[ZombieArmy]

I've been thinking about this a long time, and I can't think of a satisfactory answer.

Influencers and companies alike at this point are basically shouting in your face how "mirrorless is the future of photography, drop your DSLR grandpa!"
But there are no features I could think of that couldn't be delivered on a standard DSLR that a mirrorless does while also gaining the distinct lagfree view of real life.

People can claim how you can check exposure and the peaking is awesome, and how Eye AF literally paid for my child's tuition or something miraculous.
But frankly cameras have been doing stuff like this for years before EVFs were even passable, and honestly they still don't quite match up.

Especially if something like a hybrid viewfinder comes into play at some point, what would the excuse for a mirrorless system be then? It's smaller?
Yah smaller until you put the glass on it, then you get an unbalanced mess. Like sticking a giant telephoto on a film camera, you know how fun that is.

People are so over the top about mirrorless it's almost suspicious, like there's some money changing hands just to sell it to consumers.

And just to put it out there, I'm someone in their mid 20s. I love tech, and a big part of my life is working on electronics and learning about the latest and greatest. I'm not someone stuck in their ways or anything.

---

Last edited by ZombieArmy; 09-12-2019 at 01:29 PM.

[BigMackCam]

Rather than repeat myself, I might ask you to search my posts containing "EVF". Shooting both DSLR with OVF and SLT / mirrorless cameras with EVF, and using the latter to shoot with everything from long flange distance SLR glass (including some BIG lenses) to short flange distance rangefinder glass, I'd like to think I have a pretty balanced opinion on at least the viewfinder and handling aspects.

In the same way that other forums call out Pentax as the ugly step-child, it seems mirrorless cameras with EVFs are given the same treatment here. Perhaps it's because folks are tired of hearing how Pentax should offer mirrorless instead of, or in addition to, DSLRs or get left behind. I get that.

In any case, it's tiring hearing the same polar extreme opinions time and time again regarding DSLRs and OVFs, mirrorless and EVFs. There are advantages and disadvantages to each, added to which folks have their individual preferences. The only thing I can't fathom is why everyone can't just accept there's room for both...

[stevebrot]

Good thoughts

Conventional wisdom is:

• Potential for compact form factor
• Lens design advantages, primarily for wide-angles
• EVF may provide an advantage for some types of shooting and some users

Steve

[stevebrot]

The only thing I can't fathom is why everyone can't just accept there's room for both...

There seems to be plenty of room for both among the film shooters on this site where "mirrorless" is part of the mix for many; there with no venom expressed either direction.


Steve

---

Last edited by stevebrot; 10-18-2019 at 01:49 PM. Reason: punctuation

[jspi]

I have both and...

Pros (Panasonic gx-85)
1. More compact.
2. No shutter (noise, vibration, and something else that can break)
3. Live View is far superior to my K3 II
4. Better video (which I never use)

Cons:
1. I need my reading glasses to take photos (especially manual focus).
2. Almost took a basketball to the head because of lag on the display. (sometimes 1/2 second delay matters).
3. I prefer a large camera (personal preference).
4. If I forget my reading glasses, I have to hold it far enough away to negate the size benefit.

If I need a lightweight, good camera that won't be used for action... I grab the Panasonic. The rest of the time it's the Pentax K3 II. I do like having both to choose from but the Pextax is my primary camera.



---------- Post added 09-12-19 at 08:44 PM ----------

Oh, if I choose to, I can get an adapter and use all of my wife's Canon lenses (full auto with the right adapter). Or buy adapters and use lenses in manual from other brands.

[Kerrowdown]

What is the actual benefit of mirrorless?

A definite disadvantage of mirrorless is... nothing to assist herself with the lippy.

[ZombieArmy]

Perhaps it's because folks are tired of hearing how Pentax should offer mirrorless instead of, or in addition to, DSLRs or get left behind. I get that.

This forum is nothing compared to the hellscape that is youtube. DPR/Jared/Others are borderline toxic when it comes to DSLRs.

I remember a small snippet I saw of Jared doing a piece on the 90d and M6 Mark 2 and he, no joke, said he didn't want to use the screen on the back of the 90d for a scene where it would have been advantageous because he thought it didn't look pro. That is just sickening to me. Mirrorless users are the ones who really need to get a grip on reasons for both existing.

