mirrorless v mirror

Quote:

---

The large LCD screen on the back is adjustable on the GX7, but the EVF is not.

---

You've missed a trick here Manfred :) Yes, the menu says monitor brightness, but when you look through the viewfinder it magically says "viewfinder brightness" They are independently changeable.

Dave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davidedric

You've missed a trick here Manfred :) Yes, the menu says monitor brightness, but when you look through the viewfinder it magically says "viewfinder brightness" They are independently changeable.

Dave

---

Thanks Dave. I tried it and it seems to be a somewhat useless function. I have the default "auto" and outdoors that's as bright as it gets, so unfortunately, there is no way to turn thing up higher in bright light. I guess I could turn it down in dim light, but again limited testing suggests it does so automatically as well.

I fear you re right - I'd never actually tried it!

All viewfinders are a bit of a pain for me. I have to wear spectacles, partly because of astigmatism, but mostly because after cataract surgery my eyes can no longer focus, also I have to wear the kind that darken in sunlight because my pupils don't change size very much. All to do with getting old :(

Dave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davidedric

All viewfinders are a bit of a pain for me.

---

The main reason I went full-frame is the large viewfinder these cameras have. I can see the whole scene I'm shooting, wearing my glasses without going through extreme contortions. Visually, my biggest issue is astigmatism; I'm not aware of any viewfinder attachment that corrects for that so I do wear glasses to shoot.

The sad thing with mirrorless cameras is that the viewfinder can be any size the manufacturer wants it to be. The downside of a larger one is obviously a slightly larger camera and a more expensive display. A brighter display is also possible, but that will reduce battery life (or increase camera size for a larger battery).

I cut my photographic teeth on cameras of this size and weight...

4x5 Inch Graflex

http://rpcrowe.smugmug.com/Other/Pho...20Camera-S.jpg

4x5 Inch Speed Graphic

http://rpcrowe.smugmug.com/Other/Pho...ic%20Kit-S.jpg

So, I don't really have too much empathy for today's photographers who complain about the size and weight of Canon or Nikon crop format cameras.

I shoot with a pair of Canon 7D cameras carrying the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and a 70-200mm f/4L IS lenses. Even though I will be reaching my 75th birthday, this June, I still have enough strength not to balk at carrying a few pounds of camera gear. The total weight of my two cameras and pair of lenses is 3037 grams or about 6.6 pounds.

In return for that weight, I get excellent image quality from 17mm to 200mm, with fast and accurate auto-focus as well as a constant f/2.8 in my mid range zoom and a constant f/4 in my longer zoom. I can boost the long side of my 70-200mm f/4L IS lens to 280mm at f/5.6 with the addition of MY 1.4x TC at only a few ounces extra weight.

I am certainly not recommending this setup to all. I am just saying that I think it is one of the best weight to performance packages I have ever used. I have shot (using some different cameras) with these lenses on trips to Alaska, China, Italy, Greece and Turkey and have never found them lacking. So I am not looking to reduce the weight of the gear that I carry and therefore am not really interested in the mirrorless systems...

I like TTL viewfinders and detest using the LCD as a viewfinder for 99% of my imagery. I also don't really like EVF since it seems fairly difficult to follow fast moving subjects with the electronic viewfinder. I will admit that I have not used a top-line camera which incorporates an EVF.

I am a general purpose photographer and shoot everything from sports to wildlife to people and dogs. An efficient viewfinder is one thing that I will not compromise about...

Me too Richard :) My guardian had some English reflex 1/4 plate from before WWII which I used on holidays from photo school.
When I started using my Canon s20 P&S for BCUs of caterpillars I enjoyed the LCD as an equivalent of the LF ground glass screen, sort of :)

Perhaps expensive but I have often wondered when people complain about viewfinder why they do not modify the VF to suit their eye ... though perhaps this is not quite as simple as a different dioptre, as Manfred alludes to I think, that suits my situation.

I assume you have a significant investment in Nikon glass, so that suggests looking at the other FF Nikon DSLR alternatives, in particular the D750 which combines the best of the D810, the D4S and adds some of the features associated with mirrorless cameras, like tilting LCD panel and WiFi.....but the Sony A7 series has great stuff, beginning with full frame....the A7 II at 24 megapixels adds image stabilization, the A7R adds 36 megapixels which may be important for your landscapes, and the A7S is the low light king, mirrorless or mirrored. The A7R and A7s arent out in series II yet, so you may want to wait for whatever benefit comes from stabilization. You havent mentioned video at all, and if that's not important, the D750 gets outstanding reviews - I have not used it but have lusted for it. Still heavier than the Sony A7 series....the mirrorless cameras, with adapters, can use virtually all of your Nikon glass and for that matter Canon, Leica, and you name it.....

