No interest in mirrorless cameras?

[docvale]

I'm a little surprised in not seeing any threads about mirrorless system cameras.
I understand they would not compete with top-notch D-SLRs, but since I got my Sony Nex my relation to photography evolved into passion.

Products such that, from Sony to Fuji, going through Olympus or Panasonic, provide an affordable tool for street photography. Personally, I also love their portability, look and, specially considering the wide availability of adaptors, flexibility.

 

[FrantzM]

I'm a little surprised in not seeing any threads about mirrorless system cameras.
I understand they would not compete with top-notch D-SLRs, but since I got my Sony Nex my relation to photography evolved into passion.

Products such that, from Sony to Fuji, going through Olympus or Panasonic, provide an affordable tool for street photography. Personally, I also love their portability, look and, specially considering the wide availability of adaptors, flexibility.

I don't see why they would not compete with top-notch DSLR. I actually believe that a mirrorless camera has some advantages over SLRs. The problem so far is that of sensor. I know only three mirrorless full frame digital cameras and they are all Leica (M9, M Type 240 and Monochorm). I heard some noise about Sony to get one out soon. Nothing sure yet. There several advantages to mirrorless, not least of them the absence of mirror (duh!) thus less vibration when taking pictures. The Leicas are also very light , since you have no mirrors mechanisms and no prism ... Interestingly the Leica is priced close to theCanon and Nikon Top pf the lines DSLRs. Leica most likely will get you back on the lenses they are likely to be pricey as usual. No! I don't subscribe to the systematic superiority of Leica lenses over those from Canon or Nikon. I actually believe the contrary to be true. Some will call me heretic, I had an SL-2 back in the days and several Nikon, F3, FE, FM, FM2, etc and I never found the Leica lenses that I had to be superior...
back to digital.. Nikon feeble effort in mirrorless is not that good IMHO. They need to step up but may never do so as not to cannibalize their profitable DSLR line up. I suppose the same rationale would be at work with Canon.

I don't see myself buying the Leica though. The Nikon D600 at $2k for the body is "good enough" for my needs. The Leica doesn't have autofocus.. To me a necessity. A mirrorless offering inline with say a D-600 or D-800 in term of features and price would be much interesting.

 

[amirm]

For me the problem is the lens investment. Until such time Canon does one, it is not a direction I can go. I agree they are pretty innovative.

 

[docvale]

Canon did one, actually. But it didn't catch the general satisfaction.
Together with Canon, only Sony and Fuji produce APS-C based mirrorless cameras. Truth is Leica is the only FF available, but it is not recommended for economical convenience. Actually investing on a Leica is way more demanding than with FF D-SLRs, since the body only is ~$7k and lenses all range from $3k to $11k...

The lens availability is controversial. Sony or Fuji can mount lots of lenses, starting from legacy ones to Canon EOS or Nikon FX. The Speedbooster from Metabones, also, allows to have the DoF of a fullframe and to gain 1 stop of aperture... Obviously certain lenses would look just ridiculous on those tiny bodies and the portability would lose the convenience.

Anyway the point of this thread was the surprise in not seeing the WBF photocommunity discussing about some of the most glamorous kind of cameras on the market

 

[JackD201]

For me the problem is the lens investment. Until such time Canon does one, it is not a direction I can go. I agree they are pretty innovative.

They have

 

[Steve Williams]

They have

The EOS-M, no?

 

[JackD201]

Yessir. EF compatible (with an adapter).

I owned a Sony NEX5. Late last year before leaving for Spain, at the very last minute I decided to leave my D700 because of the weight. I picked up the little Sony at the HK airport during the short layover. It's small, light, easy to use (nice manual control layout), takes good pictures. My only problem with cameras of this sort is having to rely on live view 100% of the time. When it is bright out, taking shots is a crapshoot since you have hardly any idea what the sensor is seeing. The 5 also doesn't have a built in flash. I gave it to my daughter when we got back and she absolutely loves it. I'm eyeing a Fuji. I was eyeing an M9 but when I did the math, I said I'd rather buy an interconnect. Just kidding Frantz! LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[docvale]

The EOS-M, no?

Yes.
For now, the EOS-M relies on a standard kit zoom (18-55mm) and a prime lens only. They can mount EF lenses using an adapter, but the lens availability is truly modest if you compare native lenses to the native ones in other systems (were micro4:3 lenses are the most abundant, followed by Sony Nex and Fuji X).

