Here's the truth. Until recently, I thought professionals using mirrorless cameras were a joke. I grew up in the days of film. Got my hands dirty in the darkroom. Had a Canon A1 and F1 in my camera collection, plus learned on others like a Pentax 35mm as well. Feeling the weight of the camera in my hands and hearing the sound of the mirror slap was part of the joy of photography for me. Pun entirely intended.
There is something about the sound of that shutter click that so many photographers love. Not only do we love the sound of the shutter, but we can often identify it with a certain brand of camera. To take that away from me in a mirrorless camera is taking away a part of the fun for me.
I do have a Sony a7S in my possession, though I use it for recording my AdoramaTV series much more than I use it for photos. I like the small format of the Sony camera, particularly because I travel so often and it is perfect for stowing in my carry-on. The first time I tried to take pictures with it though, I was not in my element. To be honest, the pictures were awful. I really think learning to shoot with a mirrorless camera system has a different learning curve than shooting with a DSLR. So much so that there are classes specifically dedicated to learning portraiture with a mirrorless camera.
Let's break it down and talk about some of the big things that are important when discussing mirrorless vs mirrored camera systems.
Perception
The mirrorless cameras, in my opinion, have always left something lacking. Yes, they're convenient in size, but because they're so small, consumers and therefore my clients, don't see them as professional. At least not as seemingly professional as a nice, hefty, meaty DSLR like my Canon 1DX. The bigger the better in their eyes. Not that our clients should be dictating what kind of cameras we use because obviously they don't know enough about them to do so, but their perception of them is important. It reflects on us and gives them an opinion about our work potentially before they even see it.
The way a client views a photographer shooting with a mirrorless camera, as opposed to one using a (D)SLR, is not to be taken lightly. For me, branding is a huge part of why I’m successful in my business, and much of that has to do with my perceived value. I charge a premium for my clients to hire me to come shoot their luxury weddings. In some level, if I show up with a little, mirrorless camera, I feel like I'm not meeting their expectations. Having a less-than-professional looking camera is the last thing I want, especially when side-by-side with guests who so often bring their own (D)SLRs. It's going to make me appear less credible as a photographer and potentially cause my client confidence to drop. When photographing these events, I feel that my equipment and I should in a way match the grandeur of the event.
Perspective
Fellow Fstoppers guest writer, Miguel Quiles, is a colleague of mine who primarily uses the Sony A7RII for his portrait work. Miguel is a phenomenal photographer and shoots a mirrorless camera system both for his studio portraits and recording video for his AdoramaTV series. He is teaching an upcoming course on CreativeLive on mirrorless camera systems that I’ll likely check out so I can become more familiar with it even if I don't use it in my own photography business.
In regards to the client perspective, Miguel once photographed me in his studio using his Sony A7RII. While he was doing an amazing job and certainly knows what he's doing with posing and lighting and getting expression, I couldn't help but be on the other side of that itty bitty camera thinking, "Oh my gosh, how cute." "Oh my gosh, how cute," is the last thing I want my clients to feel on the other side of my camera. The final image was nothing short of amazing of course.
Photo by Miguel Quiles
I want my clients to feel like movie stars and 110% confident in me in my ability; and that includes how they feel and what they think when see me from their side of the lens. Regardless of what the truth actually is about the quality of the camera or the quality of the photos coming out of it due to the photographer’s talent and expertise, how a client feels plays a huge role in their experience and ultimate opinion of you and your photography.
More and more, I photograph weddings with the videographer standing next to me using an iPhone as their main camera. Granted it has some attachments and accessories on it, but there’s a part of me that dies inside watching a professional use their phone to capture a wedding. An iPhone is obviously not comparable to a Sony A7RII, but the exaggerated comparison of how the client perceives both as opposed to a DSLR can be argued.
Photo by Miguel Quiles
Would I love my camera to be lighter on a wedding day after carrying around with a heavy lens on it for eight, ten, or twelve hours? Absolutely! But, I can't get past my biased view of the mirrorless cameras enough to validate the drop in weight and transportability. For me, there's always going to be a fine line between what I do for ease of use and what I do because I know it's better for me professionally.
