Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8   Go Down

Author Topic: The Mirrorless Revolution  (Read 32660 times)

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #120 on: September 15, 2014, 02:26:19 pm »

Hi,

I don't really see the weight/size gains as a major factor with mirrorless unless compact lenses are used. A 70-400/4-5.6 lens will be as large on mirrorless as on a DSLR. That said, some lenses can be compact. Sony gives up some maximum aperture to keep size down, like 35/2.8 and 55/1.8 (instead of 55/1.4), it may be a reasonable choice.

For me, the major attraction of mirrorless is simplicity. Essentially getting rid of the moving mirror and AF assembly.

I don't think that mirrorless can compete with DSLRs on all accounts, viewfinder lag may be problematic shooting sports, for instance. On the other hand I am pretty sure that mirrorless will dominate DSLRs in the long term, because of the said simplicity.

Best regards
Erik

With the new Sony 16-35 f/4 announced, I have updated the comparison sheet including the weight differences.

Note that Nikon does not have a 24-70 f/4 so I took the 24-120 f/4 instead which is heavier than a 24-70 f/4 should be.
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

barryfitzgerald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 688
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #121 on: September 15, 2014, 07:37:05 pm »

I picked a good day there are lots of big FE mount lenses announced!

http://www.photographyblog.com/news/sony_distagon_t_35mm_hands_on_photos/

http://www.photographyblog.com/news/sony_90mm_macro_hands_on_photos/

http://www.photographyblog.com/news/sony_24_240mm_hands_on_photos/

The 16-35mm doesn't look too massive but those ones do a great job of the "small body with big lenses" problem

MF rangefinder lenses were compact and small, but as far as AF lenses goes well it's cut and dry so far no advantage to smaller lenses at least with what Sony are up to.
Logged

MoreOrLess

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 239
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #122 on: September 15, 2014, 08:20:36 pm »

Here's one:
Both are f/2. 100mm vs. 90, but that is pretty close. Both manual focus, both "pretty good" lenses. The Zeiss is better wide open, but once you get to f/4, the differences are subjective. The Zeiss focuses closer, but this image shows both lenses set to infinity, which is their shortest length.

And I certainly agree there is more light falloff on some lenses. But to say that means they are unusable, unacceptable and makes those lenses 'not count' in anyone's analysis is not something I agree with. We all have our personal constraints we abide by. You may have a certain limit to light falloff as one of yours. But that doesn't mean I have to accept that same constraint in my analysis and decision.

Dave



I'd guessing the Zeiss's macro ability adds weight besides the lens becoming longer when focused more closely. Looking at a lot of older macro lenses that didn't internally focus there clearly larger than non macro lenses of similar specs. If theres a difference in sharpness wide open that's pretty significant as well, most people wouldn't buy a lens like these purely to shoot F/4. Plus of course the Leica costs double the price of the Zeiss, I'm guessing more exotic size saving design maybe part of that.

Look at the just announced Sony 90mm macro...

http://www.photographyblog.com/news/sony_90mm_macro_hands_on_photos/

Not exactly small.


Logged

dchew

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1020
    • Dave Chew Photography
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #123 on: September 15, 2014, 10:10:07 pm »

What we've established here is "it depends."  If someone wants to shoot with zooms, then there is little to be gained in lens size and maybe weight. But if someone makes it a priority to find very high quality prime glass, then there are ways to save weight and especially size when choosing the a7r. I agree with Barry it is no panacea. But these cameras offer options that DSLR's don't (and vice versa of course).

I was a Canon shooter since the early 90's. Although I switched to medium format in 2011, I still needed a more versatile system, and my 5d was getting old. Canon didn't have anything exciting to me, and I didn't want to switch all my lenses in order to get a D800. When the a7r came out I thought it was perfect because I could use all my Canon glass. But after I got to know the camera, I realized I was wasting a great potential for a smaller system. I had a Zeiss 21, 24, 35, 50 and canon 90 ts. I replaced that with the two Leicas (WATE and 90) and two Sony's (35 & 55).

Equal quality (using my constraints), smaller and lighter kit.

