Top 10 Mirrorless Advantages

[Roaring 40s]

Moving subjects don't suffer from the flat AF failure issue.
Possible reasons and 3 other Sony focus weaknesses are explored here: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1664839/0#15354890

Weakness no 5 has been added. In wide AF the A9II only acquires focus in the centre square.

...

As a test of image softness rates with BIF bursts, set your camera to AF priority and see what happens to the frame rate.

 

[jeffnles1]

Steve,
Thanks for sharing your top 10 list. Quite interesting things to think about. Right now, especially living on a retiree's income, my D500 and Nikon F mount glass (Nikon glass and Sigma glass and one Tokina lens) are meeting my needs. Our annual calendar sells, I manage to sell a few prints here and there but mostly, I just enjoy sharing my photographs with friends and even people I'll never meet. Mostly done through instagram and facebook these days. That will change as different media become more popular.

Bottom line, my next camera may well be a mirrorless. I kind of lust after the newer tech (I am retired from a 36 year career in IT). Right now I"m waiting to see what happens and see if my D500 will bite the dust or outlast me (heck, my D7200 is pushing 100K shutter actuations and going strong).

Again, thanks for posting this in such a coherent way that is easily digested and thought about.

 

[Sean B]

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.

I wish I could agree, but its sadly it's just not the case. Every day I see "Pro Photographers" selling their services, wetter that be, wedding, sports, portraits etc.. the only way they are capable of doing this, is because camera technology allows them to do so, you can just turn a camera on, point it at your subject and everything else is taken care of, no need to worry about focus auto eye detect will do that for you, just shoot in in Auto and then fix everything up in post.

"Better technology leads to potentially better results" is what camera manufactures have spent millions of dollars convincing us is the truth and sadly they have won! everyone thinks the newest lens or the latest body will get you the shoot you would have otherwise not have got- If skill is what got you the shot than the skilled photography would have the shot and the newbies wouldn't, now there is no line and things are only going to get worse. The golden days are well and truly over.

 

[gbodave]

"you can just turn a camera on, point it at your subject and everything else is taken care of, no need to worry about focus auto eye detect will do that for you, just shoot in in Auto and then fix everything up in post."

Couldn't be further from reality. Every day I see photos from beginners where there is something wrong with their photo and they are using full auto mode. Constant failures for the camera to use a suitable shutter speed or a suitable F number or both, or not focusing on the main subject. When those people jump to a semi auto mode and understand how things work, their results increase in quality by leaps and bounds.

 

[Steve]

I can see the shot just taken without even moving my eye away from the viewfinder which is a big plus over a DSLR. For me anyway

I really like that too - plus the viewfinder is adjusted to my eye with the diopter, so no need to grab my reading glasses every time I want to evaluate a shot - I just check it out in the viewfinder

 

[Steve]

I should add that I'm very short sighted in my left eye ... and alas, it's also my dominant eye! so yes, Steve, I share that. In a way it's a shame I had a detached retina in my right eye three years ago. Why? because I was at -8.5 correction - and when they lasered the retina back, they said I'd get a cataract because of the operation...they were right, and now in my right eye, I have 20/20 visIon ....BUT they won't recommend the lens replacement for my left eye. that's m and the adjusted diopter adjustment works well for me too.

sorry for the history. LOL.

Dang, that is a shame - you can't win on that one.

 

[Nick B.]

well the EVF is why it’s mirrorless. It’s a personal thing, but I find the lag quite negligible and on the plus side, for me, is that you see exactly what the image looks like to the sensor. In fact, I set playback to a fn button so if I want, I can see the shot just taken without even moving my eye away from the viewfinder which is a big plus over a DSLR. For me anyway

As you and I said: 'it's a personal thing' I understand many people find benefits from EVF. But, for me, I want the connection with the real world that I get with an OVF. I don't want to view the world through an electronic display. I want to see exectly the same image/colors/etc when I look through the viewfinder as when I look at the world without a camera on my eye. I know that I will be doing post-processing so I don't need processsed views int he viewfinder. My needs are making sure I have good composition, no blown highlights, etc. Having the option to display a histogram in an OVF might be useful. I'm not trying to change minds - just putting out my preferences.

