❤ " . . . freedom to choose . . . ." Photograp phic examples of the differences you discussed would be helpful. Thank you for your thoughtful presentation.
Thank you. Yes probably I need more examples, but here is more about a personal preference than specific images. I still have to learn a lot as youtuber :) Thanks for the feedback.
Hi, I have both reflex and mirrorless cameras. I buy them used and enjoy using both systems. I have also an xpro1 and shoot with the ovf, it is a very nice camera. I like the Xt1 too. I bought an old olympus E-420 dslr with 3 lenses recently for 45 euros (like new) and I must say that I am impressed by the beautiful colors straight out from the camera. I shoot raw and just need small adjustments like a little bit of contrast. I found that usually digital cameras have difficulty to render the red color and you get orange instead, but Olympus seems to control colors nicely. Then I am OK with 10 to 16 Mpix cameras because I print at max A3 format. I really don't understand that race for high Mpix especially when most of people don't print. Then I think that the big advantage of mirrorless cameras is that you can adapt almost all vintage lenses.
Thanks for sharing your experience. I agree, having the option to use vintage lenses is a good point for mirrorless system and is the same reason I really like Pentax philosophy to not change the K bayonet so all the K vintage lenses can be used also on a reflex camera.
Well, after DSLRs first came out, at first I couldn't understand why they were a thing. You can see the image the camera will take with the aid of the sensor on a screen, so why go to the trouble of having a moving mirror and a pentaprism? A ground glass, though, has higher resolution than a video screen, and there are also focusing aids on the screen - a split prism and microprisms. That is what the DSLR brings.
Hello Luigi, I also believe this is a problem. Too many put the effort on the camera body and having the best and latest spec sheet and technology. But to be honest, technology is usually there to make things easier, not necessarily "better". I think you mention the important points. Mirrorless has great advantages for those who want to have an easier time with very specific types of photography, like wildlife photography for example; with advances in sensors that can lock focus on the eyes, or the speed of the ssensor to catch focus. But these are, just like you said, a tool for a very specific case. It is like everything I guess. I have many friends/family that will only buy an iPhone. But they do not even know how to use it to its potential. They take pictures with it, but do not even know how to change the lens they use. So they buy the BEST, but use it the same way as if they had the cheapest phone on the market. I think it is like anything, some people prefer to follow a trend or feel like they are modern and they keep up. To me, photography is not a job. I do not make money, so it is for fun, a hobby, a passion. For me, I prefer to give myself more trouble and make it more complicated. Because, this way, I feel more involved. Like using a prime lens, the limitations help to open the creativity, because you must take time to think. I have recently decided to go back to film photography more seriously and have even started developing my own film. Even if I am not the greatest photographer, it does not matter. I enjoy the process, I enjoy the time I take to think and wonder about things. The time I spend to learn something and to do something is valuable. When we get lazy and let machines do everything, we are not developing our minds, we are becoming a slave to the technology and the marketing of the companies is proof that it works. Anyways, happy photography!
Amen to that. I think we are letting the machines substitute our mind and vision. I just bough a book called "Program or be programmed", I think in the digital era we are forgetting to use the tools for what they are, just tools, and we become the tools. In the recent years I see a ton of images that look all the same because the camera in some way imposed the style on the photographer. We have tools capable of great quality but we let them lead us. Something I really dislike of my mirrorless camera is that there are always some hidden "improvement" of the image. It can be the real ISO changing to keep the highlights exposed, noise reduction on the RAW files and similar things. Those can be great features but I want to know them and be able to choose if I want to use them or not. I want the total control of the tool. Film photography is a good way to be the master of the tool and we can learn to be confident no matter the camera we are using. Every picture in film must have a value to justify the cost and that means we have to think more and be sure of what we do. To. master film photography can seem complex at the beginning but in a while is much easier that a digital. Once you know the basics the challenge is just to create great images and not to remember where to get in a menu a specific setting. Thanks always for you interesting inputs!
