Is SLR dead?

[gmrza]

It seems like many who are enthusiastic about mirrorless cameras are enthusiastic about a product that exists only in their minds. Big sensor, small lenses, lightweight, clear viewfinder, high ISO, quality images, low cost. But no one makes this dream mirrorless camera. Frankly, I suspect that the ideal mirrorless camera would need to be something like Dr. Who's TARDIS: bigger on the inside than on the outside. And outside of science fiction, that's a bit difficult to accomplish.

The EVIL camera is a bit like the netbook, at least at the moment. Remember when Steve Jobs said that Apple would not go into the netbook market, because it was not possible to produce a netbook that was not a piece of junk. Essentially, he was right. Fortunately for us, PC technology has matured to the level where ultrabooks make netbooks irrelevant.

Cameras will take a bit longer.

I think Canon's strategy of staying out of mirrorless has been right, at least so far. I don't know that Canon will make a profitable entry into that niche, given how small it is.

I believe a big issue where mirrorless systems fall down at the moment is on the fact that their market is too narrow - unlike DSLRS, which appeal to all kinds of users from beginners to seasoned professionals. DSLRs also cater for the widest range of use cases from landscape, portraiture, events to reportage and sports. That breadth of appeal and use makes it possible to build economies of scale, which are still impossible for a mirrorless system, at least for the foreseeable future.

In addition to all the issues that have been mentioned, any decent mirrorless system, without the economies of scale that Canon and Nikon's DSLR systems have, will suffer from "Leica syndrome" - the costs of production will be too high to bring a product to market at a price which has broad appeal.

 

[Jettatore]

Someone tell me who the mirrorless interchangeable lens customer is, please. Early adopters who want the latest cool gadget? I suppose tourists not wanting to be loaded down with a big DSLR, but wanting nice pictures from their trip of a lifetime might be a good market. But is that a sustainable market? And, knowing how most consumers think, they might pay $6,000 for trip but aren't going to shell out $1,000 for a camera and lenses to remember the trip by. ("I thought about it and then realized I could just upgrade my iPhone for $200.")

It seems like many who are enthusiastic about mirrorless cameras are enthusiastic about a product that exists only in their minds. Big sensor, small lenses, lightweight, clear viewfinder, high ISO, quality images, low cost. But no one makes this dream mirrorless camera. Frankly, I suspect that the ideal mirrorless camera would need to be something like Dr. Who's TARDIS: bigger on the inside than on the outside. And outside of science fiction, that's a bit difficult to accomplish.

I think you are mostly right, (your whole post, not just the snippet above) however you asked, and I think a distinction needs to be made. There already is a niche, mirrorless, fullframe high-quality camera system that negates most of the snippet above, the Lieca M9 (rangefinder and manual focus-aperature, etc.). It's a niche product, it is absurdly, absurdly, absurdly expensive, but for what it does, in it's small form factor, it has no equal.

So that's one range defined, the other, is the Nikon 1 and Micro 4/3rd's systems that already exist. Nikon 1 feels very, very, very consumer end, Micro 4/3'rds, slight bigger/pricier but more pro-sumer ended. Because of the level of interest/experience of most registered users here, there just isn't a lot of excitement for these style cameras, especially not on the lower end Nikon 1 series side of things, and I suspect if Canon simply clones either of these systems in it's own right it will mostly be ignored by this crowd, especially if it's 1 series. I personally am not even looking forward to having the front rumors page cluttered up with Nikon 1 series style announcements. On the other hand, an affordable, competing mirror-less system of Lieca quality at much lower prices would not only interest me, it might just get me to swap all of my equipment if the price is right and the quality is a match or better. There is also the Sony mirror-less which aside from regular upgrades isn't that well differentiated from Sony's mirrored cameras that take the same lenses. You at least need to have lenses that are designed (or already functionally small enough) to cater to the benefits of a small form factor body that mirror-less can afford and Sony doesn't quite capture on this to the same extent as Pan/Oly, Lieca or Nikon 1.

 

[paul13walnut5]

it is absurdly, absurdly, absurdly expensive

Is it? If folk are willing to pay it then it can't be that absurd.

It is bespoke, made in short production runs, finished to a high standard, different economies of scale (design, tooling, niche market)

For all that I wouldn't have one. Don't like 'em. I might buy a contax G2 whilst they are cheap. ish.

I agree they are expensive, but is it all that absurd. TS-E lenses are expensive, is that absurd?

 

[Razor2012]

it is absurdly, absurdly, absurdly expensive

Is it? If folk are willing to pay it then it can't be that absurd.

It is bespoke, made in short production runs, finished to a high standard, different economies of scale (design, tooling, niche market)

For all that I wouldn't have one. Don't like 'em. I might buy a contax G2 whilst they are cheap. ish.

I agree they are expensive, but is it all that absurd. TS-E lenses are expensive, is that absurd?

I wouldn't say TS lenses are expensive, but I would say the 5 & 600mm's are ones that are.

 

[paul13walnut5]

Economies of scale. Just like the real leicas (not rebadged Panasonics, Fuji's, Minoltas or whatever)

For the folk who get rangefinders is the cost any less absurd than those who want low selling fast aperture extreme telephoto primes?

