The value of mirrorless: post by Thom Hogan that is DEAD ON

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by entropicremnants, May 1, 2013.

  1. entropicremnants

    entropicremnants Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 16, 2012
    John Griggs
    What Constitutes Value? | Sans Mirror — mirrorless, interchangeable lens cameras | Thom Hogan

    He says they have value but the manufacturers have NO idea how to communicate that. His sarcastic take on how people market them from the post linked above:

  2. dav1dz

    dav1dz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Nov 6, 2012
    I had a good laugh thanks.
  3. jziegler

    jziegler Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 15, 2012
    Salem County, New Jersey
    I just read that myself. Filled out his survey as well. The camera companies should really part more attention to what he says.

    Sent from my LG-LS840 using Tapatalk 2
  4. sgreszcz

    sgreszcz Mu-43 Veteran

    Oct 7, 2012
    Great article.

    I was looking for a replacement my older Nikon D40 and lenses. I wasn't using the DSLR due to weight and size and having to carry along a lot of toddler gear. I also wanted better low-light performance as well as video functionality. I was considering buying a D3200 (which wouldn't have given me the weight savings) when someone suggested to take a look at Olympus (who I really hadn't heard of).

    For me, like the author, the value was size/weight and having lenses/image quality that compares with APS-C DSLRs.

    I now go out of the house with a Lowepro Compuday 250 that has a small accessible pocket where I can fit the OMD, 14-150 zoom, Panasonic 25mm, and then something fun like the fisheye or 45mm. The 14mm pancake (which I use for video mostly) goes in one of those small pockets that hold mobiles/keys with my filters (which are also small). The rest of the room is for laptop/ipad if needed and my 2-year old's stuff.

    Everyone in this forum knows the benefits. It is strange that the mirrorless manufacturers (or at least their marketing department) don't.
  5. darosk

    darosk Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Apr 17, 2013
    Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia
    My idea for an m43 video ad:

    Some hip, "hot commodity" celebrity in a sharp outfit walking into the scene and holding up the camera.

    CELEB: It's light, it's small, and takes photos just like a big and heavy DSLR.

    CUE catchy music, either upbeat indie pop rock, or some 'epic' film soundtrack-like sounding piece. Music choice is tailored to target demographic.

    Quick-paced slideshow of beautiful images taken with the camera, edited to the beat of the song. End on an awe-inspiring shot of some kind - possibly a magnificent wide shot of a sunset with plenty of saturated blues and oranges.

    Cut back to CELEB.

    CELEB: "{product tagline}"

    End scene.
  6. mowog6000

    mowog6000 Mu-43 Regular

    Mar 2, 2012
    Oregon City Oregon
    Pat bailey
    What sold me was the ability to use legacy lenses I'm sure a commercial showing a guy with a lot of 35mm equipment saying he will have to take a bath on it because he can't do film anymore and a friend with a OMD or Pen shows him how he can put all those lenses on a digital camera I know the manufactures want to sell their digital lenses but getting the person to buy the camera in the first place is the key. I bought a 12~50 for my EPL-5 and use it a lot but still like to use legacy lenses for low light or tele reasons.
  7. caimi

    caimi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 13, 2012
    middle US
    No amount of advertising or change in advertising overcomes one factor that every camera consumer sees whether at a sporting event or a concert or watching paparazzi on TMZ . They see "professional" photographers using DSLR's with huge lenses. So the strong implication is that if you want to take "professional" pictures, that's what you need. At a recent sporting event I attended, all of the people wearing the green "photographer" vest who got to stand in the special roped off areas to take pictures were using either Canons or Nikons outfitted with huge lenses. That is the best advertising for DSLRs one could ever hope for. So when the aspiring photographer goes to a camera store for his first "serious" camera, he's already looking for a DSLR. Not a mirrorless. His first lens, after the kit lens he bought with the camera, is going to be as big and sexy and long a lens as his budget can afford. How can mirrorless hope to compete with that?
  8. ean10775

    ean10775 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 31, 2011
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Me too, but I agree that its not necessarily a good way for the camera companies to market their products.
  9. Just Jim

    Just Jim Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Oct 20, 2011
    I feel like the Pentax one should be their slogan for life... always so weird. That's why I root for them, but never get their products.
  10. Biro

    Biro Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 8, 2011
    Jersey Shore
    Pentax's small, quality DSLRs and DA Limited primes keep me in their system. I don't shoot with their zooms very often and I should really sell off those that I own. Eventually I'm likely to bail but you never know what's going to come out of that company now that Ricoh owns them.
  11. entropicremnants

    entropicremnants Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 16, 2012
    John Griggs
    Well keep in mind that Thom wasn't ripping on the gear so much as the way that each company markets that gear.

