I'm starting to wonder if "mirrorless" is all it's hyped up to be

[Guillermo Luijk]

http://www.slrlounge.com/dslr-vs-mirrorless-cameras-future-of-photography/

The "real world" argument is endelessly repeated by EVF detractors:

"Given that today, digital technology is allowing us to see “through the lens” by viewing what the sensor sees, is there still a case for having mirrors in our cameras? Of course there is – some people still prefer being able to see “the real world” through the lens optically, rather than an LCD screen with the images on it. After all, we still wear glasses, not small LCD screens placed in front of our eyes, right?"

He even makes the comparision with glasses. Others say they prefer to see the real world through a window instead of using any electronic device. Great, I do prefer to look straight at the real world with my own eyes as well, without any electronic device in the middle. But a camera's VF doesn't exist to see and enjoy the real world, but to capture an image that will for sure differ from the real world. And it will differ much more as seen through a OVF than with a EVF.

I find OK that some prefer the OVF, but the "real world" argument doesn't make sense to me. I can see the so called real world with my eyes and my E-P5, just need to shift my eyes a couple of cms from the camera.

Regards

[barryfitzgerald]

I can only speak for myself but I found it very difficult to use EVF's and it took a lot of time to get used to them. There is something to be said for a clean view of a subject (ie your eyes) and an optical finder it's just "pure" and devoid of distractions (least to me) But I'm mostly using EVF's now some great advantages but they can struggle in harsh lighting. Yes you can look away with your eyes I've even used the back LCD "Old style" looking down at that. It's a mixed bag the EVF's are getting better no question. I still like optical finders though

Battery life is a valid point the ILC's I've owned and used are way behind even the SLT Models I have which are sub DSLR battery performance are vastly superior to the Fuji's it could be an issue for longer shoots (weddings) you'd def need a fair few spares. All the Fuji's I've used have ho hum battery life under 50% of what I get now, if you're using a DSLR you can get over a 1000 shots a charge on the mid level ones and up.

[Telecaster]

But a camera's VF doesn't exist to see and enjoy the real world, but to capture an image that will for sure differ from the real world. And it will differ much more as seen through a OVF than with a EVF.

Yep, this is the clincher for me. I find the best current EVFs show me an image more like the photo data my cameras capture than do OVFs. And you can fine-tune EVFs. I suspect I was primed long ago for EVF use by reading Galen Rowell, picking up on his assertion that photographers should train themselves to see things the way their films do. Substitute "sensors" for "films," et voilà!

-Dave-

[scooby70]

I don't buy, however, the whole WYSIWYG argument via the EVF.  Even the best EVF is a horror outdoors in daylight.  Try WYSIWYG-ing to open up the horribly blocked-up shadows in the EVF, using your exposure or comp., and see what the file looks like. In this regard, EVF/mirrorless has a LONG way to go, IMO.  It is good enough to "tolerate and work around" but nothing more.  And I don't think having the plethora of on-screen information compensates a bit - in fact I often find myself turning it all off so that I can see "what's out there" enough to make a decent composition.

Horrors in daylight? Blocked up shadows? Can't see enough to get the composition? Don't buy WYSIWYG?

I can't see how anyone can say that it's not a lot more WYSIWYG than any OVF system but reading internet forums often makes me wonder how experiences differ so much.

As I may have said before on this forum, I'd only go back to a conventional OVF DSLR if a gun was put to my head. Others are free to choose otherwise

[scooby70]

I can only speak for myself but I found it very difficult to use EVF's and it took a lot of time to get used to them. There is something to be said for a clean view of a subject (ie your eyes) and an optical finder it's just "pure" and devoid of distractions (least to me) But I'm mostly using EVF's now some great advantages but they can struggle in harsh lighting. Yes you can look away with your eyes I've even used the back LCD "Old style" looking down at that. It's a mixed bag the EVF's are getting better no question. I still like optical finders though

I have a technical background and maybe that allowed me to adopt EVF's easier and now I wouldn't want to go back.

