[jgnfld]

Being an old-timer myself, I find mirrorless appealing in a number of ways.

Manual focusing something like a 50mm f/1.2, 85mm f/1.4 or 200mm f/2.5 on a DSLR while wearing multifocal glasses can best be summed up in two words: forget it. ...

You might try the Pentax O-ME53 Viewfinder Loupe 1.2X Magnifying Eyecup. New they're about $40 USD. It has quite a lot of focus adjustment for old eyes using the focus slider bar on the top.

Works for me on my K-50/K-70/KPs over my more weak-eyed years. There is the slight tradeoff in that you need to learn to compenate for the slight extra areas in the periphery that are in the pic, but not in the view you get. Easy, but us old people CAN be forgetful! At least I have on occasion with a quick opportunity--like a particular moose that suddenly walked out onto the trail a year back. Of course cropping is pretty easy in that case.

---

Last edited by jgnfld; 03-09-2021 at 04:22 AM.

[Kevin B123]

If you are anything like me (old), then I suspect you may be up-to-date with some things and hopelessly living in the past ("retro" sounds better) with other things.

Change is hard. Change is uncomfortable. The fact is, change is almost always difficult, and we will almost always look for reasons not to change. But change always comes. There are no telephone booths anymore.

I'm positive about change, digital everything is the modern game changer and now we are into everything with it.

In Junior school, we did long division with log tables, before long the Texas calculator turned up and changed everything and since then I have viewed change generally as a good thing.
I did not get into programming though. In school, it would take all day to program a ball to slowly move across a screen and bounce off the other side, no thanks, show me that again when it can do something useful .

For our generation we have had nothing but change, it has been normal and we have jumped on every useful thing going. Texting and photos on the phone, great, maps on a smart phone even better.
Remember when Captain Kirk would put a produce a communicator and talk to the ship, we all marveled how that one day may be possible (we were young after all). Now we look at that brick and ask if that's all it will do .
Maybe 10 years ago, I visited a museum and saw tools that I used in the 80's as exhibits, that's progress and it has enabled ever greater consumerism to the point that modern digital camera's are affordable and mass produced.

Regarding mirrorless, it's the new shiny and expensive thing. Starting from scratch, a Nikon Z5 looks good, but if considering a change, not so much. It's not luddite, just cost and for little gain in many use cases, for me at least.

[LeeRunge]

I see it differently. For me the mirrorless Af is better because I get the 1Dx Mark III performance at 2500$ which is the price of R6. Therefore, I don't need to pay extra 4000$ if I'm interested in Af and fps. R6 is the equivalent of 6D Mark II when comes to DSLRs and the difference in speed and Af is night and day between 6D Mark II and R6. That's the advantages I'm interested in and the ones I look for. Same when comes to 5D Mark IV and R5. It's quite a big upgrade the R5 in every single aspect.

Sure, given the huge number of lenses available for DSLRs, we may see a few more years DSLRs around us, especially due to the huge second hand market and the very cheap prices that comes with it. A Nikon D850 with around 40000 shutter clicks can be found in my country for 2100$ and a 5D Mark IV with 30000 shutter clicks for 1800$. DSLR lenses are also at the lowest prices I ever saw on the second hand market. The technology seems to move towards mirrorless and given the amount of money Canon and Nikon already invested in mirrorless, they will push as hard as they can the mirrorless trend. Once Canon and Nikon will launch their mirrorless flagship sports cameras and some of their sport and wildlife exotic lenses, I don't think they will release anything else for DSLRs... The good news is that the adapter work so good with my DSLR lenses that I don't have to worry about this aspect until my lenses will need a replacement. With the DSLR lenses I have, I'm good for the next 2-3 years. I usually upgrade my lenses after 4-5 years due to extensive use.

I guess I'm seeing things more from Nikons side where the D500/850 already had very similar AF to the pro line cameras. I have a D750 as well and the AF is so good on it I don't really ever want/need more than that. It's burst rate is slow compared to the R6/5 but I rarely need that kind of burst speed. Getting a Z5 which has the same AF as 6/7 I didn't notice any real advantage over the D750 other than full frame coverage. 3D tracking on the D750 is really good already. I don't really use the eye AF so that hasn't been a large attraction for me personally.

Is the R6 AF that much better than the 5D mark 4? I thought Canon's DSLR's already had pretty solid AF before mirrorless came along. Even the switch every 5 minutes Northrups kept that D850 forever for the BIF performance.

