DSLR vs Mirror-Less ???

[shadowlands]

I see many people getting into all of these mirror-less camera’s that look like a larger point & shoot with a lens attached to it.
I haven’t read much into them for I’m a fan of DLSR’s. You know what I mean… Nikon D90, D800, D4, etc…
I dream of a D3 or D4 type of deal, but until that day, I generally shoot my D700 with a battery grip to obtain that “bulk” feeling.
What is my point? Well, am I alone in my lack of interest of that new trend? Even if some of them provide excellent quality and options, I just don’t have an interest.
I shot digital point and shoot camera’s when I couldn’t afford a larger DSLR, out of necessity.
I get the “convenience” aspect, of course, but outside of that, I don’t get it.
Will we see professionals shooting weddings with these things? Wouldn’t that look silly? Just saying…

 

[gsgary]

This photographer only uses an Fuji Xpro1 he used to use any camera he wanted even also Hasleblad 60mp
Lovegrove Weddings - Perfect wedding photography guaranteed

 

[goodguy]

There are winds of change in the photography world and I think currently no one knows exactly where they will take us.

DSLR vs Mirrorless
Crop sensor DSLR vs Full Frame DSLR

I have a feeling in time Mirrorless will become more dominant then it is taking a larger share from the crop sensor cameras and also the full frame will take many of the crop sensor cameras users leaving the main 2 camera bodies with mirrorless and full frame DSLR but that's just a feeling of course.

 

[KmH]

Each - DSLR or mirrorless - has its pluses and minuses.

 

[shadowlands]

Thanks for the replies, everyone....

 

[SCraig]

No, you're not alone. I have no interest in them either.

 

[shadowlands]

No, you're not alone. I have no interest in them either.

Thanks. Even though they may get the job done, to me, something is missing.
The fat grip, heft, etc... the look/feel of a DSLR.

 

[Gavjenks]

I see many people getting into all of these mirror-less camera’s that look like a larger point & shoot with a lens attached to it.
I haven’t read much into them for I’m a fan of DLSR’s. You know what I mean… Nikon D90, D800, D4, etc…
I dream of a D3 or D4 type of deal, but until that day, I generally shoot my D700 with a battery grip to obtain that “bulk” feeling.
What is my point? Well, am I alone in my lack of interest of that new trend? Even if some of them provide excellent quality and options, I just don’t have an interest.
I shot digital point and shoot camera’s when I couldn’t afford a larger DSLR, out of necessity.
I get the “convenience” aspect, of course, but outside of that, I don’t get it.
Will we see professionals shooting weddings with these things? Wouldn’t that look silly? Just saying…

Sometime in the probably not so distant future, all cameras should be and probably will be mirrorless, at leats the major professional models.

Currently, the major weaknesses of mirrorless cameras are lag in being able to see what you're focusing on (or if you use the viewfinder, not seeing exactly what you're taking a picture of or the effects of the lens/filter/etc.), and poorer autofocus than DSLRs, since autofocus via the sensor is generally inferior to specialized autofocus sensors on the bottom of a DSLR body.

Both of these things can be fixed, though, and will be eventually. The Canon 70D that just came out has new technology where they split every pixel in two on the sensor to allow for what should be much faster autofocus through the sensor (live view), which is exactly what a mirrorless system would need.

I haven't seen any reviews out yet, but if this works really well, that would solve one of mirrorless' major issues. If not, it's only a matter of time until some other solution does address it.

And then if they can make the live view update quickly enough to not perceive any lag, then there would basically no longer be any reason to have a bulky DSLR, with unnecessary moving mirror parts and an unnecessarily huge distance between the sensor and the lens. Shorter distance = cheaper and higher quality wide angle lenses, and fewer moving parts = longer camera life and fewer technical issues and initial cost and size.

view cameras --> twin lens reflex cameras --> single lens reflex cameras --> mirrorless

The only way I see that NOT happening is if some other weird new technology swoops in first, like multiple sensor array cameras or light field cameras.



if you want weight in your camera for the sake of weight, I'm sure you could just screw a lead weight onto your camera's tripod mount, if and when they are all mirrorless.

 

[sashbar]

I personally feel silly with a bulky DSLR on the street, like a frigging paparazzi, that's why I would never buy D3 and the like. I know too well how many great shots I have missed this year with my DSLR simply because it stays at home most of the time. I know top pro photographer who has to use both D3 and D4 on a daily basis, simply because this is his work. He says his dream is to ditch all his bulky stuff and have a good small camera he can put in his pocket. Some people have to save money to buy their dream - a D4. He wants to save money to be able to ditch it.

 

[Gavjenks]

What's so great about a D4? Lots of things, but Most of those things that are great about it have little or nothing to do with it being a DSLR.

