The new and most important reason for my love for mirrorless cameras

Real-time Eye AF

Real-time Eye AF

For 2020, I have worked very closely with different mirrorless cameras. Filmed a lot on Sony a7 M3 и Sony a3500, as well as many other mirrorless cameras, from a simple Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2, to super-top Sony a9 M2.

For me, there is no fundamental difference when shooting with a DSLR or mirrorless camera. But more and more I catch myself thinking that the automatic detection of the face and eyes in the frame, followed by precise and consistent focusing on them helps me a lot and simplifies my work, especially during portrait photography (which is about 90% of the main commercial photography). For me it the nicest function in mirrorless cameras (it's a pity, of course, that not in all), which is absent (or almost nonexistent) in SLR cameras.

Some DSLR cameras can also detect face / eyes while shooting when in use JVI (exactly JVI, and not Live View), but it is done much worse (using the metering sensor exposure).

Eye AF takes away almost all the focus control work from me. There is no more need to drive the focus points throughout the frame and no longer need to hope that the camera will understand me correctly and focus where it is needed. Of course, you need to get used to the work of Real-time Eye AF, but as soon as I understood its principle of operation and tried it in practice, I don't want to go back to SLR cameras at all.

Materials on the topic

  1. Full frame mirrorless systems... Discussion, choice, recommendations.
  2. Cropped mirrorless systems... Discussion, choice, recommendations.
  3. Cropped mirrorless systems that have stopped or are no longer developing
  4. Digital SLR systems that have stopped or are no longer developing
  5. JVI or EVI (an important article that answers the question 'DSLR or mirrorless')
  6. About mirrorless batteries
  7. Simple and clear medium format
  8. High-speed solutions from Chinese brands
  9. All fastest autofocus zoom lenses
  10. All fastest AF prime lenses
  11. Mirrored full frame on mirrorless medium format
  12. Autofocus Speed ​​Boosters
  13. One lens to rule the world
  14. The impact of smartphones on the photography market
  15. What's next (smartphone supremacy)?
  16. All announcements and novelties of lenses and cameras

Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.com.

Material prepared Arkady Shapoval... Look for me on Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram.

Add a comment:

 

 

Comments: 91, on the topic: The new and most important reason for my love for mirrorless cameras

  • Pokemon

    Canon R5 / R6 AF video:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZxF_ADf4eg
    The module is highly praised even by the owners of 5DMk4, EOS R, and all units up to 1Dx mk2.

    • Pokemon

      AF, rate of fire, and DD are the main reasons for the transition to new items.

      • Arkady Shapoval

        Well, the rate of fire personally doesn't really bother me or worried me at all, and even with DD, the new products don't have anything fundamentally new, high DD appeared in Nikon D600 (camera of 2012).

      • Victor

        Well, about DD, I agree with Arkady - there are no special breakthroughs here, I would also add the WYSIWYG principle on my own, and the ability to use exclusively an electronic shutter in many models (this is important when shooting time-lapses with panoramas)

  • Radmir

    Somewhere a little D40 is sad)

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Big plans for d40 in 2021

      • Ivan

        By the way, literally the day before yesterday you offered to sell your D40 for a symbolic cost. Have the big plans changed?

        • Arkady Shapoval

          I still have. The only pity is that people are always trying to invent something, come up with and expect something that does not exist.

    • B. R. P.

      😪📷

  • Rodion

    Applicable to AF - cool thing. But if we are talking about manuals, then, it seems to me, there is still nothing more pleasant than a light pentaprism JVI. EVI with its magnifier is very convenient, but it loses a lot in the speed of aiming and reaction speed.
    At least, this is exactly the impression I got when I simultaneously held A7s and half-killed 6d

    • Dima

      I don’t know of course how it’s on the cool devices, but having the D7000 with probably one of the best viewfinder and pentaprism in the crop (in the D200 it was no better), I still liked the simple Nex-6 more on manual glasses, with its average 2,4 million in viewfinder.
      Perhaps on the wedges it will be better with optical, the vision is excellent, but still it is not always perfectly visible in the D7000 where the middle of the DOF is.

