October 31, 2014, 02:37:08 PM

Author Topic: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?  (Read 9117 times)

Flake

  • Guest
Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #15 on: June 01, 2012, 01:06:58 PM »
Maybe an odd question at first glance, but there is a lot of substance behind it.  Canon in particular has pushed up prices of its higher end DSLR models to such a degree that the really need to produce something pretty special - the trouble is that they don't produce image quality that much better than the previous models.

Last month Canon held a management briefing here  The interesting thing is what they said about comming compact cameras:

"we will further differentiate and enhance our lineup by launching new cameras offering the image qualities that approaches SLR cameras; furthering the improvement in design and qualities, and by incorporating features such as network, connectivity capabilities."



Now I'm sure that there will be those who view this as some kind of heresy and won't believe that this is even possible, but have a look at these images taken with the Olympus E-M5 and a Canon FD 50-300mm f/4.5L and then ask yourself seriously if a DSLR would have returned better image quality.

Falling sales of high end product will reduce profits, and put pressure on manufacturers to raise high prices even higher, but what is the real point of paying so much for something which isn't returning images significantly better than those which can be obtained for a tenth of the outlay?  Of course we know that clients expect to see a big camera, better than something they might own, and for those users, there's little choice

When you take 50,000 Photos a year for live events, weddings, studio photos, concerts, and many other things, films workflow can be a strain to manage, tag, print, copy, email, scan for clients. Digital is king for speed while I feel film is for medium or large format jobs which require the extra detail and DR.  IE: architecture & Landscapes.

The 35mm film format isnt worth the extra processing and cost for me. Its detail isnt worth it compared to just shooting digital.

Also, No one says you have to shoot with the latestest and greatest gear. A Good full-frame 5Dc and an EG-S screen can run you as low as 800$ and has AF if you'd like to use it. Thats a bargian compared to processing and drum scans to get every ounce of IQ from a slide.

Just my 2 Cents.

You do know that the Olympus OM-D E-M5 is a 16 MP digital mirrorless camera ?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #15 on: June 01, 2012, 01:06:58 PM »

dstppy

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 935
    • View Profile
Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #16 on: June 01, 2012, 01:26:09 PM »
The combustion engine has been around for 100 yrs, but with the advances in other technologies(battery) electric cars are starting to look more and more appealing.

IC is going nowhere any time soon.  Both Subaru and Mazda are going full-on "KISS" and aiming for better gains from conventional wisdom (optimizing, weight reduction etc.) over more complicated models, and Ford is betting big on twin-turbo.

Before SLR goes anywhere, we're going to need to see a consistent lineup of better products from a variety of sources . . .
Canon Rumors is presently creating photographer shortages in Middle Earth (all the trolls emigrated here)

dirtcastle

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 391
    • View Profile
    • Eric Nord Flickr Page
Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becoming an endangered species?
« Reply #17 on: June 01, 2012, 02:05:54 PM »
I wonder what F stop our eyes have?

The range is aproximately f/3.2 - f/8.   :)

Yep, I find the bokeh of my eyeballs to be quite displeasing, too.

lol.

I have thought about the same issue. I think over the past 5 years photography has become more and more popular, not because of technology but because of social media and their inclusion in phones. I feel that basic point and shoot will be come extinct and a higher end NON DSLR will take its place. However this has made high end photography more valuable because of the intrinsic increase in photography itself recently and because most of these newer picture takers take really horrible pictures. Like the typical "look a me and my crew at the latest club" etc. It makes no sense to have a point and shoot cam and a phone. Phones will have better cameras because it is now a primary purpose and buying decision of a high end phone because it is more convenient and better to have it there because of social media and comms. There seems to be emerging more and more interest in higher end consumer cams for those consumers who dont want to be bogged down with learning and carrying a DSLR. These newer cams are cooler and smaller than entry level DSLRs. Those who want the use the best lenses /sensors must continue to use DSLRs (Semi Pros and higher). THe link to those golf pics i really dont see these as anything great. These are Ideal conditions (lighting, subjects etc), where DSLR excels are in difficult conditions.

