DLSR vs mirrorless

[Hexlord79]

I used a D850 a couple of weeks ago after using my Z6 and Z7ii since they were released. It was amazing how hard it was to use a DSLR once you have fully embraced a good mirrorless camera and learned to use it. The focus of the D850 was just okay with too much variation and inaccuracy for slow moving wildlife. What you see through the viewfinder has no meaning when it comes to exposure, WB and how your images will look. I can't zoom through the viewfinder - only after a photo is taken. Burst length is very limited with a slower frame rate. Focus points are limited to the center of the frame which is very limiting. There was not even a hint of subject detection - even for common subjects. The number of AF area modes was very limited and poorly defined. The lenses for the D850 seem big and ancient - even the 500mm f/4 I was using.

I'm exaggerating a little, but it using a DSLR is quite a different experience from a Z7ii. I'm happy with my Z cameras and lenses.

The one big opportunity with a DSLR kit probably has a time horizon of 4-6 years, and that's the ability to buy excellent gear at a very good price. DSLR cameras are not benefitting from innovation and development of new technologies found in mirrorless cameras. But it's not going to make current DSLR gear obsolete. The lenses that are current today probably have a lifespan of another 10 years or more. Cameras probably have a lifespan of at least 5-6 years. You could buy a very good kit of DSLR cameras and lenses for about 25-30% of the cost of an equivalent mirrorless kit.

But that depends on whether someone needs any of the newer Z mount, first or third party, lenses moving forward. We're not getting any new DSLR lenses from anyone.

At that point I'd say save the cash, skip the DSLR and go straight to a mirrorless camera. That's why the lower price point mirrorless cameras serve as entry level cameras. It's also why they're the most popular, because it's the more economically sensible thing to do and that's what others are also doing.

That said, I will wait for the next gen tech to reach said entry level cameras. The difference is night and day.

In the meantime I recommend the younger photogs to grab some cheap DSLRs/M43 cameras to learn their photography.

And I plan to pick up another DSLR. Good times!

 

[Droster]

I used a D850 a couple of weeks ago after using my Z6 and Z7ii since they were released. It was amazing how hard it was to use a DSLR once you have fully embraced a good mirrorless camera and learned to use it. The focus of the D850 was just okay with too much variation and inaccuracy for slow moving wildlife. What you see through the viewfinder has no meaning when it comes to exposure, WB and how your images will look. I can't zoom through the viewfinder - only after a photo is taken. Burst length is very limited with a slower frame rate. Focus points are limited to the center of the frame which is very limiting. There was not even a hint of subject detection - even for common subjects. The number of AF area modes was very limited and poorly defined. The lenses for the D850 seem big and ancient - even the 500mm f/4 I was using.

I'm exaggerating a little, but it using a DSLR is quite a different experience from a Z7ii. I'm happy with my Z cameras and lenses.

The one big opportunity with a DSLR kit probably has a time horizon of 4-6 years, and that's the ability to buy excellent gear at a very good price. DSLR cameras are not benefitting from innovation and development of new technologies found in mirrorless cameras. But it's not going to make current DSLR gear obsolete. The lenses that are current today probably have a lifespan of another 10 years or more. Cameras probably have a lifespan of at least 5-6 years. You could buy a very good kit of DSLR cameras and lenses for about 25-30% of the cost of an equivalent mirrorless kit.

But that depends on whether someone needs any of the newer Z mount, first or third party, lenses moving forward. We're not getting any new DSLR lenses from anyone.

At that point I'd say save the cash, skip the DSLR and go straight to a mirrorless camera. That's why the lower price point mirrorless cameras serve as entry level cameras. It's also why they're the most popular, because it's the more economically sensible thing to do and that's what others are also doing.

That said, I will wait for the next gen tech to reach said entry level cameras. The difference is night and day.

In the meantime I recommend the younger photogs to grab some cheap DSLRs/M43 cameras to learn their photography.