Do I think photographers like Miguel Quiles that shoot with mirrorless cameras produce work that’s any less professional than others like Moshe Zusman who uses and teaches with DSLRs? No, absolutely not. They're both professionals producing beautiful imagery. It’s a personal business decision for me; I don't think I'm ever going to be able to use a mirrorless system for professional use.
Unfortunately far too many play into perception whether it's real or internalized. How many professionals balked at the idea of digital when that came about? I shoot FF DSLR, and could care less what someone shoots with. Mirrorless is a fad, just like the internet, right!?
Ha!
The iPhone 6s Bikini Shoot from Fstoppers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nT6eaBm82bQ
I guess all those leica shooters should go get a "proper camera" to feel more "pro". Piffle, but then I should know these aren't well thought out articles rather than polarising rubbish to instigate debate, i'll bite though as there are impressionable people that read this kind of thing.
If you aren't confident enough in your ability to provide a product regardless of what you shoot that is a personal issue of confidence - a truly competent and confident individual will radiate this regardless of what he holds in his/her hand.
Mirrorless -/+ dslr is a misnomer these days and does not represent capability, it's whether a black box with a hole has a mirror or not, even the smaller m43 cameras can keep up with full frame flagships of less than a decade ago which some would choose in place simply for this daft reason. On the other hand smaller can be an advantage when it comes to obtrusiveness.
If anything completely shattering peoples perception educates, after all if you can provide stunning work which uncle bob couldn't even with his huge dslr, battery grip, flash pointed straight forward then people not in the know will end up realising its not the gear but the artist behind it.
Why not use medium format cameras then? They're bigger, no one will think you're not a pro with a couple of Phase One's or Leica S's on your shoulders.
What? technology has advanced? you don't need a bulky mid format camera for high quality images anymore? a dslr is more convenient and capable enough?. So is a mirrorless compared to a dslr these days.
Tough there might be customers who pay attention to those things, I think they're a small minority.
As a less experience photographer, I can see why Ms. Joy feels the need to impress her clients with a bigger camera. And it may be true that if she were to use a mirrorless camera her clients would think her less professional. That wouldn't be because of the camera but her sense that she was using less "professional" looking gear. When we get more confident in our selves then props like very large cameras and lenses won't matter. They don't to my clients. Notice that while Ms. Joy, herself, cringes when a videographer uses an iPhone. That person is still getting gigs.
As to keeping yourself in shape to use heavier gear, again I point to age. The eventual wear and tear, of extra pounds, or injury, add up over time and no amount of good eating or exercise can keep that away.
There are legitimate reasons to use DSLRs, like focus speed for action sports/wildlife photography or because of lens selection. I'm thinking of tilt-shift lenses and extreme telephotos. Large camera size is only hiding insecurity.
So we should worry about the size of our camera not the quality of the work ??? I think clients hire you to make decisions about the best gear for you to use and if that happens to be mirrorless or whatever then so be it. It's kind of showing off showing up with a massive camera knowing that a smaller could do just as well.
I really hope you meant this to be tongue in cheek. It's ridiculous. Whenever has anyone chosen a photographer because they shoot with a particular brand of equipment? Or vice versa. When was the last time you lost work because you shoot with a DSLR and not medium format? Do your clients care if you use speedlights instead of monolights when the speedlights will do the job with a whole lot less hassle? Honestly, your credibility has just lost major points.
Nice
I couldn't disagree more. Your clients hire you because of the pbotos you take. Bigger camera, bigger distractions! If you have a photojournalistic style a mirrorless camera is perfect. Your "branding" isn't a 9 pound camera with a light the size of a small vehicle. That crap means more time between photos, more time setting up lights, more missed moments. No focus peaking so no hyperprime manual lenses less emphasis on natural light. Ive shot my last 7 weddings with x series cameras only using flash for a few reception shots. Many of my shots on manual focus lenses like a 35 f/0.95 something that gives an awesome vintage look I can't get on my 5d4. Also they let me print photos instantly and give my clients a tangle fun keepsake at the reception so they are SUPER excited to see photos which they get sooner because I previsualized them in my EVF. Fuji jpegs look so much better than my canon files. I get better photos, faster turn around, happier clients, less on equipment & maintenance. You can actually be an artist and not just ahoot wide open all the time.
