Top end DSLR v Mirrorless AF shootout.

[woof woof]

Here...

This surprised me as I expected the top end DSLR to be the clear winner but in this shootout the difference between one of the best DSLR's on the market, the best (AF wise) CSC (G4) and a more reasonably priced CSC (Sony 6000) doesn't seem to be as big as I'd expected.

As/if CSC AF continues to improve the justification for high end DSLR's may lessen and already (according to the guy in the vid) CSC's outperform DSLR's in their price segment. That statement came as a bit of a shock to me as I expected DSLR's to still have the edge for focusing on moving targets but it looks like CSC's have the edge at their price point these days and even compared to the top end DSLR's it's very close.

Happy viewing.

 

[CSB]

Thanks for posting, I've been thinking about selling up my Canon kit to fund a GH4 and this video is making it easier for me to make my decision.

The fps of those little cameras is very impressive for the price!

 

[simonblue]

Interesting,but to be honest its not the sort of photos i take.

But still if i was a sport pro i would still be temped by the D4s

 

[BacktotheFuji]

Interesting video, thanks for posting. Looks like mirrorless is closing the gap big time! The new releases in the last year really do appear to be a big step forward AF wise. I still prefer a big body for sports/action/wildlife though, AF or no AF. And I'm not really into AF

Perhaps the next step for Fuji/Olympus/Sony/Panasonic/even Samsung will be to release a D4s size mirrorless

 

[Brazo]

How would these cams manage in low light, or through a stacked 10 stop and nd grad? I'm simply looking for accurate af and not speed.

 

[pingu666]

the big step might be global electronic shutter with detached on sensor focusing (focus pixels could be on all the time), would avoid the dead time that you get with dslrs (mirror flapping) and shutter with csc

 

[LongLensPhotography]

Many frames were OOF in the video. It looks like he has fairly low expectations of decent AF and he is well known for his love of mirrorless. I really hope that the tiny things are improving, but why on earth would you want a camera that is so uncomfortable to hold and shoot with?

I love how he defended fuji despite the very worst performance clearly biased

 

[pingu666]

depends on the focal length, at shorter ones or your standard kit lens range, then a compact is completely fine, longer ones then the big slr is better ergonomicly. im not sure about ultrawide shooting.

for panning a ovf is best

 

[woof woof]

... but why on earth would you want a camera that is so uncomfortable to hold and shoot with?

I agree. DSLR's are sooooo 1980.

 

[woof woof]

How would these cams manage in low light, or through a stacked 10 stop and nd grad? I'm simply looking for accurate af and not speed.

Dunno about 10 stop and I haven't used grads for years but ND's don't seem to pose a problem. I'd expect the latest MFT and APS-C CSC's to be good in low light as even my GX7 is no slouch and I've always found CSC focus accuracy to be good and at least there's no front / back focusing and MA to worry about. Generally, I thought that it was pretty much accepted that CSC focusing is more accurate than DSLR's for static subjects and it looks like they're just about there for moving subjects now too.

 

[Gaz J]

I dont care how good the mirrorless bodies become. Until I find one that is comfortable to use in the way that my DSLR's are i will never buy one for anything other than holiday snaps.

 

[dejongj]

I dont care how good the mirrorless bodies become. Until I find one that is comfortable to use in the way that my DSLR's are i will never buy one for anything other than holiday snaps.

Isn't that the case for any camera though? When I got my (second) SLR it was basically only between a Nikon and a Canon at the time....I preferred the handling of the Nikon better which was lets face it the only major difference...

Mirrorless has got so many different body styles and options now that it has quite a good choice...From the rather large and negating the size advantages of the GH4 and M1, to very small models like the PL range....I didn't like the layout of the EM5 at all, the control wheels were in the wrong location (to me), but the feel and positioning on the E-P5 was great....

As I said, just like any other system....different models feel and handle differently...

 

[woof woof]

I dont care how good the mirrorless bodies become. Until I find one that is comfortable to use in the way that my DSLR's are i will never buy one for anything other than holiday snaps.

