Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 25 Jul 2014 (Friday) 14:55
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Whats so special about mirrorless bodies?

 
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,594 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6552
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jul 27, 2014 02:48 |  #76

nekrosoft13 wrote in post #17057716 (external link)
like everyone else already said. lighter, smaller, better then majority of DSLR, often better image quality then the best that Canon crop DSLRs can offer.

Some mirrorless have even better image quality then the best Canon can offer.

No more neck, back, shoulder pains after lugging DSLRs around.

Mirrorless is not necessarily light. Carrying an A7r with 50mm, almost as heavy as the 6D and 50L.

larger the sensor, larger the lenses.


Sony A7siii/A7iii/ZV-1 - FE 24/1.4 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 - 28-200 RXD
Panasonic G9 - Laowa 7.5/2 - PL 15/1.7 - P 42.5/1.8 - OM 75/1.8 - PL 10-25/1.7 - P 12-32 - P 14-140

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
pwm2
"Sorry for being a noob"
Avatar
8,626 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2007
Location: Sweden
     
Jul 27, 2014 03:06 |  #77

Charlie wrote in post #17058614 (external link)
Mirrorless is not necessarily light. Carrying an A7r with 50mm, almost as heavy as the 6D and 50L.

larger the sensor, larger the lenses.

Except that the distance between lens and sensor does a big difference for wider lenses. So no - not all 50mm lenses are the same size/weight even if they happen to have the same maximum aperture.


5DMk2 + BG-E6 | 40D + BG-E2N | 350D + BG-E3 + RC-1 | Elan 7E | Minolta Dimage 7U | (Gear thread)
10-22 | 16-35/2.8 L II | 20-35 | 24-105 L IS | 28-135 IS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.8 II | 70-200/2.8 L IS | 100/2.8 L IS | 100-400 L IS | Sigma 18-200DC
Speedlite 420EZ | Speedlite 580EX | EF 1.4x II | EF 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jocau
Goldmember
Avatar
1,838 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 338
Joined Mar 2012
Location: Belgium
     
Jul 27, 2014 04:08 |  #78

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17058028 (external link)
I know of numerous wedding photogs who've abandoned their entire FF Canon or Nikon kit to go with Fuji offerings. TTL is a luxury many photographers choose not to use (myself included). I've been in the exact situation you brought up and used manual flash... no issues. If the lighting is constant (it pretty much always is in a wedding) then there's pretty much no reason to use TTL.

http://www.kevinmullin​sphotography.co.uk/fuj​i/ (external link)
http://www.colinnichol​lsphotography.com …lm-x-cameras-xe1-weddings (external link)
http://www.albionrow.c​om/for-togs/fuji-x-cameras/ (external link)

If their next line of sensors which are rumored to come this year give ISO100 (or lower) and ISO12800 (or higher) at the RAW level, I just might make the full switch.

The lighting wasn't consistent at all during the evening party. The building in which the evening party was held basically consisted of 3 rooms (the main/dance room, the room with all the food in it and a hallway where the weddingbooth app was installed). All three rooms had different light levels. And there were also 2 outside areas where the light levels differed a lot according to where you were standing. The photographer very frequently moved from one area to another. So while it would have been possible to use a speedlite in manual mode, she would have missed shots this way.


550D | EF-S 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 IS | EF 50mm F/1.8 II | EF 70-200mm F/4L IS | Speedlite 580EX II | LumoPro LP180 | Gitzo GT3541XLS | Arca-Swiss Monoball Z1 SP | ONA Bowery (black, non-leather) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
speedync
Goldmember
1,532 posts
Gallery: 121 photos
Likes: 1090
Joined May 2011
Location: Geelong, Australia
     
Jul 27, 2014 04:14 |  #79

The EVF giving a simulated exposure is a pretty cool feature of mirrorless I reckon. Tweak your exposure & watch the changes in real time. As opposed to taking shot after shot & chimping just to get your exposure somewhere near it.
I also think APS-C is the sweet spot for mirrorless bodies, as dedicated APS-C lenses are a lot smaller & lighter then their FF versions, and match the reduction of size & sometimes weight of the body much better. Just a couple of things I personally like.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jocau
Goldmember
Avatar
1,838 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 338
Joined Mar 2012
Location: Belgium
     
Jul 27, 2014 04:28 |  #80

The one thing that really makes me jealous is the Dual Mode EVF of the X-T1 because it looks like it makes manual focusing dead simple.


