Completely lost

[Gary A.]

In my defense, lol, the body felt really good also, solid, not to big, not to small ... just one good looking camera with a great feeling body. (Took me back to my college days.)

 

[Bebulamar]

Any way I do have many cameras without mirror but I have no mirrorless camera.

 

[greybeard]

Like I said, if you have to ask such a question, no amount of explaining will ever get you to to say that you accept mirrorless as a legitimate category. Does the interchangeable lens rangefinder Leica belong to the mirrorless category?

 

[soufiej]

Like I said, if you have to ask such a question, no amount of explaining will ever get you to to say that you accept mirrorless as a legitimate category. Does the interchangeable lens rangefinder Leica belong to the mirrorless category?

I didn't "have" to ask. So maybe there's hope for me yet.

There have been several extremely helpful posts in this thread. I'm not an expert in this category but I do now understand more fully why someone might buy from this category. I'm still not convinced that a camera such as the Canon SL-1 isn't a better choice in cameras for less money. But to each their own.

Unfortunately, I can't say your posts have been of any assistance since you haven't explained anything yet but have simply only told me I'll never understand what you have to say. You're not related to lovemycam, are you?

Why don't you actually try to explain mirrorless cameras and we'll see how I do, eh?

Or not, other posters have been helpful. Have it your way. You don't really seem interested.

I'm not brand specific so I really don't care what cameras fit or don't fit in the category. If you want to debate that issue, you'll need another thread. This isn't the one.

 

[Gary A.]

Soufiej- If you're in California, I'd be happy to let you try out my EM1, XP1, X100S and XT1.

 

[soufiej]

Thanks for the offer, Gary. I'm in Dallas and probably gonna stay here for awhile.

 

[greybeard]

Like I said, if you have to ask such a question, no amount of explaining will ever get you to to say that you accept mirrorless as a legitimate category. Does the interchangeable lens rangefinder Leica belong to the mirrorless category?

I didn't "have" to ask. So maybe there's hope for me yet.

There have been several extremely helpful posts in this thread. I'm not an expert in this category but I do now understand more fully why someone might buy from this category. I'm still not convinced that a camera such as the Canon SL-1 isn't a better choice in cameras for less money. But to each their own.

Unfortunately, I can't say your posts have been of any assistance since you haven't explained anything yet but have simply only told me I'll never understand what you have to say. You're not related to lovemycam, are you?

Why don't you actually try to explain mirrorless cameras and we'll see how I do, eh?

Or not, other posters have been helpful. Have it your way. You don't really seem interested.

I'm not brand specific so I really don't care what cameras fit or don't fit in the category. If you want to debate that issue, you'll need another thread. This isn't the one.

Sorry if my earlier posts were flippant but your question and other responses seemed rather Trollish. I will do my best to explain mirrorless and why this forum has chosen to make it a category. Actually the 1st interchangeable lens cameras (view cameras) could be classified as mirrorless but, they already have a classification. The Leica rangefinder cameras are also mirrorless but they also have a classification (interchangeable rangefinder). So along comes the Nikon 1, Sony NEX, etc. etc. They are interchangeable lens, Auto focus, but the viewfinders are all electronic and not optical. Most just have an electronic display screen on the back like a smart phone and some even have an electronic eyelevel viewfinder too. What they don't have is a flipping mirror, pentaprism and optical viewfinder. (mirrorless)

So, what are the advantages and disadvantages of this design? The 1st advantage that I have observed is that of size and weight as mirrorless cameras are about 1/2 the size and weight of a comparable dSLR producing similar results. I have a Nikon D7000 dSLR and a Sony A6000 mirrorless and have used them enough to know what I am talking about. The Nikon is a full size dSLR and with the battery pack attached it looks like a professional rig. The a6000 is about the size of a bar of soap and with kit lens will easily fit into my coat pocket. The optical vs electronic viewfinder is a mixed bag. In doors and in darker environments the electronic mirrorless has the advantage in that it will brighten up automatically but, in brighter environments the optical is clearer. When it comes to manually focusing the electronic viewfinder on the a6000 is wonderful. It adds red or yellow or white edges to the part of the scene that is in best focus. It will also magnify a small part of the scene so you can fine focus on it. Can't do that with a dSLR. Manually focusing on my D7000 is not much fun at all. It does have an electronic rangefinder but it isn't near as nice as what is on the a6000. This is not an issue if you never manually focus but, if you have any older lenses, they can probably be adapted to a mirrorless camera and used manually. I have several old Minolta Rokkor lenses that have been sitting round for years. I bought a $25 adapter for the a6000 and can now manually focus and use all my Minolta lenses I have a Nikon adapter too and I can get adapters for practically any 35mm mount.