Dave
Logged

MoreOrLess

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 239
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #124 on: September 16, 2014, 05:39:53 am »

What we've established here is "it depends."  If someone wants to shoot with zooms, then there is little to be gained in lens size and maybe weight. But if someone makes it a priority to find very high quality prime glass, then there are ways to save weight and especially size when choosing the a7r. I agree with Barry it is no panacea. But these cameras offer options that DSLR's don't (and vice versa of course).

I was a Canon shooter since the early 90's. Although I switched to medium format in 2011, I still needed a more versatile system, and my 5d was getting old. Canon didn't have anything exciting to me, and I didn't want to switch all my lenses in order to get a D800. When the a7r came out I thought it was perfect because I could use all my Canon glass. But after I got to know the camera, I realized I was wasting a great potential for a smaller system. I had a Zeiss 21, 24, 35, 50 and canon 90 ts. I replaced that with the two Leicas (WATE and 90) and two Sony's (35 & 55).

Equal quality (using my constraints), smaller and lighter kit.

Dave

The question then really becomes whether this is a "revolution" or a niche product akin to Leica's rangefinders post SLR growth in the 60's/70's.

What really stands out for me with these newly announced lenses is that Sony is likely going to need to release a larger body give a good grip to aid handling them. When you also consider that theres nothing to stop Canon and Nikon putting higher resolution sensors in a 6D/D750 sized body I think that has a big impact on size saving, it likely becomes less 1kg vs 500g and more something like 700-800g vs 650g.

Again for me I think a big part of the success of mirrorless thus far is that its been "filling the gaps" both in terms of few DSLR's focused on small size for advanced users AND in terms of advanced compacts lagging behind in sensor size. When compacts were stalled at 1/1.7' sensors for years on end mirrorless systems offered the only relatively small camera with good IQ. Recent 1 inch and larger sensor compacts though show that a fixed lens can have a significant size advantage over a systems camera. The LX100 especially to me makes that clear given just how heavily the lens outspecs(2+ stops) m43 power zooms.
Logged

dchew

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1020
    • Dave Chew Photography
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #125 on: September 16, 2014, 06:31:10 am »

I just think ultimately it comes down to Erik's point. Once the technology is there for fast autofocus and EVF w/ adjustable contrast and other features that make it as "viewable" as an OVF, there is no reason to have the mirror box, and you get the additional benefits to direct viewing TELECASTER brought up. And you can still use the lenses you have, if you want.

Dave
Logged

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2106
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #126 on: September 16, 2014, 07:37:48 am »

The EVF's I have seen don't compete at all with the viewfinders on my 1Ds III, 5D III and D800E/D810. I want a bright, clear and uncluttered view finder and I do not want to look at real time histograms, zebras etc. I want to compose my images!

Besides that, as documented, the size and weight savings on full frame mirror less cameras are small and for the Canon about 20% with zoom lenses from 16mm to 200mm. For simplicity: I really like simplicity, but I'm not ready to give up essential features for simplicity. So for me the mirrorless revolution is not that revolutionary. I think it's an evolution where both Canon and Nikon will come out with alternative mirrorless bodies at some point to supplement the DSLR's using the same mount. Yes, Canon has a small APS-C mirror less, but that is not really an alternative to the DSLR's. Look at the Canon 7D mkII (and the 70D) with the 80% coverage on the sensor with phase detection dual pixels. This is just the quiet way to develop the technology to enable a mirrorless body at some point too far into the future. But really, what is the big point? I see so far the mirror box as an advantage and not a disadvantage. I only had one issue with the shutter failing more than 10 years ago and this could happen on a mirror less body as well. I never had a failure in the mirror box itself. And I have had several hundred thousands of exposures over the years.

The only way really seen so far to really scale down is a reduced sensor size which is not my wish. I do have a pocketable Sony RX100 III (mirror less!) to complement. For quite a while I was thinking I should have a smaller camera setup to travel light until I realized looking at the math that there was little savings and I still had to carry the cameras in a bag, so the RX100 made so much more sense as a complement.