Ugh, this article is how I imagine a 1999 era film shooter ranting about "the passing fad" that is digital photography. I was quite shocked to read this type of nonsense on here. I have NEVER had a client or a guest question me on my gear. My mirror less bodies have a retro look and guests occasionally state how cool they think it looks. Other than that, the wedding day is too hustle and bustle for them or me to notice or care.
Also, mirror less cameras are MUCH easier for new photographers to learn on than DSLR. They see the exposure change directly in their eye and a light bulb goes off and they feel like they are progressing. I teach local classes on occasion and I often see this.
I'm amazed how some artists have such a religious devotion to the style and brand of gear they use to make their art. We should be embracing all of the choice we have. Several brands continue to make large DSLR cameras in all categories - from amateur to pro and the same goes with mirror less. Professional work is being created on both. Professional photographers are admired and referred by their clients based upon the work and service provided and NOT based upon their camera systems, with or without a mirror box.
Vanessa, you are being incredibly naive. So your work is dependant on the size of your camera?? You should ditch your Canon and as you are old enough to remember the film days, buy a Reisekamera 18x24cm view camera! that'll impress your clients :)
I thought photography was all about creativity and lighting?? If you feel you need a big camera, then I can only assume you have a confidence issue?
So you can't take good pictures with a Sony camera. I have to wonder why, they still have the basic functions of ISO, Aperture and Shutter speed.
Surely clients are more impressed by a great portfolio andendearing personality of the photographer
https://youtu.be/kumVc0Jagak
A very good response to Vanessa's snobbish and out of touch article.
https://youtu.be/kmm2UvCjSp4
You have the same problem I had when about 20/25 years ago I switched from medium format to 35mm (hasselblad to canon). I'm retired now, but I can tell you: It's all in your mind!! You are using for a wedding a Canon 1DX. Do you really need a1DX to shoot a wedding? No, but in this way you know that you are not going to find a guest at a wedding that has a better camera than yours. First, of course you need to learn your new camera and feel comfortable with it. Clients are not judging you from the camera you are using but FIRST from your personality and then the quality of your work. And the quality seems to be there.
This is a very interesting conversation, and no doubt a VERY hot button subject. I think all of us who have invested in mirrorless camera systems, have thought or experienced this concern. I don't entirely agree with the assessment, this article concludes, however I understand the concern of it.
Personally I think there are a number of factors, that are taken into consideration, when buying and using cameras. I work as both a photographer and videographer, and this factor always plays into the type of projects and clients, you are working with. For instance, unless you are a world renowned commercial photographer endorsed by Fuji or Sony as their "It" photographer; I could see walking into a commercial or fashion photoshoot with a very high end client, might be a better idea to come with a full frame Nikon or Canon system, or even a medium format system, as I know commercial clients can at times, tend to be judgmental, especially in this day and age, where everyone considers themselves a photographer or cinematographer and might have knowlegde from an enthusiasts point of view, and if this is the case, I would have no problem, with providing what the client is comfortable with.
What's surprising is that I don't see this case as often in the wedding photography world, from what I've seen and heard. I'm not a wedding photographer, so I don't have first hand experience on this, but I know that in several weddings I attended this year, I saw quite a few Sony A7 series cameras either as second bodies, or primary bodies. So it's definitely catching on, and with the rise in popularity with systems like Sony and now, with the Fuji X-T2 (which is what I currently own), I see and increase in acceptance with these mirrorless systems more or less. I used to be a Canon Full Frame DSLR system owner, but recently after extremely positive experiences, on my Fuji System, decided to let go of the Canon system. My justification was that I wanted to invest more into my Fuji X system and felt that the Fuji was being used 80% of the time for my photography. I also have the mindset that if I were to get hired for a big job where either the client wanted me to use Canon, or I got the vibe or sense that coming in with my Fuji might make a client feel uncomfortable, and that's after I had a heart to heart conversation with them....I would have no problem renting a Canon system for that particular job and billing that into my quote! Same goes, if it means, renting a medium format kit, for a shoot as well. I approach my jobs like this, in video and film all the time, and most cinematographers can't afford owning half the cameras we operate, so rental is the usual way we bill our jobs, so I tend to approach my non Fuji jobs that way.