So, I would say that the classification MIRRORLESS applies to a group of cameras that are interchangeable lens with electronic display/viewfinders only, no mirror.

 

[The_Traveler]

One of the great advantages of an evf that is too often overlooked is that the results of using exposure compensation are seen in the viewfinder.
No more need to guess whether .3 or .7 or even 1 full stop makes the exposure better.

 

[sashbar]

Mirrorless cameras as a category exist because finally there are technologies that allow a manufacturer to dispose with a mirror-prism-optical viewfinder system, which is an expensive film era design that practically came to its limit and makes it very difficult to improve an interchangeable lense camera any further.

A modern DSLR is a last century film camera design with a sensor stuck into it instead of a film. This is one part of a digital camera that holds it back makes any further improvement vey difficult.

You can not make the finder larger, because it affects the mirror and prism size and makes a camera way too large and cumbersome to operate.

You can not improve the shooting speed easily because of the flipping mirror that has its limits - to do so, one has to experiment with expensive materials that is financially restrictive.

The focus mirror leads to back of forth focus, a need for adjustments and problems with focusing on a wide open fast lense.

The large flange distance of a DSLR camera makes lenses larger and more expensive to produce especially wide ones that also suffer from some problems associated with the large flange distance. A mirrorless due to the lack of a mirror makes this distance shorter.

That in turn activates economical factors. A mirrorless lense of the same focal range, same optical quality and the same sensor size is cheaper to manufacture.

That means in the long term DSLR lenses manufacturers will lose to mirrorless simply because they need to invest more to compete.
Same goes for mirrorless bodies. Mirror/prism/ovf are expensive. A mirrorless camera is cheaper to manufacture.

Several years ago mirror less was more of a bridge sort of camera. Now mirrorless are compete with DSLR on many fronts.

2-3 years ago EVF was horrible. Now the best EVFs often are preferred to OVF simply because they are more advanced and allow to include a lot of information, including a final image that will be captured. That means a photog can under or overexposed the scene and instead of guessing he can see exactly what the image will be. In the near future EVF will become even larger than the largest OVF and that will change a lot on the top end of camera market. Just look into a XT1 EVF and tiny, dark OVF of a beginners DSLR will seem horrible.

Now focus. Focus speed of a mirrorless and their ability to track is still lagging behind. But it is getting closer, and the precision is often better than with DSLR because unlike a DSLR there s no back focus or front focus, it focuses directly on a sensor.

So all in all mirrorless are catching up very fast.

That is the main reason for their existence - a potentially better, more modern technology, cheaper cost of manufacture and ability to design more formats that cater for different clients with different needs but similarly high IQ demands.

Mirrorless is clearly THE biggest thing that happened in the camera market in the last 10 years and it clearly will be much bigger in the future.

 

[soufiej]

Like I said, if you have to ask such a question, no amount of explaining will ever get you to to say that you accept mirrorless as a legitimate category. Does the interchangeable lens rangefinder Leica belong to the mirrorless category?

I didn't "have" to ask. So maybe there's hope for me yet.

There have been several extremely helpful posts in this thread. I'm not an expert in this category but I do now understand more fully why someone might buy from this category. I'm still not convinced that a camera such as the Canon SL-1 isn't a better choice in cameras for less money. But to each their own.

Unfortunately, I can't say your posts have been of any assistance since you haven't explained anything yet but have simply only told me I'll never understand what you have to say. You're not related to lovemycam, are you?

Why don't you actually try to explain mirrorless cameras and we'll see how I do, eh?

Or not, other posters have been helpful. Have it your way. You don't really seem interested.

I'm not brand specific so I really don't care what cameras fit or don't fit in the category. If you want to debate that issue, you'll need another thread. This isn't the one.

