Opinions on a pure mirrorless world?

[32BT]

So, due to the recent discussions on the next wave of mirrorless offerings, i came across a sentence suggesting that the future might be a "pure mirrorless" world. I'm the first to admit the advantages of electronic viewfinders, primarily because i'm a real bad photographer (or would be if we were still shooting film) and fading eye-sight doesn't help either, but having used evf for a while now, i do slowly long back to the direct connection with reality one has with a slapper.

So my question is this: what's your take on a "mirrorless only" future?
- maybe one day
- sooner rather than later
- never

?

[KLaban]

My own solution - while eyesight permits - to the question of OVF or EVF is to cheat and use both in the form of an OVF (rangefinder) and (toy grade, for the moment) EVF on the same body. Both give me advantages over the slapper with admittedly one or two disadvantages: I wouldn't choose to be without either the RFOVF or the EVF.

I can't see myself ever returning to the slapper (the wife would give me hell) or even wanting to. My crystal ball sees me using the above combination for as long as I can followed by the use of a far superior EVF.

Choice is everything.

[BernardLanguillier]

I currently don’t intend to replace my DSLR by a mirrorless body, eveb if it’s performance were superior.

The mirrorless body, whatever it ends up being, will complement it.

We’ll have to see how good EVFs can become. It has been quite a few years and they are still mediocre at best IMHO, which may be by design to keep the update cycle going.

But even if they become very good, there may be an element of pleasure of shooting associated with OVF that may never go away.

Cheers,
Bernard

[chez]

My last DSLR is going to be my 7D and its life is short once I get my hands on the A73. I only use the 7D for sports...everything else is handled by my A7R2 / A7R. No plans on going backwards for me.

[Rob C]

So, due to the recent discussions on the next wave of mirrorless offerings, i came across a sentence suggesting that the future might be a "pure mirrorless" world. I'm the first to admit the advantages of electronic viewfinders, primarily because i'm a real bad photographer (or would be if we were still shooting film) and fading eye-sight doesn't help either, but having used evf for a while now, i do slowly long back to the direct connection with reality one has with a slapper.

So my question is this: what's your take on a "mirrorless only" future?
- maybe one day
- sooner rather than later
- never

?

That's a very resigned take on life! There are still some lovely, free women in the world - you need to go out more.

Rob

[Rob C]

My own solution - while eyesight permits - to the question of OVF or EVF is to cheat and use both in the form of an OVF (rangefinder) and (toy grade, for the moment) EVF on the same body. Both give me advantages over the slapper with admittedly one or two disadvantages: I wouldn't choose to be without either the RFOVF or the EVF.

I can't see myself ever returning to the slapper (the wife would give me hell) or even wanting to. My crystal ball sees me using the above combination for as long as I can followed by the use of a far superior EVF.

Choice is everything.

I don't think I'd put it to your wife quite like that! She may not really be too keen to share. Your crystal ball may get a hard kick when you're least expecting it - just to make choice irrelevant.

;-)

[Rob C]

So, due to the recent discussions on the next wave of mirrorless offerings, i came across a sentence suggesting that the future might be a "pure mirrorless" world. I'm the first to admit the advantages of electronic viewfinders, primarily because i'm a real bad photographer (or would be if we were still shooting film) and fading eye-sight doesn't help either, but having used evf for a while now, i do slowly long back to the direct connection with reality one has with a slapper.

So my question is this: what's your take on a "mirrorless only" future?
- maybe one day
- sooner rather than later
- never

?

It'll probably come. The cellphone is to the camera as the iPad is to the computer. The screen is the draw, and the fact that the pro photographer people will eventually be working for the electronic world exclusively will render wonderful cameras out of date.

I used to tell people not to 'phone me because the cell is only on when I want to use it, and I never answer the landline unless I recognize the number (I have a long list of crap numbers to ignore) - my advice was to e-mail me because I spot those several times a day. No longer: most of my surfing is on the iPad now, and the computer is for heavy-duty stuff only, whatever the hell that means, but thinking in those terms fills me with a sense of something worth doing somewhere along the line. You see ? Positives everywhere!

Oscar, you know damned well you are not a bad photographer; there is no place for fake false modesty on LuLa!

Oh - mirrors! I was right about that when I sold my Vito B, which back in the day cost me £25/3/11 (I say cost me, but my girlfriend/wife-to-be helped finance it: she got more pocket money than I did. Which was tough on the ego, but helpful for paying for the second movie of the week.) What was I saying? Oh, the Vito B: from that to the Exakta 11a and the die was cast for ever.

Never desert the pentaprism.