I do disagree with the idea that OVF are pure as mine were constantly full of debris and once or twice there were things crawling around in there and then there's the difference between what I saw when I looked through my Canon DSLR's and what I saw on the back screen. Such was the difference that I often had to take the shot again. If dust, hairs, bugs and little relation to the final image are purity I'm happy to leave it to others

[barryfitzgerald]

The advantage of an OVF Is that your eyes has massive DR, an EVF does not that can be useful in some situations.
There are certainly strong and weak points to both, the ideal scenario would be a combination of both a hybrid OVF/EVF

However it is quite wrong for some folks to suggest the EVF is some kind of miracle "solve all wonder" solution it has drawbacks too, and some very good strong points.
The weedy battery performance of ILC's though is a notable negative. The biggest strength is being able to use other non OEM lenses. But I can't help but wonder that kills lens sales for the maker. For example if I bought an E mount body I can use adapters for all my lenses even get AF if I wanted, there would be almost no incentive to buy Sony lenses for that mount..none. I think Fuji and Sony are overcharging on some of their lenses which drags the appeal down.

Ultimately though the smaller form factor is a mixed one for handling and comfort. I'll continue to use an ILC body in addition to my DSLR outfit but that's about it really I won't be investing in a new mount.

[Paulo Bizarro]

Ref. OVF vs. EVF, recently I was testing my new Sony A7II, who arguably has one of the best EVFs in the business. The day was clear with fantastic blue sky, and cold and crispy weather. So sunlight was abundant, which sometimes turned the EVF a bit useless, as I could barely see what was in it, with the sun coming from the side or my back.

In the end, I just use what is available in the camera I like to use, and adjust to it and move on.

[Mjollnir]

Fair enough.  Along the same lines:
http://inmybag.net/martin-gillman-2/

LOL!  The butthurt is strong in that one.  So much sound and fury, and so little of substance.

[Telecaster]

Ref. OVF vs. EVF, recently I was testing my new Sony A7II, who arguably has one of the best EVFs in the business. The day was clear with fantastic blue sky, and cold and crispy weather. So sunlight was abundant, which sometimes turned the EVF a bit useless, as I could barely see what was in it, with the sun coming from the side or my back.

Yep, this can be an issue with the Sony A cameras. The best EVF contrast-wise I've used is the one in Olympus' E-M1 (and new E-M5ii). EVF tech isn't perfect but it is incrementally getting better.

-Dave-

[Iluvmycam]

I can only speak for myself but I found it very difficult to use EVF's and it took a lot of time to get used to them. There is something to be said for a clean view of a subject (ie your eyes) and an optical finder it's just "pure" and devoid of distractions (least to me) But I'm mostly using EVF's now some great advantages but they can struggle in harsh lighting. Yes you can look away with your eyes I've even used the back LCD "Old style" looking down at that. It's a mixed bag the EVF's are getting better no question. I still like optical finders though

Battery life is a valid point the ILC's I've owned and used are way behind even the SLT Models I have which are sub DSLR battery performance are vastly superior to the Fuji's it could be an issue for longer shoots (weddings) you'd def need a fair few spares. All the Fuji's I've used have ho hum battery life under 50% of what I get now, if you're using a DSLR you can get over a 1000 shots a charge on the mid level ones and up.

Sure sometimes they can be a problem. But so can the bulk of a dslr. It takes balance. There I no perfect cam.

[pegelli]

LOL!  The butthurt is strong in that one.  So much sound and fury, and so little of substance.

+1, and so little common sense. How believable is a guy who first passionately wrote he abandoned DSLR's and then a few month later passionately moves back and abandons mirrorless. While in real life it's not an "either/or" decision, what's wrong with "and"?

[AFairley]

Ref. OVF vs. EVF, recently I was testing my new Sony A7II, who arguably has one of the best EVFs in the business. The day was clear with fantastic blue sky, and cold and crispy weather. So sunlight was abundant, which sometimes turned the EVF a bit useless, as I could barely see what was in it, with the sun coming from the side or my back.

In the end, I just use what is available in the camera I like to use, and adjust to it and move on.

The partial solution to that is a deep eyecup unless you wear glasses.  Oly has one that is great once you get used to it jamming into your eye.  Fuji has left X-E2 users high and dry in that regard, I sometimes have to shoot one handed using the other hand to block the light.

