Originally posted by Emacs Come on, don't be a noob!
Mirrorless AF is far more predictable and covers far larger area. AF speed is good enough nowdays and AF precision easily surpasses the precision of DSLR. Lowlight AF performance surpasses one of DSLR. The shooting process is far more predictable as well: closer approximation to what we will see.
What is it about you guys that you feel it is important to attack ad hominem. Noob? I have likely taken pictures since before you were born - and I have significant mirrorless experience including owning one of the finest m43 bodies made until recently. Where do you derive your position of superior knowledge to call me a Noob?
I left this thread but since you felt it important to quote me - let me just say that my K3 easily outperforms my Gx7 in focus performance. I don't think it is fair to conclude that focus performance in mirrorless is more precise than in DSLR's. In the recent past focusing in mirrorless systems lagged DSLR's by a considerable margin, recent improvements have helped considerably to get close to the same level. As for exposure accuracy? It is hilarious that this is even a topic. Unless you produce JPG only files and never manipulate them, the high dynamic range of most files puts the entire "what you see is what you get" argument into a tailspin since the final product may vary dramatically from any exposure selected due to desires to manipulate different parts of the exposure differently. Furthermore - my experience with mirrorless and dslr chimping is that neither of the LCD or EVF views is as accurate as displaying these on a large monitor. Finally, with ISO invariance, the seen is often not the final product in any case. This of course is also merely is a sensor property not a technical difference between mirrorless and dslr's implementations.
This rabid fanboy like behavior isn't convincing anyone. Rather than building up the product you support and laying out careful constructs of logic you and others in this thread have resorted to name calling and telling other people why their choices made with careful understanding of the pros and cons of the technology are objectively wrong not subjectively wrong. You make no allowance for different opinion and different weighting to criteria. You also seem hellbent on only talking about the minor areas where there may be advantages without addressing the complex whole which includes some minuses.
Frankly I'm happy I have mirrorless and dslr options in my stable, but there is nothing in my mirrorless experience so far that convinces me to abandon DSLR's. That said - I'm open to future developments - when I can pick up both an OVF and an EVF and not see a negative difference immediately in terms of responsiveness and accuracy of the view - I will still have other issues with moving away from my chosen platform due to investments in lenses. Giving up the ability to autofocus my FA Limited and DA Limited lenses is hard to fathom. I have started to accumulate some M43 items to see how this suits me, I have also tried some legacy glass manual focus. Manual focus on both platforms isn't great and while it is slightly better on my GX7 - it isn't good enough to warrant not using AF. I have used manual focus using a split prism screen for dozens upon dozens of years and find that provides the best experience in terms of manual focus.
But hey - keep beating the drums and stirring up things. I'm out of this fight because it bores me. I'm tired of laying out long logical constructs to have someone attack me and repeat a few tired phrases without further expansion of the details and without good comparison info including photos or videos of the problem and solutions.