And I plan to pick up another DSLR. Good times!

I'd say take one step further and say just stick to their phones first. Save that money for when the updated bodies arrive.

 

[Hexlord79]

I used a D850 a couple of weeks ago after using my Z6 and Z7ii since they were released. It was amazing how hard it was to use a DSLR once you have fully embraced a good mirrorless camera and learned to use it. The focus of the D850 was just okay with too much variation and inaccuracy for slow moving wildlife. What you see through the viewfinder has no meaning when it comes to exposure, WB and how your images will look. I can't zoom through the viewfinder - only after a photo is taken. Burst length is very limited with a slower frame rate. Focus points are limited to the center of the frame which is very limiting. There was not even a hint of subject detection - even for common subjects. The number of AF area modes was very limited and poorly defined. The lenses for the D850 seem big and ancient - even the 500mm f/4 I was using.

I'm exaggerating a little, but it using a DSLR is quite a different experience from a Z7ii. I'm happy with my Z cameras and lenses.

The one big opportunity with a DSLR kit probably has a time horizon of 4-6 years, and that's the ability to buy excellent gear at a very good price. DSLR cameras are not benefitting from innovation and development of new technologies found in mirrorless cameras. But it's not going to make current DSLR gear obsolete. The lenses that are current today probably have a lifespan of another 10 years or more. Cameras probably have a lifespan of at least 5-6 years. You could buy a very good kit of DSLR cameras and lenses for about 25-30% of the cost of an equivalent mirrorless kit.

But that depends on whether someone needs any of the newer Z mount, first or third party, lenses moving forward. We're not getting any new DSLR lenses from anyone.

At that point I'd say save the cash, skip the DSLR and go straight to a mirrorless camera. That's why the lower price point mirrorless cameras serve as entry level cameras. It's also why they're the most popular, because it's the more economically sensible thing to do and that's what others are also doing.

That said, I will wait for the next gen tech to reach said entry level cameras. The difference is night and day.

In the meantime I recommend the younger photogs to grab some cheap DSLRs/M43 cameras to learn their photography.

And I plan to pick up another DSLR. Good times!

I'd say take one step further and say just stick to their phones first. Save that money for when the updated bodies arrive.

That's honestly a few years down the road and they want to do some portrait photography this year at our local events.

No point waiting for years for things to happen haha. It's all about the "Now"

 

[aniltulsi]

After using the modern tuch-screen mobiles, will you go back to old keypad mobiles?

Even if manual transmission has it's advantages, preferred are the automatic cars...

So forget DSLR and enjoy your ML camera...

Oh, I adore standards. I've only driven a standard for the past 27 years or so.

I had a 1991 Audi 200 Turbo Quattro with five-speed manual.

Then a 2002 Honda Civic LX coupe with five-speed manual.

Now a 2012 Honda Civic Is coupe with six-speed manual.

It's the only way to drive.

People with automatics are missing out.

It is strange when I -- every so often -- wind up driving an automatic car. Every time this happens: I come to my first stop sign. I move my foot to the clutch pedal. I feel a sting of slight panic, coz I can't find the clutch pedal! Then I remember I'm driving an automatic ... a slush box. XD

Yes, i understand what you mean. My old BMW had all hydrolic systems, instead of electronic of today, and the old one was so amazing to drive

But i hope you can visit my city, Mumbai in India some day, and try driving here. In a 20 km stretch, you will praying to be allowed to drive above 30-40 km/h. You can be stuck in bumper to bumper traffic for hours, and every day to the office. Then you will wish you had an automatic transmission.

Coming back to cameras, i had D800 before, and in 5 years, i clicked around 75,000 pics. Before that, i had D7100 & D7000, and in 8 years combined, i had clicked less than 50,000 pics. After i got my Mirrorless camera, i clicked over 150,000 pics in 4 years. ML cameras have made it easier to click better pictures. For example, in the 150,000 clicks with ML camera, not a single pic in so over or under exposed, that it cannot be recovered, which was not the case in DSLRs.

Of course, many people will miss the features of DSLR, like the optical view finder, speed of switching on, and be ready to click, battery life, feeling of delay-less vew finder and many other things. Still, most will prefer to move on with ML cameras...

My Z9 starts up almost as fast as my D850. Viewfinder is improved over Z7. Useable now wirh fast paced panning

Yes, I agree that the $5,500 ML camera has caught up with what the $500 DSLR could do easily over a decade back. I salute it.

 

[Droster]

After using the modern tuch-screen mobiles, will you go back to old keypad mobiles?

Even if manual transmission has it's advantages, preferred are the automatic cars...

So forget DSLR and enjoy your ML camera...

Oh, I adore standards. I've only driven a standard for the past 27 years or so.

I had a 1991 Audi 200 Turbo Quattro with five-speed manual.

Then a 2002 Honda Civic LX coupe with five-speed manual.

Now a 2012 Honda Civic Is coupe with six-speed manual.

It's the only way to drive.

People with automatics are missing out.

It is strange when I -- every so often -- wind up driving an automatic car. Every time this happens: I come to my first stop sign. I move my foot to the clutch pedal. I feel a sting of slight panic, coz I can't find the clutch pedal! Then I remember I'm driving an automatic ... a slush box. XD

Yes, i understand what you mean. My old BMW had all hydrolic systems, instead of electronic of today, and the old one was so amazing to drive

But i hope you can visit my city, Mumbai in India some day, and try driving here. In a 20 km stretch, you will praying to be allowed to drive above 30-40 km/h. You can be stuck in bumper to bumper traffic for hours, and every day to the office. Then you will wish you had an automatic transmission.

Coming back to cameras, i had D800 before, and in 5 years, i clicked around 75,000 pics. Before that, i had D7100 & D7000, and in 8 years combined, i had clicked less than 50,000 pics. After i got my Mirrorless camera, i clicked over 150,000 pics in 4 years. ML cameras have made it easier to click better pictures. For example, in the 150,000 clicks with ML camera, not a single pic in so over or under exposed, that it cannot be recovered, which was not the case in DSLRs.

Of course, many people will miss the features of DSLR, like the optical view finder, speed of switching on, and be ready to click, battery life, feeling of delay-less vew finder and many other things. Still, most will prefer to move on with ML cameras...

My Z9 starts up almost as fast as my D850. Viewfinder is improved over Z7. Useable now wirh fast paced panning

Yes, I agree that the $5,500 ML camera has caught up with what the $500 DSLR could do easily over a decade back. I salute it.

Actually if you shoot in live view and/or switch between the EVF and the back screen a lot, the ML actually surpasses the DSLR by quite a significant bit. You can salute it once more.

 

[aniltulsi]

After using the modern tuch-screen mobiles, will you go back to old keypad mobiles?

Even if manual transmission has it's advantages, preferred are the automatic cars...

So forget DSLR and enjoy your ML camera...

Oh, I adore standards. I've only driven a standard for the past 27 years or so.

I had a 1991 Audi 200 Turbo Quattro with five-speed manual.

Then a 2002 Honda Civic LX coupe with five-speed manual.

Now a 2012 Honda Civic Is coupe with six-speed manual.

It's the only way to drive.

People with automatics are missing out.

It is strange when I -- every so often -- wind up driving an automatic car. Every time this happens: I come to my first stop sign. I move my foot to the clutch pedal. I feel a sting of slight panic, coz I can't find the clutch pedal! Then I remember I'm driving an automatic ... a slush box. XD

Yes, i understand what you mean. My old BMW had all hydrolic systems, instead of electronic of today, and the old one was so amazing to drive

But i hope you can visit my city, Mumbai in India some day, and try driving here. In a 20 km stretch, you will praying to be allowed to drive above 30-40 km/h. You can be stuck in bumper to bumper traffic for hours, and every day to the office. Then you will wish you had an automatic transmission.

