Discussion in 'Talking Pictures' started by P_Stoddart, Apr 18, 2017.
What Nick said ^^^^^ When you don't know what you're talking about it's best to stay quiet.
Variations on a mirror have been tried and gone quite a few times. However they have never become mainstream or very popular, and all have major downsides.
Nor do they have the wide open development path offered by mirrorless systems.
Semi-silvered systems and rotating prisms have been used since forever.... and have perhaps had more success in Cine applications such as the obsolete Technicolor or the more obscure oneshot large format plate cameras for colour.
And apart from a limited number of specialist applications these have have never progressed further.
All the applications that have been tried will be better served by mirrorless systems in the future.
I can not ever imagine buying a DSLR again.
Benchista it has nothing to do with whether I have used a pellicle mirror SLR.
That design died out long before digital came along. The likes of Canon and Nikon stuck with moving mirror SLRs.
Why because whether it is the pellicle mirror or prism design they both have a big flaw they rob light energy from the light path to give the shooter a OVF.
Now the flaw with the moving mirror design of SLR is that there is a speed limit on how fast you can move the mirror out of the way for each shot and it blanks the OVF out on each shot.
The Sony A9 overcomes that. Therefore it give a better functionality to the shooter. Which the moving mirror SLR cannot offer.
As each generation of the A9 improves it will pull further ahead of the old dSLRs
Also such developments will of course filter down into lower spec versions.
Andrew Flannigan seem to miss my point that the current dSLR design is a moving mirror. The other methods have been tried to give OVFs and don't work or the users find them flawed so they have no meaning in this situation.
So as the mainstream SLR design is moving mirror which has a flaw itself it will die out or go niche.
As mirrorless address that flaw and will do it better and better in the future
I suspect the Sony A9 will be camera of the year 2017.
Honestly, you really should do some research before posting. The Olympus E-10 and E-20 digital SLRs both used a prismatic chain to provide continuous optical viewing. I used an E-20 for a while and it was a very nice camera in every way. If they'd produced an E-30 with the same optical system and a 10MP sensor I'd have bought it in a heartbeat. Your general claims are too broad. the dSLR design still has much to offer and as someone who uses both dSLR and mirrorless I find that even my 11 year old Canon 1Ds II provides a more effective viewfinder than the best of my mirrorless cameras. That may chsnge but I think it unlikely with the present state of the art in small displays.
IMVHO and that of a mate of mine who's uses his Nikon D500 and Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VRII to shoot (indoor)sports -- ice hockey,
figure skating and lacrosse --, the main reason for "not using" mirror less cameras for shooting sports is the lack of "longer" 2.8
glass/lenses. As for his Fuji kit, (XT-1 x 2, XE-2 x 2 and a boat load of lenses) he uses his XT-1's for commercial shooting
and XE-2's along with his XT-1's for fun/travel shooting
Andrew Flannigan it is a fact that Canon etc do NOT make a pellicle mirror SLR anymore they only make moving mirror SLR
Olympus dropped the prism SLR for again mirrorless. In fact they drop moving mirror SLR as well in favour of the OMD design.
So my statement is true they died out.
The only maker currently offering anything like pellicle mirror SLR is Sony LOL
But they call it SLT because it results in a EVF setup.
Now they have sorted phase detect on sensor I suspect the SLT will be shutdown. They release the A99 MKII but could be the last high end SLT? Possibly no MKIII Because they do have a E mount adapter for A mount lenses.
I remember on this forum when the Canon EOS M came out and we was shocked it did NOT have a EVF. Canon said they would not do one.
We now have the Canon EOS M5 LOL
A few writers said "at last" LOL
There are lots of other benefits to cameras with EVFs.
We going to see more resolution in EVFs more refresh speeds. More mirrrorless models from different makes will offer zero blackout.
I am betting Olympus, Fujifilm, Lumix all have prototypes model that can do zero black out with better OLED EVFs.
I am also betting that deep and hidden away in Canon's R/D department in a quiet corner is a mirrorless that can take Canon EF lenses LOL
Well seems Nick Dungan has no problem with using a EVF for motorsports
I wonder if he will test out the Sony A9 although the A7R II has more pixels. But for motorsports that is not needed he reckons.
Advertorial prose at its best!
Are you talking about my post or the article?
The article of course!
Who really cares? How many of us are in the market for a brace of D5 or Sony A9 ,+ esoteric lenses.
So far Sony have not produced the lenses, but they could, and probably will.
Very good point. I won't be buying either until the 2nd hand price hits £300 or less.
Ah yes this is in the high end pro section of product line now
But we all know these improvement quickly filter down the product lines. LOL
Also we should see such technology appearing in Olympus OMD and Lumix G series fairly soon
Canon have already explored producing a SLR styled mirrorless.
If dSLR comes under pressure in the pro market could indicate a phasing out in the semi-pro and consumer market as well.
If Sony are really serious at having a go at stealing Canon's crown they will produce glassware in the same range that sports shooter demand and the needed event support for their work.
More likely the other way round. The enthusiast market is milked to support marginally profitable pro equipment and support. Also applies to tyres and motor racing, golf equipment and anything where there is a broad enthusiast base where the pro end serves as image leader.
I always figured where pros go the public follow.
So if more and more of the top end shooters switch to a mirrorless system whatever the brand.
Does it not set a example for consumer to select that technology.
Let say you are a person new to photography, so you go and buy a copy of AP for research in how great images have been produced.
Now you going to read stories etc about shooters, naturally you going to look at what kit they prefer for their work creation.
Now currently in a lot of cases they shoot with a dSLR of one brand or another. Which might also affect your purchase decision.
Ok the person might not be in a position to buy the same high end kit as the pro but surely that is why the brands make lower end models.
Now if the same person was to read that the pros are using mirrorless models and creating great images would the new customer look at a lower end model of mirrorless instead of dSLR possibly?
I reckon the no screen black out advantage of mirrorless will win out in the end, but right now, I think with the possible exception of the Sony a9, the moving target focus is not quite there.
Separate names with a comma.