If I want a subaru imprezza it costs a lot less than a morgan...

Maybe thats the thing, I might think an imprezza is a better car, anonymous, but faster, better handling, better factories, but lots of folk have them - it's not a statement car. Sometimes i feel a lot of folk buy cameras as statements.

 

[Jettatore]

it is absurdly, absurdly, absurdly expensive

Is it? If folk are willing to pay it then it can't be that absurd.

It is bespoke, made in short production runs, finished to a high standard, different economies of scale (design, tooling, niche market)

For all that I wouldn't have one. Don't like 'em. I might buy a contax G2 whilst they are cheap. ish.

I agree they are expensive, but is it all that absurd. TS-E lenses are expensive, is that absurd?

I fully respect your distinctions. And I do understand that 'an appropriate price is whatever a buyer will pay/market will bear' concept of commerce, as well as economies of scale etc. etc. But I don't even agree with monetary systems for distribution of essential or non-essential goods and services, which would bring in a topic too large to fully discuss here. Again I agree with you, so long as it's a niche product and there is a market with wallets big enough that Leica can and will charge what it can get. However, I am specifically in the market for such a designed camera system but am in a completely different price range, which is why I chose to say what I said and I hope that makes sense of it.

 

[paul13walnut5]

even outwith any political stand point or perception of exlusivity, you must agree in a purely practical sense that the unit cost of something that sells 10'000 editions is going to be less than something that sells 200?

Especially with design and high technology?

I am not inclined to bum up the free market by any manner of means, but economies of scale apply whether you are working in a factory in Venezuala, Japan or Taiwan.

 

[Jettatore]

even outwith any political stand point or perception of exlusivity, you must agree in a purely practical sense that the unit cost of something that sells 10'000 editions is going to be less than something that sells 200?

Especially with design and high technology?

I am not inclined to bum up the free market by any manner of means, but economies of scale apply whether you are working in a factory in Venezuala, Japan or Taiwan.

I understand the concept and agree. However, to repeat, "I am specifically in the market for such a designed camera system but am in a completely different price range". So from my perspective, the one I am writing from (not the CEO of Lieca's perspective) the camera is absurdly priced and not even a consideration for myself.

p.s. I had edited the previous post while you were posting a response to add in "as well as economies of scale" while you were posting... wasn't intentional

 

[paul13walnut5]

The Fuji looks nice, and i have came very close to buying a GF1...

But really all I want is a canon. Just cos I've got canon lenses and that.

 

[Razor2012]

Economies of scale. Just like the real leicas (not rebadged Panasonics, Fuji's, Minoltas or whatever)

For the folk who get rangefinders is the cost any less absurd than those who want low selling fast aperture extreme telephoto primes?

If I want a subaru imprezza it costs a lot less than a morgan...

Maybe thats the thing, I might think an imprezza is a better car, anonymous, but faster, better handling, better factories, but lots of folk have them - it's not a statement car. Sometimes i feel a lot of folk buy cameras as statements.

Heh, the whole world is a statement. It all boils down to how much disposable income one has or what their priorities are. Everything everyone buys is a statement, whether it costs a little or a lot.

 

[paul13walnut5]

Yes, up to a point.

I might defend somebody who makes a living doing street or social photography spending what seems like absurd cash on a Leica M digital.

However when it comes to Hermes editions, I just think there's too many starving weans in the world. If you are that rich just buy an M9 and build a well with the change. Or something.

 

[Jettatore]

Economies of scale. Just like the real leicas (not rebadged Panasonics, Fuji's, Minoltas or whatever)

For the folk who get rangefinders is the cost any less absurd than those who want low selling fast aperture extreme telephoto primes?

If I want a subaru imprezza it costs a lot less than a morgan...

Maybe thats the thing, I might think an imprezza is a better car, anonymous, but faster, better handling, better factories, but lots of folk have them - it's not a statement car. Sometimes i feel a lot of folk buy cameras as statements.

Heh, the whole world is a statement. It all boils down to how much disposable income one has or what their priorities are. Everything everyone buys is a statement, whether it costs a little or a lot.

Yes but there is definitely something 'extra state-menty' about the feeling of the uber high price Lieca systems. It seems to speak, I know photography (otherwise I couldn't even work this camera because it's full manual), this camera fills my needs precisely and flawlessly without being 'too much/too big/or more for the sake of more' niche and the obvious 'I can afford this'. Combined, it does at least 'seem' to be making a statement even if that statement is fully assumed by the judgmental observer. I want something like it, because of size and weight without sacrificing too much quality, I have no interest in making any statement whatsoever and if I was given a Lieca system, I would gladly use it and I suspect I would use it more often than my bigger, and more capable, DSLRs. With that said, and all the other similar topics I've been in today, I think I am just going to try to get more comfortable with the idea and practice of lugging around DSLR equipment to situations where I normally wouldn't. At least for the time being that will solve most of the issue, except that it will still attract more unwanted attention.

 

[AvTvM]

... , you must agree in a purely practical sense that the unit cost of something that sells 10'000 editions is going to be less than something that sells 200?
Especially with design and high technology?

yes.

