Is SLR dead?

[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

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

You you the word 'Absurdly three times one after another in the same sentence. there is no confussion or misinterpretation about it. If you want to do back-paddle, it is your call.

 

[Jettatore]

From my perspective as a consumer, the price of the Leica system, is absurdly, absurdly, absurd, from my perspective... From Leica's CEO's perspective, the price of the Leica system is likely absurdly right on target and taking it to the bank. Bye.

 

[bdunbar79]

I guess after reading all of these threads and 1D X and 5D Mark III forums, it seems a lot of people are unhappy with their current gear, AND the new gear for sale. If there is an absolute perfect camera, it will cost about $27k or more.

 

[itsnotmeyouknow]

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

I know that many compacts have CCD sensors and of course they have 'live view'. The sensors aren't the size of a medium format sensor though, and if it was possible on a CCD sensor that size I'm sure it would have been done as manual focussing via live wire would be a great USP on MF

 

[Marsu42]

From my perspective as a consumer, the price of the Leica system, is absurdly, absurdly, absurd, from my perspective...

The price of premium brands or products is *supposed* to be absurd from a Joe Sixpack's perspective: you don't only buy the product, but the distinction that goes along with it! In economic theory, this is called the "snob effect" since more people buy a product if the cost is higher, reversing the usual price-demand curve.

Even using a Canon big white lens with red ring might give people give a considerable ego boost and will part the crowd in front of you to give the "real" photog the opportunity for stellar shots, even if/he she has no clue about photography and has trouble finding the shutter button.

However, most Canon expensive products don't fall in the "premium", but in the "pro" category because after all Canon is just another japanese tech company producing gadgets like powershots in vietnam or some other desolate low-wage country. Only a few products stand out visually and have a premium appeal like maybe the 50L which looks impressive on a 5d.

 

[FunkyCamera]

SLR isn't dead yet or Canon would have made a mirrorless already. They know the business better than anyone in this thread.

The release on the Canon mirrorless system will be the beginning of the end.

 

[paul13walnut5]

@FunkyCamera

The release on the Canon mirrorless system will be the beginning of the end.

Precedent?

Perhaps the example of 4/3's succession by m43.

Nikon have launched the J system and have since launched two of the most interesting conventional DSLRs on the market.

Pentax launched the Q system, yet have also launched the 645D and avant-garde designs like the K-01.

I remember when APS film cameras were the beginning of the end for 35mm cameras...

It's a bold statement to make without even being certain about what Canon will launch and when.

 

[itsnotmeyouknow]

I don't believe that when Canon introduces a mirrorless camera that it will be the beginning of the end for DSLR. There will always be a market for a dslr. I wouldn't exchange my 5D mk III for even a FF mirrorless which I don't see coming out this year at all. It could become a back up but wouldn't be a main camera as there are compromises to be made with mirrorless. I'm not all that interested in a rangefinder, although I was tempted by teh Fuji Xpro1. If canon brought out something similar with a FF sensor it would be very competitive, but still don't think it would kill SLR

 

[archangelrichard]

I have no idea why we keep seeing this kind of comment from people who should know better

NO!

These are different MARKETS (and the mirrorless is the one that is marked for obsoletion already - the phone cam is it's replacement and as technology gets better they will replace all low end cameras (or cameras with phones in them with wifi hubs and .....)

This is the way that market is going - "hand held devices" will replace non-dedicated cameras by taking over that price point / market position

DSLR's are NOT in that market

 

[itsnotmeyouknow]

I have no idea why we keep seeing this kind of comment from people who should know better

NO!

These are different MARKETS (and the mirrorless is the one that is marked for obsoletion already - the phone cam is it's replacement and as technology gets better they will replace all low end cameras (or cameras with phones in them with wifi hubs and .....)

