Change to mirrorless... or not?

LCPete said:
Thanks for sharing very interesting a big change is happening
At the moment I’m still using DSLR and I’ve got too much invested in EF lenses to change and couldn’t afford to anyway but if I had to buy new kit would change over to Canon mirrorless
Click to expand...
I'm also very invested in EF lenses so kept with canon. They work as native with the RF to EF adapter to there's no need to change lenses moving to Canon mirrorless.
 
TimHughes said:
I'm also very invested in EF lenses so kept with canon. They work as native with the RF to EF adapter to there's no need to change lenses moving to Canon mirrorless.
Click to expand...

Question - with the metabones E mount adaptor for Sony does this not also apply.

A lot of Sony users I've seen using Canon lenses just the thing...but never F Mount Nikon stuff.
 
SFTPhotography said:
Question - with the metabones E mount adaptor for Sony does this not also apply.

A lot of Sony users I've seen using Canon lenses just the thing...but never F Mount Nikon stuff.
Click to expand...
No, they work well AFAIK but not as well as they work on the DSLR’s, whereas on Canon mirrorless they’re the same or better
 
droj said:
I don't particularly get on with evfs, which some might find odd since I'm fond of manual focus lenses. But I prefer the seamless 3d view that an optical vf gives - it just seems more natural, direct, & 'tactile'.

If manual focussing with an evf, I find that focus peaking, whatever options are selected, intrudes and compromises the clarity of view.

Also, invoking vf magnification can be somewhat clunky, and another intrusive step to the fluidity of the experience if working hand-held.

So I'm sticking with ovfs & dslrs.

For similar reasons in the old days, I'd stick a plain screen into a film slr and eschew the stock screens with focus aids.

These days, wearing bi (or vari) focals, I look into a dslr's ovf through the upper part of my glasses - the distance rather then the 'reading' part of the lenses - because that's the natural posture. But the vf dioptre has been pre-adjusted to suit.

Indeed, it's personal.
Click to expand...

I manually focus a lot and it is very probably the most accurate way to focus if you have the time to do it. AF is quicker but if you want to focus on some exact detail MF is I believe the most accurate way of doing it and you'll see the point of focus move as you turn the focus ring plus of course because the image you see can be greatly magnified you'll see detail that would be simply impossible to see using any unaided and unmagnified optical system and can therefore focus much more accurately. Time allowing.

I find peaking to be pretty accurate at wide apertures as very little peaks but much less use at smaller apertures as just about everything peaks. Using the magnified view allows very very accurate focus but I don't know why you think it's clunky unless there are operational issues with your cameras or more likely the way they're set up. With all of my cameras, which are Panasonic and Sony and set up as I want them to be, calling up and using the magnified view is extremely simple and very easy to do and very probably simpler and less intrusive than selecting metering or AF modes or manually changing the ISO.
 
LCPete said:
Thanks for sharing very interesting a big change is happening
Click to expand...
A big change indeed. It's no wonder the likes of Canon and Nikon are plugging away with mirrorless. The same people who buy new mirrorless camera bodies will probably also buy new lenses and that's where the real profit lies.

The DSLR market has stagnated. Not because the cameras are useless but because the majority of consumers have all the gear they need.

A couple of new mirrorless bodies and a set of new glass represents a massive investment... but for what? Many of the claims people make don't stand up to scrutiny and many are just regurgitated marketing hype. That smaller body is indeed lighter but you now need to add a £300 battery grip to add balance with any of the new, larger and heavier lenses.

For the majority of casual photographers, regularly replacing kit is done for one reason only... because YOU can afford to. You have surplus cash. It's all about status. Which is fine if that's what's important to you.

I think it's important to remember that camera and lens manufacturers aren't releasing new gear to make YOU happy; they're doing it to enrichen their shareholders.

I was once addicted to buying new gear. It used to cheer me up. The snaps I took didn't get much better. Taking more photos did that (perhaps).

Just my 2c.
 
adrianday said:
A big change indeed. It's no wonder the likes of Canon and Nikon are plugging away with mirrorless. The same people who buy new mirrorless camera bodies will probably also buy new lenses and that's where the real profit lies.

