Will dSLR's be sustained only by nostalgia?

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,465
409
Davidson, NC
Previsualization is key to good photography, whether shooting film in a box camera, JPEGs on a cell phone, or Raw on a DSLR or mirrorless. Seeing a JPEG preview from the camera tells me mostly what the composition looks like. That is important of course. It helps me adjust the shot to approximate the composition I saw in my brain when I decided to take the picture. Sometimes it helps me find an even better one. Of course I also know that the final crop will be done on the computer, and allow for that.

I shot over 3000 pictures in the fall with my G5X II, so I am not a stranger to seeing a JPEG preview from the camera and adjusting accordingly.
 

tron

EOS 5D SR
Nov 8, 2011
4,458
719
I got EOS R kit (24-105) and then added a 35 1.8 and the two f/2.8 L IS RF zooms since their EF coutnerparts didn't have IS. These two zooms were the reason to think about this system. But I am not ready to get rid of my 5DIV. True it was mostly being used for low light photography which can be done by EOS R but still I like 5DIV more and handle it better. And I will get 5DMkV when/if it get's out.
 
Last edited:

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,465
409
Davidson, NC
Also, on the G cameras, changing exposure compensation can be done with a handy dial, sometimes too handy. So a very light or dark JPEG preview can let me know when I have forgotten to move the dial back to 0 or have accidentally moved it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,230
1,270
Also, on the G cameras, changing exposure compensation can be done with a handy dial, sometimes too handy. So a very light or dark JPEG preview can let me know when I have forgotten to move the dial back to 0 or have accidentally moved it.
Often shooting with multiple bodies, I'd be in BIG trouble if the EOS xD bodies did not have a "lock" switch. :rolleyes::eek::ROFLMAO:
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

Optics Patent

Former Nikon (Changes to R5 upon delivery)
Nov 6, 2019
310
248
How many years did you shoot film before transitioning to digital?
I shot film my whole life until transitioning to digital.

Or are you asking how long after the introduction to digital did I switch from film?

I think it was 2003.
 

tron

EOS 5D SR
Nov 8, 2011
4,458
719
I shot film my whole life until transitioning to digital.

Or are you asking how long after the introduction to digital did I switch from film?

I think it was 2003.
I switched late 2007 to EOS 40D. I though of switching early 2006 but the announced 30D wasn't avaiable yet and I didn't want to get 20D. The reason was the sun total eclipse. I would be new to digital and I wasn't sure about having time to prepare. So instead I got with me 2 EOS1n bodies. With the exact amount of money I saved by not buying 20D or 30D (1300 euros) I got Nikon's Coolscan ED 5000 to scan my negatives and slides. Maybe I should go for 5D (version 1) but it had been nicknamed as a dust magnet and at the same time it was much more expensive. Since I switched to digital there was no going back but this is the wrong analogy. Both DSLRs and Mirrorless cameras produce the SAME outcome. They are slightly different means to the same end.
Plus, when we have a satisfying digital picture we don't care if there was a mirror involved or not!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,230
1,270
I shot film my whole life until transitioning to digital.

Or are you asking how long after the introduction to digital did I switch from film?

I think it was 2003.
I'll repeat the question again.

How many years did you shoot film before transitioning to digital?
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,921
855
For those of us who learned to expose with film and single segment center weighted average monochrome light meters, we think anyone who can't nail exposure with an RGB+IR 200+ segment light meter supported by a library of thousands upon thousands of color/shape based scenarios just needs to go out and practice some more.

Yeah, in rapidly changing light it would be nice to be able to see a histogram in the OVF, but not at the expense of the immediacy and the ability to see what is actually in front of the camera one gets with an OVF. We've already learned how the camera sees it without needing the camera to show it to us. We've also learned what it can look like after raw post processing that the camera, even one with an EVF, still can't show us.

