VABlitz: What is the big improvement with the new mirrorless camera design? I haven't really read much about them, but it seems like everyone is over-hyping them. Is it just cost and shrinking of a camera or something to do with quality?
gooberking: I haven't kept up on what is going on right now with them, but there are some cool positives with them. Quality of the final image isn't actually one of them. They are actually making some compromises in that area to help maintain the smaller frames by having slightly smaller sensors, so a big full frame sensor probably has more potential than a mirrorless.
Part of what makes them cool, is that "potential' is hard to get at. You need really high end lenses to get the most out of it, and mirrorless bodies do a good job of balancing quality for their size in a way where the difference in quality probably isn't ever going to be an issue. They are still much better quality wise than consumer grade, fix lens cameras and are able to produce pro-level images that are acceptable for most major applications. Being able to do that with a smaller footprint is super attractive.
The mirror in a camera really has been an issue for me in the past. My camera has such a violet mirror flip that it causes vibration in telephoto shots that makes it difficult to do any distance work outdoors. I can feel the camera vibrate and the shots never come out well, unless I'm shooting with a flash which I think fires after the vibration settles down (flash duration is about 1000 of sec so I'm comparing even to 1000 of sec available light shots, and not 1000 vs 120ish for anyone thinking that might be my issue)
No matter how fast a mirror moves out of the way it will never be a fast process, and really handicaps what can ultimately be done with burst rates. HDR images that have multiple exposures with any level of motion have no hope of every really syncing frames properly, but if you had no mirror it is more possible to see collecting say three 300th of a second images in a 100th of a second.
Mirrors aren't bringing a lot to the table these days. It's brutally difficult to really see critical focus in a tiny window with an image reflected on ground glass. Live views aren't perfect in all scenarios but meet much viewing needs. It kind of depends on what the photographer is doing, and I don't know if a pro would consider going exclusively mirrorless, but I think many photographers would benefit with having a mirrorless as a quick go to camera option. If I could afford to invest in the gear I most certainly would be. They are not really cheaper btw way. The appeal is more about mobility.
I don't know about that. Mirror-less designs have some issues, for example, the view finders are still balls compared with a good OVF. It can take some learning to figure out how to best use an OVF, but once you get it the results are infinitely superior in most cases to an EVF.
There's also the issues that you mention about light loss. And the battery drain that comes from using the EVF over an OVF. With my OVF I can look through the lens for hours without any consequence for my battery life. I did quite a bit of that last week while waiting for squirrels to show up. I would have been out of batteries if I had been using a mirror-less design.
Mirrors as you say aren't brining much to the table by themselves, but until somebody figures out how to do an optical through the lens viewfinder without the mirrors, they're the best we're going to have.
I do realize that the mirror slap can be really annoying, but with modern dSLRs being what they are, I do have the option of switching to the EVF when I need to, sometimes, like when I'm taking photos of the moon, it can be quite useful. But, in general EVFs are a joke.
BTW, those issues you have with mirror slap are what mirror lock up was designed for. You can't take proper HDR images if the subject is moving anyways, so you might as well engage the mirror lock up and take the photos that way.
The quality will improve, but we're nowhere near the point where they're good enough. Then there's the issue of having to invest in that system and be stuck. My lenses work fine whether I'm shooting APS-C or 35mm and if I really wanted to, I could even get myself a film camera body that would work with the same lenses.
