Shortcomings/benefits of mirror-less cameras

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, Sep 11, 2010.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    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.
     
    RichA, Sep 11, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Sep 11, 2:34 pm, "Peter" <> wrote:
    > "RichA" <> wrote in message
    >
    > news:...
    >
    >
    >
    > > 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.
     
    RichA, Sep 11, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    RichA <> 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.
     
    Bruce, Sep 11, 2010
    #3
  4. RichA

    peter Guest

    On 9/11/2010 6:36 PM, Rich wrote:
    > peter<> wrote in
    > news:4c8bda41$0$5495$-secrets.com:
    >
    >> On 9/11/2010 2:46 PM, RichA wrote:
    >>> On Sep 11, 2:34 pm, "Peter"<> 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
     
    peter, Sep 12, 2010
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Johnny Yi

    MCSE Benefits... what benefits.

    Johnny Yi, Jan 17, 2005, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    51
    Views:
    4,647
  2. Won Dampchin

    Oem Software-any shortcomings?

    Won Dampchin, Feb 18, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    579
    Misa Mirkovic
    Feb 21, 2004
  3. David J Taylor

    Nikon mirror-less cameras - the Nikon 1 system

    David J Taylor, Sep 21, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    109
    Views:
    2,227
    John Turco
    Nov 12, 2011
  4. RichA

    Compact mirror-less cameras, my impressions

    RichA, Feb 22, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    183
    RichA
    Feb 22, 2013
  5. RichA
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    127
    RichA
    Mar 9, 2014
Loading...

Share This Page