C'mon let's wake this forum up

[Steve Axford]

I've never lost anything and not gained something, it's called experience, knowledge, wisdom, learning.....it always cost something, time, money, patience, pain even life sometimes!
No right no wrong just opinion, yours and mine
as a friend told me once there are pioneers and settlers in life, both are redundant without each other

Funny, I've never thought of myself as a settler and I think my friends would laugh at the idea, but perhaps I hold off a bit when it comes to technology. I'm a photographer and what I use has to help me to do that. Working with unproven technology for no good reason doesn't interest me at all. Mind you, I do work with some very unproven technology, but that is because there is nothing else that will do the job.

[swifty]

Tis true, this is not a fundamental mirrorless advantage, merely an advantage a particular camera current has that happens to be mirrorless.
I merely pointed out something that might be compelling for Steve for his subject matter. Not suggesting he should be an early adopter or anything. I tend to be late too although I follow news about leading tech.
It's just providing info on current mirrorless cameras for clarity sake.

But I agree the high res mode is of limited applications but the static macro genre seems to be one of them. For me, it would be of little use.
I'm venturing into format debate territory here but equivalent MP on different sized sensors give different advantages. And pixel density will have advantages on smaller formats.

But I wasn't aware Dpreview had 64MP raw shots already, thought it was just the 40mp Jpegs due to lack of converters. Will have to go back and check the comparison results. But to be clear I'm not comparing this to a full frame sensor. I merely brought it up for the specific application for Steve and his macro shooting.

[Arg]

Before Canon's going to do it, they have to adopt IBIS. We're talking Canon here....

Pentax rumour: a rumour is worth as much as the guarantee it's written on. Let's deal in reality.

P.S. I can only suggest DPR mucked up their raw conversions of the new Olympus, for us to look at, Arthur. Their 'beta version of ACR' doesn't seem to be working properly; it's way, way softer than the jpeg. The jpegs on IR tell the opposite story: Oly wins hands down in actual resolution rendering. They write, "The conclusion from our lab testing is that the Olympus E-M5 II's new high resolution shot mode is truly ground-breaking for applications involving shooting non-moving imagery from a tripod. Landscape photographers, architectural photographers and studio product photographers can rejoice!". Don't be too 'happily unimpressed', just yet.

[arthurking83]

Before Canon's going to do it, they have to adopt IBIS. We're talking Canon here....

.....

I don't know why they HAVE to adopt IBIS ?

Why can't they just adopt the sensor shift technology without the need to do image stabilisation?
(is there some patent/legal/technology restriction at play here)

In fact the last thing you would expect a company heavily invested in lens dependent image stabilisation(both Nikon and Canon here) would be to use a sensor shift technology such as this(hi res/moire cancel ability) to do image stabilisation too.
As their IS systems are lens based, they could effectively lower the requirement for doing his res sensor shift modes as the sensor is shifting purely for hi-res/moire canel duties .. and the lens does the IS.
I would imagine that Olympus haven't allowed the use of IBIS and hi res sensor shift mode concurrently .. I can image it to be difficult if not impossible to achieve.


As for jpg captures in camera .. not interested!
I know some people are (and hence do) .. but to me a jpg is not a photo.
While many folks may recommend that jpg is all you need, I still highly advise against doing so. (each to their own tho).
The decision to shoot jpg only is up to each individual to regret having done so(if or when that day comes)
The only jpgs I've captured in camera(apart from jpg only P&S type cameras) have been for testing purposes to see what the jpgs can look like.
I have never even shot raw + jpgs either. Jpgs are somethign that can easily be done if and when needed .. otherwise a wasted effort(unless this is the only option obviously).


I've read that the raw conversion in ACR has something to do with a plugin(for ACR).
I fully understand that this will be continually improved over time .. which implies only one thing .. this tech is too dependent on software.
I hope this plugin is an Olympus created software and that it's open for all to take advantage of!

.. what if some photographer's software workflow doesn't follow convention(which most assume this to be some Adobe product) .. and what if this photographer prefers the use of Product X .. which doesn't fully understand Olympus's software dependent raw file system?

eg. Photographer depends on RawTherapee for conversion from raw to raster, then chooses GIMP .... as her preferred operating system is Linux based!

While the results are all that counts, as someone once said, with respect to this new found dependence of software to create/form/interpolate/shape the image .. unless the protocols are fully open(for everyone to use) I can't see this new fangled method being an advantage in any way.

