DSLR any time over mirrorless. I use the mirrorless for casual walkabout
photography but for serious landscape, aviation, animal, etc. photography, the
beast comes out. Got myself a nice chest harness and that allows me to handle a
bigass 500mm lens as well.
-Original Message-
From: silklist [mailto:silklist-bounces+bdasgupta=gmail@lists.hserus.net]
On Behalf Of Venkat Mangudi - Silk
Sent: 08 May 2015 14:38
To: silklist@lists.hserus.net
Subject: Re: [silk] Camera gurus - need advice
So I did more research and reading. I agree that mirrorless is the future.
But for wildlife photography, the recommendation is still to go with a DSLR.
I'm debating between Olympus OM-D EM-5 which is a mirrorless that comes highly
recommended and Canon EOS 7D now. No more full frame thoughts now. My
pictures are going to be mainly wildlife and aviation. The Canon mirrorless I
have, will remain the casual camera, I guess.
Thoughts?
On May 3, 2015 10:01 AM, Tim Bray tb...@textuality.com wrote:
And I partially agree with Ashwin, except for the phrase “full-frame”.
I think that the current state of the art, things like the range of
lenses available and - especially - the ergonomics, are a much bigger deal
than
the number of pixels or square mm.The ergonomics of the main mirrorless
lines - Olympus, Fujifilm, Sony - are wildly different, and reflect
very different ways of thinking about taking pictures.
Did I mention it’s the golden age of photography?
On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Ashwin Kumar ashw...@live.in wrote:
I agree with Tim. Venkat, do try the mirrorless full frame cameras
one more time. I have a Sony A7 and been very happy with it. In
fact, I have completely given up on my film cameras.
I use 35mm and 90mm fixed lenses, but I have shot it with longer
lenses and it was very good both ergonomically and IQ wise.
~ashwin
+919483466818
On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 3:40 PM -0700, Tim Bray
tb...@textuality.com
wrote:
Hm. It’s quite likely wrong to conclude from your experience that
mirrorlesses are slow in general. Lots of people who've been using
SLRs
for
years have been going the other way recently, drawn by the charms of
mirrorless size and ergonomics. I think you'd find the recent
offerings from Olympus, Panasonic, and Fujifilm probably would please you.
Some people like the recent Sonys but I found the one I tried to be
ergonomically painful, and they have HUGE sensors which means you
wait forever while downloading and processing them. On the other
hand, if you want to make 1 meter x 3 meter prints… Having said
that, you can get a little more for your money in SLR-land, particularly in
used-SLR land.
Your question is a little unusual because many photographers,
including some with very high visibility, have in the last couple of
years switched from SLR to mirrorless. I don’t have high visibility
but I did too (Fujifilm in my case) and can’t imagine going back.
On May 1, 2015 7:36 PM, Tim Bray tb...@textuality.com wrote:
Why would you want a larger, heavier camera that won't actually
take
better
pictures?
Actually I found that the mirrorless was quite slow. During my
recent
trip,
the camera and the rented lens (prime lens at that) was too slow.
Besides, the buffer was not able to match the speed of the wildlife
and birds that I typically try to capture. It was pretty
frustrating. The mirrorless is good for relatively slower subjects and
casual photos.
-V
--
- Tim Bray (If you’d like to send me a private message, see
https://keybase.io/timbray)