[vector]

I have wondered over the past year if I should keep putting money into Pentax gear. I went out to camera stores a bunch of times to try Fuji X-T*, Sony A6*, and A7* cameras. What I found is that I don't actually like the smaller APCS mirrorless bodies. They are too small to be comfortable, and I don't have large hands. I don't like the EVF except for the possibility of Focus Peaking in the EVF. Few models have IBIS and the ones that do, don't do it as well as Pentax. Any lenses I keep would be adapted and fully manual only. I would have to buy new lenses at much higher prices than I acquired my current lineup. The only real interesting one is the A7* lineup and the only ones I could afford would be the A7 or the A7II which aren't better in any way than my K1. I don't have autofocus problems or even concerns. I would not use face tracking AF (it exists in my K3 and K1 and I don't use it now). Eye AF wouldn't work anyway because all my glass would be adapted K mount in manual focus... I would lose GPS, Pixel Shift, Star Tracker, resolution, etc... unless I had a ton of money to throw away on new glass why would I switch? I am currently not a competent enough photographer to even do justice to my "archaic" K1. So I decided I am staying where I am until it is no longer an option. If Pentax folds I will buy a second used K1 and keep shooting for the next decade or until they quit on me. The image quality of the K5 at 16 mpix is already more than I need and very good for dynamic range and noise. The K3 and K1 are even better. In my opinion, unless you are doing video, the new mirrorless cameras are just new, not better. I see very little real improvement in the new releases. The latest high mpix monsters aren't better cameras, just higher resolution and I have more resolution than I need now.
-----
Just wanted to add that I recently went out with a friend who has a Fuji GFX 50s which he was quite proud of. The whole time he kept looking at my camera and remarking at my pictures... Once he started asking me more about my lowly K1 he learned that I have 5 axis IBIS, GPS, Astro Tracer, 1/8000 shutter speed. After he saw my handheld 1/6 sec night time shots with star burst lights he stopped asking more. I think I disappointed him in his fancy new mirrorless purchase...

[disconnekt]

This forum is nothing compared to the hellscape that is youtube. DPR/Jared/Others are borderline toxic when it comes to DSLRs.

I remember a small snippet I saw of Jared doing a piece on the 90d and M6 Mark 2 and he, no joke, said he didn't want to use the screen on the back of the 90d for a scene where it would have been advantageous because he thought it didn't look pro. That is just sickening to me. Mirrorless users are the ones who really need to get a grip on reasons for both existing.

Yeah, I stopped watching Jared many months ago due to his whole "LOOK EVERYBODY! I GOT A PRO MIRRORLESS BODY! FORGET ABOUT DSLR'S, THEY'RE ARE DEAD!" toxic rants pretty much in every video.

[ChatMechant]

My buddy's Sony makes a cool "pew pew" noise when he takes photos. It sounds like a sci fi laser blaster. So there's that.

[ZombieArmy]

My buddy's Sony makes a cool "pew pew" noise when he takes photos. It sounds like a sci fi laser blaster. So there's that.

Sold!

[Dartmoor Dave]

With a DSLR, vampires can sneak up on you when you're shooting at night because you can't see them through the viewfinder. But with a mirrorless you can see them coming. And here's another useful photography tip: a hefty old centre braced tripod is much better than a lightweight carbon fibre one for bashing the brains out of zombies.

It's the everyday practicalities of real world use that matter most.

[ChristianRock]

It's all hype. It's like saying automatic transmission cars are the new thing and manual transmission cars are dinossaurs. When everything else (including the engine) is basically the same.

Mirrorless have the potential to be smaller and have a smaller flange distance - both things can be an advantage or a disadvantage depending on the type of lenses that you want to use.

Mirrorless are usually lighter, the pentaprism does weigh quite a bit.

[ZombieArmy]

With a DSLR, vampires can sneak up on you when you're shooting at night because you can't see them through the viewfinder. But with a mirrorless you can see them coming. And here's another useful photography tip: a hefty old centre braced tripod is much better than a lightweight carbon fibre one for bashing the brains out of zombies.

It's the everyday practicalities of real world use that matter most.

This gives me ideas for a great april fools project.

[pschlute]

Mirrorless....whatever will I have to photograph....