Zeisschen: Old sensor made in Thailand or old sensor made in Japan, does it really make a difference?
with a 10%-12% market share .. "barely" should have been included before that.
Peiasdf: I wish Canon outsource innovation to Sony. Maybe then there will be come interesting Canon cameras.
no idea where you get that "waiting for a new fab" from. there has been no canon announcements on a few factory / fab created.
a fab plant with the necessary elements for canon to produce sensors wouldn't cost that much, canon could augment their current fabs without much of a problem.
but changing the resolution or geometry wouldn't get that much gains anyways. it's a false herring because some people read the chipworks reports and became sensor fabrication experts overnight.
rrccad: so CIPA shows that there was a bump up on shipping as of Nov 2013. most likely due to sony flipping from SLT to MILC as far as shipping emphasis.
since then, there has been no increase in shipping of MILC's marketshare against DSLR's, fluctuating between 23% and 26%
when you think that includes Fuji, Canon, Sony, Olympus, Kodak, Panasonic, Ricoh, Nikon MILC products and with all the press and positive news and internet fandom - eight vendors share a total of 25% of the marketshare.
Nikon and Canon are quietly taking between then basically the rest of the market - with maybe sony eeking out a few percentage points in SLT's.
Still if you look on Amazon.com - what's the leanding MILC? a 43% discounted NEX-5. even with a 43% dump in price, 4 DSLR's are outselling it.
So yeah. 3 years? doubtful.
that's odd - BCN shows that top 3 cameras sold in Japan to be DSLR's and 7 out of the top 10 in japan - DSLR's. on amazon.jp 5 out of the top 20 cameras slr's .. 4 variants of the E-PL6 price slashing (58% off) and 11 compacts. 13 of the top 20 lenses, SLR lenses, 1 adapter, and 6 MILC lenses.
Sorry, doesn't sound like "everybody" is buying a MILC.
I see a lot of Asian tourists over here in Canada and the US sporting DSLR's.
yslee1: Surely it greatly depends on Nikon and Canon? I don't think these two will give up market leadership in three years.
an SL1 full frame without the mirror and still EF mount, would suffice for most.
Caerolle: "Mirrorless to outsell DSLRs 'in three years'"
The worst thing is how most of the effort seems to be put into video for most mirrorless these days, rather than stills.
And finally, Samsung, like Sony, is well short of a compelling lens system. Plus, I heard their lens opening or flange distance or something really intrinsic to the mount is all wrong. Well, and being Samsung, I would guess they have a bunch of useless 'whiz-bang' features that are far more trouble than they are worth, and get in the way.
Other than that, way to go Samsung!
Oh, I imagine their menus suck, too.
And BTW, wasnt it Samsung that made those adds about cameras not needing to look like dSLRs? By putting their little cameras in a dSLR body or something?
the criticism is that there is very little confidence that sigma, etc will make any lenses for the Samsung mount since it would require entirely new lenses specifically for Samsung.
McFern: You know, I heard all these jokes and comments when the first program cameras came along, when the first auto focus cameras came along, even when the first digital cameras came along. View cameras don't really change, medium format changes really slow, but this segment is where the cutting edge of tech advances lives. Pros don't spend unnecessary money, enthusiasts drive the market and, therefore, what is available. Im not making any predictions but I won't be surprised anymore. Never is a tricky word that gives a false feeling of control.
actually consumers drive the market. enthusiasts think they do.
RichRMA: The performance of their NX1 seems to be very good so even though people are loath to try new things, the market may shift somewhat, the way it did for Nikon DSLR's when they started using CMOS instead of CCD's and their performance improved.
not really .. there was always a large collect ion of Nikon users, that reluctantly switched but where more than happy to switch back to Nikon. they already / still had the system still in place - just needed the camera body to go with it.
switching altogether to Samsung? mmm doubtful - heck most don't even like the thought of switching to sony.
Zeisschen: DSLR will be a niche product for OVF lovers and legacy SLR glas owners, nothing else. If it takes 3, 5 or 10 years is not the important question.
"Progress cannot be stopped"
or smartphones become good enough that there just isn't a market for small cameras with cramped ergonomics and bad battery live that EVF's and mirrorless become a niche product (wait.. it is already) .. that fails to gain any substantial traction.
hmm Samsung NX1 - ranked 85th in compact system cameras and 2,941 in Camera & Photo according to amazon.comranked 86th in CSC's and 1488 in cameras according to amazon.de
on amazon.co.uk .. not even on the radar.
not even listed I don't think on amazon.jp
bcn rankings - Samsung? do they make cameras?
seriously .. who buys these things?
sneakyracer: Canon does not seem to agree. They have yet to make a decent IL Mirrorless Camera
funny though that the M was the leading MILC in japan for a healthy portion of the year according to BCN.
CameraLabTester: When consumers (not professionals) consider SIZE as a major factor: MIRRORLESS will kick in.
Oops! It already has!
