The results are in: the most important camera of the 2010s readers' poll

Mirrorless cameras are growing bigger, not smaller. Size was a selling argument at the time ML camera had lots of performance issues in other areas. Now that they are better than DSLRs in most areas, the designers no longer research size advantages, which anyway are negated once lenses > 50mm are attached.

Please: some phone app that lets me use its screen salved to my DSLR!

I've lost the URL but there was an article about 'the edges' of a 'phone and of a small P&S (Fuji/Sony/Canon/Nikon, does it matter?) and how you hold them up or to your face and how your fingers 'grip' or don't and how your elbows 'splay' or don't. it makes on wonder how the phone pictures are so sharp!
Another article was on how the GoPro stabilization is superior to anything available on cameras.

It's all digital now, it should all be 'computational photography' where we don't need flat plane sensors (the human eye doesn't have one) and hence simpler lenses (the human eye is very simple), and there are a lot more 'tricks' such as 'pixel shift' and depth of field that can be done.
Sadly, a lot of it becomes proprietary.

Staying with DSLRs is not necessarily a bad thing

pro photo 2011" T3 - I own mirrorless gear (Olympus) and have used a lot of mirrorless cameras in the past and quite recently (rented Z7).

None of the mirrorless gear I've used to date enthuses me as much as a clunky, reliable DSLR does. Using DSLR I feel like a photographer. Using Mirrorless I feel like a gadget geek.

The GoPro and other 'devices' makes it clear that the model of photography as a single unit camera as a single unit device, be it SLR, mirrorless or phone, is gone.
There is no need for the 'optics' and the 'viewer' to be in the same unit or even physically connected.

I've seen a umber of 'industrial' professional photographers with there camera on a tripod while the 'control it' a short distance away from their laptop. Wired? Wiffi? Bluetooth? Who knows, who cares. Yet the camera was a big and chunky interchangeable lens thing and there were speedlights and spots.
Was a a mirrorless or DSLR? Who cares! The photographer using it didn't.
I'm sure there are a lot like him, even here.

jxh

I think you nailed it. The A7 was a terrible camera and didn't check any boxes, AF, IQ, build, etc. were all worse than DSLRs at that time.
The A7Rii was the Model T. The A7 and A7r were Yugos.

The Model T offered a functional car at a very affordable price, one can't say that the A7 offers an affordable camera that was functional, but it was something new, something exciting, that looked cool.

The owners I've talked to pointed out the worst thing with them, and that was extreme shutter-shake, so much so that you needed to have a tripod all the time.

The tiny Nikon1 V1 is still fully up to date when it comes to AF, but was let down by pricing considerations, bad lens mechanics (the only brand I know of where thousands of lenses failed, and yet Nikon kept mum for years). The cameras work excellently, even today, the dumbed-down F adapter so too, but the lenses are in many cases of nil value, as they fail all the time.

The A7R was a poorly designed camera that was beaten by the D800 in every way possible.
Ever heard of the "Lisa" or Microsoft "Bob"? Almost no one has. The Lisa came before the "Mac". The Mac was a more important and significant computer.

"Ever heard of the "Lisa" or Microsoft "Bob"? Almost no one has."

This poll that you are responding to PROVES you are wrong. You are so stupid that you keep forgetting you are responding to a poll that has already been finished where the majority agreed that A7/R was the most historic camera of the decade. Facts are facts and your opinion is worthless vs facts. You have always been an idiot, and you will always be an idiot. A turd will always be a turd no matter how long you wait. Remember the days when you were telling us Nikon 1 is killing the e-mount in sales and that Sony will ditch e-mount to move to 1" ILC like Nikon? I do. You are a jealous little dodo and thats a fact too.

Only a an ignorant person would call "opinion" poll results "facts".

I did enjoy your melt down though, even though I've never said anything about a Nikon 1, and never owned (or wanted to own) a Nikon 1.

And thanks for showing how mature Sony fans are. You have quite the reputation.

I love Butoa's complete meltdown.
Where did someone responding say the "D800 was the most important camera of the decade"??
Nowhere, LOL!!!
Butoa, thanks for showing you can't tell reality from your delusion. Thank's for proving Sony fans can't act mature.
btw, you still think polls are accurate representations. HILARIOUS and telling of your intellect.