Coming back to cameras, i had D800 before, and in 5 years, i clicked around 75,000 pics. Before that, i had D7100 & D7000, and in 8 years combined, i had clicked less than 50,000 pics. After i got my Mirrorless camera, i clicked over 150,000 pics in 4 years. ML cameras have made it easier to click better pictures. For example, in the 150,000 clicks with ML camera, not a single pic in so over or under exposed, that it cannot be recovered, which was not the case in DSLRs.

Of course, many people will miss the features of DSLR, like the optical view finder, speed of switching on, and be ready to click, battery life, feeling of delay-less vew finder and many other things. Still, most will prefer to move on with ML cameras...

My Z9 starts up almost as fast as my D850. Viewfinder is improved over Z7. Useable now wirh fast paced panning

Yes, I agree that the $5,500 ML camera has caught up with what the $500 DSLR could do easily over a decade back. I salute it.

Actually if you shoot in live view and/or switch between the EVF and the back screen a lot, the ML actually surpasses the DSLR by quite a significant bit. You can salute it once more.

There are many other things that ML cameras can do better than DSLR's. I moved to ML as soon as it was launched, being one of the first to buy one in my country, and haven't touched DSLR since.

Coming to your comment, it seems you didn't get the context of what is being discussed...

 

[capanikon]

I don't see a major difference between mirrorless and DSLR.

If you want to create great photographs, either is fine.

The real constraint is the photographer him or herself, not the gear.

Gear is easy.

Oh you bought a thing? A camera. Wow. So impressive. lol. Congrats on your amazing accomplishment as a consumer! Wow.

Creating a great photo is hard, regardless of what gear you're using.

 

[aniltulsi]

I don't see a major difference between mirrorless and DSLR.

If you want to create great photographs, either is fine.

The real constraint is the photographer him or herself, not the gear.

Gear is easy.

Oh you bought a thing? A camera. Wow. So impressive. lol. Congrats on your amazing accomplishment as a consumer! Wow.

Creating a great photo is hard, regardless of what gear you're using.

 

[Ellis Vener]

I don't see a major difference between mirrorless and DSLR.

If you want to create great photographs, either is fine.

The real constraint is the photographer him or herself, not the gear.

Gear is easy.

Oh you bought a thing? A camera. Wow. So impressive. lol. Congrats on your amazing accomplishment as a consumer! Wow.

Creating a great photo is hard, regardless of what gear you're using.

The person behind the camera is more important than the equipment is the given thing. The greats created marvelous art work decades back, with the cameras with fraction of capabilities of today's cameras...

However, the technology keeps evolving, and makes creating pics much easier than before, like introduction of Auto Focus, Metering in Cameras, Digitization etc. If you feel Mirrorless is not a major evolution from DSLR, then explaining growth of Sony in camera business, and Nikon/Canon dumping DSLR's in favour of ML, will be difficult for you. Of course you can create same quality pics with DSLR, that you can do with ML, just that it makes things easier...

Which, paradoxically makes it harder to make new great photos. Great n the sense of making you jealously think “That’s a beautiful photo and why have I looked or or seen that (person/place/thing) photographed that way before!”

 

[AlanWatson]

If you feel Mirrorless is not a major evolution from DSLR, then explaining growth of Sony in camera business, and Nikon/Canon dumping DSLR's in favour of ML, will be difficult for you.

Not necessarily: mirrorless cameras are simpler to assemble and have fewer parts, which reduces production costs. That alone would be a reason for manufacturers to move, once the technology reaches the point where it is competitive (I was playing with an old Fuji bridge camera recently and the experience reminded me why I didn't consider EVFs a decade ago!).

Don't get me wrong: there are definitely things that the mirrorless cameras do better, in addition to the extra flexibility it gives to lens designers. I gave my last DSLR away last year. I'm just saying that there can be business factors as well.

