[stoppingdown]

Why go mirrorless? To have a very compact camera. Now add heavy and bulky lenses, and that main idea is gone?

 

Frankly, the idea, size-wide, was to have a very compact *system*, not just the camera (tele lenses excluded, of course). I think that mirrorless has also other advantages, so it's not meaningless to have a FF mirrorless. But sure, for Sony size-wide has been just an excuse for introducing a new system.

 

No problems for me: I won't buy a FF system, I'm happy that others enjoy it, I just want that Sony keeps developing APS-C lenses.

[youpii]

Could you just give me a link for an explanation of your doubts? At first glance and having no experience with FF mirrorless, I don't see a reason for them being less senseful than FF with mirror?

I bought an A7r because of it's small size but most of the native lenses are so big that they make the advantage of the small body irrelevant.

 

Oddly, a lot of A7 owners are very happy with the camera but that's because they adapt other lenses on it.

 

On the other side, the mailman brougth me a Zeiss Loxia 50/2 this morning an the A7+50/2 combo feels quite good so far.

[JJ_SO]

To buy a camera for it's small size comes with a couple of disadvantages but sometimes it's the best way to have it with me, I agree. My reasons to go mirrorless only were different and not because of possible small size: Meanwhile a mirror is no longer needed as a shortcut to focus properly with a screen. LiveView makes more sense and less noise, less vibrations - just drains the battery faster empty. So I do see good reasons to go FF without mirror.

[netrex]

Why go mirrorless? To have a very compact camera. Now add heavy and bulky lenses, and that main idea is gone?

I don't get why mirrorless has to be small cameras, size is not he reason I won't go back to DSLR cameras, at all. I want the EVF and all the perks it gives me. Also, there is no noisy mirror anymore, and no mirror mechanism that can break, and no more having an AF system elsewhere in the camera that must be adjusted to be correct as everything (both contrast and phase detection AF) is in the sensor. The AF speed will come for sure.

[Rover]

Why go mirrorless? To have a very compact camera. Now add heavy and bulky lenses, and that main idea is gone?

The camera IS compact. What you hang on it is another matter.

[stoppingdown]

I don't get why mirrorless has to be small cameras, size is not he reason I won't go back to DSLR cameras, at all. I want the EVF and all the perks it gives me. Also, there is no noisy mirror anymore, and no mirror mechanism that can break, and no more having an AF system elsewhere in the camera that must be adjusted to be correct as everything (both contrast and phase detection AF) is in the sensor. The AF speed will come for sure.

 

I also appreciate the EVF and I'm sure that AF will fill the gap in most cases (the A6000 honestly seems quite close, at least for what concerns pure speed; I can't say anything yet for tracking).

 

For the other things... The shutter is almost as noisy as the mirror, considering that it has to trigger twice instead than one time. I don't feel my A6000 really less louder than my Nikon D51000. And some cameras even showed vibration problems because of the shutter. Also, I think that the shutter is more subjected in getting broken than the mirror. Sure, sooner or later we'll see a totally electronic shutter... but this won't be just because there's no mirror.

 

In any case, for me the reason for which I spent some money to switch _is_ weight and size.

[youpii]

 

In any case, for me the reason for which I spent some money to switch _is_ weight and size.

 

I'm also drawn to weight & size for my travel camera.

 

If AF on mirrorless continues to improves rapidly, mirrors will be probably be gone in a few years.

But I guess we'll still see both small & large cameras around because it's very uncomfortable to use large lenses on small cameras. Try a 135/1.8 ZA on the A7 with LA-AE4 adapter for instance, my hand got tired very quickly.

 

For some use such as landscape & street photos, lenses can get more compact because there are limited size constraints from the focal length and aperture. But for others such as sports, birding or even portrait, lenses will always tend to be large...

[stoppingdown]

If AF on mirrorless continues to improves rapidly, mirrors will be probably be gone in a few years.

 

 

Not sure, but let's wait and see. I don't see Canikon going the mirrorless route soon...

But I guess we'll still see both small & large cameras around because it's very uncomfortable to use large lenses on small cameras. Try a 135/1.8 ZA on the A7 with LA-AE4 adapter for instance, my hand got tired very quickly.

 

 

 

 

I know most people think like that, and perhaps I'm just the only one who doesn't... When I got the SEL70200G I supposed I was going to see the problem with the A6000. But I don't see problems.

[ficofico]

www.dpreview.com/articles/3468545272/cp-2015-sony-shows-off-new-technology


We were able to try out Sony's '4D' continuous

AF with this lens on an A7 II, and it was, frankly,

jaw-dropping impressive. As long as our subject

stayed within the phase-detect area of the frame,

horizontal, vertical, and depth tracking was

incredibly accurate, fast, and completely silent for

an erratically moving subject. Almost every shot

was tack sharp on the intended subject matter at

F1.4. In good light, we'd wouldn't be surprised

if this combo gave top-of-the-line DSLRs a run for

their money when it comes to continuous AF.

[felix]

In good light...

 

That's probably the crucial part