Even if DSLRs become a smaller percentage of the camera market, the absolute number sold will continue to rise with the popularity of photography overall. Photography has become much more accessible and the artform is gaining appreciation as more people participate in non-professional photography. While it's true that DSLRs are "for pros", and pros will always be a small and limited group... the number of aspiring pros and serious hobbyists will continue to rise.

I can attest to the fact that I am one of those people who found older digital and film technology to be an obstacle to enjoying photography. This made me less inclined to do ANY type of photography. But with the new digital technologies at all levels, it encouraged me to climb the ladder up to DSLRs.

dickgrafixstop

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 274
    • View Profile
Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #18 on: June 01, 2012, 02:15:44 PM »
Of course it is - as is every other product that is technology based.  When I first started shooting, the only way to
get an "acceptable" image was to drag a 4X5 Speed Graphic and film packs to sporting events.  When I finally got a Nikon "F" the Speed Graphic went into the closet.  A variety of Nikons followed until Canon combined auto-focus with decent lenses and the Nikons went in the closet.  My Canon collection lasted through early digital, but eventually the film bodies went in the closet.  The Marks are big, heavy, rugged and wonderful - but I would drop them in a heartbeat if I could get the same image quality and/or ease of use with a smaller, lightweight autofocus body and excellent lenses.   The most intriguing solution I've seen recently is the Fuji X Pro 1 - and with a little
maturing and a wider selection of lenses, it may well be the system that banishes my Marks to the closet.

AvTvM

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1029
    • View Profile
Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #19 on: June 01, 2012, 03:36:19 PM »
As soon as the first company comes out with a really decent but still affordable (sa 3k USD/Euro) FF (36x24mm) mirrorless with a hi-end hybrid optical+electronic viewfinder, DSLRs will be obsolete. 

I for one am really looking forward to the end of mirror-clatter-noise-vibration and any other mechanical components (shutter!) in my cameras.  Sizewise I would like to have it as compact and light as a Minolta CLE. Ideally with an electrified, AF- and IS-capable M-Mount, backwards compatible with all M-mount lenses.

Hopefully ... soon! 

facedodge

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 104
    • View Profile
Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #20 on: June 01, 2012, 03:49:21 PM »
Maybe an odd question at first glance, but there is a lot of substance behind it.  Canon in particular has pushed up prices of its higher end DSLR models to such a degree that the really need to produce something pretty special - the trouble is that they don't produce image quality that much better than the previous models.

Last month Canon held a management briefing here  The interesting thing is what they said about comming compact cameras:

"we will further differentiate and enhance our lineup by launching new cameras offering the image qualities that approaches SLR cameras; furthering the improvement in design and qualities, and by incorporating features such as network, connectivity capabilities."



Now I'm sure that there will be those who view this as some kind of heresy and won't believe that this is even possible, but have a look at these images taken with the Olympus E-M5 and a Canon FD 50-300mm f/4.5L and then ask yourself seriously if a DSLR would have returned better image quality.

Falling sales of high end product will reduce profits, and put pressure on manufacturers to raise high prices even higher, but what is the real point of paying so much for something which isn't returning images significantly better than those which can be obtained for a tenth of the outlay?  Of course we know that clients expect to see a big camera, better than something they might own, and for those users, there's little choice

An Olympus E-M5 and Canon 50-300mm f/4.5L essentially looks like this...



That is a huge set up... I don't think he would have noticed a DSLR making it 1/2" longer.

facedodge

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 104
    • View Profile
Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #21 on: June 01, 2012, 04:04:05 PM »
^^^ Essentially, it's about the lens and if you want shots like that you need a lens at least 5 inches long.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #21 on: June 01, 2012, 04:04:05 PM »

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3507
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #22 on: June 01, 2012, 04:07:59 PM »
Maybe an odd question at first glance, but there is a lot of substance behind it.  Canon in particular has pushed up prices of its higher end DSLR models to such a degree that the really need to produce something pretty special - the trouble is that they don't produce image quality that much better than the previous models.

