DSLRs are a dying breed, EVIL is the future!

[AJ]

Back in the film days there were many mirrorless cameras, ranging from cheap point-n-shoots to high-quality rangefinders to big SLRs like EOS 3.

Back then, the small cameras didn't kill the SLRs. I don't see why mirrorless digital cameras will kill DSLRs in the future.

Mirrors work, and they're not that expensive to produce. Why strip them away?

On another note. Personally I'm lusting for an EF mount camera with a full-frame sensor in a Rebel-like body (plastic+pentamirror = lightweight). If you want to shave off weight, why not get rid of the metal body and big lumpy prism. But I'm not holding my breath...

 

[Flake]

While I think the writer has an interesting point, his thinking is flawed. He talks about the advances in technology which will make the EVIL cameras much better, but neglects to consider the advances which may occur in DSLR development.

I think sales of DSLRs will slow, for several reasons, recession, competition from other formats, but most of all because the technology gains are not sufficient to merit a trade up. Maybe we will see a slowing in the rate of new body launches, both the 5D & 1Ds replacements have kept bodies current much longer than was expected, perhaps what ever is launched will have an even longer product life.

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

But, maybe I'm just a weird person. All my favorite TV shows get cancelled too...

It's the other way around - people who would rather have another season of survivor, lost, or heroes are weird. People who would rather have another season of dark angel or flash forward are not.

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

Back in the film days there were many mirrorless cameras, ranging from cheap point-n-shoots to high-quality rangefinders to big SLRs like EOS 3.

Back then, the small cameras didn't kill the SLRs. I don't see why mirrorless digital cameras will kill DSLRs in the future.

Weren't rangefinder camera manual focus only ?

 

[Rocky]

Size, weight, form factor and ergonomics are all important. How many reviewer are complaining about cameras that have buttons are too small and too close to each other, hand grips are too small, etc. It all goes back to cameras are being too small. I know people that have brought the Rebel for smaller size and cheaper price compared to XXD. they end up buy ing the battery grip such tha they can hold the (even in landscape position). The existing APS-and 4/3" mirrorless are light and cute. But they are ergonomically worst than the DSLR. Also their lenses are just as big as the EF-S lenses (may be there are 2 or 3 exceptions). When we are talking about system, we are talking about lenses, flash, and camera body. with couple big lenses, the camera body doe not matter any more.
I am not against mirrorless. But I have feel that people use the wrong arguement (size and weight). In fact weight of a camera is important to help stabilize the camera during shooting. when you push the shutter button, the camera has a tendency to move downward. the heavier the body, the less movement it will have. That is why in the old film days, some cameras (Rollies, Exakta, eta ) have the shutter release to be pushed backword instead.
One poster mentioned to have pentamirror instead od pentaprism to save weight. I hopethat he realize that he will give up alittle bit of view finder brightness for the weight. The DSLR finder is already dimmer than the film SLR dueto the half mirror needed for auto focusing. I would rather have the extra weight to go me the brightness.
When the AF on mirrorless is as good as the DSLR and EVF is asgood as the optical view finder. Then, we will see whatwill happen. Untilthen,DSLR will still be the "Godfather".

 

[jbwise01]

I definitely think the SIC article is pointing out some important features of mirrorless cameras.

The article mentions FPS as one thing mirrorless has going for it. So you could pick out 1 image from 200 instead of 1 or 20. I think this is an extremely interesting topic.

My wife loves this show on E! called "Scouted", they basically look for models , I should at least mention my detest for E! and all things “pop” culture... anyways...

On this show I noticed they were using RED EPICs for their photo shoots, I was intrigued, because I figured Pro Studios would be using High end DSLRs for their shots and was completely surprised. I looked into this, and it seems that the RED EPIC is gaining a lot of popularity in studio photography and situations where shutter speeds over 1/120 are not an absolute requirement. The fact that magazines and studios are using it shows the potential for mirrorless camera in the photo industry.

The RED EPIC is basically an extremely upgraded “pro” version of a mirrorless camera EVIL-style camera.

The pros
-You can capture 120 FPS.
-Each image is a RAW 14mp
-Live view shooting can be shown on multiple reference monitors

Cons
-images shot in continuous mode are limited to an equivalent shutter speed of 1/120 sec.
-Continous shooting for a long photo session would require LOTS of storage.
-extremely expensive set up for photography
-Requires high powered / high output lighting setup and equipment
-no strobe lighting can be used
-energy needs for lighting would be high
-mobility is limited


Here’s a great Article on the RED EPIC and digital photography.
http://cinetech.drewmaw.com/2011/06/red-epic-may-replace-pro-photography-camera/

I think it will be at least a few years before we see a real “pro” version of a Full Frame mirrorless camera from either Nikon or Canon. Needless to say.. mirrorless cameras are indeed the future, the potential is there for some exciting possibilities.

