[kayasaman]

As a general comment, don’t knock an EVF until you have really tried them. The refresh rates in the Panasonic G9 and the Olympus M1 mark III is 120 frames per second and there is no blackout during exposure. I like OVFs but I can use EVFs just as well for wildlife photography. And as a final comment, you might as well learn to use EVFs since the major manufacturers are tending in that direction. I’m keeping my K3iii but it’s not my only camera system.

While I was searching for a camera with better lens choice and AF from my beloved K1 ii, I looked at the EVF specs. While checked the Nikon and Canon mirrorless ranges they were all pretty low quality compared to the high end FF models costing a lot more.

To generalize also I think the EVF's on the top range models have much better specifications then lower end models.

Therefor I do agree with UncleVanya's concurrence bellow. I don't know much about other brands outside of Pentax and now Nikon but Panasonic and Olympus (now OM Systems) are all micro 4 thirds along with Leica.... perhaps UncleVanya could chime in for Sony but I'm sure the higher end models also feature a much better quality EVF then the lower end models.

It was a shame because I was searching for a high-end APS-C camera and the current mirrorless models in cropped format don't seem to be anything near the D500 in performance.

---------- Post added 08-05-22 at 08:29 AM ----------

Yay, it's Friday!

That means I'll be out tomorrow morning trying to wrap up the 55-300 comparisons and hopefully get a few Nikkor 16-80 2.8E VR/D500 and Pentax 16-50 2.8 PLM/K3III combo shots in too. I'm expecting those smaller zooms on the two bodies to perform more closely alike than the two 55-300's have so far.

Have fun please!!


I think at this stage I'm looking more forward to seeing pictures of each system. Probably just because I am limited myself currently location wise.


Comparing and contrasting is fine, but everyone's take is so different.... that makes it hard I think to figure things out. At least online reviews are like needles in a haystack while trying to find something

Go Go gatorguy

[UncleVanya]

While I was searching for a camera with better lens choice and AF from my beloved K1 ii, I looked at the EVF specs. While checked the Nikon and Canon mirrorless ranges they were all pretty low quality compared to the high end FF models costing a lot more.

To generalize also I think the EVF's on the top range models have much better specifications then lower end models.

Therefor I do agree with UncleVanya's concurrence bellow. I don't know much about other brands outside of Pentax and now Nikon but Panasonic and Olympus (now OM Systems) are all micro 4 thirds along with Leica.... perhaps UncleVanya could chime in for Sony but I'm sure the higher end models also feature a much better quality EVF then the lower end models.

It was a shame because I was searching for a high-end APS-C camera and the current mirrorless models in cropped format don't seem to be anything near the D500 in performance.

Absolutely. The A1 EVF puts my A7RIII to shame. My A7RIII upgrade was mostly for battery life, EVF improvements, and Pixel shift. My dad still owns the A7RII I started with and even when I use it and notice the EVF is not as good - my familiarity with it carries me through.

Sony’s entire APSC body line up has just stalled. It isn’t clear why but there’s very little emphasis on moving it forward. The pandemic supply chain disruptions may be all that’s involved- the concentration on higher end (more profits) gear in a curtailed supply world makes sense. The A7RIV actually has 26mp in crop mode which is quite good. The A1 crop mode is substantial as well. Even the A7RII/III gives an 18mp crop.

[kayasaman]

Absolutely. The A1 EVF puts my A7RIII to shame. My A7RIII upgrade was mostly for battery life, EVF improvements, and Pixel shift. My dad still owns the A7RII I started with and even when I use it and notice the EVF is not as good - my familiarity with it carries me through.

Sony’s entire APSC body line up has just stalled. It isn’t clear why but there’s very little emphasis on moving it forward. The pandemic supply chain disruptions may be all that’s involved- the concentration on higher end (more profits) gear in a curtailed supply world makes sense. The A7RIV actually has 26mp in crop mode which is quite good. The A1 crop mode is substantial as well. Even the A7RII/III gives an 18mp crop.

That's probably the trend at the moment for most people. Maximize profits over all else. The other day I saw a post about petroleum companies moaning that the $7 billion profit wasn't enough or something like that. I can't exactly remember the details as it was shared somewhere else by a fellow forum member and friend.

Right now it seems that everything seems to be money based rather then - let's see what consumers actually want and need kind of thing.


Totally off-topic here but I was looking at my little mini 20 year old Sony Cybershot P10 point and shoot the other day and thought of you. It was my travel companion back during my uni days and looking at the limitations of that camera prompted me to buy the K1 ii in the first place. It was a cute little walk-about landscape camera!!