 

[Leonard Shepherd]

The one big opportunity with a DSLR kit probably has a time horizon of 4-6 years, and that's the ability to buy excellent gear at a very good price. DSLR cameras are not benefitting from innovation and development of new technologies found in mirrorless cameras. But it's not going to make current DSLR gear obsolete. The lenses that are current today probably have a lifespan of another 10 years or more. Cameras probably have a lifespan of at least 5-6 years. You could buy a very good kit of DSLR cameras and lenses for about 25-30% of the cost of an equivalent mirrorless kit.

This is very true.

Rarely mentioned is that to get increased information between body and lens to achieve higher optical quality than without requires a new lens mount :-(

The manufacturers have taken the decision to have wider lens mounts and shorter lens flange to sensor distances - generally making ML lenses completely incompatible with DSLR bodies.

This makes DSLR lens development in particular a dead end.

IF ANYBODY HAS NOT NOTICED - POSTING SO FAR CONTINUES BEYOND THE SHUT-DOWN DATE.

--
Leonard Shepherd
In lots of ways good photography is similar to learning to play a piano - it takes practice to develop skill in either activity.

 

[aniltulsi]

If you feel Mirrorless is not a major evolution from DSLR, then explaining growth of Sony in camera business, and Nikon/Canon dumping DSLR's in favour of ML, will be difficult for you.

Not necessarily: mirrorless cameras are simpler to assemble and have fewer parts, which reduces production costs. That alone would be a reason for manufacturers to move, once the technology reaches the point where it is competitive (I was playing with an old Fuji bridge camera recently and the experience reminded me why I didn't consider EVFs a decade ago!).

Don't get me wrong: there are definitely things that the mirrorless cameras do better, in addition to the extra flexibility it gives to lens designers. I gave my last DSLR away last year. I'm just saying that there can be business factors as well.

Well, before Nikon/Canon introduced ML cameras, large number of users had started moving over to Sony ML cameras, and that was nothing to do with manufacturing cost for the companies, but with the benefits the ML camera gives to the end user. This alarmed Nikon and Canon so much, that they were forced to come up with unbaked ML products (if you used or remember Z6/7 ver 1.0, and Canon R/Rp 2018 version. I was one of the first to buy Z6 in my country, and ver 1.0 was very different camera, than what it is today. Hats off to Nikon for this transformation).

By the way, moving to ML reduces the cost of mirror assembly, Prism etc, but at the same time, introduces cost of EVF, much higher capacity processor, and huge investment in software. Unfortunately for Nikon, unlike Canon and Sony, they don't make their own sensor, and Sony/Canon have been into Software for long. This is the reason for Nikon's struggle in the ML world.

 

[NickZ2016]

I'm not sure the EVF costs more than the optical viewfinder. The software gets spread over the whole production base and likely isn't much per camera.

 

[chambeshi]

If you feel Mirrorless is not a major evolution from DSLR, then explaining growth of Sony in camera business, and Nikon/Canon dumping DSLR's in favour of ML, will be difficult for you.

Not necessarily: mirrorless cameras are simpler to assemble and have fewer parts, which reduces production costs. That alone would be a reason for manufacturers to move, once the technology reaches the point where it is competitive (I was playing with an old Fuji bridge camera recently and the experience reminded me why I didn't consider EVFs a decade ago!).

Don't get me wrong: there are definitely things that the mirrorless cameras do better, in addition to the extra flexibility it gives to lens designers. I gave my last DSLR away last year. I'm just saying that there can be business factors as well.

Well, before Nikon/Canon introduced ML cameras, large number of users had started moving over to Sony ML cameras, and that was nothing to do with manufacturing cost for the companies, but with the benefits the ML camera gives to the end user. This alarmed Nikon and Canon so much, that they were forced to come up with unbaked ML products (if you used or remember Z6/7 ver 1.0, and Canon R/Rp 2018 version. I was one of the first to buy Z6 in my country, and ver 1.0 was very different camera, than what it is today. Hats off to Nikon for this transformation).