To me the biggest advantages of CSC's include WYSIWYG and more discrete shooting. For me they replace the quality RF's and compacts of the past and that's a roll that modern DSLR's struggle with as they've put on so much size and weight and whenever the view that CSC's are too small is expressed I do wonder how men managed with film SLR's which were in many cases much closer to the size of CSC's than to the DSLR's of today.

But that's another issue and the point of the vid was to evaluate focus.

 

[architectfadi]

I bought a Fuji XT1 while owning my Nikon D800. Originally I was going to use as a second body but I enjoyed using it so much that I stopped using my D800 and eventually sold it. I love my XT1 and the Fujinon lenses and with the grip the camera is perfect to handle. Watching this video I have to agree with Chris' comments. I have found that If I get the 1st frame in focus then my hit rate is very high. I can't comment on the other mirrorless cameras apart from the Panasonic which I had a go at and was very impressed with it single point focus speed even in low light, something my D800 couldn't match IMHO

 

[Bythesea]

Don't know if it's just me, but every time I see this thread title I think it is about photographing fish heads...

 

[Brazo]

Dunno about 10 stop and I haven't used grads for years but ND's don't seem to pose a problem. I'd expect the latest MFT and APS-C CSC's to be good in low light as even my GX7 is no slouch and I've always found CSC focus accuracy to be good and at least there's no front / back focusing and MA to worry about. Generally, I thought that it was pretty much accepted that CSC focusing is more accurate than DSLR's for static subjects and it looks like they're just about there for moving subjects now too.

I've had both a nex 3 and a nex 5n in the past and they were great cameras. Once I'd strapped on a few filters or used them at night, the focus ring turned to that big green square and focus accuracy dropped right off. Also the lenses not having a hard stop at infinity made manual focus difficult - impossible.

I doubt this would be so much an issue with say an A7 as by virtue of the bigger sensor it's getting more light to focus with. I would be interested to know if the a6000 improves on the older nex series.

 

[arad85]

How would these cams manage in low light, or through a stacked 10 stop and nd grad? I'm simply looking for accurate af and not speed.

In which case, you should be looking at mirrorless as they always give better accuracy than PDAF as the focusing is done off the sensor and not through a mirror and separate focus sensor.

 

[arad85]

I really hope that the tiny things are improving, but why on earth would you want a camera that is so uncomfortable to hold and shoot with?

I dont care how good the mirrorless bodies become. Until I find one that is comfortable to use in the way that my DSLR's are i will never buy one for anything other than holiday snaps.

Gripped GH3/GH4 is ideal in my hands (I'm 6' 8" tall, so have fairly large hands).

People seem to have a misplaced preconception that mirrorless = small rangefinder style bodies. Yes, there are a lot of those around, but there are also DSLR shaped bodies which are comfortable. And before anyone says but then it's the same size and I might as well take my DSLR, you win on lens size with micro 4/3rds.

 

[Gaz J]

Gripped GH3/GH4 is ideal in my hands (I'm 6' 8" tall, so have fairly large hands).

People seem to have a misplaced preconception that mirrorless = small rangefinder style bodies. Yes, there are a lot of those around, but there are also DSLR shaped bodies which are comfortable. And before anyone says but then it's the same size and I might as well take my DSLR, you win on lens size with micro 4/3rds.

Ive had a look at those and yes they are more DSLR shaped. I guess for me its down to the fact that I have been fortunate enough to have used 1 series bodies for several years and they just suit my hand. Im sure that as with most things i would get used to a slightly different shape but Im rather hoping that if eventually mirrorless catches up with a 1DX then we will see 1DX shaped bodies with the benefits of no mirror box.

 

[Brazo]

In which case, you should be looking at mirrorless as they always give better accuracy than PDAF as the focusing is done off the sensor and not through a mirror and separate focus sensor.

They do yes in good light but in my second post you will see I have been there done that and failed!

 

[arad85]

They do yes in good light but in my second post you will see I have been there done that and failed!

You have with Sony, but that doesn't mean other bodies can't. The GH4, for example, will focus in -4EV (partial moonlight or equivalent to a proper exposure of 30 secs at f1.4....). The other thing is focus will be spot on, every time (it was ultimately the lack of repeatability of focus with the 5D2 and L lenses that finally made me give up on DSLRs).