    • Ooopp

      If we are talking about manuals, then probably focus peaking, the decisive function when focusing.

  • Michael

    So we roll ... First, mirrorless cameras with auto-detection ... Then non-alcoholic beer ... And then what? A rubber model? ... Ehhhhh ....

    • Pokemon

      So 3D helmets already exist. The Japanese have already made games for themselves, where you can have fun with anime 3D girls.
      The future has already arrived :-) Welcome to 2021)

    • Arkady Shapoval

      neural network

    • Harvey

      It all started with replacing the film with a digital ... :-)

  • Sergei

    Arkady, what kind of camera would you transfer to as a Nikonist? Z5 or Z6? Considering weddings and family photography

    • Arkady Shapoval

      by canon r5, sony a7m3, canon r6, nikon z6 descending

      • Igor

        Is z6ii subjectively lagging behind r6?

        • Arkady Shapoval

          In some ways, yes, in others, no. Subjectively, its Dual Pixel CMOS AF II really likes

  • Yuri Molchanov

    For some reason, I did not have such a delight from the mirrorless. Of course there are caveats. The camera was not mine, and it was somehow indecent to rummage through the settings (let alone change them). Second. Filmed only animals. Either the eyes against the background of dark fur are not so visible to the electronics, or the cats are spinning too quickly. Therefore, for my purposes, mirrors are still preferable. Plus, as I wrote in the comments to the previous article, I have hyperopia and the electronic viewfinder is useless for me if the subject is moving quickly.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      and what was that camera model? And also, due to the epidemic, wearing an EVI / JVI mask often sweats, even if everything is done according to Feng Shui, and I shot a lot just through the main display, it is often very convenient, and when working through the main display, ordinary glasses must decide problem

      • Alexey

        ... and when working through the main display, I generally have to take off my glasses. which immediately creates a lot of problems - I don't see anything clearly beyond my nose ...

        • Arkady Shapoval

          and which camera did you use?

          • Alexey

            I have used almost all cameras, both DSLRs and mirrorless cameras. I'm repairing them)) so I filmed / played enough.

            • Arkady Shapoval

              everything is clear, some are filming, others are repairing

              • Alexey

                I didn't understand your comment. once again - I shot with almost all bulging cameras, including SF, both digital and film. and that is why I can compare what is more convenient and what is not.

            • Paul

              Alexey, how to contact you, the shutter in the D7100 has jammed, and there are no workshops in our city.

          • Alexey

            in general, I do not even try to explain to people with good eyesight the problems of mole rats. sometimes, when we go for a walk with someone, I show, as they say, step by step, how I shoot and what the problems are. when the people finally realize the full depth of the problem, then nothing but words from obscene vocabulary comes to their minds - "no ... I can't shoot like you, it's easier to shoot yourself right away"

            • Arkady Shapoval

              yes, that's right, at the same time, you need to understand that if this method does not suit you, this does not mean that you should not use it

              • Alexey

                Boyarin, how can you not understand - people with poor eyesight, and there are a LOT of them, CANNOT shoot as simply as those with normal eyes. and that is why we write our remarks, that for us, mole-rats, BZK are not suitable in principle. Well, I'm not criticizing the BZK indiscriminately, not at all, but only saying that there is a group of people for whom it is torture to shoot with this.

              • Arkady Shapoval

                Anyway, thanks for the remarks.

            • Michael

              Heh ... Problems of people with myopia - yes ... But for those with hyperopia, it is not better either. You either have to attach yourself with glasses to the viewfinder and turn the diopter adjustment - or rely on automation. And no LiveView mode will save you when you have glasses “for near” in your pocket and the object is running away rapidly or jumping from branch to branch ... So you think: I would sit at home, photograph a static object through a large monitor ...