But ...
if Canon brings to market an APS-C sensored mirrorless system camera that does everything the 650D does (with great EVF instead of tunnel-vision Rebel-OVF, minus mirror box and mirror slap) at the same price as a 650D ... plus a few matching pancake fixed focals the size and optical quality of the 40/2.8 plus a few ultra-compact zooms ... all of which I consider to be very well be possible ... they will sell them in the millions.

And ...
if Canon brings to market a 135-sensored ("FF") mirrorless system body the size of a Minolta CLE (=smaller than a Leica M9), that does everything the 5D 3 does at the price of the 5D 3 ... they will sell them by the millions. Especially if this camera would come with an electrified Leica M-mount up front. Backwards compatible with all M-mount manual focus lenses. Plus a few, new, nice and very compact Canon "E-M" lenses with USM-AF and optical quality close to the Leicas but at half the price ... they would sell gazillions.

I would order the latter system, as a matter of fact.

 

[picturesbyme]

No.

 

[paul13walnut5]

@AvTvM

if Canon brings to market a 135-sensored ("FF") mirrorless system body the size of a Minolta CLE (=smaller than a Leica M9), that does everything the 5D 3 does at the price of the 5D 3 ... they will sell them by the millions. Especially if this camera would come with an electrified Leica M-mount up front. Backwards compatible with all M-mount manual focus lenses. Plus a few, new, nice and very compact Canon "E-M" lenses with USM-AF and optical quality close to the Leicas but at half the price ... they would sell gazillions.

I would order the latter system, as a matter of fact.

I would like Mila Kunis to rub her @ss on my face. I don't know who is going to have to wait longer to be dissapointed.

Have often pondered the CLE though. A bit like an M7, but 20 years earlier. And still cheaper. Ok I admit it. I have a soft spot for Minolta. And Mila Kunis.

 

[Rocky]

... , you must agree in a purely practical sense that the unit cost of something that sells 10'000 editions is going to be less than something that sells 200?
Especially with design and high technology?

yes.

But ...
if Canon brings to market an APS-C sensored mirrorless system camera that does everything the 650D does (with great EVF instead of tunnel-vision Rebel-OVF, minus mirror box and mirror slap) at the same price as a 650D ... plus a few matching pancake fixed focals the size and optical quality of the 40/2.8 plus a few ultra-compact zooms ... all of which I consider to be very well be possible ... they will sell them in the millions.

And ...
if Canon brings to market a 135-sensored ("FF") mirrorless system body the size of a Minolta CLE (=smaller than a Leica M9), that does everything the 5D 3 does at the price of the 5D 3 ... they will sell them by the millions. Especially if this camera would come with an electrified Leica M-mount up front. Backwards compatible with all M-mount manual focus lenses. Plus a few, new, nice and very compact Canon "E-M" lenses with USM-AF and optical quality close to the Leicas but at half the price ... they would sell gazillions.

I would order the latter system, as a matter of fact.

Sounds like you would like to have everything Pus the kitchen sink.

 

[itsnotmeyouknow]

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

I have the Pentax 645D which has a 44mm x 33mm CCD sensor. There are no medium format sensors using CMOS and no Live view with any MF camera. Without the use of CMOS MF sensors there will be no mirror free medium format. With Kodak hitting the skids (they make the sensor for the 645D and the Leica S2) I can't see investment happening in this sector a little while and I believe that the circuitry in a CCD sensor of that size would not be able to handle Live view.

 

[paul13walnut5]

Don't get hung up with CMOS. I've been using CCD cameras with 'live view' for the last 23 years.

 

[Rocky]

I cannot understand while people complain about the price of M9 at $7999 and call it ABSURD, while no one complain about the Canon 1D X at $6999

 

[Jettatore]

I cannot understand while people complain about the price of M9 at $7999 and call it ABSURD, while no one complain about the Canon 1D X at $6999

Well one idea (among many other possible ones) would be that the 1DX and other high end EF cameras in or around that price range aren't the only cameras readily available for the EF mount system so your comparison seems a bit forced.... Also, I think you are, however un-fault-ably so, taking out of context the inherent perspective that must be considered of the author of said statement. When we make statements in English, more often than not, the author of the statement is assumed or completely ignored/omitted (since rarely and with difficultly is the author -as a whole- included/referenced in the statement itself) and the statement often unintentionally yet improperly taken and interpreted by the listener in isolation from it's perspective, leads to frustrations and confusions as seen above.

From my perspective and current financial position, as a consumer, it seems very reasonable, for me to consider and suggest the price of the Leica system on the whole, absurd, and move on accordingly to suggest to other manufacturers who actually develop products in my price-range - my growing interest in such a system at a different price level. Does that mean it 'is' absurd, no, - it 'is' what it 'is', and at this point, I'm not so sure it's even that...

(p.s. the verb 'to be' and it's many forms 'is' etc., very much resembles playing with land-mines, and in using English, proves extremely difficult to avoid...) Check e-prime on wikipedia and the .pdf's in the 'external links' section at the bottom if your interested in that sort of stuff.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-prime