So with all the talk of "who's going to bring out the first FF Mirrorless and when", I'm interested to know *why* people want some so badly.
The options are pretty self-explanatory, but I thought I'd give some counter-arguments to each option to start with:
- 1/2: Yes, potentially mirrorless can be thinner. But taking out the mirror and reducing the flange distance can lead to other problems, with the greater angle of incidence. Leica has overcome that problem, at least some of it, with fancy microlens arrays, but still problems exist that must be fixed in PP. Read this and this for examples of these problems. Of course, you can use your current EF lenses on any potential-future FF mirrorless body, but then the combo won't be much smaller than using it on an 1100D now.
- 3/4: Yes, taking away the mirror means less parts used in manufacturing and less potential for things to break. But you really think a bit of a mirror (which they've had 40 years of experience and R&D making) adds that much to the cost of a camera?
- 5: It will happen. ... ... eventually. For now there's no denying that phase-detect is faster than phase-in-sensor and contrast-AF. But with enough R&D it will happen.
- 6/7: That's somewhere about where I am.
Any other potential reasons to want an FF Mirrorless that i've missed?
The options are pretty self-explanatory, but I thought I'd give some counter-arguments to each option to start with:
- 1/2: Yes, potentially mirrorless can be thinner. But taking out the mirror and reducing the flange distance can lead to other problems, with the greater angle of incidence. Leica has overcome that problem, at least some of it, with fancy microlens arrays, but still problems exist that must be fixed in PP. Read this and this for examples of these problems. Of course, you can use your current EF lenses on any potential-future FF mirrorless body, but then the combo won't be much smaller than using it on an 1100D now.
- 3/4: Yes, taking away the mirror means less parts used in manufacturing and less potential for things to break. But you really think a bit of a mirror (which they've had 40 years of experience and R&D making) adds that much to the cost of a camera?
- 5: It will happen. ... ... eventually. For now there's no denying that phase-detect is faster than phase-in-sensor and contrast-AF. But with enough R&D it will happen.
- 6/7: That's somewhere about where I am.
Any other potential reasons to want an FF Mirrorless that i've missed?