The DSLR market has stagnated. Not because the cameras are useless but because the majority of consumers have all the gear they need.

A couple of new mirrorless bodies and a set of new glass represents a massive investment... but for what? Many of the claims people make don't stand up to scrutiny and many are just regurgitated marketing hype. That smaller body is indeed lighter but you now need to add a £300 battery grip to add balance with any of the new, larger and heavier lenses.

For the majority of casual photographers, regularly replacing kit is done for one reason only... because YOU can afford to. You have surplus cash. It's all about status. Which is fine if that's what's important to you.

I think it's important to remember that camera and lens manufacturers aren't releasing new gear to make YOU happy; they're doing it to enrichen their shareholders.

I was once addicted to buying new gear. It used to cheer me up. The snaps I took didn't get much better. Taking more photos did that (perhaps).

Just my 2c.
Click to expand...

Yes you’re spot on there , to be honest for what I do macro and wildlife photography my current gear does all I need
6D 2 with 100 L macro and 7D 2 with 300 2.8
 
As a photography student, I’ve been exposed to a range of cameras from point and shoot to DSLR and now currently working with a mirrorless.

I found that I really love portable equipment, that allows me to shoot on the go. I love having a long battery life and a camera that has fast autofocus.

I think you should switch to a mirrorless as it’s really portable for all the types of photography that you mentioned. You sound like someone who is constantly capturing moments on the go and you need something light to allow for easy access.
 
adrianday said:
For the majority of casual photographers, regularly replacing kit is done for one reason only... because YOU can afford to. You have surplus cash. It's all about status. Which is fine if that's what's important to you.
Click to expand...

Well, I guess that's a point of view.

So you've not actually tried any recent mirrorless cameras then?
 
I've actually made the decision to swap out one of my z6 cameras in favour of a D850 - the reason behind it is that for wildlife I miss my realtime OVF and the reliability of AF on moving subjects. I had considered going down the root of one of the new Canon mirrorless offerings with bird AF, however the price for a 20MP camera was crazy high and it would involve a new learning curve to get to grips with the new menu and features. In the end, as I have still got quite a few F mount lenses I decided to keep one Z6, and go for the D850 so I have the best of both worlds dependant on the application!! As other members have said - ask yourself what is wrong with your current setup, and that should help you figure out if a move to mirrorless will solve your problem. Certainly live view shooting is much improved - AF options, accuracy and sharpness is amazing.
 
Last edited:
ancient_mariner said:
So you've not actually tried any recent mirrorless cameras then?
Click to expand...
I suspect you know the answer. The truth is I don't need to because I have a collection of cameras that allow me to do everything I want to. I centre focus and recompose (asides from when zone focusing). The dynamic range on the D810 is superb as is the highlight weighted metering mode.

I've no issue with people who seem to continually haemorrhage cash on new equipment because they believe it will magically improve the photographs they take. That's a personal choice. As I've said, I believe taking more photos, regardless of the gear you have, is the way to improve the photographs you take.
 
I did know the answer.

It's hard to find external metrics for image 'quality' (whatever that is) however when I changed from a D610 to A7 I suddenly started getting a lot more pictures in Flickr explore. If your D810 does all you need then that's great, but there's no need for arrogance and rudeness towards those who make other choices, possibly informed ones.
 
ancient_mariner said:
but there's no need for arrogance and rudeness...
Click to expand...
It's sad but true that too many posters hold a different opinion.

Donning armour before entering the forum fray is all too often a necessary precaution. These chaps are suitably attired for their visit to the Taverna Internetus...

Roman soldiers Old Town Swindon 10D_6206.JPG
 
Last edited:
ancient_mariner said:
It's hard to find external metrics for image 'quality' (whatever that is) however when I changed from a D610 to A7 I suddenly started getting a lot more pictures in Flickr explore. If your D810 does all you need then that's great, but there's no need for arrogance and rudeness towards those who make other choices, possibly informed ones.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry if I caused you any offence. That certainly wasn’t my aim. I was merely expressing my opinion.