    Many new photographers start out imitating the "big guns" and looking for that big iron. I still laugh when I see a guy walking around Longwood in broad daylight with a Canon 1Ds on an expensive carbon fiber tripod with a stabilized lens! The tripod in question probably costs more than my body and lens combined and it's simply not needed in that light especially with a stabilized lens.

    But that big camera/lens and tripod looks professional, lol.

    I am so past that at this point. I hope people look at me, think "what a noob look at that tiny camera" -- and ignore me. As they all cluster in the same spot, shooting from tripod height I can move around, get different angles, and not compete for shot angle, lol. It's really something to watch.

    I even use an off-brand aluminum tripod (when I use one) now that is light and more than adequate for my lightweight cameras and lenses. Stealth photography, lol.
  12. spatulaboy

    spatulaboy I'm not really here Subscribing Member

    Jul 13, 2011
    North Carolina
    I see that often too, the big camera with tripod in broad daylight. I never understood that.
  13. Biro

    Biro Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 8, 2011
    Jersey Shore
    Appearances are important for many. So is buying the "right" camera and gear.
  14. mowog6000

    mowog6000 Mu-43 Regular

    Mar 2, 2012
    Oregon City Oregon
    Pat bailey
    Their buyers aren't all young 30 something hipsters which seems like the audience they are playing to. But it seems to me there are a lot of old film photogs out there that may not know about the ability to use legacy glass(I didn't) and if they can get those guys into the store to even consider a mirrorless camera it would be a plus IMO.
    I have probably "sold" ( no commission) M4/3 to at least 3 people I have met out on photo shoots and they are curious about my Pen and 28mm minolta MD lens. Most are surprised to find it is a digital camera.
    We shouldn't have to be informing the public on behalf of the mfgs There is nothing that I have found in any of their ads that mention legacy glass.
  15. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Tripods will stabilize even in good light, especially with a long lens. I just can't stand to carry them. When I go to the races I take a monopod.
  16. kponds

    kponds Mu-43 Regular

    Mar 18, 2013
    Plus tripods are very helpful with fine tuning composition, even if there is enough light to take a sharp shot without a tripod.

    And I like to take long exposures in broad daylight -- using 10-stop ND filters and such.
  17. entropicremnants

    entropicremnants Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 16, 2012
    John Griggs
    That wouldn't do you any good outdoors with the usual breeze and moving vegetation which is what these folks are shooting. To get good shots they would by definition be using faster shutter speeds or their subjects would be blurred.

    Water shots? Yes. In a botanical garden it's not particularly useful. I just can't see any justification for all that gear in that environment.

    I shouldn't think you need a tripod though to compose, do you? I've never needed a ball head to fine tune a composition -- but that's usually because I don't compose well in real-time anyway, lol. I often end up with small crops, even on a tripod!
  18. entropicremnants

    entropicremnants Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 16, 2012
    John Griggs
    How long? I never needed it with my Nikon 70-200mm VR II. Good VR in decent light completely obviates the need for a tripod. One of the places where I actually agree with Ken Rockwell, lol...
  19. The Olympus 75-300 performs better at 300mm on a tripod than it does not on a tripod, the IBIS and AF are reaching their limits at that point and the simple fact is sometimes one can get sharper, more in focus photos with a tripod, even in the daylight.

    Having said that... a full frame DSLR with a 2.8 lens is a different matter entirely :)
  20. kponds

    kponds Mu-43 Regular

    Mar 18, 2013
    I use a tripod in botanical gardens all of the time, in macro shooting it is very important to hold the camera still to keep focus, often even a focusing rail is used. Subject movement is another issue which must be overcome. I typically clamp the plant with a Plamp attached to ... my tripod. But sometimes I've used wind blockers or tents.

    Even if you are using a fast shutter speed subject (and camera) movement in macro is a huge problem, because the DoF is so narrow. So using a tripod is ideal ... unless you are super-stopped down and using full flash, in which case you just spray and pray.

    Excuse me if this sounds rude but if you don't even compose your photographs then how can you judge whether or not a tripod helps composition?