PROS: big and bulky
CONSUMERS: small, comfortable, and wise. (smart too)
Odd .. the rebels and D3x000 still outsell all mirrorless cameras and run away laughing.
dash2k8: Outsell? I actually believe it. Mirrorless will be more appealing to the masses. Ma's and pa's looking for simple family photos will prefer the smaller, lighter and more portable options. And honestly, mirrorless is closing the performance gap to make it good enough for most consumers. Pros will never outnumber amateurs so I don't see why people don't think mirrorless will outsell DSLRs. I also don't understand why ppl are upset at this eventuality.
ma and pa are using their smartphones and not bothering to fuss with ILC's.
fmian: 'Also the electronic viewfinder in the NX1 has been improved, and the time delay is very short - just five milliseconds. So there’s no lag.'
- five milliseconds- no lag
EVF will for the near future and could be for nearly a very very long time be a compromise.
the video output driving the EVF certainly doesn't have anywhere close to the dynamic range and ability to adapt to light levels as the human eye and brain does with an OVF.
not to mention some eyeglasses have a lot of issues with EVF versus OVF.
agreed on sony's market share - which really explains much of the "step" on CIPA's numbers - I think sony realized that and started to scale back shipping alpha SLT's. by all accounts the A77II is a pretty nice camera with a great price - and where is it selling? it's ranked 85th in DLSR's in amazon.com - not even on the horizon.
even the Pentax K .. ranked 38th and this with a 50% price cut down to 500 bucks.
right now DLSR's this year will sell around 7.5 million more cameras than MILC's - further increasing it's already dominant marketshare over the past 3 years. (40 million DSLR's versus 10 million MILC's)
PazinBoise: I think the last technical hurdle that mirrorless cameras need to clear in order to surpass DSLRs is AF tracking. Mirrorless camera's AF tracking has gotten a lot better but most DSLRs systems are still better at tracking moving subjects. Once they are on par with DSLRs in that functionality I don't think DSLRs will have much left to offer?
Lens selections? Lenses can be made to fit new mounts. Optical Viewfinders? Each generation of EVFs gets better and better and the advantages they offer over a OVF are great. Weather sealing and build quality? Oly OM-D E-M1 and Fuji XT-1.
I really can't think of other features that DSLR offer that can't be integrated (or have already been integrated) into mirrorless systems.
The human eye is far better at adapting to low light than a noisy EVF, where the EVF is grainy, lacking detail, with an OVF the human eye has the ability to adjust to the ambient light conditions.
and if that fails, there's the LCD on the back.
EVF's have no such luxury.
so CIPA shows that there was a bump up on shipping as of Nov 2013. most likely due to sony flipping from SLT to MILC as far as shipping emphasis.
Snikt228: Has anyone ever seen a Samsung ILC camera in the wild?
Nope. Seen Sony, Olympus a few pann's.. hmm.
that's really about it.
actually the last technicial hurdle is EVF with the same resolution and adaptive dynamic range of the human eye with zero lag, tearing, and adaptive low light capability such as what is present in the human eye.
Anastigmat: Speaking of myths, here is one myth that is still around despite countless articles and internet posts debunking it:
"but it remains true that APS-C and Four Thirds can still be smaller, lighter and less expensive: so the optimal system for you depends on your requirements."
Just compare the size of the Nikon D600 (141 x 113 x 82 mm) with the Canon 7DII (149 x 112 x 78 mm) and you know it is a myth. When Nikon released the 12mp noise bucket known as the D2X, it sold for $5K, or $2K more than the 12mp FF Canon 5D. The FF 6D sells for $1,800 with a $300 rebate, but the APS-C 7DMkII sells for the same $1800 without any rebate. Myth busted, again? Not. The myth will keep on living because people don't pay attention to facts.
I think he meant systems - including lenses. the body size is immaterial really unless you are shooting pictures without a lens.
the 7DII can use the 399 10-18mm EF-S STM lens with half decent results - can't say the same on a full frame camera.
rrccad: one thing that this glosses over a bit too much is that you should consider certain aspects of your system has having a "lease cost". you purchase it and if you upgrade / move on - you sell it. the delta is your actual cost of leasing the lens for the period in which you use it.
brand name lenses specifically Fuji, canon and Nikon your lease cost are always very low. they sell for nearly what you pay for them - as long as you don't purchase for full MSRP when it first is released (especially for kit included lenses).
brand familiarity for most people is important. the menus the little quirks on how each company thinks photographers should be using their systems are uniquely different, as well as at times - your workflow.
I would never consider brand name lenses and for the most part camera bodies as being hard to sell to upgrade - if you purchase smart, you will end up having a very little cost to your upgrade paths.
when investing in a system - check to see how healthy the used market is. purchase what you can from that market if you feel comfortable in doing so - but at the least - it will tell you what you actual costs are if you purchase the lens and then sell it on that market.
same really with camera bodies. canon (and Nikon) bodies that are 1 generation old are still amazingly good for any but the most OCD of us and will satisfy 99% of most photographers and photography.
and their prices for what you pay for them and what you can sell them for is nearly the same - and the prices should remain stable for more than a few years time.
Also consider keeping the APS-C body (if you start off that way) - as a "sports" or telephoto body for more pixel density reach - or even convert it to IR for a different flavor of shooting style.