 

[7enderbender]

I don't see the general design concepts contradict each other. I like the size and weight of my DSLR for its use. I'm actually one of the crazy people who added the way-too-expensive battery grip to my 5DII to enhance the ergonomics and balance.

That is not to say that I wouldn't like adding another small camera at some point that is more capable than my current digital P&S. Actually, I'm closely looking at what Canon does with the new G series and certainly what Fuji just came up with. High want factor. But not as a replacement.

 

[Rocky]

Back in the film days there were many mirrorless cameras, ranging from cheap point-n-shoots to high-quality rangefinders to big SLRs like EOS 3.

Back then, the small cameras didn't kill the SLRs. I don't see why mirrorless digital cameras will kill DSLRs in the future.

Weren't rangefinder camera manual focus only ?

Straightly speaking, range finder cameras are manual focusing only. However, a lot of people call non-SLR as range finder. In the early 80's there are a lot of small AF, full auto little film camera. I personally will call them "view finder".

 

[AJ]

Back in the film days there were many mirrorless cameras, ranging from cheap point-n-shoots to high-quality rangefinders to big SLRs like EOS 3.

Back then, the small cameras didn't kill the SLRs. I don't see why mirrorless digital cameras will kill DSLRs in the future.

Weren't rangefinder camera manual focus only ?

Yes indeed that's true. Thanks for pointing that out

 

[Sunnystate]

Agree completely, I am looking to mirrorless for something to finally replace my Rebel with super wide lens that, I carry everyday for walks with my dog. My God, just give me high quality mirrorless with some kind of lens in the 14-16mm FF range, I don't care for the price, and of course I will still keep all of my other SLR bodies.

On the other hand when mirrorless technology obviously will get really advanced, exceeding ability of the SLR, it may become financially sound not to support both systems and mirrorless will also be build in the form similar to the current SLR to preserve ergonomics, weight, ability to mount large lenses etc.
In any case SLRs probably will be replaced at some point if not by so called mirrorless than by some kind of other technology that will be cheaper, more efficient and better.
There is no reason to cry... just roll with the punches learn, and take best shots you can with available technology.
If changes like that will kill one or two companies (hopefully not Canon) it only will show that there was something wrong with the management, and usual suspects are lack of imagination and arrogance.

I think people are mixing up capabilities and form factors. Mirrorless camera's will most certainly one day match the capabilities of DSLRs. But I want a big sturdy camera for my shooting.

It's all about what a camera is good for. And people are just assuming that because a mirrorless is as good as whatever other camera then people will use it. But I don't take my desktop to a coffee shop and I don't edit photos on my laptop at home. Even though they are close to the same speed each has it's proper uses.

I think it's time we got over this confusion about the two. I actually like hauling my gripped 7D around with a 70-200mm and a flash. And I wouldn't prefer a lighter version of the rig. One of the main reasons I upgrade from my Rebel was that it was too small.

But, maybe I'm just a weird person. All my favorite TV shows get cancelled too...

 

[neuroanatomist]

But, maybe I'm just a weird person. All my favorite TV shows get cancelled too...

It's the other way around - people who would rather have another season of survivor, lost, or heroes are weird. People who would rather have another season of dark angel or flash forward are not.

Wonderfalls, Pushing Daisies, and Dead Like Me - great shows that all died untimely deaths. It's hard for quirky, intelligent shows to compete against 'mainstream' shows like Survivor and Lost and Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader (hint: if you're watching it, the answer is likely 'no').

dSLRs aren't 'quirky' but while I think there will always be a market for the high IQ they can deliver, I think when the banes of mirrorless cameras get solved (AF speed and shutter lag), the consumer popularity (i.e. Rebel/xxxD lines) of the dSLR arena will be dramatically reduced.

 

[unfocused]

I use an M9 and Summicron 35 for 90% of what I shoot. I love the size and weight of the thing. I can fit it almost everywhere.

Yes...I thought that camera sitting on your workspace at CES didn't look like a Canon. Bad boy! Since it's your website, you don't get bad Karma, even though you deserve it.

Seriously though, of course DSLRS are a dying breed. It's just a question of how long it will take. Right now, there is nothing available that makes a better replacement. But, technology marches on.

In my lifetime, I've seen vinyl records, eight-track tapes, cassettes and now CDs come and go (well actually, vinyl records were here before I was born, but not the others). Same with the entire video store industry. For half of my life, there was no such thing as a video rental store. They came...they succeeded...they failed and technology marched on.

I accept that I am a dinosaur.

But, I'm also gambling that the death of the DSLR, when it comes, will arrive gradually and I may be too old and weak to lift a camera to my eye by that time. On the upside, if it comes sooner, the end of the DSLR just might give me the opportunity to pick up some nice "L" lenses at a discount when no one else wants them anymore.

