Bridge v mirrorless

Scratch

Banned
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
15,168
Location
Chorley
Do you really want to know?

I wouldn't have asked if I didn't.

If you do, simply look at my Flickr Photostream. The digital cameras are automatically recorded by Flickr from the metadata and the film cameras I have simply listed in each description. It's all there. Flickr: Regular Rod's Photostream

Please don't make me look at your Flickr stream again.

It's a simple enough question... Do you use mirrorless or DSLR?
 

richardw

Trade Member
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
10,571
Location
On the banks of the Derbyshire Wye
I wouldn't have asked if I didn't.



Please don't make me look at your Flickr stream again.

It's a simple enough question... Do you use mirrorless or DSLR?

Why do you want to know? Is it relevant at all? What do you use? Is that relevant?

Look at the Flickr Photostream again if it is important to you to know. If it isn't why ask?
:confused:
richard
 

Scratch

Banned
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
15,168
Location
Chorley
Look at the Flickr Photostream again if it is important to you to know. If it isn't why ask?
:confused:
richard

FFS man, why do I have to wade through your Flickr stream when you can answer a simple question for me with one word...

Mirrorless or DSLR?
 

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
28,773
Location
Embra
Why? What do you lose out on?

You lose out on a perfect view of what is in front of you... the difference between looking at something and looking at the same thing on a television screen. You maybe prefer the TV screen view. I prefer the true view. That's one of the things I prefer about an SLR and why I use them and why I recommend them to others. It's not a case of right and wrong - all we can do is state our own preferences, which we do, repeatedly, and it always seems to end up in an argument :eek:mg:

Col
 

Scratch

Banned
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
15,168
Location
Chorley
I thought as much...
Butt out then!

I wasn't interested. I thought it was relevant though seeing as you so passionately espoused the virtues of the mirrorless system over the outmoded, and outdated DSLR. :rolleyes:

Why you are so reluctant to answer such a simple question Richard?

I think everyone has worked that out.
 

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
28,773
Location
Embra
So in effect you have to resort to using the enormous phallic symbol DSLR and its long lens at arm's length. That sounds a bit like using my little pocket camera only you need muscles like Geoff Capes to hold it.


No, don't be stupid :rolleyes:. When using the enormous phallic symbol DSLR and its long lens, it is being braced against oneself, held up to the eye, while looking through its fabulous crystal clear 100% field of view, through the lens viewfinder. ;)

The Live View function comes in handy when doing desk-top photography - eg fishing flies - when it is on a tripod. Best of both worlds ;)

Col
 

richardw

Trade Member
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
10,571
Location
On the banks of the Derbyshire Wye
I wasn't interested. I thought it was relevant though seeing as you so passionately espoused the virtues of the mirrorless system over the outmoded, and outdated DSLR. :rolleyes:

Why you are so reluctant to answer such a simple question Richard?

I think everyone has worked that out.


Amazing! Based on what? You don't know and can't be bothered to find out. How can you work anything out without some facts?

richard
 

Scratch

Banned
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
15,168
Location
Chorley
Amazing! Based on what? You don't know and can't be bothered to find out. How can you work anything out without some facts?

richard

Ok, Richard, look.... I'm at work, and Flickr is blocked...

Do you use mirrorless or DSLR?
 

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
28,773
Location
Embra
So DSLRs are best because they are big, right?

For me at least, yes, absolutely. As I mentioned already, there is no comparison for me. It is entirely my own preference - and I explain why, so anyone can take that on board when making up their mind. I get on much better with a full sized SLR than I do with either a small SLR or a compact. The ergonomics of handling it just work a 1000 times better for me with a big lump of a thing in my hand, rather than a wee fiddly compact. Some folk are bound to be different - I'm just putting my case for a big feck-off SLR over a wee compact.


Real men have black cameras, right?

Well, of course they do :cool: :p

...............................Col
 

richardw

Trade Member
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
10,571
Location
On the banks of the Derbyshire Wye
So in effect you have to resort to using the enormous phallic symbol DSLR and its long lens at arm's length. That sounds a bit like using my little pocket camera only you need muscles like Geoff Capes to hold it.


The point was that the camera would not be at eyelevel and braced in the traditional and well proven way, he was on about using "live view"...

You lose out on a perfect view of what is in front of you... the difference between looking at something and looking at the same thing on a television screen. You maybe prefer the TV screen view. I prefer the true view. That's one of the things I prefer about an SLR and why I use them and why I recommend them to others. It's not a case of right and wrong - all we can do is state our own preferences, which we do, repeatedly, and it always seems to end up in an argument :eek:mg:

Col

So your viewfinder of your SLR gives you 100% exactly what is going to be on the image and recorded in the file?

No of course it doesn't. Neither do the mirrorless cameras either. The really good ones both show "Approx. 100%" perhaps? However, the mirrorless camera does show you what you will actually get with regard to image colours and brightness. The mirror might show you what is out there but it doesn't actually show you what you will get in your file. Hence the "checking" process on the screen after each exposure...

The argument didn't come about because of your preference. It came about because your assumptions were just plain wrong. DSLR cameras have no advantage over mirrorless cameras when it comes to producing good photographs.