I remember the EOS-M has been negatively review by DXO and the DPreview forum and various blogs killed it. Either Canon will release and updated/improved version or it will mean they don't have big interest on the system.

BTW, Nikon has a mirrorless series too. Their debut was not bright too, despite both the camera bodies and the lenses from the second generation seem to perform better. Peculiarly, the Nikons have a sensor that is smaller than the micro4:3.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

I believe for mirror-less to be taken as seriously as DSLR must have features that are comparable or superior. It would help to have one serious flagship mirror-less. FOllowing the philosphy of Leica when the Leica rangefinders had features similar to SLR, even TTL metering in the M5 or (M6?).
A camera similar in philosophy to the old Leica CL (remember that gem?) would have been interesting. mirrorless allow small, light bodies a small range of lenses for "discreet" shooting like the old Leica CL. The CL system offered in the beginning two lenses the "normal" 45 mm lens, a 90 mm telephoto and it could take with adapters I believe the M series Leica lenses. Such a camera would make a lot of sense to carve the niche then push for a more M-like but with Autofocus body. M-10??? I shudder at the price... will likely get into Odin's territory
Leica may not have the research wherewithal of Canon or Nikon to pull this off. Maybe those biggies or meddling outsiders like Sony, Panasonic, Samsung or Olympus?

 

[docvale]

Jack,

I think that you might have fun giving a mirrorless a new chance
With regards to the Nex-5 series, it's now at the 3rd generation (5, 5N and now 5R). The introduction of the 5N provided, according to users and reviewers, major improvements in all the aspects of the camera performance. The 5R is instead a 5N with a screen that can turn up to 180 degrees and wifi capabilities. Both the N and the R can mount an electronic viewfinder, so your liveview concern would not be an issue anymore.
Let's say that a 5R+EVF costs like a Nex6 (where the EVF is integrated) so it might be the case to get a 6 directly.

I got a 5N after the release of the 5R, so the price was heavily discounted. I might add the EVF when it'll get cheaper. In my case, having a dominant left eye, the integrated EVF would not be comfortable due to its position. When I tried the Nex7 my nose was constantly hitting on the LCD screen...
The external EVF is also tiltable, which is a nice option. The only thing is truly missing on a Nex5N (or R) is a mechanical knob for the shoot mode selection (like the one the Nex6 has). Otherwise the programmable functions make the 5 series pretty user friendly.

Regarding the Fuji, I think the X-E1 is a masterpiece of aesthetics. It has to be also truly good (unless you also want to shoot movies, a feature that even Fuji fan-boys consider badly implemented on the X series). Let's say that I envy the vintage look of the Fuji, despite the Gariz leather half case I picked for my Nex made it more traditional.
In terms of lenses, the native Fuji ones are regarded as better than the Sony counterparts, despite they're not stabilized and they cost more. I've never tried any, so I cannot tell by personal experience. I guess that in my unexperienced hands the 2 different systems would perform just the same... OTOH, the Sony system has opened to third party produced native lenses, so you can find affordable (but apparently super good ones) lenses from Sigma, Rokinon and SLR Magic (the latter, together with Zeiss, now produce both for Sony and for Fuji).

Anyway, this Sony vs Fuji competition mirrors(less) the eternal fight between Nikon and Canon among the D-SLRs... there's never be a winner.

Yessir. EF compatible (with an adapter).

I owned a Sony NEX5. Late last year before leaving for Spain, at the very last minute I decided to leave my D700 because of the weight. I picked up the little Sony at the HK airport during the short layover. It's small, light, easy to use (nice manual control layout), takes good pictures. My only problem with cameras of this sort is having to rely on live view 100% of the time. When it is bright out, taking shots is a crapshoot since you have hardly any idea what the sensor is seeing. The 5 also doesn't have a built in flash. I gave it to my daughter when we got back and she absolutely loves it. I'm eyeing a Fuji. I was eyeing an M9 but when I did the math, I said I'd rather buy an interconnect. Just kidding Frantz! LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[docvale]

Franz,

I think that a pro user won't drop his loyal D-SLR for a mirrorless.
Many pros bought a mirrorless as second camera, for travels, street photography or simply GAS...

Other people moved to mirrorless cameras from point-and-shoot cameras (like myself), so the need to compete with D-SLR quality/functions is remote. Finally, others approached to the Sony or Fuji systems as "poor man" Leica (as someone defined them): I speak of long time Leica users with a number of legacy lenses but without a recent digital camera body. Apparently both Sony and Fuji perform really good with rangefinder lenses.

