DSLR vs Mirrorless

There are plenty of reasons to own either a mirrorless or DSLR FF kit, so why does one side have to be either right or wrong?

I save over two pounds and plenty of bulk carrying an A7R/55 1.8 combo instead of my old 6D/50A combo. I also gain dynamic range, eye focus AF, EVF and an articulating screen. Do I miss the snappy AF? Sure. Do I miss the top LCD? At times. Battery life/ not as much as I thought I would.

It is all about tradeoffs, and I am happy to make them to ultimately gain IQ. If I want faster Af, I can upgrade to the A7RII. As is, I have two crop bodies with great AF.

What DSLR combos match the A7Rii in IQ? I believe your answer lies there--that is the point of a professional mirrorless kit.

As a secondary measure, the A7S series can't be touched by any DSLR for high ISO work. There are some pros who find this desirable, even with the MP tradeoff.

None of this is to knock DSLR, as they are still the standard for most working pros and for plenty of reasons--durability, company support, dual card slots, top LCD, OVF preference, buffer, battery, and more. But failure to see the merit of tools like the A7Rii and A7S series is simply turning a blind eye to their merits.

delta0014 wrote in post #17961434

Hosted photo: posted by delta0014 in
./showthread.php?p=179​61434&i=i72706766
forum: Camera Vs. Camera

http://petapixel.com …mirrorless-fatal-mistake/

Many fanboys can be heard triumphantly declaring the victory of FF mirrorless over the DSLR, but like George W. Bush’s declaration of “mission accomplished” this triumphalism is grossly premature. I am allowed to say this because I am a Sony FF mirrorless owner after I too was suckered into following the mindless herd over the cliff. It was largely a mistake. How could I have been so foolish?

So we find ourselves returning for the last time to the original question: what is the point of professional grade FF mirrorless? It isn’t for the compactness (beyond shooting with just one pancake type lens), certainly not for the faster autofocus, not for faster frame rates, not for EVF/exposure preview, not for access to a high cost-performance lens habitat, not for manual focus peaking, not for the ergonomics, and almost universally not for the sake of adapting lenses.

When it comes to FF professional grade mirrorless, the answer is that there is little or no point. People are buying into it because it is an irrational fad. You end up having to buy lots of big and expensive lenses for the one tiny body, when it is preferable to have lots of smaller lenses for the one big body, since the total lens-body combination is the same anyway due to physics. In actual fact the lens-body combination makes professional grade FF mirrorless multi-lens packages larger overall. The only time you get more compactness is when you shoot with just one short focal length pancake or quasi-pancake lens for use as a walkabout camera. The moment you carry around several professional lenses, all size advantage is lost.

basically a troll thread

funny how it cherry picked a bunch of combos.

Here's a concept that escapes the poorly written article..... nobody forces you to shoot with GM lenses. I know, it's a crazy idea. This interchangeable lens idea........

I'm pretty sure, I can slap on a small lens and realize some real weight and size savings...... Like I've been doing for nearly two years now..... how could I have been so foolish!

I mean, I can cherry pick from my own collection of gear, and make the dslr system seem huge in comparison, but it's really a silly exercise. Sony users have the option of shooting some really small lenses on top of a small body. DSLR users have a lot less options, it's not rocket science.

Charlie wrote in post #17961610
basically a troll thread

funny how it cherry picked a bunch of combos.

Here's a concept that escapes the poorly written article..... nobody forces you to shoot with GM lenses. I know, it's a crazy idea. This interchangeable lens idea........

I'm pretty sure, I can slap on a small lens and realize some real weight and size savings...... Like I've been doing for nearly two years now..... how could I have been so foolish!

I mean, I can cherry pick from my own collection of gear, and make the dslr system seem huge in comparison, but it's really a silly exercise. Sony users have the option of shooting some really small lenses on top of a small body. DSLR users have a lot less options, it's not rocket science.

This.

Also, seriously, WHY DOES IT MATTER! I really just flat out don't understand why so many DSLR users feel the need to "knock Sony down a peg".

Some people prefer a DSLR some prefer mirrorless...... Fact of life.

Each has their purpose.
I like my DSLR and that's just me. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and can buy whatever fits their need.

don1163 wrote in post #17961798
Some people prefer a DSLR some prefer mirrorless...... Fact of life.

+1

The camera is just a tool so pick the one that does the job for you the best. Just like a carpenter is picking his hammer. It is not the tool that counts just the things you create with it.

Horses for courses IMHO.

Neither is right or wrong. Both have advantages and disadvantages compared to the other. Personal preferences combined with intended application probably prioritise which aspects carry the most 'importance' when choosing mirrorless vs DSLR or full-frame vs crop vs mFT etc...

There are more advantages to mirrorless than size alone. i.e. no need to MFA since the AF sensor is built into the image sensor, and better AF accuracy in general. Hit rate is damn near 100% at fast aperture, even with adapted lenses like the 50L. Of course there are downsides as well....not the best tool for sports and wildlife, though the a6300 seems to big a big leap in the right direction.

Horses for courses.