The relative merits of DSLRs and mirrorless

[Anthony]

It needs to be said that the above statement is, unfortunately, seriously mistaken.

In many areas of the world, temperatures of -20 or below are common. In large parts of Northern America, Alaska and Canada, in much of Europe and particularly in Northern Europe, as well as in mountain areas all over the world such temperatures are commonly confronting photographers. In nearly all of inland Scandinavia - that is Norway, Sweden and Finland - a temperature of -20C is normal during most of the winter and lower temperatures are by no means uncommon. In the inner areas of Norway, Finland and Sweden there may sometimes be -40C and below. This often happens in the northern areas. Photography is performed in all these countries, and is also an increasingly popular activity.

In Russia and Central Asia we know that large areas of the Taiga and Tundra areas are characterized by very low winter temperatures, and we are talking about areas where -20C is considered mild for the winter. The same is true for Mongolia and northern China. While I do not know about photography in these countries, tourism is as we know everywhere and the climate is known to be very cold during winter.

I assure you that many photographers do shoot in such temperatures as mentioned, and that the need for photo equipment to tolerate many degrees below zero (Celsius) is for real. If there is any doubt about that, please perform an internet search after for example "Cold weather photography," "Photographying in the cold," "Arctic photography," "Canadian Arctic photography," and "Winter photography." You will see that many photographers, both professionals and amateurs, take pictures in these areas, and these photographers seem to be growing in number. Electronic viewfinders (as of 2018) drain batteries very fast during use in cold weather. If the temperature is very low, the electronic viewfinder function will soon become so slow that it is no longer functional and finally it stops working. If mirrorless cameras are to compete with optical viewfinders in all types of weather, they have to function equally well in all types of weather. If they cannot do that, they cannot replace SLR cameras with optical viewfinders.

There is no question that a photographic system which is to be a serious one must be able to cope with low temperatures. The equipment simply has to be able to withstand very cold weather and to function flawlessly under such conditions.

Thanks for replying, Per.

You are correct that many areas of the world are bitterly cold at certain times of year.

However, the proportion of photography at such temperatures is very low.  And I speak as someone who has photographed in both the Arctic and the Antarctic.  I have successfully used mirrorless in both regions.

I really do think that the battery issue is overstated for most people in most circumstances.

[Birna Rørslett]

I have to agree, at least partially, with Per Inge here. Battery consumption is an important factor for photography in the field. The battery data produced by the makers are a fourth class of lie besides "lies, damned lies, and statistics". I have never been getting more than at most 30-40% of the numbers quoted even under the most optimal conditions. In more "normal" situations, I'm down to 20% or less of the stated capacity. In winter my camera dies on me after just a handful of captures on occasion.

OK, no problem if you carry a massive load of spare batteries and have to opportunity to charge them every day. However, such is not the case in many fields of practical photography.

The first generation of DSLRs had an abysmal poor battery performance so we have come a long way since then. However, mirrorless by their very design always will be inferior in terms of battery performance compared to (D)SLRs.  Improved battery technology cannot change that fundamental fact.

It's the end user who has to decide what system will be the "better" for them. For some of us,  battery performance is a key factor. For others it isn't.

[Jack Dahlgren]

I have to agree, at least partially, with Per Inge here. Battery consumption is an important factor for photography in the field.
The first generation of DSLRs had an abysmal poor battery performance so we have come a long way since then.

However, mirrorless by their very design always will be inferior in terms of battery performance compared to (D)SLRs.  Improved battery technology cannot change that fundamental fact.

It's the end user who has to decide what system will be the "better" for them. For some of us,  battery performance is a key factor. For others it isn't.

Yes we are at a sweet spot for batteries and electronic device power usage these days. I remember people carrying heavy battery packs for flashes, spare AA batteries for their early digital equipment, batteries for motor drives and so on. Now my Df goes for weeks without charging.

But I think things will get even better.

It is indeed the end user, of which there are many types. I can’t claim to represent anyone but me, but I welcome continued innovation in all directions.

[Ann]

Battery life does depend on the way in which it is used.

Even on the D-single # range, with their large batteries; I only get about 2 hours between re-charges if I am using LiveView while I can photograph all day for a couple of days on a single charge when using the optical VF.

Intensive use of the rear LCD while setting up menu functions etc. also results in the need for more frequent charging but not to the extent that working in LV requires.