I can't wait for Butoa to embarrass Sony fans even more. (You don't see Canon and Nikon fans talk like kids here, only Sony fans)

"you still think polls are accurate representations."

accurate representation of what? The opinion of people who visit this site? If that isn't a somewhat accurate representation of people who visit this site, then what is better representation? You? Are you saying you are a better representation of people who visit this site? So instead of the poll results, we need to agree with our opinion? Is that your point? A7/R is the most important camera of the decade according to the majority. That's a fact as the poll already ended. You have already lost. Now if you insist that D800 must be the most important camera of the decade as an anti-Sony hater you can't stand the result, ask DPR to make a new poll in the hope you might have better luck next time -- as you already lost in this poll that ended already.

I feel like I am talking to a five year old, lol!

Only a 5 year old would thing polls are always accurate representations of people who visit sites.

Typical of Sony fans though. Just as they make up BS about responders saying "D800 was the most important camera of the decade"
Typical Sony fan.

I feel like I am talking to an idiot. I asked you this: If the poll on this site isn't a somewhat accurate representation of people who visit this site, then what is a better representation? You? You didn't answer -- as you are a typical jealous anti-Sony troll -- we know last 10 years was very hard for you guys ;)

If the poll on this site isn't a somewhat accurate representation of people who visit this site, then what is a better representation?
Purchase history
Threads on specific cameras.
etc.

But then you keep assuming this site represents the opinion of all photographers. Like I said, you think like a 5 year old...or worse a Sony fan.

Purchase history? Why would you need a poll for that? Just check the best seller stats. This poll was about what was the most important camera of the decade. Not what was the best seller or best featured or most liked. Are you now switching from D800 to Canon Rebel and claiming that Canon Rebel was the most important camera of the decade as that was the best seller? As I said, you are an idiot dude and will always be an idiot. A7/R was the most important camera of the decade according to the poll, and too bad for you you already lost that point as the poll is over.

"Purchase history? Why would you need a poll for that?"

In that one sentence you showed again just how spectacularly ignorant you truly are. lol!!
You just don't get that online poll are mostly meaningless and solely for entertainment. And your stupidity has been even more entertaining.
Only a moron would think I said create a poll about purchase history. Heck with every new camera announce a handful of jokers click on "I owned it" months before release. And morons like you probably believe them! ROFTL

Only a moron would think most sold camera must be picked as the most important camera of the decade, as you did. In other words, you went from D800 to Canon Rebel as the most important camera of the decade. Truly a moron. Plus you did say once that Nikon 1 is killing Sony e-mount when Nikon sales were high. You can make puppet accounts and lie but you can never hide. The most important camera of the decade, according to this poll on this site, was Sony A7/R. That debate is over already as the poll is over. I know that result hurts a jealous little anti-Sony troll, but that's life. You have been losing for the last 10 years ;) Never forget that.

jay-A
No, I was talking about your constant brand bashing, name calling, and paranoia that everyone who is not a Sony fan must be the same person.
I am sure you are a nice person, but your Sony fanaticism is a little strong.

It was nice you pointed out that in one comments section not about Sony you had dozens of comments mostly bashing or promoting Sony.

Can we get back to the discussion, or are you going to continue to attack people and brand bash?

tkbasi has done the same anti-Sony trolling for the past 10 years. Like I said in the earlier thread if there was an award for the most jealous person of the decade he would have won it. That's why he keeps changing his IDs as he is ashamed himself ;) -

I remember him from his style. This dude even once said Nikon 1 series is killing emount (haha) and that Sony will move to 1" ILC cameras.

I bet he will be here in 2029 if he is alive.

@Luis:

"the most important camera of the 2010s"

lol, sure, sure, let's pretend it's a Sony FF ILC. Totally not the iPhone. Must just be my poor reading comprehension.

The a6000 was, in a lot of ways, superior to the NEX-6. I've used both, and the AF is miles ahead of the older NEX-6. It'll also do AF in the 10fps mode, iirc. The interface is also drastically changed, giving actual menu sections and introducing the new fn menu. It's a clear division between the old soft-button driven interface of the NEX-line, and the new interface we still have today. The only real downgrade the a6000 had, was the viewfinder resolution.

I think so too. Even the NEX-7 was a better camera than the A7. If they wanted to go to the camera that started it they should put the NEX-5 there.