[gatorguy]

Is the R6 AF that much better than the 5D mark 4? I thought Canon's DSLR's already had pretty solid AF before mirrorless came along. Even the switch every 5 minutes Northrups kept that D850 forever for the BIF performance.

Excellent questions Lee. Doesn't that speak to the core of his post? Unless Canon's DSLR AF wasn't up to Nikon standards to begin with I don't see how Canon's R5/R6 would be a "night and day" autofocus improvement over what they offered a year previous in their premium DSLR line. Your point about the excellent AF performance on the D500 DSLR sounds spot on IMO.

---

Last edited by gatorguy; 03-09-2021 at 06:44 AM.

[Dan Rentea]

Is the R6 AF that much better than the 5D mark 4? I thought Canon's DSLR's already had pretty solid AF before mirrorless came along. Even the switch every 5 minutes Northrups kept that D850 forever for the BIF performance.

5D Mark IV has a great Af for a DSLR, not far behind D850 which is it's direct competitor. Eye Af aside, the main advantage when comes to Af is that R6 has 100% Af coverage and it has advanced subject recognition system that will make your Af to stick better on a moving subject. Then, it has eye Af which makes shooting at fast aperture (f1.2. f1.4, f1.8) a much more easy (and fast) task. On top of that it has 12fps with mechanical shutter and 20fps with the electronic shutter, while 5D Mark IV has 7fps. The difference may not count for the ones who don't shoot action or for the ones shooting at f4-f5.6, but it counts especially for the ones shooting action or for the ones shooting at fast apertures at events for example where focusing and recomposing it's almost impossible at f1.4 or f1.8 when a person is not standing still or when you don't have the time to change the focus points.

---------- Post added 03-09-21 at 02:01 PM ----------

Excellent questions Lee. Doesn't that speak to the core of his post? Unless Canon's DSLR AF wasn't up to Nikon standards to begin with I don't see how Canon's R5/R6 would be a "night and day" autofocus improvement over what they offered a year previous in their premium DSLR line. Your point about the excellent AF performance on the D500 DSLR sounds spot on IMO.

Let's not confuse or misread what I wrote please because it will lead to a debate that isn't necessary. I said that the Af on R6 is night and day compared to 6D Mark II, which is not the premium DSLR line, it's the entry level line. And I also spoke about Canon cameras, not about Nikon DSLRs vs. Nikon mirrorless because Nikon seems to need a little more time to work on their mirrorless cameras.

[normhead]

I dont know if I am unusual but I only dip in to photo tech every few years, in between times I just use the kit I have without giving much thought to developments and new products. Recently returned as I was pondering getting an ultra wide lens again

And then read today that only 3 manufacturers now left make DSLRs; Canon, Nikon and Pentax. And I got to wondering if it was time to sell up and move to mirrorless (or something) rather than spend more money on something that could soon obsolete, and un-sellable used

So is the DSLR format rapidly dying (or dead) now? Canon still seem to be in the game, advancing the quality of their kit, Nikon maybe not so much. Unsure where Pentax/Ricoh is heading but I know they have a keen interest in the future of digital imaging and seem to be carving out a niche of their own

But I have spent 40 years using SLRs and find it hard to concieve of using a camera any other way (ie look through a real viewfinder displaying exposure information). Heck I still dont use AF a lot of the time, and still chuckle at the photgraphers who click the shutter and instantly review the image on the screen (is it still called chimping?) - but presumably I am a dinosaur, a dinosaur who doesnt see the end coming

All photo sales are way down, last time I paid any attention, Mirrorless and DSLRs were locked in a race for new sales, with first place for new sales up for grabs. But there is no reason at assume DSLRs will disappear. If anything mirrorless would seem to be stalled a current levels.

Pentax is about to release their most advanced camera ever.

I wonder about guys who haven't figured out how to use the histogram and use their DSLRs like they were film cameras or haven't figured out live view and focus assist for manual focus. I usually set my parameters for the type of shooting I'm doing, then run off as many as 800 images of wildlife or birds, without chimping again, or doing my head more than a few inches from the viewfinder. Mirrorless is like chimping in the viewfinder, before you take the image. If you don't believe in chimping, mirrorless has little advantage in terms of practicality, it is lighter though, until you put some lenses on the camera.

The most popular cameras on Flickr are iPhones.

I'm not sure I'd call you a dinosaur, but you are clearly a guy not taking advantage of what digital has to offer. DSLR or Mirrorless.

