# you can't do WHAT with Mirrorless?!?



## Aglet (May 3, 2015)

somebody otta tell these guys you can't make a living as a sports photographer using mirrorless cameras. 
who will it be?..

www.mirrorlessons.com/2015/04/28/10-photographers-who-use-mirrorless-for-sports-photography/

I wonder if Samsung's NX1 will get a BIF function in the new firmware?...


----------



## sanj (May 3, 2015)

Great post. What revelation! But the fact is that any photo is possible with any camera, broadly speaking. I would choose 1dx for these kinds of shots as it would be easier with that camera.


----------



## meywd (May 3, 2015)

and you can do it with an iPhone, and get a good quality image, out of a 1000, unless you only took one.


----------



## Aglet (May 3, 2015)

totally..
I shot motorcycle jumping with a PowerShot A610 and got consistently good results in an indoor venue.

But these guys in the article are shooting mirrorless regularly, in a fast paced environment, using some of the skills we used to need back before AF and digital.
But ML systems are not exactly all handicapped, Nikon 1 V3 is one of the fastest focusing and shooting cameras available. As is the a6000 if you can set it up for what you need.
Fast pro DSLRs will have the lead in this kind of area.. but ML systems are charging up the mid-ranks pretty fast now.


----------



## Sporgon (May 3, 2015)

What can't you do with a Mirrorless ?

Leave your battery charger at home


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 3, 2015)

You can pound in a nail with a screwdriver or a crescent wrench...that doesn't make them the right tool for the job.


----------



## Aglet (May 3, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> What can't you do with a Mirrorless ?
> 
> Leave your battery charger at home



you nailed THAT one!
I wish they'd stop putting dinky little batteries in these things and make them "real" sized instead of dwarfish.
FWIW, was out all day with ML and DSLRs and didn't have to swap batteries in any of them. If anything, my d800 seemed to eat the most juice when doing long exposure night shots.


----------



## distant.star (May 3, 2015)

.
Thanks, interesting piece.

To read this in a reasonable time, just go to question number 4 for each photographer -- that's where they explain (some better than others) why they chose the mirrorless.

If you're interested in who they are or what moves them about photography, you can read the rest -- that's just fill and fluff to me.


----------



## Sporgon (May 3, 2015)

distant.star said:


> .
> Thanks, interesting piece.
> 
> To read this in a reasonable time, just go to question number 4 for each photographer -- that's where they explain (some better than others) why they chose the mirrorless.
> ...



There's so much on the size and price. Fair enough, nearly all these guys were using pro FF bodies with fast long lenses. But given the arguments many could have achieve the same goal with 7DII and higher end EF-s lenses, or even a 70D for that matter - and the Nikon equivalents of course. 

I find it funny that those (well known or self promoting) guys who have changed to small (often APS or micro four this) mirrorless cameras have come from the top end, largest and heaviest gear. 

Not that it matters. If someone wants to use an Olympus or Fuji good for them. It's just that often as not their arguments are based around a choice between a Canon 1Dx + 70-200 f2.8, Nikon D4 etc, or small format mirrirless. Nothing in between, which I think makes most of their arguments a little weak.


----------



## 9VIII (May 3, 2015)

The most important thing that I hope comes out of all this is a tilty screen on a 1D.
If every other "pro-body" out there has one and people like it, Canon will adapt.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (May 3, 2015)

9VIII said:


> The most important thing that I hope comes out of all this is a tilty screen on a 1D.
> If every other "pro-body" out there has one and people like it, Canon will adapt.



I hope not!


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 3, 2015)

9VIII said:


> The most important thing that I hope comes out of all this is a tilty screen on a 1D.
> If every other "pro-body" out there has one and people like it, Canon will adapt.



Like...the D4s?? :


----------



## sanj (May 4, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> What can't you do with a Mirrorless ?
> 
> Leave your battery charger at home



In all fairness if I was out shooting for the day with my 5d I would put an extra battery in the bag. One could do that just as easy with Mirror Less as well. Maybe two batteries instead of one, they are very small and light. Simple!


----------



## AcutancePhotography (May 4, 2015)

As long as they can get the shot and the photograph is good enough, more power to them!


----------



## sanj (May 4, 2015)

AcutancePhotography said:


> As long as they can get the shot and the photograph is good enough, more power to them!


That is such a good attitude.


----------



## Dylan777 (May 4, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> You can pound in a nail with a screwdriver or a crescent wrench...that doesn't make them the right tool for the job.



About using 1Dx to break coconut... ;D


----------



## sanj (May 4, 2015)

Dylan777 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > You can pound in a nail with a screwdriver or a crescent wrench...that doesn't make them the right tool for the job.
> ...



