The Mirrorless Future

[RS2021]

I was away from the site for a while and I see my profile, comments, and “karma” (good move CR) are all gone.

I saw the Canon product road map and chuckled a bit. Yes, Canon will put out more of the single reflex systems with hefty prisms, slap-down mirrors that “lock up”….with incremental tweaks to what is essentially last century ideas…to squeeze out profits with what they already have to the very last, wheezing, painful, breath. This is how companies work; this is how Canon will work, as long as they possibly can.

They will tease; introduce smaller mirrorless “systems”, just to keep a Canon-head like myself from jumping ship to a full frame competitor with less-storied lenses. We complain, we moan, write long comments on blogs for other Canon-heads, but at the end, we are like those vacant-eyed calves they put on the conveyer belt… helplessly, meekly, bleating, we go down the “road map” to become yummy veal for Canon

But the future is now… some of what Canon does will depend on what the competitors do and what the market demands. I say “some” as one can never underestimate the sheer optimism (naïveté?) of a diehard fan who will hang on tooth and nail even if the platform is being overtaken, not in steps, but in bounds.

I am happy with my Canon gear for now, as with everything, it is a balance; no one is perfect. I am sure Miss America has one tit smaller than the other if you look hard enough Only a pedantic fool will expect his Canon SLR to bring his beer in high resolution at 90 fps with a DR of 2 million . For the size of the sensor, the resolution, the quality of lenses, and the “I am used to it” factor… Canon is good. They are delivering at a slow, steady, dollar-squeezing pace.

But to get back to the product road map, some of this will be dictated by the market forces. Full frame mirrorless in a decent form-factor will have to come at a faster pace than I glean from that road map picture CR posted. And I predict it will … it has to.

Because, as with everything, there is an end to even the mindless optimism and naïveté of the diehard fan. Canon is likely to drag it out for another 4 to 5 years… with “almost there” teases to keep you buying… we will have to wait and see.

But here is a sacred promise I make in the presence of other vacant-eyed calves on the conveyer belt… ID-X is my last miorred SLR… I do not plan on buying anymore “intermediate”…incremental flagships.

Enjoy your veal!

 

[Bengt Nyman]

Yes Ray 2021. An eloquent and timeless statement applying to all products of the world.

I agree, the SLR is what should be up for slaughter. And it is:
This year we will see Sony, Leica and Hasselblad introduce mirrorless products that outperform the DSLR.
Sony does it because they can. They will offer a FF mirrorless adaptor-camera which accepts just about every body else's lens including Canon, legacy and production.
Leica does it to save its petty little life.
Hasselblad does it to get get back on top with a 2-up on Leica in a 2xFF (36x48) mirrorless camera.

So sitting on your conveyor belt on the way to your slaughter, if you find yourself sitting on something hard, it is probably a DSLR.

 

[RS2021]

This mirrorless Sony that accepts everything sounds too good to be true... are we talking rumors or something more concrete.

 

[Bengt Nyman]

This mirrorless Sony that accepts everything sounds too good to be true... are we talking rumors or something more concrete.

It is supposedly a statement made by a Sony official: To offer a FF mirrorless camera body that can accommodate a large range of legacy and production lenses including those made by other manufacturers.
If they do, it might force Canon and Nikon to give up their mirror-boxes earlier than planned. A win-win for the world when it happens.

 

[AmbientLight]

I truly wonder why I shoot using the viewfinder most of the time and only on occasion use the 10x magnification in liveview? I don't think removing the mirror and prism arrangement does so many wonders for me. One of the biggest factors here is autofocus speed.

Given that in current cameras autofocus slows down using liveview autofocus mode, we should not expect that just removing a seemingly old-fashioned mirror and prism arrangement will make autofocus faster, because the camera also has to deliver image information to the viewer. How image data is handled in camera also affects how quickly it can be delivered on screen. I don't consider this a negligible factor. I do have my doubts about mirrorless cameras replacing DSLRs as long as I don't have autofocus at least being as fast as it can be using liveview. If using the viewfinder would slow down autofocus, then that would be different.

A mirrorless design may be able to get faster eventually, but when and at what cost? I fear that there is too much trust in new technology. We will have to wait a while, before anything spectacular might happen in this area.

 

[meli]

But here is a sacred promise I make in the presence of other vacant-eyed calves on the conveyer belt… ID-X is my last miorred SLR… I do not plan on buying anymore “intermediate”…incremental flagships.

Enjoy your veal!

"calf" here, its one thing being optimist about a tech, another being ignorant.
Suggesting that next gen tier-1 models will replace ovf for evf, meaning that you would be able to -lets say- pan with a 40mp 1D in harsh light is just that, pure ignorance. Ignorance is bliss though so keep entertaining us please!

 

[Ryan708]

What utter tosh!