            • Anton

              I still did not understand what is the difficulty of shooting from the main screen, with poor eyesight (as I understand it about myopia speech). Mirrors with glasses and glasses are inconvenient, yes. With the bzk, on the contrary, everything is fine, the focusing speed is normal, and there is no need to squeeze in evi / ovi. At the very -7.5 =)

              • Alexey

                the key word is the loss of accommodation. if it, accommodation, is still there, then even with a high degree of myopia you can live quite comfortably. but if accommodation no longer works, that's it. epic fail. the end of the life, so to speak))

              • Anton

                It's just that I still don't understand why the BZK is worse in this regard than DSLRs. JVI, whatever one may say, is less convenient in this regard. If you adjust the diopters through the eyecup, it can be done with glasses, with a small screen.

      • Molchanov Yuri

        There were all generations of Sony Alpha 7. The camera is small, very much like those who travel a lot. Since I work on a yacht, guests often carry photographic equipment to be repaired or simply properly cleaned of dirt. I held many cameras in my hands. And I know all the advantages of mirrorless cameras. Anyone who has climbed the mountain at least once, at least three hours in a row, does not need to be convinced of the benefits of a small light camera.
        But, as I already said, the LCD viewfinder does not suit me with farsightedness. Let me explain healthy. Through the JVI, I look at the object as I look at it live. Anything further a meter from my nose, I can distinguish as well as you. The picture in the LCD viewfinder is located a centimeter from the eye and the adjustment wheel, which for some reason does not help near the eyepiece. The same wheel on the OVI works! I don't know what the secret is, but judging by other comments, I'm not the only one. So it seems to me that DSLRs will buy, if only for this reason.

  • Boris

    I didn’t understand much about "blindness", but I will say that I have been wearing glasses all my life (and I have been for many decades), and, of course, during filming, inconveniences often arise, but knowing myself, I have adapted to various circumstances for a long time: where are the glasses? you take it off, where you put it on, where you click almost blindly ... Everyone can get used to their peculiarities, and you certainly shouldn't blame the technique. Of course, if your pockets are constantly bumping with money, you can buy a camera on wheels, because then you won't have to wear it, push in front of you and click occasionally ... It's interesting how in the distant fifties and seventies photographers worked with DSLRs without diopter adjustments? Among them there were probably a lot of "blind ball". but nothing prevented them from taking truly outstanding pictures. they were simply not so spoiled and sated, and they compensated for the small discomfot with creative successes. A well-fed cat does not catch mice ...

    • Rodion

      Personally, I had to glue a negative lens outside at the zenith without a diopter adjustment in order to see at least something. Although, probably, the masterpieces were created just blindly ...

      • Victor

        Rodion, masterpieces (sorry, good pictures) depend on cameras very little. More important is the state of your soul, which cannot be explained in words, but you can feel it, having a certain experience behind you ... I proceed from my own - I created my best works with the simplest cameras.

      • zengarden

        heh, in the 90s I also shot on Zenith - I attached glass from glasses to the viewfinder, if without glasses ... there were no such problems with rangefinders. But the BZK somehow quickly adapted to the EVI, after Nikon's OVI it became even more convenient (especially for manual optics).

    • Sergei

      Boris, diopter attachments for the zenith eyes of the viewfinder, were made in the scoop for a long time. Ever since Zenith-B. I remember exactly that Dad shot with one mounted on this camera in 1973. Where he dug them - I do not know, but soviet. Two are still lying somewhere.
      I am now also bespectacled, myopia. Glasses are not very convenient. Therefore, when I take off a lot, I put in contact lenses, and the glasses remain either at home or in a case in my pocket. When I tried it for the first time with contacts, it became much more convenient. I strongly advise all “four-eyed” ones. Conveniently !

    • Jea reth

      It's simple: corrective lenses were produced for the required diopters, which were inserted into the eyecup of the viewfinder eyepiece. This was the case for large companies for almost any self-respecting system camera. Now these are definitely still produced by Canon and Leica, I do not know about other manufacturers, because their proposals are not interesting to me. Nikon has to do pretty well.
      I can't say for sure about our zeniths and other creations of the KMZ, since I did not find the USSR. But already in the post-Soviet times it was definitely possible to order a diopter attachment for the eyepiece when buying a camera. I didn't deal with them myself, I say right away.
      But for the current lovers of zenith magic, Avito comes across magnificent gizmos such as “Eyepiece LT attachments”. As you know, the same zeniths, due to the ingrained inferiority of their viewfinders, did not have a built-in diopter corrector. Therefore, what is a neat little wheel in today's cameras was realized in those years in the form of a healthy barrel, comparable in size to the Industar-50 lens unit, and even on a folding metal frame. Nevertheless, the thing is very pleasant - it allows, within certain limits, to compensate for a slight plus or minus of your vision. I have one, inherited, signed in the 90th year of issue and at a price of 7 rubles 50 kopecks.

