/p/ - Photography » Thread #3419431

[138 / 13 / ?]

Mirrorless v. DSLR

Anonymous Sat 12 Jan 2019 20:12:56 No.3419431 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>3419457 >>3419472 >>3419475 >>3419721 >>3419760 >>3419852 >>3420324 >>3423898

I'm looking for an opinion as I'm in the market for a mirrorless camera and I'm looking to move away from my DSLR.
What would you guys recommend with a budget of ~$1500 (can go a few $100 above, if necessary).
I've done some research but I'm torn between going for full frame or not. My friend has a Sony a6300 and he loves it and I've played around with it a bit and I really like the way it feels and the EVF.
Please give opinions and thoughts, I'd love to hear them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Jan 2019 21:01:34 No.3419457 Report

Quoted By: >>3419853

>>3419431
personally own the a6500, gifted my parents the original a7 and have an a7r iii and two a7 iii at work. if minimalistic photographer, a7 is a really good deal. for video, the a6500 which feels amazing is superb and not that expensive. if you have the money the a7 iii has everything you need, feels even better than the a6500 and the mark ii's and offers full frame image performance.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Jan 2019 21:05:00 No.3419459 Report

Quoted By: >>3419468

mirrorless if you want portability and features
DSLR if you want build quality, reliability, compatability and handling
it's such a difficult question because everyone has different needs, figure out what you need yourself
get a full frame instead of APS-C though, it's worth it

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Jan 2019 21:24:57 No.3419464 Report

Quoted By: >>3419620

Save up a little bit more for the A7 mark 3, or the Nikon Z6.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Jan 2019 21:32:39 No.3419468 Report

Quoted By: >>3419470 >>3419471 >>3419620

>>3419459
The Z6 and Z7 have the same build quality as the best DSLRs.
(it will probably also be the same for the upcoming Panasonic S1 and S1R, if Panasonic is telling the truth)

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Jan 2019 21:36:39 No.3419470 Report

Quoted By: >>3421974

>>3419468
I'm still going to buy nikon DSLRs but I heard that the handling and feel on the z6 is the best that mirrorless has to offer, I'll get to try one out soon which I am very excited about.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Jan 2019 21:36:52 No.3419471 Report

Quoted By:

>>3419468
Panasonic is 4500 dollar though.

Some people are still hoping they will be 2000, but I think they will be surprised by the price tag.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Jan 2019 21:38:56 No.3419472 Report

Quoted By: >>3419478

>>3419431
What DSLR do you have now?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Jan 2019 21:44:19 No.3419475 Report

Quoted By:

>>3419431
why the hell wouldn't you go full frame, no point in upgrading otherwise especially with that budget

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Jan 2019 21:57:46 No.3419478 Report

Quoted By: >>3419484 >>3419867

>>3419472
I'm the dude who posts in the /rpt/ with a Pentax K50D, so I basically have some garbage.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Jan 2019 22:25:41 No.3419484 Report

Quoted By:

>>3419478
with your budget you should be able to obtain some full frame w/ lenses, maybe not the best of the best gear but quite good pro photography capable stuff none the less

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 04:49:31 No.3419620 Report

Quoted By: >>3419687

>>3419464
>>3419468

It's the Z 6 or Z 7.

DON'T FORGET THE SPACE.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Z-olympus-pen-f-reverse_angle.jpg, 207KiB, 1024x754

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 05:13:00 No.3419625 Report

Quoted By: >>3419627 >>3419661 >>3419758

no reason to NOT get mirrorless

now here are imo priorities

I got a heavy as fuck pro DSLR. It was gay and heavy and produced images that were great if you zoomed in 200%

I bought a m4/3 camera its a quarter of the weight and cost , and has images that are great if you zoomed in 120%

Lesson is a camera you can take anywhere and is not heavy is better than a larger heavier camera. Full frame will always be limited by its sensor size which requires heavier lenses to gather light for it.

Anyway onto micro4/3

Olympus has the best image stablization on the market and are getting ready (later this year) to start getting into global shutter technology which will once again put them at the top of the technological game.

Panasonic makes amazing video cameras that take pictures just as good.

