3 ms·

> there are no advantages of a mirrorless camera over SLR tech. Here are a few I can think of. - Less moving parts, so increased reliability. - Possibility o

by shawnz 9y ago

> there are no advantages of a mirrorless camera over SLR tech. Here are a few I can think of. - Less moving parts, so increased reliability. - Possibility of faster shutter time (assuming the autofocus issues with mirrorless can be resolved). - No high precision SLR mechanism means more engineering budget to spend on better sensors, etc. Thus producing a better camera at the same price. - Viewfinder shows a truer representation of the final image since it's reading from the same data as what will ultimately be captured.

petre 9y ago
- Shorter sensor to flange distances which allow for simpler design, more compact wide angle lenses, plus any kind of mirrorless to SLR adapter.
rrauenza 9y ago
- Smaller body due to smaller mechanical footprint - using image processing for focus rather than finicky focus sensors which only cover a small part of the image (and having to tune your lenses...) I’ve been on the fence of getting the latest Nikon 850 or waiting to see if Nikon announces a full frame mirrorless compatible with DSLR lenses someday... I saw a rumor they may announce some kind of mirrorless this year.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
rangibaby 9y ago
> Less moving parts, so increased reliability. I use Nikon and haven't heard of a mirror failing on its own. Ever! Dead cameras due to some electronic part that got wet or desoldered OTOH... > No high precision SLR mechanism means more engineering budget to spend on better sensors, etc I don't think the way the reflex mirror works has changed for ~50 years.
- shawnz 9y ago
  > I don't think the way the reflex mirror works has changed for ~50 years. True, but integration of a complex mechanism still adds complexity, even if the mechanism itself has already been designed.
- shawnz 9y ago
  Furthermore (sorry, can't edit my post): A mirrorless camera would require strictly less electronic parts than a DSLR. So your experience with electronics failures supports the idea that a mirrorless design could be more reliable.

by shawnz 9y ago

petre 9y ago

- Shorter sensor to flange distances which allow for simpler design, more compact wide angle lenses, plus any kind of mirrorless to SLR adapter.

rrauenza 9y ago

- Smaller body due to smaller mechanical footprint - using image processing for focus rather than finicky focus sensors which only cover a small part of the image (and having to tune your lenses...) I’ve been on the fence of getting the latest Nikon 850 or waiting to see if Nikon announces a full frame mirrorless compatible with DSLR lenses someday... I saw a rumor they may announce some kind of mirrorless this year.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

rangibaby 9y ago

> Less moving parts, so increased reliability. I use Nikon and haven't heard of a mirror failing on its own. Ever! Dead cameras due to some electronic part that got wet or desoldered OTOH... > No high precision SLR mechanism means more engineering budget to spend on better sensors, etc I don't think the way the reflex mirror works has changed for ~50 years.

shawnz 9y ago
> I don't think the way the reflex mirror works has changed for ~50 years. True, but integration of a complex mechanism still adds complexity, even if the mechanism itself has already been designed.
shawnz 9y ago
Furthermore (sorry, can't edit my post): A mirrorless camera would require strictly less electronic parts than a DSLR. So your experience with electronics failures supports the idea that a mirrorless design could be more reliable.