[Mikesul]

+1 no useful info for a long time.

We have filled this whole thread with opinion and conjecture.. wait for the camera to be released before determining a 'victor' -- this imaginary 'battle' hasn't even started yet as the opponents are not on the field.

[MrNPhoto]

A mirrorless camera is interchangeable lens camera that lack a feature; the optical finder.

Look on the positive side: One could just as easily say that a mirrorless camera is an interchangeable lens camera that offers features made possible by removing the optical finder. New lenses optimized for shorter registration distance, EVF that offers preview options not possible with an OVF, greater lens options through adapters, lack of mirror vibration, weight reduction by removing prism and mirror. Optical stabilization doesn't have to worry about interference with the mirror mechanism. No moving mirror means that you can decrease latency before capturing an image, or even pre-capture images. Camera bodies can be made smaller and lighter. Plenty of folks find these features worth the loss of optical viewfinders.

[audiobomber]

They were shot with iPhones through the VF (that is what DPReview stated in the comments). So yes, they are representative of the best AF performance of the 5DS and 810.

It's an artificial scenario. I'll be convinced when I see a pro sports shooter's results. I've shot action with my a6000, which had impressive green flashing AF points all over my subject. Unfortunately the images were all soft.

[IchabodCrane]

Look on the positive side: One could just as easily say that a mirrorless camera is an interchangeable lens camera that offers features made possible by removing the optical finder. New lenses optimized for shorter registration distance, EVF that offers preview options not possible with an OVF, greater lens options through adapters, lack of mirror vibration, weight reduction by removing prism and mirror. Optical stabilization doesn't have to worry about interference with the mirror mechanism. No moving mirror means that you can decrease latency before capturing an image, or even pre-capture images. Camera bodies can be made smaller and lighter. Plenty of folks find these features worth the loss of optical viewfinders.

MILC latency is only lower with electronic first curtain shutter. Unlike on a DSLR, the physical shutter has to first close once the shutter button is pressed.

[RonHendriks1966]

The size difference between mirrorless 4/3 and FF may not seem that big until you see them side by side (this is the picture I have posted for this week's caption contest, btw)....

No no no....... The Pentax is the smallest, we all know....

[Nicolas06]

Look on the positive side: One could just as easily say that a mirrorless camera is an interchangeable lens camera that offers features made possible by removing the optical finder. New lenses optimized for shorter registration distance, EVF that offers preview options not possible with an OVF, greater lens options through adapters, lack of mirror vibration, weight reduction by removing prism and mirror. Optical stabilization doesn't have to worry about interference with the mirror mechanism. No moving mirror means that you can decrease latency before capturing an image, or even pre-capture images. Camera bodies can be made smaller and lighter. Plenty of folks find these features worth the loss of optical viewfinders.

A7-II + 70-200 f/4 and KS2 + 50-135 f/2.8 give you a weight/size adventage on the DSLR side while providing more grip, same reach and similar low light performance.

Looking at APSC mirrorless, the fuji 50-140 f/2.8 is 17.5cm long and 1kg while 50-135 is 13cm long and 700g. KS2 + 50-135 and Fuji X-T1 + 50-140 give you same weight/size in the end with less grip for the Fuji.

All of this weight/size adventage work only for focal length 35mm or shorter and start to be an issue at 50-60mm... Especially on an FF body where you are VERY likely to go at least up to 100-200mm that's not that great.

[JanG]

It's an artificial scenario. I'll be convinced when I see a pro sports shooter's results. I've shot action with my a6000, which had impressive green flashing AF points all over my subject. Unfortunately the images were all soft.

What should be artificial about the scenario? Actually, I am shooting people indoors quite often. And in many cases with f/1.4 lenses. It is quite demanding and anything like eye tracking would be of great help.
Concerning the a6000: it uses last year's technology. I do not know whether the rumored a7000 will get the technology of the a7R II but that is not the point. The point is that the technology exists and can be bought in the a7R II.

BTW, please remember the videos I have linked above have been taken by DPReview (and in very brief time they had with a beta software running the cam), not by Sony.

[woodywesty]

Look on the positive side: One could just as easily say that a mirrorless camera is an interchangeable lens camera that offers features made possible by removing the optical finder. New lenses optimized for shorter registration distance, EVF that offers preview options not possible with an OVF, greater lens options through adapters, lack of mirror vibration, weight reduction by removing prism and mirror. Optical stabilization doesn't have to worry about interference with the mirror mechanism. No moving mirror means that you can decrease latency before capturing an image, or even pre-capture images. Camera bodies can be made smaller and lighter. Plenty of folks find these features worth the loss of optical viewfinders.

I may just be old fashion but if the camera doesn't have an OVF then I'll use my phone.... I need to be looking through the lens to compose not at a screen which is essentially useless outdoors (in my experience) in daylight. EVF are fine for snapshots which I think makes the phone solution so appropriate.