 

[Rocky]

In my lifetime, I've seen vinyl records, eight-track tapes, cassettes and now CDs come and go (well actually, vinyl records were here before I was born, but not the others). Same with the entire video store industry. For half of my life, there was no such thing as a video rental store. They came...they succeeded...they failed and technology marched on.

I accept that I am a dinosaur.

But, I'm also gambling that the death of the DSLR, when it comes, will arrive gradually and I may be too old and weak to lift a camera to my eye by that time. On the upside, if it comes sooner, the end of the DSLR just might give me the opportunity to pick up some nice "L" lenses at a discount when no one else wants them anymore.

May I add that I have seen 78 rpm hard phono record, hand crank phono player, steel wire recorder. That is a real dinosaur.

 

[Viggo]

But, maybe I'm just a weird person. All my favorite TV shows get cancelled too...

It's the other way around - people who would rather have another season of survivor, lost, or heroes are weird. People who would rather have another season of dark angel or flash forward are not.

Wonderfalls, Pushing Daisies, and Dead Like Me - great shows that all died untimely deaths. It's hard for quirky, intelligent shows to compete against 'mainstream' shows like Survivor and Lost and Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader (hint: if you're watching it, the answer is likely 'no').

dSLRs aren't 'quirky' but while I think there will always be a market for the high IQ they can deliver, I think when the banes of mirrorless cameras get solved (AF speed and shutter lag), the consumer popularity (i.e. Rebel/xxxD lines) of the dSLR arena will be dramatically reduced.

+1 for that, I think the best tv-series EVER produced for an insanely amount of reasosns, "Arrested Development" were to smart for people, three seasons only? Because it wasn't profitable. I for one can't wait until the movie gets here...

 

[Viggo]

Again, why are people so obsessed with loosing the mirror?

I see nothing but benefits from it. (If you shoot video and argue for AF on video, forget it. If you buy a 1d X purley for filming, you have a rig and person adjusting focus anyways.)

 

[alipaulphotography]

I think my ultimate gear combination would be a big medium format Contax with Zeiss glass for the best image quality.

Then a small mirrorless full frame for portability.

That would probably be the best of both worlds.

I agree the DSLR's will always have their place in sports and wildlife photography for sure.

 

[EYEONE]

But, maybe I'm just a weird person. All my favorite TV shows get cancelled too...

It's the other way around - people who would rather have another season of survivor, lost, or heroes are weird. People who would rather have another season of dark angel or flash forward are not.

Wonderfalls, Pushing Daisies, and Dead Like Me - great shows that all died untimely deaths. It's hard for quirky, intelligent shows to compete against 'mainstream' shows like Survivor and Lost and Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader (hint: if you're watching it, the answer is likely 'no').

dSLRs aren't 'quirky' but while I think there will always be a market for the high IQ they can deliver, I think when the banes of mirrorless cameras get solved (AF speed and shutter lag), the consumer popularity (i.e. Rebel/xxxD lines) of the dSLR arena will be dramatically reduced.

+1 for that, I think the best tv-series EVER produced for an insanely amount of reasosns, "Arrested Development" were to smart for people, three seasons only? Because it wasn't profitable. I for one can't wait until the movie gets here...

Arrested Development, Firefly, Stargate: Universe... The list goes on.

However, I did love Lost too...

 

[skitron]

I suppose at the end of the day the laws of physics will have its say in the matter. If you want the framing and DOF that a full frame gives with a particular lens then sure, you can miniaturize the body. Maybe you can even miniaturize the lens 5% under what you have now. But at the end of the day does anyone really want to shoot a 70-200 L f/2.8 with something like a NEX 5 body?

 

[dstppy]

Arrested Development, Firefly, Stargate: Universe... The list goes on.

However, I did love Lost too...

Yall got nothing on my troubles. Since Nero Wolfe got cancelled . . . I've had to turn to READING!!! Oh the Humanity! :'(

 

[traveller]

When EVFs are indistiguishable from OVFs and on-chip phase detect AF is as good as using a separate sensor, then I cannot see the point of having a mirror inside the camera anymore. But none of this means that all future 'mirrorless' cameras will be tiny pocketable models; I've stated my position before that in the future 'mirrorless' cameras will simply be the norm and there will be plenty of room in the market for many different form factors.

Imagine this for a future Canon pro camera:

-no mirror, on-sensor hybrid phase and contrast detect AF (Nikon 1 style)
-smaller flange back distance frees up designers to produce exciting new lenses (which can be used on smaller bodies when you need compactness or discretion)
-EF mount adaptor allows mounting of legacy lenses
-Huge EVF (bigger than current 1D X's 0.76x) that lets you compose in near darkness (to match the low light capabilities of future sensors), whilst previewing white balance and exposure.
-fully electronic shutter with 120+fps capability (no moving parts), flash sync at just about any speed you like...

Still afraid of losing the mirror?