      And about the problems people have with modern technology ... I would like to remind you of the existence of contact lenses. Let's omit the cases when there are contraindications to wearing them - I know all this very well, since I myself am short-sighted and wear lenses. In other cases, this is exactly the thing that solves this problem at the root. They have almost no distortion and you keep your eye exactly where the camera manufacturer intended. And already bring the proofreader to the ideal. I use lenses in the same way as different types of ZK and UZK with an electronic viewfinder - I don't see any problems at all.

      • Ivan

        And yet there were "native" diopter attachments for the Zenith:
        http://www.zenitcamera.com/mans/don/don.html

        • Jea reth

          In-in, I wrote about them. Only I bought my Zenit-122K without this stuff.
          And the more eminent manufacturers have done everything a little more civilized.

          • Ivan

            As I understand it, you wrote about the "Lt ocular attachment". This is a completely different device that gives 1,25 magnification and diopter adjustment from -4 to +5.

            • Jea reth

              Why is it different if we are talking about the method of diopter correction? And even more so, both are nozzles. The increase in LT is a side-burn, just a useful plus of the device. Moreover, it is not always 1,25.

  • Boris

    You see, Rodion, you just got out of it, just as the photographers did before you; You solved your problem with simple resourcefulness. And so in many cases. There is a problem, there is a solution. This is a sign of professionalism: it is easy and quick to get out of any "ambush" with minimal costs.

  • Ivan

    Quite good eyepieces with diopter adjustment were made for DSLRs, for example these:
    https://www.nikon.ru/ru_RU/product/accessories/slr/slr-viewing/dk-20c-dioptre-correction-eyepiece
    Of course, -7, like Alexei doesn't have here, only by -5, but probably to these -5 you can add sharpness adjustment on the camera itself. But for the UPC, no such eyepieces have yet been made.

    • BB

      Yes, only these attachments have never been in real stores :(
      I also attached a custom attachment to the Zenith. And with DSLRs I mostly use contact lenses.

      • Ivan

        The official store has almost everything (though it's in Russia):
        https://nikonstore.ru/search/index.php?q=DK-20C

        • BB

          I didn’t find it in Ukraine 5-7 years ago. And the price tag is not humane. For this money, you can order glasses (frame + lenses + work) with far from the cheapest lenses ...

    • Victor

      Here, Ivan, I just wanted to voice this idea ... Nikon still has the best viewfinders (experience in the local defense industry affects). Nikon, in addition to the release of the brightest viewfinders (D 1 - 5 series cameras), also produces a variety of diopter lenses in frames for correcting vision, which allows "bespectacled" people to feel very confident in their work.

      • Ivan

        Yes, they have a lot of things, there are lenses that increase the image size for some cameras ...

  • SashOK

    I betrayed the faith of the mirror-makers' fathers!
    I went to the mirrorless sect!
    ;)

    • Arkady Shapoval

      you can only believe in photography, everything else is burned at the stake

  • Victor

    Which corrective lens will help with vision +2,5 on nikon d5100? Thank you.

      • Victor

        Ivan! It turns out you need to buy a lens with a +, not a -?