1) Fast FPS has to do with data transfer speed and processor power. In fact, being a DSLR is a HINDRANCE to high FPS, because you have to engineer some way to flap the mirror that fast without it breaking.
2) Autofocus ability is indeed due to it being a DLSR, however any sort of fancy software support for autofocus like face recognition is NOT due to it being a DSLR.
3) A large sensor has nothing to do with mirrorless vs. DSLR. Mirrorless cameras could easily be any sensor size, along with whatever features a given sensor provides (dynamic range, etc.)
4) Whatever modes and menu options and power of flexibility it offers could also be offered in a mirrorless. These are just programs and buttons, and have nothing to do with whether it has a mirror or not.
5) Video has NO advantages, because the mirror is not even used during video.
6) Features such as wireless have nothing to do with it being a DSLR
7) Build quality and magnesium alloys and whatnot have nothing to do with it being a DSLR.
8) Dual memory card slots have nothing to do with it being a DSLR.


See a trend? Almost all of the same features could just as easily be put in a high end mirrorless. The only thing holding it back is autofocus, pretty much. Which, as I mentioned above, is being worked on quite actively in the major companies' R&D departments.

 

[sashbar]

What's so great about a D4? Lots of things, but Most of those things that are great about it have little or nothing to do with it being a DSLR.

1) Fast FPS has to do with data transfer speed and processor power. In fact, being a DSLR is a HINDRANCE to high FPS, because you have to engineer some way to flap the mirror that fast without it breaking.
2) Autofocus ability is indeed due to it being a DLSR, however any sort of fancy software support for autofocus like face recognition is NOT due to it being a DSLR.
3) A large sensor has nothing to do with mirrorless vs. DSLR. Mirrorless cameras could easily be any sensor size, along with whatever features a given sensor provides (dynamic range, etc.)
4) Whatever modes and menu options and power of flexibility it offers could also be offered in a mirrorless. These are just programs and buttons, and have nothing to do with whether it has a mirror or not.
5) Video has NO advantages, because the mirror is not even used during video.
6) Features such as wireless have nothing to do with it being a DSLR
7) Build quality and magnesium alloys and whatnot have nothing to do with it being a DSLR.
8) Dual memory card slots have nothing to do with it being a DSLR.


See a trend? Almost all of the same features could just as easily be put in a high end mirrorless. The only thing holding it back is autofocus, pretty much. Which, as I mentioned above, is being worked on quite actively in the major companies' R&D departments.

This is all logical, but most of the time we are dealing with illogical, subconsious desire to own a big, heavy "serious" camera which will help making better pictures. As you rightly mentioned - just screw a lead weight, but noone will do it. Because in reality it is not the weight people are after.

 

[Gavjenks]

Okay, screw on a big empty aluminum shell lined with lead weights.

Or the manufacturer might do that for you if the market demands it (making unnecessarily bulky cameras) for awhile. But it will still be a mirrorless nonetheless in the not so distant future.

it would still be very worth it anyway, for the cheaper and higher quality wide angle lenses and easier to design bodies.

 

[gsgary]

I shoot mirrorless 2 no Leica M4

 

[Derrel]

Okay, screw on a big empty aluminum shell lined with lead weights.

Or the manufacturer might do that for you if the market demands it (making unnecessarily bulky cameras) for awhile. But it will still be a mirrorless nonetheless in the not so distant future.

it would still be very worth it anyway, for the cheaper and higher quality wide angle lenses and easier to design bodies.

I wonder how long it will be until all these alleged advantages suddenly convince manufacturers to devote more energy to making cameras that so far, DO NOT SELL worth a DAMN? Have you not seen the ACTUAL, real-world decline in mirrorless camera shipments to photo dealers? Mirrorless cameras already have some of the advantages you describe, like compactness, light weight, and small lenses, but the sales for these cameras dropped like a stone within the last year...the manufacturers shipped around 40% fewer mirrorless cameras this year compared to the year before...the things have met with fire-sale price fates in the case of Canon and Nikon offerings...just to get the danged things off of dealer shelves.

Meanwhile, despite a sluggish economy, d-slr shipments were up, to 102.5% of the levels of the prior year... 40% decline versus a 2.5% uptick in shipments of d-slrs...

How old must I grow to be before I live to see this world where manufacturers decide to start focusing on a product category that customers have proven they do not have much enthusiasm for? 100 years old?

Yeah...I heard the same refrain three years ago: "Mirrorless will come to dominate the entire camera market--and really soon too. Because it's smaller, and the image quality is close to what an APS-C camera can do. As long as the ISO levels are at 400 or lower. And the light level is high enough, like EV 11 or brighter." Yadda,yadda,yadda.

 

[Joeywhat]

I'm curious, is there a good comparison between the capabilities of each platform in regards to photo quality and flexibility? Something that is mostly subjective?

I would eventually like to get a better camera, and a huge DSLR seems to be a real PITA to carry around, especially since I'm not doing this professionally. I'd love to see some comparisons between the two that shows the differences in photos each can take, along with how flexible each can be based on lighting, camera/subject movement, etc.

Anything like that out there?