This is the way that market is going - "hand held devices" will replace non-dedicated cameras by taking over that price point / market position

DSLR's are NOT in that market

I don't think for a second that the mirrorless system is earmarked for obsoletion. Compacts may become more like phones and there may end up being an amalgamation. I do think that mirrorless will grow, and if it grows with more models like the Xpro1 then it will be good growth. DSLR won't die any time in the foreseeable future but I think that mirrorless will continue to grow as it has many advantages: it's consumer friendly yet feels like a premium product to consumers.

 

[hgascoigne]

I have a friend that has a NEX-5n and I've played with it a little bit. It's image quality is on par to that of a 7d for quite a bit less. However, I would never buy one simply because of the ergonomics. It's awkward for me to hold and I much prefer the larger body of the 7d, especially on long days of shooting. Not to mention I prefer the optical vf.

That being said, I easily see both styles of camera coexisting. I know many people, including my friend, that could care less about anything other than taking nice looking pictures. For them, mirrorless is perfect.

 

[KitsVancouver]

Look at two other consumer trends:
Music Quality
Video Quality

There was a time when people sat down and listened to music. Today, people just download compressed music. there are always going to be audiophiles, but they are the minority. I'm one of them, but I know it's not the norm.

Then there is Blu-ray. Where can you rent those today? How big is the Blu-ray section in your local electronics retailer? Again, I've got a movie set-up at home, but I'm the minority. I didn't think people would ever watch movies and video on small screens, but it's happening.

On one side, we have quality...image quality, video quality, sound quality. On the other side, we have convenience, weight, on-demand, cost, etc. I don't know if SLRs will diminish in sales numbers, but for all those that don't think it's even a remote possibility, those people aren't looking outside of their own world.

This seems like a bit of a different arguement to me, agenst higher image quality generally rather than SLR's as the preffered basis for that quality.

I'd argue that photography had its "shift to convenience" a decade ago with the digital revolution and what were seeing today is a shift back towards quality.

Audio and video already went through their improvement stages.

People care less and less about quality after it's met a minimum standard. That's some unknown level of perceivable difference. Most people don't have the time, care or money to tell the difference of modern technologies.

Maybe our circles of influence are different but the strong majority of women I know don't want an SLR and many of my friends who are early adopters who have SLRs have either augmented or replaced their SLRs with smaller formats.

You don't have to believe me. Look into industry sales numbers. DSLRs sales are growing but at a declining rate.

 

[photogaz]

Yes, absolutely! I'm willing to offer a recycle service for your SLRs.

Send em to me!

 

[moreorless]

Look at two other consumer trends:
Music Quality
Video Quality

There was a time when people sat down and listened to music. Today, people just download compressed music. there are always going to be audiophiles, but they are the minority. I'm one of them, but I know it's not the norm.

Then there is Blu-ray. Where can you rent those today? How big is the Blu-ray section in your local electronics retailer? Again, I've got a movie set-up at home, but I'm the minority. I didn't think people would ever watch movies and video on small screens, but it's happening.

On one side, we have quality...image quality, video quality, sound quality. On the other side, we have convenience, weight, on-demand, cost, etc. I don't know if SLRs will diminish in sales numbers, but for all those that don't think it's even a remote possibility, those people aren't looking outside of their own world.

This seems like a bit of a different arguement to me, agenst higher image quality generally rather than SLR's as the preffered basis for that quality.

I'd argue that photography had its "shift to convenience" a decade ago with the digital revolution and what were seeing today is a shift back towards quality.

Audio and video already went through their improvement stages.

People care less and less about quality after it's met a minimum standard. That's some unknown level of perceivable difference. Most people don't have the time, care or money to tell the difference of modern technologies.

Maybe our circles of influence are different but the strong majority of women I know don't want an SLR and many of my friends who are early adopters who have SLRs have either augmented or replaced their SLRs with smaller formats.

You don't have to believe me. Look into industry sales numbers. DSLRs sales are growing but at a declining rate.