I've been using SLRs for 54 years, I'm not sure how that's relevant. There are still a lot of us old geezers, who like to stay current with industry trends.

If you're happy with what you do, worrying about whether or not Mirrorless is taking over the world is pointless.

If you're thinking of investigating a new mirrorless, a lot of previous Pentax shooters, many of our most famous have moved on to to Fuji for their mirrorless option, try there first. But there are lots of Pentax features you haven't experienced if your latest body was a K-x. If you want to use your Pentax glass on a Pentax, you should be looking at a K-P or K-1ii.

K-Ps are currently being closed out, so it's available for great prices. You sound like you might be a "close out" kind of guy.

[gatorguy]

5D Mark IV has a great Af for a DSLR, not far behind D850 which is it's direct competitor. Eye Af aside, the main advantage when comes to Af is that R6 has 100% Af coverage and it has advanced subject recognition system that will make your Af to stick better on a moving subject. Then, it has eye Af which makes shooting at fast aperture (f1.2. f1.4, f1.8) a much more easy (and fast) task. On top of that it has 12fps with mechanical shutter and 20fps with the electronic shutter, while 5D Mark IV has 7fps. The difference may not count for the ones who don't shoot action or for the ones shooting at f4-f5.6, but it counts especially for the ones shooting action or for the ones shooting at fast apertures at events for example where focusing and recomposing it's almost impossible at f1.4 or f1.8 when a person is not standing still or when you don't have the time to change the focus points.

---------- Post added 03-09-21 at 02:01 PM ----------



Let's not confuse or misread what I wrote please because it will lead to a debate that isn't necessary. I said that the Af on R6 is night and day compared to 6D Mark II, which is not the premium DSLR line, it's the entry level line. And I also spoke about Canon cameras, not about Nikon DSLRs vs. Nikon mirrorless because Nikon seems to need a little more time to work on their mirrorless cameras.

Apologies Dan as I did not know you were limiting the comment to the $1400 6D. With the R6 70% more expensive than that camera, and the R5 280% more, a buyer would certainly assume the AF is at least one of the features that is noticeably improved.

So have you used a more expensive Canon DSLR, aka premium (yes I know you have), and is the R6 overall autofocus still "night and day" better than on the DSLR you had? Further, have you ever used a Nikon D500 or 850 mentioned by Lee and are the Canon equivalent models better of worse or the same WRT AF performance? I know Canon sensors aren't always held in high regard so the question seems pertinent. https://fstoppers.com/originals/has-canon-closed-gap-or-it-hobbled-poor-perf...sensors-495276

Just from my own personal and very limited experience with Pentax cameras and portraiture, and there's a tight group of us who get together very regularly, at least twice a month with several published models, the mirrorless guys aren't getting better overall images or a better keeper rate than those us with DSLR's whether Canon or Nikon or Pentax. I realize in your own work you find mirrorless makes you a better photographer, but I'm just not convinced that applies to a large percentage of those switching over.

I personally believe there is a tendency to blame the tools rather than the technique for our shortcomings and there's only a tiny percentage of very dedicated photographers who will find mirrorless will actually make them more successful than they could be with a DSLR. IMHO it's marketing and profits more than anything driving the mirrorless promotion. I don't think the big (but shrinking) camera manufacturers really have a choice considering the lagging sales of camera's overall. If they can't drive people to buying new lenses, new cameras, and assorted requisite accessories their already dimming future just becomes reality faster.

So as it regards Pentax specifically, I think positioning themselves as last man standing in DSLR's is the best move they could make. I don't believe that in the real world the photographic experience and success rate is all that different between DSLR and MILC. None of the camera companies are "winning", only figuring out the best way forward to survive in a much smaller marketplace. I see the current rate of model releases from each of the big three is the last major push to see if one of the big boys can be forced to exit the business and put off the inevitable a little longer for the ones left over. Sony and Nikon and Canon are all welcome to punch away at each other with a couple dozen mirrorless models between them as long as Pentax continues to improve DSLR technology, especially the low light and autofocus performance. They already win on ergonomics from the comments I see from users of competing cameras. A lot of them have fond memories of how nice a Pentax felt in hand even if they believe the company itself had become too plodding.

So I think it's good Pentax has already learned how to be lean. There's still a future for DSLR's, and for Pentax specifically as long as everyone else thinks a mirrorless slugfest is the wise move while Pentax focuses (!) on creating the best DSLR experience.

---

Last edited by gatorguy; 03-09-2021 at 08:34 AM.

