Reading mode: Light Dark

Canon must make mirrorless camera or else it's compacts will be 2nd tier

Go to last post
Your original statement was that DSLRs are obsolete. I proceeded to offer several examples of why that isn't so. You did not accurately refute any of these points. Now you are admitting the obvious that there are situations today in which there is no substitute for an optical viewfinder. That doesn't sound like "obsolete" to me. What you are really saying is that DSLRs are obsolete for your personal requirements . I certainly can't disagree with that but you made a generalization that is utterly false and will remain so for some years to come.
 
Graystar said:
The only problem is that it can’t be built.
Click to expand...
And yet, they've been able to build something quite similar for film cameras a number of times.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
RAL said:
But those two or three pieces of glass do not have to be somehow mechanically linked to the lens focal length and have all of the elements move back and forth so they show at least a close representation of what will be in the scene. In electronic all they have to do is focus on the screen. Much easier and cheaper.
Click to expand...
Slightly easier.
RAL131504 said:
And electronic is surely even more economical to build than a proper prism and mirror arrangement incorporated in a dslr.
Click to expand...
Surely? How do you know? A prism and mirror can be very inexpensive (we've had $100 full-SLRs in the past), and decent microdisplays can be quite expensive (dozens to hundreds of dollars for high-end ones).

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
ljfinger said:
Graystar said:
The only problem is that it can’t be built.
Click to expand...
And yet, they've been able to build something quite similar for film cameras a number of times.
Click to expand...
Exactly. So obviously, there are some insurmountable technical issues regarding lens design for digital cameras that you’re not accounting for.

There’s also the marketing issue of no one but you (and DPx owners) being willing to buy a fixed-lens compact that starts at f/4 lens!

.
 
I bet you that the DSLR category will have massively lost market share, in both volume and value, 10 years from now.

There will still be some people who will use them, either as I said because they'll still be superior in some areas (which remains to be seen), or just because they'll be nostalgic an will have so much money sunk in lenses.

If the DSLR category has gained market share over that period I buy you a beer - but this will certainly not have happened as ASP's continue to drop, AND volume growth is tapering off and will soon go back.

I'm afraid you were confusing my remarks which applied to the market as a whole, with the niche effect. There still are photographers using view cameras you know - and they still deliver the best landscape images. Does this mean that they're not obsolete?

THe camera of the future will be a tiny device one can carry around w/o even noticing it and with quite solid IQ. Not some obsolete heavy bulky and costly monster.
 
ELTY4 said:
Why would you buy a G11 with noisy sensor and an optical viewfinder that's practically useless ie. not accurate by a mile when for a bit more you can get a cracking GF1 with the largish sensor?
Click to expand...
Sounds simple then...buy the GF1 and don't worry about what Canon may or may not come out with. Buy the camera that fits your needs today, not the camera that might never come.

Mark
 
The reason that Canon needs to make this type of camera is that it will potentially be much better than anything Panasonic, Olympus or Ricoh can churn out. The build quality and reliability of say the G9 or G10 was incredible. I have two S70 that have shot tens of thousands of photos and still going strong.

I messed with a GF1 the other day and was shocked by how primitive the menu system was. I actually laughed out loud at it.

Once again, the reason G11 keeps getting compared to the likes of GF1/EP2 is because it is essentially the same size and weight.

The reason people want Canon to build a GF1 equivalent is because it will likely be better.



--
Still waiting for the Canon FF/APS compact...
 
Graystar said:
ljfinger said:
Graystar said:
The only problem is that it can’t be built.
Click to expand...
And yet, they've been able to build something quite similar for film cameras a number of times.
Click to expand...
Exactly. So obviously, there are some insurmountable technical issues regarding lens design for digital cameras that you’re not accounting for.
Click to expand...
There aren't any for lenses of this type (slow non-retrofocus).
Graystar said:
There’s also the marketing issue of no one but you (and DPx owners) being willing to buy a fixed-lens compact that starts at f/4 lens!
Click to expand...
And yet, they already do by buying small-sensor cameras. The camera in my pocket at the moment has the full-frame equivalent of an f/15.7-f/32.5 lens. I still bought it and I still use it. Would I prefer an f/6.4-f/11.2 equivalent? Sure I would, and I'd pay extra for it. But not if it doesn't fit in my pocket the way m4/3 cameras don't.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
I have to disagree. I think Canon will be vulnerable because the days of ultra-compact P&S cameras are coming to an end. Cameraphones are getting better with each generation and will probably decimate sales ELPH in 3-4 years. I wouldn't be suprised to see more interest in EVIL or large-sensor, fixed-lens cameras when that happens.