You can certainly do that. Don't try is with the Fuji though...


----------



## RLPhoto (May 4, 2015)

It's still probably 10-1 or more in those stands for DSLR/ML. They understand the time and place for everything, and one guy even mentioned if it was the olympics, he'd be using a 1Dx.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 4, 2015)

A good photographer can make the best of his tools, it does not take a super camera shooting 10 or more FPS to shoot sports. 

Sports events were shot with the big 4 X 5 Graflex Press cameras for many years. You had to pull the film pack out after every shot and turn it over or pop a new one in. 

You also had to put the film cover in place and remove it or lose your image. Even when I was in high school, our photography students photographed sports using the 4X5 and got some great photos.

Of course, many cannot seem to conceive of capturing the right image with just one exposure, but when that's all you can do, you learn to do it right.


----------



## sanj (May 4, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> A good photographer can make the best of his tools, it does not take a super camera shooting 10 or more FPS to shoot sports.
> 
> Sports events were shot with the big 4 X 5 Graflex Press cameras for many years. You had to pull the film pack out after every shot and turn it over or pop a new one in.
> 
> ...



True. I would love to perfect the timing. But shoot it with 12 fps. Since I can, why not?


----------



## zim (May 4, 2015)

Quite a lot of negative comments in that article too if one cared to just focus on that sort of thing but the one comment that caught my eye was;

_The GH4 has 4K Photo as an option, and this is where I have to be careful. I can only use it for certain things, for example I can’t use 4K at a football game as it is totally forbidden due to strict licensing rules_

What's that all about?


----------



## weixing (May 4, 2015)

Hi,
Hmm... may be using a mirrorless (with a super telephoto lens) as a spotting scope?? : Just wonder how long will the battery last??

Have a nice day.


----------



## faca (May 4, 2015)

I own both Canon equipment as well as Panasonic m4/3. A couple of observations, although I am sure that you have heard this before:
Sports photography: There is still no better tool for the job than a dedicated slr like the 1Dx. It is just a matter of choosing the best tool for the job. However, you would not take a 5Ds or a 6D to a hockey game...
A trip to Europe with the family, my granddaughter's birthday and most jobs that do not require extra fast auto focusing or printing over 20 x 30": I would choose my GH4 or GX7 anytime.
A small commentary on slrs: I find it unbelievable that we are still relying in 70 year old technology, the mechanical mirror. The moment that either one of the two big guys comes out with a fast focusing full frame mirrorless (Sony is getting close, guys...), the mirror may rest in piece. And do not mention the viewfinder stuff. EVFs are so good these days, and can do so many things that regular VFs can not do that it is not an issue anymore.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 4, 2015)

weixing said:


> Hmm... may be using a mirrorless (with a super telephoto lens) as a spotting scope?? : Just wonder how long will the battery last??



I'd go with a different option...battery-free. 

http://www.amazon.com/Lens2scope-10mm-Eyepiece-Canon-Angle/dp/B004GGBQAC


----------



## AcutancePhotography (May 4, 2015)

faca said:


> A small commentary on slrs: I find it unbelievable that we are still relying in 70 year old technology, the mechanical mirror.



I would hate to hear your opinion on the wheel. ;D

Camera manufactures use mirrors because they work, work well, are a known technology (little risk) and are affordable. That is not to say that a mirrored camera is best for all types of photography or best for all photographers. That's why there is a choice. One does not have to be better than the other. 

As long as there is a steady supply of customers willing to pay for a mirrored camera, and camera manufacturers can continue to make a profit from these sales... mirrored cameras will stay around.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 4, 2015)

faca said:


> ...most jobs that do not require extra fast auto focusing
> 
> A small commentary on slrs: I find it unbelievable that we are still relying in 70 year old technology, the mechanical mirror.



It seems you've addressed your own commentary...


----------



## Aglet (May 4, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> weixing said:
> 
> 
> > Hmm... may be using a mirrorless (with a super telephoto lens) as a spotting scope?? : Just wonder how long will the battery last??
> ...



BLINK as hard you like but you won't preserve the view.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 4, 2015)

Aglet said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > weixing said:
> ...



THINK harder about the purpose of a *spotting scope*.


----------



## East Wind Photography (May 4, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> faca said:
> 
> 
> > ...most jobs that do not require extra fast auto focusing
> ...



I agree. The mirror is not the only reason to bail on 70 yo tech. I have not found a single mirror less that I can use reliably in full sunlight. Add an EVF and you take the dismal battery life down to a really unusable state.

The mirror and optical viewfinder takes relatively little power when the camera is in a state used the most, between shutter actuations. i will stick to my dslr for sports and wildlife as it's the only real option for the unforseeable future.


