[MJKoski]

Well, what's the point of releasing a MILC if it does not really do anything better than a DSLR? Total system size is not the answer (so far). If the camera itself is small, lenses still tend to be big. It should be some real technological advantage which is the driver behind the MILC push to the market. Super fast readout is one of the key requirements for computational photography applications. So far, only Sony has brought fast sensors to the table AND included them in their cameras. But even if Sony FF sensors are ~fast, they are many steps behind the sensors used in smartphones.

[BigMackCam]

Well, what's the point of releasing a MILC if it does not really do anything better than a DSLR? Total system size is not the answer (so far). If the camera itself is small, lenses still tend to be big. It should be some real technological advantage which is the driver behind the MILC push to the market. Super fast readout is one of the key requirements for computational photography applications. So far, only Sony has brought fast sensors to the table AND included them in their cameras. But even if Sony FF sensors are ~fast, they are many steps behind the sensors used in smartphones.

Some people simply prefer using mirrorless cameras and EVFs, Matti. It's the exact same thing we've been discussing in these forums for years, but from the other side of the table. As Pentax users, we frequently have to explain to mirrorless fans that we actually prefer an optical viewfinder, and why... but at the same time, we understand (or we should understand) that many people really like using EVFs, and that there can be benefits in doing so depending on use case and individual preferences - e.g. WYSIWYG (more-or-less) in the viewfinder with visibility of certain tools such as live histogram, ability to view a useable representation of a scene in very low light, focus peaking and magnified view... and more. Of course, even now (and possibly for a long time to come) EVF technology comes with some compromises - but the same is true of DSLRs; they're just different compromises.

[Rondec]

Well said. There's no such thing as "junk" cameras these days, and the fact that all the major brands have many, many satisfied users of each model is testament to that. There's only subjective likes and dislikes, for a variety of reasons. Different models suit different folks. I'm not in the market, nor am I the target market, for this new Sony, but if I were gifted one and a brace of lenses, I'd happily use it and probably enjoy it - and the same goes for any camera, from any brand. They're all good...

I just think it is amazing the amount of camera you can get these days for a thousand or fifteen hundred dollars.

Considering what was available even ten or fifteen years ago, today's models, even the entry level are pretty phenomenal.

[surfar]

today's models, even the entry level are pretty phenomenal.

LeRolls has the phenomenal models!

Base level cameras of recent times are very capable,I agree.I'm not sure if they will survive in the shrinking market though?Margins must be pretty small.

[Rondec]

LeRolls has the phenomenal models!

Base level cameras of recent times are very capable,I agree.I'm not sure if they will survive in the shrinking market though?Margins must be pretty small.

I know you are making a joke, but Le Rolls gets quite good results with APS-C MILCs (and had excellent results when he was shooting with a K-01). I don't know that having 60 frames per second frame rates would make much difference with his style of shooting.

[Dan Rentea]

Well, what's the point of releasing a MILC if it does not really do anything better than a DSLR?

Show me a DSLR that can do what R5 or A1 can do. Yes, in terms of image quality you won't see differences or, if you can see marginal differences, it's because of the lenses that seems to be better on mirrorless. The technological advancement in getting the shots in challenging situations it's what makes the difference and that's why so many photographers are changing their DSLRs with mirrorless. Sure, if you are a landscape photographer, a D850 or even a K1 Mark II can still be relevant today or in 1-2 years from now, because with landscapes it's simply impossible to miss a shot if you are on location at the right time. But for event photographers or even for wildlife photographers the latest models of mirrorless cameras represents a big improvement over DSLRs in terms of performance. I see it almost every 3 weeks when I go out with different photographers how different it's the workflow when shooting with mirrorless vs. DSLRs. No more focus and recompose, no more cropping to get the composition you want, no more emotions to shoot dynamic scenes at fast apertures, no more front or back focus, etc.

Yes, EVFs and OVFs will remain a "battle" for at least one generation of mirrorless but that's it. I still read about handling problems with mirrorless bodies and tele lenses. Have you seen photographers shooting handheld with the big ones like 400mm f2.8 or 600mm f4? Those lenses are used with tripods or monopods and you won't have any kind of problem in terms of handling with basically any camera. For the ones who do have some problems with smaller tele lenses like 300mm f2.8 or 200-600mm, there are battery grips available that solve this problem also.

