Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

bunnspecial

macrumors G3
May 3, 2014
8,353
6,496
Kentucky
Two, is focusing off of the actual image sensor which eliminates the accuracy problems associated with reflex focusing.

Focusing in mirrorless can be interesting.

Since AF in SLRs(or specifically passive TTL focusing-ultrasonic or IR active focus in P&S cameras was in use earlier) became practical in the mid to late 80s, phase detect focus has been the dominant method. In something like a Nikon F4 or any other camera of the area, you have a 3 or 5 pixel CCD sitting behind the reflex mirror-usually on the floor of the mirror box. There's a semi-silvered patch in the center of the reflex mirror that bounces light down onto the CCD. The AF module then works together with the motor to maximize the contrast between two adjacent pixels. That's also why you need an area of good contrast.

Over the past 30+ years, phase detect has been refined and improved tremendously where it's now lighting fast and precise. Modern high end cameras now have stupidly high numbers of AF points(I think the D850 has somewhere around 150). The low light capabilities have also been improved, as well as other things in in less-than-optimum conditions.

For years now, going back to P&S digitals, now cell phones, and high end interchangeable lens cameras we've the development of contrast detect AF technology. It essentially looks at the whole sensor, picks out what's important, and then maximizes the contrast in the area. It has the ability to be incredibly precise, but is also slow compared to phase detect. It's getting better, and does have the ability to focus over the entire imaging area(a big step up from the single center point in an F4). Still, the speed is a big turn-off.

A co-worker has the first generation A7R, and one of his two big complaints is how slow the AF is on it. Admittedly that's a fairly old camera as high end mirrorless goes. Incidentally, his other complaint is that it's as loud as a DSLR, something that's been addressed in newer cameras.

With that said, I admit to not having read up on it a HUGE amount, but as per that same co-worker the current high end Sony cameras actually use a separate phase detect system for course focus and then switch over to contrast to do the final "fine tune." That seems to me like the best of both worlds.
 

macuser453787

macrumors 6502a
May 19, 2012
578
151
Galatians 3:13-14
My next purchase will in all likelihood be the step up to medium format, so either a Fuji GFX 50S or Pentax 645Z, plus some good glass to make the most of that sensor. A pretty big outlay, but well worth it when I consider how long I will be using it for and the potential to print huge images.

Thanks for the info, I'm looking into this :)
[doublepost=1520790092][/doublepost]
Many of the new mirror less camera's use a micro4/3 sensor, which is smaller than the typical SLR. This means the camera body is also smaller, but more importantly the lenses are smaller.

I have a Nikon D750 with a full frame sensor, and also an Olympus E-M1 mirrorless. I find that I am using the Olympus a lot more than the Nikon. I have a similar range of lenses for both camera's and the camera bag for the Olympus is 1/4 the weight of the Nikon bag.

So the weight savings can be a factor. I can see that. When I had my D5300 (which is DX format) I found it to be very manageable to hold/carry for long periods of time. Actually found it to be more comfortable holding in my hand than around my neck with a strap -- even with the bulkiest lens I had, which was the 55-300 mm.
 

bunnspecial

macrumors G3
May 3, 2014
8,353
6,496
Kentucky
So the weight savings can be a factor. I can see that. When I had my D5300 (which is DX format) I found it to be very manageable to hold/carry for long periods of time. Actually found it to be more comfortable holding in my hand than around my neck with a strap -- even with the bulkiest lens I had, which was the 55-300 mm.

One of the big potential advantages to the DX format is that the glass can be smaller and lighter than full frame glass. You have physics in your favor by having to cover a smaller image area. One of the most dramatic comparisons-to me-is when I put something like an 80mm 2.8 Zeiss Hasselblad-mount Planar next to my little jewel 85mm f/2(manual focus) Nikkor. To be fair, the Hasselblad lens has a shutter in it, but it's MASSIVE next to the Nikkor. Also, I know of very few MF lenses that are faster than 2.8. Pentax made one or two 2.5s for the 67, but that's about it. I don't know 645 fairly well-I'd think you could get f/2.5 or f/2 with the smaller image circle needed, but then I'm not a lens designer.

In any case, my 18-200 is both smaller and lighter than the 90s 70-210 3.5-4.5 AF-D. To be fair, the 70-210 is pretty well overbuilt and is almost all metal, whereas the 18-200 has a lot of plastic. Still, the 18-200 is solidly a mid-range lens with stuff like "real" AF-S and nicely damped zoom cams. It's not optically in the same league as better lenses, but is still a great lens to toss on my D300s for a walk-around. The 18-300 that replaced it is not that much heavier or larger. My 12-24 f/4 is a solid piece and definitely built to Nikon's top standards from when it was made(although it lacks a mount gasket). The newer 10-24 is lighter and better optically, although not as well built.