When I'm shooting with film, SLR is the way to go. Macro, zoom lens, tele lens... anything that is not suitable with rangefinder (mirrorless of film era). But the good thing is such limitations are not exist anymore on digital mirrorless system... so why bother keeping a mirror box, which make s the camera bigger?
If I just want to take snaps without being too much involved, I use my mirrorless cameras ( not many left). If I want to really enjoy the process of shooting, I take my SLRs and DSLRs. I have sold all my Fujifilm equipment to switch back to OVF. I only have Sony A7S and a couple MFT camers for portability.
Ciao Luigi, buongiorno. Apprezzo molto il tuo approccio pragmatico al discorso. Chi fa le foto è il fotografo non lo strumento, che poi lo strumento abbia i suoi pro e contro è un dato di fatto, ma come giustamente dici tu, ogni uno di noi è diverso, ogni uno ha un approccio mentale differente, ma quello che conta è il risultato. Ho cominciato tardi a fotografare, a quasi 50 anni e con sistemi mirrorless, nello specifico una Olympus e-m10 IV ed una Nikon Zfc. Ricordo ancora papà che a metà anni 70 aveva Pentax e Nikon e la sua camera oscura in casa, dove all'ombra della luce rossa sviluppava e stampava le sue foto. Di recente, ad un mercatino, ho trovata una Pentax K1000. Sono affascinato dalle macchine fotografiche di un tempo. Le mie mirrorless infatti hanno un design "vecchio stampo", adoro le ghiere sul corpo macchina, adoro la ghiera a scatti dei diaframmi sulla lente. Se c'è una cosa che ho capito prima da musicista e informatico nella vita, poi appassionato di fotografia è il confronto sano ed intelligente, dove contano più i perché dei come e che non siamo tutti uguali. Per quello che mi piace fotografare, basta una qualsiasi fotocamera tra i 1000 e 2000€, non faccio avifauna, ma qualche volatile l'ho fotografato, non faccio fotografia sportiva o estremamente dinamica, ma qualcosa che si muove l'ho fotografato. Il messaggio finale è quello di avere il controllo dei propri mezzi, sia fisici che mentali. Siamo noi che controlliamo ed usiamo la tecnologia, anche se il marketing e le tendenze vorrebbero il contrario..... grazie.
grazie a te. Concordo pienamente. Purtroppo ultimamente l'educazione porta a far si` che le persone si facciano definire dagli strumenti al posto che dominarli. Qualche tempo fa, parlando ad un gruppo di studenti adolescenti che erano incollati ai loro smartphone e ne parlavano con orgoglio facendo a gara a chi lo aveva piu` bello, li ho messi in crisi con una semplice domanda: chi di voi ha mai programmato un'app? Caduto il silenzio. Eppure si facevano definire dallo strumento che avevano in mano.
dslr will never truly die so as long as companies like pentax carry the torch - i currently use a mirrorless sony a6600 due to its compact size and low weight combined with a prime but i know plenty of people who use canon and nikon dslrs still for music gigs around town :) i personally would like a dslr at some point just for the experience of the ovf and mirror slap, even if technically these days it's "inferior" to the technology found in mirrorless cameras
Tech geeks are everywhere. And I suppose amateurs have little choice currently. Mirrorless is everywhere and last remaining SLR manufacturer, so Pentax is hard to find in shops, even online it is somewhere in side menu. Nikon and Canon still sell DSLRs but those are "old" cameras so customers shy away from them in fear of not being supported, ease of repair etc. I use SLR (both film and digital) cause I want to get away from screens in my life. I work in IT so screens follow me for most of my day, I at least want my hobby to be as screen free as possible. I shot action (kinda: I am photographing airplanes and trains) and do it with reflex cameras. 100% doable, again both with film Pentax K2 and digital Pentax K-3 Mk III. I am getting photos I love to watch, print and hang on my wall. If someone want mirrorless then by all means go for it, they are great cameras, technical masterpieces. There is Nikon, there is Canon, there is Fuji, there are medium format cameras. Just leave Pentax alone so that I have an option to buy DSLR cameras and lenses for them.