[normhead]

This is the Pentax DSLR thread. Maybe it should be moved to the non-Pentax section given the current drift into the Canon world. For some, there's no discussion that can't be turned into a Canon discussion.

[Dan Rentea]

Apologies Dan as I did not know you were limiting the comment to the $1400 6D. With the R6 nearly twice the p[price of that camera I would certainly;y assume the AF is at least one of the features that is noticeably improved.

6D Mark II was 2000$ on its release.

have you used a more expensive Canon DSLR, aka premium, and is the R6 autofocus still "night and day" better than on the DSLR you had? Have you ever used a Nikon D500 or 850 to compare with the Canon? Was the Nikon DSLR AF more effective in general than Canon's equivalent?

I have used 5D Mark IV as my main camera, until I tested it side by side with EOS R and I sold the 5D because EOS R has an advantage when comes to shooting at fast aperture, at events. EOS R has a slight disadvantage compared to 5D Mark IV when comes to tracking, but mostly due to a lag in the EVF that it's visible when comes to shooting subjects that move erratic (birds in flight to be more specific) or when it comes to sports player that move erratic (soccer player for example). It has no problem with athletes or with cars for example.

I used the R6 3 weeks ago for a few shots and I used it again a few days ago and I would say it's around 30% better than 5D Mark IV when comes to tracking at fast apertures. Compared to D500 and D850, cameras that I'm familiar with, I think R6 has a 15% edge in overall tracking performance, but that's just my first impression. A more detailed feedback I can offer if the pandemic will allow me and my friends to go on a 2 days wildlife trip to Danube delta.

D500 is the best DSLR APS-C available today and I think that it doesn't have a mirrorless APS-C that can beat it. D850... I said it in this forum more than a dozen time that in my opinion is the most balanced DSLR ever made. But in terms of tracking in my opinion is behind a little both R5 and A7R IV. The sensor resolution doesn't help on a DSLR when comes to tracking...

[LeeRunge]

Excellent questions Lee. Doesn't that speak to the core of his post? Unless Canon's DSLR AF wasn't up to Nikon standards to begin with I don't see how Canon's R5/R6 would be a "night and day" autofocus improvement over what they offered a year previous in their premium DSLR line. Your point about the excellent AF performance on the D500 DSLR sounds spot on IMO.

I can't reference the D500/850 5DIV and R6/5 as I haven't personally used those, they're beyond what I need for photography and too expensive for my needs. Consider this the lower budget experience notes.

I can speak to the difference between the Z5 and D750 as I own both, and the K-3. The AF between the D750 and Z5 (which is the same as 6/7) is so close that I would call it negligible for most people. It has eye AF but I've turned it off after using it a few times, but I'm not after weddings with a F1.2 lens so I could see it making life way easier there if its reliable. I have no good experience though as I'm not heavy into portraits. For burst rate if you need 15-20fps I guess MILCS the only game in town. But it does seem like most of the sidelines at pro sports games are 1DX or D5/6's right now. I don't see a lot of Sony's or other mirrorless in the mix so that says something to me. Youtubers seem to love them but they're way more heavy into video and MILC does have much more advancements in video.

I do prefer the Z5 now as I enjoy the EVF. It's a larger viewfinder. It's high resolution so it's not "a tiny low resolution screen" as was in the past. It's a huge improvement over the OMD EM 10 ii I have. Other benefits are better in low light where you can't see anything through the OVF, what you see is what you get, or pre-chimping. Manual focus is much easier and more enjoyable imo with the EVF. It's not a full on replacement just different. I think as they improve the latency/framerates will just get to the point where they aren't much of an issue. The latest ones are pretty good but you still notice it trying to track something really fast like a bird.

For pure AF performance between the Z5 and D750 it's really just the focus point coverage is better on the Z5 being full coverage. The AF itself is really good on both. I prefer the 3D tracking implementation on the D750 more then the "lock on box" of the Z5 for tracking but they both work well. Once Pentax K-3 iii arrives and hopefully gets on par with D750/500 or somewhere inbetwen or maybe better than that point will be tied up with the Pentax system for those users that found fault with it.

Do I think MILC is pointless? No not at all. I personally like the EVF experience, I appreciate the lighter weight and a bit more compact depending on lens selections, and NIkon fully sealed it finally unlike the lower end stuff in the past (esp lenses). So they did add overall improvements. As for the images? You can get the exact same thing out or DSLR or Mirrorless, it might be easier on MILC for some things or if you just prefer OVF it's worse. So the "death of DSLR" I think will be a very slow process as most don't need bleeding edge eye AF or 20-30fps burst rates in general.