But with that said, most clients, don't care, because they look at my images, and love them and they tend to be EVEN more intrigued when it's not a Canon or Nikon, and are usually encouraging, because what they see and enjoy, from my portfolio, they want for their own shoot, and so they give me the leaway to go with what I'm comfortable with, and I can confidently say, that with my recent purchase of a Fuji X-T2 and Fuji X-Pro 2, I am getting results equal to or sometimes surpassing the capabilities of my previous Canon 5D Mark III kit.
So I guess my point is, as a photographer you can be flexible and invest in what you see yourself using the most for your own setup, but don't be afraid to rent a camera system for a job, where you might run into a client, that would prefer that and just bill it in to the hidden costs of your quote, and you should be good.
And lastly, Battery Grips, are definitely a way to not only allow your mirrorless cameras to last longer on battery life, offer better ergonomics in the hand for those that don't like smaller bodies, from a ergonomic stand point but YES...it does make your camera look more "professional", for sure!
Make sense?
I think what a lot of commenter here are leaving out is the Experience delivered by a photography team. From your character to your clothes to yes, your equipment. And while my current favorite camera is a Fuji x100t I still get comments on professional shoots of how small it is, little do clients know it has a leaf shutter and is far advanced than all my other cameras in this regard. If people see big "professional" looking equipment it makes them feel comfortable they have hired a pro. Yes it is ignorance but we all need to understand that and make the decision that fits out brand.
I don't shoot mirrorless for pro work either, but I think size of camera argument is completely ridiculous. If it's a concern, it should be the absolute last on the list of things that go into what gear someone decides to shoot with. I am just baffled, Vanessa, that you would push this argument on the community. I can't help but wonder if it comes out of you being sponsored by Canon, because it just seems so silly. I'd like to hope that has nothing to do with it. But either way, congratulations on misinforming thousands of newer photographers and the unhelpful bias that fuels the gear wars and restricts people from making informed decisions based on factors that actually matter for producing high quality work.
As one that has shot over 40 weddings and countless of engagement sessions since switching to mirrorless, I know that none of my clients hired me because of my camera weight or size. They hired me because of what I can deliver for them, for my customer service, quality of products and total experience in dealing with our studio.
I totally agree with her that perceived value, as well as branding, are important elements to the success of a studio. But since when the size or weight of a camera define who is a professional? Maybe for the insecure photographers, those who lack any mastery of the craft or cannot differentiate themselves because of the quality of their work.
I am sorry, but there is something very wrong with a photographer whose market positioning, differentiation and credibility as photographers are dependent and determined by the brand, size and weight of a camera. Should it not be based instead solely on your mastery of the craft, quality of work and client experience?
She affirms that "the first time I tried to take pictures with it, though, I was not in my element. To be honest, the pictures were awful." Yes, you need to adapt to a slightly different way of using the camera. But photography is not about mirrors or shutters noises but about a creative process that uses light and composition to create an image. A professional photographer who has mastered his or her craft should be able to produce the same images no matter what she or he uses. Photography doesn't suddenly change because you use a mirrorless camera or your smart phone, for that matter.
Those who has really been around will remember that in the 1990's many wedding photographers made the same silly arguments about using 35mm SLR instead of a medium format cameras. They too tried to make the size and weight of their medium format cameras a differentiating factor for their brands. Yet, all those photographers made the transition to a Digital SLR.
Derives joy of the noise a mirror makes when it slaps? Really? Silly me, I thought the fun of photography was in the liberating and fulfilling effect of the creative process and not in the brand of a camera or it's weight and size or the noise made by the shutter or mirror. That is just silly nostalgia and, as she admits her "bias view of mirrorless cameras".
Bottom line: use whatever work best for you but do not be defined by the equipment you use.
I so agree with you!
This is the most absurd reason I have ever read in my life! Bunch of nonsense crap!
....
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kmm2UvCjSp4 MUST WATCH VIDEO! Completely agree with Jason Lanier! This article is ABSURD!
