If you're going to do that and use a cheap low limited range zoom, you might as well just use a P&S camera IMHO. dSLRs are all about having the options for much better lenses and end results than P&S. And a 18-55 f3.5-5.6 lens is just like a P&S lens. Now a 100 f2 lens now you've got something fun!
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Lets Face It, DSLRs, Appear Somewhat Heading In The Way Of The Dinosaurs
- Thread starter BRJR
- Start date
MusicDoctorDJ
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 12,400
- Reaction score
- 11
Actually, P&S cameras are not "on the way out" as you say, but demand for them has reached a peak!
Same thing will happen with DSLR's very soon.
In otherwords, most who want them already have them, and the need to upgrade often is now gone.
As for cell phone cameras replacing P&S digitals . . . I don't think so, either.
Sure, cell phone cameras will cut in to P&S sales somewhat . . .
But stop and think about what an Iphone or a Blackberry would look like with a 7x or 12x optical zoom lens on it (I'm sure some of the Photoshoppers around here could whip up a shot for us).
Plus . . . the camera geeks will keep buying P&S's when they need them as they don't consider camera phones 'cameras'.
No matter how good (or how bad) the camera phone images are . . .
--
J. D.
Colorado
I do understand its a Jeep thing . . . thats why I bought a Dodge!
Exactly, and I agree. 
--
BRJR ....(LOL, some of us are quite satisfied as Hobbyists ..)
--
BRJR ....(LOL, some of us are quite satisfied as Hobbyists ..)
I think that DSLR's as we know them today are going the way of the dinosaurs.
And will be replaced by cameras like the Panasonic G1 & GH1 (EVIL) with electronic viewfinders and other offshoots of these types of cameras.
The OVF DSLR's will probably be all but gone, with exception of maybe two or three high end models for those who can't live without the OVF.
And, in 20 or 30 years, we'll still be here arguing about the demise of the EVIL cameras (and still dreaming of the days of old when ground glass focus screens and tiny APS-C and 4/3 OVF's were king) as they are replaced with whatever the new wave of high end cameras are for that time.
Heck . . . in 30 years, digital photography as we know it today will probably be long gone and replaced with some other form of image capture!
And we'll probably argue about that as well . . .
Just like film vs digital or RAW vs JPEG . . .
All of this is a vicious never ending cycle that will continue forever after all of us are long gone!
--
J. D.
Colorado
I do understand its a Jeep thing . . . thats why I bought a Dodge!
And, continuing technological improvements/advances in cameras such as the Canon S90 and G11, and Micro Four Thirds, should help in accelerating this.
--
BRJR ....(LOL, some of us are quite satisfied as Hobbyists ..)
--
BRJR ....(LOL, some of us are quite satisfied as Hobbyists ..)
Actually, P&S cameras are not "on the way out" as you say, but demand for them has reached a peak!
Same thing will happen with DSLR's very soon.
In otherwords, most who want them already have them, and the need to upgrade often is now gone.
As for cell phone cameras replacing P&S digitals . . . I don't think so, either.
Sure, cell phone cameras will cut in to P&S sales somewhat . . .
But stop and think about what an Iphone or a Blackberry would look like with a 7x or 12x optical zoom lens on it (I'm sure some of the Photoshoppers around here could whip up a shot for us).
Plus . . . the camera geeks will keep buying P&S's when they need them as they don't consider camera phones 'cameras'.
No matter how good (or how bad) the camera phone images are . . .
--
J. D.
Colorado
I do understand its a Jeep thing . . . thats why I bought a Dodge!
Here is a quote from Canon Inc Company history.
The slowdown was partly attributable to the maturation of some of Canon's key product areas, notably copiers and cameras. The maturation in cameras--especially the SLR cameras Canon specialized in--affected Canon much less severely than other major camera makers (notably Minolta and Nikon), who relied on cameras for a much larger portion of overall sales than Canon did. In 1992, cameras comprised only 19 percent of overall Canon sales (compared to 44 and 43 percent for Minolta and Nikon, respectively), and by 1995 the percentage had dropped to 8.2 percent. Thus, the rapid growth in popularity of compact cameras, which began with Fuji's launch of the QuickSnap disposable camera in 1987 and was advanced by Konica's 1989 introduction of the Big Mini (the first super-compact camera), did not push Canon into the huge losses suffered by Minolta and Nikon in the early 1990s.
the whole article can be accessed here http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/Canon-Inc-Company-History.html
Your turn
--
bosjohn aka John Shick [email protected]
Cedarhill
Senior Member
Any time someone starts out a comment with the words "Let's face it", they are about to pronounce something to be a forgone conclusion when there is insufficient evidence to support the proposition.
Am I right?
Am I right?
SullyC5R-427
Senior Member
We own 2 P&S and 2 dSLR's. I bought the P&S because of convenience...well, I do not even use them anymore. I was tired of compromising quality with the P&S for ease of size. I bought a comfortable strap for the dSLR's and use them exclusively. I recently spent two days in Paris and one day in DC. In both cases I carried the dSLR for 8-10 hours. IMHO The photos are worth the extra effort.
--
http://www.pbase.com/sullyc5er
--
http://www.pbase.com/sullyc5er
mw2424
Active member
when walking so for 10-12 hours in Paris and DC witha DSLR - what lens do you have on your camera (I can't believe you have one or more in your pocket/s)
Rifleman1776
Well-known member
I use what some call a 'bridge' camera. I call them 'mid range'. Much better than a small P&S but not big, expensive or capable of interchangeable lenses. My current one is a Sony DSC-H2. I'll soon be buying an Olympus SP 590UZ. I'm a former pro and understand the advantages of a well equipped DLSR. But, I also know the advantages of having a camera with you as opposed to leaving the twenty pound camera and thirty pound backpack at home when a good photo op presents itself. My Sony is capable of very high quality work. I have the pictures to prove it. One is a recent award winner.
toomanycanons
Forum Pro
Dude, you got the makings of what I call a "dSLR snob". If it doesn't cost a fortune, if it doesn't weigh a ton, it must be a toy and worthless, right? How wrong you are. I am so glad I don't labor under your misconceptions.