[BigMackCam]

Yes, EVFs and OVFs will remain a "battle" for at least one generation of mirrorless but that's it.

I'll take the other side of that bet, Dan Even if we're a minority, there are simply too many of us - even those of us who use mirrorless in addition to DSLR - that prefer using an optical viewfinder. It's going to take more than one or two additional generations of mirrorless for the viewfinder to look and feel exactly like an OVF, if indeed it ever gets there. Very, very close? Perhaps... Indiscernible? I have big fat doubts about that... but I'm willing to be convinced.

[Dan Rentea]

I'll take the other side of that bet, Dan Even if we're a minority, there are simply too many of us - even those of us who use mirrorless in addition to DSLR - that prefer using an optical viewfinder. It's going to take more than one or two additional generations of mirrorless for the viewfinder to look and feel exactly like an OVF, if indeed it ever gets there. Very, very close? Perhaps... Indiscernible? I have big fat doubts about that... but I'm willing to be convinced.

I was talking more about the lack of new DSLRs which will reduce the number of DSLR users more and more. Canon said a year ago that they will concentrate on mirrorless, Nikon just announced the same... This and also the improvements in EVF performance which personally I can't wait to test it in A1 when I will have the chance.

[surfar]

Indiscernible? I have big fat doubts about that.

Not sure how many reviews you watch Mike,but i see a fair few.Amongst them are sprinklings of dslr users who use the latest EVFs.I hear plenty of their comments saying"as good as OVF".thats been happening since the 3.69 evfs have been around,Thats 3 gens ago.

I'm sure there are plenty of users who can only use an OVF due to "not so good" eyesight.

Dan has adjusted from the OVF to EVF(that gave him trouble).You didnt like the NX10s Evf,but i thought it was fine and very useable.

I use both and a Hybrid.IMO,they are all good but none is perfect.

Ofcourse,its a personal choice.Buyers decide what suits best.

[BigMackCam]

I was talking more about the lack of new DSLRs which will reduce the number of DSLR users more and more. This and also the improvements in EVF performance which personally I can't wait to test it in A1 when I will have the chance.

I agree with you regarding the reduction in new DSLRs, though thankfully this could actually be a positive for Ricoh / Pentax. I'm certain we're not the only group of folks who have a preference for DSLR photography when the use cases suit.

As for the A1, I'm sure it'll be nothing less than amazing. Sony gets a fair bit of stick around here... some of it is deserved, much of it not. I think for the right audience, the A1 will be an awesome camera. I'm not sure how large that audience is, mind you, but it only needs to be large enough for Sony to turn a nice profit on R&D and production, and/or to rattle the competition and put doubts in the minds of their users...

[Dan Rentea]

Not sure how many reviews you watch Mike,but i see a fair few.Amongst them are sprinklings of dslr users who use the latest EVFs.I hear plenty of their comments saying"as good as OVF".thats been happening since the 3.69 evfs have been around,Thats 3 gens ago.

I'm sure there are plenty of users who can only use an OVF due to "not so good" eyesight.

Dan has adjusted from the OVF to EVF(that gave him trouble).You didnt like the NX10s Evf,but i thought it was fine and very useable.

I use both and a Hybrid.IMO,they are all good but none is perfect.

Ofcourse,its a personal choice.Buyers decide what suits best.

It took me about 2 years to get used to EVFs. My biggest problem was related to poor EVFs available at that time. But, using those mirrorless from Fuji, Sony and Oly each time I had the chance helped me to get used to them. An A7R II for example or an E-M1 Mark III still gives me a little discomfort, but it's way less than it used to be.

[UncleVanya]

A very short time ago mirrorless was highly criticized for NOT being able to focus as quickly and accurately as DSLRs. The tail is wagging the dog here. Mirrorless required new lenses to provide accurate and fast focus. Mirrorless required sensor updates to include PDAF on sensor which wasn’t needed on DSLRs. The explosion of new lenses has led to improved designs over existing lenses but there is nothing inherent in mirrorless making this a superior platform optically - on the contrary the mirrorless lenses often leverage a lot more software correction to meet the user expectations masking optical issues that can cause slight degradation over a better uncorrected lens but with a smaller and lighter design.