Had Nikon continued to develop their DX line up, it would have been nice to see more fast primes in the same vein as the 35mm 1.8. It's a great little lens and IMO a real bargain at $200-my only complaint is that it lacks a focus scale. Something like a 24mm f/1.4 could have been a real killer as a "wider than normal" prime in the same vein the old photojournalist's favorite 35mm f/1.4

I don't have much interest in DX anymore, especially since my main digital these days has a ~16mp DX crop mode, and if I really need speed without too much of sacrifice in quality my D300s remains a great camera.
 

macuser453787

macrumors 6502a
May 19, 2012
578
151
Galatians 3:13-14
Was just looking at the A9 on B&H, and it has some very compelling specs, images and footage.

Since the lens selection seems more limited and pricier than some of the Canon options, I'd be looking at getting a MB gen 5 adapter, which has mixed reviews about functionality -- especially in the AF area.

Also, I really like it's video capabilities (again, AF comes into play there). It records 4:2:0 internally which isn't preferred, but for everyday purposes that wouldn't necessarily be a deal breaker.

Really like the super-fast rolling shutter. They don't call it that, but from what I can see in their videos it does appear to be a rolling shutter, just a lot faster than a conventional rolling shutter, which according to them eliminates distortion. So it seems to be the next best thing to a global shutter, with the flexibility of a wide range of ISO, and IIRC fewer ISO options is a limitation of a global shutter setup.

The A9 may be a contender.
 

Altis

macrumors 68040
Sep 10, 2013
3,167
4,898
I'd like to upgrade from my NEX-6 at some point as I find the photos to just not be that sharp or high quality. I otherwise love the camera, but the results seem to always disappoint me. It's always quite soft and lacks detail, and also in auto-focus seems to be off the mark often enough.

I have a few lenses for the crop E-mount (50f1.8, 35f1.8, SEL55210, Rokinon 12f2), and one that works on full-frame E mount (Rokinon 85f1.4), as well as two kit lenses.

I'm torn between the a6300, a6500, and a7ii. I really like the idea of full-frame, but honestly in going over hundreds of photos on flickr, I don't find myself more drawn to one or the other. The a6300 is the least expensive (CAD $1150) and has a great sensor and good features, but lacks IBS to help with my two manual lenses (which I love using with focus peaking). The a6500 is the most expensive right now (CAD $1650) which makes me tempted to go with the full-frame a7ii (not mk3) at CAD $1600, since it costs less, is full frame, and comes with kit lens.

I don't shoot anything in particular, though more people/events and nature than anything else. The a6300/a6500 seem to have considerably better auto-focus, which can come in handy. The a6500 and a7ii have IBIS, which isn't absolutely necessary but could extend the capability of manual lenses. However, if I got the a7ii I could still use the lenses I have in crop-mode or sell them to offset the extra cost, making the a6500 more expensive yet. There's a chance I'll get into recording, where 4k is the norm, giving an advantage to the a6300/a6500 if that ends up being the case.

Though the a7iii (mk3) would be ideal, it's more expensive than I'll be able to afford for a while. I'm leaning towards the a6300, but I honestly can't decide.

But I've come to realize that I just don't bother with photography anymore because I never like the results of the camera.
 

Krevnik

macrumors 601
Sep 8, 2003
4,101
1,312
Was just looking at the A9 on B&H, and it has some very compelling specs, images and footage.

I'd also keep the A7III in mind. It doesn't have the absolute latest EVF, some of the high-end ports, or tweaks made to the A9's control dials (but is has most of them), but the price gap is huge. If you can wait a few weeks, real-world tests and photo samples from buyers should be available in early April. I personally think the difference is small enough that I wouldn't actually jump for the A9 unless there's something specific you need from it.

The A9 is nicer than the A7III, but the A7III brings quite a bit from the A9 down into the 2k price range. Is it 2500$ nicer, though? That's something you'll have to decide.

Since the lens selection seems more limited and pricier than some of the Canon options, I'd be looking at getting a MB gen 5 adapter, which has mixed reviews about functionality -- especially in the AF area.

That's the downside to the Sony ecosystem. Another reason I personally would take the A7III over the A9. The price difference can buy you some nice native glass, and there are some real gems in the lineup, but not a whole lot on the budget end, unfortunately.

I'm torn between the a6300, a6500, and a7ii. I really like the idea of full-frame, but honestly in going over hundreds of photos on flickr, I don't find myself more drawn to one or the other. The a6300 is the least expensive (CAD $1150) and has a great sensor and good features, but lacks IBS to help with my two manual lenses (which I love using with focus peaking). The a6500 is the most expensive right now (CAD $1650) which makes me tempted to go with the full-frame a7ii (not mk3) at CAD $1600, since it costs less, is full frame, and comes with kit lens.

