Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-13-2019, 09:13 AM - 1 Like   #31
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
Exactly!

A hybrid VF brings the best of both DSLR and MILC worlds with 1) the aesthetics, eye-friendliness, energy-savings, and noise(heat)-avoiding properties of an OVF with 2) the digital-preview/review, image enhancement, overlays, and blinkie/sparklie feedback on exposure and focus of an EVF. I'd love to be able to use an OVF for composition and shooting but get to see a quick digital review of each shot without taking my eye from the view finder. I'd only use full MILC-mode sporadically.

Sure, a DSLR with a hybrid VF might be more complex and expensive, but I'm looking for the best camera, not the cheapest camera I can find.
Everyone wants the best camera. Always funny when someone plays the "I want the best camera I can get." card. As if there's someone else who doesn't.
I'm a "I'm happy with what I have" guy, until the day I'm not.
The problem being our definitions of what makes the best camera are different.
One person's definition of what makes a "best camera" is another person's unnecessary frills.

As for why anyone would care what I appreciate, I'm not sure why that's of relevance to anyone. My thought should be unimportant to anyone else. Just putting them out there, like every one else. The only possible use could be someone thinking about the issue using the thoughts presented to clarify their own thought.

I tend to buy cars without the upgrade packages as well. There's absolutely nothing wrong with being a minimalist when it comes to tools. The only issue is can you get what you want with what you have. I'm not having problems that way. So, too me add features are superfluous.

The answer to "you can have this and that or the other " is, "why do I need that?" "What am I having trouble with now that this "enhancement" would improve?"
No one has actually made case for the superior performance of mirrorless, only peripheral features which may or may not be of any relevance. Different is not always better.

To, me "top of the heap" belongs to the Nikon D850. 24 MP, marginally better than a K-1 in non-pixel shift images. !0 FPS compared to the K-3's 8. OVF. Nikon AF, the one camera that does everything well. Yet I don't see the Sony A7r having the same type of following despite similar specs.

Look at the camera brands used on flickr.

Apple is still number 1.

Pentax is still #12. flicker and 81 users uploaded images yesterday using K-1s.

The Sony A7r had uploads from 60 users yesterday.

The D850 had uploads from 587 users yesterday.

If Mirrorless is superior, there are a lot of people who aren't getting it. The issue always comes down to are the offered frill useful very often and will the affect IQ. NO question they are there, the question is, does what they do make any difference to your photography when you discuss output. Those points are not even addressed in the discussions of mirrorless.

After all, more information is more distraction and less attention paid to what you're doing. Someone needs to make the case that all the frills photographers never needed in the past add or detract from the photographer's experience. After all, sometime an "improvement" is just marketing fluff. The fact that some engineer somewhere went off on a tangent, doesn't make it practical, or even useful. evaluation is needed.

The assumption that advances in mirrorless will out strip advances in DSLRs are so far, unfounded.
Bottom line, if you want the best camera for you, it's probably not mirrorless. I might be, and you might want one as part of a group of cameras (I own an XG-1, mirrorless with an EVF. I take it out to save weight. But mirrorless as your main package, it's hard to find evidence of high res shooters going that way.

It's starting to look like Sony A7 series shooters do more buying than shooting, which would make sense based on my experience of the ergonomics and ease of use with those cameras.


Last edited by normhead; 03-13-2019 at 10:29 AM.
03-13-2019, 10:13 AM   #32
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,128
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Everyone wants the best camera. Always funny when someone "I want the best camera I can get." card. As if there's someone else who doesn't.
I'm a "I'm happy with what I have" guy, until the day I'm not.
The problem being our definitions of what makes the best camera are different.
One person's definition of what makes a "best camera" is another person's unnecessary frills.

