Infiltration
THEORY
Ethics
Observations
 
PRACTICE
Abandoned Sites
Boats
Churches
Drains/Catacombs
Hotels/Hospitals
Transit Tunnels
Utility Tunnels
Various
 
RESOURCES
Exploration Timeline
Infilnews
Infilspeak Dictionary
Usufruct Blog
Worldwide Links
Infiltration Forums home | search | login | register

Reply
Infiltration Forums > UE Main > Mirrorless Vs DSLR(Viewed 1426 times)
Heavy.Metal.Spook location:
Southern Indiana
 
 |  | 
Mirrorless Vs DSLR
< on 2/12/2021 2:39 PM >
Posted on Forum: UER ForumQuote
I'm undecided on this and would like a more professional opinion from you wonderful people 🙂


[last edit 2/15/2021 8:59 PM by Archer - edited 1 times]

dtewsacrificial location:
Bay Area, CA
 
 |  |  | DtEWSacrificial's Flickr
Re: Mirroless Vs DSLR
<Reply # 1 on 2/12/2021 8:40 PM >
Posted on Forum: UER ForumQuote
In an urbex context, often involving long exposures?

Mirrorless will endow you the advantage of a light- (but really, signal- ) amplified viewfinder, which is useful in framing very dark and even almost-no-light conditions. Mirrorless will also allow a magnified viewfinder, which allows better manual focusing in situations where AF fails, or you are truly going for critical focus on something. Mirrorless also does not require the PDAF microadjustment calibration that is needed for the dSLR to perform at full potential (and worse, is missing from lower-end dSLRs).

OTOH, dSLR won't use the imaging sensor when you are framing, which depending on your shooting style, might take a long time. This means that your imaging sensor will be used exclusively for exposure, which means it stays cooler, which in turn means that the SNR can be better. And dSLRs, by virtue of being bigger, tend to have better thermal characteristics. Also, the optical viewfinder is not limited by the display resolution, signal noise, or refresh speed of mirrorless' electronic viewfinder. I have found that it is easier to ascertain if multiple points-of-interest in a shot are all in okay-enough focus, or if the entire object-of-interest is within acceptable DoF.

That said, I often work hard to achieve critical focus, so neither OVF nor EVF have even been entirely satisfactory. A hybrid would be great, and it has been threatened many times... but never came to fruition.

This is all in the context of a 135-format ("full-frame") sensor. If you're talking about an APS-C sensor, then hands-down mirrorless for the simple fact that the electronic viewfinder can present an image to your eye as big as the manufacturer desires with no optical/physics limits.

All things considered, though... mirrorless will likely be the dominant format of the future. dSLRs will probably continue to exist, but it won't be the default anymore.

Edit: One more thing. If you also like to shoot film (which many do for a variety of reasons; I do it as a palate-cleanser to break out of my digital shooting habits), a dSLR system will allow you to do that by simply adding a film body.

A noob thinks that the camera body is the most-important thing to put their money on... but anybody beyond one will know that the system (and for many non-money-earning* photographers, the lens collection) is what will end up being the bulk of your investment. Lenses tend to be good-and-relevant for decades. Camera bodies go obsolete in about 4 years.

* (For money-earning photographers, lighting systems begin to take a bigger chunk.)


[last edit 2/12/2021 9:08 PM by dtewsacrificial - edited 2 times]

randomesquephoto   |  | 
Re: Mirroless Vs DSLR
<Reply # 2 on 2/12/2021 8:52 PM >
Posted on Forum: UER ForumQuote
I've been using mirror less shortly after I started exploring. In 2011. And, it's fine a long way!

What got me started on it personally was the small cameras! I really liked not carrying much in my bag. And instead of having to have big lenses, it left room for an extra beer!

Image quality was always good too. Currently using a Sony a7rii. But, have used various m4/3 olympus cameras. Fujifilm. And nikon Muriel's in the past. All have been really good!



RIP Blackhawk
ryanpics location:
Central Va
 
 |  |  | 
Re: Mirroless Vs DSLR
<Reply # 3 on 2/13/2021 9:56 AM >
Posted on Forum: UER ForumQuote
I've only owned mirrorless and don't plan on switching. I've shot on mirrored cameras before I the weight and size certainly feel nice, but the generally cheaper prices and compactness of the mirrorless does it for me. I got a Sony a6500 when it came out a few years ago. Specs still holding well and the camera has never had any issues.

For photos, lenses are what's gonna make the biggest difference these days. Any modern camera can make quality images if you know how to use it. If you're doing video then the body matters more for a variety of reasons, but even then lenses make up a big part in how the image is gonna look.

If you haven't invested in anything yet I'd say go with an entry level mirrorless camera and just save up for nice lenses. My friend has a Lumix gx85 that I can personally vouch for often making better looking images than my a6500.