Sony will release a full-frame Nex model (Nex9?) and I guess Fuji will do the same. But I think they'll try to compete against Leica, rather than D-SLRs...

Hi

I believe for mirror-less to be taken as seriously as DSLR must have features that are comparable or superior. It would help to have one serious flagship mirror-less. FOllowing the philosphy of Leica when the Leica rangefinders had features similar to SLR, even TTL metering in the M5 or (M6?).
A camera similar in philosophy to the old Leica CL (remember that gem?) would have been interesting. mirrorless allow small, light bodies a small range of lenses for "discreet" shooting like the old Leica CL. The CL system offered in the beginning two lenses the "normal" 45 mm lens, a 90 mm telephoto and it could take with adapters I believe the M series Leica lenses. Such a camera would make a lot of sense to carve the niche then push for a more M-like but with Autofocus body. M-10??? I shudder at the price... will likely get into Odin's territory
Leica may not have the research wherewithal of Canon or Nikon to pull this off. Maybe those biggies or meddling outsiders like Sony, Panasonic, Samsung or Olympus?

 

[FrantzM]

Franz,

I think that a pro user won't drop his loyal D-SLR for a mirrorless.
Many pros bought a mirrorless as second camera, for travels, street photography or simply GAS...

Other people moved to mirrorless cameras from point-and-shoot cameras (like myself), so the need to compete with D-SLR quality/functions is remote. Finally, others approached to the Sony or Fuji systems as "poor man" Leica (as someone defined them): I speak of long time Leica users with a number of legacy lenses but without a recent digital camera body. Apparently both Sony and Fuji perform really good with rangefinder lenses.

Sony will release a full-frame Nex model (Nex9?) and I guess Fuji will do the same. But I think they'll try to compete against Leica, rather than D-SLRs...

You are probably right. I do however believe that removing the prism and the mirror would make for a simpler professional body. The concept of DSLR is a remnant of film when you had to have a prism to see exactly what the lens did. With the Digital sensor they are able one can "see" what the lens does with no parallax, no mirror, no prism.. The electronic viefinder and its lag may be aproblem for some.
it may take time and if there is no demand ... as you put it in the thread title: No interest and the DSLR keep on getting better...

 

[docvale]

Olympus is making a mirrorless with the shape of a D-SLR. It is very well regarded all around... but it is a micro4:3. So, way far from a fullframe sensor...

Regarding the EVFs, some Fuji users (X-Pro1, X100 and X100s, which sport a hybrid OVF/EVF) say that they mostly use the optical rather than electronic viewfinder. It is to be clarified, though, if it is due to actual superiority or rangefinder mimicking obsession.

A well implementation of the upcoming Nex9 could create the mirrorless you might crave for: fullframe sensor, no prism (so no movement behind the lens), ergonomics and top tier quality. And maybe portability...
Rumors speak about top tier prices too...

You are probably right. I do however believe that removing the prism and the mirror would make for a simpler professional body. The concept of DSLR is a remnant of film when you had to have a prism to see exactly what the lens did. With the Digital sensor they are able one can "see" what the lens does with no parallax, no mirror, no prism.. The electronic viefinder and its lag may be aproblem for some.
it may take time and if there is no demand ... as you put it in the thread title: No interest and the DSLR keep on getting better...

 

[jprice]

I've been a DSLR user for well over 10 years and have been quite happy with the results and with the quality of the cameras I've used. Currently, I have a Nikon D300 and a D7000, plus some rather good lenses. Recently, however, I have felt that the bulk and weight of the cameras and lenses have become a real burden, and I began looking at the mirrorless pro/semi-pro cameras.

In February, I bought a Fuji X-E1 camera with the "kit" zoom and a 35mm f/1.4 lens, and I have been overwhelmed with the results. Image quality is stunning - at least as good as the Nikons, while the cameras are almost feather-weight by comparison. I couldn't be happier with my choice. Recently I ordered the, to be introduced this month, 55-200 mm zoom, and the total package, with a small Fuji flash, will weigh less than 5 pounds. The cameras and lenses have extremely good build quality and image quality is amazing.

According to what I've learned through a lot of research and study, the quality of the better mirrorless cameras does not lag far behind their DSLR counterparts, and my Fuji camera has a sensor that is the same size as the sensors in my Nikons, plus it is more modern and is a superior design to both.