Maybe my irony radar is switched off but come on!

The SLR form is perfectly braced for hand held shooting, mirrorless with live view is not.

Thats before you get under the hood.

For the folk who need WLF's nothing other than a WLF will do, for the folks who need an SLR form, nothing else will do, for the folk who like rangefinders, nothing else will do. Part function, part form, part technology.

Everybody want to kill off DSLRs, yet nobody really wants to buy into mirrorless.

Get your stories straight and stick to them.

+1 Try using a mirrorless with the sun over your shoulders glaring on that screen. Anyone that has used a viewfinder would miss it. Try having a mirrorless with a large sensor and a 400+mm lens hanging off the pathetic grip, and hand-holding a shot. I'll keep my camera pressed against my face, thank you.

 

[unfocused]

What utter tosh!

Maybe my irony radar is switched off but come on!

The SLR form is perfectly braced for hand held shooting, mirrorless with live view is not.

That's before you get under the hood.

For the folk who need WLF's nothing other than a WLF will do, for the folks who need an SLR form, nothing else will do, for the folk who like rangefinders, nothing else will do. Part function, part form, part technology.

Everybody want to kill off DSLRs, yet nobody really wants to buy into mirrorless.

Get your stories straight and stick to them.

Exactly. The OP has wandered deep into tin-foil hat territory. The conspiracy theories about companies taking advantage of customers get to be a little old. No one is holding a gun to anyone's head to buy a camera. Only in government-controlled economies can manufacturers withhold technology or attempt to dictate what the consumer is allowed to buy. And, as can be seen by the collapse of the Soviet Union and China's de-facto turn to capitalism, it doesn't even work very well in government-controlled economies.

Okay, someday we all may move to an alternative form factor that improves on the DSLR. But, let's face it, the current state of mirrorless cameras are little more than electrified versions of 19th century view cameras. The major improvement being that the image is right-side up. Given the current state of development, the ergonomics of mirrorless cameras cannot come close to that of SLRs.

There are reasons why SLRs have been the preferred format of serious photographers for well over 50 years. Just because some technology is declared to be "new" doesn't make it better. DSLRs may eventually be replaced, but that will only happen when something actually better comes along.

Will mirrorless bodies displace SLRs, or will they be the Instamatics of the 21st century? Right now, I would bet on the latter.

 

[Daniel Flather]

It's like the electric car, it's been almost here for 40 years.

 

[Daniel Flather]

may eventually be replaced, but that will only happen when something actually with better marketing comes along.

There, unfortunately —fixed.

 

[unfocused]

may eventually be replaced, but that will only happen when something actually with better marketing comes along.

There, unfortunately —fixed.

I always find it deliciously ironic when photographers complain about marketing. With the possible exception of a few narrow scientific research applications, photography is nothing but marketing.

Wedding photography: marketing; Sports photography: marketing; Fashion photography: marketing; Nature photography: marketing; Photojournalism: marketing; Art photography: marketing; Portraits: marketing. It's all marketing, all the way down.

 

[Ryan708]

Apple Im sure could sell the shit out of a 5mp mirrorless, 2 FPS, 5EV dynamic range, single f/8 autofocus point, with a NiCad, non-replaceable battery, internal-only memory, and no external buttons. It would probably be quite thin too! Maybe it could even support direct file transfer, to Ipad only of course.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

It is supposedly a statement made by a Sony official: To offer a FF mirrorless camera body that can accommodate a large range of legacy and production lenses including those made by other manufacturers.

Yes, sony has disclosed their lens communical protocol to those other manufacturers - Sigma and Tamron. Surly, you did not think they meant Nikon, Canon, or Pentax.

 

[Bennymiata]

History has shown us that SLR's will still win out in the end.

Going back through the years has shown that there have always been non-SLR cameras out there that have competed with SLR's, and have been cheaper, but the SLR has always been the camera of choice for serious photographers.
Hasselblad, Leica, Canon, Nikon all made 35mm non SLR cameras, but SLR's are still in production and selling well.
This was true even in the days BEFORE auto focus, and now that auto-focus is such an important feature to have, the mirrorless cameras are still way behind the 8 ball with their poor speed of focussing amongst other things.

Until the EVF's of this world come anywhere near an OVF, and their focussing speed is within the speed of SLR's, mirrorless cameras will only ever be just one step above a P&S camera, and certainly NOT a camera of choice for serious photographers.
Then there is the price issue.
Most of the mirrorless cameras are actually more expensive than the base model SLR's, and this also dooms them to eventual obscurity IMHO.

 

[Deeohuu]

I always find it deliciously ironic when photographers complain about marketing. With the possible exception of a few narrow scientific research applications, photography is nothing but marketing.

