But that was also true for SLR film owners too. So it's nothing new.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Smoking them. The product just got 4g lte in the last go around, still has the same small display and specs. All the other manufacturers are moving ahead, they are taking away market share that is why Iphone is declining or flat. Every year a new section of the young population will start using smart phones and every 2 years many older people will upgrade their smartphone to the latest and greatest. The market is not saturated.
As I said before in another post.
For most people there are 2 kinds of cameras one that fits in your pocket and one that does not. The IQ on the newer smart phones is good enough. I think you will see a decline in pocket cameras because of this. The IQ is good enough and it is built in to something you already have.
Then when you want to do more and you have to carry around a camera with lenses, the problem with the mirrorless is it is not that much smaller, so you buy the more capable camera with is a DSLR.
As DSLRs get smaller, become more advance having standard fast AF and improving on the sensor AF (live view) and having better AF with video, it will only bury mirrorless even farther into the ground of no differentiation. The IQ of DSLRs is better than 4/3rds which also hurts mirrorless.
Mirrorless will probably hang around for a while but it is a niche market an such with stiff competition from below (smartphones) and above(DSLR) there is not much room for it to fit in and now the novelty of the promise of a smaller DSLR (which isn't that much smaller and IQ is not better) it gets lost in the competition. Another driving factor is cost. (It many cases it costs more or the same as a DSLR.) It doesn't measure up and it costs as much or more.
Americans do have a bigger is better ideology, but it is because often it is true. A bigger engine produces more power. A bigger truck holds more stuff etc. But if it is bigger and it does not perform they are not stupid, they are really going for better. Bigger in most cases is along for the ride.
In the case of mirrorless, it is not that much smaller and it is certainly not better in price or performance, so this also adds to the decline.
For most people there are 2 kinds of cameras one that fits in your pocket and one that does not. The IQ on the newer smart phones is good enough. I think you will see a decline in pocket cameras because of this. The IQ is good enough and it is built in to something you already have.
Then when you want to do more and you have to carry around a camera with lenses, the problem with the mirrorless is it is not that much smaller, so you buy the more capable camera with is a DSLR.
As DSLRs get smaller, become more advance having standard fast AF and improving on the sensor AF (live view) and having better AF with video, it will only bury mirrorless even farther into the ground of no differentiation. The IQ of DSLRs is better than 4/3rds which also hurts mirrorless.
Mirrorless will probably hang around for a while but it is a niche market an such with stiff competition from below (smartphones) and above(DSLR) there is not much room for it to fit in and now the novelty of the promise of a smaller DSLR (which isn't that much smaller and IQ is not better) it gets lost in the competition. Another driving factor is cost. (It many cases it costs more or the same as a DSLR.) It doesn't measure up and it costs as much or more.
Americans do have a bigger is better ideology, but it is because often it is true. A bigger engine produces more power. A bigger truck holds more stuff etc. But if it is bigger and it does not perform they are not stupid, they are really going for better. Bigger in most cases is along for the ride.
In the case of mirrorless, it is not that much smaller and it is certainly not better in price or performance, so this also adds to the decline.
mirrorless design is a feature, what is the benefit? This is where mirrorless falls apart, it has almost no advantages over DSLR and a number of disadvantages, AF, and image artifacts. It is not that much smaller with a lens of any consequence, as soon as you carry more than one, the differentiation disappears for size and then DSLR shines with its feature set.
I guess I am not getting it. I buy a pancake for a DSLR, it is smaller, and compared to an Oly that has no built in flash, when you add the flash it is actually bigger. What are you saying the DSLR cannot do? It does everything, and well.
I think you will be the one frowning when manufacturers figure out the decline is not just in the US and starts around the world because people figure it out. All you will have at that point are legacy lenses.
I have done that too, I have a point ans shoot, for me the smart phone IQ is good enough but no lens or zoom which is the biggest problem for me . But for the most part, I find the smart phone good enough. And to take snapshots it is good enough.
Having to worry about another camera, make sure I didn't leave it somewhere, make sure the battery is charged and enough memory is just redundant. Then you start looking for a smartphone that will take the place of it.
Once the technology produces a decent 3 setting zoom, say wide angle, portrait FOV and a slight telephoto on the smartphone camera the point and shoot will be a niche market.
