(10-08-2020, 01:18 PM)mst Wrote: (10-08-2020, 11:29 AM)Brightcolours Wrote: 1st off... the R5 is ready to make a photo within 1 second after it is switched on.
That might indeed not be fast enough. Especially if the EVF stays black during startup and you can't see where you're aiming.
Out of curiosity, I just checked with the D5: the delay between switching it on and the shutter clicking is basically zero. I assume it's not any different with a 1D-series camera.
Besides startup times, the biggest challenge for any manufacturer trying to bring a pro ML camera to market will be battery life. On events I took the D5 to (racing), I managed close to 5000 shots on a single battery. I don't see numbers close to that for any ML camera too soon. I wrote "within 1 second" meaning less than a second. It is more or less instantly (about half a second it seems).
Any EVF will be black during before and during startup.... That is mirrorless for you. Nothing a Z9 can improve there...
Indeed, the increase in power consumption with mirrorless cameras due to EVF (so: imaging sensor constantly using power, EVF/LCD, all that data computing constantly) will always make mirrorless less efficient than OVF DSLRs.
(10-08-2020, 01:18 PM)mst Wrote: (10-08-2020, 11:29 AM)Brightcolours Wrote: 1st off... the R5 is ready to make a photo within 1 second after it is switched on.
That might indeed not be fast enough. Especially if the EVF stays black during startup and you can't see where you're aiming.
Out of curiosity, I just checked with the D5: the delay between switching it on and the shutter clicking is basically zero. I assume it's not any different with a 1D-series camera.
Besides startup times, the biggest challenge for any manufacturer trying to bring a pro ML camera to market will be battery life. On events I took the D5 to (racing), I managed close to 5000 shots on a single battery. I don't see numbers close to that for any ML camera too soon. Hi Marcus,
Please do tell, how does a sportsphotigrapher switch on a camera?
My experience is that the camera is switched on, then brought up toeye level. That easily takes 0.6 s to 1 s or even more with a heavy lens. Between switching a camera on and actually operating it, 1 s is absolutely negligible.
As to getting 5000 shots out of a battery: that is without chimping, I assume. I also wonder how many of those are usable, as in, sharp - with the R5, when you have set it up for your purpose, that is about 99.8 %.
With my EOS-R I easily get 1200 shots out of a battery BTW, having the camera on all of the time. I have managed 1800 shots once, doing a lot of shooting in a relatively short time. So, you'd need 3 batteries to get to 5000 in that case, and get about 4730 potential keepers ....
Batteries way very little, and take up very little space, so it is easy enough to have a few extra at hand anyway.
I really do think you need to reset your frame of reference here  . Looks like you are still set in the old way of thinking  .
Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....
(10-08-2020, 03:13 PM)wim Wrote: Please do tell, how does a sportsphotigrapher switch on a camera?
My experience is that the camera is switched on, then brought up toeye level. That easily takes 0.6 s to 1 s or even more with a heavy lens. Between switching a camera on and actually operating it, 1 s is absolutely negligible.
Especially with a long lens, the camera is usually resting on a monopod. So either switched on by default (draining battery in case of a ML) or in standby. Where startup time is similar.
I, personally, switch off the camera regularly. On the Nikons, the On/Off switch is at your index fingertip anyway.
(10-08-2020, 03:13 PM)wim Wrote: As to getting 5000 shots out of a battery: that is without chimping, I assume.
No, that is with regular chimping.
(10-08-2020, 03:13 PM)wim Wrote: I also wonder how many of those are usable, as in, sharp - with the R5, when you have set it up for your purpose, that is about 99.8 %.
No difference to a D5. There has been reliable AF before mirrorless cameras happened
(10-08-2020, 03:13 PM)wim Wrote: I really do think you need to reset your frame of reference here . Looks like you are still set in the old way of thinking .
Maybe, but we're discussing very specific pro photographer needs. Any sports shooter will probably have the same frame of reference, old-fashioned or not. Press photographers have similar, but not identical needs. To adress that group first with a rugged pro ML body might be the smartest approach. Could be a slightly easier target. See Sony's recent Ap deal, for example. It's a move in that direction.
Editor
opticallimits.com
D6 type of cameras ( I am not sure about Canon model) are in their own class due to built quality, ergonomics and whatever else comes with them.
I don't think is wise to compare cameras based on specs and try to un-justify price.
(10-08-2020, 03:58 PM)borisbg Wrote: D6 type of cameras ( I am not sure about Canon model) are in their own class due to built quality, ergonomics and whatever else comes with them.