Wedding photography: marketing; Sports photography: marketing; Fashion photography: marketing; Nature photography: marketing; Photojournalism: marketing; Art photography: marketing; Portraits: marketing. It's all marketing, all the way down.

Agreed. Agreed to the point that a lot of "scientific research" is also marketing. The hype around the Mars Rover panos etc. is largely to justify the expense to the rabble. There may be scientific benefits that result for the mission but someone has to pay for it.

 

[jrista]

What utter tosh!

Maybe my irony radar is switched off but come on!

The SLR form is perfectly braced for hand held shooting, mirrorless with live view is not.

That's before you get under the hood.

For the folk who need WLF's nothing other than a WLF will do, for the folks who need an SLR form, nothing else will do, for the folk who like rangefinders, nothing else will do. Part function, part form, part technology.

Everybody want to kill off DSLRs, yet nobody really wants to buy into mirrorless.

Get your stories straight and stick to them.

Exactly. The OP has wandered deep into tin-foil hat territory. The conspiracy theories about companies taking advantage of customers get to be a little old. No one is holding a gun to anyone's head to buy a camera. Only in government-controlled economies can manufacturers withhold technology or attempt to dictate what the consumer is allowed to buy. And, as can be seen by the collapse of the Soviet Union and China's de-facto turn to capitalism, it doesn't even work very well in government-controlled economies.

Okay, someday we all may move to an alternative form factor that improves on the DSLR. But, let's face it, the current state of mirrorless cameras are little more than electrified versions of 19th century view cameras. The major improvement being that the image is right-side up. Given the current state of development, the ergonomics of mirrorless cameras cannot come close to that of SLRs.

There are reasons why SLRs have been the preferred format of serious photographers for well over 50 years. Just because some technology is declared to be "new" doesn't make it better. DSLRs may eventually be replaced, but that will only happen when something actually better comes along.

Will mirrorless bodies displace SLRs, or will they be the Instamatics of the 21st century? Right now, I would bet on the latter.

+1 Couldn't agree more!

There is still a LOT going for the "addled old DSLR". Personally, having handled quite a few mirrorless options as they come onto the market, I've found not a single one that even comes remotely close to the ergonomics and balance of a DSLR for the kind of photography I do (mostly birds, BIF, wildlife, with some nature macro and landscapes mixed in.) There is NOTHING like a real, optical viewfinder for shooting action...I wouldn't trust that to an EVF for any reason, and there will have to be some stupendously mind blowing improvements to EVF's before I would even consider it. Trying to find, track, focus, and continue tracking subjects with a gigantic live view screen is a worthless endeavor. When it comes to long lenses, the balance and options available for DSLR, particularly with Canon's lens lineup, is unparalleled. You don't end up with any of those ridiculously imbalanced and odd looking conflations like you do with "mirrorless telephotos" (a term which to me seems like a total contradiction in terms!)

The DSLR will reign supreme for serious photographers who value their strengths, such as high quality prismatic viewfinders, low-light AF sensors, and excellent ergonomics...for a very long time. When they introduce a mirrorless in a DSLR-sized body with the same ergonomics, with FPPD-AF that outperforms a dedicated AF sensor, with double the AF points and twice the sensitivity, and an EVF that looks like an optical viewfinder and doesn't fatigue the eye...then I'll start considering mirrorless.

 

[Bengt Nyman]

Surly, you did not think they meant Nikon, Canon, or Pentax.

Surely Sony did or they would not have mentioned Canon by name.
Sigma and Tamron making low cost lens alternatives to the Big Guys is nothing new.

 

[pdirestajr]

An issue I have with mirrorless EVF cameras is that I feel more removed from the photography experience. It's hard to explain, but when I look at an EVF or "live view" I feel like I am watching the camera take a photograph.

Not ready to be a spectator.

 

[Bengt Nyman]

EVF still has a ways to go. I also agree that shooting in live view is a distant and somewhat shaky experience.
I would like to see an optically magnified live view with a slightly protruding eyepiece alá Pro-Video, for solid viewing and camera control. Include exposure preview, composite dynamic range preview and focus highlight.
By the way, just out about Sony:
First new Sony mirrorless FF cameras for 2012 are high end camcorders. NEX-7 alike mirrorless FF cameras in 2013.
Also: Sony announces mirrorless FF image sensor technology with PDAF pixels on the image sensor. Possibly part of a two step process with fast PDAF before final CD microfocus, both on the image sensor.

 

[distant.star]

.
Very interesting and insightful comment. I seem to have similar sorts of feelings, although I'm not sure I can really quantify them so well.

On the other hand...if God had meant for man to fly, he would have given us wings!

An issue I have with mirrorless EVF cameras is that I feel more removed from the photography experience. It's hard to explain, but when I look at an EVF or "live view" I feel like I am watching the camera take a photograph.

Not ready to be a spectator.