Mirrorless Interchangeable lens camera issue.

[Rja4000]

The notion that, that is a reason to not get a mirrorless camera is moronic.

On that one, I agree.
It is not a reason not to use a mirrorless.
It is just a reason why mirrorless camera requires some different routine.

 

[Rja4000]

the huge majority of consumers and even prosumers, do not need the reflex mirror with its extra size, weight , mechanical complexity, reliability degradation and mirror slap noise and vibration.

On that one, I disagree.
Mirrorless is NOT a revolution, it's just different.
Anything you can do with mirrorless, you could do with a reflex in liveview, if you could attach an electronic viewfinder to it (which is very basic, as the Canon M6 demonstrates).
The only exception being the shorter flange-to-sensor distance.
Size and weight are mainly related to the sensor size, not to the technology used. (With the notable exception of wide angle lenses).

Reflex is a proven thing.
The problem the manufacturers are facing is that there are too many out there, and good enough for nobody wanting to buy new ones.
So they invented the mirrorless "revolution". Which, in my educated eye, is rather just another "marketing idea".
I don't say mirrorless has no benefit. I say, for a typical end user, those benefits are far from justifying the whole system replacement bill.
And I'm travelling here with the EOS R instead of my trusted 5DSR. Because I like new things.
And, yes, I also own some Sony.

 

[Soniclife]

On my Canon R, when you switch it off, a message is displayed saying "don't let the camera exposed to the sun or another light source without lens cap"
Do you thing they'd display that if there was not a measured risk? Where would be their interest?

Covering their ass from warranty repairs seems the reason. They're are similar warnings in my Olympus manual, as well as lots of other dumb things it should be obvious not to do. They are probably in the manual of all makes.

There isn't so far any evidence provided that different types of camera have more or less susceptibility to this issue.

 

[Rja4000]

Covering their ass from warranty repairs seems the reason. They're are similar warnings in my Olympus manual, as well as lots of other dumb things it should be obvious not to do. They are probably in the manual of all makes.

There isn't so far any evidence provided that different types of camera have more or less susceptibility to this issue.

I own 4 other Canon digital camera, and they don't display that message.
Wait... All of those are reflex camera.
(10D, 1D2, 1DX, 5DSR)

 

[gene_stl]

I have a large set of legacy Nikon F mount lenses. But I never had any inclination to spend the fortune they charge for the Nikon dSLRs. I do have adapters to stick them onto my Olympus which then only uses the center optical "sweeter spot"

In microscopy for the same reason a smaller sensor is better except for low light use (ie. fluorescence microscopy)

I am much more inclined to carry my Olympus which by the way is famous for weather sealing and I know two people who take them into rain forests for nature photography. One in Ecuador on one in SE Asia.

Also when I did go on vacation I usually took my Nikkormat rather than one of my F models. So that I wouldn't want to shoot myself if it fell into the ocean or a lake. And it too was smaller lighter and less clunky.

I am reminded of the old Questar telescope adverts. "The best telescope , is the one you take outside and actually use!" They had it right and while their scope was not a light bucket it was lightweight and easy to handle. They guy I bought mine from used to backpack it up into the Sierra mountains to try and get above as much atmosphere as he could. Here in the midwest we don't have that option much but I take it out and look through it at the drop of a hat. The same applies to smaller cameras.

I also remember a family trip out west in 1967. My uncle loaned me a half frame point and shoot camera which I used on that trip (pre Nikon F) even though the frame size was small, for regular 3x5 prints the pix looked great. Buying a 10,000 camera system for your vacation snapshots is overkill.
But don't get me wrong. I LOVE overkill. (just look at those speakers)

I am pretty sure on any future vacations I will carry a point and shoot which fits in your pocket and does more tricks than I care to even learn about.
Leave the somewhat expensive Oly macro stuff at home with the macro rig and the scopes. But that is because I am older and don't care so much about vacation pix anymore.

 

[Soniclife]

Size and weight are mainly related to the sensor size

True, and it's not the sensor or the body it's in that's the driver, but how the sensor size drives lens size. And this relationship isn't a simple linear one, some FOV lenses end up smaller and lighter in full frame than crop sensors. But for my uses my kit bag ends up much more compact and lighter with m43 than it would on other systems, people with other needs need to do their own calcs.

 

[Soniclife]

I own 4 other Canon digital camera, and they don't display that message.
Wait... All of those are reflex camera.
(10D, 1D2, 1DX, 5DSR)

And I own several Olympus body's that don't display that message, so is this really a canon problem?

 

[Rja4000]

I have a large set of legacy Nikon F mount lenses. But I never had any inclination to spend the fortune they charge for the Nikon dSLRs.

I am much more inclined to carry my Olympus which by the way is famous for weather sealing and I know twol people who take them into rain forests for nature photography. One in Ecuador on one in SE Asia.

Also when I did go on vacation I usually took my Nikkormat rather than one of my F models. So that I wouldn't want to shoot myself if it fell into the ocean or a lake. And it too was smaller lighter and less clunky.

Olympus, even in film days, was renowned for their reflex compactness. OM1 OM2 OM3...

Weather sealing is sometimes a life saver.
When I have to take a photo, whatever the weather, I use a 1Dsomething. I've been shooting under heavy rain storms with those several times.

Pentax camera are also famous for their weather sealing.

 

[JJB70]

Go back to the Nikon FM2, those things were almost as indestructible as Cher.

 

[Rja4000]

True, and it's not the sensor or the body it's in that's the driver, but how the sensor size drives lens size. And this relationship isn't a simple linear one, some FOV lenses end up smaller and lighter in full frame than crop sensors. But for my uses my kit bag ends up much more compact and lighter with m43 than it would on other systems, people with other needs need to do their own calcs.