Was at a wedding standing nearby the official photographers not long after picking up my a6000. The bridesmaids were dancing in a chorus line and I squeezed off 11fps. The junior photographer asked something to the effect of "jesus, what are you driving?" I answered and the senior photographer said something like "we need to look into Sony's new cameras." The a7 was nowhere to be seen at the time, but the photographer accurately foretold what was to come.

Keith Meinhold

The A6000 shutter is very loud. My guess is that is more of what he was talking about. It used to be Sony had a shutter sound played through a tiny speaker on their cameras that could not be turned off. There were threads that discussed how to clip the wire to the speaker to make not so darned loud.

@tkbasic Not so loud for the time, you are thinking about the original a7 - that beast was loud. She was commenting on the FPS, because she asked me more about the camera later - we both agreed it wasn't going to fit her professional needs. Today (nearly 6 years later) everything is faster and quieter.

That is exactly right! When everybody else was struggling with dirty sensors, Olympus E-M5 had no problem. I still like that camera though it's not used that much.

I shot Olympus for 10 years (and film cameras since childhood) and used to defend 4/3rds on the forums. But there are more people slanting every argument in favor of FF. Then I tried a FF and realized they are right. ;) Just kidding. It's about priorities and Olympus checks lots of boxes--price, speed, size, dust free images, and weather sealing are a few. I think the most impactful decisions to happen to digital cameras are companies who decided to go all in on mirrorless. Olympus made the biggest commitment of the bunch because they had a Pro-DSLR system with an all Olympus full catalog of beautiful glass (Panasonic, Sony, and Fuji really didn't). I wish Olympus had embraced FF at that point as Panasonic has now because I don't think the market would be here without what Sony has done by committing to FF mirrorless technology. They, after all, make the sensors.

I agree the E-M5 earned it's recognition. Of course it did not come out of nowhere. Olymus introduced IBIS first, but long ago in their 4/3-DSLRs. All previous mft-cameras had IBIS, but the one in the E-M5 was much better. They introduced LiveView to the interchangeble lens camera marked. That made the switch to mirrorless possible. The first Olympus mirrorless camera the PEN E-P1 started the retro craze. Panasonic had had prifessional bodies before. The GH1 made an imression. But is was the whole packet that makes the E-M5 so outstanding. It definitly has its place in camera history.

Real talk. E-M5 got the firsts in those categories but not that significant in as far as the arrival of the Sony Full Frame systems that challenged the dominance of Canon and Nikon to the point that they release their mirrorless FF system. So no, Olympus is not the most important. If Sony did not lead the charge with their innovations and improvements to sensor and af technologies, the idea of using mirrorless as a child's toy would forever be considered a niche product by professional standards.

To be clear,
"Sony Full Frame systems that challenged the dominance of Canon and Nikon "
The A7 did not do this.
It might have started with the A7Rii though.

Also, Sony hasn't innovated much. They copied a lot of things though. They were not even the first FF mirrorless camera, and they bought their OSPDAF tech.

@ Flow Friday
We love newcomers fans...

There was a big difference Kodak Instamatics and 35 mm film cameras in image quality of the day, where as today the cell phones can compete many stand alone cameras in image quality in many situations. Cell phones are much more serious cameras than Instamatics were.

Yeah....pretty silly indeed, but DPreview can fool a lot of people. A Nikon D700 is still an awesome camera. Sure my D850 is better at pretty much everything, but anyone with some talent could win prizes and make money with a D3 or D700.

The last 10 years of cameras have been "good enough" for most anything.

Thanks for the feedback.

Judging from the tourists places I've been in the past year or two, I almost never see anyone over 40 with a Sony mirrorless camera. If we speak only of mirrorless I feel like there are more A6xxx (and the occasional A7, often with adapted lenses) than Fujis or Olympus, but the gap isn't as big as sales figures suggest.

Of course it's again subjective too, as I didn't travel everywhere and I imagine there wasn't an equal amount of tourists from each country/market.

@aliasfox: I've been to Venice, Italy and still saw quite a few dedicated cameras. Obviously, there were 4-5 times more smartphones taking pictures, but I expected less cameras.

@CarlitosM: obviously the A7, or mirrorless in general, is a good compromise for size and weight. IBIS or silent shutter are also welcome, when available.

We have two feedbacks here where people compared Nikon DSLRs to Sony A7, would the decision still be the same now, with Nikon Z6/Z7 being available? would someone who never owned a camera (and has $1500-2000) consider Nikon or Canon?