But isn't Jason Lanier an officially sanctioned spokesperson, artisan, influencer, brand ambassador, shill, for Sony? not the most independent voice...
I disagree he used to shoot with Nikon, he just changed to Sony because of the quality of their cameras, not because they are paying to use them...
While I agreed with a lot of his points, his disingenuous demeanor, juvenile side comments and fake laughing lessened the impact of his rebuttal a bit for me.
Vanessa,
Do you actually believe this, or are you just trying to stir up the pot?
I won't knock what makes anyone feel in their sweet spot. But I can't see any confident or expert photographer with a great portfolio who couldn't easily overcome a query or concern about camera size.
Vanessa, you clearly do great work and I bet if you switched, it wouldn't end up being a real problem for you. A big camera has zero to do with your brand. To think so is selling yourself short.
I think Vanessa is just stirring the pot because of photographers that went from DSLR to Mirrorless. Either that or she's just a vanity poser photographer.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Vanessa! I have been shooting weddings for 1 full year with a hybrid setup, Canon 5DKMIII and Sony A7RII. When I compare my images in post, 9/10 times I love my mirrorless images better. The quality is higher and the color is more consistent. Not to mention the bokeh that Sony has fine tuned to replicate film, compared to my Canon... it's pretty night and day.
I agree that perspective is everything in this business but how clients view us as professionals matters more to them when it comes to our personalities, confidence, and overall execution than our camera size. I shot 28 weddings this year and over 30 portrait sessions... not once has a client commented on my Sony. If anything, they are intrigued but it's different and they know it produces great images based on my work. I think mirrorless is the future of wedding photography and am really excited to see where it takes the industry.
Are you using a battery grip on your Sony A7S?
My Sony A7RII doesn't look so small after added a grip. Also, I use a Metabones adapter for my Canon mount lenses and mostly shoot my Zeiss Otus 55mm 1.4 and that adds more to it.
Your article reminded me of a podcast I listened to recently when it comes to perception versus practice: http://revisionisthistory.com/episodes/03-the-big-man-cant-shoot
I know it takes a lot of courage to stick you neck out in an artice and share your thoughts on something that at the end of the day is completely objective - I really appreciate hearing your perspective on shooting mirrorless but at the end of the day, I have just had a much different experience.
OMG ...please which client cares about gear over the results. This is just stupid and makes no sense GO jump somewhere...
This is the the epitome of not only what's wrong with photography, but what's wrong with the world. Whether it's due to a lack of self esteem, lack of confidence of your ability, or maybe you were that kid that was picked on growing up, this article is more about your insecurity as a photographer than anything else. I'd hate to know what advice you'd give to a young photographer starting out.
Under the guise of "what clients think" this article is more about what you think. And showcases some deep insecurity issues that may extend well beyond your job as a photographer.
And honestly, I don't believe it when you say... "sure, the quality of work isn't determined by the size of camera." I think you state that (repeatedly) so you can go back and point it out and have something to cling on to knowing the firestorm this article would spark.
I think fstoopers allowing this article to exist on their platform is some sort of twisted satire where the joke is on you.
To me being a young professional photography I feel like you need confidence if you don't have that then you should not call your self a professional. The size of your camera don't mean a thing. Can you get the shot? Does it looks like you took it from a camera phone?and are you coming off as a paid professional? A professional photographer will get the shot with the wow factor and it will not look like he/she took it from a phone. Let your work talk for it self not your camera.
This is seriously one of the dumbest articles I've ever read. I feel dumber just for having gotten through all the words, lol.
Why would there be a learning curve? Most people the first time they shoot a mirrorless shoot it EXACTLY like a DSLR. A quality lens in front of a quality sensor, shot in exactly the same way, ZERO learning curve. What did you do differently? I would GENUINELY love to know what it is you think you did differently?
On the other hand, a true live view camera CAN be a far BETTER creative tool...and that requires changing the way you shoot. But to be EQUAL to a DSLR, there is no learning curve. Just saying that disqualifies you as any kind of expert.
Your entire premise (aside from the truly absurd "learning curve" part) is that customers look at you differently. It's true.....some customers will.....but if you're THAT insecure as a photographer that you don't think you can overcome that very rare, minor situation, then the problem is in you head, not in your hands.
