Originally posted by Antonio Marques I can't see how it compares to LCDs vs CRTs. Who ever complained about the former? Yes, it took a while for LCDs to reach the quality of CRTs, but ti was always a matter of degree.
The very first time I saw a color LCD, I was blown away by its sharpness and contrast. To me it was obviously superior. However, there were other people who griped about LCD refresh rate and color accuracy for several years. I couldn't even see what they were talking about -- but they were doing different things with their computers.
Quote: Here in this case, there is nothing of the sort. A 'mirrorless' camera is just a crippled SLR, not something different.
Crippled???? I have no idea how you figure that.
Quote: There is nothing it can offer - apart from a difference in size that is necessarily static rather than evolving - that an SLR can't incorporate as well. Each and every thing that you can put in a mirrorless camera to make it better, you can also put in an SLR.
I don't see any DSLR with an EVF.
When I first learned photography on a 35mm SLR, composing and focusing through the taking lens was a revelation to me. It was the ultimate. This was how I wanted to take pictures. However. . . Unfortunately, today's DSLR optical viewfinders aren't really the same thing. They're relatively small, dim, and lack focusing aids. They're not the ultimate. An EVF works better in dim light (because it gains up the image), gives a better visual impression of exposure, offers focus aids such as magnification or focus peaking, and can overlay more readable info about the camera settings and status. To me, an EVF is obviously better than an OVF in much the same way that first color LCD was obviously better than a CRT.
Quote: If lenses were much smaller, then there might be a point, but modern SLR lenses are not necesssarily that bigger when compared to mirrorless lenses. Lens size ends up being a function of sensor size more than register, and with diminishing returns.
I think the size issue is overblown. However. . . DSLRs have seemed to just get bigger and bigger, and lenses to some extent have done so too. They've gotten much bigger than the old 35mm SLR systems that reporters used to carry for portability, not for image quality. Medium format cameras continued to rule the studio, and other situations where traveling light wasn't a priority. Now DSLRs have grown to the size of medium format film cameras, and they've lost some of that easy portability that originally propelled 35mm SLRs to success. What mirrorless systems have done is bring portable systems back down to about the size they used to be.