly may even be CaNikons future price level, once they are "willing and able" to offer similar products.

 

[Sella174]

Although we might not be there quite yet on all these points, mirrorless has the potential to offer ...

• accurate object recognition
• accurate object tracking
• seamless HDR, based on actual light readings
• better exposure control, and basically everything Live-View current offers, but through an EVF

Sony is running a loss on its electronics division ...

I can never understand this argument. If Sony is ACTUALLY losing money, then why don't they just shut this division down?

 

[J.R.]

Sony is running a loss on its electronics division ...

I can never understand this argument.

It is not an argument - it is a fact!

 

[Sella174]

Sony is running a loss on its electronics division ...

I can never understand this argument.

It is not an argument - it is a fact!

OK, then ... I can never understand nor believe this statement of fact.

 

[J.R.]

Sony is running a loss on its electronics division ...

I can never understand this argument.

It is not an argument - it is a fact!

OK, then ... I can never understand nor believe this statement of fact.

Ok, then if I don't understand Japanese nor believe Japan exists ... it won't exist? : : :

You could however, go here -

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/28/business/global/sonys-bread-and-butter-its-not-electronics.html?_r=0

 

[bholliman]

While I don't care that much for Sony's financial well-being, I am thankful for their competition. They have clearly demonstrated to all of us - the entire market - that reasonably well-equipped FF-sensored mirrorless cameras cameras can be made today and be sold at "reasonable" prices

+1

Competition is a great thing for consumers. Sony announcing these cameras will undoubtedly spur Canon and Nikon to respond, which will result in better products at reasonable prices.

 

[Sella174]

You could however, go here -

Right you are. But then why (a) does Sony keep the electronics division, and (b) would anyone "invest" in Sony (electronic) products? One managerial change and - poof! - no more cameras and TV's. I simply cannot believe that Sony management can be so, well, non-businesslike. But then, cow-dung baffles brains.

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

You could however, go here -

Right you are. But then why (a) does Sony keep the electronics division, and (b) would anyone "invest" in Sony (electronic) products? One managerial change and - poof! - no more cameras and TV's. I simply cannot believe that Sony management can be so, well, non-businesslike. But then, cow-dung baffles brains.

Sony is a very big company to abandon a market segment for loss profit in the short term. We must remember that for decades, Sony has been hegemonic in high end video cameras (BETACAM, DVCAM) and now has competition from companies that did not threaten his position a few years ago. Even DSLR are eating the market share of high end video. For more creative products that have launched in the area of photo and video DSLR not strongly dominate the market, with the exception of NEX cameras. If losses continue in the TV line, Sony will be forced to abandon these products. Innovation does not necessarily dominate the market. The consumers do not always buy the best technically (EXMOR) but what fits your needs.