[normhead]

Everything I have read about the A6000 and the A7r II says that these cameras do not take a back seat to SLRs when it comes to auto focus and tracking.

I gotta ask, where did you read that? I've been warned by some A7x users not to even try and do what I do on an A7x. Because of those issues. They said tracking and AF weren't as good as my K-3, forget about a Nikon or Canon. But I'd be happy to read a different opinion.

If I were to go to a FF system up right now, where I just owned one camera, it would probably be Nikon D750, sooooo... what would be the equivalent MILC?

---

Last edited by normhead; 11-02-2015 at 10:52 AM.

[mecrox]

Some MILC fans seriously worry about people still using DSLRs (a certain forum's Open Talk section being a good example). They're constantly predicting DSLR's demise, explain how EVFs are so superior and how an instant return mirror (derogatorily named 'flappy mirror') is the worst thing you could possibly have in a camera.

If you want trends, the same CIPA document is presenting data for Jan-September 2015: the DSLR production was at 96.7% in units, and 104.9% in value compared to the same period in the previous year.

---------- Post added 02-11-15 at 07:38 PM ----------


Unfortunately, few people have figured it out.
IMO:
+ there's no immediate need for such a MILC - and by that I mean every other major project (hint: FF) should be stopped to make room for it
+ the FF project, and strengthening the K-mount overall (APS-C and FF) is the most important thing which could be done right now. And maintaining 645, of course.
+ a new large sensor MILC system might be Ricoh Imaging's next major project (it would be added to, not substituting the current Ricoh/Pentax systems)

Er, if I recall it was not one of these pesky MILC users who started this thread and tossed in some inflammatory comments for good measure. It was you. Honestly, you are so transparent. I think the mods should cut this one off at the pass.

I'll try to forestall the thread running to 196 posts by saying that I have just seen a Nazi eating a cheese sandwich.

[osv]

OVF is better until they come up with an EVF with same resolution as the sensor

like an ovf has decent resolution? no... the ground glass that's used for focusing destroys the picture quality; replace the screen with something that's usable for manual focusing and you've darkened the ovf and lowered the p.q., because of the increased roughness of the ground glass... been there done that with the k10d, it sucked, and it was never useful for accurate manual focusing.

evf is superior because it has wysiwyg and it has magnification; the only time that there is lag is in dark conditions that render an ovf basically unusable.

when i mount a flash on the a7r, i can see the effect that the flash will have on the shot, in the evf, because the camera takes the additional light into it's evf display calculation... you can't do that with an ovf.

the list of evf benefits over ovf is long, and most people who take the time to learn evf never want to go back to ovf.

that's why the rate of mirrorless growth has been so much higher than that of dslrs.

[monochrome]

^^ OMG that's funny!

[bertwert]

I once tried an EVF and I hated it.
Never want one until I feel they are superior to OVF.

An OVF with an EVF overlay, I may like...

[Kunzite]

Er, if I recall it was not one of these pesky MILC users who started this thread and tossed in some inflammatory comments for good measure. It was you. Honestly, you are so transparent. I think the mods should cut this one off at the pass.

You would have a point, if we didn't have so many "why is Ricoh even bothering with a FF DSLR? They should make a MILC instead! (screw the current users!)" and even "smartphones are replacing cameras" posts. As it is, you just want to censor a thread with inconvenient data (unfortunately, resorting to personal comments).

But I have the solution for that: boriscleto'd.

[bertwert]

But I have the solution for that: boriscleto'd.

[Kunzite]

that's why the rate of mirrorless growth has been so much higher than that of dslrs.

FTR, I just presented data which shows this isn't the case.
Amazing, don't you think? As the EVFs got better (with no similar progress on the OVF side), the relative growth rate declined almost to a grinding halt.

[Clarkey]

I'm eating crackers, rather than popcorn, but....it' still fun.

[osv]

I once tried an EVF and I hated it.
Never want one until I feel they are superior to OVF.

An OVF with an EVF overlay, I may like...

evf displays are constantly changing... fuji has an ovf with overlay?? i've never seen it, but fwiw: Hybrid Viewfinder | FUJIFILM FinePix X100

take a look at this split focus display in one of their evf cameras:

You Tube

You Tube

---------- Post added 11-02-15 at 10:26 AM ----------

Er, if I recall it was not one of these pesky MILC users who started this thread and tossed in some inflammatory comments for good measure. It was you. Honestly, you are so transparent.

i put him on ignore a long time ago, suggest that you do the same, you certainly won't be missing anything useful

[ChristianRock]

that's why the rate of mirrorless growth has been so much higher than that of dslrs.

Did you even bother to read the original post before making this comment? Or do you just spout what you like and ignore empirical data?

[Kunzite]

Since I'm on his ignore list, he didn't. And I doubt he cares much about it

[bertwert]

evf displays are constantly changing... fuji has an ovf with overlay?? i've never seen it, but fwiw: Hybrid Viewfinder | FUJIFILM FinePix X100

I've seen this, but this is a rangefinder OVF not an SLR.

[RonHendriks1966]

Are you comparing before-tax U.S. prices with VAT-encumbered (21% where you live) E.U. ones?

You are right. That makes a big difference.


But still in Europe we buy cheaper dslr's then in the Amerika's.

[Kunzite]

You mean, more expensive?
At least we don't live in the U.K....