Technological progress is nothing short of remarkable.
[0] https://kenrockwell.com/canon/rebel-xti.htm
[1] https://onfotolife.com/camera_sample_photos?camera_id=30&pag...
[1]: https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/30745/what-is-the-...
As an active photographer, I still see most people using DSLRs or their phone. Actually, everyone I know who bought into mirrorless actually gave it up.
Back when they were popular I did look into getting one. But there were too many competing lens mounts, and not enough good lenses. So you could buy in to one mount only to have a different mount take over the market, or have yours go away.
Back when they were popular? (Practically?) Every new camera coming out is mirrorless. Every pro is moving to mirrorless. It won’t be all that long before you can’t even buy a new DSLR.
Canon, Sony, and Nikon all have their own mount just as they always have. Canon and Nikon took the opportunity to make theirs larger/better/shorter distance, but you can use adapters to use old glass. As a matter of fact, I don’t even have any Z lenses for my mirrorless body.
Mirrorless is better, full stop. The only real disadvantage is battery life. Some people prefer an OVF, but personally I have a much easier time seeing through an EVF. The jump in focus accuracy is an absolute game changer, and it’s worth switching for that reason alone.
I have a Z8 on the way and then I’ll be fully mirrorless myself, and I can’t wait to ditch what’s largely considered the best DSLR ever made - the D850.
I haven't used one lately, but ten years ago the delay between seeing the image and capturing it was so great that it made them useless for people photography (unless people are posing, but I like to capture real emotions as they are happening).
Are they better now? In my experience, the shutter lag must be close to 0 to be able to capture the right facial expression. Lag ruins pictures.
[1]https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4703538
The downsides are price and battery life, and if you have existing lenses you’ll need an adapter..
The newer ones like the Canon R3 are even faster and the Sony A1 can do 240fps in the EVF.
Another perk of EVFs: they're much brighter indoors as they simulate the actual exposure.
I'm very sensitive to lag to the point where I couldn't play Smash Bros on a friend's TV that he insisted was fine. I'm not sure what the actual numbers are but the EVF latency is for all practical purposes imperceptible, and the cameras can shoot much faster bursts to boot.
Plus, people tend to change their expressions when a shutter/mirror is clacking away and mirrorless cameras can be silent.
DSLRs are worse for capturing the right facial expression in some ways too, because the mirror flip temporarily blocks the viewfinder. With an electronic shutter enabled, a wedding photographer on mirrorless will never have the viewfinder blackout during burst shots when trying to capture "the moment". The mirror/shutterbox puts the "real" world lag on many DSLRs in the 60-120ms range, which is not so hard for an electronic viewfinder to get competitive with.
Mirrorless models with electronic shutters in theory also have the option to continually "precapture" and then use an image from say 100ms ago when button pressed - the iPhone does this to reduce lag time even more, and try to eliminate human response time from the process. A DSLR can only do this concept if the mirror was up blocking the view finder.
While people assume that there is a degree of "WYSIWYG" with the mirror, this isn't always 100% true either. Cheaper/small prisms or pentamirrors result in much dimmer and smaller viewfinders than a good electronic viewfinder, especially on APS-C sized sensors, and 100 percent view coverage is rare outside of high end ones. AFAIK all electronic viewfinders to date are generally 100 percent coverage, and often bigger.
One enormous benefit for wedding/event photographers that mirror elimination accomplishes is making the camera silent. A high end DSLR operating at its highest burst speed is very noisy as the mirror slaps back and forth, which genuinely can be problematic in quiet or intimate settings. The mirror boxes also generally are only good for typically 100-150k activations, which lasts a long time, but they can wear out.
False! Pentax is sticking to DSLR ;)
Editors never ask me "what camera did you use?". They evaluate images based upon impact.
This moment in the camera market seems really interesting to me because we have phone cameras becoming more and more capable thus shrinking the DSLR/Mirrorless market exponentially. High end cameras are getting more expensive. Where is it all going?
Paired with an AC power adapter and a mount for my monitor it's a nice webcam. I bought a 24mm lens for it that was reasonably affordable and I get a nice "real" bokeh effect in my background (it's not as blurry as the computational one but it's a nice to have). (FWIW I also push it through OBS to crop it).
Most of them were only specced to record up to 30 minute clips at a time in original guise and are passively cooled, so running for an hr or more can push the sensors beyond their original specifications etc. I've had this happen rarely with some m43 cameras I use as webcams via an HDMI capture card. There's a ton of youtube videos on this topic with all sorts of homemade cooling setups:
While it looks like your camera is supported by both versions, maybe you'll have better luck with this one.
What is this alluding to? Bingle are not helping.
These are definitely a good choice for taking good pictures
They’re cheaper but you have to carry an adapter.
this is still a huge amount of money, to me.