My job as a photographer is to the best I can...which requires the best tools...if my customers don't understand why I'm using a certain camera, that's FAR less important than ME, as a professional, knowing how my camera works and why it's a better choice. You don't even understand how your camera works and why!!
Don't shoot mirrorless...honestly, no one really cares. But don't MISINFORM people with goofy ideas like there's a "learning curve." lol
Good grief. How do people get to BE good photographers having no idea whatsoever how cameras WORK?
Just for anyone out there who still doesn't understand the difference.....a mirrorless camera isn't just smaller and lighter. It takes the MIRROR, which blocks the sensor in a DSLR and gets it out of the way. That's a HUGE advantage because now, you can actually SEE how your camera is going to alter reality to create the shot....and not just after you take it...which is such a dinosaur, slow workflow, but BEFORE you take the shot, and continuously as you make adjustments and decisions.
Focus zooming, focus peaking, SEE IN THE DARK...eye tracking, smile tracking, facial recognition, focus points that extend alllllll the way to edge. There are so many things you can do to make a camera better if you lose the stupid MIRROR!
DSLR was an important design. Once. It's now wholly un-necessary, and a much slower, less accurate way to be truly CREATIVE.
For anyone taught to use a mirrorless camera to it's full potential, going to a DSLR is a massive penalty.
Maybe what we need is a special line of mirrorless cameras, that have all the benefits of the better design, but are built HUGE and UNWIELDY so that the shallow minded photographers that care more about how cool they look when they shoot than whether they have the best technology don't have to suffer, lol
So if you were to cook your friends a meal, does their enjoyment of the meal depend on what brand and size of cooktop or oven you used?
This Week in Photo has posted a podcast in response to this article, in which two photographers discuss their experience in shooting weddings with mirrorless cameras.
http://thisweekinphoto.com/twip-weddings-050-can-use-mirrorless-camera-p...
Biggest load of nonsense I have ever wasted time reading. if your clients are so snobbish, get some new clients! You come off as a horrible snob in this article, it's like a bad joke. If you were a good enough photographer you should be able to please your clients with ANY gear. You seem to suffer from big camera syndrome. If your gear is what matters most, i certainly wouldn't hire you!
Very little research went into this article. There are pros and cons to both DSLR and mirror less. Use whatever suites your needs. Don't listen to photographers who tell you size of the camera matters. It doesn't. If you feel the client will judge you on how big the camera is, stick to the big body cameras. Bigger is better is such an uninformed statement to make in our industry.
I own a Sony A7S II and a Panasonic GH4 (both mirrorless) with a Metabones (Canon) adapter on both. I use them STRICTLY for video/digital movies for film shoots, clients, and personal projects.
For professional photography only, I still use my Canon 5D Mark II, Canon 7D, and occasionally Canon T2i. I too don't trust mirrorless enough yet. And my Canons are tried and true when it comes to stills. Shove a prime on those babies and we're in business. Stills and video are two different beasts as far as image quality goes. Dynamic Range is better on photo with more colors, shadows, highlights, etc because it's RAW as we all know, vs a h.264 or even XAVC S video codec on these prosumer and consumer cams. Only Blackmagic, Red, and Arri, to name a few, feature RAW in video.
So the 4K resolution and somewhat acceptable bit-rate on cams like the A7S II and GH4 with (SLog, Cine4, and V-Log profiles) allows for more manipulation and higher image quality against the aforementioned Canon DSLRs. Canon is insistant on pushing their C (Cinema) Line of cameras like the C100 and C300 series and short changing the filmmaking folks who gave them high DSLR sales. And the body's aren't affordable to the average joe. The C100 Mark II body is close to $4000-$4500 and doesn't shoot 4K or RAW.
The C300 Mark II is close to $20,000. And while it shoots 4K, it doesn't shoot RAW internally (it can output it externally with a device purchased additionally) it uses a XAVC S file. Unless you're using a film crew, I'd skip the current C-Line (the Mark I's are reasonably priced).
