The OVF lag on the high end models is significantly faster than the time it take the mirror to retract (a D5 SLR has about 40ms of shutter lag). This means that while you might have a very minimal lag on the EVF, you make up for it in shorter shutter lag.
Just a note: I used to do Photojournalism for a living. This kind of precision timing is irrelevant for action shooting. Once AF and motor drive happened, the technique shifted from trying to hit the decisive moment, to just mashing the shutter and picking the best shot from the series.
As you point out, 40ms delay doesn't matter for shutter timing. Coming at it from a gaming and controls perspective: delay can make it a little harder to track things, though. I don't know how big of a deal this is to real users. I do know that the sheer amount of blackout on almost all current mirrorless sucks.
> Once AF and motor drive happened, the technique shifted from trying to hit the decisive moment, to just mashing the shutter and picking the best shot from the series.
Yah, and this is a place mirrorless cameras win and even phone cameras perform very well-- 10 picture/second burst rate on iPhone which few DSLRs can match. Middle/lower end Canon now is hitting 15FPS mechanical shutter and 23FPS electronic/silent, which is absolutely nuts to me (I have memories of buying a "blindingly fast" 7FPS camera..)
The Z mount 14-24mm f/2.8 that's even sharper and has fewer optical flaws than the F-mount version.
> But here's the big thing with DSLRs over mirrorless: input lag for target tracking. An optical viewfinder ("OVF") is just inherently faster than any electronic viewfinder ("EVF"). For a lot of people that doesn't matter. If you're trying to shoot an animal on the run or a racing car then it probably doe
The only thing that matters here for something like the Z9 is the delta between hitting the shutter release and it capturing an image. That is indisputably longer, though short enough it doesn't matter for most folks.
For cameras like the Z7ii (which I have personal experience with), yes, tracking kind of sucks because of blackout (in 5 FPS mode) and really sucks in 10 FPS mode (where you're just seeing the last frame). Neither of those are in play for the Z9. I expect we'll see that trickle down to more cameras as time goes on.
And weighs 35% less, and is a bit smaller.
The old 14-24 is a mediocre lens compared new ultra wide zooms. Nikon hasn't got to an z-mount f2.8 yet, but their f4 is already sharper. When they do a f2.8 it likely will be even better.
> For landscape people you get far better wide-angle lenses
What specifically? Just comparing Nikon mirrorless to Nikon DSLRs, the F-mount (for DSLRs) has, for example, the highly regarded 14-24mm f/2.8. What's the mirrorless equivalent to that?
> For sports people you get more images per image
I assume you mean more images per second? That much is true (eg 14fps for the D6 vs 30fps for the Z9 at full res).
> ... no blackout at all (Z9 only, for now).
This is... partially true. There is an inherent blackout in SLRs but that may or may not matter. Assume you're shooting at 1/500 shutter speed and you're continuous shooting on a Z9 you're going to get some inherent blackout because you won't be shooting 500fps (because you can't).
But here's the big thing with DSLRs over mirrorless: input lag for target tracking. An optical viewfinder ("OVF") is just inherently faster than any electronic viewfinder ("EVF"). For a lot of people that doesn't matter. If you're trying to shoot an animal on the run or a racing car then it probably does.
It's also worth noting that some DSLRs can also shoot shutterless and get a lot of the benefits of mirrorless.