Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Shortcomings/benefits of mirror-less cameras

Reply
Thread Tools

Shortcomings/benefits of mirror-less cameras

 
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-11-2010
The concept is a good one, ditch mirrors. But each member of this
family has problems. They suffer from "pan image shearing" EVF's but
they each has unique shortcomings that don't plague good DSLRs. The
idea is to be a very small camera with good image quality and
interchangeable lenses. That they accomplished. Provided you don't
use them for sports or low light work. Currently, there are only a
couple great lenses, the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 and the Panasonic 7-14mm
zoom. One advantage of the micro 4/3rds bodies is they can adapt some
seriously fast glass (f1.1 and under) and the Olympus bodies have I.S.
which means easy night shooting and the ability to compensate for
relatively poor high ISO performance.

Panasonic
G1, great EVF, poor high ISO, making 800 the max you want to ever
use. Fast focus. Outer body skin peels.
G2, same problems as G1 with video included and a worse kit lens.
GH1, too expensive($1000+) since you are stuck with buying the
14-140mm zoom. Great for video.
GF1, good size, great build, poor resolution add-on EVF. Means you
are stuck with the LCD which is bad for manual lens users or people
who just don't like using it like a P&S. Lens adaptability is one
reason some bought into this system.

Olympus:
EP1, SLOWWW focus, no EVF. The least DSLR-like of all these cameras
in-terms of performance and speed.
EP2, good EVF, but it's add-on, SLOW focus.
EPL1, probably best bang for the buck, very inexpensive at $479.00.

Samsung:
NX10, too DSLR-like to appeal to the market segment, poor video, not a
great EVF. Reasonable APS-C sized sensor.

Sony:
NEX5, good build, too small, poor ergonomics, terrible 16mm prime
lens, sensor excellent, great high ISO, but registration distance
demands high quality (expensive) lenses that don't yet exist. Slow
focus, other performance issues.
NEX3, cheaper version of above. Same issues, but oddly, more
comfortable to hold.
You really do not want to put a big lens on these cameras with
adapters, they would be too clumsy. So, small high quality lenses
will be a must.

It'll be interesting to see what Nikon brings to the table. First one
with Panasonic focus speed and a built-in high rez EVF with the EPL1-
type body wins.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-11-2010
On Sep 11, 2:34*pm, "Peter" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> "RichA" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>
>
> > The concept is a good one, ditch mirrors. *But each member of this
> > family has problems. *They suffer from "pan image shearing" EVF's but
> > they each has unique shortcomings that don't plague good DSLRs. *The
> > idea is to be a very small camera with good image quality and
> > interchangeable lenses. *That they accomplished. *Provided you don't
> > use them for sports or low light work. *Currently, there are only a
> > couple great lenses, the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 and the Panasonic 7-14mm
> > zoom. *One advantage of the micro 4/3rds bodies is they can adapt some
> > seriously fast glass (f1.1 and under) and the Olympus bodies have I.S.
> > which means easy night shooting and the ability to compensate for
> > relatively poor high ISO performance.

>
> > Panasonic
> > G1, great EVF, poor high ISO, making 800 the max you want to ever
> > use. *Fast focus. *Outer body skin peels.
> > G2, same problems as G1 with video included and a worse kit lens.
> > GH1, too expensive($1000+) since you are stuck with buying the
> > 14-140mm zoom. *Great for video.
> > GF1, good size, great build, poor resolution add-on EVF. *Means you
> > are stuck with the LCD which is bad for manual lens users or people
> > who just don't like using it like a P&S. *Lens adaptability is one
> > reason some bought into this system.

>
> > Olympus:
> > EP1, SLOWWW focus, no EVF. *The least DSLR-like of all these cameras
> > in-terms of performance and speed.
> > EP2, good EVF, but it's add-on, SLOW focus.
> > EPL1, probably best bang for the buck, very inexpensive at $479.00.

