3 ms·
Definitely for video.
by bennesvig 9y ago
Definitely for video.
- DanielBMarkham 9y agoAgreed. I've read some great reviews of mirrorless cameras, but they always seemed a bit fan-boyish -- and I don't want to invest in gear simply because it's something all the cool kids are doing. All I care about is the art, and I understand that there's always going to be trade-offs. Quite frankly, the main attraction to me right now with mirrorless cameras is the incredibly high ISO I'm seeing. But since photography is a long-term hobby, and since I don't go out and buy the new stuff simply because it's the new stuff, I figured the DSLR guys will be along in a few years with just as good sensitivity only it'll work with all of my other stuff, right? I have no problem shooting with a cell phone if I think I've got a good shot. The problem is when I gear up and specifically go out to try and get something. At that point, what does mirrorless really get me? (assuming the DSLR bodies catch up over the next few years) I'm already hauling stuff. I'm thinking the mirror itself is a nit either way at that point. Like I said, I need to keep an eye on this. The field is evolving quickly.
- brudgers 9y agoOne of the potential art side technical differences is vibration from mirror slap. Though many DSLR's offer mirror lockup or live view shooting, mirrorless systems do eliminate it completely from the process.