As for why anyone would care what I appreciate, I'm not sure why that's of relevance to anyone. My thought should be unimportant to anyone else. Just putting them out there, like every one else. The only possible use could be someone thinking about the issue using the thoughts presented to clarify their own thought.
My comments on this subject are intended to shine light on the subject, so my "I understand" comments were intended to turn down the heat. In the age of film, I thought of a slide as something that had been present when I "captured the scene" - put what I was seeing onto this tiny frame of chemicals I was holding. Initially I emotionally had issues with digital because the image is so ephemeral; I understand your reaction to viewfinders as being similar to my reaction to media

To me, an EVF is just like LV, and to me looking at the LV is just like viewing the scene directly through the OVF - but that is just me. I've noticed that videographers are most comfortable with LV - but they've had LV on an articulated screen back to the days of camcorders {in fact, those who worked in live TV had some sort of screen much longer}, so way of viewing the scene definitely is idiosyncratic.

To be perfectly honest, the "best camera" often will not fit in our budget, just as "best camera" and "best film" didn't in the age of film. I am willing to 'settle' for adequate if needed; I would rather send some of our 'discretionary income' to organizations that provide services to the poor in cities, poor in the Mississippi Delta, and to American Natives {what you Canadians call "First Nations"} - if members here wish to make negative comments about my priorities, they will. When the KP first came out, I loved what I was seeing, but I doubted it would ever come down to my usual $700 limit - then came the Black Friday sales.

QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
The assumption that advances in mirrorless will out strip advances in DSLRs are so far, unfounded.
That is true.
03-13-2019, 10:53 AM - 1 Like   #33
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,113
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Everyone wants the best camera. Always funny when someone "I want the best camera I can get." card. As if there's someone else who doesn't.
I'm a "I'm happy with what I have" guy, until the day I'm not.
The problem being our definitions of what makes the best camera are different.
One person's definition of what makes a "best camera" is another person's unnecessary frills.

As for why anyone would care what I appreciate, I'm not sure why that's of relevance to anyone. My thought should be unimportant to anyone else. Just putting them out there, like every one else. The only possible use could be someone thinking about the issue using the thoughts presented to clarify their own thought.

I tend to buy cars without the upgrade packages as well. There's absolutely nothing wrong with being a minimalist when it comes to tools. The only issue is can you get what you want with what you have. I'm not having problems that way. So, too me add features are superfluous.

The answer to "you can have this and that or the other " is, "why do I need that?" "What am I having trouble with now that this "enhancement" would improve?"
No one has actually made case for the superior performance of mirrorless, only peripheral features which may or may not be of any relevance. Different is not always better.
Excellent points!

The "best" versus "cheapest" comment was an allusion to the pro-EVF argument that MILC supposedly saves costs. Leaving aside the high likelihood that what little money is saved by getting rid of the mirrorbox is probably spent on the EVF display, lower-latency digital processing pipeline, and higher frame-rate sensor, the deeper point is that cameras are not commodities (e.g.,gasoline) in which most consumers simply pick the cheapest possible option. (MILCs might look simpler than DSLRs, but it's an illusion.)

My point is that I would be willing to pay substantially more to get a hybrid VF. (In fact, I've got some ideas for how make a hybrid VF that would actually create the brightest, most realistic OVF ever made as well as providing EVF functionality).

----

Others may have other preferences on features, size, price, etc. They may not want to pay for frills, but would accept them if they were free. Or, they might abhor the frills so much, that they would gladly pay more of a simpler camera. And then there's the difference between preference ("I'd like to have camera A"), acceptance ("I'm willing to buy camera B"), and absolute rejection ("I'd give up photography if I had to use camera C").

The challenge for camera makers is in aggregating all these individual opinions and conceiving of the camera that attracts a large enough pool of buyers and a high-enough price point to make the camera financially viable.
03-13-2019, 11:04 AM - 1 Like   #34
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,113
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
It's starting to look like Sony A7 series shooters do more buying than shooting, which would make sense based on my experience of the ergonomics and ease of use with those cameras.
That's because they can't use their camera for more than 15 minutes without getting a headache.

Some people love EVFs and some people love OVFs.