Sto valutanto la Pentax KF con un paio di lenti. Per il prezzo che ha la teovo incredibile e penso che la prenderò l'anno prossimo. Al momento scatto principalmente con Olympus/OM-System e mi trovo benissimo, ma mi manca l'immediatezza della pellicola o almeno delle reflex. Mi ritrovo molto in quello che hai detto sulle mirrorless, è una cosa di cui mi sono reso conto ed è stata abbastanza traumatica. Cinsono veramente tanti parametri. Sono sempre stato un estimatore di Pentax che è anche il marchio che mi ha trasportato nel digotale, e mi manca, sia per una questione di affetto che per i colori e il feeling delle immagini Pentax. Penso proprio che farò l'acquisto al massimo l'anno prossimo. Grazie per i tuoi ottimi video.
Mirrorless ! I do 99% of my photography with manual focusing, so a mirrorless camera with a very good EVF is much better than a DSLR ! Also mirrorless camera are more compact and light weight than DSLR.
Hey Luigi, my name is Johnny and I'm a freelance logo designer, currently I'm looking for more works, do you love to have a logo redesign for your channel's branding to have a more memorable graphic based monogram logo to help your audience recognise and follow your channel easier? I would love to design a photography themed logo inspired by your direction for you! Let me know if you interested to make it happen! :-)
❤ " . . . freedom to choose . . . ." Photograp phic examples of the differences you discussed would be helpful. Thank you for your thoughtful presentation.
Thank you. Yes probably I need more examples, but here is more about a personal preference than specific images.
I still have to learn a lot as youtuber :) Thanks for the feedback.
Hi, I have both reflex and mirrorless cameras. I buy them used and enjoy using both systems. I have also an xpro1 and shoot with the ovf, it is a very nice camera. I like the Xt1 too. I bought an old olympus E-420 dslr with 3 lenses recently for 45 euros (like new) and I must say that I am impressed by the beautiful colors straight out from the camera. I shoot raw and just need small adjustments like a little bit of contrast. I found that usually digital cameras have difficulty to render the red color and you get orange instead, but Olympus seems to control colors nicely. Then I am OK with 10 to 16 Mpix cameras because I print at max A3 format. I really don't understand that race for high Mpix especially when most of people don't print. Then I think that the big advantage of mirrorless cameras is that you can adapt almost all vintage lenses.
Thanks for sharing your experience.
I agree, having the option to use vintage lenses is a good point for mirrorless system and is the same reason I really like Pentax philosophy to not change the K bayonet so all the K vintage lenses can be used also on a reflex camera.
Well, after DSLRs first came out, at first I couldn't understand why they were a thing. You can see the image the camera will take with the aid of the sensor on a screen, so why go to the trouble of having a moving mirror and a pentaprism? A ground glass, though, has higher resolution than a video screen, and there are also focusing aids on the screen - a split prism and microprisms. That is what the DSLR brings.
Yes, but personally I got very tired to see the world filtered by a screen, and not only speaking of mirrorless...
Hello Luigi,
I also believe this is a problem. Too many put the effort on the camera body and having the best and latest spec sheet and technology. But to be honest, technology is usually there to make things easier, not necessarily "better". I think you mention the important points. Mirrorless has great advantages for those who want to have an easier time with very specific types of photography, like wildlife photography for example; with advances in sensors that can lock focus on the eyes, or the speed of the ssensor to catch focus. But these are, just like you said, a tool for a very specific case.
It is like everything I guess. I have many friends/family that will only buy an iPhone. But they do not even know how to use it to its potential. They take pictures with it, but do not even know how to change the lens they use. So they buy the BEST, but use it the same way as if they had the cheapest phone on the market. I think it is like anything, some people prefer to follow a trend or feel like they are modern and they keep up.