>
> > Samsung:
> > NX10, too DSLR-like to appeal to the market segment, poor video, not a
> > great EVF. *Reasonable APS-C sized sensor.

>
> > Sony:
> > NEX5, good build, too small, poor ergonomics, terrible 16mm prime
> > lens, sensor excellent, great high ISO, but registration distance
> > demands high quality (expensive) lenses that don't yet exist. *Slow
> > focus, other performance issues.
> > NEX3, cheaper version of above. *Same issues, but oddly, more
> > comfortable to hold.
> > You really do not want to put a big lens on these cameras with
> > adapters, they would be too clumsy. *So, small high quality lenses
> > will be a must.

>
> > It'll be interesting to see what Nikon brings to the table. *First one
> > with Panasonic focus speed and a built-in high rez EVF with the EPL1-
> > type body wins.

>
> I'm impressed and jealous. Did you rally get to do first hand tests on all
> of that equipment?
>
> --
> Peter


Yes. I've used them all. But most extensively, the GF1 and G1 (which
I own).
I think for most people, the EPL1 makes the best bet, particularly
with it's high-quality JPEGs and price.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-11-2010
RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>The concept is a good one, ditch mirrors. But each member of this
>family has problems. They suffer from "pan image shearing" EVF's but
>they each has unique shortcomings that don't plague good DSLRs. The
>idea is to be a very small camera with good image quality and
>interchangeable lenses. That they accomplished. Provided you don't
>use them for sports or low light work. Currently, there are only a
>couple great lenses, the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 and the Panasonic 7-14mm
>zoom.



As the owner of a Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, I don't agree that it is a
great lens. Too much reliance is placed on in-camera electronic
distortion control, and this smudges detail away from the centre of
the field of view.

Central subjects have excellent sharpness, even at f/1.7, but the area
outside that central area is always going to disappoint. The
transition from sharp to mushy comes quite close to the centre, with
the result that subjects positioned according to the Rule of Thirds
will be noticeably unsharp.

Not that I adhere to the Rule of Thirds, of course! I was using it to
illustrate a point about the lens. I am sufficiently disenchanted with
the lens to be looking for a replacement for my GF-1.

 
Reply With Quote
 
peter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-12-2010
On 9/11/2010 6:36 PM, Rich wrote:
> peter<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
> news:4c8bda41$0$5495$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com:
>
>> On 9/11/2010 2:46 PM, RichA wrote:
>>> On Sep 11, 2:34 pm, "Peter"<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>>>> I'm impressed and jealous. Did you rally get to do first hand tests
>>>> on all of that equipment?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Peter
>>>
>>> Yes. I've used them all. But most extensively, the GF1 and G1
>>> (which I own).

>>
>> Is this hat you do for a living, or do you do it as a hobby. I'm
>> trying to think just how much of a test I should give a prospective
>> purchase.

>
> Hobby. I'd test the camera as much as is possible. Saves having to
> return or dump it later because it wasn't what you anticipated.



OK. If I want a feature I research the issue. I then test a possible
replacement to the extent that it has a reasonable chance the feature
will work for me. I have no desire to test equipment that I have no
intention of purchasing.

Similarly, before getting a new car, I will rent a similar one for a
week. Yes, it costs a few bucks, but it allowes me to do a real test
drive without some salesperson hanging over my shoulder.
Similarly, I do not even do a showroom test of a car I do not intend to
buy. (Though a recent offer from my local Ferrari dealer tempted me.)



--
Peter
Horses for courses
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cameras--Cameras--Cameras wagwheel Digital Photography 1 04-01-2007 07:55 PM
Cameras--Cameras--Cameras wagwheel Digital Photography 4 04-01-2007 01:12 PM
Cameras--Cameras--Cameras wagwheel Digital Photography 0 03-31-2007 11:38 AM
Cameras Cameras decisions. CBM Digital Photography 3 01-22-2004 07:25 PM
People with both pocket digital cameras & bigger digital cameras zxcvar Digital Photography 12 01-04-2004 02:38 AM



Advertisments