Currently, I have no yearning for an electronic viewfinder; neither can I foresee any advantages (but I can foresee a lot of disadvantages!) in using a mirrorless camera for the work that I do.

If I wanted to create simple snapshots, I would use my iPhone but I don't — and I don't.
 

[Akira]

The current 3.68MP OLED EVF used in Panasonic GH5, GH9, Sony A9, A7RIII, Fuji H-X1 is a game changer: it is the very first EVF ever on which I felt virtually no eye strain in any situations.

Combining its fast response and the short shutter lag thanks to the absence of the mirror, the total shutter lag can be shorter even than the Nikon D-single-digit camera.

On the other hand, the rolling shutter can still be an annoyance on the cameras with larger sensors, if you often chase fast moving subjects.

The battery life of the mirrorless cameras is, as already discussed, one of the major pain.  I've never in need of a second battery for any DSLRs I've ever used, but I haven't been able to live without one for all the mirrorless cameras I've ever used.  Thus I have to charge the batteries of mirrorless cameras way more often than those of DSLRs, which is not nice, especially we have to charge the batteries of too many digital gadgets that we (have to) have today.

So far as the Nikon mirrorless camera is concerned, the transition from DSLR would be very tough.  It would be easier for Canon to retain the compatibility of the new full-frame mirrorless system with the existing DSLR lenses, thanks to their total lack of the mechanical linkage in the first place and their proprietary dual-pixel sensor that offers phase detect AF.  Nikon has started to offer E lenses only just recently, and the live view AF is abysmal even to put it mildly.

On the other hand, the dual function sensor whose patent has been filed by Nikon recently looks very interesting.  It offers the rolling shutter mode (better for still images with the mechanical shutter) and the global shutter mode (ideal for the video thanks to the potential lack of the rolling shutter effect).  On condition that Nikon should offer at least the competitive AF system, their full frame mirrorless camera seems to be attractive.

[BEZ]

The current 3.68MP OLED EVF used in Panasonic GH5, GH9, Sony A9, A7RIII, Fuji H-X1 is a game changer: it is the very first EVF ever on which I felt virtually no eye strain in any situations.

I have tried the X-H1's EVF and it is far from a "game changer" for me. I appreciate, and enjoy EVF's for certain applications, but would not like to rely on one to capture "the decisive moment".

I shoot fujifilm X-Pro and X100 series cameras because they have hybrid OVF, EVF, finders. If this option was included in an updated f-mount D8##, it would be ideal for my use.

I can confirm the battery life of my fujifilm cameras is pathetic. I have to take 4 for each camera  ....8 battery's for a day's shooting. They are both used in OVF mode 95% of the time, and I am not a big chimper. I don't often need 4, but have to take them for when I do.


Cheers

[CS]

The current 3.68MP OLED EVF used in Panasonic GH5, GH9, Sony A9, A7RIII, Fuji H-X1 is a game changer: it is the very first EVF ever on which I felt virtually no eye strain in any situations.

Is there any issue with that OLED EVF to suffer image burn-in, like OLED TV's are subject to do?

[Akira]

I have tried the H-X1's EVF and it is far from a "game changer" for me. I appreciate, and enjoy EVF's for certain applications, but would not like to rely on one to capture "the decisive moment".

I shoot fujifilm X-Pro and X100 series cameras because they have hybrid OVF, EVF, finders. If this option was included in an updated f-mount D8##, it would be ideal for my use.

I can confirm the battery life of my fujifilm cameras is pathetic. I have to take 4 for each camera  ....8 battery's for a day's shooting. They are both used in OVF mode 95% of the time, and I am not a big chimper. I don't often need 4, but have to take them for when I do.

The strain in the eye is one of my essential issued with the EVF, so the lack of it is such a big news that it is entitled to be called a game changer to me.

Is there any issue with that OLED EVF to suffer image burn-in, like OLED TV's are subject to do?

I'm afraid I'm not sure.  Unlike the TV or the computer screen, the EVF will be turned off periodically by the power saving function.  So, the burn-in could be less of a problem.

[pluton]

Many users have reported eye strain.  I don't know what that is, but I can report being annoyed at how dim the EVF in my Fuji X cam is when the camera is used in blazing bright sunlight.  It would be nice if someone fixed that.