        • Ivan

          I am not in the know, not familiar with ophthalmology, how to choose the right lenses, in + or in -.
          Here is the list:
          Diopter adjustment eyepiece DK-20C +0.0 DPTR - FAF04101
          Diopter adjustment eyepiece DK-20C +0.5 DPTR - FAF04201
          Diopter adjustment eyepiece DK-20C +1.0 DPTR - FAF04301
          Diopter adjustment eyepiece DK-20C +2.0 DPTR - FAF04401
          Diopter adjustment eyepiece DK-20C -2.0 DPTR - FAF04601
          Diopter adjustment eyepiece DK-20C +3.0 DPTR - FAF04501
          Diopter adjustment eyepiece DK-20C -3.0 DPTR - FAF04701
          Diopter adjustment eyepiece DK-20C -4.0 DPTR - FAF04801
          Diopter adjustment eyepiece DK-20C -5.0 DPTR - FAF04901

        • Victor

          Victor, plus is farsightedness, minus is myopia. The rest, the doctor will tell you in the "Optics" store ... If your camera has a diopter adjustment of the viewfinder, then this is a big plus. If not, you can adapt it by purchasing a lens with an appropriate frame.

          • Victor

            Ivan and Victor! Thanks for the answers and clarifications. All the best in the new year!

    • Ivan

      And I think half a diopter can be adjusted by adjusting the sharpness of the viewfinder on the camera itself.

      • Victor

        Not enough speed, thanks for the advice.

        • Ivan

          You probably didn't get it. I meant that there are no lenses for 2,5 diopters, there are 2 and 3. If you put them on the camera, then the camera "twist" should be enough to adjust to +/- 0,5 diopters.

    • Ivan

      There is another way, but now you need to look for such components on the Internet. There were corrective lenses for the FM3A, FM2, FA and FE2 film SLRs. They are round and threaded. For modern CZK there is an adapter DK-22 You can screw the lens into it and change the eyecup on the camera. You can also add the DK-3 rubber eyecup and improve the ergonomics of the camera (the nose will rest less on it and the likelihood of exposure to the exposure meter through the viewfinder decreases). By the way, there are lenses without diopter adjustment. They can be used to construct this rubber eyecup. Combined with a battery grip, the camera becomes more comfortable and ergonomic.

    • Ivan

      Set:

  • Jury

    All health and creative success in the new year!

  • Vadiuhin

    Arkady, could you list those cameras where af has such a function? (Sorry for almost offtopic, everyone is talking about diopters)))
    And, in the meantime, I found a "blind spot": "... and you don't need to HATE anymore that the camera will understand ...." (In the last paragraph before "Related Materials"). (there, besides the confused letters, the "b" is also missing)

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Fixed
      In the eyes - in all the latest UPCs, in the face - in most ULCs since 2010.

  • Not a bot

    I fully support! Face / eye autofocus + shooting through the display - top, and the number of sharp photos has increased significantly !!! and you speak on Mirrors. Back-front is a rarity)

  • Vio

    “Which is absent (or almost absent) in SLR cameras” - but in my EOS 90D there is such a thing :)

  • Vadiuhin

    Another reason for love was added (to mirrorless cameras)). Almost every lens is pathetic. Eighty five and two hundred are doubly sorry….

    https://dphotoworld.net/news/canon_prekrashhaet_vypusk_populjarnykh_obektivov_dlja_zerkalnykh_fotokamer/2021-04-01-9804

  • Vladislav

    Good afternoon!
    Arkady, you are just a fine fellow by opening a new and very important for today heading about the place of mirrorless cameras in photography.
    This heading will revive your blog, bring a lot of passion and discussion in terms of how we will continue to live for photographers, what to use, in the sense of what new technology, and how they now relate to our favorites - DSLRs, now lying in bags on the shelves, further actions.
    That is, we will run to sell them, darlings, fascinated by another revelation of Arkady about the merits of new technology - mirrorless, in order to buy one good mirrorless for 3000 USD, and for this we will have to sell all our friends in order to scrape together the required amount.
    Or let's say no, we don't sell friends!
    This is an emotional reprise.
    Seriously though, Arkady, as always, is right. He is always at the forefront of progress, everything that is better, of higher quality, faster, more productive, everything that facilitates the work of a commercial professional photographer - all this must be taken into account.
    The same as in all other technology in our life. Progress cannot be stopped.
    But Arkady just had to add that mirrorless cameras are purely commerce, and nothing else. Creativity in photography is the photographer himself, independently a digital SLR, film (by the way, in the west, photographers continue to be fond of films, and films are released), mirrorless.
    From myself I can add, and WHY not to call mirrorless and simple advanced inexpensive now soap dishes.
    After all, the principle of their operation is exactly the same as that of the hype mirrorless.
    That is, a mirrorless camera can be called a COOL SOAP, and nothing else.
    I'm right ?
    I have an excellent pocket-sized soap dish with cool settings, like in a DSLR or mirrorless, tracking functions, face tracking (like in a mirrorless), excellent full hd video, excellent image quality, but inferior in mental perception to good DSLRs.
    Canon PowerShot SX260 HS is called. And I bought a used one for 30 USD. in ex. sost.
    She can shoot all the festive events for herself, without hiring outside photographers, and everything will be gorgeous.
    Here is my opinion.