However, Canon is in better shape than Nikon because they can leverage their market in videocameras. If Canon decides to come up with their own EVIL format with lenses that are compatible with a new line of interchangeable-lens HD videocameras... well, you can imagine the possibilities.
 
vshin said:
I have to disagree. I think Canon will be vulnerable because the days of ultra-compact P&S cameras are coming to an end.
Click to expand...
Pretty bold prediction...I just bought an ultra compact camera.
vshin606994 said:
Cameraphones are getting better with each generation and will probably decimate sales ELPH in 3-4 years.
Click to expand...
Unless ELPH cameras put in a phone... :)

IMHO unless you are just a casual photographer the combo will never be as good as the separate devices.
There will be room for all.

--
Don
http://www.pbase.com/dond
 
ljfinger said:
Graystar said:
Exactly. So obviously, there are some insurmountable technical issues regarding lens design for digital cameras that you’re not accounting for.
Click to expand...
There aren't any for lenses of this type (slow non-retrofocus).
Click to expand...
Then get some investors and build it yourself. You'll make a fortune.
Lee Jay said:
Lee Jay said:
There’s also the marketing issue of no one but you (and DPx owners) being willing to buy a fixed-lens compact that starts at f/4 lens!
Click to expand...
And yet, they already do by buying small-sensor cameras.
Click to expand...
No, they don't. The fact that a compact's f/2.8 lens is like a full-frame's f/16 lens, doesn't mean that exposure is based on f/16. It's still based on f/2.8, with a correspondingly fast shutter speed. That's the difference.

.
 
Graystar said:
ljfinger said:
Graystar said:
Exactly. So obviously, there are some insurmountable technical issues regarding lens design for digital cameras that you’re not accounting for.
Click to expand...
There aren't any for lenses of this type (slow non-retrofocus).
Click to expand...
Then get some investors and build it yourself. You'll make a fortune.
Graystar said:
Graystar said:
There’s also the marketing issue of no one but you (and DPx owners) being willing to buy a fixed-lens compact that starts at f/4 lens!
Click to expand...
And yet, they already do by buying small-sensor cameras.
Click to expand...
No, they don't. The fact that a compact's f/2.8 lens is like a full-frame's f/16 lens, doesn't mean that exposure is based on f/16. It's still based on f/2.8, with a correspondingly fast shutter speed. That's the difference.
Click to expand...
My default on my compact is ISO 80 and I try hard not to go higher. My default on my full-frame camera is ISO 1000 and I don't bat an eyelash about going to ISO 3200. You always assume ISO is a constant, which it's not.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
ljfinger said:
My default on my compact is ISO 80 and I try hard not to go higher. My default on my full-frame camera is ISO 1000 and I don't bat an eyelash about going to ISO 3200. You always assume ISO is a constant, which it's not.
Click to expand...
No, I don't assume that at all. What I'm assuming is that people will balk at having to increase ISO to finally get the faster low-light shutter speeds they want...only to have the images look like they came out of a compact.

Your full-frame ISO 3200 images have more noise than your compact's ISO 80 images.

.
 
I own a Canon G10 and a GF1 w. 20 f1.7 (and the Voigtlander 40mm optical finder). I shoot the GF1 in 3:2 aspect ratio.

Both cameras were used on a recent trip to Tuscany and I am very happy with the images from both.

But there is not question in my mind that the IQ of the GF1 is much better than the G10.
 
Graystar said:
ljfinger said:
My default on my compact is ISO 80 and I try hard not to go higher. My default on my full-frame camera is ISO 1000 and I don't bat an eyelash about going to ISO 3200. You always assume ISO is a constant, which it's not.
Click to expand...
No, I don't assume that at all. What I'm assuming is that people will balk at having to increase ISO to finally get the faster low-light shutter speeds they want...only to have the images look like they came out of a compact.
Click to expand...
Bad assumption. In case you hadn't noticed, large-sensor cameras are more popular than f0.3 lenses for compacts. Why? High ISO performance, of course.
Graystar said:
Your full-frame ISO 3200 images have more noise than your compact's ISO 80 images.
Click to expand...
The same, actually. And the 5D's images are better in other ways.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top