Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I did look at and test drive a Z7 during my quest to acquire a D850. I agree that it is smaller and lighter than either my d500 or D850. However, I am not a big fan of electronic view finders. I much prefer standard optical viewfinders.
-G
That is my biggest issue with mirrorless. I HATE the lcd viewfinders.
that is our reason for getting away from the dslr .. there are very few requirements today that can't be done with far lighter , smaller and in many cases better equipment for the job .
my d800 and the 70-200mm f2.8 weigh a lot ... more then i want to bring on most trips .
It's all in the quality you want. The little zooms have wretched resolution in the corners, though the center of the shot is fairly sharp.
It's all in the quality you want. The little zooms have wretched resolution in the corners, though the center of the shot is fairly sharp.
This is not true on the Nikon Z series ... the lenses run between 1k and 2500 each and are nikons best quality to date ,as well as use existing Nikon glass
Nope, wouldn't even consider giving up my full frame cameras.
Like Mathjak however, thinking a mirrorless Nikon would be handy for taking along on paddling trips.
Well the z6 is around 2k with no lens and 3200 for the z7 ... Nikon is giving a nice discount on them with the lens kit ...I would never take them paddling. Ha ha
Last year I picked up a Canon M5 as a walk around. It's a mirrorless aps-c and very small and light. The best thing though is with the adapter I can still use my top of the line lenses. In order to keep it light I picked up a 70-200L f4 IS which is much lighter than my f2.8.
I really got used to the electronic viewfinder so I picked up the EOS R and so far no complaints. I bought one of the new RF lenses but otherwise, once again, adding the adapter and I can use all of my Canon L and Sigma Art glass.
I'm not seeing much of a savings in weight with the EOS R since like my other bodies I added a grip. I'm 6'4" with big hands so I prefer the grip, plus I shoot vertically about 85% of the time. Though by the end of the day my arthritis will be acting up.
I like the fact that I have a crop sensor dslr and mirrorless body, plus a full frame and mirrorless dslr and can use the same lenses on all of them.
Absolutely not. I travel with my full frame dslr. I wouldn't even consider a point and shoot. I've had a few. Can't trust them. Sometimes you get an ok shot sometimes you don't. Not worth the risk.
It does take quite a bit more skill to use a so-called "point and shoot" and get consistently good results. The photographer has always been the most important part of the equipment.
It does take quite a bit more skill to use a so-called "point and shoot" and get consistently good results. The photographer has always been the most important part of the equipment.
I wouldn't call it skill so much as just hoping the stupid thing does what it's supposed to do.
I know exactly what my dslr is going to do, how it's going to react, and what my results are going to be so I can use my skill to get the shot I want.
With a point and shoot, it might react this way one time, and in the exact same scenario act a completely different way giving drastically different results. It has nothing to do with skill. I'd sooner use my phone camera than a point and shoot just because my phone camera, although rather crappy, is more reliable and consistent than a point and shoot.
It does take quite a bit more skill to use a so-called "point and shoot" and get consistently good results. The photographer has always been the most important part of the equipment.
Yup.... Remember "Its not the arrows, its the Indian."
High end P&S cameras (the topic of this thread) have both Manual shooting modes as well as the ability to shoot raw. So the skill level required to use them is the same as DSLRs for any given shooting mode, and they can give good results in non-demanding situations.
There are many reasons why DSLRs (and mirrorless) will always surpass P&S cameras -- the biggest advantage is the ability changes lenses. Other advantages of DSLRs include being more rugged, better weather sealing, multiple card slots, much longer battery life, faster and more flexible AF systems, often faster burst rates and typically better low light performance, just to name a few. As a professional, there's no way I'd use a P&S camera on my job . I even backback with DSLR equipment when the destination is really important even though I own excellent smaller/lighter cameras. Those are usually used more for family trips. I used to use a good P&S camera for documentary purposes during my photo trips (mostly shots of photographer buds) but now I just use my cell phone cam for that. One press and it's on Facebook.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