Like Patrick, I am also struggling with serious eye issues this summer. I find that I can adjust the diopter setting on my OVF and use tha camera fully even wearing progressive lenses. I'm not sure what more an EVF could offer me in that regard.

 

[SMB]

With wildlife the switch for me to EVF meant real time exposure adjustments while shooting. Seeing a histogram and having the camera set so that EV/SS/Fs can be changed quickly has been a game changer. Composition is not always an issue with fast action and can be managed in post. With posed subjects it's kind of nice to see directly how DOF changes if one is changing f stops. Has mirrorless made me a better photographer? I was enjoying the process just as much with my DSLR kit, but I do think I am more nimble with my new set up.

 

[Ken Miracle]

@Steve Anxiously awaiting your more complete thoughts on the Z6 II and Z7II when you get your hands on it. Held off on D6 (for low light fewer MP bif camera) with the various rumors about the Z's. My D500's and D850 are no slouches in low light but my D4S was better.

 

[AndyL3]

Steve, why the Sony 100-400 instead of the 200-600? You mention your travel kit for Sony, was wondering why the 200-600 wasn't there?
Thanks

 

[Steve]

Steve, why the Sony 100-400 instead of the 200-600? You mention your travel kit for Sony, was wondering why the 200-600 wasn't there?
Thanks

I have the 600 F/4

The 100-400 is much smaller / lighter and I shoot most of my stuff with a 600mm anyway - so the extra focal lengths provided by the zoom are coming into play less than 20% of the time (maybe less than 10% on some trips), so I pick the stuff that's easier to pack and lighter (especially with bush plans, I'm always worried about bag weight).

 

[markymark]

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.

Thanks for the reply Steve.
Could someone get a mirrorless body, but without changing the lenses as well & just use the adapter? Or would they’re be a trade off?

 

[Steve]

Thanks for the reply Steve.
Could someone get a mirrorless body, but without changing the lenses as well & just use the adapter? Or would they’re be a trade off?

You can do it that way. You won't lose any optical quality with an adapted lens, just AF speed. However, one of the things that make the Z system so compelling are the lenses. The wider mount allows the designers more flexibility and this generally translates into shaper lenses with sharper corners. Especially on the wider end.

 

[bleirer]

For me focus peaking and magnification in the evf are things I wouldn't give up. On my mirrorless Canon I've switched from bbf to having the af-on button turn AF off while held. This way I can have all the benefits of BBF, but still get focus peaking without having to switch off servo.

 

[MrB]

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.

Not sure I can quite agree with #9. I have seen multiple EVF "flutters" regardless of brand (Fuji & Nikon anyway) that lead me to believe that like all electronics, my mirrorless cameras are not dead stable. My Nikon dslrs, in particular the pro bodies, just work. My D3s (which I may never let go of) has bounced off a concrete arena floor years ago causing the case to crack. It has never wavered in the least. If #9 does come true it will be well into the future. However , I would definitely add that if you like to use manual focus lenses, new or old (I have both), they are much more fun and intuitive to use on my mirrorless cameras than my dslrs. With focus peaking it even seems like you do not need DOF preview because you can see what is in focus.
Happy shooting!

 

[Steve]

Not sure I can quite agree with #9. I have seen multiple EVF "flutters" regardless of brand (Fuji & Nikon anyway) that lead me to believe that like all electronics, my mirrorless cameras are not dead stable. My Nikon dslrs, in particular the pro bodies, just work. My D3s (which I may never let go of) has bounced off a concrete arena floor years ago causing the case to crack. It has never wavered in the least. If #9 does come true it will be well into the future. However , I would definitely add that if you like to use manual focus lenses, new or old (I have both), they are much more fun and intuitive to use on my mirrorless cameras than my dslrs. With focus peaking it even seems like you do not need DOF preview because you can see what is in focus.
Happy shooting!

At the moment I tend to agree, that's why I mentioned "in theory" and "over time".

