4 ms·

But that's almost the only thing they are superior in. Mirrorless cameras have ways to mitigate the problem somewhat, for example by having sensors to detect if

But that's almost the only thing they are superior in. Mirrorless cameras have ways to mitigate the problem somewhat, for example by having sensors to detect if your eye is actually looking through the viewfinder, and if not they will turn it off, saving battery. Mirrorless has several advantages: no more mismatch between the focus sensor and the CMOS sensor, no more mirror lag, viewable area matches CMOS sensor area perfectly, electronic viewfinder can show the image as it would be after exposure (making over/underexposed areas easy to spot while composing the shot), and most importantly it allows for much more compact lens designs because the last optical element can be much closer to the sensor since there is no mirror in the way. Viewfinder lag has not been an issue anymore since 10 years ago. And with recent CMOS sensors having phase-diversity elements, autofocus can be as fast as with DLSRs.

PaulHoule 4y ago
I was shopping for lenses the other day for my Sony and what stood out is a lot of lenses that are very small such as the Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 SEL35F18F that make for a very light kit combined with a mirrorless camera that is itself much lighter than a DSLR. I got the opposite kind of lens, one at the upper end of what you can wrangle in your hands. If your lens is big you have a heavy pack, look like a dork, can't hold it steady, all that. There is a lot to say for a camera that is easy to handle.
- Youden 4y ago
  The body can make a substantial difference but if you're using big lenses on your DSLR, you're probably going to be using big lenses on your mirrorless too. The weight of the lens is down to the optics and build rather than the mount. For me, the weight of the lenses is by far the bigger problem. To take your SEL35F18F as an example, the lens weighs 280g. The Nikon DSLR equivalent, "AF-S NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G ED", weighs 300g. To go to extremes, Sony's SEL600F40GM weighs 3kg and so does Canon's "EF 600mm f/4L IS III USM" (admittedly, Nikon's equivalent weighs 4kg). I'm not saying this to prove you "wrong" or anything, a Sony A7RIV weighs 665g to a Nikon D850's 1kg or a Canon 1DX Mk3's 1.4kg but switching to Sony might just be the difference between a 5kg kit and a 4.7kg kit: it's still pretty heavy. I'm just pointing this out because when I was starting out I heard a lot of people talking about how small and light mirrorless cameras were. I think at the time this idea was focused more on cameras like the Olympus OM-D series. Amateurs/enthusiasts (including myself, who owned an OM-D) often didn't realise that one of the major reasons an OM-D kit was much lighter than a DSLR kit was that it was optically less capable due to the differences in sensor size. A big part of the reason an 17mm f1.8 MFT lens is so small is that it isn't equivalent to a full-frame 35mm f1.8 the way many people thought it was. It's more accurately equivalent to a 35mm f3.5 which could be made similarly light for the larger sensor, if anybody wanted that (but few people want that).
- mnw21cam 4y ago
  Yeah, I read an article a while back that was complaining that the new mirrorless cameras were claiming to be saving space and weight by being smaller and allowing better lens designs closer to the sensor. But they weren't. In actual fact, the lenses were bigger in a way that more than makes up for the smaller lighter camera body. What they didn't point out is that those bigger heavier lenses are bigger and heavier because they are more recent, and the camera sensors are so detailed that the cameras need fantastically sharp lenses, which means that they are bigger. Also, people's expectations of the quality of lenses has increased. So, they could make some small light lenses, but then someone would pixel peep and complain about how blurry they are, when in actual fact they would be just as sharp as the old DSLR lenses, but the cameras are more able to reveal their shortcomings.
positus 4y ago
I've used modern Fujifilm (X-Pro 1-2-3, XT-1-2-3-4, X100 series), Sony (A7s3), Nikon (Z7) and other mirrorless cameras and I still hate the experience. Battery life is not great. I don't need or want exposure preview. The refresh rate will never match a SLR. With every camera there was a feeling of being detached from the scene and subject because of the EVF and almost every EVF gives me a headache after a few minutes of using it. The user experience on the whole has been more frustrating and less reliable than something like a Nikon D3 which just kind of gets out of the way when I am making images. The accurate autofocus is nice but I would rather have an older flagship DSLR than any modern mirrorless camera. The only exception I might make is for a more recent Leica M camera, but that's only because I've sold one and would like to use those nice tiny little lenses again.
amelius 4y ago
> most importantly it allows for much more compact lens designs because the last optical element can be much closer to the sensor since there is no mirror in the way. But are these lenses and bodies actually designed that way, or do they keep the old dimensions because of backward compatibility?
- gsliepen 4y ago
  It seems Nikon has introduced the Z-mount for its mirrorless cameras, and you have an adapter to go from Z to the F-series mount for older lenses. There will be Z-mount lenses specifically designed for mirrorless, but there might also be lenses (especially from third parties) that use an old design, and just modify the mount so it fits on mirrorless cameras without the need for an adapter.

