[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by sgiitk

Proper options does not necessarily mean lenses recomputed for mirrorless operation! In the beginning there will be some optics computed/designed for mirrorless but the majority will be old lenses.

Of the lot you have listed I only consider Fuji, Olympus and Canon as camera companies. Others have strayed into this domain. When I
bought my (Nikon C) SLR two years ago, I found no lenses for mirrorless camera designs.

I'm guessing you weren't looking in the right places cause these are the m4/3 lenses available right now:

https://www.four-thirds.org/en/microft/lense.html

For Sony E-mount there are even more options.

And I think your issue is the mindset. Not counting Sony and Panasonic as camera companies when they are currently at the top in most aspects.

Did you know that the Nikon camera you use is using a Sony image sensor that too not the latest and greatest that Sony reserve for their own cameras.

[JMaruru]

Originally Posted by Vid6639

minimal effort with brilliant result stay with Sony.

+1. This is the clincher for Sony!

Originally Posted by Vid6639

And I think your issue is the mindset. Not counting Sony and Panasonic as camera companies when they are currently at the top in most aspects.

Did you know that the Nikon camera you use is using a Sony image sensor that too not the latest and greatest that Sony reserve for their own cameras.

+1. I could NOT agree more. The 'mental block' is the main reason for lots, NOT to consider mirror-less as an option. Even, a many of non-sony mobiles carry sony image sensor for their cameras!

[Thad E Ginathom]

Don't fret, sgiitk, as of tomorrow you should be able to buy at least two Sony E-mount lenses in the >$10000 price bracket!

On the other hand, you can check out third-party lenses from major manufacturers like Sigma and Tamron, or even explore options that are even fully compatible with Sony alpha autofocus from lesser-known brands from China/Taiwan. Even they are ahead of you in noticing the relevance and status of mirrorless.

You have mentioned the need to have space, in an SLR, for the mirror. Don't you realise that the absence of this space opens up mirrorless not only to own-brand lenses, but to many, many others. I use an old Tamron manual-focus lens on my Sony camera almost every session.

I could say, "hey, my camera will not only take the lenses designed for it, it would probably take lenses designed for camera too!" (I don't know about adapting Nikon lenses to e-mount, but the principle hold in many cases)

There are valid criticisms to be made of Sony cameras. If you look just a little bit further, you could find them. Here's one from me: I can't understand why this huge high-tech company doesn't make a superb, modern, touch-screen interface for its cameras: it has that technology. If their phones were like their cameras to use, they would never sell a single one. It's like asking a PC user to be satisfied with a character-based terminal from 40 years ago.

I know that some of the other camera giants make other equipment too, but Sony must be the only one with a finger in every tech pie, from pro to consumer. It has the expertise and the technology.

[adimicra]

Guys,

Asking my question once again as it probably got lost in the discussion -
How does in-camera HDR processing of mirrorless cameras from Olympus/Fuji/Canon etc compare with the in-camera HDR of flagship smartphones like Pixel or S10? I am asking this because in my case, many shots are backlit and my Canon DSLR produces terrible images in those scenarios. Obvisouly, you can do exposure bracketing and post-processing but I don't have the enthusiasm to do the same. From my research, it looks like the in-camera HDR of these cameras can't compete with what we get from flagship smartphones and you need to do post processing to get the same or better. Wanted to check your actual experience regarding the same. This is the final question I have before putting my money on to a mirrorless system

[sgiitk]

Originally Posted by Vid6639

1. I'm guessing you weren't looking in the right places cause these are the m4/3 lenses available right now:

2.Did you know that the Nikon camera you use is using a Sony image sensor that too not the latest and greatest that Sony reserve for their own cameras.

1. Adapting a mount is not the same as computing a lens for the space released at the rear. This will make the lens smaller and lighter.

2. Sony makes the sensors does not make it a camera company? As fas as I am concerned any camera over 10MP is a marketing joke. You need 3MP for a decent A4 printout. Taking into account cropping etc. I have come up to 10MP (could have been 5MP!). So I stick with my views.

[Jeroen]

An interesting perspective: https://www.lightstalking.com/when-y...y-will-ignite/

[adimicra]

did my own research on the internet and my conclusion is this - The flagship smartphones will produce better HDR images than most dedicated cameras in some of the backlit conditions unless you do bracketing and post processing. Just shooting in RAW and post-processing a single image will not give you the dynamic range you can get from a Pixel or Iphone. However, the main reasons for an amateur to still consider a dedicated camera is for the handling, flexibility in the focal range, low light etc. Also, bokeh effect from a proper camera and fast lens can't be fully tricked by software.

Look at this video in youtube -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3m81493kTM

However, I feel that the dedicated camera manufacturers have been caught napping and they need to up their game by investing in computational photography which will take the advantage of the bigger sensor and lens to take it to a different level.

[Thad E Ginathom]

However good phone cameras get, it is still within the limits of fixed-length mostly-digital zoom and other constraints. In this respect, it is a marketing win, rather than an actual win. Those of us who use "real" cameras know our reasons, even down to just personal handling preferences.