----------



## 3kramd5 (May 4, 2015)

zim said:


> Quite a lot of negative comments in that article too if one cared to just focus on that sort of thing but the one comment that caught my eye was;
> 
> _The GH4 has 4K Photo as an option, and this is where I have to be careful. I can only use it for certain things, for example I can’t use 4K at a football game as it is totally forbidden due to strict licensing rules_
> 
> What's that all about?



Probably league rules. They don't want people who aren't paying oodles of dollars for broadcast rights recording high quality video of games.


----------



## dcm (May 4, 2015)

faca said:


> A small commentary on slrs: I find it unbelievable that we are still relying in 70 year old technology, the mechanical mirror.



How about 150 year old technology, the internal combustion engine?  There are many examples of older technology that have not yet been replaced. They usually only get replaced when there is a compelling reason to change, despite perceived superiority of the new technologies that could replace them. It is usually a gradual change that allows us to use either or both during the transition. I use both about equally right now.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (May 4, 2015)

The people busy shooting sports with a mirror-less camera should not be interrupted by people telling them they can't do it. ;D


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (May 4, 2015)

Many forum members seem to be fixated on consistently pointing out that mirrorless cameras can't replace bodies like the 1dx.

"Shoot sports with 1dx, shoot action with 1dx, mirrorless can't ever match 1dx for focusing." 

Well, great. Something I'm curious about however, is whether any of the naysayers has stopped to think about all the things that you CAN do with ML that you wouldn't necessarily do with a 1dx?

*hand raised

Okay okay, I'll start. LOL. I used to be one of those naysayers until I actually began using them extensively. Now that I have logged thousands of mirrorless images, my perspective has changed.

1. I can and do take my mirrorless rig everywhere. For those of you with young children, you know this is priceless.
2. Most people never bat an eye at me when my ML rig is either on my hip or slung across my body. When I walked around with a 5d3 + fast prime, many people took notice. Same with my 6D. This used to become an issue often times. 

For example, I've been asked to stop operating my DSLR inside of the mall before as it is their "policy" to not allow it. On the other hand, I've since taken my ML rig into that same mall (and other similar venues) with my kids about 2-4 dozen times without issue. I have experienced this same phenomenon in numerous other places.

3. I hold up the ML cam to take a shot using the LCD and silent ES, most people don't even notice I'm taking photos even though I've just run off 20 shots. 

Just in the last month, I've taken the ML rig to my daughter's first dental visit, first haircut at the salon, restaurants of all types, the mall, busy parks (with tons of other kids and their parents around), etc. No one has had any issues with my presence with the rig. 

Try pulling any of that off with a 1dx and lens. Won't be so much fun even if you can get away with it.

The point I'm trying to make is, so much weight is put on ML not being good for this or that, battery life being bad, EVF sucking, blah blah blah. Most of the niggles are minor in comparison to what they bring to the table for many people like myself. Mirrorless has allowed me to document tons of things that I would not necessarily have been able to with my DSLR rigs. I'm pretty sure that the market niche I am in (dad with wife and two kids), is much larger than the fast action/sport shooter 1dx niche. Because of this, I think that often times, mountains are made out of mole hills when it comes to talking about ML. 

For us mere mortals that shoot real life things that most people shoot, ML does perfectly well.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (May 4, 2015)

One more thing out of curiosity, how many of you in here regularly use subject tracking AF features in your DSLRs? If so, how much of your shooting does it consist of? Lastly, how many of the millions of DSLRs in the world do you think are used to track subjects everyday vs how many simply use single point spot focus?


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (May 4, 2015)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> One more thing out of curiosity, how many of you in here regularly use subject tracking AF features in your DSLRs? If so, how much of your shooting does it consist of? Lastly, how many of the millions of DSLRs in the world do you think are used to track subjects everyday vs how many simply use single point spot focus?



Can't speak for others but I use AF tracking nearly all the time for my photography, it's very handy when subjects move!

Personally I am not "Anti ML" I have just not, yet, found a useful one. When EVFs will work in differing lighting conditions with no lag whatsoever, AF systems improve to the point that it is useful to me and the batteries last a bit longer then I will happily join the queue to buy one - I am just not holding my breath!
ML cameras are just the job for many people/uses, just of no use (yet) to me.


----------



## TeT (May 4, 2015)

BIF would be more difficult...

It is not so much cannot as it is not as easy. For me, anyways...

On the other end, world class photographers are not limited by their equipment nor are they created by their equipment. (generally speaking)


----------



## MARKOE PHOTOE (May 4, 2015)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> Many forum members seem to be fixated on consistently pointing out that mirrorless cameras can't replace bodies like the 1dx.
> 
> "Shoot sports with 1dx, shoot action with 1dx, mirrorless can't ever match 1dx for focusing."
> 
> ...



