D800 24mp Mirrorless - August 24

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

08/16/2011 01:34:41 PM · #1

What is and how does a mirrorless DSLR work?

robs

Canon EOS R6 Mk II

08/16/2011 01:40:45 PM · #2

I don't see the big deal dropping the mirror that a lot of people do... ASSuming (and you know what that does)... that the focus is not affected to end user perception and the view on the simulated screen is as good as a live mirror with no perceivable delay and the sensor been up front does not get all the dust action.

The old 1D and several of the lower end Nikons effectively did part of that with the CCD's where the mirror was there but not used at higher speeds anyway. The image is just a snap from the data on the CCD at any point in time. They had the mirror for view and focus though.

Dropping the mirror would increase fps (a lot), allow the body to be smaller (plus or minus) or allow popups flashes on FF bodies e.t.c.

08/16/2011 01:52:04 PM · #3

The mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras are not DSLRs, since they do not have the moving mirror which is the reason for the "reflex" in Single Lens Reflex.
The rumors I see are that the Nikon mirrorless is not a D800, it's a smaller-format camera, something on the order of 2.6x crop.

08/16/2011 01:58:02 PM · #4

I see.

Ok...so what is this "quiet mode" I'm hearing about on Canon's ?

Originally posted by kirbic:

08/16/2011 01:59:00 PM · #5

My biggest worry with mirrorless cameras has to do with autofocus. From my understanding you either need to do away with the fast phase detect autofocus, which would suck, or you add a prism that splits the light. I've heard somewhere that this sends about 30% of the light to the phase detectors for focus, and 70% to the sensor. This seems like it would both reduce the effectiveness of the auto focus and reduce the amount of light available to the sensor. So both options suck.

Hopefully my understanding of the technology is wrong, and I'm sure you guys will let me know if it is :)

08/16/2011 02:00:58 PM · #6

Even removing the mirror, you still have aperture and shutter curtains. It may make a little less noise, but I don't think it will be quiet.

Dphoto

Nikon D800

08/16/2011 02:04:37 PM · #7

All I know is I've been standing in line now for months waiting for the D700 replacement to come out. We still aren't sure if it will or not but Nikon Rumors believes the new Nikon mirrorless camera will be announced on 24 Aug. I sure hope they are wrong. This money is burning a hole im my pocket and I don't know how long I can hang on to it. Nikon Rumors has info on the mirrorless system.

08/16/2011 02:05:39 PM · #8

Yeah...I think I missunder stood the "mirrorless" in the article. I think the mirrorless was referring to some kind of 16mm sensor....I'll try to find and post.

Dphoto

Nikon D800

08/16/2011 02:08:19 PM · #9

//nikonrumors.com/2011/08/16/nikons-mirrorless-interchangeable-lens-camera-will-be-announced-on-august-24th.aspx/#comments

08/16/2011 02:09:27 PM · #10

Here is the link

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Canon Mount

08/16/2011 02:27:16 PM · #11

I think I got one of the last D700s a few months ago. All good with this cam. For me to sell and move up to the D800 it would have to:

All features of the D700 - Plus

24(ish)MP
HD Video with Autofocus
Fold out screen for crazy POV possibilities
$3000 price RANGE

Three of the four above would keep me interested....Four of the four would see this in my stocking at Christmas. (With the D700 for sale)

Originally posted by Dphoto:

Mike

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

08/16/2011 02:36:08 PM · #12

you also probably get better or worse auto focus depending on how you look a it, you would get better live view AF but im not sure how it would affect normal AF.

Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux M Aspherical MF - Black

08/16/2011 03:09:22 PM · #13

Originally posted by mike_311:

you also probably get better or worse auto focus depending on how you look a it, you would get better live view AF but im not sure how it would affect normal AF.

Good point! It would be nice to have phase detect AF in live view, or even better, while shooting video.

scarbrd

Leica M10

08/16/2011 03:55:25 PM · #14

Mirrorless is all about size and weight. The camera bodies can be designed much smaller if the mirror box is removed.

Smaller lenses require a smaller sensor. Olympus and Panasonic created a standard in the Micro 4/3 format. Something I've recently bought into. The 4/3 sensor has 25% of the surface area of a full frame sensor. While smaller than FF and APS sensors, it is much larger than P&S sensors. This allows them to make very small lenses, especially primes. I have the 14mm and the 20mm pancakes from Panasonic. You would not believe how tiny these lenses are. There is a 2x factor on the focal length to compare to comparable FF lenses. (14mm=28mm, 20mm-40mm)

Sony has a mirrorless system based on the APS sensor size. While the cameras can be much smaller than DSLRs with APS sensors, the lenses are much larger than those for m4/3 due to the larger sensor area.

The autofocus on the new Olympus E-P3 is incredibly fast. It is a mixed bag though. While it is as fast as any DSLR for a single shot, continuous AF isn't up to the better DSLR standard yet.

You also have to consider the increased DOF with the smaller sensor. Shooting at F2.8 on m4/3 has the same DOF as F5.6 on a FF sensor. This can make things like bokeh and blurred backgrounds a bit challenging. That's why you see fast primes like the Olympus 12mm f2.0 and 45mm f1.8, Panasonic 20mm f1.7, even a Leica 25mm f1.4.

Then again, shooting with a very deep DOF has it advantages, too.