Sorry if my earlier posts were flippant but your question and other responses seemed rather Trollish. I will do my best to explain mirrorless and why this forum has chosen to make it a category. Actually the 1st interchangeable lens cameras (view cameras) could be classified as mirrorless but, they already have a classification. The Leica rangefinder cameras are also mirrorless but they also have a classification (interchangeable rangefinder). So along comes the Nikon 1, Sony NEX, etc. etc. They are interchangeable lens, Auto focus, but the viewfinders are all electronic and not optical. Most just have an electronic display screen on the back like a smart phone and some even have an electronic eyelevel viewfinder too. What they don't have is a flipping mirror, pentaprism and optical viewfinder. (mirrorless)

So, what are the advantages and disadvantages of this design? The 1st advantage that I have observed is that of size and weight as mirrorless cameras are about 1/2 the size and weight of a comparable dSLR producing similar results. I have a Nikon D7000 dSLR and a Sony A6000 mirrorless and have used them enough to know what I am talking about. The Nikon is a full size dSLR and with the battery pack attached it looks like a professional rig. The a6000 is about the size of a bar of soap and with kit lens will easily fit into my coat pocket. The optical vs electronic viewfinder is a mixed bag. In doors and in darker environments the electronic mirrorless has the advantage in that it will brighten up automatically but, in brighter environments the optical is clearer. When it comes to manually focusing the electronic viewfinder on the a6000 is wonderful. It adds red or yellow or white edges to the part of the scene that is in best focus. It will also magnify a small part of the scene so you can fine focus on it. Can't do that with a dSLR. Manually focusing on my D7000 is not much fun at all. It does have an electronic rangefinder but it isn't near as nice as what is on the a6000. This is not an issue if you never manually focus but, if you have any older lenses, they can probably be adapted to a mirrorless camera and used manually. I have several old Minolta Rokkor lenses that have been sitting round for years. I bought a $25 adapter for the a6000 and can now manually focus and use all my Minolta lenses I have a Nikon adapter too and I can get adapters for practically any 35mm mount.

So, I would say that the classification MIRRORLESS applies to a group of cameras that are interchangeable lens with electronic display/viewfinders only, no mirror.

Thanks for weighing in. With more companies entering the camera market over the last few years, there also seems to be a lot more diversity in how the cameras are marketed. With more diversity in the lines from the major manufacturers, distinctions between cameras also seem to be made less clear. Since I learned photography on a Canon and I've owned Canon for a few decades now, I know the Canon line more than I know, say, Sony or Fuji. Samsung is another story all together and, being familiar with Samsung as a (fairly low end build/high feature set) video line, I have a hard time taking them seriously in cameras. They seem to be coming into the camera market hoping people with Samsung smartphones will buy a familiar name. I'm guessing they have the financial resources to make other, more established lines somewhat unhappy with (even) a dent in their sales in a more diluted market.



So, to be clear, a camera without a mirror but with interchangeable lenses is a "mirrorless" camera. But a camera with a mirror, an optical view finder and a fixed lens is still a "compact camera" (Canon G-1X and G16). Both are sold as being "pocketable" - if you have large pockets. As is the small bodied DSLR Canon SL-1 with an optical view finder. Canon appears to favor optical view finders with back of camera, articulated LCD screens in their line. As I've shopped I've found some rather obvious disparities in the resolution offered in LCD's and EVF's. Not so much with optical view finders, they are pretty consistent when it comes to resolution. Pro's and con's of optical vs electronic aside, is Canon simply sticking with proven technology with their upper end cameras when it comes to view finders?

Possibly this isn't a question well known to the end users but, how many manufacturers of LCD's and EVF's are there? In televisions there are (I believe the number is still) two manufacturers producing LCD screens. Every television manufacturer is buying from this small subcontractor market if they want to build an LCD set. Same for plasmas and LED's (though I think the supply for LED may be down to one builder). Control chips and digital processors for televisions and mass market audio are coming from a similarly small number of suppliers. In fact, most of what you are buying outside of the name itself is subcontracted out to other suppliers in these markets. With some products one manufacturing plant turns out equipment marked for, say, Pioneer on Monday and Tuesday and for Sharp on Thursday and Friday. Wednesday is open for bid. Only the name plate changes. Choose one master control chip and then everything that makes your product "different' is a matter of which switches are thrown on that one chip.

How much does the consumer camera market depend on a similar design/manufacturing concept? I assume the optics of most larger camera companies are still their own though I understand Panasonic and Leica have shared technology if not total cameras. How much of the rest of the camera actually belongs to another company?