Last month Canon held a management briefing here  The interesting thing is what they said about comming compact cameras:

"we will further differentiate and enhance our lineup by launching new cameras offering the image qualities that approaches SLR cameras; furthering the improvement in design and qualities, and by incorporating features such as network, connectivity capabilities."



Now I'm sure that there will be those who view this as some kind of heresy and won't believe that this is even possible, but have a look at these images taken with the Olympus E-M5 and a Canon FD 50-300mm f/4.5L and then ask yourself seriously if a DSLR would have returned better image quality.

Falling sales of high end product will reduce profits, and put pressure on manufacturers to raise high prices even higher, but what is the real point of paying so much for something which isn't returning images significantly better than those which can be obtained for a tenth of the outlay?  Of course we know that clients expect to see a big camera, better than something they might own, and for those users, there's little choice

When you take 50,000 Photos a year for live events, weddings, studio photos, concerts, and many other things, films workflow can be a strain to manage, tag, print, copy, email, scan for clients. Digital is king for speed while I feel film is for medium or large format jobs which require the extra detail and DR.  IE: architecture & Landscapes.

The 35mm film format isnt worth the extra processing and cost for me. Its detail isnt worth it compared to just shooting digital.

Also, No one says you have to shoot with the latestest and greatest gear. A Good full-frame 5Dc and an EG-S screen can run you as low as 800$ and has AF if you'd like to use it. Thats a bargian compared to processing and drum scans to get every ounce of IQ from a slide.

Just my 2 Cents.

You do know that the Olympus OM-D E-M5 is a 16 MP digital mirrorless camera ?

My Bad. LOL I Just hear olympus OM and think of my Old OM-1.

Carry On. ;D

AvTvM

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1029
    • View Profile
Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #23 on: June 01, 2012, 04:10:09 PM »
^^^ Essentially, it's about the lens and if you want shots like that you need a lens at least 5 inches long.

with that much light the same shots can be made with a Nikon 1 and the tiny 30-110mm lens.
He did not even get the ball or club-hits-ball once in a picture. ;-)

facedodge

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 104
    • View Profile
Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #24 on: June 01, 2012, 04:17:00 PM »
^^^ Essentially, it's about the lens and if you want shots like that you need a lens at least 5 inches long.

with that much light the same shots can be made with a Nikon 1 and the tiny 30-110mm lens.
He did not even get the ball or club-hits-ball once in a picture. ;-)

300 f/4.5 is nearly three times as long and nearly twice as bright than the 110 f/5.6, although, that is a nifty little lens.

Rocky

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 634
    • View Profile
Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #25 on: June 01, 2012, 05:15:46 PM »
Camera is a tool . A tool should fit the owner and usage. There is no doubt that the OM D E-M4 is a good camera. Can it replace the existing DSLR??? I have to say NO. Just think of the following items: Price, shutter/Af delay, wide choice of lenses, View finder. DSLR will beat the OM D.  As for picture quality, It is hard to say, based on the size we have seen in the web.  Remember the oldsaying in the old filem days?  " Post card size picture from a box camera under the sun  will look as good as a picture from  Rollie" Therefore I am not getting into it.  Another thing is the percentage of "keeper" from sporting event. I am sure that everybody will agree that the DSLR is definitely higher.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2012, 05:41:41 PM by Rocky »

Tcapp

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 510
    • View Profile
    • Timothy Capp Photography
Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #26 on: June 01, 2012, 05:29:02 PM »
^^^ Essentially, it's about the lens and if you want shots like that you need a lens at least 5 inches long.

