[Klaus]

Reall tests show that select DSLRs (Canon's 70D for instance) can focus more accurately with PD AF than mirrorless with CD AF.  It does depend on the lens used (some lenses with PD AF are just inherently "crude").

The funny thing: many mirrorless cameras replaced a mirror slap with a more problematic shutter slap. The irony!

 

And yes, I do not like EVFs. With very good reason.

 

PD-AF can't overcome focus shift. That alone makes it an inferior concept.

Shutter slap is as present on DSLRs as on mirrorless cameras - take the Nikon D3x or Sony A900 as examples.

The difference is ... modern mirrorless cameras have a full electronic shutter with zero camera-induced vibrations whereas DSLRs remain compromised by the mirror slap till the dawn of their era.

 

I like EVFs for very good reasons. 

[Arthur Macmillan]

But really, brightcolors is right.  Any way you slice it with a large FF lens, a MILC is just awkward. 


And I am not dissing MILC's because their autofocus speed is not good.  In fact, while I am not experienced with the different mirrorless autofocus technologies, I do really like the dual pixel live view focus of the 70 D. 

 

I think I might get what you are saying.  Would I trade EVF for OVF?  Absolutely!   The main problem I have is I can by a decent DSLR and a couple of L lenses for what they charge for an underweight FF MILC.  And from my personal experience, none of my Canon DSLRs have ever broken**.  They are super reliable.  (**I did brake one, but it wasn't the cameras fault).  Every Sony product I've ever owned had died within 3-4 years.


And this is just a question.  Does the short flange to image plane have an actual advantage other than allowing for a lot of different adapters?  Is there an optimal distance?  I ask this because the shorter that distance, the wider the angle that light rays will have to go in order to cover the sensor.  And that would put a limit on pixel density.  So is putting a bigger sensor really going to make sense unless you maintain a similar FFD?  And if you do that...Canon may as well continue development as part of the tradition DSLR, and simply remove mirror and add EVF when they are ready.

[Studor13]

The funny thing: many mirrorless cameras replaced a mirror slap with a more problematic shutter slap. The irony!

 

 

Yes, the shutter slap on the Sony NEX 5 is as loud as the mirror slap on my DSLRs.

 

Then again the electronic shutters on the V1 and J5  make the cameras absolutely silent.

 

One other thing about EVFs: The V1 gets its share of dust in the eyepiece and this can make the LCD stay off as the camera thinks that an eye is covering the EVF.

 

I drove 80km to the Nikon repair shop only to find out that with just canned air and brush over the eyepiece fixed the problem.

[Brightcolours]

PD-AF can't overcome focus shift. That alone makes it an inferior concept.

Shutter slap is as present on DSLRs as on mirrorless cameras - take the Nikon D3x or Sony A900 as examples.

The difference is ... modern mirrorless cameras have a full electronic shutter with zero camera-induced vibrations whereas DSLRs remain compromised by the mirror slap till the dawn of their era.

 

I like EVFs for very good reasons. 

Not even that is true. CD AF cameras don't close down the aperture either when focussing, so focus shifts still can occur.

No Canon DSLR has a similar shutter slap issue. 

The full electronic shutter often comes with rolling shutter effect. That is why they still offer mechanical shutters.

 

Yeah and I like OVFs for very good reasons also.

[Arthur Macmillan]

PD-AF can't overcome focus shift. That alone makes it an inferior concept.

Shutter slap is as present on DSLRs as on mirrorless cameras - take the Nikon D3x or Sony A900 as examples.

The difference is ... modern mirrorless cameras have a full electronic shutter with zero camera-induced vibrations whereas DSLRs remain compromised by the mirror slap till the dawn of their era.

 

I like EVFs for very good reasons. 

 

I love EVF's!  They are another drain on the battery, but worth it.  I think it is more than a little ironic that many MILCs came out without them!  Hard to frame a picture when you can't see the view screen outside!  I also find it ironic that in this cutting edge concept of MILC most people got excited because it meant they could use their old lenses.  The SpeedBooster is a whole different story.  That concept is exciting...but really, if the concept is valid why don't companies make lenses that are designed that way by the maker to produce an internally large image circle that is then metabonessed down to a brighter focus that is consistent with the imager size.


After all, a company like Canon can control all of the variables.  They can create the perfect imager size and FFD and metaboner component that will be perfect for each lens designed and not just a one size fits all fix?  Why would you guess Canon doesn't do that?  I can guess why Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, and Olympus aren't. 

 

I am the the most jealous of the EVF than any other part of the current MILFs!

[Klaus]

Not even that is true. CD AF cameras don't close down the aperture either when focussing, so focus shifts still can occur.

No Canon DSLR has a similar shutter slap issue. 

The full electronic shutter often comes with rolling shutter effect. That is why they still offer mechanical shutters.

 

Yeah and I like OVFs for very good reasons also.

 

Some mirrorless cameras do close the aperture prior of obtaining the focus (depending on the light conditions). Some don't, yes. 

 

Canon DSLRs have a soft shutter slap, yes, but there's a reason why I do the MTF tests on the 5Ds R in live view mode (the mirror slap).

 

A rolling shutter effect occurs with fast moving objects only. Now I'm not into action photography and in all those years I have seen this once (a speed boat). If action photography is your thing then yes, don't use a full electronic shutter. Electronic shutter should also not be used in artificial light (first curtain electronic shutter is fine). Even so - this statement is just a snapshot in time. Global shutters will solve this issue within a few years. The Blackmagic MFT camera has a global shutter till 1080p already.

[Arthur Macmillan]

I'll say this about OVFs.  It's really nice to shoot over 1,000 shots and not have drained the battery.  And for all intents and purposes it will not wear out.

 

I didn't think of the fact that the CD focus isn't stopping down while focusing.  Interesting!  That still doesn't change the fact that it will get the shot in focus when PD will not.  It does make me wonder why?

 

But for some types of shooting you will simply not see anything like what your photo is going to look like, because the sensor sees things differently than your eyes.  You can make do with the view screen.  You can even get backs for the camera that convert the screen to a viewfinder (optically).  But the electronic view seems the more critical one.  Lucky DSLR users almost have best of both worlds.

 

Another revelation!  People actually use histograms?  Wow! 

[Arthur Macmillan]

...I'll tell you what I was shooting today.  A crystal decanter with stars of various colors.  I lined them with a diagonal row of crystal candlestick holders.  I wanted to see what would happen with the out of focus highlights, of course.  You probably can guess where I am going....


First I took normal PD photos.  I tried exposure compensating in both directions.  Nothing changed.  I don't know why, but with the PD all those beautiful colors were just pinpoints of brightness.

 

Then I used my type of focus that the live view has.  There were beautiful colors from the crystals. 

 

Just now I got out my bright LED flashlight.  5,000 Lumens bright.  I won't bore you with the details other than to say that I put it in shutter priority and shined the light on it to see if the diaphragm would get smaller.  5,000 Lumen is pretty brutal.  Those little LED flashlights that run on three AAA batteries put out about 80 Lumen.  Yet the diaphragm staid wide open.

 

There is a lesson here.  You guys provided the facts, and they check out.  And I think it is pretty obvious.  Oh, for fun I did take an exposure.  I'm pretty sure you know what happened, since it is consistent with the crystal flare phenomenon. 

 

What I saw in the preview is what I got in the capture.  I guarantee you I did not look through the optical viewer...or take a picture...wait...I wonder...

[Klaus]

At the end of the day we are all different and mirrorless cameras and DSLRs can coexist happily ever after.   :-)