1+ I have the same experience in many cases. If you've never had the experience to shoot with both, then how can anyone honestly take a side? I was amazed and excited at what ML could produce in comparison to my Canon gear. I love my DSLR's but also spend a lot of time with in the ML camp. Fuji has a lot to offer IMO.


----------



## raptor3x (May 5, 2015)

I was in Seattle last weekend visiting friends and afterwards ran into the May Day protest while walking back to my hotel. I just happened to have my E-M1 with me along with the 12-40 2.8 and 40-150 2.8 lenses. I put the 40-150 on and started following the protest. I have to say that I was a bit shocked at how bad the E-M1 performed in terms of autofocus. Granted, the light wasn't great as the sun was starting to set but the tracking performance was truly atrocious. Even with the deeper DoF provided by m43, I was seeing maybe 1 in 10 in focus. I've never been terribly impressed with the tracking in good light but it's usable in a pinch, but it seems if the light is anything but perfect then it's just complete trash.

Looking at the mini-galleries provided in the link, I was surprised to see how many of the shots are either of static subjects, have an extremely deep DoF, and are just straight up out of focus. Not a very convincing article.


----------



## raptor3x (May 5, 2015)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> 2. Most people never bat an eye at me when my ML rig is either on my hip or slung across my body. When I walked around with a 5d3 + fast prime, many people took notice. Same with my 6D. This used to become an issue often times.



I think most sports shooters will agree that the 'big camera' factor is generally a positive thing when shooting sports. People tend to get out of your way and/or ask for a card when they see a great white lens but seem much more happy to walk right in front of you if you're shooting with a smaller body.


----------



## Aglet (May 5, 2015)

raptor3x said:


> I was in Seattle last weekend visiting friends and afterwards ran into the May Day protest while walking back to my hotel. I just happened to have my E-M1 with me along with the 12-40 2.8 and 40-150 2.8 lenses. I put the 40-150 on and started following the protest. I have to say that I was a bit shocked at how bad the E-M1 performed in terms of autofocus. Granted, the light wasn't great as the sun was starting to set but the tracking performance was truly atrocious. Even with the deeper DoF provided by m43, I was seeing maybe 1 in 10 in focus. I've never been terribly impressed with the tracking in good light but it's usable in a pinch, but it seems if the light is anything but perfect then it's just complete trash.
> 
> Looking at the mini-galleries provided in the link, I was surprised to see how many of the shots are either of static subjects, have an extremely deep DoF, and are just straight up out of focus. Not a very convincing article.


I don't have the EM1, considering it but waiting for the goodies of the EM52 to land in an EM1ii.
but meanwhile, a protest march isn't exactly a fast moving subject, is it?..
So, are you making the most use of your EM1's AF abilities?
Perhaps this link can be of some assistance:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=up8K_xd_iwU

If anything, EM1 should do reasonably well to AF the initial shot.


----------



## Aglet (May 5, 2015)

East Wind Photography said:


> I agree. The mirror is not the only reason to bail on 70 yo tech. I have not found a single mirror less that I can use reliably in full sunlight. Add an EVF and you take the dismal battery life down to a really unusable state.
> 
> The mirror and optical viewfinder takes relatively little power when the camera is in a state used the most, between shutter actuations. i will stick to my dslr for sports and wildlife as it's the only real option for the unforseeable future.



WHAT are you talking about re inability to use in sunlight?!?
That's a PnS complaint. If you've only ever tried a cheap ML with no EVF then that's not a very valid opinion.

Any decent ML body with a good EVF is not significantly different from using a DSLR.
FWIW, my XT1's EVF is particularly pleasant to use and I was using it to MF a slow lens in low light the other night, VERY low light. This was nearly impossible to do with the DSLRs we had available. (nearly full moon, the only source of light but obscured by cloud)
DSLR AF did not function on low contrast subject and MF was not working well with the optical viewfinder either.
We had to indirectly MF the DSLRs but I could just manually focus the XT1 via the EVF. Next time I'll have to remember to bring my low light DSLR focus accessory tricks just to speed things up but this was a great example of how good the XT1's EVF system is.
And if you have 2 functional eyes, whatever lag some EVF systems may have is also a non-issue.
I'd say the optical viewfinder is already obsolete, however simple, convenient and low-battery-power it is.


----------



## candc (May 5, 2015)

There is a fellow among the local bird shooters "mike the Sony guy" who uses an a77ii, he likes it. There are some advantages to ml but for now a dslr is more suited for that type of shooting.