First A7 , relevant?

Most relevant. Best. Whatever. D850 still beats the Sony toys.

@Mister Anders0n
you are still not getting the architect's point.

Marrying a camera with the internet yielded an explosion of capturing but more importantly sharing of images. The smartphone revolutionized and democratized photography for better or worse.

Is there a difference between the NEX and the Axxxx-series? They just changed the naming scheme, didn't they?

C'mon, they don't even know how to point the 'camera' forwards!

@ Sheepstar: Yes it did. I wonder if those people started taking (more) pictures just because the camera was there, would they've bought a dedicated one if phones did not come with a camera?

Any change from DSLR to mirrorless is but a blip on the radar screen, a small evolution, compared to the revolution started by the smartphone, which was started by the iPhone.

Yeah, the Sony was so successful that sales of the entire market continue to plummet, not in any way saved by Sony. In fact, Sony may have hurt things, as they forced more of an emphasis on esoteric tech specs over usability and user experience, which the vast majority of people clearly rank as more important.

@ armandino my reply was directly to the point about "Guess what kind of cameras 95% of the pros would be using" . There is a strong delusion/belief amongst some of the Sony faithful that Sony is dominating the entire market when in fact especially amongst pro shooters there is and will be for a some time a massively entrenched DSLR user base.

You’re totally wrong. The first mirrorless was an Epson, not Panasonic.

@James Stirling No, there is no way that 95% of the pro shooters are using Canon and Nikon DSLRs today. Note that I wrote "DSLR" and you conveniently removes that word in your first reply to make me look like like someone who only cares about brands, nice try. Mirrorless sales have already taken over DSLR sales overall, and for FF, this happened even quicker, so even if still a majority of the pros are using DLSRs, it's not going to be even remotely close to 95%.

It is not about who or what started it imo, but what made critical mass to make it happen.

@dkeller with FF, sure. But sony did what sony does, make a Ton of stuff until something sticks.
The rest they drop and act like they didn't make it at all.
And as for relevancy, Panasonic did more firsts in mirrorless than sony.

I see you fell for Sony Marketing. Their huge investment in marketing dollars are paying off.

Exactly. I chuckle when people say that Sony caught Nikon/Canon off-guard. They didn't. Canon wasn't in a rush to be first and as far as I'm concerned, waited to see the direction the market was going and let the mirrorless tech stabilize. Real "pros" were not going to suddenly abandon their tried-and-true dSLR systems just because Sony came out with something shiny.

Don't get me wrong, Sony makes a great mirrorless camera. It's not for me for my own personal reasons but making such grand claims really comes across as fanboyism.

Oh Snap!

I'm not sure that all of you understand what an open mount or open standard is. It is not only about availability of specifications, but a question of intellectual property. If it has not been released under some license for everyone to use, then it remains Sony's intellectual property and using it potentially opens you up to a lawsuit. What I see in the link from Mac Daddy is not an open license, he's certainly correct in that. I don't know what your history with Mac Daddy is that has lead to such animosity.

jay-A Finding the specs doesn't make them an open specification. If that is your standard for calling a mount 'open'... then I could call Canon EF mount open. I'm aware of where to get the reverse engineered details known for Canon, Samsung, and Sony mount, and the Sony one may even have the least info of the three unless you know some source I haven't seen.

Also, ... those dozens of third party manufacturers have signed NDAs and aren't keen on getting sued by Sony. For this same reason they are at far greater legal risk participating in any reverse engineering of E mount than anyone else.

fjbyrne No, that is not what an open license is. See for instance https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Open_license or https://www.appropedia.org/Open_licenses A license that is what you guys are calling "free" is just as free as someone under house arrest. He's free to roam about... so long as he doesn't leave his home. You're free to make use of E Mount... so long as you're a "legal entity" (by which they mean LLC, Ltd., B corp, C corp, etc... ignoring that individuals are in fact legal entities, they are referring to business entities, which could actually include sole proprietors and partnerships though I doubt Sony would approve a request from a sole proprietor or partnership, considering that a sole proprietorship is not legally distinct from the owning individual) that applies and may be denied and only use it in the ways the specifically allowed. Many well known closed license products are shared with other companies in exactly the way Sony is and are not called open.

it certainly has changed photography .. and anyone who juxtaposes the before and after conditions ...must understand it is something for which we should be ashamed, not giddy and gleeful