I would encourage everyone to rent one and try it out, especially the newer EVF's as they are much much better than just a few years ago. But for general photography they're both digital and using basically the same sensor tech so the images look generally the same in the end. Just a different experience to get there.

TLDR: DSLR and MILC produce the same images with similar sensors. Just get what experience you prefer to get there.

[gatorguy]

6D Mark II was 2000$ on its release.





I have used 5D Mark IV as my main camera, until I tested it side by side with EOS R and I sold the 5D because EOS R has an advantage when comes to shooting at fast aperture, at events. EOS R has a slight disadvantage compared to 5D Mark IV when comes to tracking, but mostly due to a lag in the EVF that it's visible when comes to shooting subjects that move erratic (birds in flight to be more specific) or when it comes to sports player that move erratic (soccer player for example). It has no problem with athletes or with cars for example.

I used the R6 3 weeks ago for a few shots and I used it again a few days ago and I would say it's around 30% better than 5D Mark IV when comes to tracking at fast apertures. Compared to D500 and D850, cameras that I'm familiar with, I think R6 has a 15% edge in overall tracking performance, but that's just my first impression. A more detailed feedback I can offer if the pandemic will allow me and my friends to go on a 2 days wildlife trip to Danube delta.

D500 is the best DSLR APS-C available today and I think that it doesn't have a mirrorless APS-C that can beat it. D850... I said it in this forum more than a dozen time that in my opinion is the most balanced DSLR ever made. But in terms of tracking in my opinion is behind a little both R5 and A7R IV. The sensor resolution doesn't help on a DSLR when comes to tracking...

We agree that a particular DSLR may be the better tool especially as it concerns certain types of photography. So there should still be a market for DSLR's, and hope for the new Pentax K3III at being one of the shining stars in that category.

Looking forward to commentary once the camera gets into our hands. I see DSLR's in my future.

[normhead]

Seriously dudes, start your own thread.
Any thread that's going to degenerate into long discussions about Canon gear, should be in the non-Pentax part of the forum, and should be clearly labelled, so those of us who don't care can avoid it.

Those of us who don't give a rat's derriere about the latest Canon offerings should be able to avoid the discussions of such gear. Sorry if I responded to the actual topic and messed up your Canon marketing session.

Interesting though, some of the same people who point out I'm in the non-Pentax section if I happen to mention Pentax gear in one of thier threads, now jumping into an off brand discussion in a Pentax DSLR thread. It's only wrong when I do it apparently.

I answered the question as written by the OP, then had to read through all this irrelevant marketing hype to see the thread had been completely hijacked.

[gatorguy]

Seriously dudes, start your own thread.

It's being nudged back on topic.

DSLR's and Pentax tying their future to them. I believe it's a very smart strategy, strive to be the best at what you are good at.

In fairness Norn the very first post, the one we're all responding to, mentioned mirrorless, Canon and Nikon. You're probably correct that it should not have been a Pentax only thread since the OP was speaking about DSLR's in general. Let's move it as you suggest. Thanks for the prompt.

[AggieDad]

Manual focusing something like a 50mm f/1.2, 85mm f/1.4 or 200mm f/2.5 on a DSLR while wearing multifocal glasses can best be summed up in two words: forget it.

I feel your pain. I wore trifocals for some twenty years. Last February, on the cusp of the pandemic, I had laser surgery and new lenses put on my eyes. Revelation! Now I only use glasses for reading. And my glasses are off when using the camera.

Remember when Captain Kirk would put a produce a communicator and talk to the ship, we all marveled how that one day may be possible (we were young after all).

This reminded me of the story Gene Roddenberry told about the automatic doors on the original Enterprise. A commercial door manufacturer visited the Star Trek set to learn how the automatic door worked. They found out it was just a guy behind the wall pulling and pushing a lever. So the old revolving doors continued for a few more years. Now every apartment, office building, and store has automatic doors.

[KiloHotelphoto]

Is the R6 AF that much better than the 5D mark 4? I thought Canon's DSLR's already had pretty solid AF before mirrorless came along. Even the switch every 5 minutes Northrups kept that D850 forever for the BIF performance.

Canons DSLR autofocus was good, the 1DX2 was the best I had used but the R5 and R6 are so much better. I had no plans of getting rid of my dslr's when I picked up the R5 but after a month I knew I never wanted to go out shooting without the autofocus capabilities of the R5 and 6.