My own take is that hype more than need is driving this move. I ran into a Nikon shooter who along with her husband has been a pro for 20+ years. They have had no customer feedback asking for things they can’t do with their d300s. However they feel like they need to move to mirrorless. When asked the photographer I spoke with had no answer for why. An article on Petapixel a few years back showed a similar push for equipment updates (not to mirrorless at that time) but the same pressure from the photographer feeling out of date but having no actual issue selling images or capturing them. Gear crazy people will love that the A1 can do what it can. But it is likely fewer than 5-10% “need” it to get the shots.

[BigMackCam]

Not sure how many reviews you watch Mike,but i see a fair few.Amongst them are sprinklings of dslr users who use the latest EVFs.I hear plenty of their comments saying"as good as OVF".thats been happening since the 3.69 evfs have been around,Thats 3 gens ago.

I'm sure there are plenty of users who can only use an OVF due to "not so good" eyesight.

Dan has adjusted from the OVF to EVF(that gave him trouble).You didnt like the NX10s Evf,but i thought it was fine and very useable.

I use both and a Hybrid.IMO,they are all good but none is perfect.

Ofcourse,its a personal choice.Buyers decide what suits best.

As I told Dan in an earlier post, I tried the A7 MkIII not long back and thought the EVF was great, but to my eyes it wasn't close to an OVF... definitely better than others I'd used previously, and impressive to someone like me who is already "EVF friendly"; I'd be happy using one when necessary - but I don't consider it a replacement for an OVF. I've heard some other brands and more expensive models praised for having better EVFs than the A7 MkIII, but then I've also read comments that say they're still not comparable, and in any case the cost makes them irrelevant to me. I suspect it's a subjective thing... and I agree with you, no viewfinder is perfect, the choice is personal, and buyers will decide what suits them best...

[Dan Rentea]

I agree with you regarding the reduction in new DSLRs, though thankfully this could actually be a positive for Ricoh / Pentax. I'm certain we're not the only group of folks who have a preference for DSLR photography when the use cases suit.

As for the A1, I'm sure it'll be nothing less than amazing. Sony gets a fair bit of stick around here... some of it is deserved, much of it not. I think for the right audience, the A1 will be an awesome camera. I'm not sure how large that audience is, mind you, but it only needs to be large enough for Sony to turn a nice profit on R&D and production, and/or to rattle the competition and put doubts in the minds of their users...

There are certain group of folks who have a preference for film photography also, but it's a niche. There are too many DSLR users in order for me to imply that DSLRs will become a niche in 2-4 years, but it's quite impressive how fast mirrorless gains popularity. And if new DSLRs won't be released anymore, people will start to switch. Some will replace the bodies first and continue to use DSLR lenses on them with adapter until the lenses need to be replaced (myself included), some will replace the entire DSLR system with a mirrorless one. At some point, cameras and lenses have to be replaced, especially when we talk about photographers who use their gear to earn some money or to make a living out of it.

The fact that an R6 it's close to 1Dx Mark III in terms of tracking and the animal eye af makes it a little better than the flagship in certain circumstances, with the R6 beeing less than half the price of 1Dx, it can't be ignored by enthusiastic photographers who don't afford or simply don't need the build quality, weight and durability of the 1Dx.

As much as I love to, I really don't think that OVF will be such an important aspect so that Pentax can count as an alternative for the lack of new Canon and Nikon DSLRs. Mostly because you only have one alternative to choose from in terms of full frame, because there are some gaps in lens department that needs time to be filled, because of the slow release of new products and not lastly, the lack of third party support.

[BigMackCam]

It took me about 2 years to get used to EVFs. My biggest problem was related to poor EVFs available at that time. But, using those mirrorless from Fuji, Sony and Oly each time I had the chance helped me to get used to them. An A7R II for example or an E-M1 Mark III still gives me a little discomfort, but it's way less than it used to be.

It's great that you got used to EVFs, but you have to wonder... if it took two years, is that worth it to most folks? I mean, it should take much less time now with better EVFs, but still... if it's an effort to acclimatise to them, isn't that taking something away from the enjoyment? I realise effort is required in photography, but most of the challenges I've encountered are to do with technique, and I've found those enjoyable...

Having said that, I've been really lucky with EVFs. I've not had a problem with any but the very earliest, and I could still use those without discomfort. None of them I've tried thus far, though, has given an OVF experience... not even close. They just feel very different in use to me...