I don't think is wise to compare cameras based on specs and try to un-justify price.
You can un-justify the price when there is no mirror mechanism and no expensive prism, yet the same price as a pro DSLR, though.
Ergonomics do not cost anything, by the way. They just are (bad/good/in between).
(10-08-2020, 06:14 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: You can un-justify the price when there is no mirror mechanism and no expensive prism, yet the same price as a pro DSLR, though.
Not sure that equation works. An OLED display (plus quite a few optical elements) is hardly cheaper than the prism and a few mechanical parts for the mirror. Plus, taking away the mirror makes traditional phase detect AF impossible and requires either on-sensor solutions or lots of calculation power. Both not cheap... in terms of engineering, production and battery consumption.
Still: obviously both Canon and Nikon see a market niche they want to fill. Especially now that Sony caught some prestige clients in the pro market.
My point was not to prove ML or classical DSLR pro bodies inferior or superior. The point is: this is a really demanding market niche and in order to make any pro in that niche consider switching, they need to come up with some really good ideas to solve the potential downsides of the mirrorless approach. Or offer features, that simply wouldn't be possible with a DSLR, but would create a market advantage (for the users). And to be attractive for those clients, they first of all need pro grade lenses and pro grade bodies... where "pro" is definitely not only defined by the number of shots per second.
In terms of mirrorless, Sony is far ahead in that market for now. But their share of the total market is minimal. It's still dominated by Canon and Nikon.
Editor
opticallimits.com
(10-08-2020, 07:19 PM)mst Wrote: (10-08-2020, 06:14 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: You can un-justify the price when there is no mirror mechanism and no expensive prism, yet the same price as a pro DSLR, though.
Not sure that equation works. An OLED display (plus quite a few optical elements) is hardly cheaper than the prism and a few mechanical parts for the mirror. Plus, taking away the mirror makes traditional phase detect AF impossible and requires either on-sensor solutions or lots of calculation power. Both not cheap... in terms of engineering, production and battery consumption.
Still: obviously both Canon and Nikon see a market niche they want to fill. Especially now that Sony caught some prestige clients in the pro market.
My point was not to prove ML or classical DSLR pro bodies inferior or superior. The point is: this is a really demanding market niche and in order to make any pro in that niche consider switching, they need to come up with some really good ideas to solve the potential downsides of the mirrorless approach. Or offer features, that simply wouldn't be possible with a DSLR, but would create a market advantage (for the users). And to be attractive for those clients, they first of all need pro grade lenses and pro grade bodies... where "pro" is definitely not only defined by the number of shots per second.
In terms of mirrorless, Sony is far ahead in that market for now. But their share of the total market is minimal. It's still dominated by Canon and Nikon.
The DSLR contains the same on-sensor solution and computing power...
Someone else's view on present and upcoming MLCs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rdw9P_lmb0E
...... nice to see various viewpoints ....
(10-08-2020, 08:01 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: (10-08-2020, 07:19 PM)mst Wrote: (10-08-2020, 06:14 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: You can un-justify the price when there is no mirror mechanism and no expensive prism, yet the same price as a pro DSLR, though.
Not sure that equation works. An OLED display (plus quite a few optical elements) is hardly cheaper than the prism and a few mechanical parts for the mirror. Plus, taking away the mirror makes traditional phase detect AF impossible and requires either on-sensor solutions or lots of calculation power. Both not cheap... in terms of engineering, production and battery consumption.
Still: obviously both Canon and Nikon see a market niche they want to fill. Especially now that Sony caught some prestige clients in the pro market.
My point was not to prove ML or classical DSLR pro bodies inferior or superior. The point is: this is a really demanding market niche and in order to make any pro in that niche consider switching, they need to come up with some really good ideas to solve the potential downsides of the mirrorless approach. Or offer features, that simply wouldn't be possible with a DSLR, but would create a market advantage (for the users). And to be attractive for those clients, they first of all need pro grade lenses and pro grade bodies... where "pro" is definitely not only defined by the number of shots per second.
In terms of mirrorless, Sony is far ahead in that market for now. But their share of the total market is minimal. It's still dominated by Canon and Nikon.
The DSLR contains the same on-sensor solution and computing power...
Nikon and Canon DSLRs don't feature IBIS. It doesn't come for free...
To BC
Just for clarification BC, you stated that there is no EVF lag on the R5..........
Are you saying that: ....... from the moment that photons fall on the sensor until the EVF displays them ..... is zero time / 0 milli seconds ....... or have you a time in milli seconds ??
If you could clarify that ..... thanks !!
|