I look forward to the day Nikon implement this type of sensor shift tech to eliminate moire(and or increase resolution where it helps with an image).

[swifty]

It should be noted Hasselblad has already done the sensor shift without IBIS so there likely lots of ways this can be implemented. But Olympus really seem like they got this IBIS thing down pat. Make no mistake, if this turns out to be a great feature, others with follow suit.
But I highly doubt this tech is more so dependent on software any more than other RAW formats. Any time they play around with the way they combine the colour info (x-tran, fovean) there are initial RAW conversion issues.
Anyways, think we're straying off topic again.
Just wanted to give an example of features from mirrorless cameras that might interest Steve.
There's an E-m5 II thread to discuss the merits of sensor shifting to achieve higher res and better colour sampling.

[arthurking83]

......
Anyways, think we're straying off topic again...... .

I think this is a common and recurring theme on AP ..

[Arg]

Richard Butler has posted an article on DPR titled "Opinion: The future of DSLR or: how I learned to stop worrying and love the ILC". He says that Mirrorless is closing the gap to DSLR, and DSLR is closing the gap to Mirrorless (yes, there is such a gap). As the gaps close, he says buyers will not differentiate, but just buy whichever they like most.

If this happens (or already is), Mirrorless sales will take off IMHO, because there will no longer be such a claim as "I shoot DSLR because they are best for what I do". As soon as the market sees it this way, 50/50 sales volumes will quickly follow.

[ricktas]

Richard Butler has posted an article on DPR titled "Opinion: The future of DSLR or: how I learned to stop worrying and love the ILC". He says that Mirrorless is closing the gap to DSLR, and DSLR is closing the gap to Mirrorless (yes, there is such a gap). As the gaps close, he says buyers will not differentiate, but just buy whichever they like most.

If this happens (or already is), Mirrorless sales will take off IMHO, because there will no longer be such a claim as "I shoot DSLR because they are best for what I do". As soon as the market sees it this way, 50/50 sales volumes will quickly follow.

Time will tell, and I reckon for those getting into photography yes, but for a lot of people they have a lot of money invested in lenses, etc, that at present cannot be just attached to a mirrorless. So anyone who at present has a decent DSLR kit, it would cost a lot to move over.

IF Nikon bring out a mirrorless full frame that can accept all their current lenses then I am ready to buy a mirrorless. But given the current mirrorless offerings, I am not willing to even consider it. For me, mirrorless has a way to go, before it will something I would consider. And I reckon I am not alone.

[ameerat42]

Richard Butler has posted an article on DPR titled "Opinion: The future of DSLR or: how I learned to stop worrying and love the ILC". He says that Mirrorless is closing the gap to DSLR, and DSLR is closing the gap to Mirrorless (yes, there is such a gap). As the gaps close, he says buyers will not differentiate, but just buy whichever they like most.

If this happens (or already is), Mirrorless sales will take off IMHO, because there will no longer be such a claim as "I shoot DSLR because they are best for what I do". As soon as the market sees it this way, 50/50 sales volumes will quickly follow.

But Arg. What I see needs addressing is that statements are made by somebody that are bland and vacuous. Now mind: this is about "statements", not cameras. I wish I could find the "article" that you referred to, but this morning I was feeling too lazy to plough through this thread looking for it. However, on what I have seen cited, here's my take:
1. This Richard's heading is nothing but a begged question. So I ask, does everybody worry about an ILC/DSLR/Whatever?
2. He appeals to some "gap" that is then shown - or thought/opined/hoped/imagined - is "closing". I would hope that he at least illustrates both the gap and how it closes in the full article.
3. Presumably, the last sentence in your post is still this Richard talking, - it's a bit shaky - and so I ask, how valid is that as a statement?... The rest is vapid.

Now just a reminder: this is about the argument, not the respective camera systems.

Well, that's all. Ta for persisting.
Am.

[Arg]

.... I wish I could find the "article" that you referred to, but this morning I was feeling too lazy to plough through this thread looking for it....
1. This Richard's heading is nothing but a begged question.....

Hi Am, I agree that the title is like click bait. Butler is a senior staffer at DPR. The article is there under News, dated about 2 days ago. I tried to link but it's clumsy with tapatalk. Cheers

Sent from my HTC_0P6B using Tapatalk

[ameerat42]

Ta Arg. Will avverlook later.
Am.