----------



## Aglet (May 5, 2015)

candc said:


> There is a fellow among the local bird shooters "mike the Sony guy" who uses an a77ii, he likes it. There are some advantages to ml but for now a dslr is more suited for that type of shooting.



Certainly, sports-oriented DSLRs make the job of getting certain shots a lot easier and more certain at this time.
I still shoot predominantly DSLR for similar reasons but I _enjoy_ shooting w ML more for some reason.
But ML systems are already very good and rapidly improving. Samsung's NX1's specialized hardware is likely capable of being programmed to do a variety of specialty tracking and AF functions so I'm interested in seeing what that technology comes up with VS what the regular PDAF/CDAF combo ML systems are doing now, which is really not much different from DSLR/compact camera AF methods.


----------



## candc (May 5, 2015)

Truenuff, ml is the way of the future and pretty soon I don't think there will be any performance advantage for dslr's. I shoot bif with both eyes open and the evf doesn't seem to work very well that way but then you are really talking about special applications where a dslr is better.


----------



## raptor3x (May 5, 2015)

Aglet said:


> I don't have the EM1, considering it but waiting for the goodies of the EM52 to land in an EM1ii.
> but meanwhile, a protest march isn't exactly a fast moving subject, is it?..
> So, are you making the most use of your EM1's AF abilities?
> Perhaps this link can be of some assistance:
> ...



I think the key was that it wasn't in daylight. Also, it was a protest but that doesn't mean people were moving in a slow march; it was fairly hectic with people running around as the cops threw flashbangs and some tear gas cannisters after some officers were injured.

I've used the E-M1 tracking quite a bit before and while I've never been impressed by it, it's certainly useable in a pinch (especially after the 3.0 firmware update) but I'd take a T3i over the E-M1 or X-T1 for tracking. I saw that mirrorless shootout video when it first came out and I always thought it was very telling that they didn't give any kind of hit rate numbers, based on my experience with both the E-M1 and X-T1 I would strongly suspect that the hit rates were significantly lower for the mirrorless cameras than the D4s.



Aglet said:


> WHAT are you talking about re inability to use in sunlight?!?
> That's a PnS complaint. If you've only ever tried a cheap ML with no EVF then that's not a very valid opinion.



No, he's right. The X-T1 is far and away the best EVF for use in bright sunlight, but this has more to do with the terrible eyecups used by Olympus and Sony than anything intrinsic to the EVF.



Aglet said:


> Any decent ML body with a good EVF is not significantly different from using a DSLR.
> FWIW, my XT1's EVF is particularly pleasant to use and I was using it to MF a slow lens in low light the other night, VERY low light. This was nearly impossible to do with the DSLRs we had available. (nearly full moon, the only source of light but obscured by cloud)
> DSLR AF did not function on low contrast subject and MF was not working well with the optical viewfinder either.
> We had to indirectly MF the DSLRs but I could just manually focus the XT1 via the EVF.



The idea that current EVFs are not significantly different from OVFs is going to be strongly colored by your intended use. For general use I completely agree with you (especially for the X-T1, they really nailed the EVF), but for applications with heavy using of continuous shooting, especially in low light, EVFs are very far behind OVFs. 

Also, FWIW, the live view focus on my Canon DSLRs outperforms all of my mirrorless bodies in extremely low light as long as you're not in a rush. I agree that the EVF is helpful here, but it can be pretty hard to accurately focus even with the EVF as the noise makes it difficult to distinguish critical focus. It seems like when these kinds of discussions come up, people seem to forget that DSLRs also have live view.



Aglet said:


> Next time I'll have to remember to bring my low light DSLR focus accessory tricks just to speed things up but this was a great example of how good the XT1's EVF system is.
> And if you have 2 functional eyes, whatever lag some EVF systems may have is also a non-issue.
> *I'd say the optical viewfinder is already obsolete, however simple, convenient and low-battery-power it is.*



I would strongly disagree with this. The blackout period and slideshow behavior of mirrorless cameras EVFs in continuous shooting mode makes them almost useless for tracking action when there is a high degree of unpredictability. They may seem ok when you're doing something easy like tracking a person running straight towards you but when you have subject rapidly changing directions using current gen EVFs in continuous shooting mode is an exercise in futility.


----------



## Hillsilly (May 5, 2015)

There's no reason why on-sensor AF can't equal or exceed the AF performance of a conventional DSLR. When that day arrives, the mirror becomes redundant (and you have more space to pack in more processing power). Canon will jump all over that technology as it will allow them to remove some of the most costly components out of their cameras. I'm just curious whether it will be an entry level 900D or a more advanced 1DX3 Where we'll see this first. 

Imagine a camera with the same speed as a DSLR, but with the AF accuracy of a mirrorless camera. Who wouldn't want one?