I'm sure you can always find a reason why mirrorless is not for you (as can people who only use medium format for not taking DSLRs), but generally CSCs are now good enough that for most people, there is no practical difference in images produced. And by practical, I mean printed to reasonable sizes and displayed in normal houses.

 

[Gaz J]

Image quality is nothing if you cannot get the image in the first place. Expensive to change just to try and find its not for you. I like the idea but its not for me at the moment. Repeatability of focus is getting better on the latest bodies. 5D3 & 1DX have better accuracy and repeatability with the latest canon lenses which is quite an improvment over the 1D MkIV for example and significantly better than the 7D.

 

[woof woof]

Don't know if it's just me, but every time I see this thread title I think it is about photographing fish heads...

Ah, the joys of typing on a small screen with one of those touch pen thingies...

Title now corrected.

 

[woof woof]

I'm sure you can always find a reason why mirrorless is not for you (as can people who only use medium format for not taking DSLRs), but generally CSCs are now good enough that for most people, there is no practical difference in images produced. And by practical, I mean printed to reasonable sizes and displayed in normal houses.

I think also that some are under the impression that mirrorless camera somehow must produce less good images because they're not DSLR's. Maybe some forget that form factor and image quality are different things and that mirrorless cameras now have MFT, APS-C and FF sensors and the image quality that an APS-C or FF mirrorless camera is capable of could well be class leading as indeed some are and even the "small" sensor MFT is easily capable of producing images that stand comparison with very good DSLR's.

Anyway, the CSC v DSLR argument will run and run but the reason I posted this thread was because I was surprised how close CSC's now seem to be to the very best DSLR's in what's thought to be one of the last areas of advantage for DSLR's.

 

[Brazo]

You have with Sony, but that doesn't mean other bodies can't. The GH4, for example, will focus in -4EV (partial moonlight or equivalent to a proper exposure of 30 secs at f1.4....). The other thing is focus will be spot on, every time (it was ultimately the lack of repeatability of focus with the 5D2 and L lenses that finally made me give up on DSLRs).

I'm sure you can always find a reason why mirrorless is not for you (as can people who only use medium format for not taking DSLRs), but generally CSCs are now good enough that for most people, there is no practical difference in images produced. And by practical, I mean printed to reasonable sizes and displayed in normal houses.

Your mistaking me for someone else perhaps I have used mirror less and think they are great. IQ between APS-C mirrorless and APS-c SLR is identical because they use the same sensor. Lenses will of course make the difference.

I prefer the larger sensor sizes not only for IQ but the bigger the sensor the better feed quality there is to the EVF which of course when the light gets very low can mean a big difference and M4/3rds just won't cut it in that department, when you try and mf for example the screen is just a noisy fuzz as it tries to gain up. Even APs-c mirror less EVF becomes like that after a while. brighter lenses do help though.

 

[woof woof]

I prefer the larger sensor sizes not only for IQ but the bigger the sensor the better feed quality there is to the EVF which of course when the light gets very low can mean a big difference and M4/3rds just won't cut it in that department, when you try and mf for example the screen is just a noisy fuzz as it tries to gain up. Even APs-c mirror less EVF becomes like that after a while. brighter lenses do help though.

Shooting in very low light (and I mean out of town darkness not just a well lit high street) is something that's improved vastly recently. This is something that used to have me tearing my hair out when I tried to shoot at night with my G1 as the EVF just went black and yet also kicked out so much light that I was just about blind after looking through it.

My Sony A7 is vastly and I do mean vastly better. Better than my 5D was. My GX7 is also a vast improvement over my G1 and 5D and enables me to see more than I can by eye and therefore more than I'd see through any optical DSLR and although there's still significant light output from the GX7 it's nowhere near as bad as the G1.

So, if you haven't tried one of the newer CSC with a good EVF you should as your comments re low light shooting with MFT don't tally with my experience of the GX7.

 

[Brazo]

I have used the EVF on the 5n (detachable) and it was great but only as good as the lcd screen as they are both fed from the same sensor.

Its more a physics issue in that the smaller the sensor size the less light an evf will get and exactly why your full frame sony is vastly superior to the much smaller mft sensor.

Perhaps my example is an extreme one say when using a 10 stop at sunset/twilight.

