Death of the DSLR.

[ianbrown]

I read a review from a well respected UK magazine called Amateur Photography which clearly stated that the new NEXC3 produced as good an IQ at the NIkon D7000.

On a head to head test the Sony performed as good and on occasions (dynamic range) better than the D7000.

Now I know that ergonomically the 7000 is more Proficient and for sport etc it will out perform a smaller camera. However I bet it's not long before we see DSLR's only used by professionals who need tough and very specialist requirements.

I think the technology is advancing faster with the likes of Sony and Samsung and NIkon and Canon could be left sitting on their laurels.

Thanks to companies like Sony, they are making photography more fun and enjoyable.

Ian

 

[KM Legacy]

I've been predicting the same thing. The NEX-7 shows that one can now enjoy eye-level thru-the-lens viewing and focusing in a far smaller package than with the DSLR/DSLT, which are really only needed for sports and wildlife at this point. However, the mirrorless technology can be easily copied by Canikon and others. Sony had better get off its tail and speed up development of lenses, so that the E-mount will become the dominant mirrorless system , just as Nikon and then Canon became the dominant SLR systems only through offering a wide range of lenses. The other electronic giants, Samsung & Panasonic, have been much more aggressive in introducing lenses. Canikon excel in lensmaking.

 

[harold1968]

I was about to do a post with the same heading

The DSLR is inherently flawed

the mirror box is the culprit:

1. it means the lens has to be further from the sensor. This makes the lenses larger then they should be. it also introduces more difficult aberation issues, whcih is why all DSLR lenses are softer at the edges then the centre. Rangefinders do not have mirror boxes, which is why Leica lenses are so small and so damn sharp at their largest f rating.

2. the mirror flip kills sharpness. I can mostly get sharp pictures on a Leica at 1/15, but on a DSLR need above 1/60 most of the time.

3. the camera overall is bigger

4. Althought the phase detect focusing system in DSLR is fast, it is inherently a tuned mechanical design. It can go out of alignment easily. This is why the issue of back and front focus will always dog DSLRs, and why micro-focus adjustment will always be needed on pro-DSLRs. Contrast detect is always accurate

There are other issues, but clearly the CSC is destined to take over eventually, as soon as the focus is fast enough (which it pretty much is on the new Olympus range).

I read a review from a well respected UK magazine called Amateur Photography which clearly stated that the new NEXC3 produced as good an IQ at the NIkon D7000.

On a head to head test the Sony performed as good and on occasions (dynamic range) better than the D7000.

Now I know that ergonomically the 7000 is more Proficient and for sport etc it will out perform a smaller camera. However I bet it's not long before we see DSLR's only used by professionals who need tough and very specialist requirements.

I think the technology is advancing faster with the likes of Sony and Samsung and NIkon and Canon could be left sitting on their laurels.

Thanks to companies like Sony, they are making photography more fun and enjoyable.

Ian

 

[cgarrard]

Interesting to see how forums have evolved with the use of words like "Death" "Crusher" and other words mean to strike a sensationalist tone.

I don't like those terms/words used at all- to me they are beneath the industry. This isn't a war.

That said:

The DSLR is in no way a camera design that is going anywhere soon- especially when based purely on image quality. D.I.L.C cameras will definitely chew into DSLR sales, but how much and for how long remains to be seen. DILC are just a new class of camera growing in popularity- and rightly so.

Form factor is very important to photographers- and it's not to be underestimated, DSLRS are highly evolved tools that give a photographer a serious advantage just in the form factor alone.

Handling is also very very important to working photographers- just as important to them as image quality (generalizing based on all the pro's I know personally and enthusiasts I know and talk too in this industry). Not every photographer wants a small camera, some actually prefer larger cameras for most professional work.

Image Quality is one of the big three items on a photographers check list, but it isn't always the number one thing. How a camera holds in the hand, and how it operates under stressful working situations are equally important as image quality.

If anything happens to the DSLR it will be an evolution, not a "Death". I suggest we try and be a little less sensationalistic and mature in our word useage.

And remember, camera manufacturers all need each other, not one company I've spoken with ever wishes ill will or "death" to a type of camera another makes. Combined, all the companies generate a united effort/interest into camera designs.

--

http://photographic-central.blogspot.com/

"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson

 

[harold1968]

not a sudden death, but definitely a slow one

pro DSLRs will be here for many decades to come.

once most enthusiasts realise that Sony and the new Leica CSCs are better or the same in picture quality then their bulky DSLR, the switch could be very quick. its already happening in Japan.

Arguably the Canon 5Dii and 50mm f1.2 is a bit off a leica M9 and 50mm ASPH f1.4 in terms of sharpness at f1.4 but mostly within spitting distance after f2. Its also 1/3 of the price. So why is the M9 selling as fast as Leica can make them ? For lots of reasons actually, but the most often stated one is the size - like it or not!

Canon and Nikon have great brands. they sell alot on this alone. But it can't last for ever.

this is a real market paradigm shift, and about time too

Interesting to see how forums have evolved with the use of words like "Death" "Crusher" and other words mean to strike a sensationalist tone.