Thats what she said?   :o
5DIII, 5DII, 7D, 50 1.4, 85 1.4, 70-200 2.8 IS L, 70-200 2.8 IS L II, 2x TC III, 15 Fisheye 2.8, 100 Macro 2.8, 24 1.4 L
http://www.TimothyCapp.com
Follow me on facebook! https://www.facebook.com/pages/Timothy-Capp-Photography/94664798952

Jman13

  • Guest
Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #27 on: June 01, 2012, 05:44:52 PM »
with that much light the same shots can be made with a Nikon 1 and the tiny 30-110mm lens.
He did not even get the ball or club-hits-ball once in a picture. ;-)

The E-M5 is a lot better than the Nikon 1.   If I wanted a slower lens with AF, I also could have used the Panasonic 100-300mm or Olympus 75-300mm, both of which are much smaller than the FD 50-300, but they're a stop or more slower and not as good optically.

Anyway, I'm the photographer linked to in the OP (and the 50-300L picture above is mine on my GX1). 

I think you're being tongue in cheek with the second comment, but just in case...when you photograph golf, you do NOT click the shutter before ball impact.  That's a very quick way to have angry golfers and get removed from the premises.  I did get a few shots shortly after impact when I was rather far away and using the long end when I photographed the practice rounds, but I didn't do it during the Pro-Am because it's a competition round.

For instance:







A few other points for anyone who is interested:

1) The 50-300L is a great lens!  I was wary when I bought it, as many older manual focus zooms are pretty poor...this lens rocks.  Also, it is rather large and heavy.  However, since the FOV is the same as a 100-600mm lens on full frame, it's still smaller than a similar length lens on an APS-C or Full Frame DSLR.   It is true that I wouldn't have noticed the extra size (especially since I shot the tournament with both the horizontal and vertical grips on my E-M5, which makes it just a little smaller than a DRebel with grips).  Yeah, a 7D with a 100-400L would be similar in size and capability, but also a lot more expensive. But yeah, really long stuff isn't where m4/3 shines in the size department.  (Aside from using shorter focal lengths for the same FOV).

2) I am a former Canon shooter...I loved the system but eventually got bogged down by all the weight.  While the times I use the 50-300L are not exactly huge reduction in size and weight, it's the everyday stuff where it's big.  My shoulder bag used to have the 1Ds Mark II, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 17-40L, Sigma 50/1.4 and 100 f/2.8L IS Macro...maybe another lens or two.  All told it was close to 18 lbs of gear, and it wasn't that fun.  Now I will carry my E-M5 with 7-14mm or 12mm f/2, 25mm f/1.4 and 45mm f/1.8, and either a lightweight 40-150mm zoom or if I want more depth of field control, a 135mm f/2.8 for my long lens.  My kit bag now weighs about 4 lbs.  It's definitely not the right choice for everyone, but it has been wonderful for me.

3) The Oly E-M5 has image quality roughly on par with my 1Ds II.  Similar (or even slightly better) dynamic range, and high ISO noise is within a half stop.   It's a more responsive camera, though...9fps and faster single shot AF.  Of course, it's not nearly as good in continuous AF, though.

I've found the switch to Micro 4/3 wonderful, and it does some things (aside from weight) better than DSLRs...for instance, the single shot autofocus on both the E-M5 and recent Panasonic bodies (GH2, G3, GX1) is exceptionally fast and dead-on accurate.  Puts the AF in almost any DSLR to shame.  In low light, my GX1 absolutely smokes the 1Ds II in single shot.  And, you never have to worry about front or back focus with a CDAF system. 

However, if you need really shallow DOF (and thus the FF or larger sensor), or you need great continuous autofocus, a DSLR is still by far the best option.  I don't see DSLRs going away just yet, but I think a large portion of the market will shift to mirrorless in the next decade, especially as continuous AF improves to match or exceed that in DSLRs. 

While I'm sure there will be full frame mirrorless cameras coming eventually, they won't be quite as good in size reduction just because of the longer focal lengths needed for long lens work and the larger image circle vs APS-C or m4/3, but just like now, photographers will have to see what they're willing to trade for other advantages. 