I'm very happy that phone cameras continue to improve. I can expect that my next phone, in a few years time, even at the lower end of the cost range, will be really good. But I will still find it impossible to hold still at screen-viewing distance, and, if it is another camera-in-the-corner model, I'll still be putting my finger over it!

The internet is full of proclamations that phones can be as good as cameras. They have certainly killed the compact-camera market. I wouldn't, any longer, carry a compact around with me as well as a phone.

Whether or not phones are as good, for each one of us, as a camera, depends on our kind of photography. For me, the answer is no.

[PapaBravo]

After a lot of research finalized & bought the Fujifilm X Series X-T100 24.2MP Mirrorless Camera (Champagne Gold) with XC15-45mm Lens Kit.

Didn't go for DSLR mainly due to the weight since I travel a lot. Also, I was not sure how good the entry level DSLRs would be. This is an upgrade from a normal point & shoot from Sony that I used earlier.

Still trying to get the hang of it since it is just one day old. Clicked some pictures in the morning posted below with some PP.

Cheers,

Pawan

[amitk26]

Without violating any confidentiality clause of employer.
I can only say yes your observations are right.
I am a product manager working on visual R&D of a mobile OEM ( each feature of any subsystem is a product in itself)

While Camera companies try to solve using optics they really don't focus on algorithms.

The reason could be that thier customers evolved from film era and have great aversion to anything algorithmic ( though they all use LR and PS in pvt but brag how it is straight out of camera).
DSLR/Mirrorless are not really constrained for size of optics

Phone companies have great limitations on the size but almost unlimited computing power and no historical baggage to carry.

A lot can be achived by combination of multicore CPUs , GPUs and NPUs

Example while camera companies focus on eliminating shake and blur
See this link to check how slight movements of hand while clicking was used to create a multiframe to give better digital zoom by Google.

https://ai.googleblog.com/2018/10/se...r-res.html?m=1

Google is example because its most open however all OEMs deploy army of engineers to fight war of algorithms to give a slight edge.

While some brands shout from rooftop AI others are conservative and don't use word AI despite using lot more AI.

HDR is just one use case of multiframe

Originally Posted by adimicra

Guys,

Asking my question once again as it probably got lost in the discussion -
How does in-camera HDR processing of mirrorless cameras from Olympus/Fuji/Canon etc compare with the in-camera HDR of flagship smartphones like Pixel or S10? I am asking this because in my case, many shots are backlit and my Canon DSLR produces terrible images in those scenarios. Obvisouly, you can do exposure bracketing and post-processing but I don't have the enthusiasm to do the same. From my research, it looks like the in-camera HDR of these cameras can't compete with what we get from flagship smartphones and you need to do post processing to get the same or better. Wanted to check your actual experience regarding the same. This is the final question I have before putting my money on to a mirrorless system

[adimicra]

Originally Posted by PapaBravo

After a lot of research finalized & bought the Fujifilm X Series X-T100 24.2MP Mirrorless Camera (Champagne Gold) with XC15-45mm Lens Kit.

Nice shots.
As I said before, XT100 is on top of my list considering the price performance factor. I am also considering Panasonic GX85/G85/GX9.
As I read in the XT100 manual, it has in-camera HDR (check bracketing section in the user manual). Can you please post some pics with and without HDR for any backlit scene? It will be very helpful. ALso, I would like to know how the kit lens performs. Are you planning any additional lenses?

Originally Posted by amitk26

Without violating any confidentiality clause of employer.
I can only say yes your observations are right.

I prefer a proper camera for handling - view finder, physical controls etc and the flexibility of the zoom range. Also, if you want really good bokeh shots, you need a proper camera but it is true the progress in computational photography has been amazing to say the least.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by PapaBravo

Still trying to get the hang of it since it is just one day old. Clicked some pictures in the morning posted below with some PP.

Wow, you're off to a great start there! Very nice

[PapaBravo]

Originally Posted by adimicra

As I read in the XT100 manual, it has in-camera HDR (check bracketing section in the user manual). Can you please post some pics with and without HDR for any backlit scene? It will be very helpful. ALso, I would like to know how the kit lens performs. Are you planning any additional lenses?

Yes it does. It's called HDR art mode. I will try to click come this weekend & post it. The kit lens does what it should. Not too great but but not bad either. The f stop goes till 3.5 only. The range is good with 15-45 similar to entry level DSLR lenses. I have a 35/50mm prime in mind but will wait it out till I utilize this lens to the maximum.

Nice shots.

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

Wow, you're off to a great start there! Very nice

Thank you. This is encouraging

Cheers,
Pawan

[PapaBravo]

Originally Posted by adimicra

Can you please post some pics with and without HDR for any backlit scene?

Here you go. Some normal & HDR Art mode shots. No post-processing





Cheers

Pawan

[amitk26]

Originally Posted by PapaBravo

Attachment 1885538

Lots of artefacts around object boundaries particularly towards left palm tree.
I guess keeping HDR off would be better