 

[greybeard]

Mirrorless cameras as a category exist because finally there are technologies that allow a manufacturer to dispose with a mirror-prism-optical viewfinder system, which is an expensive film era design that practically came to its limit and makes it very difficult to improve an interchangeable lense camera any further.

A modern DSLR is a last century film camera design with a sensor stuck into it instead of a film. This is one part of a digital camera that holds it back makes any further improvement vey difficult.

You can not make the finder larger, because it affects the mirror and prism size and makes a camera way too large and cumbersome to operate.

You can not improve the shooting speed easily because of the flipping mirror that has its limits - to do so, one has to experiment with expensive materials that is financially restrictive.

The focus mirror leads to back of forth focus, a need for adjustments and problems with focusing on a wide open fast lense.

The large flange distance of a DSLR camera makes lenses larger and more expensive to produce especially wide ones that also suffer from some problems associated with the large flange distance. A mirrorless due to the lack of a mirror makes this distance shorter.

That in turn activates economical factors. A mirrorless lense of the same focal range, same optical quality and the same sensor size is cheaper to manufacture.

That means in the long term DSLR lenses manufacturers will lose to mirrorless simply because they need to invest more to compete.
Same goes for mirrorless bodies. Mirror/prism/ovf are expensive. A mirrorless camera is cheaper to manufacture.

Several years ago mirror less was more of a bridge sort of camera. Now mirrorless are compete with DSLR on many fronts.

2-3 years ago EVF was horrible. Now the best EVFs often are preferred to OVF simply because they are more advanced and allow to include a lot of information, including a final image that will be captured. That means a photog can under or overexposed the scene and instead of guessing he can see exactly what the image will be. In the near future EVF will become even larger than the largest OVF and that will change a lot on the top end of camera market. Just look into a XT1 EVF and tiny, dark OVF of a beginners DSLR will seem horrible.

Now focus. Focus speed of a mirrorless and their ability to track is still lagging behind. But it is getting closer, and the precision is often better than with DSLR because unlike a DSLR there s no back focus or front focus, it focuses directly on a sensor.

So all in all mirrorless are catching up very fast.

That is the main reason for their existence - a potentially better, more modern technology, cheaper cost of manufacture and ability to design more formats that cater for different clients with different needs but similarly high IQ demands.

Mirrorless is clearly THE biggest thing that happened in the camera market in the last 10 years and it clearly will be much bigger in the future.

Will Pentax make a mirror-less version of their 645Z? I know that Phase One is jumping in, seems like a very natural transition to me.

 

[greybeard]

Like I said, if you have to ask such a question, no amount of explaining will ever get you to to say that you accept mirrorless as a legitimate category. Does the interchangeable lens rangefinder Leica belong to the mirrorless category?

I didn't "have" to ask. So maybe there's hope for me yet.

There have been several extremely helpful posts in this thread. I'm not an expert in this category but I do now understand more fully why someone might buy from this category. I'm still not convinced that a camera such as the Canon SL-1 isn't a better choice in cameras for less money. But to each their own.

Unfortunately, I can't say your posts have been of any assistance since you haven't explained anything yet but have simply only told me I'll never understand what you have to say. You're not related to lovemycam, are you?

Why don't you actually try to explain mirrorless cameras and we'll see how I do, eh?

Or not, other posters have been helpful. Have it your way. You don't really seem interested.

I'm not brand specific so I really don't care what cameras fit or don't fit in the category. If you want to debate that issue, you'll need another thread. This isn't the one.

Sorry if my earlier posts were flippant but your question and other responses seemed rather Trollish. I will do my best to explain mirrorless and why this forum has chosen to make it a category. Actually the 1st interchangeable lens cameras (view cameras) could be classified as mirrorless but, they already have a classification. The Leica rangefinder cameras are also mirrorless but they also have a classification (interchangeable rangefinder). So along comes the Nikon 1, Sony NEX, etc. etc. They are interchangeable lens, Auto focus, but the viewfinders are all electronic and not optical. Most just have an electronic display screen on the back like a smart phone and some even have an electronic eyelevel viewfinder too. What they don't have is a flipping mirror, pentaprism and optical viewfinder. (mirrorless)

