Top 10 Mirrorless Advantages

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Member's gallery
Steve said:
I think it depends on the situation which is better. The line sensors aren't doing us any favors for some subjects, that's for sure (they hate black bear cubs too in case anyone was wondering :) ). However, my overall hit rates are about the same with Nikon's best DSLRs and the a9ii. There are times the DSLRs are better, times the a9ii is better, and times where either setup gets the shot (most times, in fact).

To give you an example, I was in Badlands SD taking photos of barn swallows as they took off from a foot bridge. Try as I might, I just couldn't coax a sharp photo out of the D6 - it missed EVERY time. I tweaked every AF mode / setting and no luck. The Sony a9ii on the other hand did much better. While it didn't nail every shot, it did get an acceptable keeper rate. Here's one (it's not finished, but you get the idea).

View attachment 5012

Of course, this only applies to this particular subject. There are other times I think the DSLRs do a better job. Still, I think eventually mirrorless will be the best bet. If they could come up with a way to do cross-type AF it would really out mirrorless over the top. (I mean, it's possible since we're just using masked pixels, I think it's just expensive to implement - and processor intensive too.)
Click to expand...
Thanks Steve.
And the regular absolute lock failure with small static birds?
I describe my journey with this here: https://www.talkemount.com/threads/a9-focus-fails.19467/
 
Member's gallery
Ziggy said:
Thanks Steve.
And the regular absolute lock failure with small static birds?
I describe my journey with this here: https://www.talkemount.com/threads/a9-focus-fails.19467/
Click to expand...
When you say small birds, like small in the frame? I haven't done a ton of small birds with it, but haven't had an issue. Most of the time though, I won't shoot unless I'm pretty close. This was from a long series of shots. It's a medium crop (for me). Probably hacked off about 20% ~ 25% of the extra pixels. Still, I didn't really experience any significant issues with focus. One thought is that possibly if the line sensors don't like the target and can "see" a better choice behind it, they'll opt for that instead. Happens with the Z cameras all the time.

This was the a9ii + 600 F/4 + 1.4TC.

blue-bird.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
Ziggy said:
Thanks Steve.
And the regular absolute lock failure with small static birds?
I describe my journey with this here: https://www.talkemount.com/threads/a9-focus-fails.19467/
Click to expand...
I gave it some thought and I have a couple more things to add.

1. Keep in mind that I am a bit new to the a9ii - it's totally possible I'll have the same problem down the road, it just hasn't happened to me yet. My field time with the a9ii is pretty limited so far - I've mostly been shooting Nikon this year with the new Z series AF book and the D6 review. That, and Covid has put a damper on my travels. So, I may just not have been in the right circumstances yet.

2. Another thought. When the camera refuses to focus, have you tried rotating it 45 degrees? If it's a line sensor issue, that usually solves it. (I saw in the thread you mentioned someone has suggested tilting the camera, but that wouldn't do it - it need a bit of rotation).
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
In the post, Are You Shooting Mirrorless Yet, I mentioned that I'm happily shooting both DSLRs and mirrorless at the moment, but in the not-so-distant future I can see myself shooting 100% mirrorless all the time.

This generated a great question - besides weight, what's the advantage to shooting mirrorless?

I think this is a question many people have, so I'm going to list the reasons I like mirrorless below.

Here's my top 10:

1. AF points all over the viewfinder.

This is a big one for me - I like to keep the AF point on my subject's eye and find myself compositionally restricted with the AF spread on full-frame DSLRs. With mirrorless, I can always find an AF point for any eye position.

2. Tracking all over the viewfinder.

OK, this is technically an extension of the first point, but it's useful nonetheless. The truth is, sometimes tracking doesn't go as planned and our subject falls outside the AF area of our DSLRs. With mirrorless, the system can follow all over the viewfinder while we get our "stuff" back together.

3. (Usually) No need for AF Fine Tuning.