If your goal is photography i would go with olympus. Might have to wait a few months for their new cameras to get announced because the EM1x is a giant sports/nature camera that will cost 3000 dollars and nobody is going to buy it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 05:38:52 No.3419627 Report

Quoted By: >>3419630

>>3419625
were you one of those retards that actually bought a PEN F?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 05:46:55 No.3419630 Report

Quoted By: >>3419631

>>3419627
no but if the next one has improved specs i will buy the shit out of it. They are super small i fucking love it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 05:48:01 No.3419631 Report

Quoted By:

>>3419630
>he next one
the sales of the current one are so bad i doubt you'll ever see a new one.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 06:57:21 No.3419661 Report

Quoted By:

>>3419625
Stupid expensive lenses and the few 3rd party lenses are garbage. Adapted 35mm lenses are a pain in the ass to focus because the infinity point is off and the crop factor removes most of the fun you can get out of them. The built-in filters tend to add insane levels of sharpening. PEN-F is nigh unusable for left-eye dominants.

I'm waiting for the system to die so I can at least get a decent lens for it for cheap. Can't be far off now that even Panasonic realized there's no point sticking with it.

Also PEN-F isn't small at all if you're used to film cameras.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 07:58:28 No.3419687 Report

Quoted By: >>3419698

>>3419620
Actually, please switch spelling ways between posts. Marketing screwed up big time with the naming. It's an SEO nightmare. By alternatingly spelling it both ways you help us teach search engines that it's the same thing

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 08:57:59 No.3419698 Report

Quoted By:

>>3419687
>teach search engines
for free? no thanks nikon marketeer

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 10:56:13 No.3419721 Report

Quoted By:

>>3419431
Every company is going mirrorless now, i dont see what's there to think

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 13:29:49 No.3419758 Report

Quoted By:

>>3419625
is this bait

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 13:38:03 No.3419760 Report

Quoted By: >>3419813

>>3419431
some banging deals on fuji xt2 atm.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 16:44:32 No.3419813 Report

Quoted By: >>3419826 >>3419839 >>3419842

>>3419760
>paying that much for a crop sensor

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 17:33:30 No.3419826 Report

Quoted By: >>3419878

>>3419813
yet its cheaper than the a7iii and provides an image as good

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 18:19:18 No.3419839 Report

Quoted By: >>3419878

>>3419813
>muh ff
What is this, 2016?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 18:20:02 No.3419842 Report

Quoted By: >>3419878

>>3419813
>giving a shit about sesor size when it makes such an insignifcant difference.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 18:49:00 No.3419852 Report

Quoted By:

>>3419431
I moved from Nikon d600 to Fuji x-t3. Budget lens selections is more limited, happy with everything else. I carry my camera more with me now so that's the main benefit for me. aka > the one you have with you

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 18:49:14 No.3419853 Report

Quoted By: >>3419912

>>3419457
What about the lense selection though? FE lenses are horribly expensive.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 19:04:15 No.3419867 Report

Quoted By: >>3420097

>>3419478
>Pentax K50D
I've got one of those in pink. What color is yours?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 19:39:37 No.3419878 Report

Quoted By: >>3419919 >>3419942

>>3419826
>>3419839
>>3419842
wtf /p/, full frame has objectively better performance, don't kid yourselves, if you're spending as much as OP has budgeted for you'd be stupid to go from APS-C to yet another APS-C, not very much of an upgrade, when you can go full frame instead

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 21:13:35 No.3419912 Report

Quoted By: >>3420023 >>3420065

>>3419853
you can put every lense except those new canon/nikon mirrorless things onto an alpha. you may sacrifice the max autofocus speed but i feel like superfast autofocus is only needed for sports and action stills. i do videos for money and stills for fun, so i don't use autofocus at all.

sigma lenses are good. i mostly use vintage nikon and minolta glass from my film cameras on my a6500 for creative video work.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 21:48:01 No.3419919 Report

Quoted By: >>3420240

>>3419878
>objectively better performance
N E G L I G I B L E

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Jan 2019 23:07:45 No.3419942 Report

Quoted By: >>3420013 >>3420240

>>3419878
On paper yes they're "better" but in real world usage there is barely any noticeable difference.

https://youtu.be/zZNr24yVD9s?t=452

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1541225942313.png, 1MiB, 1920x1080

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 02:40:29 No.3420013 Report

Quoted By: >>3420059 >>3420064 >>3420277 >>3423406 >>3423495

>>3419942
>On paper yes they're "better"
Nah. Full Frame is simply superior.

Cheap 600 dollar lenses like the 85mm F1,8 just destroys Fujifilm's more expensive equivalents because they aren't short enough to make up for the smaller pixels.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 02:41:48 No.3420014 Report

Quoted By:

*they aren't sharp enough

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 02:58:14 No.3420023 Report

Quoted By: >>3420061

>>3419912
Yeah ok buddy but why should I get a 350 euro brand new sony A7 when all the lenses cost 700 fucking euros for a decent lense and the adapters cost another 700? Manual lenses are shit, not even worth considering. Image quality might be good but I don't want to fiddle around with the focus ring like a retarded when I'm just trying to take some nice shots.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 04:21:41 No.3420059 Report

Quoted By:

>>3420013
oh gawd, not this shit again

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 04:27:33 No.3420061 Report

Quoted By: >>3420710 >>3420713 >>3421965

>>3420023
The original a7 is total garbage, no one should put their hard earned (or even stolen government) money towards some shitbag like that.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 04:38:16 No.3420064 Report

Quoted By: >>3420067

>>3420013
>a comparison of auto white balance on several different cameras
very useful thanks

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 04:39:32 No.3420065 Report

Quoted By: >>3420080

>>3419912
You know there's several af adapters for fuji also? Even a speedbooster type? And they all work just as well as on sony, ie no where well enough.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 04:45:21 No.3420067 Report

Quoted By:

>>3420064
They weren't set on auto whitebalance.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 04:55:44 No.3420080 Report

Quoted By:

>>3420065
>And they all work just as well as on sony, ie no where well enough.
The Sigma MC-11 actually works really well on Sony. Near native performance, totally usable.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 05:04:50 No.3420097 Report

Quoted By:

>>3419867
>pink
That’s fantastic lol. Mine is a matte green sort of color.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 15:19:12 No.3420240 Report

Quoted By: >>3420249

>>3419919
>>3419942
FF is absolutely better at high ISO. There's no debating this.

FF is not clearly better, after post processing, when MP are equal and you're dealing with low ISO scenes. However, if you're comparing similar pixel densities (i.e. high resolution FF vs. APS-C) then FF is, once again, clearly better.

Whether you need the IQ gains is another matter.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 15:34:09 No.3420249 Report

Quoted By: >>3420250

>>3420240
That's why you should just shoot fuji gfx like a real man, none of those tiny ass sony shits

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 15:37:10 No.3420250 Report

Quoted By: >>3420320

>>3420249
No third party lenses, shit first party lineup with no zooms.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 16:43:49 No.3420277 Report

Quoted By: >>3420281 >>3420296

>>3420013
everytime there's an argument about gear online it's always a fucking Sony faggot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 16:48:39 No.3420281 Report

Quoted By: >>3420319

>>3420277
Stop being so angry just because your camera system was shown to have shit colour and shit details.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 17:22:14 No.3420296 Report

Quoted By: >>3420712 >>3420714

>>3420277

You ever wonder why there's never, ever an article that objectively puts sony as anything other than the best?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 18:42:46 No.3420319 Report

Quoted By:

>>3420281
>always a Sony faggot

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 18:47:16 No.3420320 Report

Quoted By:

>>3420250
There are two Mitakon Zhongyi lenses (65mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.2) and Fuji actually has one zoom available (32-64mm f/4) with a 100-200mm f/4 coming this year and a 45-100mm f/4 next year.

There should also have been a Meyer-Optik Gorlitz 105mm f/2.7 but well, things did not go well for them...

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 19:00:35 No.3420324 Report

Quoted By: >>3420337 >>3420371

>>3419431
I'd go mirrorless as eventually all the major players will stop developing for DSLR.

I have both full frame and micro four-thirds and love both systems for their unique qualities.

If you want something light weight and travel friendly, great in-body image stabilization, less expensive 3rd party lenses (aps-c lenses usually are available in m43), and easy large dof landscapes, go with something like the gx9, pen-f, e-m5 mkii, or g85.

If you would prefer greater color depth, slightly improved noise performance, full use of any classic full-frame lens, excellent (albeit more expensive) 3rd party lenses, and shallower depth of field (super easy for portraits), go with an a7, a7ii, or if you can afford it, a7rii/a7iii/z6.

Only reason I don't list Canon is the crazy price of their current native lenses.

You can adapt pretty much any lens to any of these systems for under $50 if you don't care about electronic control.

When it comes to image quality, don't sweat the pixel-peepers. I still shoot with my 10+ year old e-p1 and the pictures are great, especially at 15" wide which is the size most people will see on their computers, and they print great up to 16x20.

The most important thing though is to try and get your hands on the cameras you're looking at to try them out. I tried both Canon and Nikon and hated them because I didn't like their layout, which meant I didn't take them with me when I would go out. Panasonic and Sony are my favorites because of their handling, and I almost never go out the door without one, simply because I enjoy shooting with them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 19:35:12 No.3420337 Report

Quoted By: >>3420364 >>3420375 >>3420393

>>3420324
What's the point of buying a modern expensive as shit camera if you're gonna put shitcunt manual crap on it?????? Sony fanboys are delusional

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 20:22:10 No.3420364 Report

Quoted By:

>>3420337
Some older lenses don't have modern equivalents, like for example the DC-Nikkor 105mm f/2 and 135mm f/2 (both default to MF on a Nikon Z as the FTZ adapter does not have a built-in focus motor).
Both are still in Nikon's current catalog.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 20:44:13 No.3420371 Report

Quoted By: >>3420452

>>3420324
>slightly improved noise performance,
If by "slightly" you mean 2-3ev, then yeah, "slightly."

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 20:49:29 No.3420375 Report

Quoted By:

>>3420337
nothing against modern glass but telling old glass bad because is old is absolutely retarded. ask photographers what their favorite picture is, chances are it's from before the 70s.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Jan 2019 21:45:34 No.3420393 Report

Quoted By:

>>3420337
Because the image quality is still fucking great? Lots of people wouldn't mind manual focus if they can save a thousand bucks. Hell, i like manual lenses, less electronics to fail on me.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Jan 2019 01:39:18 No.3420452 Report

Quoted By: >>3420700 >>3420704

>>3420371
In benchmarks yes, but I use the gx8 and a7ii and can tell you that in real world applications, the difference is nearly unnoticeable.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Jan 2019 14:04:05 No.3420700 Report

Quoted By: >>3422082

>>3420452
the difference between a $100 lens and a $1000 lens is nearly unnoticeable, doesn't mean you should skimp on gear if you're supposed to be a pro photographer who can afford good gear

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2019-01-15 at 6.16.0 (...).png, 1MiB, 1342x692

Anonymous Tue 15 Jan 2019 14:16:36 No.3420704 Report

Quoted By: >>3420719 >>3420737 >>3420742

>>3420452

Sage

Sage Tue 15 Jan 2019 14:43:05 No.3420710 Report

Quoted By:

>>3420061
The a7ii is not much better. Even at the Black Friday price of $999 it wasn't worth it.

Sage

Sage Tue 15 Jan 2019 14:45:08 No.3420712 Report

Quoted By:

>>3420296
Graft?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Jan 2019 14:49:57 No.3420713 Report

Quoted By:

>>3420061
The a7ii is not much better. Even at the Black Friday price of $999 it wasn't worth it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Jan 2019 14:51:05 No.3420714 Report

Quoted By:

>>3420296
Graft

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Jan 2019 15:02:04 No.3420719 Report

Quoted By: >>3422142

>>3420704
if you have to pixel peep iso12800 raw files @100% magnification, you've already lost.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Jan 2019 15:53:30 No.3420737 Report

Quoted By: >>3422081 >>3422142

>>3420704
That’s a controlled studio test scene viewed at 100%.

If you consider that “real world usage”, then you and I have fundamentally different views on the purpose of photography.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Jan 2019 16:18:43 No.3420742 Report

Quoted By: >>3422142

>>3420704
That's it! I'm ordering GH5 and M.Zuiko f2.8 7-14mm f2.8 as we speak!

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 01:01:44 No.3421965 Report

Quoted By: >>3421967 >>3422018

>>3420061
>The original a7 is total garbage
And what exactly wrong with it?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 01:12:42 No.3421967 Report

Quoted By:

>>3421965
Lens prices

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 01:52:07 No.3421974 Report

Quoted By: >>3422001 >>3422104

>>3419470
>I heard that the handling and feel on the z6 is the best that mirrorless has to offer

By Nikon shills, so take that with 11 trillion grains of salt.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 03:34:49 No.3422001 Report

Quoted By:

>>3421974
Some might prefer the EOS R but I never liked Canon's ergonomics (kind of strange as lots of people rave about them) and my Z7 feels much better in my hand than an α7/α9, X-H1 or GFX-50S.

I must admit that I have never held a Leica SL nor the upcoming Panasonic S1.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 04:14:08 No.3422018 Report

Quoted By: >>3422180

>>3421965
Everything is so laggy it's almost unusable (like a cheap android phone from 2009 -laggy)
VF is choppy and laggy
AF barely works
Batterylife is shit
UI/UX is a nightmare
Build quality is questionable
Mount mounted on plastic
etc
etc

Valiant first effort, but more like a prototype than an actual camera.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 08:42:36 No.3422081 Report

Quoted By:

>>3420737
Yeah no, I call wandering a national park and shooting 1000+ shots a real world test.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 08:50:13 No.3422082 Report

Quoted By: >>3422238

>>3420700
I don't think the price of equipment should be a measure of a photographer. If it is to you, maybe you spent too much on lenses rather than time shooting pictures.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 09:54:32 No.3422095 Report

Quoted By: >>3422101 >>3422129

I miss my OVF.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 10:16:20 No.3422101 Report

Quoted By: >>3423353

>>3422095
I don't really. It's much nicer when you have an automated system that warns me of over exposed zones.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 10:24:18 No.3422104 Report

Quoted By: >>3422128

>>3421974
mirrorless so far have had garbage ergonomics so not like it's an impressive title
leave it to canikon to actually produce nice feeling bodies

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 11:26:20 No.3422128 Report

Quoted By:

>>3422104
>mirrorless so far have had garbage ergonomics
Spotted the person who's never used a Panasonic G or GH series body.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 11:29:25 No.3422129 Report

Quoted By:

>>3422095
>I miss my OVF.
I certainly don't. I can't go back to an OVF, what with their lack of live histograms, zebras, and focus peaking. A lack of a good EVF is a dealbreaker for me.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO xpro2.jpg, 38KiB, 600x532

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 11:48:12 No.3422131 Report

Quoted By: >>3422147 >>3422148 >>3422158 >>3422164

Can you imagine lugging around a big bulky DSLR? lmao nerds

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 12:34:59 No.3422142 Report

Quoted By: >>3422153

>>3420719
>>3420737
>>3420742
That's a huge difference which would be visible on screen and in print. In my experience APS-C and m43 are done at 3200, maybe 6400 depending on subject, lighting, and post work.

FF is good through 12800 and 25600 with a little work.

Perhaps more importantly, FF 1600 is virtually indistinguishable from 100 in print. Past 400 crop/m43 IQ starts to degrade.

Crop/m43 is suitable for the majority of uses. But to claim that FF high ISO performance is "nearly unnoticeable" is absolute bullshit. You need your eyes checked if you can't see it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 12:55:57 No.3422147 Report

Quoted By: >>3422177

>>3422131
That thing looks pretty bulky still desu

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 13:02:52 No.3422148 Report

Quoted By: >>3422177

>>3422131
If you lug around anything bigger than the cellphone you already have in your pocket, you're a huge nerd.

Signed, a guy who carries a 5D3 everywhere.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2019-01-18 at 7.07.2 (...).png, 656KiB, 580x602

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 13:14:41 No.3422153 Report

Quoted By: >>3422180

>>3422142
>to claim that FF high ISO performance is "nearly unnoticeable" is absolute bullshit.
Ehhhhhh. For most FF cameras, sure. The A7 and A7 II are a special case because they have absolutely shitty noise performance, on par with a good APS-C crop sensor.

And the assertion was that the difference is difficult to see in "real world usage", which is different from "in high ISO usage" for most people*. The higher the ISO goes, the clearer the difference is. But if you're down at ISO 800 and below, you'll be hard pressed to notice any difference unless you peep in to 100%.

* (Although, that being said, not for me--I do most of my shooting north of ISO3200, and it's the main reason I have a full frame DSLR. But I'm not most people)

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20121019-PA192302-XL.jpg, 184KiB, 1024x683

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 13:29:11 No.3422158 Report

Quoted By: >>3422205 >>3422244

>>3422131
I love my X-Pro but why they didn't put a flash in it is beyond me. The ef-x20 is pretty compact but it looks kinda retarded.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 14:25:48 No.3422164 Report

Quoted By: >>3422177

>>3422131
I've looked at the alternatives and it isn't much smaller
I'll be carrying around a d810 with a tamron 24-70, actually takes less space than the mirrorless counterparts, still going to be heavy as shit, 0.7KG heavier than similar mirrorless setups which might suck.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO promocreep62117.png, 210KiB, 575x296

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 15:27:54 No.3422177 Report

Quoted By: >>3422189

>>3422147
>>3422148
>>3422164
It's not about exact size but the looks.

DSLRs are ugly plastic blobs that scream creepy in public while retro inspired cameras look more casual, like an accessory to outfit and people aren't nervous.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 15:38:19 No.3422180 Report

Quoted By:

>>3422018
>it's laggy
It's not, the menus are very responsive, startup takes a couple of seconds but that's it.

>evf is laggy

Sure, it was measured at 23ms, which is about half the shutter lag on a d800.

>af barely works

This is about a cheap camera, some people want better af and worse image quality, others want image quality as af isn't that important to them. Your insistence that this is an issue just highlights that you need crutches to shoot.

>battery life is shit

Still the most efficient mirrorless on the market, the batteries and power system are best in class.

>ui is a nightmare

I get it, you need labels because your pea brain can't remember 7 custom buttons and 3 custom dials functions.

>build quality is?

No it isn't, the a7 was selling for $700 new by the time it left shelves, show me a camera with better build quality at that price, it's a shit ton better than the a6500 or canon m50.

>PLASTIC IS BAD

No, plastic is good, it expands and contracts less with heat, isn't subject to corrosion and can be made much more accurately

>>3422153

Sony are the only company that don't bake in color noise reduction to raws, that's the difference you are seeing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 16:14:07 No.3422189 Report

Quoted By:

>>3422177
that argument goes both ways, you'll look way more "pro" with a DSLR than a mirrorless because of the utilitarian look.
using a camera for a fashion accessory is retarded and you should be more worried about how it performs out in the field.
that being said I'm really considering getting an x-t20 as a backup camera for a d810 since aps-c lenses are way smaller than full frame ones.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 16:58:23 No.3422205 Report

Quoted By:

>>3422158
looks great to me desu

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1505503663666.jpg, 62KiB, 624x479

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 17:08:18 No.3422216 Report

Quoted By:

This thread is filled with idiots.

It's all down the preference, simple as. If you prefer mirrorless then mirrorless is best for you and same goes for if you prefer DSLR's. No one is right or wrong in what they choose to go with and you're genuinely mentally challenged if you think so, both have their pros and cons.

Also If you think of your camera as a fashion accessory then this hobby isn't for you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 18:16:47 No.3422238 Report

Quoted By:

>>3422082
ok show up to a $10k shoot with your $1k aps-c with kit lens and see how long you last

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 18:37:54 No.3422244 Report

Quoted By:

>>3422158
Looks cute for all I care. Makes me think of a budget Minolta CLE. Knock off flash for a rangefinder knockoff seems just fair.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 18:38:11 No.3422245 Report

Quoted By: >>3422366

if it can't fit in your pocket its not really a compact

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Jan 2019 23:39:06 No.3422366 Report

Quoted By:

>>3422245
a fucking RX100 doesn't fit in most pockets

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO .png, 1MiB, 863x840

Anonymous Sat 19 Jan 2019 00:42:27 No.3422434 Report

Quoted By: >>3422440 >>3422529 >>3422582

mirrorless in the white house

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Jan 2019 00:59:10 No.3422440 Report

Quoted By: >>3422579

>>3422434
>all those burgers
the greatest nation on earth

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Jan 2019 05:58:08 No.3422529 Report

Quoted By: >>3422530 >>3422605

>>3422434
haaha he got wendy's and mcD's
but seriously. The wh kitchen staff is on furlow because of the shut down and the football players are on strict diets during the playing season. This was a nice treat from the sounds of it and a pretty laid back atmosphere. People talk about politicians that they could "have a beer with" but, Trump doesn't drink alcohol for personal reasons. I think it would be pretty cool to have a quarter pounder and a coke with the guy though. Even if we don't agree on things.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Jan 2019 06:03:14 No.3422530 Report

Quoted By:

>>3422529
>a nice treat
lol it's the cheapest/lowest quality burger they could've possibly served them without buying the boxes of frozen grocery store burgers. it would've been chintzy for any president, but doubly so for president "i'm very rich and successful and want you to believe i am a billionaire"

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Jan 2019 10:44:27 No.3422579 Report

Quoted By:

>>3422440
*berders

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1305032952663.jpg, 108KiB, 554x439

Anonymous Sat 19 Jan 2019 10:59:45 No.3422582 Report

Quoted By: >>3422588

>>3422434
There was a press conference once with Obama and the TV couldn't pick up anything but *CLAK* *CLAK* *CLAKAKAK* *CLAK*

I guess they got tired of that at some point.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Jan 2019 11:42:08 No.3422588 Report

Quoted By:

>>3422582
the claks are a beautiful sound though, hearing *CLAKCLAKCLAKCLAKCLAK* in the distance is a sound that soothes the heart and most likely cured my cancer

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Jan 2019 14:04:25 No.3422605 Report

Quoted By:

>>3422529
>*cold* quarter pounder and coke

Any mcdonnies enthusiast knows them shits don't stay hot for 5 minutes.

>a nice treat

No, mcdoons is a treat for a 7 year old, a nice steak, with some well cooked vegetables and a half decent bottle of wine is a treat for an adult.

>trump doesn't drink for personal reasons

Yeh, he can't afford ANOTHER affair.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO sizes.png, 464KiB, 1672x649

Anonymous Sat 19 Jan 2019 17:20:59 No.3422647 Report

Quoted By: >>3422650 >>3423424

People sort of miss the point of small mirrorless cameras when they get a huge objective to make it just as large as a DSLR. No-one _needs_ that extra -f0.2, just get a nice prime or two and you're good to go.

Here's a comparison of
Sony FE 85mm f/1.8
Sony FE 85mm f/1.4 GM

Samyang AF 35mm f/2.8 FE
Sony FE 24mm f/1.4 GM

First pair has no real technical difference to speak of but some still want to carry 500 grams more glass with them.

The second pair has some actual technical difference, but to me it is not clear how this affects the photography (i.e. what kind of a photo the GM takes that Samyang doesn't?). Samyang and the A7 II almost fits in your pocket.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1537473167313.jpg, 180KiB, 1014x570

Anonymous Sat 19 Jan 2019 17:27:49 No.3422650 Report

Quoted By:

>>3422647
The first comparison is valid, the F1,4 is for the bokeh whores who really, really, really wants to stand out from smartphone shots.

The second one is two different things.
The 35mm is for being stealthy.
The 24mm is designed specifically for shooting the stars, but even then, it's not THAT mush bigger. If you can carry the 85 F1,8, you can carry the 24mm as well.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 11:20:57 No.3423345 Report

Quoted By: >>3423351

What recent-ish MILC would you recommend to someone who has no lenses worth shit to speak of? I got tired of lugging my D90 around, but these days, I feel like getting back into the game.

Mainly looking for used mid-range APS-C / M43 at the moment, don't really have that high of a budget (and I have to get glass for it as well). Which brands / series to avoid and what to look out for?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 12:01:46 No.3423351 Report

Quoted By: >>3423375

>>3423345
Sony are way out in front, and half the price of equivalent models.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 12:36:34 No.3423353 Report

Quoted By: >>3423363

>>3422101
You should learn how to expose correctly then.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 13:10:38 No.3423363 Report

Quoted By: >>3423366

>>3423353
That is a tool to help me expose correctly and more precisely than you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 13:22:33 No.3423366 Report

Quoted By: >>3423367

>>3423363
It's not really that hard that you need tools for it lol.
I expose my shots perfectly even without a meter.
You should learn it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 13:37:27 No.3423367 Report

Quoted By: >>3423385

>>3423366
>>It's not really that hard
That's not an argument. Tools are there to get your job don faster and more efficient. You're that one guy in the 80's who argued for manual focusing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 14:08:44 No.3423375 Report

Quoted By: >>3423390 >>3423477

>>3423351
Which Sony MLCs are recommended? My budget is around 500EUR, would be nice if the kit lens came with that price. Looking to buy used.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 15:08:41 No.3423385 Report

Quoted By:

>>3423367
I assume you also need tools for breathing, I quess it's hardcore for some people even from mouth.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 15:17:25 No.3423390 Report

Quoted By:

>>3423375
Depends on your priorities, you could get a sony a7 for that price, with its full frame 24mp sensor you will get much better image quality, but its a 2nd gen mirrorless device so the autofocus is still crap.

Alternatively you could get a sony a6500, which has lightning fast autofocus and ibis to allow you to handhold shots in low light easier, but it has a crop sensor.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 15:50:43 No.3423406 Report

Quoted By: >>3423411

>>3420013
I never understood this comparison, what did they test here, the operators ability to set white balance for the in-camera JPEG?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 16:09:04 No.3423411 Report

Quoted By: >>3423445

>>3423406
>the operators ability
And how would you react when told the white balance is set to the same value on all cameras?

We keep moving the goal post. First blame the auto white balance, now blame the operate.
Just one more to go.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 17:02:00 No.3423424 Report

Quoted By:

>>3422647
GM lenses are for rich Asian kids. Samyang, Tamron and even Smegma make great lenses for any budget. The Sony 85 1.8 might be an exception to the rule too.

t. using a Canon nFD 135 on my A7II getting me razorsharp pictures for $65

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 17:43:35 No.3423445 Report

Quoted By: >>3423458

>>3423411
Different cameras need different settings to achieve the same white balance, you should know this.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 17:56:12 No.3423458 Report

Quoted By: >>3423479

>>3423445
I know how the argument goes.

When the colours look good=> superb colour science!
When the colours look shit=> i-it's the white balance's fault

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 18:28:10 No.3423474 Report

Quoted By: >>3423554

I know you don't have to be a /sci/ prodigy to understand basic concepts in photography, but seeing the level of stupidity always baffles me whenever I visit this board. And it is worse every time.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 18:39:43 No.3423477 Report

Quoted By:

>>3423375
with that budget, are you sure you need a MILC? look at canikon APS-C DSLRs

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 18:41:08 No.3423479 Report

Quoted By: >>3423485

>>3423458
they will all look the same after post-processing

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 18:49:18 No.3423485 Report

Quoted By: >>3423492

>>3423479
Except for loss of detail like the shirt texture and the beard stub, etc. which was the original point of the post.
Smaller pixels demands too much from the lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 18:57:12 No.3423492 Report

Quoted By: >>3423493 >>3423535

>>3423485
which ones have a loss of detail? the sony looks sharper because it doesn't have noise reduction built in. EOS R and Z7 are full frame too so what is the point exactly?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 19:01:36 No.3423493 Report

Quoted By: >>3423495

>>3423492
>EOS R and Z7 are full frame too
They are smaller than APS-C crop in video.
And their APS-C are smaller than m4/3 in video.

The A7iii and the Z6 are different because they are 6K video.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 19:03:59 No.3423495 Report

Quoted By: >>3423497

>>3423493
you didn't even mention until now that >>3420013 was about video, which most people ITT don't really care about

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 19:06:26 No.3423497 Report

Quoted By:

>>3423495
The Black Magic should have made that obvious though.

Either way it was to show the sensor size can make a difference.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 19:23:53 No.3423535 Report

Quoted By:

>>3423492
The point is he wants to sell Sony on a third rate vietnamese basket weaving forum

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Jan 2019 19:55:40 No.3423554 Report

Quoted By: >>3423846

>>3423474
i don't know which side you're arguing for, but a pro photographer shouldn't have qualms about spending thousands on gear, anons claiming it's not about gear are coping with their hobby-level gear

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 22 Jan 2019 10:40:14 No.3423846 Report

Quoted By:

>>3423554
Buying expensive gear doesn't automatically make you a pro photographer. It only makes you a wanker.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 22 Jan 2019 14:07:00 No.3423898 Report

Quoted By: >>3423965

>>3419431
Definitely go full frame. And get a DSLR if you plan on using your camera for more than a few hours on a single charge. Plus electronic viewfinders are shit and mirrorless sensors get dirty really easily. No contest.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 22 Jan 2019 17:00:32 No.3423965 Report

Quoted By: >>3423977

>>3423898
lyl
That has got to be bait.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 22 Jan 2019 17:42:37 No.3423977 Report

Quoted By: >>3424221 >>3424225

>>3423965
the budget isn't quite enough for a top of the line full frame mirrorless and a good lens, so a DSLR is a valid option to consider

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Jan 2019 03:43:31 No.3424221 Report

Quoted By: >>3424224 >>3424225

>>3423977
Not enough for FF DSLR+lens either brainlet

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Jan 2019 03:54:40 No.3424224 Report

Quoted By:

>>3424221
maybe on the used market? i dunno. if mirrorless is as good as anons say there should be thousands of photographers dumping their DSLRs for them. it just feels lame since OP already has an APS-C DSLR so why should he spend $1.5k+ while having to compromise on another APS-C. maybe he should save up some more money to make the upgrade truly worth it? /v/-tards spend thousands on their gaming pcs, monitors and peripherals, /o/-tists spend thousands on their cars, but coping /p/oorfags expect to use their $100 hand-me-downs even when talking about PROFESSIONAL photography.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Jan 2019 03:59:05 No.3424225 Report

Quoted By: >>3424226

>>3424221
>Not enough for FF DSLR+lens either brainlet
5D Mark III: $1135

https://www.keh.com/shop/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-22-3-megapixel-digital-slr-camera-body-only-black.html

50/1.8 STM: $111
https://www.keh.com/shop/canon-50-mm-f-1-8-fixed-focal-length-lens-for-canon-ef.html

Well under budget.

>>3423977
>the budget isn't quite enough for a top of the line full frame mirrorless and a good lens
A7 II: $939
https://www.adorama.com/us%20%20%201082628.html
FE 50mm f/1.8: $199
https://www.adorama.com/us%20%20%201085633.html

Also well under budget.

Neither are "top of the line" (both older generation and a step or two down from flagship besides), but both were still high end full frame digital cameras in their day.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Jan 2019 04:05:19 No.3424226 Report

Quoted By: >>3424235

>>3424225
D600 $600
50/1.8G $120
Tamron 28-75/2.8 $200
etc

There's bucketloads of good and even great used dslr lenses for really cheap on the market. Not so for the sony.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Jan 2019 04:29:27 No.3424235 Report

Quoted By:

>>3424226
>There's bucketloads of good and even great used dslr lenses for really cheap on the market. Not so for the sony.
True, as far as native lenses go, but the Sony has the advantage that it can mount just about any legacy glass with a simple adapter.

Neither is definitively better than the other. They both have their tradeoffs.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

Mirrorless v. DSLR