• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

DSLR's Are Dead (1 Viewer)

Victor Vector

Well-known member
United States
I think you are all forgetting,what ever the system you use,its the person behind the camera that matters.
^^^This. I use a 300 dollar camera (actually purchased for $215) and have been featured on Explore on Flickr and also have many Opus entries here on the forum. Same thing goes with anything: music, art, sports, whatever.....you can buy all the gear you want, talent on the other hand can not be purchased. It is a blessing from God. (doesnt mean I dont want a better camera though, lol....someday)
 
Last edited:

opisska

Jan Ebr
Poland
The viewfinder of my camera is also the main tool I use to look at birds. If I wanted to look at a display, I would google bird photos. So no, DSLRs are not "dead".
 

THE_FERN

Well-known member
The viewfinder of my camera is also the main tool I use to look at birds. If I wanted to look at a display, I would google bird photos. So no, DSLRs are not "dead".
I have nothing but admiration for those who can actually find things in the small optical viewfinder of a Canon 7dii in dark rainforest conditions. I know someone who can in an uncanny manner...

...Those who take photos of other things find it difficult to understand the resistance there has been to adding swing out EVs to DSLRs. Very difficult to photo flowers etc without this...
 

opisska

Jan Ebr
Poland
I have recently taken up insects and other tiny things. I have a DSLR with a fold out display, yet I still find it far easier to do macro shots with extension rings through the optical viewfinder. The benefits of 1. looking straight forward and 2. leaning the camera against my face are just far too big, especially for high magnification macro where it's difficult to keep the subject even on the field of view.
 

Frank Anderson

Well-known member
The viewfinder of my camera is also the main tool I use to look at birds. If I wanted to look at a display, I would google bird photos. So no, DSLRs are not "dead".
I have a sneaky feeling there’s a touch of sarcasm in that statement as clearly there’s no similarities between Googling bird pictures and being out and seeing them in a EVF and taking bird pictures.

As someone who’s been looking at optical viewfinders since my OM-10 days, I can say I quickly adapted to them and any disadvantages are massively outweighed by their advantages.
 

Barred Wobbler

Well-known member
I didn't fancy exposing the gubbins of my R5 to the sun through a long lens while photographing this morning's solar eclipse. I was going to have to experiment with exposure and density of ND filter and one problem with mirrorless is in the name - a lack of mirror to protect the shutter from the focused heat when pointing at the sun. I had more or less decided not to bother, but then I gave it a bit more thought.

I couldn't use my go-to 150-600 Sigma because I don't have any 105mm diameter filters, but then I remembered my trusty old Canon 400/F5.6 that has lain forlorn and almost forgotten in the cupboard since I bought the Sigma in 2015. It's got a 77mm filter ring and I've got ND filters that size. That lens with my hardly-ever-used Canon 1.4 TC might do the trick.

Clear skies this morning and a bright sun. The 5D IV that I've used only once since December came out of the cupboard. I screwed a 10 stop ND filter onto the lens and gave it a go - far too bright, blinding in fact. The R5 shutter might have withstood it with that filter, but I wasn't going to risk it. I screwed a 6 stop ND in front of the 10 stop. Just the job.

30 minutes in. Maximum at 67 minutes and 100 minutes in. 1/2000 sec (hand held and no IS on the lens, so not taking any chances), F8 and ISO 125, 16 stop ND.

Long live DSLRs
 

Attachments

  • (5)-10,40-BST-30-minutes-in-fbook.jpg
    (5)-10,40-BST-30-minutes-in-fbook.jpg
    294.2 KB · Views: 5
  • (10)-11,17-BST,-maximum-(40%)-fbook.jpg
    (10)-11,17-BST,-maximum-(40%)-fbook.jpg
    289.4 KB · Views: 5
  • (14)-11,50-BST-100-minutes-in-fbook.jpg
    (14)-11,50-BST-100-minutes-in-fbook.jpg
    173.4 KB · Views: 4

opisska

Jan Ebr
Poland
With a mirrorless camera I wouldn't worry about the shutter - that comes in contact with the light only for a split second, because it spends 99.9% of the time open - otherwise you wouldn't see anything in the finder. Not that it's good news, because the part constantly exposed to the light - the chip - is far more expensive :)
 

Barred Wobbler

Well-known member
With a mirrorless camera I wouldn't worry about the shutter - that comes in contact with the light only for a split second, because it spends 99.9% of the time open - otherwise you wouldn't see anything in the finder. Not that it's good news, because the part constantly exposed to the light - the chip - is far more expensive :)
You're right. My mistake. The shutter is open to the the light 100% of the time that there is no lens cap on the lens, but only as long as the camera is switched off. With a long focus lens on even in transit, if the lens happens to point at the sun there is a real danger that damage to the shutter will result.

However, with the camera switched on it's another and potentially much more serious matter. It's the sensor that's exposed to all those nasty rays through the uncovered lens and I wasn't about to risk pointing it at the sun while I experimented with what ND filter(s) to use.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top