By the way, moving to ML reduces the cost of mirror assembly, Prism etc, but at the same time, introduces cost of EVF, much higher capacity processor, and huge investment in software. Unfortunately for Nikon, unlike Canon and Sony, they don't make their own sensor, and Sony/Canon have been into Software for long. This is the reason for Nikon's struggle in the ML world.

The Z6 and Z7 were definitely not unbaked. I bought a Z7 in September 2018 (before any firmware update) and it was then and still is a top choice for landscape photography and portraits, concluding wild mammals.

Your post distorts the history of Nikon's products very badly. Many of us were benefitting from the many features in Nikon Coolpix cameras well over 2 decades ago.

And go Look up the Nikon 1 MILC System which introduced several features for the first time in ILCs, including 60 fps and world's fastest AF system.

 

[Droster]

If you feel Mirrorless is not a major evolution from DSLR, then explaining growth of Sony in camera business, and Nikon/Canon dumping DSLR's in favour of ML, will be difficult for you.

Not necessarily: mirrorless cameras are simpler to assemble and have fewer parts, which reduces production costs. That alone would be a reason for manufacturers to move, once the technology reaches the point where it is competitive (I was playing with an old Fuji bridge camera recently and the experience reminded me why I didn't consider EVFs a decade ago!).

Don't get me wrong: there are definitely things that the mirrorless cameras do better, in addition to the extra flexibility it gives to lens designers. I gave my last DSLR away last year. I'm just saying that there can be business factors as well.

Well, before Nikon/Canon introduced ML cameras, large number of users had started moving over to Sony ML cameras, and that was nothing to do with manufacturing cost for the companies, but with the benefits the ML camera gives to the end user. This alarmed Nikon and Canon so much, that they were forced to come up with unbaked ML products (if you used or remember Z6/7 ver 1.0, and Canon R/Rp 2018 version. I was one of the first to buy Z6 in my country, and ver 1.0 was very different camera, than what it is today. Hats off to Nikon for this transformation).

By the way, moving to ML reduces the cost of mirror assembly, Prism etc, but at the same time, introduces cost of EVF, much higher capacity processor, and huge investment in software. Unfortunately for Nikon, unlike Canon and Sony, they don't make their own sensor, and Sony/Canon have been into Software for long. This is the reason for Nikon's struggle in the ML world.

The thing is there is a learning curve even for the manufacturers. Nobody gets it right the first time. Not even Sony. Took Sony 4 years from the initial a7's release in 2013 to get it right with the a9 in 2017. Nikon got it right in 3 years. And this is still with Nikon not making their own sensors. Nikon's software like Snapbridge also had a rocky start, but today is arguably the best out of the camera makers.

Nikon's struggles stems from them having to move from making the best DSLRs to playing catch up in a video-centric world today. We photographers are still around and the Z9 makes a good photographer's camera. But we don't form bulk of the camera buying market anymore. The consumer video market is.

But at least we can see they're trying, at least until we see the bodies and if they can meet the changing market's demands.

 

[jjz2]

Yes, the younger people I know that I work with and have met, let’s say…25 and under that own mirrorless cams, they are almost exclusively doing video, and their interest is generally creating content.

Of course this is anecdotal but it’s almost every time.

 

[aniltulsi]

If you feel Mirrorless is not a major evolution from DSLR, then explaining growth of Sony in camera business, and Nikon/Canon dumping DSLR's in favour of ML, will be difficult for you.

Not necessarily: mirrorless cameras are simpler to assemble and have fewer parts, which reduces production costs. That alone would be a reason for manufacturers to move, once the technology reaches the point where it is competitive (I was playing with an old Fuji bridge camera recently and the experience reminded me why I didn't consider EVFs a decade ago!).