They're going to have to do more than that for me. I also want a faster lens, more controls, better handling, high-speed video modes, and a tripod mount.
Rmark
Senior Member
For an everyday walk around camera I bought a Canon G1x...no mirror, no lenses to change, great IQ. Other times I use my E30...fast AF, sharp lenses, great macro and telephoto.
BigBen08
Veteran Member
I'm already seeing a decline in p&s cameras. The last two auto shows I attended - which drew thousands of people - smartphones rule the day. I'm seeing very few p&s cameras. Actually, I see very few dslrs as well.
Right on. I like the Sony Nex 7 & 5 cameras, but with the large, honking zoom lens, it won't fit in my pocket. And they are expensive. So I stick with my dslr.
Are dslrs getting smaller? I don't see that trend.
Well said. Perhaps that's why Sony is building the Nex - 3N, at a lower price of $500 with lens.
Jason Elander
Well-known member
He says shipments are down. Not the same thing as sales.
Roger Engelken
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 5,558
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 2,483
You are right. As the market sees that they've been sold on something that has less real benefit than imagined benefit, they'll say 'fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice...'
Yes, mirrorless can equal the IQ of a DSLR. IF you get the image in focus. IF you can frame the action. And it's not THAT much smaller. Too many people are hung up on the somewhat smaller size.
Martin.au
Forum Pro
This is exactly the reason I stopped talking with you in the other thread.
I gave you a very good example of a situation where the smaller mirrorless works. You clearly recognised that in that situation that the DSLR kit could not be setup small enough to compete, as you studiously avoided looking at the comparison.
Yet here you are, blithely continuing on as though that never happened. Not exactly a great example of intellectual honesty.
Let me just emphasis that difference again. Mirrorless 960gm. DSLR 2.5Kg.
That post is false.
In my area of California, every major mirrorless brand has shelf space in stores that carry cameras. Sony has the most prominent displays, followed by Nikon 1, with Olympus and Panasonic in third and fourth place. I have not seen Fuji X at all.
P&S cameras are getting less and less shelf space, that is true. But they are not selling much compared to a few years ago.
I have no theory to explain it. Americans still buy lots of Canon DSLRs, which are perhaps the worst of all brands at entry level. So you certainly can't accuse Americans of being discerning.
Last edited:
MoreorLess
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 5,976
- Solutions
- 4
- Reaction score
- 3,481
Last edited:
L
Lin Evans
Guest
Wellington100
Forum Pro
Last edited:
charleyd
Senior Member
Just another revenue source that nobody needs or ask for.
aekn
Forum Enthusiast
forpetessake
Veteran Member
Mirrorless is not necessary about the size, they may be as small and light as Sony NEX series, or as big and heavy as Panasonic GH3, the absense of mirror box is providing more flexibility, not less.
There is no doubt that mirror goes the way of dodo bird. But as it often happens during technological disruptions, the old technology puts up a good fight. SLRs were designed and engineered for ages, they are perfect in many respects, and Canon/Nikon releasing smaller lighter bodies at lower price points make many prospective SLM buyers think twice before parting with their money. And the first generation of SLM users might have been as well disappointed with imperfections of mirrorless cameras and decided to go back to SLRs.
But technology is improving rapidly, there is no magic in having that flipping thing inside the camera body, in the long run it's a liability, so it will have to go away. The PDAF on the sensor will be perfected, the inexpensive FF sensors will be developed, the high quality EVF will be a norm, the prices will go down and SLRs will have no reason to exist.
There is no doubt that mirror goes the way of dodo bird. But as it often happens during technological disruptions, the old technology puts up a good fight. SLRs were designed and engineered for ages, they are perfect in many respects, and Canon/Nikon releasing smaller lighter bodies at lower price points make many prospective SLM buyers think twice before parting with their money. And the first generation of SLM users might have been as well disappointed with imperfections of mirrorless cameras and decided to go back to SLRs.
But technology is improving rapidly, there is no magic in having that flipping thing inside the camera body, in the long run it's a liability, so it will have to go away. The PDAF on the sensor will be perfected, the inexpensive FF sensors will be developed, the high quality EVF will be a norm, the prices will go down and SLRs will have no reason to exist.