[thxbb12]

The truth is that mirrorless cameras do not always nail focus. The truth is that I know of no DSLR photographer with that Reikan Focal, and I only read about it on Nikon forums. My guess is that the same people who like reading on DXO about DXO DR scores are the same who go about MFA-ing all their lenses all the time with stuff like that.

The truth is that the Canon EOS 70D did better with the old Canon EF 50mm f1.4 USM with clunky micro USM with PD AF (95.6%)  and CD/PD live view AF (95%) than the Nikon D7100 with Nikkor AF-S 50mm f1.4 (83,2% PD, 91.4% CD), the Pentax K-3 with Pentax DA 55mm f1.4 (85%, 89.9%), Sony Alpha 77 II with Sony SAL 50mm f1.4 (86.7% PD, no CD), Olympus OM-D E-M1 (91.2% with 45mm f1.8, 91% with Leica 42.5 f1.2), Panasonic GH4 (84.5% / 85.5%), Sony Alpha 6000 with SEL 55mm f1.8 (85%).

 

Fact about DR: My 6D has more DR above ISO 400 than most other cameras. That is where it starts to count. You must know that, as you happily let the camera choose higher ISO settings. Another thing: the information does not get distributed evenly in RAW. At the dark end, the steps are big, in the light end there is most information. It pays to get exposure right, to get the best tonality. Thinking one can underexpose and then decide later to whereever you want to push the tonal curve will just degrade the end result. 

 

And about "fast changing conditions", come on. Conditions never change "fast". It sounds cool to you maybe, but is just as spec sheet fan-ish as the DR nonsense and the loathing of mirrors.

My camera can't know when I am shooting with the camera well braced, when a long exposure can be done with ISO 100. It does not know which old MF lens I am using for its character, and therefore is unable to make a well informed decision about best ISO setting either. Nor does it know when and how many extension tubes I use, or when I use my 1.7x Soligor TC. Auto ISO is nice for you obviously, it is silly to me. Unless I hand my camera to some snapshooter, but then I also put it in an automatic program mode.

And that ISO stuff anyway has nothing to do with MILC vs DSLR, so why don't you drop this arguing? My initial post is as valid now as it was when I wrote it. DSLRs do have their advantages, and your trying to discredit that with all that biased stuff does not change it.

 

Sorry that in the past you chose the wrong DSLRs and that that skewed your view. On PZ there is another shooter who, because of "advice" on here, went the D800 route. He always never was happy, and went for a 6D (and was impressed with the camera). And he is a very gifted photographer. And it is fine that you like your current MILC too.

 

Funny how you stand by the only single resource on the whole internet claiming PDAF is more accurate than CDAF ;-)

Meanwhile technology as well as everybody else shows the opposite... A couple of them here for you:

 

1) https://photographylife.com/mirrorless-vs-dslr : I recommend you read this article, it's quite informative and objective too (something you could learn from). Note they have a section entitled "DSLR Camera Limitations". Point 5 (Secondary Mirror and Phase Detection Accuracy) and 6 (Phase Detection and Lens Calibration Issues)  are exactly what I've been saying all along.

 

2) http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-t1/19 : this part in particular: "excellent autofocus - in our experience it's more accurate at focusing fast lenses than any APS-C SLR".

 

Besides, Roger Cicala's results are the most telling since he measures lens performance for a living. He knows very well AF calibration is not a myth, even in Canon's land.

 

Tell me, why is that that Canon added micro AF adjust to the firmware of their high end bodies? This is the ultimate proof of the issue, by the manufacturer themselves! "We aknowledge the AF accuracy issue and give users a way to somewhat fix it"

 

Regarding DR and auto ISO: the point is moot. We have different opinions and that's fine. I won't try to convince you you need more DR or auto ISO. So please do the same for me and accept I need better DR and a good auto ISO implementation.

 

Please note that I've never claimed mirrorless is better than DSLRs at everything. As of today, DSLRs are much more capable at tracking things. It's just bound to change, it's just a matter of time. I'm not sure why you don't seem to see it. From a technological point of view, it's undeniable. I also accept that some people prefer OVF to EVF and I'm fine with it.