[Rand47]

The partial solution to that is a deep eyecup unless you wear glasses.  Oly has one that is great once you get used to it jamming into your eye.  Fuji has left X-E2 users high and dry in that regard, I sometimes have to shoot one handed using the other hand to block the light.

There is an optional deep eyecup for the Fuji X-T1 that works very well in preventing side/back light intrusion.  I've put one in both my bodies, and they are very usable with eyeglasses.  The EVF is still very poor in bright and or contrasty light.  I like everything else about the camer "so much" that I put up with it, but I have not imbibed the EVF cool-aid. 

Rand

[AFairley]

There is an optional deep eyecup for the Fuji X-T1 that works very well in preventing side/back light intrusion. 

Which makes the lack for the X-E2 even more galling.  As with the recent firmware update, Fuji is treating the X-E2 like the bastard stepchild of the x sensor cameras. 

[bcooter]

I use both, I don't care as optical or electronic everything requires a rethink and workaround.

If I come from a session with optical finders and then use electronic I find the optical limited.  Then again if I reverse the process I find electronic awkard, but with both after a period they just seem "normal".

What amazes me is how good and cheap some of these small cameras finders are.

An em5II sells for what?   $1,000?

A decent viewfinder in the motion camera world goes for $3,000 to $5,000 minimum.  Price out the new Gratical from Zacuto and it's no better than that little olympus and sells for 4x the cost.

BTW:   Compare that to the previous Zacuto which sells for more than most of the cameras mentioned here and the earlier zacuto is very limited.

IMO

BC

[stamper]

What I don't understand is when someone complains that when they use an EVF that can't see shadow separation. I would have thought that is something you you sort out in post processing. Lack of DR is the problem for most cameras with respect to separation. In short, frame the image, shoot and think about the separation afterwards.

[Rand47]

What I don't understand is when someone complains that when they use an EVF that can't see shadow separation. I would have thought that is something you you sort out in post processing. Lack of DR is the problem for most cameras with respect to separation. In short, frame the image, shoot and think about the separation afterwards.

The problem is sometimes in your very statement; ..."frame the image,"

Rand

[bcooter]

The problem is.......
Rand

I think we all know that any advancement in capture devices is going to come from electronics.

The little mirrorless gh3/4, em1/5 have touch screens.  It fabulous in finding all the setttings cameras offer and it's also flexible.

I guess it depends on what you want.  If you want ovf they're all over the place and work well, though pretty much stuck in 2005 not 2015.

I think the point we all miss is the largest selling camera in the world in an iphone, so millions of young image makers are learning this way and they're not going to accept one purpose devices that only shoot a still, or won't do an auto panorama, or variable frame crops, or stabilized movies, instant effects and instant uploads.

I honestly believe if Apple came out with a high spec camera that synced to a mobile device, had a larger sensor size, some kind of fast zoom lens, it would dominate the lower spec market.

Don't misunderstand I love old analog style cameras like the Contax and even my Leica S2 and m8 and they do a amazing but very limited job and when you use one you know it.

So whether anyone wants-or likes electronic finders, menus that are touch screen, or even movie capabilities in a still camera, I think we should all realize those cameras are going the way of film.

IMO

BC

[Herbc]

My first camera was a Speed Graphic 2 1/4 x 3 1/4  in 1951.  I sold my 8x10, 5x7 and 4x5 a few years ago.  I kept my 6x6 however.  As a landscape photographer, my current favorite is the Sony A7R on a tripod.  I use a right angle viewfinder at times when the sun makes the rear screen unreadable.  It is a very worthy tool.
I sometimes miss not having the ground glass and the dark cloth, but I don't miss carrying the LF equipment.

[bcooter]

On a side note our producer was in NY to do a quick fitting/casting.

She's not a photographer, doesn't have any interest in leaning cameras, so I set up an em-1 with the little clip on flash, set it to ai, set up the touch screen on the back and told her to shoot it like an iphone.

The results were great and other than change batteries all she had to do was take out the card, drop them into an ipad air, edit them down and well, done.

previously we've done this same type of casting with a crew of 4, so I guess this explains how the world is changing.

IMO

BC