With regards Flickr explore; you’re probably doing yourself an injustice. The photograph you took made it to explore. You composed the image. You pressed the shutter button. You process the image. The camera you use plays such a small part in the process.
 
adrianday said:
With regards Flickr explore; you’re probably doing yourself an injustice. The photograph you took made it to explore. You composed the image. You pressed the shutter button. You process the image. The camera you use plays such a small part in the process.
Click to expand...
Flickr has always refused to disclose the parameters used to access images for explore. There may well be some degree of scoring based on equipment used, with recent hardware from specific sponsoring manufacturers getting a boost.

My own cameras (mirrorless of DSLR) are generally around 5 years old when I buy them, so if there is an advertising related boost I doubt I ever benefit from it. At least this means i don't continually haemorrhage cash which is just as well as the family tends to find other uses for what cash I can arrange :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Petrochemist said:
There may well be some degree of scoring based on equipment used, with recent hardware from specific sponsoring manufacturers getting a boost.
Click to expand...
Could you point me to some evidence for this?
 
droj said:
Could you point me to some evidence for this?
Click to expand...
No it's pure speculation, but it does give a reason for flickr being so cagey about the system used.
NB I did use the word may to indicate it was not definite. If I had evidence I would have made a more definite statement.
 
woof woof said:
Using the magnified view allows very very accurate focus but I don't know why you think it's clunky
Click to expand...
Clunky because it's an extra jolt (or two, even) in what I prefer to occur as a natural flow, given that I would've set up any camera for my greatest convenience to begin with.

If hand-held, I like to keep sight of the entire context of the view.
 
adrianday said:
I’m sorry if I caused you any offence. That certainly wasn’t my aim. I was merely expressing my opinion.

With regards Flickr explore; you’re probably doing yourself an injustice. The photograph you took made it to explore. You composed the image. You pressed the shutter button. You process the image. The camera you use plays such a small part in the process.
Click to expand...

Sorry to be 4rsey in my turn.

The key thing for me was that the D610 has major flaws with focussing and sometimes metering, and the RAW images could fall apart if pushed too hard in processing. In many ways it's a good camera, but replacing it with the A7 meant that I could just concentrate on getting the pictures I wanted instead of having to compensate for the camera half the time. The better camera allowed me to take the pictures as I wanted, and perhaps that's the reason they did better too, not withstanding the comments above.
 
ancient_mariner said:
Sorry to be 4rsey in my turn.
Click to expand...
Virtual pint on its way.
ancient_mariner said:
The key thing for me was that the D610 has major flaws with focussing and sometimes metering, and the RAW images could fall apart if pushed too hard in processing. In many ways it's a good camera, but replacing it with the A7 meant that I could just concentrate on getting the pictures I wanted instead of having to compensate for the camera half the time. The better camera allowed me to take the pictures as I wanted, and perhaps that's the reason they did better too, not withstanding the comments above.
Click to expand...
The Sony A7 was in a different league to the D610. I'm sure Nikon intended it as a pathway to the D8x series. Numbering their first FF mirrorless the Z7 is clearly testament as to whom Nikon now consider their main competitor.

I've had a few cameras that, perhaps in hindsight, have had limitations that you need to be conscious of when using. It is nice to have a camera that fits your needs, be it a A7 or D810 (or Ricoh GR, or Olympus E-P5, or Nikon D3300, or Nikon F6, or Voigtländer R3M ... )
 
rob-nikon said:
quite a few of the manufacturers now do a free 2 day test. I think Canon, Olympus and Fuji do it but I’m not sure on others.
Click to expand...
Update... Ive been to a local store and had a look at a Canon R6 for myself. Wasnt loving the digital view finder if im honest, but think I would soon get used to it. I did notice a strange colour cast on it at the time, but have since wondered if it was maybe the light balance setting... do any if you know if this could be the case... ie would wrong colour balance setting show up on the viewfinder? Asked them about hiring but with current covid situation they arent doing this at the min. Can anyone point me towards somewhere that could hire me one fir a weekend?
Also interested in this possible trial period quoted above) if anyone could advise where this is available?
Thanks folks
 
I can't speak for that make and model but all my mirrorless cameras are pretty much WYSIWYG so if the WB is giving wrong colours in the EVF or on the back screen it's because that's what you're going to get when you press the button.
 
woof woof said:
I can't speak for that make and model but all my mirrorless cameras are pretty much WYSIWYG so if the WB is giving wrong colours in the EVF or on the back screen it's because that's what you're going to get when you press the button.
Click to expand...
One of my IR converted mirrorless cameras gives a different WB while framing the shot to what it does on review afterwards (on the same screen) sadly not WYSIWYG with that one.
 