550D | EF-S 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 IS | EF 50mm F/1.8 II | EF 70-200mm F/4L IS | Speedlite 580EX II | LumoPro LP180 | Gitzo GT3541XLS | Arca-Swiss Monoball Z1 SP | ONA Bowery (black, non-leather) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,828 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 4494
Joined Oct 2012
Location: GA Mountains
     
Jul 27, 2014 10:04 |  #81

Charlie wrote in post #17058614 (external link)
Mirrorless is not necessarily light. Carrying an A7r with 50mm, almost as heavy as the 6D and 50L.

larger the sensor, larger the lenses.

This is the main reason I'm not interested in that system right now. They have the potential to make those lenses smaller and lighter, but right now you're right, it's really not much smaller or lighter than a 6D setup.

jocau wrote in post #17058678 (external link)
The lighting wasn't consistent at all during the evening party. The building in which the evening party was held basically consisted of 3 rooms (the main/dance room, the room with all the food in it and a hallway where the weddingbooth app was installed). All three rooms had different light levels. And there were also 2 outside areas where the light levels differed a lot according to where you were standing. The photographer very frequently moved from one area to another. So while it would have been possible to use a speedlite in manual mode, she would have missed shots this way.

Variances in the lighting our easy to compensate for by changing settings on the body though. A quick change to your aperture or ISO is all it takes for most shots. It comes down to mostly preferences. I get that a lot of shooters like TTL, that doesn't mean you can't shoot a wedding without it.


Fuji X-T3 // Fuji X-Pro2 (Full Spectrum) // Fuji X-H1 // Fuji X-T1
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)www.LucasGPhoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
"spouting off stupid things"
Avatar
56,267 posts
Likes: 2948
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Jul 27, 2014 10:26 |  #82

Charlie wrote in post #17058614 (external link)
Mirrorless is not necessarily light. Carrying an A7r with 50mm, almost as heavy as the 6D and 50L.


EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17059081 (external link)
This is the main reason I'm not interested in that system right now. They have the potential to make those lenses smaller and lighter, but right now you're right, it's really not much smaller or lighter than a 6D setup.

Seriously? The two are very different. The 6D/50f1.2 combo is a bit over 46 oz while the Sony with 50 f1.4 is just over 24 oz. That's almost 1/2 the weight. Even the 6D with a 50 f/1.4 attacked is over 37 oz.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,594 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6552
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jul 27, 2014 11:33 |  #83

gjl711 wrote in post #17059107 (external link)
Seriously? The two are very different. The 6D/50f1.2 combo is a bit over 46 oz while the Sony with 50 f1.4 is just over 24 oz. That's almost 1/2 the weight. Even the 6D with a 50 f/1.4 attacked is over 37 oz.

I should have clarified, using 50mm F0.95 on the Sony. ~1200g combo.


Sony A7siii/A7iii/ZV-1 - FE 24/1.4 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 - 28-200 RXD
Panasonic G9 - Laowa 7.5/2 - PL 15/1.7 - P 42.5/1.8 - OM 75/1.8 - PL 10-25/1.7 - P 12-32 - P 14-140

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
4,391 posts
Likes: 829
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Jul 27, 2014 11:54 |  #84

pwm2 wrote in post #17058632 (external link)
Except that the distance between lens and sensor does a big difference for wider lenses. So no - not all 50mm lenses are the same size/weight even if they happen to have the same maximum aperture.

Yeah, look at the 50mm lenses photogs drool over: the Sigma Art and Ziess lenses are behemoths! The Sony A7 looks promising, but I'm still a DSLR kinda person. The only way mirrorless cameras stay light is by using their kit lenses. To stay small, they then have to have smaller apertures. They still have a long way to go to have a complete system. It's not surprising that some of the news about the World Cup was that photographers were required to wear Sony badges, but the only systems you saw on the field were the big Canon and Nikon lenses.

Eventually I might get a mirrorless with kit lens for the portability. But for versatility, I still like lugging a DSLR system.


Canon 5D mk IV
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
"spouting off stupid things"
Avatar
56,267 posts
Likes: 2948
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Jul 27, 2014 12:10 |  #85

Charlie wrote in post #17059235 (external link)
I should have clarified, using 50mm F0.95 on the Sony. ~1200g combo.

