Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8   Go Down

Author Topic: The Mirrorless Revolution  (Read 30918 times)

Chrisso26

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 78
The Mirrorless Revolution
« on: August 27, 2014, 09:28:58 pm »

Very informative and entertaining video (as usual).
On the Nikon/Cannon aspect, when you see a 'press pack' there is no evidence of mirrorless usage, it's all behemoth Nikon and Cannon systems. Is this because of the investment the press photographer has made in those systems, or is it a prejudice in the news organisations and press agencies?
On a specific mirrorless format…
I can't really afford more than one lens system, although I maintained m4/3rds (GH1) and Sony E mount (NEX7) for a few years. I mostly used legacy lenses (Leica M).
I think it is said you upgrade bodies from time to time, but hang on to good glass for years. I think Michael has made this point.
Apart from the M lenses, I bought a Voigtlander 25mm for the GH1 and lusted after the Zeiss E mount lenses for a long while. As you pointed out in the video, Sony discontinued the NEX line and confused me with the remaining lens mount choices. At the same time I bought a Blackmagic Pocket Camera (m4/3rds) for video. It is handy to own at least one or two native lenses for any system in my opinion, so it made sense in my circumstances to concentrate on m4/3rds lenses and ditch the Sony system.
Fuji looks sexy, also the Sony A7r that Michael so highly praises, but as a non-professional I can't justify both native FE mount and m4/3rds lens collections.
So my conclusion as to the choice of which mirrorless system to go with, it depends on the lenses you already own.
Logged

David Anderson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 715
    • http://www.twigwater.com
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #1 on: August 28, 2014, 12:39:29 am »


On the Nikon/Cannon aspect, when you see a 'press pack' there is no evidence of mirrorless usage, it's all behemoth Nikon and Cannon systems. Is this because of the investment the press photographer has made in those systems, or is it a prejudice in the news organisations and press agencies?


Some of it would be service related IMO.
Both Canon and Nikon have good after sales service for pro's here in Australia.

Money would come into it as well.
It's a big finical decision to switch systems.

Still very tempted to lighten up with some of that blingy little Sony gear.. ;)
Logged

wtlloyd

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 135
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #2 on: August 28, 2014, 02:53:32 am »

Great video, enjoyed the camaraderie typical of Lula. Great to see Michael looking so well and vibrant again.
Gotta say, mirrorless has not been on my radar and I'm sure I'm not the only one.
I've been patiently waiting for Canon to up their sensor density to match the Sony sensors.
I think the specialized superteles used by bird and wildlife photographers will be a niche needing standard DSLR bodies to remain in use for quite some time to come.
Logged

Aku Ankka

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #3 on: August 28, 2014, 03:53:06 am »

According to the article:
Quote
Fuji uses its own sensors

Fuji uses Sony's sensors. They do have their own color filter array, but the image sensor itself is a standard off-the-shelf Sony sensor.

Also, in the "The Others" section Pentax and Samsung were forgotten - though it's probably to just forget them anyhow ;)
Logged

Jonathan Cross

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 344
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #4 on: August 28, 2014, 05:42:28 am »

Yes, it is a great, watchable, thought provoking video. It also illustrates my dilemma.  I have long had Canon kit, and now have a 5D mk3 plus L series lenses.  I also have a Fuji X-E1 with their lenses plus a Leica 35mm Summicron and the Fuji adaptor (I have just picked up a very good condition used X-E1 body for just the Summicron).  For travel and general use, it has become a no brainer; I use the Fuji.  I only print up to A3 (approx. 16.5" x 11.7") and I find the image quality excellent - the 23mm prime is great for portraits). 

BUT...  I also do wildlife and macro, and the 5D mk3 gives me great results.  I am not sure that the Fuji would cope with a fast diving gannet folding its wings just about to enter the sea, but the Canon does.  I also have a Canon 1:1 macro that works well for me;  I do not believe Fuji has a 1:1 macro.

The upshot is that my dilemma is whether to sell my 24-105 and 17-40 Canon lenses and keep the 5D just for wildlife and for macro.  If I do it will be a wrench, but bulk and weight are factors.

My conclusion from the video is that currently for wildlife, sports photography and big prints, the DLSR is still the tops, but for other uses Olympus, Panasonic and Fuji are the winners.  For the reasons given in the video, and what users tell me, I will not consider Sony till it gets better and more lenses (despite what Michael says about Zeiss), and improves its ergonomics.  By the way, I am a stills person - taking and processing video seems too much hassle for me.

Thanks again for a great video.

Jonathan
Logged
Jonathan in UK

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4697
    • My photography site
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #5 on: August 28, 2014, 05:49:15 am »

On the Nikon/Cannon aspect, when you see a 'press pack' there is no evidence of mirrorless usage, it's all behemoth Nikon and Cannon systems. Is this because of the investment the press photographer has made in those systems, or is it a prejudice in the news organisations and press agencies?

It's not prejudice, just investment in bodies / glass that have proved able to get the job done. If there was a fresh start, it might well be different, and in a few years' time too. But when they are not in that press pack environment, don't imagine that the same guys don't use mirrorless bodies for other types of work.

Chrisso26

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 78
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #6 on: August 28, 2014, 05:53:25 am »

The Nex 7 I had was great. The menu was annoying (as Michael points out). It worked great with my Leica lenses, but with the crop factor I felt I needed to invest in a wider lens.
The Zeiss look fantastic, but I couldn't justify the expense after I bought the m4/3rds Blackmagic video camera. I'm about 50% each in terms of stills and video.
The point I'm making, and a point that didn't come up in the video, is how many lens systems are you being asked to maintain?
Yeah, I have quite a few adapters, but for auto functions it's just good to have the odd native lens. Albeit I generally work in full manual mode.
Logged

Chrisso26

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 78
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #7 on: August 28, 2014, 05:55:56 am »

It's not prejudice, just investment in bodies / glass that have proved able to get the job done. If there was a fresh start, it might well be different, and in a few years' time too. But when they are not in that press pack environment, don't imagine that the same guys don't use mirrorless bodies for other types of work.

I was more talking about the newsrooms, not the photographers themselves.
I'm a musician, and there is prejudice against (perceived) prosumer gear in the music industry. Pro Tools, for example, is installed at most if not all major studios, even though other digital workstations are just as good.
Logged

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4697
    • My photography site
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #8 on: August 28, 2014, 06:18:25 am »

I was more talking about the newsrooms, not the photographers themselves.
I'm a musician, and there is prejudice against (perceived) prosumer gear in the music industry. Pro Tools, for example, is installed at most if not all major studios, even though other digital workstations are just as good.

Sure, and they seem to use Macs too (let's not go there!). You were talking about the "press pack" and around London that's a mix of staffers and more and more freelancers. The newspapers, just like the photographers, have an investment in bodies / glass that have done the job. Prejudice doesn't come into it - though I don't dispute it exists and may be unfounded.

anthony kar

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #9 on: August 28, 2014, 06:26:04 am »

Thank you for the video guys. Your enthusiasm and love of photography puts a smile on my face!
Jonathan, I'm in a similar space.
I had a 1DSmkII and a 1DmkIII with a nice collection of lenses for shooting mostly wildlife and landscapes: 16-35, 24-105, 70-200 f4, 100-400 and 50 f1.4. And a Pentax MX-1 which is my "friends and family" camera :-)

I finally took a deep breath and sold the 1Ds and the 24-105 in order to finance a G6 with the 14-140, 100-300 and the 45mm macro. Here is the thing: for "friends and family" stuff, the G6 plus 14-140 is absolutely fine as far as I am concerned. And if you're into macro, the G6 plus 45mm is also perfectly fine, especially if you think how much weight you are saving! I'm getting to a certain age, where this matters a lot.

But it's not all wine and roses. The future is most definitely mirror-less, but the present is more of a mixed bag.
BIF photography with the G6 is really challenging. And it's not just the tracking AF (I used to manual focus in the old days, so adjusting my shooting style again is not going to kill me), but also the EVF black-out and the EVF and shutter lag. Of course these things will get sorted out in the next 5-7 years (faster CPUs, etc), but in the here and now, if a new birder/photographer asked me whether they should spend over £1,000 on a high end m43, I would have to advise them that they can save money and frustration by getting a second hand DSLR and a good lens.
And while we're on this thorny subject, the prices for quality m43 lenses is, I'm sorry to say, ludicrous in the UK. Why would I choose a Panasonic 35-100 at nearly £900, over a Canon 70-200 at £800?

I certainly hope that Sony, Panasonic, et al keep pushing the big boys in terms of performance and price. For now, I'm selling the Panasonic 100-300 and I'm pairing the G6 with the Canon 16-35 when I want to do landscapes (I know the combo sounds/looks ridiculous but it does work very nicely and my back is very grateful indeed).  
Logged

NancyP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2513
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #10 on: August 28, 2014, 01:15:37 pm »

I like the ergonomics of DSLRs. Teensy camera bodies don't feel right in the hands.
Logged

deejjjaaaa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1170
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #11 on: August 28, 2014, 01:36:46 pm »

I like the ergonomics of DSLRs. Teensy camera bodies don't feel right in the hands.
you mean for example full of controls plastic Canon Kiss dSLR vs metal E-M1 or GH4 dSLM, right  ::) ?
Logged

deejjjaaaa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1170
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #12 on: August 28, 2014, 01:38:36 pm »

And while we're on this thorny subject, the prices for quality m43 lenses is, I'm sorry to say, ludicrous in the UK. Why would I choose a Panasonic 35-100 at nearly £900, over a Canon 70-200 at £800?
size & weight for example... and no need to tune AF... and you do not need to buy that in UK either
Logged

deejjjaaaa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1170
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #13 on: August 28, 2014, 01:40:05 pm »

Fuji uses Sony's sensors.

so did chipworks dissassembled any Fuji so far ?
Logged

Ken Bennett

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1777
    • http://www.kenbennettphoto.com
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #14 on: August 28, 2014, 01:47:50 pm »

I like the ergonomics of DSLRs. Teensy camera bodies don't feel right in the hands.