I don't like those terms/words used at all- to me they are beneath the industry. This isn't a war.

That said:

The DSLR is in no way a camera design that is going anywhere soon- especially when based purely on image quality. D.I.L.C cameras will definitely chew into DSLR sales, but how much and for how long remains to be seen. DILC are just a new class of camera growing in popularity- and rightly so.

Form factor is very important to photographers- and it's not to be underestimated, DSLRS are highly evolved tools that give a photographer a serious advantage just in the form factor alone.

Handling is also very very important to working photographers- just as important to them as image quality (generalizing based on all the pro's I know personally and enthusiasts I know and talk too in this industry). Not every photographer wants a small camera, some actually prefer larger cameras for most professional work.

Image Quality is one of the big three items on a photographers check list, but it isn't always the number one thing. How a camera holds in the hand, and how it operates under stressful working situations are equally important as image quality.

If anything happens to the DSLR it will be an evolution, not a "Death". I suggest we try and be a little less sensationalistic and mature in our word useage.

And remember, camera manufacturers all need each other, not one company I've spoken with ever wishes ill will or "death" to a type of camera another makes. Combined, all the companies generate a united effort/interest into camera designs.

--

http://photographic-central.blogspot.com/

"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson

 

[justmeMN]

"Canon raised the forecast for sales of cameras with interchangeable lenses, typically used by professionals, to 7.3 million units from 7 million predicted earlier. The forecast for sales of compact cameras was kept unchanged at 20 million units."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-25/canon-raises-full-year-net-income-estimate-18-increases-sales-forecast.html

 

[justmeMN]

"Nikon now expects sales of its digital SLRs to jump 26 percent in the year to March 2012 to 5.4 million units. It said that its compact camera sales would also grow by 9 percent to 15.5 million units and sales of interchangeable lenses would gain 20 percent to 7.6 million units."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/10/nikon-cameras-idUSL3E7JA16M20110810

 

[harold1968]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-07/canon-clinging-to-mirrors-means-opportunity-for-sony-cameras.html

 

[justmeMN]

That article states:

“If the western geographies follow the same pattern as Asia, then it will be negative for Nikon and Canon.”

The key word is IF.

What's popular in Japan isn't necessarily popular elsewhere.

 

[ChetRoi]

I'm not a professional photographer--been in it only two years since retirement--but do you think this new gen of cameras will at least catch on quickly with pros as a backup camera?

 

[cgarrard]

"If anything happens to the DSLR it will be an evolution, not a "Death". I suggest we try and be a little less sensationalistic and mature in our word useage."

pro DSLRs will be here for many decades to come.

once most enthusiasts realise that Sony and the new Leica CSCs are better or the same in picture quality then their bulky DSLR, the switch could be very quick. its already happening in Japan.

Arguably the Canon 5Dii and 50mm f1.2 is a bit off a leica M9 and 50mm ASPH f1.4 in terms of sharpness at f1.4 but mostly within spitting distance after f2. Its also 1/3 of the price. So why is the M9 selling as fast as Leica can make them ? For lots of reasons actually, but the most often stated one is the size - like it or not!

Canon and Nikon have great brands. they sell alot on this alone. But it can't last for ever.

this is a real market paradigm shift, and about time too

Interesting to see how forums have evolved with the use of words like "Death" "Crusher" and other words mean to strike a sensationalist tone.

I don't like those terms/words used at all- to me they are beneath the industry. This isn't a war.

That said:

The DSLR is in no way a camera design that is going anywhere soon- especially when based purely on image quality. D.I.L.C cameras will definitely chew into DSLR sales, but how much and for how long remains to be seen. DILC are just a new class of camera growing in popularity- and rightly so.

Form factor is very important to photographers- and it's not to be underestimated, DSLRS are highly evolved tools that give a photographer a serious advantage just in the form factor alone.

Handling is also very very important to working photographers- just as important to them as image quality (generalizing based on all the pro's I know personally and enthusiasts I know and talk too in this industry). Not every photographer wants a small camera, some actually prefer larger cameras for most professional work.

Image Quality is one of the big three items on a photographers check list, but it isn't always the number one thing. How a camera holds in the hand, and how it operates under stressful working situations are equally important as image quality.

If anything happens to the DSLR it will be an evolution, not a "Death". I suggest we try and be a little less sensationalistic and mature in our word useage.

And remember, camera manufacturers all need each other, not one company I've spoken with ever wishes ill will or "death" to a type of camera another makes. Combined, all the companies generate a united effort/interest into camera designs.

--

http://photographic-central.blogspot.com/

"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson

--

http://photographic-central.blogspot.com/

"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson

 

[EvanZ]

A digital version of my old Nikon FE. I took better pictures with that FE than I ever did with the F4 that replaced it, and the only reason for that is that I took the FE with me everywhere and was always ready to shoot.

Gosh, to make that point even clearer, I took it with me to Mt. Kiliminjaro a few years back which sadly it didn't survive the trip. But I got some great pictures before it died on my up at 15,000 ft on a snowy patch of rocks.