To me, photography is not a job. I do not make money, so it is for fun, a hobby, a passion. For me, I prefer to give myself more trouble and make it more complicated. Because, this way, I feel more involved. Like using a prime lens, the limitations help to open the creativity, because you must take time to think.
I have recently decided to go back to film photography more seriously and have even started developing my own film. Even if I am not the greatest photographer, it does not matter. I enjoy the process, I enjoy the time I take to think and wonder about things. The time I spend to learn something and to do something is valuable. When we get lazy and let machines do everything, we are not developing our minds, we are becoming a slave to the technology and the marketing of the companies is proof that it works.
Anyways, happy photography!
Amen to that. I think we are letting the machines substitute our mind and vision. I just bough a book called "Program or be programmed", I think in the digital era we are forgetting to use the tools for what they are, just tools, and we become the tools.
In the recent years I see a ton of images that look all the same because the camera in some way imposed the style on the photographer. We have tools capable of great quality but we let them lead us.
Something I really dislike of my mirrorless camera is that there are always some hidden "improvement" of the image. It can be the real ISO changing to keep the highlights exposed, noise reduction on the RAW files and similar things. Those can be great features but I want to know them and be able to choose if I want to use them or not. I want the total control of the tool.
Film photography is a good way to be the master of the tool and we can learn to be confident no matter the camera we are using. Every picture in film must have a value to justify the cost and that means we have to think more and be sure of what we do.
To. master film photography can seem complex at the beginning but in a while is much easier that a digital. Once you know the basics the challenge is just to create great images and not to remember where to get in a menu a specific setting.
Thanks always for you interesting inputs!
When I'm shooting with film, SLR is the way to go. Macro, zoom lens, tele lens... anything that is not suitable with rangefinder (mirrorless of film era).
But the good thing is such limitations are not exist anymore on digital mirrorless system... so why bother keeping a mirror box, which make s the camera bigger?
because with SLR you have a different approach not seeing the subject filtered by the camera sensor. That is why I still like reflex also in digital.
If I just want to take snaps without being too much involved, I use my mirrorless cameras ( not many left).
If I want to really enjoy the process of shooting, I take my SLRs and DSLRs.
I have sold all my Fujifilm equipment to switch back to OVF. I only have Sony A7S and a couple MFT camers for portability.
I'm still keeping my Fujis... all X-Pro and I use OVF 90% of the time.
Thanks for sharing you experience.
Ciao Luigi, buongiorno. Apprezzo molto il tuo approccio pragmatico al discorso. Chi fa le foto è il fotografo non lo strumento, che poi lo strumento abbia i suoi pro e contro è un dato di fatto, ma come giustamente dici tu, ogni uno di noi è diverso, ogni uno ha un approccio mentale differente, ma quello che conta è il risultato. Ho cominciato tardi a fotografare, a quasi 50 anni e con sistemi mirrorless, nello specifico una Olympus e-m10 IV ed una Nikon Zfc. Ricordo ancora papà che a metà anni 70 aveva Pentax e Nikon e la sua camera oscura in casa, dove all'ombra della luce rossa sviluppava e stampava le sue foto. Di recente, ad un mercatino, ho trovata una Pentax K1000. Sono affascinato dalle macchine fotografiche di un tempo. Le mie mirrorless infatti hanno un design "vecchio stampo", adoro le ghiere sul corpo macchina, adoro la ghiera a scatti dei diaframmi sulla lente. Se c'è una cosa che ho capito prima da musicista e informatico nella vita, poi appassionato di fotografia è il confronto sano ed intelligente, dove contano più i perché dei come e che non siamo tutti uguali. Per quello che mi piace fotografare, basta una qualsiasi fotocamera tra i 1000 e 2000€, non faccio avifauna, ma qualche volatile l'ho fotografato, non faccio fotografia sportiva o estremamente dinamica, ma qualcosa che si muove l'ho fotografato. Il messaggio finale è quello di avere il controllo dei propri mezzi, sia fisici che mentali. Siamo noi che controlliamo ed usiamo la tecnologia, anche se il marketing e le tendenze vorrebbero il contrario..... grazie.
grazie a te. Concordo pienamente. Purtroppo ultimamente l'educazione porta a far si` che le persone si facciano definire dagli strumenti al posto che dominarli.