Although it's technically possible that AF fine-tuning could, on the rarest of occasions, be necessary for mirrorless, that usually doesn't happen since AF is done right on the sensor. This also means focus tends to be more accurate overall, even at different distances and focal lengths (something that's not always true with a DSLR - even after tuning).

4. Better image quality due to wider lens mounts.

The wider lens mounts - especially on the Z cameras - allow for better "angles" as the light passes through the lens. This makes it easier to create lenses with fantastic corner to corner sharpness. (This is a big reason why so many users and critics shower the Z series lenses with praise.)

5. No blackout between frames.

OK, this only applies to the Sony a9 and a9ii at the moment, but I feel like it will become standard-issue in future mirrorless cameras. And I can tell you without reservation that it's a game-changer for tracking.

6. Live Exposure Information

Have you ever forgotten to check your settings before taking a photo and ended up with a grossly over or underexposed image? With mirrorless, you have the option of seeing precisely what the exposure looks like in real-time as soon as you put the camera to your eye. Many cameras offer in-viewfinder live histograms and even zebra stripes for blown highlights.

7. Less camera noise.

If you need silence, you can't beat mirrorless. Silent shutter mode allows you to shoot without a sound. Heck, even in normal shooting mode with a mechanical shutter, they're still considerably quieter than a DSLR and all that mirror slapping.

8. Less overall vibration

Since you can shoot without a mechanical shutter and there's no mirror slap, this means less overall vibration throughout the system and potentially sharper images (depending on the lens and shutter speed).

9. Potentially greater reliability

This one is trickier, but in theory, mirrorless should prove more reliable over time since they have less moving parts.

10. Easier to transport

This may seem minor, but when traveling overseas it's always (ALWAYS) a pain when it comes time to choose the gear that's coming along. What goes, what stays, what fits? The truth is, it's far easier to slide a pair of mirrorless cameras into my backpack than a D6 and a gripped D850! In fact, my current Africa setup is a pair of Sonys, the 600 F/4G and 100-400 - it all fits in my bag with room to spare (I'll probably add a 24-70). With my Nikon setup, I had to sneak lenses into my laptop bag!

That's my list - what's yours? :)


PS - Of course, DSLRs still hold some advantages (no lag for one, faster start-up for two, better battery life for three), but the gap is closing all the time. I don't think it will be long before we see mirrorless catch up to DSLRs in every category and that's probably when I'll make mirrorless my primary system.
Click to expand...

When Nikon released the Z-mount I didn’t see the benefits of it. But a few weeks ago I came across Matt Irwin in Australia who, in several videos, explains what he think is the reason and the future of the Z-mount. If he’s right Nikon has a plan for the Z, and it is to make one kind of lenses that fit all sensor sizes from cropped to full frame to medium format. I find his thoughts on the Z-mount very interesting and I hope he’s right.

That said, I don’t have the finances yet for an upgrade - far from it. Meaning, I’m happy to keep the D500 for many years to come before considering a change to mirrorless. But others are in a better position than I, and, taking Matt Irwin’s thoughts into consideration, I fully understand the ones who make the change.
 
Member's gallery
I agree with not needing to do an autofocus fine tune setting for each and every camera and lens and teleconverter combination. When I added a 300mm f/4 lens to an Olympus E-M1 and took a shot of a hummer at 4 feet and using a shutter speed hand held of 1/8s and getting a super sharp image thanks to the camera's internal OS combined with the that of the lens, I found this quite remarkable.

But I also have had problems with the excellent EVF of the Olympus cameras when shooting outdoors during the day as any stray light would cause the EVF to go dark. For BIF I find an optical viewfinder easier to use at this time. EVF technology has improved tremendously over the past 5 years and it will continue to do so.