Well that's kind of stacking the deck. Pick a 50mm that's so far out of reach for 99% of photographers and a whopping f/.95 as well. Bottom line, the body alone will save you just a tad over 10oz and quite a bit of size. Clearly it's not for everyone and there are plenty of situations where it will perform worse than a SLR but a small, light FF body that can deliver better IQ and nearly the same performance as a DSLR is quite a feat.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pwm2
"Sorry for being a noob"
Avatar
8,626 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2007
Location: Sweden
     
Jul 27, 2014 12:15 |  #86

davesrose wrote in post #17059276 (external link)
Yeah, look at the 50mm lenses photogs drool over: the Sigma Art and Ziess lenses are behemoths! The Sony A7 looks promising, but I'm still a DSLR kinda person. The only way mirrorless cameras stay light is by using their kit lenses. To stay small, they then have to have smaller apertures. They still have a long way to go to have a complete system. It's not surprising that some of the news about the World Cup was that photographers were required to wear Sony badges, but the only systems you saw on the field were the big Canon and Nikon lenses.

Eventually I might get a mirrorless with kit lens for the portability. But for versatility, I still like lugging a DSLR system.

Look at the small and nice Leica lenses. They aren't slow kit lenses.

A f/1.2 wide/normal lens for a mirrorless body can be made smaller than a f/1.2 wide/normal lens for a SLR body because it doesn't need as many lens elements when the lens can be placed much closer to the sensor. But it requires native lenses made for that flange distance. To get the size/weight advantage, you can't use lenses designed for a SLR body and an adapter to force the lens further away from the sensor to mimic the use with the original SLR body.

Ever wondered why not all lenses are pancakes? But you do see how small the pancake lenses are - because they happen to have a focal length where no extra lens elements are needed to get the image perfectly projected onto the sensor. Changing the flange greatly affects the options available when making the lenses. It doesn't really mater for tele lenses but it can matter very, very much for wider lenses.


5DMk2 + BG-E6 | 40D + BG-E2N | 350D + BG-E3 + RC-1 | Elan 7E | Minolta Dimage 7U | (Gear thread)
10-22 | 16-35/2.8 L II | 20-35 | 24-105 L IS | 28-135 IS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.8 II | 70-200/2.8 L IS | 100/2.8 L IS | 100-400 L IS | Sigma 18-200DC
Speedlite 420EZ | Speedlite 580EX | EF 1.4x II | EF 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
4,391 posts
Likes: 829
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Jul 27, 2014 12:28 |  #87

pwm2 wrote in post #17059327 (external link)
Look at the small and nice Leica lenses. They aren't slow kit lenses.

Because Leica has been developing range finder cameras for so long, and the M system is a bit of a bigger budget then your typical point and shoot camera:D

To be serious, I do think there's some marketing lies coming from mirrorless brands that like to claim equivalencies in FL with their lenses vs 35mm formats. They then don't do the full format conversion by also multipling the aperture. To get the full equivalency in DOF, you also have to multiply crop factor to your aperture. A 400mm 2.8 FF lens is huge because it's letting in more light.


Canon 5D mk IV
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pwm2
"Sorry for being a noob"
Avatar
8,626 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2007
Location: Sweden
     
Jul 27, 2014 12:39 |  #88

davesrose wrote in post #17059347 (external link)
Because Leica has been developing range finder cameras for so long, and the M system is a bit of a bigger budget then your typical point and shoot camera:D

It isn't because they have had so many years. It's because the range finder cameras allows smaller lenses.

And so does mirrorless cameras. So if people start to invest in mirrorless cameras, then the lens manufacturers will reciprocate by designing similarly small lenses for the mirrorless cameras. But no one invests the money in dedicated lenses for a specific line of mirrorless cameras unless they see that there is an interest.

To be serious, I do think there's some marketing lies coming from mirrorless brands that like to claim equivalencies in FL with their lenses vs 35mm formats. They then don't do the full format conversion by also multipling the aperture. To get the full equivalency in DOF, you also have to multiply crop factor to your aperture. A 400mm 2.8 FF lens is huge because it's letting in more light.

But I'm talking about the ability to make small lenses for fullformat sensors. So no need for any marketing lies.

Your example with 400mm is a tele lens. As I did write, it's the wider lenses that can be made smaller. Same with EF vs EF-S. EF-S isn't needed for tele lenses, because there isn't really much to gain. But there is lots to gain on the wider lenses by having the lens reach into the body and so reduce the distance between the lens elements and the sensor.