I rambled on with all that to say, right now Mirrorless is good for filmmaking and movies as a whole, but needs to speed it up when it comes to stills. Even the great A7R II can't hold a candle to some of the features the Canon 5D Mark IV has to offer.
If the main prejudice against mirrorless is the size factor, then lug a Medium Format to the weddings instead, and really impress the $hit out of them with your professional equipment! Sorry I don't agree that a mirrorless camera equals a "point & shoot quality equipment" in the minds of the client. The mirrorless technology surpasses the DSLR's in some aspects, capabilities, and features. I for one, would rather have a lighter camera body and form factor for a long day of shooting. The quality of the pictures are no better or worse using some DSLR over some mirrorless - I'm talking mainly about the flagship models. So I respectfully disagree that mirrorless cameras are perceived as not being professional grade.
This is so incredibly well written. It echos my sentiment precisely. Thank you!
While a appreciate where you are coming from, it reminds me of a media symposium run by a top media professional in the early 1990's at the Jacob Javitz Center in NYC. She asserted that: "digital is great, but it will never take the place of film, as it cannot compare in terms of image quality." While that was true then, I asserted that Moore's law of digital doubling price performance every 18 months or so would pass film by. She and most of the audience balked at my assertion at that time.
I assume that, 18 months after you wrote this article, you hopefully now have accepted that mirrorless and its evolutionary offshoots are the future of camera tech for most professional photography areas of specialty-- at least for anyone who wants to compete and create most effectively. Further, all camera phones (many of which are now better than my early $10K+ pro DSLR's from 10 years ago in most ways), are all mirrorless by design and definition. Similarly, all Hasselblad/DJI systems are mirrorless.
There is nothing wrong with DSLR (I own a 5DSR, a Nikon D4 and 5300 and a P1 DSLR-- as well as several film DSLR's that I use from time to time). However, it is a shame to hear you aren't able to embrace the best option, regardless of its size, sound or related "gravitas". If you really need this to sell yourself to customers and others like that, you can always use a 105mm f/1.2, a 200mm 1.8L II, a 300mm f/2.8 or a 500mm or 600mm f/4. People generally are impressed more by lens size rather than camera size anyway-- at least from what I see whenever I take out the big guns. However, I use those lenses to get the shots I want period; and I'm as equally likely to use something like a relatively "diminutive" Nocticron 42.5 f/1.2, a Voigtlander f/0.95 Nokton or an 85mm f/1.2 on a smaller mirrorless.
It is critical to note that mirrorless is, at its core, based around the progressive elimination of all mechanical camera components, and their replacement with digital alternatives (i.e. shutter, focusing subsystems, etc).
If you still haven't gotten around your size issue, it is only a matter of time when the remaining hold-outs accept that DSLR's will effectively be the now substantially superseded film equivalent of camera technology in terms of serving you and your customers in the best possible way for many types of shot. So, while you may want to still create with a DSLR or a film camera, as far as mirrorless being considered the top pro choice by many is no longer in question.
Phase One, Hasselblad/DJI, SONY, Panasonic all dominate their respective markets leveraging mirrorless now-- as do many others in their submarkets.
So, I hope you stop worrying so much about using mirrorless in professional environments and instead just leverage whatever technology works best for your you and your customers.
On that note, I just got an A7III for evaluation for some of my photographers, and they all have asked to dump their prior DSLR or mirrorless cameras in favor of the new A7 III (glad I didn't offer them all A9's!-- just kidding...)
Hopefully your views on serving clients and your understanding related to mirrorless cameras and their unique value propositions have both evolved.
Regardless, if you still wish to impress clients with the size of your gear (can't believe I just wrote that), then you should use large fast lens instead; since that is what most customers would judge by. Whenever I have a large lens (e.g. 200mm F/1.8 L2, 105mm F/1.2, 500mm F/2.8 etc, they say "what a big camera" not what a big lens. Also, a smaller camera makes the lens look even bigger-- sort of like shaving your beard makes your nose look even larger (can't believe I wrote that either...). The fact you can tell them it was worth the $10K-$25K may impress them even more-- if that is in fact your objective.
Personally, I hope you get over this, since I can tell you that none of the top photogs I know follow your approach of choosing a camera based on its size and feeling it will impress.