PaulHoule 4y ago

I was shopping for lenses the other day for my Sony and what stood out is a lot of lenses that are very small such as the Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 SEL35F18F that make for a very light kit combined with a mirrorless camera that is itself much lighter than a DSLR. I got the opposite kind of lens, one at the upper end of what you can wrangle in your hands. If your lens is big you have a heavy pack, look like a dork, can't hold it steady, all that. There is a lot to say for a camera that is easy to handle.

Youden 4y ago
The body can make a substantial difference but if you're using big lenses on your DSLR, you're probably going to be using big lenses on your mirrorless too. The weight of the lens is down to the optics and build rather than the mount. For me, the weight of the lenses is by far the bigger problem. To take your SEL35F18F as an example, the lens weighs 280g. The Nikon DSLR equivalent, "AF-S NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G ED", weighs 300g. To go to extremes, Sony's SEL600F40GM weighs 3kg and so does Canon's "EF 600mm f/4L IS III USM" (admittedly, Nikon's equivalent weighs 4kg). I'm not saying this to prove you "wrong" or anything, a Sony A7RIV weighs 665g to a Nikon D850's 1kg or a Canon 1DX Mk3's 1.4kg but switching to Sony might just be the difference between a 5kg kit and a 4.7kg kit: it's still pretty heavy. I'm just pointing this out because when I was starting out I heard a lot of people talking about how small and light mirrorless cameras were. I think at the time this idea was focused more on cameras like the Olympus OM-D series. Amateurs/enthusiasts (including myself, who owned an OM-D) often didn't realise that one of the major reasons an OM-D kit was much lighter than a DSLR kit was that it was optically less capable due to the differences in sensor size. A big part of the reason an 17mm f1.8 MFT lens is so small is that it isn't equivalent to a full-frame 35mm f1.8 the way many people thought it was. It's more accurately equivalent to a 35mm f3.5 which could be made similarly light for the larger sensor, if anybody wanted that (but few people want that).
mnw21cam 4y ago
Yeah, I read an article a while back that was complaining that the new mirrorless cameras were claiming to be saving space and weight by being smaller and allowing better lens designs closer to the sensor. But they weren't. In actual fact, the lenses were bigger in a way that more than makes up for the smaller lighter camera body. What they didn't point out is that those bigger heavier lenses are bigger and heavier because they are more recent, and the camera sensors are so detailed that the cameras need fantastically sharp lenses, which means that they are bigger. Also, people's expectations of the quality of lenses has increased. So, they could make some small light lenses, but then someone would pixel peep and complain about how blurry they are, when in actual fact they would be just as sharp as the old DSLR lenses, but the cameras are more able to reveal their shortcomings.

positus 4y ago

I've used modern Fujifilm (X-Pro 1-2-3, XT-1-2-3-4, X100 series), Sony (A7s3), Nikon (Z7) and other mirrorless cameras and I still hate the experience. Battery life is not great. I don't need or want exposure preview. The refresh rate will never match a SLR. With every camera there was a feeling of being detached from the scene and subject because of the EVF and almost every EVF gives me a headache after a few minutes of using it. The user experience on the whole has been more frustrating and less reliable than something like a Nikon D3 which just kind of gets out of the way when I am making images. The accurate autofocus is nice but I would rather have an older flagship DSLR than any modern mirrorless camera. The only exception I might make is for a more recent Leica M camera, but that's only because I've sold one and would like to use those nice tiny little lenses again.

amelius 4y ago

> most importantly it allows for much more compact lens designs because the last optical element can be much closer to the sensor since there is no mirror in the way. But are these lenses and bodies actually designed that way, or do they keep the old dimensions because of backward compatibility?

gsliepen 4y ago
It seems Nikon has introduced the Z-mount for its mirrorless cameras, and you have an adapter to go from Z to the F-series mount for older lenses. There will be Z-mount lenses specifically designed for mirrorless, but there might also be lenses (especially from third parties) that use an old design, and just modify the mount so it fits on mirrorless cameras without the need for an adapter.