[Pål Jensen]

I may just be old fashion but if the camera doesn't have an OVF then I'll use my phone.... I need to be looking through the lens to compose not at a screen which is essentially useless outdoors (in my experience) in daylight. EVF are fine for snapshots which I think makes the phone solution so appropriate.

98% of the time while photographing I don't make any photos but see trough the finder and frame and compose the image. Excessive battery consumption is the last we need. My first outing with the K-3 the battery lasted for 11 frames. I used live view a lot; it was getting dark and shutterspeed was about 30s.

[reh321]

Pentax wont stop with aps-c. But a FF will also boost the sales of aps-c. Not kill it.

At a general photo discussion site where I'm a regular, one of the Canikon fanboys told me outright that Pentax cameras are OK, but serious photographers won't be interested until Ricoh provides better support, primarily in repair facilities, because a serious guy needs quick response to his problems.

[Mikesul]

At a general photo discussion site where I'm a regular, one of the Canikon fanboys told me outright that Pentax cameras are OK, but serious photographers won't be interested until Ricoh provides better support, primarily in repair facilities, because a serious guy needs quick response to his problems.

Ouch! Truth hurts
.

[rawr]

Canikon fanboys told me outright that Pentax cameras are OK, but serious photographers won't be interested until Ricoh provides better support, primarily in repair facilities, because a serious guy needs quick response to his problems.

How would they know?.

Have they done a survey of comparative repair times by camera brand? No.
Does a 'serious guy' doing field work in Africa or photo-journalism in India or landscape shooting in Iceland or surf shooting in Hawaii expect 24 hour turnaround on repairs? No.

Many people seem to have some fantasy about 'serious' camera users getting red-carpet treatment from Canon, Nikon, Phase One, Hasselblad (anyone other than Pentax) as a matter of course, even if they aren't pros, even if they are out of warranty etc. It doesn't happen that way in the real world.

[woodywesty]

How would they know?.

Have they done a survey of comparative repair times by camera brand? No.
Does a 'serious guy' doing field work in Africa or photo-journalism in India or landscape shooting in Iceland or surf shooting in Hawaii expect 24 hour turnaround on repairs? No.

Many people seem to have some fantasy about 'serious' camera users getting red-carpet treatment from Canon, Nikon, Phase One, Hasselblad (anyone other than Pentax) as a matter of course, even if they aren't pros, even if they are out of warranty etc. It doesn't happen that way in the real world.

I wonder if Canon and Nikon users in the US have as awful repair service as Pentax users have?

[mecrox]

How would they know?.

Have they done a survey of comparative repair times by camera brand? No.
Does a 'serious guy' doing field work in Africa or photo-journalism in India or landscape shooting in Iceland or surf shooting in Hawaii expect 24 hour turnaround on repairs? No.

Many people seem to have some fantasy about 'serious' camera users getting red-carpet treatment from Canon, Nikon, Phase One, Hasselblad (anyone other than Pentax) as a matter of course, even if they aren't pros, even if they are out of warranty etc. It doesn't happen that way in the real world.

Reading between the lines, the fanboys - dread word! - might have meant that Canon and Nikon have full-on professional but pay-for support networks and, in some countries, their own, in-house repair units rather than contracts with third parties. Since other brands aren't likely to establish comparable set-ups, I think the point can be disregarded since not that many people are every going to sign up for paid support networks. More apposite is that the relative popularity of Canon (and perhaps Nikon) means that if you need to, you can probably get something or other or borrow it from a camera store local to where you find yourself. That probably won't happen with Pentax nor with some other brands, and it is a point in Canon's favour (at least while their money lasts out). There really aren't any "serious guys" unless one views that as a kind of medical condition which it might well be I suppose. There are just people and people get by and get on in all sorts of unexpected and often ingenious and original ways. Pentax use a third-party repairer where I live. They are OK, neither outstanding nor crap but OK. But, if I found I needed to use them a lot, chances are it would be because my gear wasn't well-made and was prone to failure, in which case I would move to another brand.

[Nicolas06]

What should be artificial about the scenario? Actually, I am shooting people indoors quite often. And in many cases with f/1.4 lenses. It is quite demanding and anything like eye tracking would be of great help.
Concerning the a6000: it uses last year's technology. I do not know whether the rumored a7000 will get the technology of the a7R II but that is not the point. The point is that the technology exists and can be bought in the a7R II.

BTW, please remember the videos I have linked above have been taken by DPReview (and in very brief time they had with a beta software running the cam), not by Sony.

To be honest I have no issue with AF and portraiture and low light with my FA77 so I don't see what existing problem of latest Pentax/Canon/Nikon DSLR the new Sony would solve.

As for AF performance for action/sport, let's look how the keeper rate is better with A7-II + 70-200 f/4 than with D4s + latest 70-200 f/2.8 at f/4 setting. Until we have some serious review on this, this is hypothetical.

Video? The requirement is completely different. Apperently many pro use manual focussing to control the speak of focus shift and have real control on how it is done. Samyang for example product lenses dedicated for that. And even with AF, for photography you want instant AF shift while for video you want slow change and can perfectly live with a quite slow AF system.