    • Novel

      Mirrorless cameras are system cameras with interchangeable lenses. Systemic means with numerous accessories, removable batteries that can be used in several generations of cameras, support for external flashes, synchronizers, all related protocols used in professional photography, and so on.

      It is very difficult to assert at the same time that “progress cannot be stopped” and “mirrorless is commerce”. Mirrorless cameras are an inevitable course of progress when technology advances to remove a lot of unnecessary mechanics. Quite a logical development, by the way. These DSLRs were a temporary compromise, when they simply put a digital back instead of a film in an essentially developed film camera, leaving all the strapping - mechanics, focusing sensors, and so on. Mirrors of the next generations will move more and more away from their forms, frozen since the days of film, towards something that takes full advantage of the new design.

      Western photographers using film are the deliberate choice of a small number of people. Roughly the same as a manual gearbox in the world of automatic machines. The mirrors will soon turn into the same endangered species. This is neither good nor bad, it is inevitable. But we still have 10-15 years of the resource of old cameras.

      • Vdadislav

        Roman!
        Well, that's understandable about interchangeable lenses. But the big drawback of mirrorless cameras is again these interchangeable lenses, that is, with the small dimensions of the camera itself (its advantage), it again turns out to be a cumbersome system, coupled with a lens.
        And this system cannot be called compact and light.
        In general, my prediction is such (not mandatory) that the future again belongs to compact super-advanced soap dishes with high-quality matrices with exorbitant iso, with professional settings, mostly automatic, with excellent video quality. The dimensions of the soap dishes will be determined only by the convenience of holding in the hand.
        Progress will allow all this.
        In the meantime, these are all marketing moves of companies, they also have to live the same.

        • Novel

          > In general, my prediction is (not mandatory) that the future is again for compact super-advanced soap dishes with high-quality matrices with exorbitant iso, with professional settings, mostly automatic, with excellent video quality. The dimensions of the soap dishes will be determined only by the convenience of holding in the hand.
          Progress will allow all this.

          Smartphone?

        • Novel

          For the average consumer, there will be a smartphone, the optical disadvantages of which will be compensated for by algorithms (the power is still growing).

          For the professional - a reimagined mirrorless camera with interchangeable lenses and the same computational photography, but at a more advanced level.

          Interchangeable lenses will not go anywhere, the optics will not be fooled. If the blur can somehow be emulated, then the optical zoom can not. But high ISOs allow modern mirrorless cameras to produce very interesting compact solutions like 800/11. Or a good zoom 24-105 / 4-7.1, an analogue of the usual 18-55 for a crop. Smartphones are still better in the right hands.

          • Vladislav

            Roman.
            Smartphones, yes. They also carry a lot of functions, including photos, videos.
            But smartphones are still big "shovels", I would not say that these are compact things. I meant in my assumption that compact cameras will become professional in the functions and quality of the photo, video produced in the foreseeable future. Because the problems of creating high-quality and compact optics (folding as now in the form of zooms) will disappear, I mean the so-called nanotechnology.
            The retractable, as now, lens in soap dishes has more advantages in glass quality than smartphones, besides, natural optical stabilization, optical zoom. The whole question is - do companies need to achieve this now, to improve soap dishes?