How can you say what are the right colours with IR as we cannot see colours outside the visible spectrum.

However, I have created a bespoke WB for my camera and a calibration profile in LR so it does look neutral. This information in on my Website.
 
adrianday said:
Virtual pint on its way.

The Sony A7 was in a different league to the D610. I'm sure Nikon intended it as a pathway to the D8x series. Numbering their first FF mirrorless the Z7 is clearly testament as to whom Nikon now consider their main competitor.

I've had a few cameras that, perhaps in hindsight, have had limitations that you need to be conscious of when using. It is nice to have a camera that fits your needs, be it a A7 or D810 (or Ricoh GR, or Olympus E-P5, or Nikon D3300, or Nikon F6, or Voigtländer R3M ... )
Click to expand...

I had a D610 for about 2 months before giving in to a D800 then D810's which I used heavily until this year where I ugraded to 645z. The sensor in the D610 was ace, but it's AF was hit and miss, and it didn't have live view histogram preview. Two things I like. The D8x0 cameras are ace for this and the extra resolution noticeable.

I really like the DLSR style camera and I am sure the mirrorless camera's are a technical tour de force, but it's a tour de force I am happy without for the sake of the natural feeling OVF.

And if it is accurate AF - never seen anything like a 645z. It never misses...ever.

In saying that I have a 5ds and 100-400 L coming - really because the longer stuff for the 645z is a bit dated and unweather sealed and something more modern will suit. I am sure I will love the 5ds and it's 50mp :D
 
Last edited:
Eventually every thing will be mirrorless. But there is no rush.
Your existing kit will work as well as it ever did.
Wait till you are sure what you need.
 
swiftflo said:
I have been using a Canon for the last 10 years and enjoy the feel of one in my hands, the fuji just does not feel right. The only reason I really contemplated was the weight factor, I am now 87 and not sure I can manage the backpack now (when allowed) with the weight.
Click to expand...
I am a year younger, and neither my back nor my balance is up to heavy kit. So I went Fuji. I carry as little as I can get away with, my heaviest is my XT 30 kit. And my walk about is my X 30.

However I would have gone with those anyway. Whatever the state of my back.
The XT 30 has the same sensor and processor as the top flight XT 3 so equal quality images..
 
If you look at the available new camera pages in this week's AP you will see that DSLRs are now down to a single page. And they had to double space the lines to fill that. The demise of the DSLR is now Precipitous and irreversible. With the comparatively short life span of electronic components and special parts. They will be all but history in ten years. No on will design new lenses or accessories for them, it is no longer economically viable.

Pentax are probably just running on air, and wringing what they can out of past investments, before shutting up shop. Sad may be, but you can not buck the system.
DSLR's are just old technology that has now been superseded.

There is nothing yet on the horizon to replace the mirrorless.
The DSLR when it came along, was a rehash of the old large format reflex cameras like my old 1/4 plate Ruby Reflex, with the crude farm yard mechanical functions, replaced with precision engineering and later electronics.

However mirrorless is just a step on the path to fully solid state devices. Of which phone cameras are a likely foretaste.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
However mirrorless is just a step on the path to fully solid state devices. Of which phone cameras are a likely foretaste.
Click to expand...
When you say fully solid state are you suggesting lenses will not be needed? Surely a typical ML camera is similar to a phone but with more flexible lens choices.

Dave
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
If you look at the available new camera pages in this week's AP you will see that DSLRs are now down to a single page. And they had to double space the lines to fill that. The demise of the DSLR is now Precipitous and irreversible. With the comparatively short life span of electronic components and special parts. They will be all but history in ten years. No on will design new lenses or accessories for them, it is no longer economically viable.

Pentax are probably just running on air, and wringing what they can out of past investments, before shutting up shop. Sad may be, but you can not buck the system.
DSLR's are just old technology that has now been superseded.