Lighter weight is true with the MFT Olympus cameras but it comes from using their smaller and lighter MFT lenses. The Olympus 300mm f/4 lens provides the field of view of a 600mm f/4 lens on a FX camera. Compare the Nikon 600mm f/4 at over 8 lbs to the Olympus 300mm f/4 that weighs only 3.25 lbs and is also much smaller. A two camera and three lens MFT kit for Costa Rica weighs less than 12 lbs and fits inside a 18L backpack. With my FX kit the weight is more than 25 lbs and that is from using FX lenses, the camera weight difference is trivial.

There is a downside to having to use the FTZ adapter with Nikon telephoto lenses. I already need to juggle the two teleconverters with my telephoto lenses and adding a couple of FTZ adapters for two Z cameras is not at all appealing.

For a truly lightweight pro kit the Olympus MFT cameras and lenses are the best solution at this time. They have the smallest and lightest pro lenses including a full range of f/2.8 constant aperture zoom lenses that provide the field of view range of FX lenses from 14mm to 300mm.
 
Member's gallery
It's just a constant endless tool of the power of marketing that makes us all believe that we need this or that, In all honestly has anyones actually end result picture got any better with the endless amount of gear they have brought, from the D2 to the D6, If we turned the clock back 5 years ago we would all be so excited about the release of the new DSLR, by which ever company was the in system at the time. I just watched the Documentary Salt of the Earth, goes to show that no one who sees your pictures really cares about your corner sharpness or if your focus box went corner to corner! when will it get to the point when the is zero skill left in photography. Basically just will just turn the camera on and maybe go as far as holding it and everything else will be done for you, than we will all complain that photography has lost its soul/skill, which to be honest it already has.
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
I gave it some thought and I have a couple more things to add.

1. Keep in mind that I am a bit new to the a9ii - it's totally possible I'll have the same problem down the road, it just hasn't happened to me yet. My field time with the a9ii is pretty limited so far - I've mostly been shooting Nikon this year with the new Z series AF book and the D6 review. That, and Covid has put a damper on my travels. So, I may just not have been in the right circumstances yet.

2. Another thought. When the camera refuses to focus, have you tried rotating it 45 degrees? If it's a line sensor issue, that usually solves it. (I saw in the thread you mentioned someone has suggested tilting the camera, but that wouldn't do it - it need a bit of rotation).
Click to expand...
Thanks for your thoughts Steve.
I've tried branches at various angles and vertical steel fence posts. Light and contrast can be good to no effect.
All small enough for Small Spot to overlap (though once Zone failed on a Black Cormorant in full sun that almost filled the frame; making me wonder again whether monochrome subjects were more prone).
AF may linger for a fraction of a second and then go out to infinity or it may go straight out. EXIF may register a focus point or not.
AF preferring a more distant target sounds like CDAF behaviour (I used to shoot birds with a CDAF-only Panasonic G9. Interestingly Panasonic recently released a firmware update providing the choice of distant or close preference.)
One user reports success with repeating the AF request. My only reliable workaround is to try to get a lock on something nearby and try again on the subject).
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Sean B said:
It's just a constant endless tool of the power of marketing that makes us all believe that we need this or that, In all honestly has anyones actually end result picture got any better with the endless amount of gear they have brought, from the D2 to the D6, If we turned the clock back 5 years ago we would all be so excited about the release of the new DSLR, by which ever company was the in system at the time. I just watched the Documentary Salt of the Earth, goes to show that no one who sees your pictures really cares about your corner sharpness or if your focus box went corner to corner! when will it get to the point when the is zero skill left in photography. Basically just will just turn the camera on and maybe go as far as holding it and everything else will be done for you, than we will all complain that photography has lost its soul/skill, which to be honest it already has.
Click to expand...

Photography is intertwined with technology, there's no way around it. Better technology leads to potentially better results. Faster and better AF system allow us to capture more keepers than we could with previous generation cameras. Higher frame rates, bigger buffers, better customization all play a role. In fact, one example is the first point I made on the list. I've lost shots because I couldn't focus and recompose fast enough when I had a subject with its eye outside the AF field. Mirrorless technology gives us full viewfinder AF which is a game-changer in a lot of scenarios. And that's only one example - I'm sure we could generate pages of examples.