[Kevin Raber]

I do believe that we will see a mirrorless world in the next few years. The technology is out there and when it is scaled upwards it will change everything.  Global Shutter.  This will be the next big advance in digital photography and it may happen sooner than you might expect.  Maybe one reason Nikon and Canon are getting into the market now, so they can be positioned when this technology comes into the mainstream. Google it and you'll find all sorts of information on what this technology is all about.

[KLaban]

My own solution - while eyesight permits - to the question of OVF or EVF is to cheat and use both in the form of an OVF (rangefinder) and (toy grade, for the moment) EVF on the same body. Both give me advantages over the slapper with admittedly one or two disadvantages: I wouldn't choose to be without either the RFOVF or the EVF.

I can't see myself ever returning to the slapper (the wife would give me hell) or even wanting to. My crystal ball sees me using the above combination for as long as I can followed by the use of a far superior EVF.

Choice is everything.

I don't think I'd put it to your wife quite like that! She may not really be too keen to share. Your crystal ball may get a hard kick when you're least expecting it - just to make choice irrelevant.

;-)

My wife disliked the slapper, looked upon her as excess baggage. As much as my wife disliked the slapper she was content to tolerate our ménage knowing as she did there would be a point when I'd see sense and replace the slapper with someone altogether more desirable.

The renewed ménage is just sublime.

;-)

[Guillermo Luijk]

The speed of the process depends strongly on how Canikon make things happen, it is not us the users deciding here, not even the Sony disrruption. Ten years now since the MFT system appeared on the market, most camera brands are pure mirrorless, and still there are more DSLR shipments than mirrorless by a ~65%/35% ratio. Canikon can go on slowing down the process as they have done for the last decade, or can finally adhere to it. The only good thing for us is that they will agree on this together, the first entering seriously mirrorless will force the other to do so, it's just game theory. And it seems Nikon is showing us its steps in that direction so the same will do Canon.

As soon as Canikon mirrorless options get on par with their DSLR options, common sense will prevail and DLSR will vanish at nearly the rate users replace their main bodies. Don't think of you, who for some (nostalgic?) reason prefer to look at your digital capture through a little piece of glass which doesn't display your digital capture, think of anyone who is a digital native, whose first camera was a mobile phone or a snapshot with a WYSIWYG interface, for whom it's difficult to understand why this rudimetary tool will control their exposure.



Regards

[BernardLanguillier]

As soon as Canikon mirrorless options get on par with their DSLR options, common sense will prevail and DLSR will vanish at nearly the rate users replace their main bodies. Don't think of you, who for some (nostalgic?) reason prefer to look at your digital capture through a little piece of glass which doesn't display your digital capture, think of anyone who is a digital native, whose first camera was a mobile phone or a snapshot with a WYSIWYG interface, for whom it's difficult to understand why this rudimetary tool will control their exposure.

I don't think that there is still a debate as to whether mirrorless will overtake DSLRs from a technology standpoint. They obviously will and some may argue that they already have.

Where this is a lot less clear, it is the shooting pleasure. The enjoyment of looking at a scene through a good quality OVF remains, to me, one of the reason why I choose to spend time photographying instead of doing something else (and god knows there is a wide array of other things I enjoy doing).

This isn't about digital readiness/understanding/... it is just about pleasure.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Two23]

I've been "mirrorless" for the past 25 years.  I shoot a 4x5.    As for smaller systems, I don't care.  I'll use anything.  I have no loyalty to any camera type or format.


Kent in SD

[davidgp]

For me already is, this year I gave my old and veteran Canon 5D Mark II to my little brother. Although since some years, it was only seeing little to no use (since I got my A7 II). So for me it is a mirrorless world right now.

I don't know if DSLR and OVFs will die in the future and in reality I don't care. I suspect some will still be around. Mirrorless has been evolved since Panasonic released the GF1 more than 10 years ago. This has been a slow evolution (not a revolution like the change from film to digital). It maybe increases in pace now that Nikon and probably Canon will release more profesional mirrorless systems in the future. But still will be slow. I suspect 10 years in the future people will still be talking about OVF or EVFs.

[Guillermo Luijk]

This isn't about digital readiness/understanding/... it is just about pleasure.

That's a fully respectable view Bernard; mine is just the opposite. I switched from having to struggle on every shot with my DSLR's painful spot metering, to having a real time exposure view that allowed me to be much more confident on the image I was capturing without trial & error iterations, and allowed me to focus on other things (thanks to this I started to use MF lenses for instance). My photographic pleasure began at that precise point.

Regards!

[KLaban]

I don't think that there is still a debate as to whether mirrorless will overtake DSLRs from a technology standpoint. They obviously will and some may argue that they already have.