WilsonEPhillips
Senior Member
I think that was the whole point of the thread.
I don't get this either. If I prefer using MF should I desire the death of any other format?? If someone prefers EVF then fine, get a camera that has one and there are plenty from which to choose, but this salivating for the end of the OVF really puzzles me.
When challenged, they will go on and on about all the reasons the EVF is "superior" but those reasons mey be beneficial to THEM, however they have no relevance to me at all.
So, how would the death of the OVF benefit EVF fans??
Marion
When challenged, they will go on and on about all the reasons the EVF is "superior" but those reasons mey be beneficial to THEM, however they have no relevance to me at all.
So, how would the death of the OVF benefit EVF fans??
Marion
SullyC5R-427
Senior Member
My walk-around is a Canon 24-105 4L. If I wear a vest, I do carry my 50mm 1.4.
--
http://www.pbase.com/sullyc5er
mw2424
Active member
Now you are asking an anthropological (political?) question. (May be much more relevant than OVFvs.EVF.) It seems the whole human civilization developed along those lines. So, there must be some evolutionary advantage in such behaviour...
mw2424
Active member
Thanks. I asked, for I am thinking about something like 17-70. Your choice sounds v. smart.
toomanycanons
Forum Pro
I have to say that the first time I heard an EVF proponent go on and on about how "superior" EVFs are I'd never imagined that could be an opinion someone could hold. I thought the EVF was just a cheap azz way to simulate an OVF, a way for the camera manufacturers to save money. When I heard the prevalent reason EVF proponents think the way they do (that they could see beforehand what tweaking their settings would have on the final picture) I thought "can you really tell, looking at such a crappy representation of the final picture?"
If EVS had no lag whatsoever (like an OVF), in fact, looked JUST LIKE an OVF, I might change my opinion of them, but even the best ones today, to my eye, suck. I use the EVF on my FZ50 'cause it beats the heck out of watching its 2" LCD, but I use the LCD on my FZ18 'cause it beats the heck out of its lame EVF. When I look through my Nikons' OVF it's like a breath of fresh air. If I hear someone opinionate one more time about the demise of the OVF I'm gonna hurl.
jb_va2001
Veteran Member
1. And, this trend should accelerate, as more and more small, compact and smaller cameras/Bodies/lenses (and, lets not forget camera phones) continue to advance technologically.
2. Why, heck, on his website, "18 November 2009, Wednesday", under "Go Shoot", KR, now says:
"I don't even use DSLRs anymore except in the studio. In the field, I use a point-and-shoot."
--
BRJR ....(LOL, some of us are quite satisfied as Hobbyists ..)
TrapperJohn
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 16,488
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 12,288
Or so it would seem.
I wouldn't hold your breath, though. EVIL cameras like the G1 & GH1 still account for a tiny fraction of sales compared to DSLRs. Plus, before there is a mass change to entirely new EVIL cameras, we'll likely see mirror-less DSLRs with EVFs in the exact same form factor as today's DSLRs, just without the flip-up mirror and optical viewfinder. That will allow the camera brands to preserve their current lens systems, which have a fixed lens registration distance regardless of the mirror. Also keep in mind that there is a very large segment of photographers who likes the DSLR form factor and size. And keep in mind that manufacturers will want to preserve the viability of their current extensive lens systems that they've been building for years and years. Given these considerations, I expect the DSLR form factor (with or without the mirror) along with their respective DSLR lens systems will continue on for many, many years to come.Exactly, and I agree.
So in a few years, it may be that we're shooting with DSLR-like cameras with no reflex mirror, but they will look much like current DSLRs. The overall body size will be about the same because many serious photographer like a good-sized body. And while the bodies may be thinner because they no longer need to accommodate a mirror, many users will still be using today's lenses with them using spacer-adapters much like the 4/3 system lenses on m4/3 bodies. And, of course, there will be newer lenses specifically designed for the thinner bodies. But all of this is a far cry from saying that DSLRs will go extinct like dinosaurs. It's more like they will evolve and continue to exist, but in an evolved form.
spbStan
Senior Member
I travel a lot, arrived in San Francisco last night, and in Germany yesterday and Russia before that my normal walking around rig was used; D90 with 70-200VR 2.8 mounted, a 17-55 2.8, 85 1.4, 50 1.8 and 10-20 3.5 in the pack along with a couple speedlights. Mostly its the 70-200 as the go-to-lens. I am not temped to bring my little P&S, I leave that with my GF who likes it better than her Rebel 450D, she never likes to carry extra lenses but likes it when I bring mine. I will give her my D90, which she really likes, when I get the D3s I am saving for....might be a while before I can afford that however. Having a good strap makes it handle like a dream. I am using the Black Rapid RS-1 when the heavier lenses are on the camera and I do not even notice the weight even after hours of walking.
Usually don't carry a tripod unless I know I'll have the time and flexibility to use it. I brought it with my to California because I will be here 3 weeks.
--
Stan
St Petersburg Russia
Usually don't carry a tripod unless I know I'll have the time and flexibility to use it. I brought it with my to California because I will be here 3 weeks.
--
Stan
St Petersburg Russia
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum