>>4164416True. Many of which is no concern for me.
>an increasingly inaccurate device as a translucent spot in the mirror acts as a beam splitter directing some light to the AF mirror and PDAF sensor array that people actually use (the true crutch)Nuances in my interest and all my gear is calibrated and serviced. Note that often just to minimize the time needed, I recompose to an AF field close by for exposure and focus, which is way more inaccurate than focusing offset. In my experience, AF assist beam on a DSLR center field still beats mirrorless focusing in darker environments. Take this with a grain of salt as I'm yet to test first party mirrorless/white AF assist flashguns.
>You can still force the lens to stop down on some cameras but the simple fact is humans are not meant to see in the dark and this gets unusable fastIncreasing dof with stopping down eats spherical abberation. I pick apertures based on experience, rather don't test for it, rather shoot stopped down. If sparse dof is a concern, there's mirrorless eye-AF gear, despite I don't see a major problem with even my ancient setup. Problem are rather my habits, or modes that oppose to what I'm directing at.
>MILCs are what digital cameras should be. They just make sense. You "look through the film" and can work with the lens stopped down in a hand camera, while still shooting flashless in the dim conditions digital cameras excel at. Also, manual focus on MILCsThe theory sounds great, in practice I'm still not convinced. A finer focusing screen is already great. Then I don't want to strictly omit flashguns. I'd rather reduce it to fill, sometimes have it just for metering.
I'm on call for some friends that I've guided into semi professions that I'm assisting where they've trouble shooting, in particular dimmer events or handling flashlight instead of permanent light. Where they are aspiring and creative with e.g. beauty portraits, newborn, animal, they suck with their gear at challenging handcraft.