Watcher location:
Louisiana
 
 |  | 
Re: Mirrorless Vs DSLR
<Reply # 4 on 6/15/2021 12:04 PM >
Posted on Forum: UER ForumQuote
Mirrorless is definitely the future. However, I am hoping that they become friendlier to those on a budget before I get one.



"Well, let me just jump into my time machine, go back to the Twelfth Century and ask the vampires to postpone their ancient prophecy for a few days while you take in dinner and a show."
machina   |  | 
Re: Mirrorless Vs DSLR
<Reply # 5 on 6/17/2021 4:27 PM >
Posted on Forum: UER ForumQuote
Just want to add that the low light on particularly sony mirrorless models also makes them very desirable for exploring with. It's also really nice to be able to frame in low light with the electronic viewfinder.

Also for those interested in shooting film or already have film cameras the spacing between the sensor and lens on mirrorless cameras(no mirror in the way to its smaller) allows for the use of adapters attach lenses with different mounts, Nikon F mount for example.



uLiveAndYouBurn location:
Beyond
 
 |  | 
Re: Mirrorless Vs DSLR
<Reply # 6 on 6/17/2021 4:33 PM >
Posted on Forum: UER ForumQuote
I don't use my viewfinder much anymore. The only thing it really helps for is shooting moving wildlife or moving vehicles. Everything else I shoot in live view because its the only way to make sure the shot is in focus. Why they never put ground glass in the DSLR viewfinders I'll never understand.


[last edit 6/17/2021 4:34 PM by uLiveAndYouBurn - edited 1 times]

"Aint nothin' to it but to do it"
dtewsacrificial location:
Bay Area, CA
 
 |  |  | DtEWSacrificial's Flickr
Re: Mirrorless Vs DSLR
<Reply # 7 on 6/17/2021 5:57 PM >
Posted on Forum: UER ForumQuote
Posted by uLiveAndYouBurn
I don't use my viewfinder much anymore. The only thing it really helps for is shooting moving wildlife or moving vehicles. Everything else I shoot in live view because its the only way to make sure the shot is in focus. Why they never put ground glass in the DSLR viewfinders I'll never understand.


Some dSLRs can be equipped with matte and split-prism focusing screens, notably the Canon 5DMkII and 6D. There are both factory and aftermarket options. But they do affect the metering.

With more advanced PDAF systems (eg. 5dMkIII/IV, 5DS/SR, mot to mention the 1D bodies), they have eliminated those options. But with those you are expected to calibrate/microadjust your specific copy of lenses to your body either using the services of a professional, or yourself if you are handy. There are some automated software/optical target packages on the market that can do that for you, but my experience is that 1) they seem to work better for Nikon than Canon; and 2) they don't really replace a good human-powered microadjust procedure, just approximate it.

One big advantage for mirrorless in the context of the average user is that the whole microadjustment thing is moot, which might be an overwhelming advantage unless you have special needs that reduces the relative weight of that advantage. Most people just see size and weight of MILCs (not really as big of an advantage esp. if you are carrying a few fast lenses around) and miss the really important differences.



shadowedsmile location:
Northwestern Ontario
 
 |  | 
Re: Mirrorless Vs DSLR
<Reply # 8 on 6/18/2021 1:38 PM >
Posted on Forum: UER ForumQuote
Outside of the technical aspect of DSLR vs mirrorless, the best camera to have is the one you will use the most. So if size/weight is something that is important to you, then mirrorless may be the better route. What feels nice in your hands is also important. Does the control setup feel nice and intuitive? Etc.

My go-to for the last 10 years has been my TLR and 60D, but I have recently been playing with a somewhat basic mirrorless Olympus while I waited for a lens to be repaired after my two main ones bit the dust. I like the size and weight of the EP-1, but I found I was still missing my 60D. However, sometimes I just don't want to lug a million pounds of camera gear around and the EP-1 basically fit in my coat pocket so I was more likely to bring it along. I find the EP-1 controls a bit awkward as well, but that is perhaps just something that I would need to get used to with more use. I grew up shooting a Canon F-1 so of course a Canon DSLR body is going to make more sense to me. The higher end Olympus mirrorless bodies also seem to be more along the lines of a DSLR so maybe there's something to that as well.

dpreview.com has a lot of good info and comparisons, but I think it's still really important to go and physically hold the cameras and consider what you will actually take out.



"Adventure is the respectful pursuit of trouble." - Expedition Overland
Infiltration Forums > UE Main > Mirrorless Vs DSLR(Viewed 1426 times)
Reply

Add a poll to this thread



This thread is in a public category, and can't be made private.

Powered by AvBoard AvBoard version 1.5 alpha
Page Generated In: 62 ms