The thing is, if technology didn't make a difference, we'd all be shooting entry level gear with kit lenses. The critical question is, "Does the technology help with your photography?" Since we all shoot different subject, sometimes that answer is yes, sometimes it's no. And I honestly don't think we'll reach a point where no skill is required. We may get to a point where very little technical skill is required, but what really makes a great shot often isn't technical prowess, but rather finding an inspired way to present a subject. I don't think that can be replaced with computers.
 
Member's gallery
Ziggy said:
Thanks for your thoughts Steve.
I've tried branches at various angles and vertical steel fence posts. Light and contrast can be good to no effect.
All small enough for Small Spot to overlap (though once Zone failed on a Black Cormorant in full sun that almost filled the frame; making me wonder again whether monochrome subjects were more prone).
AF may linger for a fraction of a second and then go out to infinity or it may go straight out. EXIF may register a focus point or not.
AF preferring a more distant target sounds like CDAF behaviour (I used to shoot birds with a CDAF-only Panasonic G9. Interestingly Panasonic recently released a firmware update providing the choice of distant or close preference.)
One user reports success with repeating the AF request. My only reliable workaround is to try to get a lock on something nearby and try again on the subject).
Click to expand...
Interesting, I'll have to see what happens as time goes on with the a9ii.
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
Interesting, I'll have to see what happens as time goes on with the a9ii.
Click to expand...
I'd love to know if the AF algorithm was better.
At the moment I advise anyone who has to have bird record shots to avoid the Sony Alphas, and I've gone back on the waiting list for a Nikkor 500 PF. Happily I kept the D500 body - but I've spent 30,000 Aussie dollars on Sony gear to find AF reliability that's worse than one of the best M43 cameras that cost a couple of grand.
 
Member's gallery
EricBowles said:
Steve started us with a good list, but the value of the EVF is underestimated.

I program my Fn1 button on the Z6 to zoom to 100%. This is probably one of my most used features and is unique to mirrorless.

  • invoke focus peaking to help with manually tweaking focus through the EVF
Click to expand...
Is there a way to invoke Focus Peeking on a 3rd party lens that does not have a defined 'M/A' mode?
 
Member's gallery
9. Potentially greater reliability


Anyone else out there have their Z6 or 7 die on them? I take good care of my equipment and my Z6 had never been dropped, dunked, etc. but completely died on me the other day. Shot 5 awesome cloud photos that loaded perfectly on the card (and downloaded to computer easily) but then the camera went black. I thought maybe it had gone to sleep or I'd turned it off accidentally but there was absolutely no response, (tried different fully charged battery, etc.- nothing).
I sent it to Nikon and they gave me an estimate of about $500 with possible increase when actually worked on. Of course it was a year and two months since my purchase so not in warranty. I've never had any problems with my Nikons so I have never opted for the extended warranty.
Anyway, I will post the findings when I hear from Nikon.

Thank you to you all for sharing,
Blessings,
Charles
 
Member's gallery
Charles said:
9. Potentially greater reliability


Anyone else out there have their Z6 or 7 die on them? I take good care of my equipment and my Z6 had never been dropped, dunked, etc. but completely died on me the other day. Shot 5 awesome cloud photos that loaded perfectly on the card (and downloaded to computer easily) but then the camera went black. I thought maybe it had gone to sleep or I'd turned it off accidentally but there was absolutely no response, (tried different fully charged battery, etc.- nothing).
I sent it to Nikon and they gave me an estimate of about $500 with possible increase when actually worked on. Of course it was a year and two months since my purchase so not in warranty. I've never had any problems with my Nikons so I have never opted for the extended warranty.
Anyway, I will post the findings when I hear from Nikon.

