4 ms·
Mostly yes, people are locked into their brand through the lens mount and it's pretty expensive to switch. In some ways mirrorless hasn't been considered as goo
by rythie 9y ago
Mostly yes, people are locked into their brand through the lens mount and it's pretty expensive to switch. In some ways mirrorless hasn't been considered as good as SLR, with focusing and battery life, though this has been improved a lot recently. Some others still talk about weather sealing, which Sony seems to be lacking - but this is not a inherent flaw in mirrorless systems, but a choice by Sony.
If Canon and Nikon start making full-frame mirrorless cameras, I think we'll start to see a switch, especially if they neglect their SLR bodies and lenses.
I could see silent shooting becoming a requirement in press & some sports, which would essentially accelerate a change to mirrorless in the pro market. Video is another driver for mirrorless, since it can't use the mirror anyway (except in SLT cameras).
- ghaff 9y agoI really like the Fujifilm X-Ex line in particular and use it more than my Canon 5Diii. (I mostly use the latter for action or if I need very tele or very wide angle lenses.) But the mirrorless lines are definitely sort of a niche. A lot of the potential customers are pretty locked into Canon or Nikon glass. Furthermore, for a lot of people, mirrorless doesn't fully replace DSLRs--though it increasingly can for many types of shooting. So you're left with expensive camera lines that aren't quite as versatile as a DSLR although they're significantly lighter and smaller.
- leeoniya 9y agoI recently went from a Nikon D7000 to a Fuji X-T2. I've gotten used to the EVF (quite low latency, but crappy dynamic range), but the main annoyance is poor battery life, unless you're willing to have the additional grip attached 24/7, which sorta defeats the purpose of having a smaller mirrorless body. Also, the menu system is completely unintuitive.
- ghaff 9y agoI can't say I've had a particular issue with the X-E3's battery life even when using it to shoot lots of pics at an event. I do carry spare batteries but I can usually get through a day of hundreds of photos on just one. I don't love the menu system either and I really wish they could have figured out a way to get ISO on a top dial. That said, the X-E3 has a lot of appeal. Especially with its pancake lens, its feel reminds me a lot of various rangefinders I used to use and it's much more responsive than the X-E1 I used to use. I'm less of a fan of the more SLR-looking form factors.
- mjard 9y agoISO is bound to the front wheel under your pointer finger, press it in to select ISO mode. Have the back wheel on mine bound to shutter speed (top dial set to 'T') and the top function button to switch between the electronic and mechanical shutter. White balance is the only thing that seems a bit out of reach.
- rythie 9y agoSony's make mirrorless full-frame, they already able to replace SLRs for many photographers. It's not a trade off as you suggest, because Sony image quality is rated as one of the best, if not the best in the full-frame market. The new "iii" series cameras have much longer battery life than before. The size of mirrorless cameras is only one benefit, and there's no particular reason that a mirrorless camera couldn't have a big Nikon D5 style battery if there was a market for it. I don't see any particular reason that mirrorless cameras won't completely replace SLRs in time, a mirror is no longer neccessary, like it was for film. No one would make a new SLR system if they were starting now, and they haven't, all the new mounts are mirrorless.