[Arg]

...
IF Nikon bring out a mirrorless full frame that can accept all their current lenses then I am ready to buy a mirrorless. ....

Hi Rick, what you described is a hostage situation. Nikon know this and will continue to hold you hostage for as long as possible, based entirely on profits and with no regard to your best shooting experience. Look at the high speed accurate CAF shooting the Nikon 1 can do. Plus all the generic advantages of mirrorless already covered. But not for Nikon's bigger-spending customers. They can wait. Perhaps they are generally super-conservative and enjoy being the last to enjoy new capabilities: that would make them a good match for what the company is doing to them. But IMO it is insulting to not offer loyal customers a choice. You would want to do that for a valued customer. But it's not something you would do in a hostage situation.

Sent from my HTC_0P6B using Tapatalk

[swifty]

The largest companies are usually the most conservative but I suspect there must be an element of Japanese culture that's playing into some of these corporate decisions.
Speaking purely about Nikon, I don't think it's that simple as a deliberate withholding of technology. You have to understand the legacy of the F mount, which unlike Canon survived the AF revolution in film SLRs.
Solving the mount equation will provide a migration path for those that are interested in mirrorless in the F-mount group.
If you read what Rick has been saying, he has no qualms about mirrorless per se but it takes a long time to build up a complete lens lineup offering. And even looking at m43 which currently has the best mirrorless lens line up which has taking years to accumulate, it does have the commonly used primes and zooms but has a long way to go for specialty lenses and perhaps never will produce them due to economic viability issues.

So the lens issue is a big one. Maintaining that 46.5mm flange back distance or solving it with an alternative that lets you access the inventory of F-mount lenses is what I believe to be the biggest challenge. Purely using an adapter yields little advantage over just shooting mirror up if they are able implement some form of hybrid OVF/EVF.

[ricktas]

Hi Rick, what you described is a hostage situation. Nikon know this and will continue to hold you hostage for as long as possible, based entirely on profits and with no regard to your best shooting experience. Look at the high speed accurate CAF shooting the Nikon 1 can do. Plus all the generic advantages of mirrorless already covered. But not for Nikon's bigger-spending customers. They can wait. Perhaps they are generally super-conservative and enjoy being the last to enjoy new capabilities: that would make them a good match for what the company is doing to them. But IMO it is insulting to not offer loyal customers a choice. You would want to do that for a valued customer. But it's not something you would do in a hostage situation.

Sent from my HTC_0P6B using Tapatalk

It is only a hostage situation if I am held against my will. I am not!

[Arg]

That's what they say about marriage too!

Sent from my HTC_0P6B using Tapatalk

[MissionMan]

It is only a hostage situation if I am held against my will. I am not!

Damn. And I was just about to call in the hostage negotiators. Are you sure it's not Stockholm Syndrome?

[ricktas]

Damn. And I was just about to call in the hostage negotiators. Are you sure it's not Stockholm Syndrome?

Nup. I love my Nikon but I am not under any illusions that I am a hostage to them. As for Stockholm Syndrome..have you seen the Nikon executives., no way am I falling in love with any of them.

[MattNQ]

I find DPR articles only marginally better than Ken Rockwell most time....and not as entertaining

At the risk of encouraging this often tiresome thread further, Thom Hogan has summarized it perhaps the best...

"Whether you buy a mirrorless or DSLR camera really has very little to do with the presence or lack of a mirror, as it turns out ....... It’s really about whether a camera company is providing you with what you want. "

http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/...eally-buy.html

Not sure who is being held hostage. Everybody is free to stay with their current system or leave.
If someone cannot take quality images with ANY of the current systems, be they mirrorless, crop factor, or full frame, then they should go back to crayons.

Many of those who argue to the nth degree about resolution DR, AF, EVF's, mirrorless vs DSLR only post their images to flikr anyway, at a size where you'd often be hard pressed to tell the difference between cameras used.

[ameerat42]

...If someone cannot take quality images with ANY of the current systems, be they mirrorless, crop factor, or full frame, then they should go back to crayons...

Ta Matt, but then there this - in French, but who needs to read?...

BE DAZZLED HERE

So maybe they should stick to their cameras

[MattNQ]

Ta Matt, but then there this - in French, but who needs to read?...

BE DAZZLED HERE

So maybe they should stick to their cameras

Wow, they are superb