Thanks for the interest in my photos, though!
« Last Edit: June 01, 2012, 05:52:53 PM by Jman13 »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #27 on: June 01, 2012, 05:44:52 PM »

KyleSTL

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 419
    • View Profile
Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #28 on: June 01, 2012, 05:49:56 PM »
I was thinking yesterday about how small APS Elph cameras were back in the 1990's (with APS-H sized 'sensors') and put a table together to see just what kind of cameras they were able to cram into these small packages (most importantly physical dimensions, weight, and lens - FL, zoom, and aperture).  Here's what I put together, information obtained from Canon Museum website:

ModelLensSizeWeight   Released
ELPH24-48mm f/4.5-6.290 x 60 x 27 mm190 gMay 1996
ELPH 490Z22.5-90mm f/5.6-8.9   120 x 65 x 47 mm   290 gJune 1996
ELPH 10 [AF]                               25mm f/6.7110 x 63 x 43 mm180 gNovember 1996
ELPH 260Z30-60mm f/4-7.8113 x 59 x 38 mm175 gJuly 1997
ELPH Jr26mm f/2.890 x 60 x 24 mm125 gSeptember 1997
ELPH 370Z23-69mm f/4.5-9.995 x 65 x 32 mm205 gMarch 1998
ELPH LT23mm f/4.885 x 55 x 35 mm115 gSeptember 1998
ELPH 224-46mm f/4.2-5.687 x 57 x 25 mm181 gMarch 1999
ELPH LT26026-52mm f/4.2-6.793 x 63 x 30 mm150 gMarch 2000
ELPH LT27024-65mm f/4.5-895 x 64 x 35 mm180 gFebruary 2001
ELPH Z323.5-54mm f/4.8-7.698 x 50 x 33 mm150 gMarch 2002

Compare that to a few modern digital cameras:

ModelLensSizeWeight   Lens Equ.   
G1X (3/2"sensor)   15-30mm f/2.8-5.8   117 x 81 x 65 mm   534 g   28-112mm   
S100 (1/1.7" sensor)   5.2-26mm f/2.0-5.9   99 x 60 x 28 mm   198 g   24-120mm   
ELPH 320HS (1/2.3" sensor)   4.3-21.5mm f/2.7-5.9   94 x 57 x 21 mm   145 g   24-120mm   
ELPH 530HS (1/2.3" sensor)   4-48mm f/3.4-5.6   86 x 54 x 20 mm   163 g   28-336mm   

Back in the APS film days that absolute best zoom was a 4x (490Z - 29-117mm equivalent with a very slow f/5.6-8.9 aperture).  Nowadays we have smaller, lighter cameras with 12x zooms (see 530HS).  In comparison the G1X looks huge, despite having a smaller 'sensor' than all the film cameras.  Small, light cameras can be made with larger sensors, but at the cost of zoom range and maximum aperture.  I highly doubt most amateurs would want to give up zoom range for a larger sensor (most of whom would not understand what the larger sensor or aperture would mean in terms of DOF, IQ or high ISO noise).  I would like to see what Canon could do with a camera somewhere in between a G1X and the S100 in terms of sensor size, overall dimensions, and weight.

Slightly off topic post, but I figured it was kind of related to the subject.
Canon EOS 5D | Tamron 19-35mm f/3.5-4.5 | 24-105mm f/4L IS USM | 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 USM | 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM
15mm f/2.8 Fisheye | 28mm f/1.8 USM | 50mm f/1.4 USM | 85mm f/1.8 USM | 3x 420EX | ST-E2 | Canon S90 | SD600 w/ WP-DC4

Hillsilly

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 782
    • View Profile
Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #29 on: June 03, 2012, 03:15:58 AM »
In three / four years time, the 5Div won't be a DSLR in the conventional sense but will instead be an EF mount mirrorless camera with a hybrid electronic and optical viewfinder.  It will be billed as Canon's flagship advanced technology model.  The 1 series will stay as a DSLR for a bit longer for those requiring a more rugged, time tested design.
1000FN | 7E | 3000 | 3 | LS-100TS

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Is the DSLR in danger of becomming an endangered species?
« Reply #29 on: June 03, 2012, 03:15:58 AM »