Just a question... What is the comparison of shutter lag between a top-line mirrorless camera and a top-line DSLR. Shutter lag is one of the reasons I graduated from a P&S to a DSLR. The shutter lag of the P&S Olympus 5050Z drove me crazy in comparison to the virtually no shutter lag of the manual focus Canon A-1 film camera.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rpcrowe

Just a question... What is the comparison of shutter lag between a top-line mirrorless camera and a top-line DSLR. Shutter lag is one of the reasons I graduated from a P&S to a DSLR. The shutter lag of the P&S Olympus 5050Z drove me crazy in comparison to the virtually no shutter lag of the manual focus Canon A-1 film camera.

---

Apples to apples comparison; i.e. a DSLR versus a mirrorless camera that is in the same price range. No difference in the shutter lag at all. With my DSLR I can shoot at a burst rate of 5 - 6 frames per second. With my mirrorless, that's 40 frames / sec with the electronic shutter (albeit only 4MP images and the viewfinder can't keep up so you're shooting blind).

The amusing aspect of "shutter lag" is that people do not include the time they spent focusing, setting shutter and aperture with the 'old instantainous cameras' and appreciate that they can do similar with their digital camera [ of the kind most here use] :)
Once it is set up and ready the digital camera is as fast as the reaction time of its operator.
Of course with some [sports] subjects the ability for the automatics to be quick I believe is answered with special models ? But even with an ordinary camera it is not impossible to capture action.

"Gotchaa!"
http://i57.tinypic.com/dyrmer.jpg
Nikon 5700 bridge
"Touch Down" same camera dull day 1/50 shutter I think
http://i60.tinypic.com/1oubgm.jpg

This is a most interesting and instructive discussion! Only days ago I decided in favour of the D750 and bought one when a local retailer was offering very significant discounts on cameras. Have not had much chance to play with it yet, but so far I'm delighted with the shots from the D750. Can crop to a huge degree and still get an image that looks great.

Will wait and see over the next couple of years to see how mirrorless technology develops further. It sounds extremely promising.

Further to #14 and #15
The thought of somebody who normally uses FF going out with a GX7 and complaining about lack of keepers suggests to me an incompatibility problem despite the high level of general expertise of the user. I see it as one of the basic facts of life.
I also think in reflection of viewing the shots that did make it to CiC that they were touristy shots and not shots which suited the camera or maybe that's wrong and it was simply the first reason.

I do not think a long extended tour makes for good photography.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jcuknz

Further to #14 and #15
The thought of somebody who normally uses FF going out with a GX7 and complaining about lack of keepers suggests to me an incompatibility problem despite the high level of general expertise of the user. I see it as one of the basic facts of life.
I also think in reflection of viewing the shots that did make it to CiC that they were touristy shots and not shots which suited the camera or maybe that's wrong and it was simply the first reason.

I do not think a long extended tour makes for good photography.

---

Sorry, I have to ask now: what is a GX7?

Lukas

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lukaswerth

Sorry, I have to ask now: what is a GX7?

Lukas

---

Panasonic GX7 http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pana...lumix-dmc-gx7/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jcuknz

Further to #14 and #15
The thought of somebody who normally uses FF going out with a GX7 and complaining about lack of keepers suggests to me an incompatibility problem despite the high level of general expertise of the user. I see it as one of the basic facts of life.

---

Strangely enough John, I strongly disagree.

I spent a lot of time perfecting my shooting skills on the GX7 before hitting the road and have shot it considerably more than the D800 over the past 8 months (probably well over 15,000 shots by now, versus few thousand on the D800), which is more than enough time time to become quite familiar with the pros and cons of the camera. Travel photos is generally what I do as often as I can (and do that fairly well).

Much of the analysis I provide here is my professional opinion as a designer and engineering manager with many decades of experience in this type of analysis. In real world issues there is no "best" solution, but rather a series of tradeoffs that have to be understood and quantified to come up for a "best" solution given what is available on the market for a given set of requirements.

Part of the reason I took the GX7 to the pow wow last weekend is that i knew that I would be shooting in conditions that were similar to those I've successfully used it before. Shooting side by side, I now better understand why one camera works better for me than the other (hint - I've written about this before; slower focus of contrast detect vs phase detect means that I was missing the "decisive moment" by a fraction of a second. Unfortunately, the fraction of a second to lock focus varied a bit and trying to anticipate when to press the shutter release was a bit hit and miss.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jcuknz

I also think in reflection of viewing the shots that did make it to CiC that they were touristy shots and not shots which suited the camera or maybe that's wrong and it was simply the first reason.

---

Obviously the type of shots I do are not to your taste. That's okay by me as I'm taking them for myself.

Not suited for the camera? I would certainly hope that a camera body that cost me $1000 CAD at the time would be suitable for most types of photography. At the time I bought it, the only "better" model that Panasonic had was the GH3 (which, like the GH4 that came out to replace it) is primarily a video camera that also shoots stills.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jcuknz

I do not think a long extended tour makes for good photography.

---

That of course is pure speculation (and in my view, incorrect). Some of Annie Leibowitz's best images came from the time she spent a full year touring with the Rolling Stones and some of the National Geographic work can mean a few months in the field (my wife had the opportunity to spend some time with a National Geo photo team when she was doing some work up on the Arctic Ocean)