I recently decided to sell all my Canon gear and concentrate on the m4/3 system. I travel a lot and the combination of size, bulk, weight, and image quality makes the m4/3 system much more usable for me.

the cool thing is, I can put the Panasonic and Leica m4/3 lenses on my Olympus camera.

I'm not saying the IQ on the Olympus is the same as the 5DII. It's not. And high ISO performance on larger sensors is far superior than with m/43. However, while you can tell a difference in the digital image by pixel peeping at high magnifications, the 17"x23" prints done on a pro level printer more than hold their own against any DSLR image.

Rumors on the mirrorless offering from Nikon say it will be a smaller sensor than even the m4/3. I think this is so they can make a very compact camera/lens system, yet still differentiate enough from the larger DSLR offerings in image quality. There are some predictions here

As sensors improve and autofocus gets faster, I think you'll see more people move away from DSLRs to mirrorless systems. Reflex systems are a holder over from the film days. And, it's getting pointless to haul around all that heavy gear.

08/16/2011 03:58:44 PM · #15

Originally posted by bhuge:

Yep, you understand the technology :-)
Eliminating phase-detect AF surely has an impact on AF speed (although not necessarily accuracy). The difference in speed between phase-detection and contrast detection (the mode that is used when the image falling on the sensor is used to do AF) is narrowing, though, due to greater processing capability. Still, you can only read the sensor at perhaps 60 fps, so that limits the number of data points you can generate to do AF by contrast detection. So contrast detection is simpler, lower cost, but slower. That's why it has been the mode of choice for P&S cameras, where AF speed is not so much an issue.
For high-performance cameras, phase detection is still the way to go. It's faster, but it does involve a separate, complex system, and precise alignment of this system with the sensor, so it is higher cost. It also implies some light loss if you can't move it out of the way. I think your number of 30% or so is about right for this. Keep in mind, that's just over 1/2 stop, so it is not a such a big deal when all is said and done.
A bigger disadvantage, IMO, is that if the phase detection mirror stays in front of the sensor, you have no opportunity to clean the sensor. It better stay damn clean in there.

Originally posted by bhuge:

Even removing the mirror, you still have aperture and shutter curtains. It may make a little less noise, but I don't think it will be quiet.

You will definitely still have an aperture to actuate, but that is nearly silent, since it is buried in the optics. If your camera has a DoF Preview button (I don't think the Rebels do) you can test to see how prominent the sound of the aperture actuating is. It's audible, but not from more than a couple feet away. The vast majority of the noise from a DSLR is the mirror slapping up/down.
You don't necessarily need a mechanical shutter, if you can use an electronic shutter. Most P&S cameras don't have a mechanical shutter at all. There are trade-offs, though.

ETA:
Looking over the leaked photo of the Nikon mirrorless camera, it seems to me they must be using contrast-detect focus, otherwise they would still need a partially-reflective mirror to reflect light to a phase-detect system that's out of the imaging light path.

Message edited by author 2011-08-16 16:57:34.

Neil

Fujifilm X-T30

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35 f/4 ED VR

08/16/2011 05:47:33 PM · #16

I can't wait!

As long as it has a good sensor, I will most definitely be upgrading...I should have bought full frame instead of the D7000. I will be selling my D90 and D7000 to help pay for it, so stay tuned...

My hopes (silly reasons I didn't by the D700 last time):

- As small as it can be for what it is
- SD card support! (I have a lot of these, and very few CF cards.)
- No noise to 1600 or beyond
- Same battery as D7000 (since I bought two, and they're so new)

mbrutus2009

Nikon D850

08/16/2011 05:58:39 PM · #17

Originally posted by Neil:

I can't wait!

I will be selling my D90 and D7000 to help pay for it, so stay tuned...

Put me on the list of possible buyers (D7000) if I can manage to find enough money by then.

08/16/2011 06:31:35 PM · #18

No noise to 1600 and beyond? Not sure what that means. I find that I can go well over 2000 and still get little if any noise.

CF card is kind of strange. Handn't used since my D70. Kind of scares me taking it in and out the cam because of those little pins ! CF must serve SOME purpose...but what?

Originally posted by Neil:

08/16/2011 06:58:40 PM · #19

Originally posted by kenskid:

...CF must serve SOME purpose...but what?

Back in the day, CF was all there was. You needed that much volume to squeeze in enough memory to make it useful. The original CF cards started at a few megabytes in capacity. I know I have some 16MB cards around somewhere, LOL.
Even today, because of the greater available real estate inside the card, it easier to make high-capacity cards, and the fastest, largest available cards are still CF cards. CF used to have a cost advantage as well, but in reasonable sizes, I think that advantage is all but gone. Haven't compared in some time, though.
I do think that SD is better from the standpoint of contact reliability, cost of implementation of the camera-side connector, and space required in the camera. Those are significant advantages, but the performance and capacity needs to be there as well, at competitive cost.

08/16/2011 07:31:58 PM · #20

CF cards still have quite a speed advantage. They can reach speeds up to 100 MB/s. The fastest SD cards are only around 30 MB/s

It usually doesn't matter unless your doing a really long burst of RAW images.

08/16/2011 07:34:56 PM · #21

I take that back, I just found an SD card that does 80 MB/s writes, but then again it's $440 so practical speeds may be closer to 30 MB/s