I hope the camera technology direction becomes clearer soon as currently it seems to be a little out of sync - unfortunately....

[surfar]

It was a shame because I was searching for a high-end APS-C camera and the current mirrorless models in cropped format don't seem to be anything near the D500 in performance.

Go over to DPreview, Canon R section and read the thread on R7 versus D500.Concensus of opinion there is the R7 leaves the D500 in the dust.

---------- Post added 08-06-22 at 04:03 PM ----------

To generalize also I think the EVF's on the top range models have much better specifications then lower end models.

Yes, you get what you pay for.Ricoh added 500 U$ to the latest K3 for the privilege of having an OVF at FF standard.The most recent Fuji has an EVF at the same level as the Canon R5/R3 and high end Sonys.TheFuji is the highest priced Japanese crop camera at present.

[kayasaman]

Go over to DPreview, Canon R section and read the thread on R7 versus D500.Concensus of opinion there is the R7 leaves the D500 in the dust.

---------- Post added 08-06-22 at 04:03 PM ----------



Yes, you get what you pay for.Ricoh added 500 U$ to the latest K3 for the privilege of having an OVF at FF standard.The most recent Fuji has an EVF at the same level as the Canon R5/R3 and high end Sonys.TheFuji is the highest priced Japanese crop camera at present.

Remember, you also chimed in when I was desperately looking for a camera with good AF...... there are multiple reasons for not going mirrorless in any format yet for me. Lens choice is one of the primary factors but also they are too new and haven't fully matured yet technologically.

After a lot of research, I found the lenses I wanted: Nikon 18-300mm, Sigma 105mm Macro, Sigma 60-600mm Sports, Tokina 11-20mm wide zoom. I think you already have the Sigma if my memory is correct??

Instead of looking at what other people are saying (I know you're a big Canon fan), I need to look at my needs. When the D500 arrived I was so surprised that it was the same size as my treasured K1 ii. That is exactly what I wanted!! Not smaller and definitely not thinner. It's big and chunky though lighter then my K1.

I would say the ergonomics are in between Pentax and Canon. The buttons and switches that are in similar positions to the Pentax, I like, the other Canon style buttons eg. left of the LCD, I can't stand. It's difficult to use and why zoom buttons in the first place?? The Pentax just uses the dial to zoom in and out... easy


Another thing was that the R7 hadn't even arrived in stores and with the lens lineup uncertain to me, as in what would work with it and what wouldn't, the tried and tested Nikon was a better bet. So far for Macro it's simply amazing and I can't fault it one bit. As for everything else, like with the Pentax, things are coming up too small in frame. That's why I wana grab the Sigma, and may even need a TC to go with it if subjects are still too small. Nothing to do with camera but it's annoying how small birds end up the size of golf balls at a short distance of around 6ft/2m. I really want to fill around 2/3 - 3/4 of the frame with the subject and not less then half.


Though I've still got a long way to go with equipment. I also need to look at a Moravian Instruments G3 or C3 and tracking mount plus a host of other stuff:




That's really where my heart is with photography. Which is where the K1 started everything off but having a beyered matrix sensor is proving difficult in my location which sucks for pretty any type of imaging (linear or non-linear). The monochrome CCD's get you into different wavelengths and spectroscopy. That's really exciting!!


I know, I know, I'm not your everyday average photographer but still it is nice to be involved with linear (normal) photography too even though I find it so hard. I really can't understand how to use focal lengths between say 50-300mm. It's either not wide enough for me or too short

Anyway, I'm gona put an image comparison between the K1 and D500 soon, just going through 20k images right now to try to select the best ones. So far it's taking a long time but hey, I'll get there

[surfar]

Remember, you also chimed in when I was desperately looking for a camera with good AF...... there are multiple reasons for not going mirrorless in any format yet for me. Lens choice is one of the primary factors but also they are too new and haven't fully matured yet technologically.

Not fully matured??? I'm not sure what you mean by that.M/L is highly advanced, so far ahead of Dslr its not funny.As for lens selection Fuji has plenty,M43 has double what Fuji has.Sony has plenty and the Z and RF mounts are both approaching 30.Throw in third parties and the numerous adapters and M/L has what Dslr has via adapter plus OEM.

Sigma 60-600mm Sports,

I think you already have the Sigma if my memory is correct??

I have the 150-600 Sport,the guy I bought it from sold it to me after buying the 60-600.the newer Sigma is better but costs double or more.

(I know you're a big Canon fan)

I own one Canon amongst my camera collection but intend to buy the R10 later this year(after selling some gear).I like what the Canon does for the price.

