UKC

This chap makes a good case.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OP44dXn2Q-w&nohtml5=False

In reply to The Lemming:
No

In reply to The Lemming:

Lot of birds around these parts.

In reply to felt:

I only did a tiny bit of research into this a while ago, but I thought the main problem with photographing birds with a mirrorless camera was that the autofocus is too slow, but the guy in that video seems to suggest that the autofocus on that Sony one is quite quick?

The thought of a silent, compact, light camera that can do everything an SLR can and could be hooked up to (for example) a 100-400 lens for wildlife, and a 24mm lens for climbing shots would be quite appealing.

In reply to The Lemming:

I've chatted with my brother James about this a fair bit recently. He knows a thing or two about DSLRs. I use mirrorless cameras, because for my requirements they are better – I mainly shoot mountain landscapes and other shots where time is not critical. I don't need autofocus or an optical viewfinder, but I *do* need a small and light camera. However, James is a wildlife photographer, and even with his knowledge of what's available he is 100% certain that mirrorless cameras just aren't up to the mark for all needs (yet).

Right now, as I see things, mirrorless cameras are better for some tasks, as good as DSLRs for others, but not quite there yet for things like sport and wildlife photography. I think they'll get there, but it may be a while.

In reply to The Lemming:

I'm a bit conflicted for this, as 90% of my photography is fine with a compact. I reckon 5% would be fine with a mirrorless, but for the remaining 5% nothing but an SLR will do.

The question then is do I lug an SLR around for a tiny minority of my shots?

In reply to The Lemming:

Historically mirrorless have struggled with BIF/sports because they didn't have phase-detection autofocus which is the best autofocus method for subjects moving towards or away from the camera. However, recent models like the E-M1 and later A7s have phase detect pixels on their sensors which have made them viable for BIF/sports. They're not as good as the better DSLRs from Canon & Nikon, but I reckon they'll match them within 1 or 2 model iterations. It is possible as the Nikon v1(?) has good phase detect autofocus and is mirrorless.

In reply to RyanOsborne:

Birds are dinosaurs was my point.

In reply to The Lemming:

I'll be honest here, and admit that I don't know anything about mirrorless?

But is the subject more complex than one light capturing device having a mirror and the other light capturing device removing the mirror from the process?

What does a mirror bring to the table that makes a dSLR better than a mirrorless?

Is the mirror more than just an aid to viewing the subject and it is no longer required for the digital age?

And while I'm at it, can you have a camera with a fully working android or apple operating system that uses all the apps and accesses the web?

Can we have a camera with phone capabilities rather than a phone with camera capabilities?
Surely that would be a Killer App?

In reply to The Lemming:


I've been wondering that. Why should a DSLR be any different to a mirrorless except in having the viewfinder through the lens? What apparently allows better autofocus?


Why on earth would you want that? Who wants to get their camera out, possibly in the rain, whenever they want to make a call?

In reply to The Lemming:

Like one of these?
http://www.samsung.com/us/photography/galaxy-camera

In reply to The Lemming:

What a massive meteor impact?

In reply to Robert Durran:


>Why on earth would you want that? Who wants to get their camera out, possibly in the rain, whenever they want to make a call?

We get our phones out to do that. The devices are converging in size and will, almost have, become one device.

In reply to The Lemming:

Here's a camera with a phone built in

http://www.techradar.com/reviews/cameras-and-camcorders/cameras/compact-cam...

Not my pair of shoes but if that's what your want it does exist!

In reply to Robert Durran:


I don't want to use the camera to make calls, however I would like the camera to have the versatility and power of a smartphone as in the ability to edit, crop and publish images or video to the Internet.

With a system on a chip, surely it isn't that expensive or complex to make a digital camera a smart camera with the power of a flagship phone?

In reply to Toerag:

There were/are also the Sony SLT cameras. These use static translucent mirrors (so technically neither mirrorless nor DSLR) and were amongst the fastest autofocus cameras around - possibly the very top end and much more expensive pro DSLRs were faster.

In reply to Robert Durran:


DSLRs have a standalone focus detection thingy that the mirror sends light to as well as the optical viewfinder. This is why persistent back/front focus is an issue and decent DSLRs have focus tuning functions to compensate for mirror misalignment/ tolerances.

In reply to felt:

Ah, sorry, that went completely over my head!

In reply to The Lemming:

So if I understand the arguments correctly DSLRs won't die out, but they might learn to fly and start crapping on peoples cars.

In reply to felt:


No they're not. Birds are no more dinosaurs than we are some weird little mammal that scurried around the dinosaurs' feet and which we evolved from.