 

[woof woof]

I have used the EVF on the 5n (detachable) and it was great but only as good as the lcd screen as they are both fed from the same sensor.

Its more a physics issue in that the smaller the sensor size the less light an evf will get and exactly why your full frame sony is vastly superior to the much smaller mft sensor.

Perhaps my example is an extreme one say when using a 10 stop at sunset/twilight.

I may be wrong but I wouldn't have thought that the add on 5n EVF was a state of the art device. You need to use a good EVF to see how good a good EVF is.

 

[BacktotheFuji]

I may be wrong but I wouldn't have thought that the add on 5n EVF was a state of the art device. You need to use a good EVF to see how good a good EVF is.

As far as I remember, the EVF on the Nex-5n didn't run at full resolution as the camera didn't have the processing power to deal with creating such a high quality stream. As a result, images looked much sharper in playback mode than in shooting mode. I found it really awkward to use and it gave me headaches. Hmph.

 

[Brazo]

Its the same 2.4million pixel device as on my sony a77, which is stunning.

Perhaps were confusing the issue, my point isn't about EVF's as the same affects LCD screens its simply that both LCD screens and EVF's need a good 'feed' of light. In low light conditions, perhaps very low light the larger the sensor size the more light will be fed to the lcd screens and evf's thus improving their clarity.

 

[woof woof]

Its the same 2.4million pixel device as on my sony a77, which is stunning.

Perhaps were confusing the issue, my point isn't about EVF's as the same affects LCD screens its simply that both LCD screens and EVF's need a good 'feed' of light. In low light conditions, perhaps very low light the larger the sensor size the more light will be fed to the lcd screens and evf's thus improving their clarity.

I don't think it's a sensor size issue, I think it's an electronic issue.

 

[Brazo]

You can try it yourself go out tonight with your A7, set the lens wide-open and check the quality of the lcd screen.

Now you can't replace the sensor with a smaller one but you can simulate less light 'feeding the LCD screen or EVF by stopping down, say to f32 to be extreme. Now look at the quality of the LCD screen.

Actually another thought has just sprung to mind, when you select F8 on a slr it will stay wide open until you press that shutter. On a mirror less it will stop down immediately, which of course has its advantages but not for low light focusing.

 

[chrism_scotland]

Personally I've yet to find a CSC with AF that can get anywhere near my old D7000 let alone my current D800, particularly in low light - having tried the EM1 and XT-1 I was left very unimpressed with what generally seems to be regarded two of the better AF systems on CSC.

I'd find it very hard to give up full frame now so hopefully Sony can improve the A7 AF to an acceptable level in future iterations!

 

[woof woof]

You can try it yourself go out tonight with your A7, set the lens wide-open and check the quality of the lcd screen.

Now you can't replace the sensor with a smaller one but you can simulate less light 'feeding the LCD screen or EVF by stopping down, say to f32 to be extreme. Now look at the quality of the LCD screen.

Actually another thought has just sprung to mind, when you select F8 on a slr it will stay wide open until you press that shutter. On a mirror less it will stop down immediately, which of course has its advantages but not for low light focusing.

Obviously the EVF will have to gain up at f32 if you stop down just as the OVF of a DSLR will leave you blind at night if you stop down to f32 but this is a different thing to assuming that sensor size dictates EVF image quality. MFT @ 25mm and f1.4 should give the same light to each point on the ssensor as FF @ 50mm and f2.8 and if you put the same lens on each and use it at the same aperture only the framing will alter the light at each point on the sensor, the MFT being just a crop from the centre of the FF view.

Just for fun I've just stuck my head into the wardrobe with my GX7 and 20mm f1.7 and it showed me more than I could see by eye... and it actually achieved focus too. Stopping down to f16 had no effect and the display remained as it looked at f1.7.

 

[MarkLG]

How would these cams manage in low light, or through a stacked 10 stop and nd grad? I'm simply looking for accurate af and not speed.

I regularly use a 10 stop on my Panasonic GX7 m4/3 and there is no difference in focusing or viewfinder brightness with or without the filter. For the purposes of composing and focusing a shot the filter has no effect.