Well, if you simplify it, it is easy, in my opinion.
Above 50mm focal length (on FF sensor), flange distance makes little difference on size and weight.
The lower the focal length under that, the more the decreased flange distance will allow smaller, lighter, cheaper lens design.
It's not scientific. It's just how I think it is.
Because for short focal length on reflex, you always need complex, heavy, big, retro-focus design.

Maybe somebody with more knowledge may demonstrate it (or the opposite, but I doubt it).

 

[Rja4000]

"The best telescope , is the one you take outside and actually use!"

200% agree!
The best <whatever> is the one you have with you when you need it.

 

[gene_stl]

There also was a paradigm shift that occurred when cameras became digital. They used to be a person's toy which you bought and expected , even in the presence of model creep and planned obsolescence that you would keep and use for a very long time. I never anticipated in the late 60s that there would be a better way than film and that film might even become difficult to purchase.

But somewhere in the early 2000s I started thinking of cameras as computer peripherals , like a laser printer or screen. Not as easy to "love" such things.

 

[Rja4000]

There also was a paradigm shift that occurred when cameras became digital. They used to be a person's toy which you bought and expected , even in the presence of model creep and planned obsolescence that you would keep and use for a very long time. I never anticipated in the late 60s that there would be a better way than film and that film might even become difficult to purchase.

But somewhere in the early 2000s I started thinking of cameras as computer peripherals , like a laser printer or screen. Not as easy to "love" such things.

That's the confusion the camera makers want to see in our mind.
There is NO comparison between the digital revolution and the mirrorless thing.
The film to digital camera move was similar to the same move for audio. A true revolution!
You can fight it, but there is no way you'll win.

Mirrorless is very different.
There are true benefits (shorter flange distance is the main one), some things that evolve more naturally (autofocus accuracy, without micro adjustment, and with higher use of AI, is one of the main side benefits - "side", because you actually can do the same with a reflex in live view mode).
The main drawback, and that's a serious one, is the lack of optical viewfinder. If you don't have a good FF reflex camera, you probably don't know what it is though.

 

[Ron Texas]

The notion that, that is a reason to not get a mirrorless camera is moronic. Your source likely had some kind of skin in the game or didn't like that HIS equipment choices were being criticized by the marketplace voting with their feet.

This is what I get after a call for civility? You just called me a moron. Since the issue of financial bias has been raised twice, I will debunk it. All of the major camera manufacturers now have mirrorless cameras in their lineup, so who would be bribing him? If anything, I see bias coming from mirrorless camera owners who are offended at the thought that their gear is subject to a kind of mishap which reflex camera owners don't have to worry about.

As for voting with their feet, it doesn't hunt. Besides, that and the financial bias argument are both pure speculation.

The link to lensrentals.com is irrelevant. It is meant to show reflex cameras are fragile, but all it proves is with enough abuse anything can be ruined.

To say one has not heard of problem only proves a lack of knowledge.

In the last week or so I was able to handle several mirrorless cameras in the field. They were manufactured by Fuji and Panasonic. Personally, I am uncomfortable with the eletronic viewfinder. I will admit to those cameras being nicely crafted and small.

Personally, I don't see mirrorless as a fit for me.

 

[amirm]

Cut out the person remarks guys or we will have to close the thread.

 

[LTig]

Is this not addressed by the lens cap? I put the cap on if not shooting, more to protect the lens from mechanical damage and scratches than anything else. Admittedly that leaves the sensor exposed when having the camera ready to use but I don't think that is an issue.

Me too, the lens cap is on if not shooting. I use mirrorless cams since 2009, first a Panasonic G1, followed by a Panasonic GX7 (gave the G1 to my brother) and both are in perfect working condition althouh I take them everywhere.

 

[LTig]

Go back to the Nikon FM2, those things were almost as indestructible as Cher.

Point it to the sun with a longer lens and I would not guarantee the survival of its shutter. And not your eyesight either ...

 

[gene_stl]

For me this thread is closed.

 

[Jim B]

Hello People,

As a professional photographer, I began with a manual film camera and switched to digital. I have shot and own most formats Mft, FF, Medium format by different manufacturers.

I would like to say IMHO that new digital has advance to the point that it is irrelevant what brand your using or sensor size. Sure there are minimal differences in sensor size but that can be worked around.

What is most important is identifying the type of photography you like to do, then finding a model that supports what you are planning to use it for. Best use scenario.

Mirrorless vs DLSR.... The new OVF are over 5meg resolution with low lag and low blackout. I believe mirrorless is the future.
It already has many beneficial features, however it does take some getting use to especially if you are older like me and experienced in Dlsr.

For me this is the major benefit that I get from using Mirrorless. I wear contacts and now use reading glasses. Unfortunately the quality of the view finder is very important to me. In more than one occasion using the dlsr, I find that I can manually focus down to a certain point then that’s it. With mirrorless I can zoom into the image and focus pinpoint exact. To me that sold it. As a working professional I do not rely on auto focus. Do not get me wrong, I use it but I check focus on any shot that I am creating. I don’t wing it, let the camera decide and then hope for salable images.

If you have decided that you would rather stay with DSLR, there is no issue with that, you have many great cameras and systems to pick from with all the lenses you will ever need that are available to purchase today. I also know what it’s like to buy a new mirrorless and then wait for the lenses to be released and then never on time etc..

The most important thing is get something you love. Something that makes you want to use it!

 

[Rja4000]

Hi
You may want to read this article
http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/will-the-drawbacks-go-away.html

It's a pretty good summary of current mirrorless limitations and where we are going.