I think the higher-end mirrorless are getting close and eventually will surpass DSLRs. The thing is, I can say I've had more DSLRs fail over the years at this point than mirrorless I've also had Nikon pro bodies (the D5 comes to mind) occasionally need a battery pulled for a hard restart. It didn't happen often (maybe three times over the life of the camera), but it did happen. I had a D3x that didn't work and needed to go back to Nikon for repair (and I didn't drop it or anything, just a lot of use).

What I'm curious about (and will put to the test this summer) is how mirrorless fare in the wet, right conditions I often find myself in. I know the Z series cameras have been troopers. We've beaten them up in Africa (they literally have flown off the seat and onto the metal floor for the land cruiser) and have soaked them in Costa Rica - no issues at all, ever. So, I think they are getting there.

Of course all of this is anecdotal, it'll take long-terms results from all of us to really see if it pans out.

 

[SMB]

Not sure I can quite agree with #9. I have seen multiple EVF "flutters" regardless of brand (Fuji & Nikon anyway) that lead me to believe that like all electronics, my mirrorless cameras are not dead stable. My Nikon dslrs, in particular the pro bodies, just work. My D3s (which I may never let go of) has bounced off a concrete arena floor years ago causing the case to crack. It has never wavered in the least. If #9 does come true it will be well into the future. However , I would definitely add that if you like to use manual focus lenses, new or old (I have both), they are much more fun and intuitive to use on my mirrorless cameras than my dslrs. With focus peaking it even seems like you do not need DOF preview because you can see what is in focus.
Happy shooting!

Not sure what you mean by "flutters". I don't have experience with multiple brands but have been shooting with Sony for over a year now, after 50 years with Nikon.
The EVF performs extremely well with no blackout even with 20 fps and silent shooting.
I would agree that a D2,3,4,5 body would probably fair better if dropped attached to a 600mm lens compared to a a9II body. However a relatively minor fall of my D5/500mm f4 tore up all the lens mounting rings.
I have had the a9II and a7RIV in heavy rain, wet snow, wind, dust and -20 temps without any problems. Curiously, you always read that mirrorless sensors are dust magnets, being so exposed. My experience has been the opposite. My Sony bodies don't seem to get as many sensor spots and they, so far, always clean op with a simple blower.

 

[Ken Miracle]

Not sure what you mean by "flutters". I don't have experience with multiple brands but have been shooting with Sony for over a year now, after 50 years with Nikon.
The EVF performs extremely well with no blackout even with 20 fps and silent shooting.
I would agree that a D2,3,4,5 body would probably fair better if dropped attached to a 600mm lens compared to a a9II body. However a relatively minor fall of my D5/500mm f4 tore up all the lens mounting rings.
I have had the a9II and a7RIV in heavy rain, wet snow, wind, dust and -20 temps without any problems. Curiously, you always read that mirrorless sensors are dust magnets, being so exposed. My experience has been the opposite. My Sony bodies don't seem to get as many sensor spots and they, so far, always clean op with a simple blower.

I have noticed that my wifes z50 does not seem to get more sensor spots than her dslr did or mine do. And as you said they blew off with a rocket blower.

 

[Palouse]

Thom Hogan has this to add:

The Mirrorless Myths Continue | Sans Mirror | Thom Hogan

10 myths about mirrorless cameras

www.sansmirror.com

 

[MrB]

At the moment I tend to agree, that's why I mentioned "in theory" and "over time".

I think the higher-end mirrorless are getting close and eventually will surpass DSLRs. The thing is, I can say I've had more DSLRs fail over the years at this point than mirrorless I've also had Nikon pro bodies (the D5 comes to mind) occasionally need a battery pulled for a hard restart. It didn't happen often (maybe three times over the life of the camera), but it did happen. I had a D3x that didn't work and needed to go back to Nikon for repair (and I didn't drop it or anything, just a lot of use).

What I'm curious about (and will put to the test this summer) is how mirrorless fare in the wet, right conditions I often find myself in. I know the Z series cameras have been troopers. We've beaten them up in Africa (they literally have flown off the seat and onto the metal floor for the land cruiser) and have soaked them in Costa Rica - no issues at all, ever. So, I think they are getting there.

Of course all of this is anecdotal, it'll take long-terms results from all of us to really see if it pans out.