Most of the so-called "revolutionary" advantages of EVFs are only useful to those who haven't already learned how to visualize what a scene, seen with the naked eye, will look like to the camera (and in the final product). This is just as true, though, when comparing the in camera produced JPEG preview/EVF preview to what the result of a properly processed raw file will look like. The EVF is not a true WYSIWYG unless you're shooting straight to JPEG and doing no post processing.

If you're a raw shooter, you've still got to be able to visualize how it can look after processing to get the best results in challenging light.
This is a one great post, Michael. Thank you.
 

Bennymiata

EOS 6D MK II
I started shooting film in 1960 and got my first digital camera in the mid 90's. A Poloroid branded camera with a resolution of less than 1mpx and so much noise that every photo looked like there were Xmas lights in the background.
I went fully digital with my Canon D60 (NOT a 60D).

I use an R and my trusty 5d3. For most jobs, I now use the R, but the 5d3 is still used for many things.
My eyes are getting old, and I do find that the R with eye focus and its fantastic continuous focussing together with touch and drag focussing to be a godsend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

AlanF

Stay alert, control the camera, save photos
Aug 16, 2012
6,486
5,087
I started shooting film in 1960 and got my first digital camera in the mid 90's. A Poloroid branded camera with a resolution of less than 1mpx and so much noise that every photo looked like there were Xmas lights in the background.
I went fully digital with my Canon D60 (NOT a 60D).

I use an R and my trusty 5d3. For most jobs, I now use the R, but the 5d3 is still used for many things.
My eyes are getting old, and I do find that the R with eye focus and its fantastic continuous focussing together with touch and drag focussing to be a godsend.
My first mirrorless was a 0.25 Mpx Casio QV10 digital camera in 1995, which was good enough for mugshots of my students and a 1.3 Mpx Agfa in 1998 which produced some very nice shots. I then upgraded to a DSLR when Canon made the major breakthrough of the 300D in 2003. I still have it.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,230
1,270
My first mirrorless was a 0.25 Mpx Casio QV10 digital camera in 1995, which was good enough for mugshots of my students and a 1.3 Mpx Agfa in 1998 which produced some very nice shots. I then upgraded to a DSLR when Canon made the major breakthrough of the 300D in 2003. I still have it.
I was a little late to the digital party. While still using EOS film bodies, my first digital (and also mirrorless) camera was a Powershot A540 I picked up to use as a pocket camera and to also check out what this whole digital "thing" was about in around 2005. I didn't buy my first DSLR (a Rebel XTi/400D) until it went on sale in 2008 when the Rebel XSi/450D was introduced.
 

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,073
143
I get that people want to have clarity and be reassured that if they have moved or are moving to mirrorless that they are making the right decision. But, how is that in Canon's best interest?

Canon is not going to walk away from a huge share of their market. They are going to continue to make DSLRs that people want. They are going to continue to make R models that people want. They will use what they have learned making mirrorless cameras to improve their DSLRs and they will use what they have learned about DSLRs to improve their mirrorless cameras.

I use both. I like both. The R does some things better than a DSLR. DSLRs do some things better than the R. Would it be nice if one camera could do everything? Of course. But, there are inherent differences in the formats and as one who has been using both formats consistently, I don't know if those differences will ever be reconciled.

I fail to see why so many mirrorless users are so caught up in the idea that one format must inevitably replace the other. And, I think its just plain goofy to think that Canon has an interest in forcing one format on people over another. In fact, it makes far more sense for them to keep improving both formats so that people want to own multiple cameras.
I can’t help but wonder whether people said the same thing in the late 90s when digital cameras first hit the scene. (I was not dialed into internet chatter at the time)

I prefer DSLRs overall (as a user of both types)...but at this point it’s a matter of when, not if, mirrorless cameras become the new standard. I initially thought both could co-exist, but as soon as Nikon and Canon jumped in with FF mirrorless and new mounts for both, that’s the beginning of the end for DSLR I’m afraid - whether we like it or not. That’s the direction that mass market is moving (as the user base continues to shrink).

