3 ms·
Willing to be persuaded otherwise, but the major win of mirrorless for me is scale. A mount can lose its mirrors but the flange distance is still based around a
by eftpotrm 13y ago
Willing to be persuaded otherwise, but the major win of mirrorless for me is scale. A mount can lose its mirrors but the flange distance is still based around a mirror box so there's no win there. NEX is nice in some ways but I'm not convinced the site difference with a standard kit zoom mounted between an NEX and a Nikon D3200 is worth a system switch.
- pedrocr 13y agoNEX currently sucks because it has no good compact lenses, so as you say I don't see the appeal of it versus a normal SLR. For me the real credible story of a good mirrorless system would be something that I can mount a fast small prime to and have a compact kit and yet also have the option of mounting a 70-400. For the alpha the mirror box space being empty is a huge gain for people that want to make adapters. Suddenly a Nikon adapter becomes possible when before it wasn't because there simply wasn't enough space. If I was Sony I would do the alpha mirrorless by keeping the same mount but moving it back, removing the mirror box space. Traditional lenses would be mounted with an extension tube to mimic the mirror box distance and you could build extension tubes that switched the camera mount to Canon/Nikon/Olympus/whatever.