My Fujis are about the same size as my old 35mm film cameras, which seemed a good size at the time. My new Canon 5D Mark III dwarfs my Canon F1n, not to mention the size difference in lenses.
Logged
Equipment: a camera and some lenses. https://www.instagram.com/wakeforestphoto/

aragdog

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 49
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #15 on: August 28, 2014, 03:33:37 pm »

Alright I was not going to say anything, but not to put the Olympus E-M1 on the table is horrible.  Yes horrible.  That camera has so many great lenses and what is coming is amazing.  There is also the splash proof right not, not coming as on the X-T1.  I have both cameras and pick up the Olympus most of the time.  You have image stabilization in the body and also if you want in the lenses.  Hey guys why did you leave out the poor Olympus, with the touch screen commands and so many other features.
Logged

Kevin Raber

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1339
  • Kevin Raber
    • Kevin Raber
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #16 on: August 28, 2014, 04:24:35 pm »

We mentioned the Olympus and it would have been on the table if we had it with us, since both of us own it.  We mention it and I certainly mention it in the text of the article plus mention the new lenses that are coming.

Kevin
Logged
Kevin Raber
kwr@rabereyes.com
kevin@photopxl.com
rockhopperworkshops.com
photopxl.com

PeterAit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3643
    • Peter Aitken Photographs
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #17 on: August 28, 2014, 05:21:37 pm »

We mentioned the Olympus and it would have been on the table if we had it with us, since both of us own it.  We mention it and I certainly mention it in the text of the article plus mention the new lenses that are coming.

Kevin

Aaaaah! What new lenses? Do I need to hide my checkbook?
Logged
Peter

"You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts" -- D.P. Moynihan

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2102
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #18 on: August 28, 2014, 06:06:26 pm »

I have no doubt that over time there will be different camera models to choose from. When the mirror less model has achieved parity with the DSLR in terms of auto focus then it will move fast. When that is, is nevertheless much less certain despite progress made over the last few years.

I have to smile at the comparisons made in this video between so different lenses that it is ridiculous. Both of the gentlemen sitting in front of the camera know very well that this is not a like for like comparison at all. How does a Nikon D800E with a huge Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 compare to a Sony A7R with a 24-70 f/4 lens compare? The Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 is one of the largest of the kind and heavy (and this lens is actually not that great either). Look at the attached weight comparison of Sony, Canon and Nikon in very comparable models. The difference is rather small and not huge. If 300 grams breaks somebody's back, well they should choose something entirely different :)

Comparing f/2.8 or f/4 lenses on 35mm full frame with similar lenses made for micro 4/3 is also not a like for like comparison since the DOF is vastly different.

What would stop Canon or Nikon from making a mirror less camera body that fits the normal EF or F mount? With a camera body of the same weight as the Sony the system weight would become at parity.

Look at what Canon has done with the EOS 70D. What are they working on? Well, I don't think either Canon or Nikon engineers are dumb, so they are working on making an auto focus system that can compete in speed (and accuracy) with the mirror based phase detection auto focus found on DSLR's. So when they have achieved the technology it would be absolutely straight forward to make a camera body that is mirror less and fits the existing lenses. What a huge advantage over Sony!! Maybe in the meantime Sony has come up with a new idea and left the A7 behind?

Making an entirely new lens mount and a new body like Sony did, Canon and Nikon could do overnight after having done the first mirror less model that fits the existing lens line. They would then have to launch an entirely new lens line for that body which would take years to make, just like Sony takes years to make that and just like Sony leave customers in doubt of this new line. Btw. Canon has a mirror less body that fits the EF mount, it's just not that great yet and APS-C also.

Is micro 4/3 cameras a competition to full frame in IQ and resolution? Surely not.

I don't believe like the authors of this video that neither Canon nor Nikon are ostriche's with their heads buried in the sand.

The statistics on sales mentioned is not convincing either. To me what the sales curves says is basically that mirror less has been flat for two years and that DSLR sales has been going up and down. Twice the sales has been on the same level! Is there a trend? I can't see it. Do I believe there will be a change in the next 5-10 years? Of course, but to me it is much less clear what that would be. Who would have predicted that the low end of the market had collapsed and left all to smart phones 5-10 years ago? I didn't hear any predicting that.


Chrisso26

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 78
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #19 on: August 28, 2014, 06:21:12 pm »

The professional sector has got to be a tiny minority in terms of purchasing.
Sydney is a major tourist hub, and as I walk around I've been (admittedly) surprised at the increasing amount of tourists holding up a tablet or smartphone to snap a group shot or local landmark.
Other than that, you mostly see Fuji/Nex sized bodies around the necks of tourists. On the odd occasion I come across a tourist lugging a Nikon or Canon body around, with a zoom the size of a wine bottle, I gotta admit I presume they are mad.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8   Go Up