Are Canon and Nikon falling behind on entry-level DSLRs?

Started Feb 21, 2013 | Discussions thread
Hennie de Ruyter
Hennie de Ruyter Contributing Member • Posts: 785
Re: Who bought entry level dslr's?

Murray Rothbard wrote:

Hennie de Ruyter wrote:

TrapperJohn wrote:

Thanks to mirrorless, which provides the same functionality in a much more convenient form, and the rising capability of cell phone cams, the traditional entry level dslr just isn't 'the next great thing' any more.

As a person who take the bulk of my pictures on hiking trails in bright sun light, what is convenient about not being able to see what I am photographing?

I guess you've never had the sense to use a mirrorless camera with an external EVF.

I have the sense not to ditch a perfectly fine camera plus a number of lenses simply for the the sake of doing without a mechanical component which seems to annoy so many people here (the mirror). If I need to replace all my kit at once (theft?) I might look at mirrorless if that system offers a lens similar to the Nikon 16-85 (which is a wonderful range for this mountaineer) and the EVF is as bright as an OVF without costing more.

Bang for buck an entry level DSLR CURRENTLY offers much more, especially if you factor in the availability of good second hand lenses. Mirrorless is not cheaper currently compared to something like the Nikon D3100. It might be one day but that is still in the future. When I get there I might well buy it. Technology changes all the time. I do not lie awake at night stressing the fact that the refrigerator in my house lacks silver finish and a LED display and is therefore old-fashioned. It keeps the food cold.

I am after a tool which takes good pictures and after a decent set of lenses. I value my 16-85 and 70-300 very highly. A camera is just a tool, you buy what you can afford and what you need.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow