Mirrorless vs DSLR Camera

[Busted Knuckles]

I am a bit confused - mirrorless vs. mirrored. is the topic not Canon vs. Sony.

No doubt the mirror has been around for a long, long time. One wonders if that type of technology is really needed. I played w/ an Olympus MF 4/3 and found that focusing w/ the matched 12-35 (think 24-70) was pretty darn fast.

i certainly haven't done timing tests on focusing speeds, etc. but one ponders if the mirror space was done away with does that offer up any optic benefits? One can always design for a larger effective flange space, not a smaller - somewhere along the line the lens designer had to make a compromise that in a mirrorless could be eliminated.

I know there are people on this board that have studied the physics, electronics, etc of the focusing systems and could provide the answer to focusing speed - is it the motor/algorithm (sometimes the mass of the glass has to effect the speed) or it the intrinsic predictability/precision of the various methods. Lastly chip speed has to have something do with it as well.

certainly no one complained that the Leica M "range finder" cameras IQ suffered because of short flange distance.

Noise, space, design options, these are my questions - focus is I THINK (don't know) is a software/sensor thing - I bet if the optics are there, the engineers figure out the AF concerns.

 

[Orangutan]

No doubt the mirror has been around for a long, long time. One wonders if that type of technology is really needed. I played w/ an Olympus MF 4/3 and found that focusing w/ the matched 12-35 (think 24-70) was pretty darn fast.


i certainly haven't done timing tests on focusing speeds, etc. but one ponders if the mirror space was done away with does that offer up any optic benefits? One can always design for a larger effective flange space, not a smaller - somewhere along the line the lens designer had to make a compromise that in a mirrorless could be eliminated.

From what I read, the major barriers to a full transition to mirrorless are:

1. battery life -- if you're a landscape or studio shooter this is not a problem. For events and travel it seems mirrorless needs at least double the battery life

2. EVF lag -- this is pretty close; current best is about 30% more than human visual system lag

3. EVF quality -- a very high-quality EVF is needed for pro work

4. EVF user interface -- zebras; focus peaking; ability to set the tone curve (or selectable tone curves) for the EVF; dials or buttons to allow sliding the tone-curve to check the full range of exposure.

5. EVF low-light quality

#4 may be the easiest technically, but the hardest in practice because it will require a lot of ergonomic testing with real photographers who shoot a variety of styles.

That's my completely uninformed impression/speculation.

 

[Loswr]

I know there are people on this board that have studied the physics, electronics, etc of the focusing systems and could provide the answer to focusing speed - is it the motor/algorithm (sometimes the mass of the glass has to effect the speed) or it the intrinsic predictability/precision of the various methods. Lastly chip speed has to have something do with it as well.

certainly no one complained that the Leica M "range finder" cameras IQ suffered because of short flange distance.

Putting phase detect on the image sensor is on the way to solving the AF problem for mirrorless, and Canon's DPAF is another big step in that direction. Contrast detect is slower because it's more iterative, phase detect determines direction and magnitude at the outset.

You're correct about the Leica rangefinders. No one complained about the film versions, because film is not affected by the incident angle of incoming light. No one complains about the digital versions, because Leica took sensor and lens design steps to compensate for the problem caused by high incident light angles with a short flange distance.

 

[ecka]

2. EVF lag -- this is pretty close; current best is about 30% more than human visual system lag

Which lag are you talking about?
The LiveView lag
The after shot blackout lag
The shutter lag
I call "EVF lag" the total lag difference compared to DSLR.
Mirrorless burst mode lag is pretty bad .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsddzE5f13k

 

[Busted Knuckles]

;D
OK so i have been wanting the M3 to come out so I could have a small but highly functional travel camera to stick in my briefcase/backpack for all my business trips and just to have with me 24/7 and maintain my rather substantial investment in glass.

You might recall that I stopped by the local camera shop and got tempted by the latest Olympus offering. And John expressed himself with a nifty through homage to B&W "R" (by Steiglitz I think) but a red "A" . I might deserve a greater list of letters with this one

I was able to fight off my G.A.S. disease.... until.... Metabones has just announced an adapter for all my Canon lenses to fit the M4/3 mount - either "speed booster" which steps of the speed a stop and de-crops from 2x to 1.5x or just a pass through smart adapter.

Suddenly the whole world of M4/3 and some fairly serious feature sets are wide open. I know the trade offs and $$$. But, it is an option worthy of consideration, a compact highly functional 'briefcase camera'

I have a big vacation trip coming up and the wife just might be toting a m4/3 in her purse...

 

[Aglet]

I've got a pile of ML bodies these days:
Fuji XT1
Fuji XE1
Fuji XA1. XM1

Pentax K01
Pentax Q
Pentax Q7

Olympus OMD EM10

The EM10 is my all around favourite ML; works great in most lighting conditions, very flexible tho the minimal number of physical controls makes you think carefully about how you want to set it up for various uses. It can AF very quickly even with long lenses in less than ideal light; I've been impressed. The EM1 should be even better for AF. This is a camera that you really need to spend time with to learn, it's not as intuitive to tweak as most others I've used. EVF quality is pretty good until the lighting gets too low.

The XT1 has impressive overall IQ and low light ability. The EVF is truly excellent and can display so much more info than an OVF. Still no SLR equivalent in operational terms but it's only really hampered by Fuji's bizarre user interface which means I haven't yet found a way to make it anywhere near as quick to change shooting modes as with an advanced SLR. The physical controls on this camera look great, the dials feel nice when you're only playing with them, but as far as using the camera, it gets my nod for the worst buttons and control ergonomics ever, puts Nikon's Df to shame. If they make a bunch of improvements, it will be a ML to reckon with. As it is, it makes a fantastic still life/landscape camera or portrait monster with the fast primes.

The other fuji bodies are all quite pleasant to use, if not as fast as SLR or the XT1.

The Pentax k01 is an interesting brick of a camera that's OK to use but no EVF makes it a pain to use outdoors, much as any other non-EVF ML body. All the Pentax ML bodies AF fast enough for most things except certain kinds of sports.

I don't have any Panasonic or Sony but Pany's new GH4 has a hybrid phase + contrast AF system that is fast and accurate enough to make DSLRs nervous about the future.

Live histograms in the EVF mean it's easy to adjust EV and see the results displayed as well as in the histogram. Nothing to disparage here in any of them compared to OVF, just different abilities and limitations to get used to.

You have to try one.

 

[pwp]

I like both. Mirrorless has a big future. Once the AF gets up to speed and the EVF evolves sufficiently, what else has to happen? Based on the game-changing specs & performance & gob-smacked reviews of the mirrorless Panasonic GH-4 I bought one for my video work where it tidily beats the pants off my 5D3 in all situations with the exception of high iso shooting (over 1600 iso).

After using the GH-4 for a couple of months I'm discovering the sheer brilliance of it's very decent EVF and surprisingly good AF; much much quicker and accurate than I initially expected. Now that Adobe DNG converter v8.6 and Lightroom v5.6 can see the GH-4 RAW files, I've even been using it for stills on some commercial jobs.

Mirrorless is evolving fast. It's great to use. I'd hate to see favourite mainstream manufacturers (cough, cough..) being caught flat footed as this revolution gains pace.

-pw

 

[ecka]

I like both. Mirrorless has a big future. Once the AF gets up to speed and the EVF evolves sufficiently, what else has to happen? Based on the game-changing specs & performance & gob-smacked reviews of the mirrorless Panasonic GH-4 I bought one for my video work where it tidily beats the pants off my 5D3 in all situations with the exception of high iso shooting (over 1600 iso).

After using the GH-4 for a couple of months I'm discovering the sheer brilliance of it's very decent EVF and surprisingly good AF; much much quicker and accurate than I initially expected. Now that Adobe DNG converter v8.6 and Lightroom v5.6 can see the GH-4 RAW files, I've even been using it for stills on some commercial jobs.

Mirrorless is evolving fast. It's great to use. I'd hate to see favourite mainstream manufacturers (cough, cough..) being caught flat footed as this revolution gains pace.

-pw

GH4 is a brilliant tool for video. Have you tried the Sigma 18-35/1.8 via SpeedBooster on it? Some say it helps to overcome the high ISO disadvantage very effectively.

 

[Mr_Canuck]

No doubt the mirror has been around for a long, long time. One wonders if that type of technology is really needed. I played w/ an Olympus MF 4/3 and found that focusing w/ the matched 12-35 (think 24-70) was pretty darn fast.


i certainly haven't done timing tests on focusing speeds, etc. but one ponders if the mirror space was done away with does that offer up any optic benefits? One can always design for a larger effective flange space, not a smaller - somewhere along the line the lens designer had to make a compromise that in a mirrorless could be eliminated.

From what I read, the major barriers to a full transition to mirrorless are:

1. battery life -- if you're a landscape or studio shooter this is not a problem. For events and travel it seems mirrorless needs at least double the battery life

2. EVF lag -- this is pretty close; current best is about 30% more than human visual system lag

3. EVF quality -- a very high-quality EVF is needed for pro work

4. EVF user interface -- zebras; focus peaking; ability to set the tone curve (or selectable tone curves) for the EVF; dials or buttons to allow sliding the tone-curve to check the full range of exposure.

5. EVF low-light quality

#4 may be the easiest technically, but the hardest in practice because it will require a lot of ergonomic testing with real photographers who shoot a variety of styles.

That's my completely uninformed impression/speculation.

The EVF is the single, most significant barrier in my view. AF is speeding up with each new camera release. But EVFs still aren't there. Personally, I can't stand them to look through despite all the info they provide.

 

[sanj]

I know of a professional photographer who is using Sony 7 (do not know which version) after selling his Nikon 800

 

[moreorless]

Putting phase detect on the image sensor is on the way to solving the AF problem for mirrorless, and Canon's DPAF is another big step in that direction. Contrast detect is slower because it's more iterative, phase detect determines direction and magnitude at the outset.

You're correct about the Leica rangefinders. No one complained about the film versions, because film is not affected by the incident angle of incoming light. No one complains about the digital versions, because Leica took sensor and lens design steps to compensate for the problem caused by high incident light angles with a short flange distance.

Speaking of rangefinders isn't a big issue with on sensor PDAF going to be that the light is spilt over a very short distance compared to a DSLR? rather like the difference between a rangefinder with a short and a long baselenght.

 

[jeffa4444]

Ive had Canon cameras for over 40 years but when the Olympus E-500 came out I was given one as a present and today as well as my 6d and 7d I have an Olympus OM-D E-M10 with three zooms.
I use the Oly as a lightweight alternative sometimes but as good as the images are they are not up to the Canon 6d which is much better for Landscape.

 

[Tugela]

I know the Sony A7R is a hit. But I haven't seen any professional wedding photographers using this camera on location. Are they still prefer using the DSLR like the Canon 5DM3.......if this camera is light weight and good quality, why don't they use it ? I myself is a Canon shooter with the 1DX. Tried the Sony once just find it complicated LOL plus the LCD in the back can't turn off. It bothers !

Is Mirrorless has faster focusing?

You are not likely to see many professional photographers using Sony. One big reason is their poor service, it can take months to get a repair. Professionals have to consider a whole system, they can't afford to have equipment in for repairs for months. They need all the pieces in place. I don't know how reliable they are, but, if they can't have a reasonable turnaround on repairs, it gets to be very expensive. Every brand breaks down, no one is immune. Canon has the best and fastest service for professionals - hands down. Even Nikon takes far to long to repair a item, but Sony is in a class by themselves.

I imagine that anyone who makes a living out of photography is going to have a few more than one camera body. So service time should not be a factor.

The reason people might not see many on the Sony cameras might simply because they are relatively new, which means that it is going to take time to penetrate the market since professionals do not dump all their equipment every time a new camera comes out. Even if what they have is not "state of the art", it doesn't matter 99.9% of the time. What matters to them is reliability and familiarity with the equipment they currently have. Professional photographers know how to take good pictures, they don't depend on the equipment to do it for them, so they are less concerned about the latest greatest thing in the way amateurs are.

Commercial users of technical equipment tend to be very conservative when it comes to replacing their current tools. This is a characteristic of all fields, not just photography.

 

[distant.star]

I disagree with most of what you say, but thought you might like to know there is a ship with that name...