Another thing was that the R7 hadn't even arrived in stores and with the lens lineup uncertain to me, as in what would work with it and what wouldn't,

The R7 has been available for a couple of months but sells out quickly.The lenses you mention will all adapt onto M/L and I think I mentioned the Tamron 18-400mm which gives FOV of 640mm.Also Canon have the RF 100-400 lightweight F5.6-8 which is getting high recommendations from owners.ITS the lightest and cheapest 100-400 with the DigicX AF !Even on a R10 its more than double the speed of Pentax/nikon discussed here.

I know, I know, I'm not your everyday average photographer

Ha ha, but still its good to be on a different track in some things.I'll look forward to your comparisons.

[kayasaman]

Not fully matured??? I'm not sure what you mean by that.M/L is highly advanced, so far ahead of Dslr its not funny.As for lens selection Fuji has plenty,M43 has double what Fuji has.Sony has plenty and the Z and RF mounts are both approaching 30.Throw in third parties and the numerous adapters and M/L has what Dslr has via adapter plus OEM.

It's a new tech is what I meant, I assure you no sinister ulterior meaning was meant . DSLR has been around for longer, and if you count the evolution from SLR things go way back to the 60's and 70's. Nikon has just started with their mirrorless line - as in it hasn't been around as the tried and tested D series. Canon keeps changing their stuff every few years it seems but I don't know much about Canon so in a sense anything I say can be considered non-canon (pun obviously intented haha).
No idea what my 20 year old Sony P10 was?? Mirrored, mirrorless?? It has both LiveView and OVF which are both on all the time??

I think (but this is pure speculation on my part) that micro four thirds is mirrorless? Not sure when Fuji and Sony decided to go that direction. But anyway, mirrorless is pretty much a software based platform hence the need for multiple do-it-all processors. Similar to a DSP chip or CPU in a computer. While DSLR is more reliant on hardware processing.


Actually on this topic, I guess I could have re-looked at the Olympus(OMD Systems) EM1X that I was initially looking at before purchasing my K1 ii. For sports and wildlife, the smaller sensor means shorter lenses for further reach.

Why the massive EM1X? Exactly that, because it's large! Easier to hold and grip

I have the 150-600 Sport,the guy I bought it from sold it to me after buying the 60-600.the newer Sigma is better but costs double or more.

Aaaah not worried about the price, if it was $10k then sure I'd be a little more flustered. Considering that I need I need an astro mount. Due to my location I need a portable ie. carry on capable one, meaning Harmonic or Strainwave drive. The RainbowAstro RST135 is around $3.5k while the PegasusAstro Nyx has a starting price of $2.8k(but not out until September this year), couple that to a sturdy tripod which is around $1k+ depending on load capacity; don't forget the camera /rig is gona be spinning on top of this thing so balance is essential. I have a lot of saving to do basically it what it means and the worst part is that I have to take all this stuff abroad if I wana get any decent performance out of it.
That's around a 45 pound or 20kg haul on an airplane (am I the only one nuts enough to wana bring 150 lenses on a trip with them?? Ok slight exaggeration but still, I think at a min. we're talking around 16 lenses)

Some prices written on the website of these guys - just as an example: https://www.bisque.com/product-category/mounts/

Astro is expensive stuff. Especially if you wana built up your own imaging observatory. You can easily throw around $100k on kit. If you browse the Astro group here, there are many guys and gals who do amazing things just using AstroTracer. The AT2 (K1/ii) guys are jealous of the AT3 guys because they don't need to perform the 'Chicken dance' to calibrate the internal sensors and gyros or GPS receiver to get a 3D fix. hahaha it's one of the funniest things of all time honestly. ps. the figure of 8 - cell phone approach does work too so no more embarrassing juggling with the camera lol

I own one Canon amongst my camera collection but intend to buy the R10 later this year(after selling some gear).I like what the Canon does for the price.

Yeah, thought so. If it works for you and handles how you need it that's all that matters. After all the objective is results and feel. Like anything, equipment is very subjective; we can only read so much, after that it's up to us if we like a. or b. more. Sure I would love to try different bodies and lens combinations, but really I am stuck with what I read and images I see online. At the moment due to health reasons it's difficult for me to get around, so going to a camera shop is really not possible. As a result I get all my gear online (from abroad even where the best prices are as local prices are simply extortion in many cases)

The R7 has been available for a couple of months but sells out quickly.The lenses you mention will all adapt onto M/L and I think I mentioned the Tamron 18-400mm which gives FOV of 640mm.Also Canon have the RF 100-400 lightweight F5.6-8 which is getting high recommendations from owners.ITS the lightest and cheapest 100-400 with the DigicX AF !Even on a R10 its more than double the speed of Pentax/nikon discussed here.