So, what are the advantages and disadvantages of this design? The 1st advantage that I have observed is that of size and weight as mirrorless cameras are about 1/2 the size and weight of a comparable dSLR producing similar results. I have a Nikon D7000 dSLR and a Sony A6000 mirrorless and have used them enough to know what I am talking about. The Nikon is a full size dSLR and with the battery pack attached it looks like a professional rig. The a6000 is about the size of a bar of soap and with kit lens will easily fit into my coat pocket. The optical vs electronic viewfinder is a mixed bag. In doors and in darker environments the electronic mirrorless has the advantage in that it will brighten up automatically but, in brighter environments the optical is clearer. When it comes to manually focusing the electronic viewfinder on the a6000 is wonderful. It adds red or yellow or white edges to the part of the scene that is in best focus. It will also magnify a small part of the scene so you can fine focus on it. Can't do that with a dSLR. Manually focusing on my D7000 is not much fun at all. It does have an electronic rangefinder but it isn't near as nice as what is on the a6000. This is not an issue if you never manually focus but, if you have any older lenses, they can probably be adapted to a mirrorless camera and used manually. I have several old Minolta Rokkor lenses that have been sitting round for years. I bought a $25 adapter for the a6000 and can now manually focus and use all my Minolta lenses I have a Nikon adapter too and I can get adapters for practically any 35mm mount.

So, I would say that the classification MIRRORLESS applies to a group of cameras that are interchangeable lens with electronic display/viewfinders only, no mirror.

Thanks for weighing in. With more companies entering the camera market over the last few years, there also seems to be a lot more diversity in how the cameras are marketed. With more diversity in the lines from the major manufacturers, distinctions between cameras also seem to be made less clear. Since I learned photography on a Canon and I've owned Canon for a few decades now, I know the Canon line more than I know, say, Sony or Fuji. Samsung is another story all together and, being familiar with Samsung as a (fairly low end build/high feature set) video line, I have a hard time taking them seriously in cameras. They seem to be coming into the camera market hoping people with Samsung smartphones will buy a familiar name. I'm guessing they have the financial resources to make other, more established lines somewhat unhappy with (even) a dent in their sales in a more diluted market.



So, to be clear, a camera without a mirror but with interchangeable lenses is a "mirrorless" camera. But a camera with a mirror, an optical view finder and a fixed lens is still a "compact camera" (Canon G-1X and G16). Both are sold as being "pocketable" - if you have large pockets. As is the small bodied DSLR Canon SL-1 with an optical view finder. Canon appears to favor optical view finders with back of camera, articulated LCD screens in their line. As I've shopped I've found some rather obvious disparities in the resolution offered in LCD's and EVF's. Not so much with optical view finders, they are pretty consistent when it comes to resolution. Pro's and con's of optical vs electronic aside, is Canon simply sticking with proven technology with their upper end cameras when it comes to view finders?

Possibly this isn't a question well known to the end users but, how many manufacturers of LCD's and EVF's are there? In televisions there are (I believe the number is still) two manufacturers producing LCD screens. Every television manufacturer is buying from this small subcontractor market if they want to build an LCD set. Same for plasmas and LED's (though I think the supply for LED may be down to one builder). Control chips and digital processors for televisions and mass market audio are coming from a similarly small number of suppliers. In fact, most of what you are buying outside of the name itself is subcontracted out to other suppliers in these markets. With some products one manufacturing plant turns out equipment marked for, say, Pioneer on Monday and Tuesday and for Sharp on Thursday and Friday. Wednesday is open for bid. Only the name plate changes. Choose one master control chip and then everything that makes your product "different' is a matter of which switches are thrown on that one chip.

How much does the consumer camera market depend on a similar design/manufacturing concept? I assume the optics of most larger camera companies are still their own. How much of the rest of the camera actually belongs to another company?

I do know that Sony and Toshiba are making a lot of the sensors used by many camera manufactures. They are probably making a lot of the EVF parts too.

 

[greybeard]

In my defense, lol, the body felt really good also, solid, not to big, not to small ... just one good looking camera with a great feeling body. (Took me back to my college days.)

That is a great looking camera

 

[Bebulamar]

Leica is making their M cameras mirrorless now. The M8, M9 were not mirrorless because although they didn't have mirror they didn't offer any mean to view thru the lens without mirror ( they did offer a thru the lens viewing by adding their clunking reflex adapter). Their new M-240 now has live view and optional EVF so it's a mirrorless.

 

[Gary A.]

The Fuji's X-Pro1 and X100 series, (X100, X100S and X100T), offers the option of an optical rangefinder-like viewfinder or an EVF ... the flick of a level will switch you from optical viewfinder to EVF.