 

[harold1968]

nice story

I agree. my canon 5dii with 50mm f1.2 produced some of the best pictures ever, but I stopped taking it places and that killed it

A digital version of my old Nikon FE. I took better pictures with that FE than I ever did with the F4 that replaced it, and the only reason for that is that I took the FE with me everywhere and was always ready to shoot.

Gosh, to make that point even clearer, I took it with me to Mt. Kiliminjaro a few years back which sadly it didn't survive the trip. But I got some great pictures before it died on my up at 15,000 ft on a snowy patch of rocks.

 

[Sensortivity]

DSLR will not be facing elimination any time soon despite what any random reviewer says. Let's get real, folks. Anyone who does or has used a DSLR knows the reasons why smaller form cameras are lacking in ways that are crucial to their camera usage. It's pretty simple, actually. So, don't blow up your mind ruminating over the demise of the DSLR. Instead, select the camera you want, use it, and curb your thinking that it is important to be validated in your choice by the demise of a different sort of camera.

I read a review from a well respected UK magazine called Amateur Photography which clearly stated that the new NEXC3 produced as good an IQ at the NIkon D7000.

On a head to head test the Sony performed as good and on occasions (dynamic range) better than the D7000.

Now I know that ergonomically the 7000 is more Proficient and for sport etc it will out perform a smaller camera. However I bet it's not long before we see DSLR's only used by professionals who need tough and very specialist requirements.

I think the technology is advancing faster with the likes of Sony and Samsung and NIkon and Canon could be left sitting on their laurels.

Thanks to companies like Sony, they are making photography more fun and enjoyable.

Ian

 

[KM Legacy]

I really don't care what "professional" photographers use. I think far too many people buy Canikon because "they're what pros use." So what? I will buy what I want and need, and that means small size and weight, as long as IQ is not compromised. Olympus OM showed decades ago that SLRs did not have to be huge and heavy; soon all the other brands were forced to offer downsized models. I think there is a tremendous pent-up demand for a smaller design than the DLSR, and repressed disgust with the grotesque bulk of DLSRs, including APS-C ones which are even larger than old full-frame film SLRs.

There is really only one reason for DSLR/DSLTs left, and that is PDAF. Once that advantage is gone, DSLRs will disappear quickly.

 

[odobo]

I will have to add OVF on top of PDAF.... its just a matter of time before companies develop CDAF to be as good as PDAF. However for mirrorless system people can only use the bigger nicer screen on the back or stuck with a stupid EVF (that IMO is pointless)

some older people or should I say people with lots of experience with slrs will always prefer OVF (at least thats what I get from this forum) and unless that generation is gone, there is always a group that demand OVF and hence dslr still stick around for a while.

but yes.... the mirrorbox/prisma was a old design to allow photographer to see through the lens... there is no point to keep it around for another 50 years when we have the technology to replace them already.

There is really only one reason for DSLR/DSLTs left, and that is PDAF. Once that advantage is gone, DSLRs will disappear quickly.

 

[KM Legacy]

DLSRs will not go away soon, but only because they still have the edge in AF speed and in lens selection, and because of popular inertia. I've used DSLRs, SLRs, view cameras and rangefinders. There has never been any lack of IQ in small-form-factor cameras, provided the image format was the same. Antiquated designs like rangefinders could not give parallax free view or use really long or macro lenses, but those problems disappear with the NEX-7.

 

[HB 101]

And do you think that will be a good thing for cameras like NEX?

Why do you think that NEX got so much better?

Maybe because Sony is trying to catch up with Nikon or Canon?

It is competition that drives the market, nothing else.

The death of DSLRs will be the worse thing to happen for NEX: I hope the DSLR are getting better and better every year and NEX is following!

 

[Dennis]

DLSRs will not go away soon, but only because they still have the edge in AF speed and in lens selection,

and ergonomics with big lenses, and access to controls, and vertical grip options and bigger batteries and something to put a big flash on ...

A year or so ago Thom Hogan showed a neat chart with projections for relative market share of cell phones, digicams, mirrorless and DSLRs. It showed digicams being squeezed by cell phones from below and mirrorless from above, DSLR market share shrinking with mirrorless growing. It seems entirely reasonable; the only question is how much does DSLR market shrink in 5, 10 years.

Of course, I don't know if he foresaw the possibilities of mirrorless cameras that AF with legacy lenses via adapters.

• Dennis

--
Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com

 

[KM Legacy]

Many (probably most) testers think the EVF on the Sony A55 is better (it's certainly larger) than the crumby tunnel-vision pentamirror finders on competing DSLRs. The EVF on the NEX is supposedly superior to that of the A55. Even the best SLR OVFs of today don't seem to match the size of the best of the past, like Olympus OM, Nikon F-2, etc.--where the screen was not shrunk to leave room for lots of gimmicky readouts. EVFs will continue to improve, but not OVFs.

Flipping mirrors cause shake, and fixed pellicles degrade IQ.