There is nothing yet on the horizon to replace the mirrorless.
The DSLR when it came along, was a rehash of the old large format reflex cameras like my old 1/4 plate Ruby Reflex, with the crude farm yard mechanical functions, replaced with precision engineering and later electronics.

However mirrorless is just a step on the path to fully solid state devices. Of which phone cameras are a likely foretaste.
Click to expand...

Yup.

Look at the Sony A1. It seems to be a very capable camera and it would have been science fiction just a few years ago. People whinge at the price but it's in the ballpark when compared to the Canon and Nikon high end DSLR's which it arguably eclipses.
 
By solid state I think Terry mean no moving parts inside the camera. There is the question of the shutter even if the flappy mirror is gone.
A1 is the closest we've got to removing the mechanical shutter but unfortunately its still needed in some instances.
Considering how expensive stacked sensor cameras are, I think we are still a fair while away before seeing large global shutter sensors with no mechanical shutter.
 
As far as I know, I could take all my shots without the shutter on my Sony A6600 but still choose to use the shutter.

Dave
 
SFTPhotography said:
I really like the DLSR style camera and I am sure the mirrorless camera's are a technical tour de force, but it's a tour de force I am happy without for the sake of the natural feeling OVF.
Click to expand...
My feelings exactly!

It should be a given in photography that the image is what everything else should hinge around, but each of us will have a different take on the machinery that we are comfortable with.

As technology increases in capability, it might seem to be taking over from the human. I take what I want from it (a good example being the ability to change iso on the fly), but I find many functions superfluous if not intrusive, and my ideal is I suppose a certain analogue simplicity.

Those on the first ship to settle Mars, though, won't be carrying a plate camera, will they? But I won't be on that trip!
 
Last edited:
Dave Canon said:
As far as I know, I could take all my shots without the shutter on my Sony A6600 but still choose to use the shutter.

Dave
Click to expand...

the electronic shutter in your A6600 will be 12-bits only with impact on dynamic range and ISO performance. Also you may face rolling shutter issue.
cannot use flash with it either and you will have other banding issues.
So it really needs the mechanical shutter.
This is the case with all the bodies so far that I know of but the A1.

On A1 you only need mechanical shutter for the bulb mode. Otherwise I cannot see any other reason to use it on A1.
Yes it also gives 1/400 flash sync but that's more a nice thing to have than preventing people from doing flash photography which you can do with electronic shutter on the A1 (at 1/200s flash sync speed).
 
droj said:
My feelings exactly!

It should be a given in photography that the image is what everything else should hinge around, but each of us will have a different take on the machinery that we are comfortable with.

As technology increases in capability, it might seem to be taking over from the human. I take what I want from it (a good example being the ability to change iso on the fly), but I find many functions superfluous if not intrusive, and my ideal is I suppose a certain analogue simplicity.

Those on the first ship to settle Mars, though, won't be carrying a plate camera, will they? But I won't be on that trip!
Click to expand...

Yup. It's the picture that matters and to me much more so than any fuzzy feeling I get from looking through a DSLR's prism. Mirrorless does help you to get an in focus picture more consistently than you can with any optical camera I'm aware of simply because of how its made and where it takes the focus from. Add in the compositional freedom which mirrorless brings by allowing consistent and accurate focus just about anywhere in the frame and these add up to real game changers for many people.
 
woof woof said:
Yup. It's the picture that matters and to me much more so than any fuzzy feeling I get from looking through a DSLR's prism. Mirrorless does help you to get an in focus picture more consistently than you can with any optical camera I'm aware of simply because of how its made and where it takes the focus from. Add in the compositional freedom which mirrorless brings by allowing consistent and accurate focus just about anywhere in the frame and these add up to real game changers for many people.
Click to expand...

I don't think I've ever fluffed the focus using the camera equipment I have though....:D
 
Due to heart failure I moved to Olympus , now on a omd1-mkiii and a 100-400 lens which also takes 1.4 and 2x t.c’s .the all up weight is 2kg ,and b.I.f are no problem . Plus Olympus gear is far far cheaper than other brands . What’s not to like
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top