• Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    1 day ago

    What? Why didn’t they do that a decade ago? DSLR is freaking useless with a digital camera. But apparently other brands still have them too? But why use DSLR when you can get a more exact image representation from the sensor? Seems like it’s based more on tradition than actual usefulness.

    Of course if you make an old retro film camera, the system is still useful. But my guess is that is a very small niche market. It’s inferior in every way and more expensive and time consuming.

    • myyass@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      22 hours ago

      I still use my old Nikon; why? Because I can put anything that resembles a lens on it. Or make my own lenses. I made one with a cardboard tube and pieces of a broken lens. Or used a enlarger lens to take pictures. I guess it depends on what you want to do. And well my eyes still work better than digital screens. I mean I don’t need a light meter to estimate shutter speed. But then again, I’m very much into photography.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Completely irrelevant to the issue. Moving away from using mirrors has nothing to do with what lenses you can use.

          • Buffalox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            22 hours ago

            OK, that I can understand, it may feel subjectively nicer, but there are things you can’t do technologically with an SLR, like for instance utilize the light sensitivity of the digital sensor for low light photography.

            • myyass@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              21 hours ago

              I agree, mines terrible in low light, the new tech has come a long way. I personally like to do it on hard mode. I mean I used to measure the photograph I wanted to take Ansel Adams style. So more math and planning to just take one shot. Like Adams, I’m amateur photographer and I like to do it for fun.

                • myyass@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  21 hours ago

                  Not just cameras, you can get cheap thermal cameras that will help diagnose electrical problems. I need one lol

                  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    10 hours ago

                    We bought a cheap flir for Android way back when that was new. I bet they’ve gotten both way better and cheaper.

    • SpacetimeMachine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I thought the same until I tried to take some pictures of some dragonflies in flight like I used to on my old DSLR. It’s pretty much impossible with how slow the display for the viewfinder is. Was relatively easy with a DSLR.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        You are probably comparing a high end DSLR with a low end digital camera.
        There is no reason why there should be noticeable latency on a high end digital camera. In fact the response time can be even shorter than with DSLR that has a mechanical mirror.

        • SpacetimeMachine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          23 hours ago

          There is no way the latency can be less than a DSLR when looking through the viewfinder. Dslrs just use a mirror there. I’m saying I couldn’t keep up with a dragonfly zipping around in midair because the viewfinder made it impossible to keep it in focus. On a DSLR it was relatively easy.

          • Buffalox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            22 hours ago

            The latency between what you see and when the picture is taken is mechanical, using the viewfinder on a SLR gives zero latency while using it, but when you press the trigger, there is a latency you will never see.
            With a high FPS screen for the viewfinder, the latency can easily be way below human perception.

            • SpacetimeMachine@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              22 hours ago

              Yes I know, but the latency between the trigger pull and the photo being taken literally doesn’t matter if you can’t even frame your subject. Look I like mirrorless cameras a lot. But to say that DSLRs have no advantages over them is untrue. There are still situations where mirrorless cameras are not as ideal.

              • Buffalox@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                21 hours ago

                There are still situations where mirrorless cameras are not as ideal.

                In similar price range?

    • k0e3@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’ve always wondered why people were so adamant about SLRs even in the digital age. Before mirrorless cameras came out, DSLRs were the only digital option with swappable lenses but I’ve stopped keeping track. Mirrorless cameras have swappable lenses too right? I’m assuming many of them can attach the same ones used with DSLRs.

      • stealth_cookies@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        There are two types of autofocus systems that cameras use, phase detect and contrast detect. Contrast detect is what all point and shoot style cameras (and early mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras) used where they identified contrast of vertical edges and used that to determine if an image was in focus, this is a slow process as the camera needs to figure out what direction to move the focus and check the image at multiple focus positions to compare until the camera determined it was in focus.

        DSLRs have a separate sensor up near the viewfinder that does phase detect autofocus, this is different in that it can determine how far the lens is from being in focus and go directly there which makes it significantly faster which was crucial in many professional applications.

        Eventually sensor manufacturers figured out how to integrate a version of phase detect into the pixels of the sensor itself. While these didn’t perform as accurately as the separate phase detect arrays in DSLRs, they had an extra trick where they were able to create a hybrid autofocus system that used the phase detect array to get close and then contrast detect to get accurate focus. It was only once this was implemented on mirrorless cameras that the advantages of SLR disappeared.

        • Zagorath@quokk.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          DSLRs have a separate sensor up near the viewfinder that does phase detect autofocus, this is different in that it can determine how far the lens is from being in focus and go directly there which makes it significantly faster which was crucial in many professional applications.

          Please someone tell my D7500 this. I’m genuinely not sure if it’s the camera or my shitty glass, but I have regularly completely missed shots because the camera refuses to focus properly, but also refuses to actually shoot while it’s not in focus.

      • RobotToaster@mander.xyzOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        For a long time mirrorless cameras had terrible battery life and no phase detect autofocus.

        A DSLR doesn’t need to keep a screen powered all the time you’re looking through it. Improvements in the battery life of MILCs has made that non-issue for most people though.

        • k0e3@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          Ah, of course! The battery life makes total sense. I’ll have to research what phase detect autofocus means, but thanks for answering.

        • k0e3@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          Thanks, that’s good to know. I wanna get back into photography since the mirrorlesses are so compact now, but being able to keep my lenses was one thing I needed to know about before selling my old DSLR.

    • MyNameIsAtticus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      DLSRs are a budget option usually compared to a Mirrorless Camera (what I assume you mean when you say digital)

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        DLSRs are a budget option usually compared to a Mirrorless Camera

        No SLR is the ones with the mirror. DSLR are digital with a mirror. And they are definitely not “budget”, they are the high end. Except today on a high end digital camera the mirror is not necessary as you can use the sensor for the viewfinder instead.