The only question is how long it’s going to take. It may be as short as 3 years from now, or as long as 10. It’ll depend on adoption rate and technological advancement. But the writing is on the wall...it *will* happen.
 

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,073
143
I was a little late to the digital party. While still using EOS film bodies, my first digital (and also mirrorless) camera was a Powershot A540 I picked up to use as a pocket camera and to also check out what this whole digital "thing" was about in around 2005. I didn't buy my first DSLR (a Rebel XTi/400D) until it went on sale in 2008 when the Rebel XSi/450D was introduced.
The Powershot G1 was my first digicam, bought at the end of 2000. My first DSLR camera was the Rebel T2i in 2010. I had been interested in ILCs for many years prior, but that was the first time I actually had the money (and dedication) to jump in.

I did go for the original EOS M in late 2012 to replace my P&S as my compact camera, if that counts as my first MILC.
 

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,465
409
Davidson, NC
I can’t help but wonder whether people said the same thing in the late 90s when digital cameras first hit the scene. (I was not dialed into internet chatter at the time)

I prefer DSLRs overall (as a user of both types)...but at this point it’s a matter of when, not if, mirrorless cameras become the new standard. I initially thought both could co-exist, but as soon as Nikon and Canon jumped in with FF mirrorless and new mounts for both, that’s the beginning of the end for DSLR I’m afraid - whether we like it or not. That’s the direction that mass market is moving (as the user base continues to shrink).

The only question is how long it’s going to take. It may be as short as 3 years from now, or as long as 10. It’ll depend on adoption rate and technological advancement. But the writing is on the wall...it *will* happen.
I'm old enough that it probably won't affect me at all. My 6D2 and EF lenses should still be going great when I die or otherwise get beyond shooting a lot of pictures some time in the next fifteen years. If I get beyond doing much traveling, then I won't feel the need to replace my G5X II when technology advances. I've been buying a new travel camera about every three years. I don't know anything that a mirrorless can add significantly to the choice I have of those two cameras to use. If I wanted something in between, I'd consider an M camera, but haven't thought of a real use I would have for one. As for EF lenses, I might purchase a TS lens someday to play with, but might be better served by just an occasional rental if I have a specific project in mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

Graphic.Artifacts

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 1, 2017
552
395
I can't think of anything I'd do with my 5D Mark IV that I couldn't do just as well or probably better with a MILC. Especially if it has a tilt screen.

On the other hand I just can't warm up to using a mirror-less for the kind of wildlife that I like to shoot for my own enjoyment. The EVF just doesn't work for me. I think I'd feel the same way about sports if that was something I spent a lot of time doing. The OVF is always on and just a couple beats faster and that can make all of the difference. It's irritating having to constantly wait for the EVF to start up just to be able to look through the camera and the shutter lag means you can easily miss shots in fast developing action. My 1DX is ready to shoot long before I can get it up to my eye. I never feel like I'm waiting for it to catch up.
 

Kit.

EOR R
Apr 25, 2011
1,737
1,077
I can’t help but wonder whether people said the same thing in the late 90s when digital cameras first hit the scene.
...when APS film cameras first hit the scene.

Digital cameras of the late 90s either were prohibitively expensive or had such a bad IQ that they were only used by geeks.

APS film cameras, though, were supposed to become the new mainstream. But that somehow didn't happen.
 

Graphic.Artifacts

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 1, 2017
552
395
Smart move selling the 5D Mark IV now. I expect there will be quite a few on the market in a few months when the R5 gets closer to launch. I think I'll probably be giving mine up sometime in the next few months. I'd sell it now if I had a suitable back-up. I still have my original 5D which takes very nice images considering it's age but it's impossible to keep the sensor clean for very long. The Mark II and Mark III are long gone but I kept the classic for some reason.

My plan is to swap the 5D4 for a R5 but hang onto the 1DX Mark II for a while. It has plenty of life left in it and I'm very happy with the way it performs with my 600F4. That will probably be my last DSLR for everyday use.