Hmm.... I would have gone for the 100-500mm lens from Canon but the downside to that is you loose the wide end so not great for traveling as you need to switch lenses often or use 2 bodies. You did mention the Tamron, which I looked up and read reviews. The reason I decided against it was because I read comparisons to the Nikon 18-300mm in which the Nikon was selected as being the better lens. That's the only reason that prompted me to go for that instead. If I could try and test the Tamron maybe I would have a different thought train towards it. Basically I just decided to play safe...

Not to be contradictory about traveling and my current health situation; basically, I am planning on many trips once things get sorted out. I have no idea how long it's gona take but currently having the Pentax and Nikon has really been a blessing. I guess you can say it's a challenge ahead of me, kind of like getting in-focus images haha. Unfortunately I haven't been able to travel for at least 15 years so now I really am getting sick of being plagued by ill health all the time and am determined to go somewhere.

Ha ha, but still its good to be on a different track in some things.I'll look forward to your comparisons.

Normally people think of me as a "nutty professor", mainly because I tend to say things that no body understands and pretty much construct whatever I can in such a way that nobody understands. Oh I'll have to add that to my comparison post too - the image of the 6ft / 2m high electrical cabinet I built at home from industrial parts in which I had to write a 200 page manual for electricians etc... to understand how it's wired up and how the software I wrote functions and makes the lights turn on based on temperature etc... sigh hahahaha uh


Hey this kinda turned into a mini conversation. It's fun, thanks

[abruzzi]

I have an old mirrorless (Sony Nex 6). I don't love the EVF--its better than a rangefinder style viewfinder, where it only approximated the field of view, but not as nice as most SLR style optical viewfinders. I shoot 100% manual focus on it and I find the resolution (2.4mpx) too low and contrast and contrast too high for me to manual focus as is. Focus peaking doesn't really help, so I have to use the MF zoom combined with focus peaking on every shot. That fine for a camera that cost me $100 and a handful of lenses that cost about $100 each, but even the most current Sony APS-C camera (A6600) still has a 2.4mpx EVF. I haven't tried one, but I do wonder if 10 years has seen improvements in the other ways.

I also wonder if there are other options they could do to improve manual focusing? Most MF era film SLRs had a focus aid in the center of the screen--split prism, micro prisms or similar. I wonder if they could do something on an EVF like a small circle in the center that is always on 4.5x magnification? or would that be too distracting? Have other mirrorless cameras come up with better trick?

[kayasaman]

I have an old mirrorless (Sony Nex 6). I don't love the EVF--its better than a rangefinder style viewfinder, where it only approximated the field of view, but not as nice as most SLR style optical viewfinders. I shoot 100% manual focus on it and I find the resolution (2.4mpx) too low and contrast and contrast too high for me to manual focus as is. Focus peaking doesn't really help, so I have to use the MF zoom combined with focus peaking on every shot. That fine for a camera that cost me $100 and a handful of lenses that cost about $100 each, but even the most current Sony APS-C camera (A6600) still has a 2.4mpx EVF. I haven't tried one, but I do wonder if 10 years has seen improvements in the other ways.

I also wonder if there are other options they could do to improve manual focusing? Most MF era film SLRs had a focus aid in the center of the screen--split prism, micro prisms or similar. I wonder if they could do something on an EVF like a small circle in the center that is always on 4.5x magnification? or would that be too distracting? Have other mirrorless cameras come up with better trick?

Yeah, was just going through some old pictures taken on a Nikon FM mk1 recently from the 80s/90s. The Kodak prints went all yellowy/brown in the meantime that's how old they are. Ok given we only had the standard 50mm f/1.8 that came with that camera, all the shots are in focus.
What I also like there is that the lens has hard stops for Infinity and closest distance.

At least with my Pentax K1 ii, there is focus peaking in LV. Little white lines which highlight the in focus areas. What is much harder is the OVF that you cannot tell when a subject is in focus or not easily.

The Nikon D500 though really has a sucky live view. No focus peaking and no histogram (which is important for me and astro). There is a range scale and hexagon in the OVF which is nice! But for me I find whenever looking through the OVF, I concentrate on my subject and not the displayed information. I prefer to have the K1's info display doing that. The D500 info display has to be turned on first as there is no option to have it simply 'stay on' like the K1 which is another pain.