You know you are right about the importance of good lenses. The box that hangs off the back of the lens doesn't have to be big like the lens. If it fits the lens, with or without an adapter, how can it matter what size it is?

The point was that the camera would not be at eyelevel and braced in the traditional and well proven way, he was on about using "live view"...

So DSLRs are best because they are big, right?

For me at least, yes, absolutely. As I mentioned already, there is no comparison for me. It is entirely my own preference - and I explain why, so anyone can take that on board when making up their mind. I get on much better with a full sized SLR than I do with either a small SLR or a compact. The ergonomics of handling it just work a 1000 times better for me with a big lump of a thing in my hand, rather than a wee fiddly compact. Some folk are bound to be different - I'm just putting my case for a big feck-off SLR over a wee compact.


Real men have black cameras, right?

Well, of course they do :cool: :p

Well a subjective view like yours is hardly going to help Mike who was surely seeking an objective view.

---------- Post added at 08:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:00 PM ----------

Ok, Richard, look.... I'm at work, and Flickr is blocked...

Do you use mirrorless or DSLR?

I use a variety of cameras, some of them so big Col would have an orgasm at their presence. They include a DSLR but do not include a mirrorless camera.

Does that negate my observations?

richard
 
Last edited:

Guest100

Well-known member
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
10,276
Location
North Wales
The argument didn't come about because of your preference. It came about because your assumptions were just plain wrong. DSLR cameras have no advantage over mirrorless cameras when it comes to producing good photographs.

Again, to get accurate reviews go to DPreview for cameras. They're expert in their field and you won't go far wrong with their reviews.

Interesting reading on the Olympus M5 you pointed to earlier Richard, especially regarding compromise.

The E-M5 can't completely overcome the light capture disadvantage brought by its smaller sensor, compared to APS-C, but it reduces it to the point that it's irrelevant for almost all practical purposes. At which point we think its size advantage, in terms of both body and lenses, will outweigh that difference for most uses. If you're absolutely unwilling to compromise on image quality then spending twice the money and moving up to the bulk of full-frame is the only way of gaining a significant step up from the E-M5.

Photography of moving subjects - the only area where it falls significantly behind a good DSLR.

Oh, that will be the bit I mentioned in my first post.

The rated 9 fps burst locks both focus and exposure on the first frame, where as DSLR's will continue AF and AE through the burst. So the first shot may be good, but the rest could be way off on both focus and exposure if the subject is moving. Absolute waste of time if you want to capture the fish action type shots some of us like to go for.

dpreview Olympus M5


As I mentioned earlier, it all depends whether you're willing to compromise on image quality for portability. For the majority it may well be an acceptable trade off. But to suggest they're knocking on the door of a high-end DSLR yet is still off the mark. It's a compromise.
 
Last edited:

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
28,773
Location
Embra
So your viewfinder of your SLR gives you 100% exactly what is going to be on the image and recorded in the file?

Erm, yes, it does :thumbs:. I am looking at the scene I am about to capture, not a TV picture. Actually, some mirrorless cameras don't even have an electronic viewfinder. Canon have just brought out their entry into the market - the EOS M, and it only has an LCD to compose with. I would find that impossible to use - it's all waving it about at arm's length, squinting to see what it is showing you :(.

As for the size of the body - I'm just not getting through to you here, am I? :eek:mg: It's not about the oddness of putting a big lens on a small body - do that by all means if that is what you are into. I prefer a large body for the ergonomics of using it. I don't know how else I can put it :confused: If I say that I don't bother with smartphones or iPads or tablets or notebooks... I use a phone and I use a desk-top computer... well, when it comes to cameras, I use an SLR. Does that explain it better?

It is that simple. I am not interested in using a compact - except when I have to - river fishing, hill lochs, etc. I look forward to the day that they introduce a camera that replaces the SLR, is the same size as the SLR, and has none of the disadvantages of the SLR... and there are many :eek:. Until that day comes, I'll be using a big SLR, because the current crop of mirrorless system cameras do nothing for me.

Mike - have a look at mirrorless system cameras for God's sake...

Col
 

Scratch

Banned
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
15,168
Location
Chorley
I use a variety of cameras... They include a DSLR but do not include a mirrorless camera. Does that negate my observations?

Thank God for that. Was begining to feel like Jeremy Paxman with Michael Howard.. thought I was gonna have to ask the question 12 times :rolleyes:
Like Paxman, and the viewing public, we all knew the answer.

Yes, it does negate your observations, and generally, as usual, makes you look a fool.

You espouse, almost evengelically, the virtues of the mirrorless system, yet you have never used it. You denigrate, and talk disparagingly of DSLR's yet you own, and use one.
 

brownsville

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Messages
3,079
Location
Bristol
The OP's post mentions 'bridge', so I'll chuck my hat in.

I've spent all of this year looking at the options, borrowing cameras, literally weighing it up, and I've recently settled on a compromise that works for me.

A three year old model superzoom bridge that will capture RAW, has a shitty viewfinder, 1cm macro, HDfilth, all for about £100 delivered.

Pretty much has the same functions of an SLR, sure the quality won't compare with an enormous black monstrosity, but is a 'disposable' learning tool that suits my tiny hands.



Credit to Rob for the style cues. :whistle:


P1020388.jpg







P1020036-001.jpg
 

Latest posts

Top