Does mirrorless do anything for you?

i wonder how long before dslr's become the hipster/ artsy thing to shoot.

i do remember shooting film into early 2000's maybe.. at which point if i recall correctly digital started trickling into the mainstream..

i dont recall clearly as i was to poor to afford more than a disposable film camera in those days..

but seems like the digital take over was pretty quick.

i dont think anything kills anything as literally as those that feel ML does nothing for them are trying to twist things into.
there will always be paper, i still see cd's for sale at CVS/walmart , they still sell film.

but no where near what it used to be.

ML will eventually dominiate. i wonder if it will be as quick as the way digital took over films spot

rantercsr wrote in post #18679293
i wonder how long before dslr's become the hipster/ artsy thing to shoot.

i do remember shooting film into early 2000's maybe.. at which point if i recall correctly digital started trickling into the mainstream..

i dont recall clearly as i was to poor to afford more than a disposable film camera in those days..

but seems like the digital take over was pretty quick.

i dont think anything kills anything as literally as those that feel ML does nothing for them are trying to twist things into.
there will always be paper, i still see cd's for sale at CVS/walmart , they still sell film.

but no where near what it used to be.

ML will eventually dominiate. i wonder if it will be as quick as the way digital took over films spot

If memory serves me correctly, once the 20D/350D and 5D hit the scene, that is when digital started to gain some traction. The APSC was the consumer affordable options and the 5D became a pretty important tool in the professional's bag. The preceding models were good for getting people to consider and dabble in a film to digital switch, but it seemed to really gain momentum in 2004-2006.

Bear Dale wrote in post #18678878
Are the 5DIV and D850 really all that big? There not in my hands and its not as if a ML is pocketable.

Whatever the advantages that ML might have, I don't see the oft proffered one of size to be all that much.

Using the Sony offerings for a few days, my hands cramped something terribly and using the EVF for extended times made me feel seasick.

I walked into a Best Buy near the Mall of Millenia in Orlando several weeks back, and to my surprise they had nearly every current DSLR and Mirrorless body on display. Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Sony, Fuji and Panasonic--no Leica or Hasselbad, but I won't hold that against them. Some had lenses attached, but most did not.

A few things stood out to me, and maybe the most glaring was how much bigger the D850 was than any other body on display. In comparison, the 5DIV felt like my old 6D--make no mistake, the D850 is big and built to take abuse.

After handling the D850, D500, D7500, 5DIV, 6DII and 77D I went to handle the a7rIII, a7III and a7rII. The gen III Sony bodies didn't feel like a step down in build from the crop offerings from Nikon and Canon--save the D500, which slots below the D850 in feel but above the gen III a7 Sony bodies IMO. The difference is the space to navigate the top and rear controls, which also makes the Sony mirrorless offerings smaller.

Certainly, most ML setups will not be pocketable. However, some of the Sony prime lenses will save some weight and space... and even some zooms, as pointed to elsewhere in this thread.

I'm not quite as big as you are (just 6', but broad) but the a6000 was as small as I could handle efficiently. Those with bigger hands, I definitely see how mirrorless setups would be challenging. As for the EVF, it has been a gift and a curse for me--but mostly a gift. I'm one of like a dozen US a99ii users (yes, I know a-mount is dead but what a fantastic body), and flawless toggle between shooting through EVF/rear-display is a feature I love. The EVF itself is handy, as I always know what my shot will look like. However, when I am shooting a game or an event that lasts hours, the EVF taxes my sight senses to varying degrees. Perhaps it is fixable, as I am farsighted, getting older, and I need to get glasses for reading. But the refresh rate of the current Sony lineup is very good. Lag is gone in my a99ii, and I hear it is in the a9, A7riii. Pretty sure I hear the same of the a7iii.

In short, you have a D850--life is good and ride that beast until it quits! You are a strapping guy who likes the feel of that no-apologies, ready-for-anything DSLR. Just as good, the wife is good to go shooting the D850. I can barely get mine to take pics with the rx-100ii, so kudos.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18679280
Software as a Service, usually seen as SaaS.

Oh, I knew that, but did not recognize it when in the middle of a photography forum discussion about mirrorless. Acronyms out of context of usual usage can be very unrecognizable, this proves.


The discussion of size and weight, how smaller will reign, harkens back thoughts about decades ago when the Olympus OM-1 made almost everyone rethink the size and weight of their SLRs. Yes, there was a very considerable non-pro rush to the compact SLR; many pros adopted them, too. But the full size SLR was still king for most pros.