Qualche tempo fa, parlando ad un gruppo di studenti adolescenti che erano incollati ai loro smartphone e ne parlavano con orgoglio facendo a gara a chi lo aveva piu` bello, li ho messi in crisi con una semplice domanda: chi di voi ha mai programmato un'app? Caduto il silenzio. Eppure si facevano definire dallo strumento che avevano in mano.
dslr will never truly die so as long as companies like pentax carry the torch - i currently use a mirrorless sony a6600 due to its compact size and low weight combined with a prime but i know plenty of people who use canon and nikon dslrs still for music gigs around town :)
i personally would like a dslr at some point just for the experience of the ovf and mirror slap, even if technically these days it's "inferior" to the technology found in mirrorless cameras
for concerts ovf is much better... as in all semidark situations. At least for me :)
@@LuigiBarbano i will have to get a dslr to be sure for myself but i can see how an ovf is advantageous in low-light
Tech geeks are everywhere. And I suppose amateurs have little choice currently. Mirrorless is everywhere and last remaining SLR manufacturer, so Pentax is hard to find in shops, even online it is somewhere in side menu. Nikon and Canon still sell DSLRs but those are "old" cameras so customers shy away from them in fear of not being supported, ease of repair etc.
I use SLR (both film and digital) cause I want to get away from screens in my life. I work in IT so screens follow me for most of my day, I at least want my hobby to be as screen free as possible. I shot action (kinda: I am photographing airplanes and trains) and do it with reflex cameras. 100% doable, again both with film Pentax K2 and digital Pentax K-3 Mk III. I am getting photos I love to watch, print and hang on my wall.
If someone want mirrorless then by all means go for it, they are great cameras, technical masterpieces. There is Nikon, there is Canon, there is Fuji, there are medium format cameras. Just leave Pentax alone so that I have an option to buy DSLR cameras and lenses for them.
Amen!
I'm trying to resist with a flip phone to not have a screen following me always... so I understand your choice!
Sto valutanto la Pentax KF con un paio di lenti. Per il prezzo che ha la teovo incredibile e penso che la prenderò l'anno prossimo. Al momento scatto principalmente con Olympus/OM-System e mi trovo benissimo, ma mi manca l'immediatezza della pellicola o almeno delle reflex. Mi ritrovo molto in quello che hai detto sulle mirrorless, è una cosa di cui mi sono reso conto ed è stata abbastanza traumatica. Cinsono veramente tanti parametri. Sono sempre stato un estimatore di Pentax che è anche il marchio che mi ha trasportato nel digotale, e mi manca, sia per una questione di affetto che per i colori e il feeling delle immagini Pentax. Penso proprio che farò l'acquisto al massimo l'anno prossimo. Grazie per i tuoi ottimi video.
La KF e` davvero un'ottima macchina come rapporto qualita`/prezzo. Se si cerca la fotografia pura e non prestazioni video e` una scelta ottima.
Mirrorless ! I do 99% of my photography with manual focusing, so a mirrorless camera with a very good EVF is much better than a DSLR ! Also mirrorless camera are more compact and light weight than DSLR.
different strokes for different folks! :) This is what I love about free market, everyone can have what they prefer.
Hey Luigi, my name is Johnny and I'm a freelance logo designer, currently I'm looking for more works, do you love to have a logo redesign for your channel's branding to have a more memorable graphic based monogram logo to help your audience recognise and follow your channel easier? I would love to design a photography themed logo inspired by your direction for you! Let me know if you interested to make it happen! :-)