Can't disagree with your perspective on the evolution aspect. It also seems I have had better luck with my dslrs than you have, so, point taken. This is somewhat analogous to the card failure discussion as it relates to the 2 card slot camera design. In the ten years I shot the local performance circuit (~450,000 images over 10 years) I had a couple of Lexar CF cards fail, but never a Sandisk, and I had (and still have) a lot of Sandisk CF cards. I see in forums though a lot of people having somewhat regular failures. Again, maybe I am lucky? While I don't find it absolutely necessary, I do feel more comfortable with the two slots in my Z6II. Good to hear your positive experience with the Z7's robustness! Gives me a bit more confidence that I can rely on the Z6II if I need to.

Good discussion.

 

[Ken Miracle]

At the moment I tend to agree, that's why I mentioned "in theory" and "over time".

I think the higher-end mirrorless are getting close and eventually will surpass DSLRs. The thing is, I can say I've had more DSLRs fail over the years at this point than mirrorless I've also had Nikon pro bodies (the D5 comes to mind) occasionally need a battery pulled for a hard restart. It didn't happen often (maybe three times over the life of the camera), but it did happen. I had a D3x that didn't work and needed to go back to Nikon for repair (and I didn't drop it or anything, just a lot of use).

What I'm curious about (and will put to the test this summer) is how mirrorless fare in the wet, right conditions I often find myself in. I know the Z series cameras have been troopers. We've beaten them up in Africa (they literally have flown off the seat and onto the metal floor for the land cruiser) and have soaked them in Costa Rica - no issues at all, ever. So, I think they are getting there.

Of course all of this is anecdotal, it'll take long-terms results from all of us to really see if it pans out.

I am 72 and woud bet that I just bought my last DSLR ... found a like new "used" returned to B&H apparently not used. I had been missing a low light fast action body (sold my D4s when I got a D850 to go with my D500. I have only had the D6 out twice this week and it has been dim, snowy, rainy etc.. and so far so great with Sigma 60-600 sport and Nikon 500pf. I would love to have a hand holdable 600mm and I expect that is going to be a mirrorless doubt if Nikon brings out a 600 pf for dslr. I fully expect my next bodies down the road will be replacements for the D850 and D500.

 

[Roaring 40s]

There's an important difference between performance on paper and performance in the field, and I say that regarding both systems that eg advertise 10 fps or 20 fps.

My A9 can do 20 and I set it at 10 to avoid a high culling load, but when I set Focus/Release to AF priority the burst rate will drop to say 3 where the bird is against a busy background. The nominal rate of 10 fps is only achieved with a clear bird against a plain background.

The D500 rate drops under the same circumstances.

 

[Steve Waycott]

Thanks @Steve. I am balancing precariously on the fence - stick with the D850 as my primary wildlife rig or take the plunge with a Z7ii. One of the things that will help me decide is your real world wildlife photography review of the Z7ii. Any sense of when you expect to have that one ready? Thanks!

 

[EricBowles]

I really like that too - plus the viewfinder is adjusted to my eye with the diopter, so no need to grab my reading glasses every time I want to evaluate a shot - I just check it out in the viewfinder

I wear reading glasses and the EVF is a huge benefit for me, too. I also find that my eye never leaves the viewfinder to review images, zoom for close review, change controls, etc. I've gone an entire day without chimping on the rear LCD at all, and I rarely chimp through the EVF. I know the exposure is right, and review is almost only to check focus.

 

[Doug Herr]

I wear reading glasses and the EVF is a huge benefit for me, too. I also find that my eye never leaves the viewfinder to review images, zoom for close review, change controls, etc. I've gone an entire day without chimping on the rear LCD at all, and I rarely chimp through the EVF. I know the exposure is right, and review is almost only to check focus.

Same for me. The only reasons I use the rear EVF is for a low angle photo or to show someone a photo. Having used SLR cameras since the late 1960s and now mirrorless for the last 6 or so years there's no way I'd go back to an optical viewfinder. My wildlife camera for the last three years has been a single Sony a7rIII and I can count the number of glitches on the fingers of one foot.