The OM-1 kit , which I still own, was a lightweight and compact kit which I loved, for its size and weight. Yet for professional shooting I totally abandoned use of 135 due to inherent IQ , and turned instead to medium format. That included 12 hour days with that, as mentioned earlier. Interestingly, even when used for my own pursuit of photography as a past time, I nevertheless chose the medium format kit. Fast forward to digital, and although now I avoid the 1Dn body size and weight like the plague, my FF and 7DII are closer to my medium format rig in size and weight than they are in similarity to OM-1.

So why is it that I am not beating the doors of my mirrorless dealer in hot pursuit of OM-1 size and weight?! Because unlike the OM series stuff, the lenses are not inherently significantly lighter and smaller for mirrorless, but it is merely the body which is a bit thinner and lighter. And until a number of operational issue are adequately addressed, the cons override the desire for smaller and more compact kit,..

• Battery life inherently less (I hate that my P&S battery needs changing so much more than my dSLR battery!) -- I cannot now bear the cost of an A9 simply to address my battery life issue
  
• 'Rolling shutter' effects and inherent electronic lag of displayed info to LED by one frame refresh (vs. immediacy of optical system)
  
• electronic shutter not compatible with electronic flash
  
• the expense any time you change kit fully to another brand...new flash units and wireless flash accessories, new camera accessories (L-bracket, wireless remote camera trigger, right angle finder, etc.)
  
  

The post I replied to had nothing to do with photography directly, it was around other areas of commerce and life where technology has tried to remove old legacy artifacts.

The reply to links are pretty important in AMASS forum life.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18679344
The post I replied to had nothing to do with photography directly, it was around other areas of commerce and life where technology has tried to remove old legacy artifacts.

I did not pick up the inferrence when your reply did not quote the earlier message to which your comment was aimed, and I missed the POTN reference for context because I find them too easy to miss.

It's only because of mirrorless cameras that I have finally been able to finally realize my long-held desire to photograph with a digital technical camera and/or digital view camera.

I do quite a lot of architectural-type photography, where structures have a significant role in my compositions, so at a minimum, having rise / fall / shift movements is a basic requirement for me.

Thanks to the shorter lens registers of mirrorless cameras -- typically an inch or more shorter than most DSLRs -- I am able to adapt them for use as poor-man's digital backs on my Cambo WDS tech camera and Toyo VX23D view camera.

In turn, the Cambo and Toyo function as lens adapters, offering the possibility of having movements available with every lens I use, not just dedicated shift or tilt-shift lenses.

This is a big plus for me, because it means I can choose the lenses I use for their rendering quality, independently of whether they also offer shift or tilt-shift features. It also means I can easily use rise / fall / shift movements on the rear of the camera, so I avoid any parallax issues, instead of on the front of the camera, as is typically the case with most T/S lenses used without awkward clamping systems, etc.

Which also explains why I'm so disappointed to see the new Nikon camera will have a sufficiently large and deep grip as to preclude my using it as a replacement for my A7R. (Unfortunately, the same is also true of the A7RII and A7RIII cameras, which is why I was holding out hope for Nikon's upcoming mirrorless camera. Not to mention that the A7R also does a noticeably better job of capturing detail in dark shadow areas than both of its successor cameras, so even if I could use them, they wouldn't actually be an upgrade to the A7R overall.)

And unless Canon steps up their sensor game and comes out with a camera that a significantly wider exposure range than any of their present cameras do, their mirrorless camera won't even merit my consideration. That's because I photograph mostly at night using long-exposures at base ISO for maximum image quality and as a result, I need as much exposure range as technically possible.

Audii-Dudii wrote in post #18679360
It's only because of mirrorless cameras that I have finally been able to finally realize my long-held desire to photograph with a digital technical camera and/or digital view camera.

I do quite a lot of architectural-type photography, where structures have a significant role in my compositions, so at a minimum, having rise / fall / shift movements is a basic requirement for me.

Thanks to the shorter lens registers of mirrorless cameras -- typically an inch or more shorter than most DSLRs -- I am able to adapt them for use as poor-man's digital backs on my Cambo WDS tech camera and Toyo VX23D view camera.

In turn, the Cambo and Toyo function as lens adapters, offering the possibility of having movements available with every lens I use, not just dedicated shift or tilt-shift lenses.

This is a big plus for me, because it means I can choose the lenses I use for their rendering quality, independently of whether they also offer shift or tilt-shift features. It also means I can easily use rise / fall / shift movements on the rear of the camera, so I avoid any parallax issues, instead of on the front of the camera, as is typically the case with most T/S lenses used without awkward clamping systems, etc.

Which also explains why I'm so disappointed to see the new Nikon camera will have a sufficiently large and deep grip as to preclude my using it as a replacement for my A7R. (Unfortunately, the same is also true of the A7RII and A7RIII cameras, which is why I was holding out hope for Nikon's upcoming mirrorless camera. Not to mention that the A7R also does a noticeably better job of capturing detail in dark shadow areas than both of its successor cameras, so even if I could use them, they wouldn't actually be an upgrade to the A7R overall.)