JohnDizzo15 said:


> Just in the last month, I've taken the ML rig to my daughter's first dental visit, first haircut at the salon, restaurants of all types, the mall, busy parks (with tons of other kids and their parents around), etc. No one has had any issues with my presence with the rig.
> 
> Try pulling any of that off with a 1dx and lens. Won't be so much fun even if you can get away with it.



Glad to hear that I'm not the only one who feels a little conspicuous and out of place in some situations with a large camera and lens. FYI, this is the primary reason why I'm now shooting 90% of my photos with a Fuji X100, X-E1 and GA645.

But until the Fuji 100-400 arrives, I still dust off the old Canon gear for some occasional wildlife and sports shots.


----------



## Hillsilly (May 5, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> A good photographer can make the best of his tools, it does not take a super camera shooting 10 or more FPS to shoot sports.
> 
> Sports events were shot with the big 4 X 5 Graflex Press cameras for many years. You had to pull the film pack out after every shot and turn it over or pop a new one in.
> 
> ...



You're right, it is more about anticipation, knowledge of the sport and timing.

Fyi, David Burnett uses a Speed Graphic and is getting great images. Adam Pretty also uses large format (but I think he uses a 1DX for most/all of his sports shots) - http://www.adampretty.com/


----------



## raptor3x (May 5, 2015)

Hillsilly said:


> There's no reason why on-sensor AF can't equal or exceed the AF performance of a conventional DSLR.



That's not necessarily true. The much larger AF sensors of a traditional phase detect system will always have an advantage in low light given similar levels of sensor technology. In addition, off sensor phase detect systems will have better precision than on-sensor phase detect due to the baseline. On-sensor phase detect removes the need to calibrate the two light paths but does not do anything to improve the precision of the AF system.


----------



## Hillsilly (May 5, 2015)

Do you know why the Sony A7s is getting good reviews for its low light AF performance? Its meant to be ok down to EV-4, which beats most DSLRs. (Admittedly, I haven't heard that it focuses _quickly_ in low light.)


----------



## raptor3x (May 6, 2015)

Hillsilly said:


> Do you know why the Sony A7s is getting good reviews for its low light AF performance? Its meant to be ok down to EV-4, which beats most DSLRs. (Admittedly, I haven't heard that it focuses _quickly_ in low light.)



The A7s will focus down to -4EV, although that's specified with an f/2.0 lens, using contrast detect AF. What I wrote above only applies to phase detect AF systems. By all accounts though the A7s AF is excellent in low light, but I have not had the pleasure of using one yet.


----------



## sanj (May 6, 2015)

> I would strongly disagree with this. The blackout period and slideshow behavior of mirrorless cameras EVFs in continuous shooting mode makes them almost useless for tracking action when there is a high degree of unpredictability. They may seem ok when you're doing something easy like tracking a person running straight towards you but when you have subject rapidly changing directions using current gen EVFs in continuous shooting mode is an exercise in futility.



My biggest and perhaps only issue with mirror less currently. But the camera may have a setting to disable playback while shooting. That should do it. I do not have a mirror less in my hands currently to check. Sold my XE2 and the Rx100 lent to someone for a few weeks...


----------



## expatinasia (May 6, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> A good photographer can make the best of his tools, it does not take a super camera shooting 10 or more FPS to shoot sports.
> 
> Sports events were shot with the big 4 X 5 Graflex Press cameras for many years. You had to pull the film pack out after every shot and turn it over or pop a new one in.
> 
> ...



Of course, and a horse and cart will get you to the ground eventually as well. It's just that a plane, train, bus or car may be quicker and more comfortable.

At the end of the day it is about embracing technology and making the most of it. What the 1D X has done for sports photography is phenomenal, yes we all would like to get that same shot with just one click and many (myself included) do try from time to time, but those 12 FPS are very, very useful.

There is no going back, especially when we are talking about sport photography with multiple moving objects.


----------



## Aglet (May 6, 2015)

raptor3x said:


> No, he's right. The X-T1 is far and away the best EVF for use in bright sunlight, but this has more to do with the terrible eyecups used by Olympus and Sony than anything intrinsic to the EVF.



Hmmm.. I haven't experienced that issue with mine but I do agree, all of my ML bodies could use a better standard eyecup than what they arrive with. I think I saw an optional one for the xt1?...



> The idea that current EVFs are not significantly different from OVFs is going to be strongly colored by your intended use. For general use I completely agree with you (especially for the X-T1, they really nailed the EVF), but for applications with heavy using of continuous shooting, especially in low light, EVFs are very far behind OVFs.