Don't get me wrong: there are definitely things that the mirrorless cameras do better, in addition to the extra flexibility it gives to lens designers. I gave my last DSLR away last year. I'm just saying that there can be business factors as well.

Well, before Nikon/Canon introduced ML cameras, large number of users had started moving over to Sony ML cameras, and that was nothing to do with manufacturing cost for the companies, but with the benefits the ML camera gives to the end user. This alarmed Nikon and Canon so much, that they were forced to come up with unbaked ML products (if you used or remember Z6/7 ver 1.0, and Canon R/Rp 2018 version. I was one of the first to buy Z6 in my country, and ver 1.0 was very different camera, than what it is today. Hats off to Nikon for this transformation).

By the way, moving to ML reduces the cost of mirror assembly, Prism etc, but at the same time, introduces cost of EVF, much higher capacity processor, and huge investment in software. Unfortunately for Nikon, unlike Canon and Sony, they don't make their own sensor, and Sony/Canon have been into Software for long. This is the reason for Nikon's struggle in the ML world.

The Z6 and Z7 were definitely not unbaked. I bought a Z7 in September 2018 (before any firmware update) and it was then and still is a top choice for landscape photography and portraits, concluding wild mammals.

Your post distorts the history of Nikon's products very badly. Many of us were benefitting from the many features in Nikon Coolpix cameras well over 2 decades ago.

And go Look up the Nikon 1 MILC System which introduced several features for the first time in ILCs, including 60 fps and world's fastest AF system.

Well, the condition in which the Z6/7 were in 2018, i had to use it as i used my DSLR before that, with no Eye-AF, and lacking many of the AF features it has today. So portraits had to be shot using the single point AF, as in DSLR. What features do you really need for landscape photography in ML? DSLR are good enough for that. I am not sure what features in 2018 made you believe that the Nikon ML were the top choice. Of course, the pictures of Z6/7 were as good as any DSLR, as the sensors are similar, though not same.

I have owned Coolpix and Nikon-1 cameras, so i don't have to look up for them, so know very well what they could do. If with that long background, Nikon is still not able to match the capabilities of Sony and Nikon, then it is a shame.

To let you know, i am a Nikon fan, and have only used Nikon all my life. And no one can motivate me to use any other system. At the same time, i keep my eyes and ears open, and appreciate what other cameras can do better. Most of my friends use Canon and Sony, and i have good experience of handling them too. And in the areas in which Nikon lacks, i find ways to overcome those problems in my way.

I understand that everyone use the camera for certain purpose, and not all features are needed by everyone. Unfortunately, i click everything with my camera, including wildlife, birds, Sports, landscapes, stars, portraits, stage shows, macro... And only area i get stuck in the birds. If you are not doing birds, you will not even realise the camera lacks anything. So you may be right in your assessment of the camera, from your perspective.

 

[fz750]

Forty years ago some companies just replaced the clutch pedal with a computer. It's basically the same gearbox. Anything with paddle shifters is likely this.

Plus with the shift to hybrids and EV a clutch is very much last century. I've got three motors in my car that the computer keeps in sync.

I like the clutch pedal. It's fun. Paddles can't be the same ... basically an automatic.

EV users will also be missing out on the enjoyment of the manual transmission.

After you have driven an EV for any meaningful time, what with regen braking and instant full torque and utterly instant reaction to prodding that accelerator peddle, there is no way you would want to go back to anything else which seems so primitive, slow and dirty in comparison..

OTOH, my 63 year old single cylinder Norton motorbike is just what I need on a sunny day when I feel like driving/riding a museum piece with enough nostalgia and noise to scare little kids..

I guess there are analogies between mirrorless and DSLR, and DSLR and film

 

[ericbowles]

If you feel Mirrorless is not a major evolution from DSLR, then explaining growth of Sony in camera business, and Nikon/Canon dumping DSLR's in favour of ML, will be difficult for you.