And unless Canon steps up their sensor game and comes out with a camera that a significantly wider exposure range than any of their present cameras do, their mirrorless camera won't even merit my consideration. That's because I photograph mostly at night using long-exposures at base ISO for maximum image quality and as a result, I need as much exposure range as technically possible.

I am experienced in the use of a Perspective Control lens on both film and digital FF cameras to do architectural photography.

1. the FL is usually far too long for the small size of the digital format; ultra short FL lenses for view cameras simply are not available
   
2. the distance between lens on front standard and the body mounted on the rear standard forces the use of bag bellows, and even then you are limited in the minimum FL you can use practically
   
   ...and in addition it is not possible to use the digital FF lens on the view camera as its distance assumption to the focal plane is far too short to work on a typical view camera.
   

Wilt wrote in post #18679348
I did not pick up the inferrence when your reply did not quote the earlier message to which your comment was aimed, and I missed the POTN reference for context because I find them too easy to miss.

Hopefully this picture clarifies, makes it hard to follow when Hogloff made his reply as a change to the quote in his reply, but this should clear it up.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18679393
Hopefully this picture clarifies, makes it hard to follow when Hogloff made his reply as a change to the quote in his reply, but this should clear it up.

Hosted photo: posted by TeamSpeed in
./showthread.php?p=186​79393&i=i261630903
forum: Camera Vs. Camera

Thx, we need not belabor this subthread. Your 'SaaS' reference simply struck a chord in me that today's texting intense generation uses acronyms all too readily, under the assumption they will be understood by anybody reading their message (without first using the long form term earlier in the same conversation), which is so often not the case.
I knew 'SaaS' but nevertheless could not puzzle that one out in an unfamiliar context of photography discussion, so I asked for the meaning.

Sure, no problem.

I have modified a Cambo WDS technical camera (and also a Toyo VX-23D view camera, not shown) to accept a Sony A7R body on their back side and various 35mm and medium-format lenses on their front side -- in effect, turning it into a very large, nearly univerersal lens adapter -- as so:

Wilt wrote in post #18679415
Thx, we need not belabor this subthread. Your 'SaasS' reference simply struck a chord in me that today's texting intense generation uses acronyms all too readily, under the assumption they will be understood by anybody reading their message (without first using the long form term earlier in the same conversation), which is so often not the case.
I knew 'SaaS' but nevertheless could not puzzle that one out in an unfamiliar context of photography discussion, so I asked for the meaning.

If you knew what SaaS was, and you know how to check the context of the reply, then why even ask in the first place?

Especially since you did the very same thing in another thread. What is "Alexa" and what does it have to do with final output aspect ratios for photography? Alexa is just another acronym or industry nickname. I wouldn't make the assumption everyone knows what Alexa is either, nor could they figure out what you meant by the comment in conjunction with the thread and previous reply. I guess I am confused by the seemingly double standard here.

Wilt wrote in post #18679423
Just don't bother to try asking Alexa

https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=18679423

So yes, no need to belabor the point, since there was no need for the point to have been made. Forgiven and forgotten...

Because I would be ASSuming that your use of 'SaaS' is exactly the same as my understanding...and it is bad to make such assumptions in informal (out of context of an identified industry) discussion, and I was (frankly) too lazy to try to guess which industry (camera?/software?/oth​er?) was being referenced for context.

'PC' = Personal Computer, or Programmable Controller, or Printed Circuit, or Politically Correct, or (?) for one example.

As I said, no point in belaboring continued discussion on this (although I have seemed to perturb you into frenzy over it, I am sorry)

Oh the memories of the dramatic, Frenzy from years past!

On the flip side, looks like Nikon is announcing their mirrorless offering here in a couple of weeks. The Canon rumors have all but dried up at this point? I am sure the MILC threads will be all the rage if Nikon does announce something Aug 23rd, and if they aren't using something of Sony's to do it, otherwise more of the same types of discussions.

Nikon just posted they have increased profits despite the impacts mirrorless cameras have had on their DSLR sales (primarily due to the D850), so they are still very viable and kicking. Should be even better if they bring a good ML camera to the market here shortly. I won't get a Nikon however, right now I am still intrigued by the A73, or whatever Canon should announce.

mickeyb105 wrote in post #18679336
I walked into a Best Buy near the Mall of Millenia in Orlando several weeks back, and to my surprise they had nearly every current DSLR and Mirrorless body on display. Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Sony, Fuji and Panasonic--no Leica or Hasselbad, but I won't hold that against them. Some had lenses attached, but most did not.

Best Buy is even having photography workshops now. Not only that, they even have a restocking fee on both cameras and lenses. I guess they got tired of all those who "rented" there.