<snip>

But I've come to realize that I just don't bother with photography anymore because I never like the results of the camera.

It might be worth renting a camera for a bit and trying it out. Based on what you are discussing, I would probably lean towards the A6300 in the lineup. IBIS will help most if your manual lenses are not fast/wide, or you shoot a lot of low-light.

Stepping up to the A7II the biggest difference you will see is in low light / high ISO photography more than anything else. You will probably find it easier to get sharp photos (bigger pixels), if you are not doing a lot of tripod photography, and experience camera shake.

That said, you can rent something like the A6300 or the A7II for a weekend and see if you actually like it any better. You'd be out some money for the rental, but it would at least tell you if the newer cameras address the issues you've been seeing with the NEX-6.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Altis

guzhogi

macrumors 68040
Aug 31, 2003
3,772
1,891
Wherever my feet take me…
Modern high end cameras now have stupidly high numbers of AF points(I think the D850 has somewhere around 150).

Sony's A9 is ridiculous:
The phase-detection points on the surface of an image sensor — 693 AF points — covers approximately 93% of the image area.
[doublepost=1520883574][/doublepost]
Since the lens selection seems more limited and pricier than some of the Canon options, I'd be looking at getting a MB gen 5 adapter, which has mixed reviews about functionality -- especially in the AF area.
That's the downside to the Sony ecosystem. Another reason I personally would take the A7III over the A9. The price difference can buy you some nice native glass, and there are some real gems in the lineup, but not a whole lot on the budget end, unfortunately.

A while ago, I found this website. Allows you to look for a lot of lenses for Sony cameras, both the A- and E-Mounts, APS-C and Full Frame, Sony & third party. Hopefully you'll find it useful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Krevnik

QuantumLo0p

macrumors 6502a
Apr 28, 2006
992
30
U.S.A.
Totally illogical. Even if phones take dominance over ILCs, it doesn't mean that withing the range of ILCs Mirrorless can't surpass the number of SLRs...

LOL, completely logical statement. I never said they couldn't only that it's possible. Unless someone has a DeLorean with a flux capacitor and Mr. Fusion converter to refute this, the statement of possibility is still accurate.

Doc Brown is backing me up on this one.
;)
 

MCAsan

macrumors 601
Original poster
Jul 9, 2012
4,587
442
Atlanta
Who would have believed a few short years ago that Sony with a mirrorless is serious challenging Nikon as top 35mm camera body?

https://www.dxomark.com/best-cameras-under-45200-dollars
Screen Shot 2018-03-14 at 11.56.20 PM.png
 

Apple fanboy

macrumors Ivy Bridge
Feb 21, 2012
57,003
56,026
Behind the Lens, UK
Who would have believed a few short years ago that Sony with a mirrorless is serious challenging Nikon as top 35mm camera body?

https://www.dxomark.com/best-cameras-under-45200-dollars View attachment 754505
Very true. It's an interesting decision by Sony. Of course the reality is I doubt anyone could tell the difference between an image taken by any of those cameras with comparable glass.

Looking forward to seeing what Nikon and Canon respond with later this year.
 

MCAsan

macrumors 601
Original poster
Jul 9, 2012
4,587
442
Atlanta
The "sleeper" in the DxO ratings is the Pentax K1 DSLR at #8 for $1800. Evidently Pentax just stopped K1 production and now have K1 II which can be ordered. I have not seen a hands on review of it.
 

Altis

macrumors 68040
Sep 10, 2013
3,167
4,898
Who would have believed a few short years ago that Sony with a mirrorless is serious challenging Nikon as top 35mm camera body?

https://www.dxomark.com/best-cameras-under-45200-dollars View attachment 754505

I was an early Sony mirrorless adopter years ago with the NEX series, and I was quite confident at the time that Sony mirrorless would be pushed to the top-end.

I've always been rather brand-neutral. Most of the people I knew were Canon DSLR users who insisted I bought a toy, and that only a full DSLR could possibly be a proper camera.

Well, the images we took weren't all that different. Ultimately a mirrorless with an APS-C sensor isn't all that different from a DSLR with an APS-C sensor -- especially if it's a Nikon as they tend to use Sony sensors anyways. The only real difference ended up being that I took my camera around more as it was more compact, and far less intrusive when taking photos of other people. My closest friend in photography went from T3i to 7D to 5D... to a Sony A6000.
 

dwig

macrumors 6502a
Jan 4, 2015
908
449
Key West FL
LOL, completely logical statement. I never said they couldn't only that it's possible. ...
;)
You''ve missed the point. The logical failure in your original statement is that there is no logic in stating that any influence from phones would impact the usage of DSLRs specifically. Its impact would only be on the whole ILC segment irrespective of the balance in the ILC segment between mirrorless and DSLR. The shifting balance between mirrorless ILCs and DSLR it totally independent of any influences presented by phones.
 

