Is SLR dead?

[5dmarkii]

I have been a SLR/DSLR user since 1990s, my first cameras include Nikon N90s and  FE-2. About 3 years ago I switched to Canon EOS-5D and then the Mark II.

Recently I bought a Nikon J1 for wife and decided to give it a try on my vacation to China. This is pretty much the first vacation I didn't bring a SLR/DSLR along with me. Very happy with the J1, appreciate the size/weight, especially when climbing mountains. With a 10-30mm plus a DX 70-210 I got 27-560mm coverage, plus excellent video -- all in a ridiculously small package. And the price? $400 for the body plus 10-30, $200 for an adapter(which sucks!) and $150 for the 70-210mm, total $750. My Mark II body alone cost me $2000.

This makes me wonder, is SLR heading to tomb? If you compare the testing result on dpreview, under low ISO it's hard to tell the difference between a full frame DSLR and a mirrorless. Although DSLR still have clear advantage on high ISO, I am afraid it's only time that technology will catch up and the gap will shrink(Don't think technology will eliminate the difference completely, but may make is smaller).

DSLR will always be appreciated by pros, that for sure. But for everyday amateur users, it doesn't seem to make sense to pay so much more money and carry so much weight for only limited advantage?

Just some thoughts, I am keeping my Mark II.

[RLPhoto]

Nope. 

[tamedia]

Nope. 

Nope +1

[aznable]

in the long run… yes

[Jettatore]

For amateurs and vacationers yes, definitely.  This will overtake the Rebel-end line up over time.   But it's a 2.7x crop camera, and the behavior of the lenses won't match the behavior of full frame lenses at the same calculated focal length views in terms of background compression and DOF, etc. etc.

For me, I am interested in both moving up to Medium Format or bigger, and having a smaller Full Frame system for convenience (i.e. Lieca)  But I'm not so interested in micro 4/3rds or the Nikon 1 series, simply because for the same reason it's suggestible to upgrade to Full Frame over APS-C, this is simply going in the opposite direction.  Also considering things like the 5DIII/1DX's ability to nearly see in the dark, etc. etc., I think it will be quite some time before cameras in the micro 4/3rd's and Nikon 1 series range are able to fully catch up in terms of sensor tech.  I mean I could see Panasonic launching a higher end range model than currently exists in their line-up, but I can't see Nikon at all trying to race sensor performance until forced to by Pan/Oly for consumer marketshare.  The list goes on, but I think the end result is that these cameras have at best limited 'professional' utility and will be popular enough among consumers who are not at the same time aspiring to go 'pro' or become a high-end 'hobbyist' or what have you.

[aznable]

For amateurs and vacationers yes, definitely.  This will overtake the Rebel-end line up over time.   But it's a 2.7x crop camera, and the behavior of the lenses won't match the behavior of full frame lenses at the same calculated focal length views in terms of background compression and DOF, etc. etc.

nono… i think that camera with bigger sensors and so on will become non-slr too

[lopicma]

We must be at some sort of tipping point for the cost of a small {O}LED viewfinder to a glass and mirror version.  With Google gearing up for a pair of wearable glasses, and the Television market embracing {O}LED screens at more affordable prices, it will be inevitable.

I think the design of a mirror-less camera can be identical that of current models, so why people are so resistant is puzzling.  Less moving parts is always a good thing for longevity of a product as well.

I am surprised it has lasted this long.  With everything moving to Solid State, the DSLR is one of the last hold outs.  I expect it "won't go easily" either.   I have been investing in better glass these days, so as long as the new models accept these lenses, I am ready for the change, ...whenever it comes.

[unfocused]

in the long run… yes

In the long run, we are all dead.

Not until you can hold the camera up to your eye and actually see what you are shooting as clearly as you can with today's SLRs.

[adhocphotographer]

In the long run, we are all dead.

haha, too true...  I think that SLRs, like everything else, will eventually die, being replaced by the next thing...  when and how this will happen, only time will tell!    I think mirrorless is the first step, and the fact that a lot of the P&S cameras are getting better and better!

[lopicma]

I am reminded now of people using their iPhones and iPads to take photos.  They are seeing what they shoot, and in some cases, as large a laptop screen.  If that detail can be shrunk and/or projected into a usable viewfinder, the problem is solved. 

Talk about a dead camera type...  point and shoots are slugging it out with phone cameras on an minute-by-minute basis.

[aznable]

in the long run… yes

In the long run, we are all dead.

Not until you can hold the camera up to your eye and actually see what you are shooting as clearly as you can with today's SLRs.

yap of course...and i would add with a very low lag

[drjlo]

It's much more likely that point-and-shoot cameras and cameras like Nikon J1 are dead due to phone cameras replacing them.  Those cameras' main advantage of portability over DSLR has been turned agains them with the decent phone cameras, which shoot decent pictures in good light also.  DSLR's will live on because for serious work, commercial work, weddings, etc, they cannot be replaced. 

Following are couple of shots with my Samsung Nexus Phone camera, which work OK when lighting is good.  It is utter cr**^ in anything less than optimal light, though.


IMG_20120609_122617A by drjlo1, on Flickr



Samsung Nexus phone camera by drjlo1, on Flickr

[paul13walnut5]

Not for me.  I have big hands, like shallow depth of field (big sensor) large depth of field (small apertures not limited by diffraction) and hell, just the noise it makes.

Not seen any decent fast aperture zooms for cscs, and unless you shoot with a pancake all the time, then they really aren't as compact as the hype makes out.  If its not going to fit in a pocket (as no cscs with kit zooms do) then I'm as well with my dslr.

[5dmarkii]

in the long run… yes

In the long run, we are all dead.

Not until you can hold the camera up to your eye and actually see what you are shooting as clearly as you can with today's SLRs.

I don't know man. I am not sure it will be THAT long. Just read a post which reports in Japan the mirrorless market share is already over 40%, In taiwan it's over 50%. Even worldwide, the percentage grew from 10% in 2010 to 22% in 2011. People still favor SLR in this country, maybe because we vacation more on cars rather than feet(even in mountains!), so the weight benefit is less significant.

I actually like the LCD screen more than eye level. Sure eye level is clearer, but the LCD screen gives you more realistic view how the photo would eventually turn out, sort of like the old fashioned TLRs. And LCD gives you so much more information than just apeture/shutter.

Anyway, I have used SLR/DSLR for 20 years plus a few TLRs, never owned any P/S or rangefinder until the J1, but the Mark II is probably going to be my last SLR ever.

I do agree some day phone camera may replace mirrorless as well, the smaller the better!

[JRS]

I think that SLRs, like everything else, will eventually die, being replaced by the next thing...  when and how this will happen, only time will tell!    I think mirrorless is the first step, and the fact that a lot of the P&S cameras are getting better and better!

Yes, but even if P&S reach SLR in terms of IQ, noise and ISO performance, we will not have the same DOF using small sensors....