 

[dak723]

No doubt the mirror has been around for a long, long time. One wonders if that type of technology is really needed. I played w/ an Olympus MF 4/3 and found that focusing w/ the matched 12-35 (think 24-70) was pretty darn fast.


i certainly haven't done timing tests on focusing speeds, etc. but one ponders if the mirror space was done away with does that offer up any optic benefits? One can always design for a larger effective flange space, not a smaller - somewhere along the line the lens designer had to make a compromise that in a mirrorless could be eliminated.

From what I read, the major barriers to a full transition to mirrorless are:

1. battery life -- if you're a landscape or studio shooter this is not a problem. For events and travel it seems mirrorless needs at least double the battery life

2. EVF lag -- this is pretty close; current best is about 30% more than human visual system lag

3. EVF quality -- a very high-quality EVF is needed for pro work

4. EVF user interface -- zebras; focus peaking; ability to set the tone curve (or selectable tone curves) for the EVF; dials or buttons to allow sliding the tone-curve to check the full range of exposure.

5. EVF low-light quality

#4 may be the easiest technically, but the hardest in practice because it will require a lot of ergonomic testing with real photographers who shoot a variety of styles.

That's my completely uninformed impression/speculation.

The EVF is the single, most significant barrier in my view. AF is speeding up with each new camera release. But EVFs still aren't there. Personally, I can't stand them to look through despite all the info they provide.

A year ago, I would have agreed with you. I bought both a Canon 6D and an Olympus EM-1. I was very hesitant on getting the Olympus because of the EVF. Now, a year later, I sure wish the Canon had an EVF! So much easier to adjust exposure and change settings without the eye leaving the viewfinder. Under most conditions, I completely forget that I am looking through an EVF.

 

[c.d.embrey]

I use the Oly as a lightweight alternative sometimes but as good as the images are they are not up to the Canon 6d which is much better for Landscape.

My favorite Mirrorless for Landscapes is my 4x5 Toyo view camera. Arizona Highways magazine still prefers 4x5 chromes to digital files.

 

[RLPhoto]

Lack of lens Selection.
Lack of a Mature Flash system.
Lack of Ergonomics for Long Handheld use.
Laggy EVF in Low Light.
Slow AF.
Crap Battery Life.
Crap Sync Speed (A7R)
No PC sync port.

 

[J.R.]

I imagine that anyone who makes a living out of photography is going to have a few more than one camera body. So service time should not be a factor.

Good point. So when my 70-200 II took a jarring knock last month resulting in the elements going out of alignment, what should I have done? simply reach out for my back up 70-200 II

BTW, CPS returned my lens in perfect working condition within 24 hours.

 

[deleteme]

I know the Sony A7R is a hit. But I haven't seen any professional wedding photographers using this camera on location. Are they still prefer using the DSLR like the Canon 5DM3.......if this camera is light weight and good quality, why don't they use it ? I myself is a Canon shooter with the 1DX. Tried the Sony once just find it complicated LOL plus the LCD in the back can't turn off. It bothers !

Is Mirrorless has faster focusing?

Buying new gear is NOT what pros spend their time doing. It is what amateurs do.

It is just not prudent for a person who depends on their tools to pitch them for an entire new set just because of web buzz.
Sure, the gear may be good but a pro has specific needs and the last increment of putative IQ is not one of them despite what you may think.

 

[PureClassA]

I imagine that anyone who makes a living out of photography is going to have a few more than one camera body. So service time should not be a factor.

Good point. So when my 70-200 II took a jarring knock last month resulting in the elements going out of alignment, what should I have done? simply reach out for my back up 70-200 II

BTW, CPS returned my lens in perfect working condition within 24 hours.

Did the exact same thing. 70-200 IS II hit the floor of the Houston Airport in a heavily padded lowepro sling bag. Still managed to shatter the BW filter and knock the IS motor and elements completely outta whack. I shipped it out Monday and had it back Thursday. New Orleans to Virginia and back. It was better than new. Canon Professional Service is stellar. I used to sell Sony electronics many years ago. Custom home theater design and whatnot. Sony indeed had and still does one of the single worst customer services and repair systems on Earth. That alone will keep pros queasy. And the lack of glass has already been mentioned to death. That said, Im looking forward to getting my new Canon M ;-)