OK, I might partly concede that point. I don't do action work in low light. However, I've been quite impressed by my XT1's ability to AF in low light with slow/long lenses and find it comparable to my best SLRs in that regard, and, as previously described, capable of being even a little better.



> Also, FWIW, the live view focus on my Canon DSLRs outperforms all of my mirrorless bodies in extremely low light as long as you're not in a rush. I agree that the EVF is helpful here, but it can be pretty hard to accurately focus even with the EVF as the noise makes it difficult to distinguish critical focus. It seems like when these kinds of discussions come up, people seem to forget that DSLRs also have live view.



HAHA! I forget that my Nikon's have live view as it's not implemented quite as well as on the Canon's I've used. However, I've come to completely trust the PDAF system on my Nikons so don't even bother with it any more except for some macro work.
I no longer use current Canon bodies so can't judge their LVAF. 60D's the newest one I kept and it's LVAF is terrible, I mis-focuses quite a lot in decent light with long lenses, worse than the PDAF in same conditions.
I've had no real issues with my XT1, EM10 gives up in conditions similar to my cheaper SLRs and my XE1s are somewhere in the latter range as well so far.




> I would strongly disagree with this. The blackout period and slideshow behavior of mirrorless cameras EVFs in continuous shooting mode makes them almost useless for tracking action when there is a high degree of unpredictability. They may seem ok when you're doing something easy like tracking a person running straight towards you but when you have subject rapidly changing directions using current gen EVFs in continuous shooting mode is an exercise in futility.



I haven't tried much of that (again, no action work) but I will if I get one of the faster focusing Fuji lenses.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 6, 2015)

I love mirroless, just not for speed. I mean 4x5, mounted with a MF back is a superb tool for what it does. A Sony a7r is a pinnacle landscape camera, light and small, easy to pack and cheap to a degree. The x100s can sync flash at any shutter speed, natively. Personally if the new a7rII had an ability to sync at 1/800th, I would dump my MF gear or if any camera that swaps lenses and sync at those speeds. (That's full frame.) ML still has issues that the mirror fixes efficiently and until then, I'll keep my DSLR.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 6, 2015)

sanj said:


> True. I would love to perfect the timing. But shoot it with 12 fps. Since I can, why not?



I've no problem with someone who wants to do it that way. 

I have found a few limited conditions where I felt it was worth my trouble to sort thru hundreds of images that were nearly identical to try and get the best. I used my 1D MK II, 1D MK III, and 1D MK IV in the high speed mode a few times, and was mostly sorry after having to sort thru all those images.

I once took about 500 images of a friend and his whip show in 2007 with my 30D. I was trying to catch the moment when the tip of the whip snapped the end off of the flower the pretty girl was holding in her mouth. Trying to capture something exceeding the speed of sound just a hundred feet away needs 1000 fps!

I did not come close, but later, I managed to see the tip of the whip just before and after with one of the guys in the performance.








Here is the tip of the whip coming up towards the flower, but it missed.






Another try. He was only a few feet away, so the whip tip was not going really fast like the 50 ft long whip does:






And just after it clipped the flower off






That's when I realized that I needed a lot more than the 6 FPS or even 100 fps for something like that.


----------



## Don Haines (May 6, 2015)

expatinasia said:


> Of course, and a horse and cart will get you to the ground eventually as well. It's just that a plane, train, bus or car may be quicker and more comfortable.
> 
> At the end of the day it is about embracing technology and making the most of it. What the 1D X has done for sports photography is phenomenal, yes we all would like to get that same shot with just one click and many (myself included) do try from time to time, but those 12 FPS are very, very useful.
> 
> There is no going back, especially when we are talking about sport photography with multiple moving objects.


agreed!

The trick with new technology is to see where it is going, not where it was...


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (May 6, 2015)

@Mt. Spokane - You could reattempt that shot with a Fuji xt1 

It shoots 8fps and up to 1/32000th shutter. Both burst shooting and above 1/8000th shutter was employed for most of these.


----------



## Sporgon (May 6, 2015)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> @Mt. Spokane - You could reattempt that shot with a Fuji xt1
> 
> It shoots 8fps and up to 1/32000th shutter. Both burst shooting and above 1/8000th shutter was employed for most of these.



The first picture is a classic ! Nicely done.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (May 6, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> The first picture is a classic ! Nicely done.



Thanks, Sporgon. 

I've been very happy with the xt1 for a multitude of things even in it's current state. Though word on the street is that a huge firmware update is coming in the next week which should improve AF significantly (not that it hasn't already been pretty sufficient).


----------



## raptor3x (May 6, 2015)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> @Mt. Spokane - You could reattempt that shot with a Fuji xt1
> 
> It shoots 8fps and up to 1/32000th shutter. Both burst shooting and above 1/8000th shutter was employed for most of these.