A tele lens is able to project the image far into the camera body. A wide lens is not. So a wide lens basically needs an extra lens at the back - a bit similar to a teleconverter but used to reproject the image far enough into the body. A pancake lens is an example of a lens where the focal length, compared to the image sensor size and registration distance, is able to project the image directly on the sensor without any "booster" stage. So suddenly, several cm of length can be removed from the lens. But you can also gain advantages in the diameter of the lens for the wider lenses when designing them for a body with a short flange distance.


5DMk2 + BG-E6 | 40D + BG-E2N | 350D + BG-E3 + RC-1 | Elan 7E | Minolta Dimage 7U | (Gear thread)
10-22 | 16-35/2.8 L II | 20-35 | 24-105 L IS | 28-135 IS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.8 II | 70-200/2.8 L IS | 100/2.8 L IS | 100-400 L IS | Sigma 18-200DC
Speedlite 420EZ | Speedlite 580EX | EF 1.4x II | EF 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
4,391 posts
Likes: 829
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Jul 27, 2014 13:01 |  #89

pwm2 wrote in post #17059363 (external link)
But I'm talking about the ability to make small lenses for fullformat sensors. So no need for any marketing lies.

Most mirrorless cameras aren't FF. The only FF mirrorless system is the Sony A7, and most its criticisms is the lack of native lenses. At least Leica is established and offers a full range if you can spend that kind of money.

There are quite a few amazon customer reviews of the micro 4/3 cameras stating they believe their small telephotos equals the large 35mm teles in every way. Olympus is one of the worst offenders of perpetuating this lie by having an overhead photo of a small zoom lens over a large 35mm telephoto lens.

So fundamentally, I think you're right that manufacturers can make smaller yet faster lenses for the APS/ 4/3rds cameras...but they don't seem to have any incentive for investing in that.


Canon 5D mk IV
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pwm2
"Sorry for being a noob"
Avatar
8,626 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2007
Location: Sweden
     
Jul 27, 2014 13:12 |  #90

davesrose wrote in post #17059406 (external link)
Most mirrorless cameras aren't FF. The only FF mirrorless system is the Sony A7, and most its criticisms is the lack of native lenses. At least Leica is established and offers a full range if you can spend that kind of money.

But you have to separate the debate of sensor size for the debate of advantages/disadvantag​es with mirrorless bodies.

Whatever sensor size you have, you still get a real advantage in ability to make smaller wide lenses if you can move the lens closer to the sensor.

There are quite a few amazon customer reviews of the micro 4/3 cameras stating they believe their small telephotos equals the large 35mm teles in every way.

That's a completely separate debate - no need to drag in the sensor size war in this thread. Yes, 400/2.8 or "400 equivalent"/2.8 are totally different things. Which is also why some quite cheap P&S or bridge cameras can have quite fast lenses - their real focal length is much smaller than what a full-frame body would require for the same fov.

Olympus is one of the worst offenders of perpetuating this lie by having an overhead photo of a small zoom lens over a large 35mm telephoto lens.

So they may be an offender - but it's not relevant to the DSLR/mirrorless debate. And it isn't relevant to the conclusion that a mirrorless body with a fixed sensor size can have physically smaller wide lenses than a DSLR body with the same fixed size can. All because of the reduced distance between the mount and the sensor.

So fundamentally, I think you're right that manufacturers can make smaller yet faster lenses for the APS/ 4/3rds cameras...but they don't seem to have any incentive for investing in that.

I have never debated the ability to have smaller lenses for smaller sensors. I'm debating smaller lenses for same-size sensors. Because there is no mirror that force the lens to be a big distance from the sensor.

The quality of a Leica lens comes from the Leica skill.
The smaller size of a Leica lens comes from solving a simpler problem with a range finder than with a DSLR.


5DMk2 + BG-E6 | 40D + BG-E2N | 350D + BG-E3 + RC-1 | Elan 7E | Minolta Dimage 7U | (Gear thread)
10-22 | 16-35/2.8 L II | 20-35 | 24-105 L IS | 28-135 IS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.8 II | 70-200/2.8 L IS | 100/2.8 L IS | 100-400 L IS | Sigma 18-200DC
Speedlite 420EZ | Speedlite 580EX | EF 1.4x II | EF 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

22,267 views & 0 likes for this thread
Whats so special about mirrorless bodies?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is beermode
805 guests, 248 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.