[Mike G]

Akira, its actually the X-H1! And having used an X-T1, X-T2 and now an X-H1 I have experienced no eye strain at all!
The only strain has been on my wallet.

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

I reckon that the new Nikon mirrorless FF camera will come with a new mount and an adapter for F mount. Otherwise I would not understand the world anymore.
I'll sure buy whatever 50mm Summilux-like stuff they will develop for the new mount, just one, I promise myself. The old MF lenses will continue to be used.

Unfortunately, an adapter is not equal to a full compatibility between mount and lens. Such a solution is likely to reduce optical performance ever so slightly, and the extra centimeters added to the setup are also significant.

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

The main point is that change is driven by the advantages and new capabilities of a new technology more than it is limited by its inferiority in the capabilities of existing technology. It doesn’t need to be better at what old technology is good at. It needs to be better at what old technology is not good at (or can’t do). No 35mm camera can beat the resolution of 8x10 film nor the movements and control available with that format, However, 35mm format outsells 8x10 by millions of units.

Change of technology is more often than not primarily driven by other market forces than the customers. It is much like self-driving cars. People who use cars enjoy more freedom and more resilience with user controlled cars, but tech companies and car producers are now subjecting politicians to heavy lobbying and the general public stating that "a car with built-in AI is many times 'safer' than a human driver." Which is entirely beside the point, because the crucial point is freedom of choice and who controls the vehicle. If people are fine with a vehicle that obediently stops for the highwayman who steps out in the road before the car, and which never can exceed the speed limit no matter what the circumstances, it bodes no good for human societies. Frankly. It is a business decision that we should not be allowed to control our own vehicles. But not all people are zombies. There was a discussion between Elon Musk and Neil deGrasse Tyson. Elon Musk stated that future flying cars must be automated and not user controlled. Whereas deGrasse Tyson calmly replied with a question about why people could not be allowed to control their own flying cars.

The same phenomenon of market forces' propagandizing can be seen in the realm of personal computers, where connection dependent cloud computing is being touted as a better solution than individual computers equipped with copyable software that is controlled entirely by each user and which can be installed at any time and run indefinitely with no need for "permission" or any form of license control that means the user is helpless when the day comes when the software service is discontinued or unavailable or the net simply is not there. Here the software industry counts on people's inability to maintain a perspective beyond the immediate, and again we see that technological change - or attempt at a particular change - is frequently driven not by any true advantages but by market forces' desire to increase their profit as much as they can.

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

My Sony A7R2 had to have 6 batteries to function for a real outing. That's a joke and Sony should have known better.

It is the stark reality.

[Les Olson]

Many users have reported eye strain. 

I don't know if it is what you are referring to but there is a well-defined phenomenon of loss of vision in one eye caused by looking at bright screens in the dark (http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc1514294).

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

Thanks for replying, Per.

You are correct that many areas of the world are bitterly cold at certain times of year.

However, the proportion of photography at such temperatures is very low.  And I speak as someone who has photographed in both the Arctic and the Antarctic.  I have successfully used mirrorless in both regions.

I really do think that the battery issue is overstated for most people in most circumstances.

On the contrary, the battery issue is understated.

Moreover, it is not only about the battery consumption. My cameras' LCDs (not that I use them much apart from when I need to access the menus) simply cease to function in temperatures below -25. An electronic viewfinder would be increasingly useless in such circumstances.

Lastly, I live in Norway and often go to northern Sweden and northern Finland. I can assure you that there are many photographers in these areas who are active during winter, and in addition tourism is on the rise. Those who have tried cameras with electronic viewfinders find that battery life is dismally poor and that function ceases.

Optical viewfinders are far superior in cold climates - and of course the battery capacity problem is there in all temperatures. It is not a real solution to bring a large number of batteries with a mirrorless system when an OVF system gives you three or four times as many exposures per charge.

It is not my impression that the photographers who need cold capable equipment is few. Just perform an internet search for cold weather photography in different areas of the world, and you will see that the proportion of photographers who need equipment that can withstand low temperatures is significant. Photography is a popular activity in all parts of the world. Also, that proportion is likely to be increasing with modern tourism - quite a few people go to cold areas to experience natural wintery environments. 

Apart from the proportions of photographers in the Mediterranean summer and in the Arctic and the Antarctic, the capability of a mirrorless system versus a system with an optical viewfinder is hardly determined by proportions. We are talking about demonstrable and significant differences.