03-13-2019, 11:21 AM   #35
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2012
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,787
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
To, me "top of the heap" belongs to the Nikon D850. 24 MP, marginally better than a K-1 in non-pixel shift images. !0 FPS compared to the K-3's 8. OVF. Nikon AF, the one camera that does everything well. Yet I don't see the Sony A7r having the same type of following despite similar specs.

Look at the camera brands used on flickr.

Apple is still number 1.

Pentax is still #12. flicker and 81 users uploaded images yesterday using K-1s.

The Sony A7r had uploads from 60 users yesterday.

The D850 had uploads from 587 users yesterday.

If Mirrorless is superior, there are a lot of people who aren't getting it.
People don't usually switch systems because they've invested a lot of money and time in their current system. And they like to believe that the choices they've made were correct. So when you have $5000 of Nikon gear and you've been on Nikon forums and immersed in the Nikon camera culture and listening to people who love Nikon you're pretty darned unlikely to sell off everything at a 30% loss so you can have an (arguably) slightly better Sony A7r. The D850 had nine times as many users upload to flickr yesterday because Nikon has had vastly bigger market share than Sony forever, and it takes an awful lot to get someone to switch.

Also, quality, competitive mirrorless with good EVFs have only been around a fraction of the time DSLRs have. Many people bought into DSLRs before mirrorless was really an option. It's not necessarily that they know DSLRs are better, many jumped in before there was a competitive mirrorless option. How many people were "getting it" with DSLRs over film in 2004?

And if popularity on flickr is important in any way, then why are we here on Pentax Forums?
03-13-2019, 12:19 PM   #36
Pentaxian
Fenwoodian's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,872
.
These days, lenses are what might tempt me to switch systems - not camera bodies.

For example, Roger Cicala at Lens Rentals published MTF test results recently on the latest Sigma Art lenses and the new Sony FE 135mm f/1.8 GM lens. These MTF's are the best he's seen. I'm considering buying a Sony body just to use the new 135/1.8 on.
03-13-2019, 05:45 PM   #37
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,128
QuoteOriginally posted by Fenwoodian Quote
.
These days, lenses are what might tempt me to switch systems - not camera bodies.

For example, Roger Cicala at Lens Rentals published MTF test results recently on the latest Sigma Art lenses and the new Sony FE 135mm f/1.8 GM lens. These MTF's are the best he's seen. I'm considering buying a Sony body just to use the new 135/1.8 on.
You won't get any competition from me for that lens - I can't imagine changing systems just because of some prime lens.
Someone can afford to that only so many times.


Last edited by reh321; 03-13-2019 at 06:00 PM.
03-13-2019, 06:00 PM   #38
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Working From Home
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,276
QuoteOriginally posted by Fenwoodian Quote
.
These days, lenses are what might tempt me to switch systems - not camera bodies.

For example, Roger Cicala at Lens Rentals published MTF test results recently on the latest Sigma Art lenses and the new Sony FE 135mm f/1.8 GM lens. These MTF's are the best he's seen. I'm considering buying a Sony body just to use the new 135/1.8 on.
Is the #3 best MTF lens so much worse that someone would trade up from it? #5? #10?

I suppose if an Art Museum is paying you $125,000 a year to produce all their photo documentation and promotional artwork it might matter, but for us? Certainly not for me.
03-13-2019, 06:29 PM - 1 Like   #39
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
For some reason I really enjoyed being out with my F 70-210 yesterday. I must be a bad photgraphy person.
03-13-2019, 06:37 PM   #40
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Working From Home
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,276
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
For some reason I really enjoyed being out with my F 70-210 yesterday. I must be a bad photgraphy person.
Heavy, noisy, BANG.LOCK. Sharp, sharp.
03-13-2019, 07:16 PM - 3 Likes   #41
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
RGlasel's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Saskatoon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,225
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
if pigs could fly we'd have to spend a lot more time looking up.
Have you ever been to Austin? One of its main attractions is waiting for hundreds of thousands of Mexican Free-tailed bats to leave their roosts under a bridge to go on an insect harvest in the air. From the article I've linked "you do run a slight risk of being bombarded by a little bat pee or poop (aka guano). It’s rarely more than a sprinkle, but it does happen." Which is complete bull-sheet. If you don't bring an umbrella, you will experience a very unpleasant facial and with or without an umbrella, a hot shower and a change of clothes afterwards is mandatory.