I'm not sure the electronic shutter would be ideal for that. You tend to get a very noticeable rolling shutter effect with fast moving subjects. Also, in regard to those shots, the EXIF data indicates they were shot at 1/400s so things could have been improved significantly without resorting to new hardware.


----------



## Don Haines (May 7, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > @Mt. Spokane - You could reattempt that shot with a Fuji xt1
> ...


agreed! It is perfect on so many levels!


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (May 7, 2015)

Thanks, Don. 

@Raptor- agreed re the potential for rolling shutter. However, I think it may have worked in that whip scenario since it would just have been the whip that is moving at a high rate of speed. Also agree re the 1/400th shots from Spokane. Although I would still say that 1/4000th or 1/8000th still wouldn't have done it the justice that something significantly faster could have.


----------



## Aglet (May 14, 2015)

Fuji promo video of the new AF system with firmware v4, coming soon for the XT1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaoIZXA5RMM

won't be tracking in BIF (bullets in flight) but it might do _birds_ in flight.
seems the AF area is reduced when shooting in high speed continuous mode... might be running into processing limits

- face and eye tracking feature (Olympus has had this for a while)

Looking fwd to this update... and a 10-24mm.

edit - update X-T10 looks pretty good at a nice price point and small
www.imaging-resource.com/news/2015/05/18/fujifilm-x-t10-bridges-gap-between-entry-level-x-series-cameras-and-pro-lev

and here's some humor from Olympus
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNo5H1cK_gQ


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 2, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> A good photographer can make the best of his tools, it does not take a super camera shooting 10 or more FPS to shoot sports.
> 
> Sports events were shot with the big 4 X 5 Graflex Press cameras for many years. You had to pull the film pack out after every shot and turn it over or pop a new one in.
> 
> ...



I'm so sick of these stupid statements. Who cares? Obviously you don't shoot sports, are not under the gun to produce, and not pressured to get "exact moment shots." 

Once rare, iconic photos from the 70's and 80's are EXPECTED, and lots of them. You increase your odds of getting more of them with better AF tracking and higher fps.

Things change over time, believe it or not.


----------



## Aglet (Jun 4, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > A good photographer can make the best of his tools, it does not take a super camera shooting 10 or more FPS to shoot sports.
> ...


Sounds like 8k video will fix a lot of that for sports 'togs.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 4, 2015)

Nope, it's already fixed. It's called the 1Dx.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jun 4, 2015)

I wouldn't say that somebody looks like a tool shooting without a view-finder, but he/she sure looks like a clueless tourist, no matter how "pro" he/she feels. :


----------



## deleteme (Jun 7, 2015)

dcm said:


> faca said:
> 
> 
> > A small commentary on slrs: I find it unbelievable that we are still relying in 70 year old technology, the mechanical mirror.
> ...



Heck, I am still cooking with fire!


----------



## deleteme (Jun 7, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > A good photographer can make the best of his tools, it does not take a super camera shooting 10 or more FPS to shoot sports.
> ...


Things do change. I shot sports for money in the 70's with a manual wind Pentax and a manual wind Nikkormat. One did develop skills to maximize the reduced opportunities those cameras afforded. When using my 1Dmk2 for sports I found that I became a lot more lax in the timing of my shots. I to lots of gray shots but so did the MWACS.
I spent more time trying to find new ways to shoot the events rather than relying on the brute strength of the camera.


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 7, 2015)

Normalnorm said:


> faca said:
> 
> 
> > A small commentary on slrs: I find it unbelievable that we are still relying in 70 year old technology, the mechanical mirror.
> ...



Best comment in the thread!


----------



## dolina (Jun 7, 2015)

I'm still bathing with water!


Don Haines said:


> Normalnorm said:
> 
> 
> > faca said:
> ...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 7, 2015)

dolina said:


> I'm still bathing with water!



The Greeks started using oil and sticks millennia ago, you mean you haven't switched to the newer, better technology yet? Sheesh, you're probably still using a dSLR, too!


----------



## sanj (Jun 8, 2015)

I like my DSLR. But can't help posting these photos in reference to the 'fire' comment. All in good spirits.


----------



## zim (Jun 8, 2015)

Aglet said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



Absolutely pointless arguments, just look at what super slo-mo is producing in motor/bike racing. DSLR or Mirrorless the future of pro sports action 'photography' is high res video direct from Sky etc.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Jun 8, 2015)

I am looking at my new car. Still using those old fashioned round wheels. I got ripped off. How long are these lazy car manufacturers going to continue pushing this old technology on the consumers. It's the 21st century and we are still using the round wheel???

No innovation.


----------