Thank you to you all for sharing,
Blessings,
Charles
Click to expand...

Sadly, there's always going to be cameras with issues. I had issues with both of my D800s when they came out. It happens.

On a positive note, we've taken our Z cameras all over the US as well as Costa Rica and Africa. They have been put through rain, dust, and been bounced around in the back of landcrusiers on incredibly bumpy roads with no issues. The DSLRs did fine too, but - at least for us - the Z cameras have proved very reliable. I can't speak for all mirrorless, but it seems the Z cameras are as reliable as Nikon's DLSRs (with the exception of the single digit pro series - I have a feeling those are built to a higher standard :) )
 
Member's gallery
Yes, thank you Steve,
I realize it can happen, just a surprise when it does. I follow you and Moose Peterson the most and both of you use your cameras a lot more than I and without problems.
It seemed my Z6 died from some electronic problem that wasn’t my doing and was curious if any others might have experienced that.
I am 71 and to the person in the postings above who was 70 and didn’t want to “learn” a new camera or whatever, I say don’t let your age stop you. Learning, challenged by, something new keeps us young!
A few years ago I decided to learn Photosho/ACR and now, 5 years later I’m not bad at it, but, it’s been a very humbling experience. And, incredibly fun, when I wasn’t speaking rudely to my computer.
 
Member's gallery
Ziggy said:
I'd love to know if the AF algorithm was better.
At the moment I advise anyone who has to have bird record shots to avoid the Sony Alphas, and I've gone back on the waiting list for a Nikkor 500 PF. Happily I kept the D500 body - but I've spent 30,000 Aussie dollars on Sony gear to find AF reliability that's worse than one of the best M43 cameras that cost a couple of grand.
Click to expand...
Wow, that has not been my experience at all. Have been shooting the a9II, a lot, for 8 months. I do a lot of bird photography including warblers. Couldn't be happier with the a9II/600mm f4 combo.
 
Member's gallery
As far as Nikon is considered, I would count in-body image stabilization as an advantage, as well. I think I am correct that only the Nikon mirrorless cameras have IBS, right?
 
Member's gallery
A pithy synopsis @Steve, which deserves to cross-cited in the about "Does Gear Matter?" :):)
And paraphrase these two paragraphs into your ebooks

Steve said:
Photography is intertwined with technology, there's no way around it. Better technology leads to potentially better results. Faster and better AF system allow us to capture more keepers than we could with previous generation cameras. Higher frame rates, bigger buffers, better customization all play a role. In fact, one example is the first point I made on the list. I've lost shots because I couldn't focus and recompose fast enough when I had a subject with its eye outside the AF field. Mirrorless technology gives us full viewfinder AF which is a game-changer in a lot of scenarios. And that's only one example - I'm sure we could generate pages of examples.

The thing is, if technology didn't make a difference, we'd all be shooting entry level gear with kit lenses. The critical question is, "Does the technology help with your photography?" Since we all shoot different subject, sometimes that answer is yes, sometimes it's no. And I honestly don't think we'll reach a point where no skill is required. We may get to a point where very little technical skill is required, but what really makes a great shot often isn't technical prowess, but rather finding an inspired way to present a subject. I don't think that can be replaced with computers.
Click to expand...
 
Member's gallery
There has been IBIS in a DSLR but it wasn't a Nikon. With Z system IBIS works together with VR if those lenses that have it: ie many F mount Nikkors.
Comparing the AF in MILC versus DSLR, the AFC in mirrorless is still a work in progress, while the AFC in D5 and now D6 has been improved over 3 decades (if we count the F3 AF). While the total area of the AF window has probably plateaued, pattern recognition algorithms will continue to improve AFC in the latest dslrs; the benefits go mostly to action shooting, especially tracking tricky subjects and grabbing eye focus etc.
MILC AFC is catching up fast, and AFS is intrinsically more precise off the sensor in mirrorless and in Liveview in current DSLRs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top