Where this is a lot less clear, it is the shooting pleasure. The enjoyment of looking at a scene through a good quality OVF remains, to me, one of the reason why I choose to spend time photographying instead of doing something else (and god knows there is a wide array of other things I enjoy doing).

This isn't about digital readiness/understanding/... it is just about pleasure.

Cheers,
Bernard

Bernard, Some time ago I would have said exactly the same. I was used to using amongst the best if not the best OVFs in the business -  30 or so years with Hasselblad V film & H series digital systems - and the viewfinders were a major factor in choosing those systems.

And then something weird happened, I acquired a used Leica M9 and fell in love with a rangefinder. The optical viewfinder was bright, expansive but admittedly not WYSIWYG. It also allowed me to see beyond the frame whilst looking through the viewfinder, something I had never before experienced or appreciated. Now I could watch people walking into the frame and make compositional judgements with ease. I was working in an entirely new way. Of course the use was limited and as much as I loved the M9 I eventually switched to the M240s to take advantage of liveview via the accessory EVF or the LCD. This change meant my system was now far more adaptable, covered all of my needs and introduced me to a new and exciting working methodology. One system, one small bag and the best lenses I've ever used: Heaven.

Now, I'm not suggesting for a moment that my choice of system is the answer to everyone's needs, far from it, it is niche in the extreme. What I am suggesting is I've forgotten all about that compulsive need I had for the best OVFs in the business; I've moved on. I still use the RFOVF most of the time but I now have the adaptability of choice.

So, how has this affected my work? Well, I feel that over the last five years my work has diversified more than I ever thought possible and as far as anyone can judge their own work has also developed and improved beyond my expectation. Why, well, obviously not because I'm using a better viewfinder, but that said perhaps because I'm using a different kind of system with a different kind of viewfinder, that different methodology and the buzz that change brings. Whatever, the change certainly hasn't hurt.

Good shooting to you.

Keith

[Paulo Bizarro]

A few thoughts:

1. I have no doubts that once Canon and Nikon fully commit to MILCs, things will change faster.

2. Canon already has a very competent APSC MILC system. At the other end of the spectrum, Leica already has a serious FF MILC system. Not to mention near-MF MILCs already around.

3. EVFs have come a long way, and arguably there are some very good ones around.

4. To me, the benefits of some of the tech that comes with MILCs are really helpful. Real time histograms, effects on VF/screen, saving on weight and size, means I have it easier on the field.

5. IMO, the crucial point will be twofold: can they make really cheap MILCs for the masses (think Rebel); can they convince pros? A lot of amateurs buy specific brands because that is what pros use. This was valid 30 years ago, it is still valid today.

[Guillermo Luijk]

2. Canon already has a very competent APSC MILC system.

Do you really think the EF-M lens lineup make a competent system?. Unless by 'system' you mean something else, you must be joking or love blinded

Regards

[BernardLanguillier]

Do you really think the EF-M lens lineup make a competent system?. Unless by 'system' you mean something else, you must be joking or love blinded

A close friend does use one of the M bodies and likes the few lenses available.

For now it very much feels like the M was designed as a complement for Canon DSLR users more than as a full system.

Cheers,
Bernard

[davidgp]

A close friend does use one of the M bodies and likes the few lenses available.

For now it very much feels like the M was designed as a complement for Canon DSLR users more than as a full system.

Cheers,
Bernard

I'm happy for your friend, but this lens line: https://www.canon.es/lenses/ef-m/ , it is not what I will call "competitive lens line up that will make everybody to move into Canon Mirrorless and forget about their L glass". That is a lens line that demonstrates that Canon it is not taken seriously the users of that market. The same Canon is doing with the EF-S mount. Or Sony with the E mount series of non Full Frame lenses.

But that it is the approach of Canon with EF-S or EF-M lenses... lets do something not serious enough so people still buy big L lenses and the expensive EF cameras. For a person that wants to use mirrorless for profesional work with profesional level lenses designed for mirrorless cameras I don't think it is a valid approach. For a marketing point of view, to keep people in the Canon field, I think it is working very well for Canon. After all, they are still the biggest, with a difference, camera sellers.

[Paulo Bizarro]

Do you really think the EF-M lens lineup make a competent system?. Unless by 'system' you mean something else, you must be joking or love blinded

Regards

Yes. And I not love blinded, as I do not use Canon anymore. What people need to see is the intended market for the M system: people buying entry level or mid level DSLRs that want to have something better than their smartphone.

You don't need a full complement of lenses to achieve that; in Japan, Canon are the best selling MILC.