 

[Brazo]

Obviously the EVF will have to gain up at f32 if you stop down just as the OVF of a DSLR will leave you blind at night if you stop down to f32 but this is a different thing to assuming that sensor size dictates EVF image quality. MFT @ 25mm and f1.4 should give the same light to each point on the ssensor as FF @ 50mm and f2.8 and if you put the same lens on each and use it at the same aperture only the framing will alter the light at each point on the sensor, the MFT being just a crop from the centre of the FF view.

Just for fun I've just stuck my head into the wardrobe with my GX7 and 20mm f1.7 and it showed me more than I could see by eye... and it actually achieved focus too. Stopping down to f16 had no effect and the display remained as it looked at f1.7.

Now stick a 10 stop on the front and see how it does

I'm not talking about the IQ of an EVF just how much noise is present in low light situations. I see it all the time with my A77, with an F2.8 lens at night its great, with an F4 lens its not so great. Simple physics.

In fact I'm just going to state my theory as I have experienced it across numerous digital cameras.

That theory is the less light 'any' EVF/LCD receives the more noise will appear on the screen thus reducing the quality of the image seen on that screen. Less or more light can be given through sensor size and lens brightness (f stop).

The above is not only applicable to mirrorlless but any compact camera or sony SLT camera, hows your iPhone screen at night? Crystal clear? easy to focus?

 

[dejongj]

Personally I've yet to find a CSC with AF that can get anywhere near my old D7000 let alone my current D800, particularly in low light - having tried the EM1 and XT-1 I was left very unimpressed with what generally seems to be regarded two of the better AF systems on CSC.

I'd find it very hard to give up full frame now so hopefully Sony can improve the A7 AF to an acceptable level in future iterations!

Very different experience to me. I find my Oly PEN E-P5 quicker and more accurate than my D7000 ever was.

Only at ISO6400 upwards my D7000 got the upper hand. However just like with dSLR you need to give it some decent lenses. Comparing my Panasonic 35-100 f2.8 versus my Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR. I'll take the mirror less combination out thank you very much.

Just my experience.

 

[woof woof]

Now stick a 10 stop on the front and see how it does

I'm not talking about the IQ of an EVF just how much noise is present in low light situations. I see it all the time with my A77, with an F2.8 lens at night its great, with an F4 lens its not so great. Simple physics.

In fact I'm just going to state my theory as I have experienced it across numerous digital cameras.

That theory is the less light 'any' EVF/LCD receives the more noise will appear on the screen thus reducing the quality of the image seen on that screen. Less or more light can be given through sensor size and lens brightness (f stop).

The above is not only applicable to mirrorlless but any compact camera or sony SLT camera, hows your iPhone screen at night? Crystal clear? easy to focus?

You are quite mad

I regularly use a 10 stop on my Panasonic GX7 m4/3 and there is no difference in focusing or viewfinder brightness with or without the filter. For the purposes of composing and focusing a shot the filter has no effect.

You need to try a leading EVF and stop expecting an EVF to do what an OVF can't. They can do more than a OVF to an extent but don't expect miracles. Of course f4 will result in more noise just as f4 with a DSLR results in less light. Stick a 10 stop on a DSLR set to f4 and what will you see through the OVF?

Anyway, the point of the thread was the vid as I was surprised that mirrorless gets so close to a very top end DSLR set up and as we're now getting into the same old tired discussions so I'll leave it there.

 

[RAB2000]

Will try and watch this later. I've recently bought a Fuji X-E1 with a view to it replacing a Nikon D90 with 17-55G lens. At the moment I'm enjoying the camera but the AF is slow and as I tend to take pics of my kids it's only ok if they're still. Once they're moving it's not good.

I know the X-E1 is probably one of the slower AF CSCs but at the moment I think I will be keeping it as the price I paid and the compact size mean it's still handy. If the AF speed was the same as my D90 then it would be my perfect camera.

 

[paulcamcas]

I know the X-E1 is probably one of the slower AF CSCs but at the moment I think I will be keeping it as the price I paid and the compact size mean it's still handy. If the AF speed was the same as my D90 then it would be my perfect camera.

Have you updated the firmware Rob? Ver. 2.00 brought an improvement in AF speed. The latest is Ver. 2.20. You need to update the lens firmware too.