MCAsan

macrumors 601
Original poster
Jul 9, 2012
4,587
442
Atlanta
Check out the specs of the Sony A7III. 600+ focus points on the sensor. Watch the reviews on Youtube. It is an amazing body for $2k.
 

Macshroomer

macrumors 65816
Dec 6, 2009
1,305
733
IMHO, Sony should purchase Nikon just to get the glass. They don't need the Nikon bodies.

Yeah, well a lot of us higher end and very successful pros would not be happy about that. I know the amateur set seems to think electronic VF's and mirrorless is the holy grail but it is simply not. There is a lot of reason to have that connection to the subject through an optical VF and there are more than a couple of things the lack of an optical VF does not do well with.

If I want "mirrorless", I use my Leica M3, M6 or M10, still an optical VF. Other than that I am sticking with Nikons, Hasselblad, Sinar's etc because they work for me and I make the final call on where my photography goes next, not tech heads who think they have the big secret on all this.

As an aside, I don't care for Sony's marketing tactics through ambassadors and bloggers who can't seem to shut up about who they "converted" this week. Why does this company need to convert anyone? Is it not enough to sell a camera system to a person who uses more than one? I think that part really stinks.
 

The Bad Guy

macrumors 65816
Oct 2, 2007
1,141
3,539
Australia
Yeah, well a lot of us higher end and very successful pros would not be happy about that. I know the amateur set seems to think electronic VF's and mirrorless is the holy grail but it is simply not. There is a lot of reason to have that connection to the subject through an optical VF and there are more than a couple of things the lack of an optical VF does not do well with.

If I want "mirrorless", I use my Leica M3, M6 or M10, still an optical VF. Other than that I am sticking with Nikons, Hasselblad, Sinar's etc because they work for me and I make the final call on where my photography goes next, not tech heads who think they have the big secret on all this.

As an aside, I don't care for Sony's marketing tactics through ambassadors and bloggers who can't seem to shut up about who they "converted" this week. Why does this company need to convert anyone? Is it not enough to sell a camera system to a person who uses more than one? I think that part really stinks.
None of you tech heads gonna argue with this...? :)
 

Alexander.Of.Oz

macrumors 68040
Oct 29, 2013
3,200
12,501
I'm a pro using a 6D...
with some good glass, creativity and ability.

Adam, I'm just a bloke that's had photography be his saving grace, who happens to use a 6D. I can honestly say that if photography had not entered my life in 2012, I would not be here now. I'm definitely not a "higher end and very successful pro."

I'm always amazed at the "pro's" that pop up answering threads here, and we've never seen any of their images, ever. You'd think that they would flick one or two our way to show us how it's done... o_O
 

Apple fanboy

macrumors Ivy Bridge
Feb 21, 2012
57,003
56,026
Behind the Lens, UK
with some good glass, creativity and ability.

Adam, I'm just a bloke that's had photography be his saving grace, who happens to use a 6D. I can honestly say that if photography had not entered my life in 2012, I would not be here now. I'm definitely not a "higher end and very successful pro."

I'm always amazed at the "pro's" that pop up answering threads here, and we've never seen any of their images, ever. You'd think that they would flick one or two our way to show us how it's done... o_O
I think you're doing alright!
 

The Bad Guy

macrumors 65816
Oct 2, 2007
1,141
3,539
Australia
with some good glass, creativity and ability.

Adam, I'm just a bloke that's had photography be his saving grace, who happens to use a 6D. I can honestly say that if photography had not entered my life in 2012, I would not be here now. I'm definitely not a "higher end and very successful pro."

I'm always amazed at the "pro's" that pop up answering threads here, and we've never seen any of their images, ever. You'd think that they would flick one or two our way to show us how it's done... o_O
I think you're doing alright too. :D

In fairness and I mean no offence when I say this, when I think of a tech head / geartographer on this forum, I don't think of you. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alexander.Of.Oz

Alexander.Of.Oz

macrumors 68040
Oct 29, 2013
3,200
12,501
I think you're doing alright too. :D
Thanks, Adam!

In fairness and I mean no offence when I say this, when I think of a tech head / geartographer on this forum, I don't think of you. ;)
Thank goodness for that! I don't either. Whilst I'm a pedant and very technically oriented with my long-exposures and macro, I don't have that inclination to debate the ins and outs of various gear. :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.