    • Novel

      > She can shoot all the festive events for herself without hiring outside photographers, and everything will be gorgeous.

      It all depends on the quality of the events. For some, a phone is enough. And some are better not to shoot and forget as soon as possible.

      • Vdadislav

        Roman!
        I agree completely.

  • Vdadislav

    I will continue my thought about the fact that the future belongs to compact cameras, the size of today's soap boxes. Why they were called soap dishes, everyone knows - for their frequent “soap” at the beginning of the era of compacts.
    But mirrorless cameras from Sony made a success in photographic equipment, gave direction to the development of cameras in the direction of decreasing dimensions, moving away from mechanical parts of mechanisms towards electronics.
    And compacts are a further niche for improving cameras towards even smaller sizes.
    Everyone is waiting for the achievements of nanotechnology, so that high-quality pixels with high iso, with a vivid image, etc. will fit on a tiny matrix (the heart of the camera). etc.
    Well, compact optics will be tightened up, it's all about the cost of future compact cameras, so that they are available first to professionals, and then in a couple of years to all amateurs.

    • Victor

      Still, compacts were called compacts not for “soap in the picture”, but for a form factor that really resembles an ordinary soap dish.

      A revolution in matrices will not happen in the near future, but adding computational photography to cameras is quite possible (and this is already happening)

      • Novel

        Some kind of rounded IXY / IXUS especially - in size, shape, and texture of the plastic.

      • Vladislav

        Victor.
        You named the 2nd variant of the version of the origin of the name of the soap dish, I am the 1st variant.
        The variant of the name of the soap dish due to poor-quality photographing, that is, blurring in the photo on the first cheap compact cameras, is more suitable, since it has a common, dismissive meaning characterizing these cameras, especially among advanced photographers and professionals.
        The latest models of compacts canon, nikon with settings like those of advanced SLR cameras, allowing you to get high-quality photographs and with a (initial) price at the level of inexpensive DSLRs, it is no longer possible to call the tongue a soap dish.
        But both those and others belong to the category of compact cameras.

        • Ivan

          What kind of "soap boxes" are you talking about, about digital ones? Film cameras began to be called "soap dishes" in the early 90s. And they really looked a lot like a travel soap case. Everyone noted the poor quality of the picture in comparison not only with the mirror Zenith, but even with the Smena. But no one talked about the "soap" image. This jargon appeared later, with the development of digital photography.

          And in general, what is the essence of your comments? What's new you want to tell us? What is the future for compact cameras (by the way, this is the correct name for "soap boxes")? You will not convince us. Moreover, the world is changing so much that it is impossible to predict the future. It is enough to look at pictures of how people of the past envisioned technology in the future. These are very funny and naive predictions.

          • Victor

            2Ivan, it was from the film that such a name went, yes, and it was precisely for the shape of the case. And it was firmly entrenched, including for digital cameras (which gave a picture already noticeably better, nevertheless)

            It doesn't matter how and from where, as long as the word “soap dish” makes it clear what it is about :)

    • Novel

      No amount of nanotechnology can go beyond the physical limits. The unit of radiation transfer is a photon. The smaller the cell size of the matrix, the fewer photons it can capture. When the count is in units of photons, the rounding errors in the dark areas will be so great that the picture will have a characteristic “looseness”, this is the very photon noise.

      A promising direction - these are the clever lenses that Rodion wrote about, which will reduce the number of lens elements. Although judging by the size of fifty dollars, this is still far away.

      There was no fundamental improvement in the actual optical characteristics of matrices and lenses for a long time, a sharp leap in the quality of smartphones is provided by software, algorithms and computing power. High-aperture lenses grow in size and number of elements. Well, the use of EVF allows you to use compact lenses with aperture of 5.6 - 8 - 11 with automatic exposure compensation. In a DSLR with direct otic observation, it's already 5.6 - very sad.

Add a comment

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2022

English-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2021/01/new-milc-love-real-time-eye-af/

Versión en español de este artículo https://radojuva.com/es/2021/01/new-milc-love-real-time-eye-af/