Just my 2 cents :)
« Last Edit: September 16, 2014, 10:36:14 am by Hans Kruse »
Logged

MoreOrLess

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 239
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #127 on: September 16, 2014, 10:30:14 am »

The EVF's I have seen don't compete at all with the viewfinders on my 1Ds III, 5D III and D800E/D810. I want a bright, clear and uncluttered view finder and I do not want to look at real time histograms, zebras etc. I want to compose my images!

Besides that, as documented, the size and weight savings on full frame mirror less cameras are small and for the Canon about 20% with zoom lenses from 16mm to 200mm. For simplicity: I really like simplicity, but I'm not ready to give up essential features for simplicity. So for me the mirrorless revolution is not that revolutionary. I think it's an evolution where both Canon and Nikon will come out with alternative mirrorless bodies at some point to supplement the DSLR's using the same mount. Yes, Canon has a small APS-C mirror less, but that is not really an alternative to the DSLR's. Look at the Canon 7D mkII (and the 70D) with the 80% coverage on the sensor with phase detection dual pixels. This is just the quiet way to develop the technology to enable a mirrorless body at some point too far into the future. But really, what is the big point? I see so far the mirror box as an advantage and not a disadvantage. I only had one issue with the shutter failing more than 10 years ago and this could happen on a mirror less body as well. I never had a failure in the mirror box itself. And I have had several hundred thousands of exposures over the years.

The only way really seen so far so really scale down is a reduced sensor size which is not my wish. I do have a pocketable Sony RX100 III (mirror less!) to complement. For quite a while I was thinking I should have a smaller camera setup to travel light until I realized looking at the math that there was little savings and I still had to carry the cameras in a bag, so the RX100 made so much more sensor as a complement.

Just my 2 cents :)

As I said I see the growing high end compact market as taking a sizeble bite out of the interchangeable lens mirrorless market in the future. I think a lot of people who bought more basic mirrorless bodies in the past were likely actually after something like the RX100, G7X, LX100 but didnt have that option.

Personally though as you say I think people need to take a step back and look at the real situation. We constantly get the "revolution" hyperbole but when you look at what were actually talking about(removing a mirror and making cameras a bit slimmer) it hardly seems that radical for FF at least when you consider the size of the lenses involved. That's hardly akin to the shift to digital, perhaps not even the shift to AF that added new very significant functionality.

I think its notable that the DSLR form factor we've had for the last 30 years or so isn't only the result of having a mirror in the body. The big grip of the modern DSLR is I'd say the result of a combination of the increase in size of lenses in the 80's(with zooms, AF, etc being introduced) and the increased need for power(with with automation and AF, then with the switch to digital) from large batteries. The mirrorless market that we see today is not IMHO the same kind of market we would see should DSLR tech be dropped, todays mirrorless because it can't offer DSLR performance instead sells based on small size, if it were to take over from DSLR's it would likely increase in size and in that situation using DSLR mounts would actually matter little(especially as lenses could be recessed into them).
Logged

barryfitzgerald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 688
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #128 on: September 17, 2014, 07:40:33 am »

Design evolved over the years and I think the additional grips and size were an ergonomic choice.
Lenses did increase a bit in size due to AF, however I have many original Minolta lenses that are far more compact than modern designs (primes and zooms).

As modern lenses go for in lens motors, electronic aperture control and in lens IS all of these add size to a lens no other way to convey that.
You can't have it all and expect no size increase, however Canon are notorious for "big lenses" and bar a few of these newer pancakes they've consistently not sought compact lens designs in fact quite the reverse.

And note the Pentax limited range is also compact, but again with mechanical aperture and screw driven.
I'm not objecting to smaller lenses, but I don't see much point just having smaller bodies and lenses that are big. Even some of the Fuji X series lenses are larger than I would expect and that's a crop sensor body. It's quite disappointing really

Logged

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #129 on: September 17, 2014, 08:38:45 am »

The EVF's I have seen don't compete at all with the viewfinders on my 1Ds III, 5D III and D800E/D810. I want a bright, clear and uncluttered view finder and I do not want to look at real time histograms, zebras etc. I want to compose my images!
Turn them off then. Problem solved.  ;D
I recently tried an XT1 and the thing that impressed me most about camera was the viewfinder and how big it was even compared to my FF DSLRs and it's enormous compared to crop sensors DSLRs.  And for me a big viewfinder is much better for composing etc than a pokey one, so was very impressed by the XT1 in that respect. Mind you my 5Ds have a small viewfinder compared to my old OM film bodies which are tiny in comparison. Not only that, they were designed about 50 years back, progress eh!

Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

deejjjaaaa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1170
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #130 on: September 17, 2014, 10:31:50 am »

The EVF's I have seen don't compete at all with the viewfinders on my 1Ds III, 5D III and D800E/D810. I want a bright, clear and uncluttered view finder and I do not want to look at real time histograms, zebras etc. I want to compose my images!
/quote]

and you can switch those things off in EVF... because it is just a matter of firmware.

Logged

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2106
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #131 on: September 17, 2014, 10:46:15 am »

and you can switch those things off in EVF... because it is just a matter of firmware.

Ok, I probably need to say, yes, of course :) But this seems to be much of the argument for the EVF's ! For me nothing beats a good OVF.

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #132 on: September 17, 2014, 12:00:31 pm »

Ok, I probably need to say, yes, of course :) But this seems to be much of the argument for the EVF's ! For me nothing beats a good OVF.
I thought that until recently too. Although current EVFs are not as good as OVFs for some things [as of yet], after trying some out I now find myself missing quite a few of the features they do have when using an 'old fashioned' OVF.  :-\
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

telyt

  • Guest
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #133 on: September 17, 2014, 01:16:48 pm »

This discussion strikes me as a re-hash of AF vs. MF, film vs. digital, UV vs. not UV.  Canon vs. Nikon, anyone?  Or better yet, go take some pictures.
Logged

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #134 on: September 17, 2014, 01:29:18 pm »

This discussion strikes me as a re-hash of AF vs. MF, film vs. digital, UV vs. not UV.  Canon vs. Nikon, anyone?  Or better yet, go take some pictures.
Very definitely the old way is better Vs fancy pants modern methods discussion. 
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2106
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #135 on: September 17, 2014, 01:33:50 pm »

Very definitely the old way is better Vs fancy pants modern methods discussion. 

I have always been a fan of real progress :) And I do go out shooting. Now I'm off to run two workshops in the Dolomites with and without mirrors, autofocus, live view, tripods, good light :)

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #136 on: September 17, 2014, 01:37:24 pm »

I have always been a fan of real progress :) And I do go out shooting. Now I'm off to run two workshops in the Dolomites with and without mirrors, autofocus, live view, tripods, good light :)
Ooh, Dolomites! Keep meaning to go there and do some bike riding and admire the scenery
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

MoreOrLess

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 239
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #137 on: September 17, 2014, 03:12:31 pm »

There is I'd say also been a good deal of warping of history going on here. The reality is IMHO that the push towards mirrorless was mostly the product of Canon and Nikon coming out ontop in the move for the DSLR market. Everyone else either needed to look elsewhere for significant market share or fall going to the wall(or becoming a niche player).

Sony and Panasonic especially to me give the impression of companies who look a bit desperate knowing that there camera divisions could be facing the ax if they don't increase profits quickly. I wouldn't be supprized if the FE system is Sony's camera division last roll of the dice.
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #138 on: September 17, 2014, 03:20:31 pm »

Hi,

I have been with Hans in the Dolomites and I have seen all possible cameras and I guess that we all came home with great pictures…

Best regards
Erik

I have always been a fan of real progress :) And I do go out shooting. Now I'm off to run two workshops in the Dolomites with and without mirrors, autofocus, live view, tripods, good light :)
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

deejjjaaaa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1170
Re: The Mirrorless Revolution
« Reply #139 on: September 17, 2014, 03:48:07 pm »

The reality is IMHO that the push towards mirrorless was mostly the product of Canon and Nikon coming out ontop in the move for the DSLR market.
certainly, a lot of progress in various areas happens because somebody is trying to come up with disruptive ideas...
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8   Go Up