I don't think you can generalise like that, the reality is that peoples desire for quality will be closely linked how how much they value a certain kind of media.

As I said I think photography went though what music has at an earlier stage, when digital cameras first appeared they were not offering near to the same quality as 35mm film yet they quickly came to dominate the market. Those who'se quality needs were met by compact cameras never bothered to upgrade to DSLR's or other large sensor options where as many who wanted the convenience of digital AND high quality upgraded.

DSLR growth slowing really isnt a supprize I'd say since we've just been though a major transition, you had an entire generation moving to DSLR's from either 35mm film or compacts.

Music and video are for me very different cases, I think the former has generally been a media focused on quality for decades with LP's and CD's where as the latter was until recently far less so with TV and VHS. Hence music generally moving towards lower quality where as video moves towards higher, first DVD and then HD.

 

[Wilmark]

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

When you say Nexus - are you talking about the Galaxy Nexus running Android 4? I have that phone and the camera is utter crap - I dont think i have taken any pictures this good with it under any conditions. What app are you using or any special settings? Its so bad that i have black listed any future purchases from Samsung because of the poor photo performance in a flagship phone.

 

[KitsVancouver]

You're wrong about video quality. Video stores are dying and bluray sales are falling off the charts. Many brick and mortar stores don't even give any shelf space for it.

If you're on this message board you're already far more of an enthusiast than the average Joe. IMO, the difference in IQ and flexibility (lenses etc) are far greater between SLRs and compacts than between SLRs and micro 4/3 and the like.

Anyways, no one can prove the future. We can only see what happens. IQ is the most important thing for me regardless of size but if there was a way to prove it, I'd wager that convenience (where acceptable IQ exists) is for most, the most important thing.

 

[moreorless]

You're wrong about video quality. Video stores are dying and bluray sales are falling off the charts. Many brick and mortar stores don't even give any shelf space for it.

Video stores are dying because business is moving to net rentals/sals/streaming.

Sales of physical media are I'd guess down but HD streaming is growing and HD generally is moving towards the standard for TV viewing.

If you're on this message board you're already far more of an enthusiast than the average Joe. IMO, the difference in IQ and flexibility (lenses etc) are far greater between SLRs and compacts than between SLRs and micro 4/3 and the like.

Anyways, no one can prove the future. We can only see what happens. IQ is the most important thing for me regardless of size but if there was a way to prove it, I'd wager that convenience (where acceptable IQ exists) is for most, the most important thing.

The DSLR market as it is today really doesnt depend on the average Joe if you ask me, the average Joe was happy with his compact and is now probabley happy with his camera phone so never bothered with a DSLR in the first place.

Now whether the DSLR market might be replaced with something new such as mirrorless that offers the same or better image quality is certainly questionable but thats a very different arguement to saying it will die because people don't care about image quality.

As I said I think photography had its big shift to convenience with the digital revolution, that was a massive shift that did convince many people who took photography serious to accept a drop in quality to start with. I don't think that a mere size difference will have as big an effect personally, espeically as many users are happy with the form factor of the DSLR.

 

[iaind]

In keeping with EU directives I am happy to recycle any 1DX 5DII/III or 7D that anybody has.

 

[Rocky]

With the pancake 40mm f2.8 lens, canon is trying to make the 5D "not too much bigger" than the "interchangeable lens mirrorless". Canon should also make a 30mm f2.8 EF-S for the Rebel. That will really make the Rebel close to the size of some "interchangeable lens mirrorless". Both will have much better Ergonomics than any mirrorless.

 

[paul13walnut5]

Is video going higher quality? VHS was pretty crap, but analogue broadcast was excellent, the DVB system is MPEG2 based, and like over applied JPEGs you can get banding and shadow mush etc.

Bluray is excellent (so long as compression kept in toe) streaming... not so much.

Maybe it's because I work in video that I'm more critical of these things, but I wouldn't want to watch a streamed movie on my 40" telly.