To the topic at hand, if anyone looks at the new mirrorless cameras developed in the last five years, none of the supposedly inherent advantages of mirrorless over single lens reflex cameras have been realized. No cost savings, no significant weight savings for a comparable camera/lens combination, no superiourity in auto-focus, no improvement in shutter operation (there are DSLRs with electronic shutters) and no image quality benefit. As far as I know, every DSLR on the market can operate as a mirrorless camera, if the user wants to do so, but you can't do the converse. For the life of me, I can't see how an EVF is objectively better than an OVF in any practical shooting situation, but I do believe in freedom of choice, so I'll leave that alone.

Which brings me to my final point: Forget about theoretical benefits, we have enough real life information to clearly see where the mirrorless camera business is headed. It is not headed towards cheaper, lighter and more responsive camera and lens combinations and it is not giving photographers better images. Just because a new mirrorless camera is better than older mirrorless cameras does not mean it is better than new DSLRs. Now I'll go back into hibernation.
03-13-2019, 08:12 PM   #42
Pentaxian
Fenwoodian's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,872
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Is the #3 best MTF lens so much worse that someone would trade up from it? #5? #10?

I suppose if an Art Museum is paying you $125,000 a year to produce all their photo documentation and promotional artwork it might matter, but for us? Certainly not for me.
.
I doubt that you'd find any exisiting, full-frame, K-mount lens in the top 10 (probably not even in the top 50).

Also, these "MTF busting" Sigma and Sony lenses don't cost much more that the new full frame lenses Pentax is coming out with. Do you need a high paying Art Museum job to pay for these new Pentax full frame lenses too?

Last edited by Fenwoodian; 03-13-2019 at 08:18 PM.
03-13-2019, 08:33 PM - 1 Like   #43
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Working From Home
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,276
QuoteOriginally posted by Fenwoodian Quote
.
I doubt that you'd find any exisiting, full-frame, K-mount lens in the top 10 (probably not even in the top 50).
I’d bet the Fat Fifty is in the Top Ten HD Pentax-D FA 50mm f/1.4 SDM AW Lens Review | ePHOTOzine

QuoteOriginally posted by Fenwoodian Quote
Also, these "MTF busting" Sigma and Sony lenses don't cost much more that the new full frame lenses Pentax is coming out with. Do you need a high paying Art Museum job to pay for these new Pentax full frame lenses too?
9 months after release the DFA*50/1.4 is <$1,000
03-13-2019, 09:15 PM   #44
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 16,394
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
I’d bet the Fat Fifty is in the Top Ten
Sure, it's a Zeiss beater, and there is the 85mm and 35mm to come in the series.
03-13-2019, 11:35 PM   #45
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,177
Camera customer type choices are kinder garden level, which is why some brands succeed more then others.

Last edited by biz-engineer; 03-13-2019 at 11:41 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
body, button, development, digital camera, dslr, dslrs, era, evf, future, image, kp, lens, lenses, life, mirrorless, nikon, pentax, people, sensor, sensor technology, shutter, sony, switch, tech, times
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Speculations on the new D-Fa large diameter standard zoom Stavri Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 58 09-26-2015 05:58 AM
K-7 Speculations (moved over from review section) sctybear Pentax DSLR Discussion 15 05-07-2010 05:48 PM
K30D/K300D speculations and new lenses ogl Pentax News and Rumors 355 01-24-2009 11:49 PM
Suggestion: "Speculations on the Future" forum mattdm Site Suggestions and Help 3 10-19-2007 10:54 AM
Your Speculations? (on the Hoya-Pentax Issue) RiceHigh Pentax News and Rumors 37 06-16-2007 03:08 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:46 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top