Not necessarily: mirrorless cameras are simpler to assemble and have fewer parts, which reduces production costs. That alone would be a reason for manufacturers to move, once the technology reaches the point where it is competitive (I was playing with an old Fuji bridge camera recently and the experience reminded me why I didn't consider EVFs a decade ago!).

Don't get me wrong: there are definitely things that the mirrorless cameras do better, in addition to the extra flexibility it gives to lens designers. I gave my last DSLR away last year. I'm just saying that there can be business factors as well.

Well, before Nikon/Canon introduced ML cameras, large number of users had started moving over to Sony ML cameras, and that was nothing to do with manufacturing cost for the companies, but with the benefits the ML camera gives to the end user. This alarmed Nikon and Canon so much, that they were forced to come up with unbaked ML products (if you used or remember Z6/7 ver 1.0, and Canon R/Rp 2018 version. I was one of the first to buy Z6 in my country, and ver 1.0 was very different camera, than what it is today. Hats off to Nikon for this transformation).

By the way, moving to ML reduces the cost of mirror assembly, Prism etc, but at the same time, introduces cost of EVF, much higher capacity processor, and huge investment in software. Unfortunately for Nikon, unlike Canon and Sony, they don't make their own sensor, and Sony/Canon have been into Software for long. This is the reason for Nikon's struggle in the ML world.

If you remember, Nikon introduced the Nikon 1 system in 2011 - well before Sony was in the mirrorless game. It included many technologies that were on the later DSLR cameras such as the D500 and D850 - things like an EVF, a motion snapshot that produced images at 60 fps, FT1 adapter to use F-mount lenses, the shared EN-EL15 battery, etc. The Nikon 1 system had something like 8 different camera bodies. Nikon announced back in 2011 with the V1 release that is was a major shift in camera technology and the basis for future cameras.

The early Sony bodies were not very good - certainly not something that would cause you to upgrade. The sole benefit was related to size and weight. AF was terrible - slow, laggy and impossible to capture anything in motion. They did a good job with the later releases, but it took several years before they had anything that could match a DSLR for any purpose.

Apple doesn't make their own sensor either. I guess that explains their struggles. Nikon has been designing their own camera sensor for more than 15 years. Sony produces components for a number of companies - sensors, batteries until they sold to Samsung, etc.

 

[Guy Dagar]

The one big opportunity with a DSLR kit probably has a time horizon of 4-6 years, and that's the ability to buy excellent gear at a very good price. DSLR cameras are not benefitting from innovation and development of new technologies found in mirrorless cameras. But it's not going to make current DSLR gear obsolete. The lenses that are current today probably have a lifespan of another 10 years or more. Cameras probably have a lifespan of at least 5-6 years. You could buy a very good kit of DSLR cameras and lenses for about 25-30% of the cost of an equivalent mirrorless kit.

This is very true.

Rarely mentioned is that to get increased information between body and lens to achieve higher optical quality than without requires a new lens mount :-(

The manufacturers have taken the decision to have wider lens mounts and shorter lens flange to sensor distances - generally making ML lenses completely incompatible with DSLR bodies.

This makes DSLR lens development in particular a dead end.

IF ANYBODY HAS NOT NOTICED - POSTING SO FAR CONTINUES BEYOND THE SHUT-DOWN DATE.

What? We're still here? Wow! Maybe they were just pushing our legs!

As for DSLRs vs Mirrorless, I think with the Z9 it goes a bit deeper and makes DSLRs even more outmoded. We know all the advantages of mirrorless: IBIS, OSPDF and so on, but the Z9 makes it shutterless as well, and while that may be somewhat discounted or overlooked, it is a major step forward and away from DSLR technology. No shutter. Consider all the advantages of that one innovation.

I still love DSLRs, I still have a D6 that is a supreme DSLR (at the same level as the D850 in my opinion), but every time I reach for a camera I can't think of a reason to reach for the D6.

If this is the end, best wishes to all. It has been a pleasure and an honor to have been part of DPReview with all of you.