Is end times for DSLRs?

[Peter Kwok]

It is not the phone, but the apps that run on the phone that will kill all stand alone cameras, not just consumer DSLRs.

Third party software on smartphones can edit, enhance and share photos easily. All phone makers actively court App writers.

On the other hand, downloading third party firmware to your camera voids the warranty. It is time for the old men running the Japanese camera makers to retire.

 

[Edymagno]

If I was Canon I would get into the cell phone business. Canon is great at writing software, probably the best at the camera business in the world. According to the great EOSHD article, the future (and present) is about software.

...

Eduardo

I wouldn't say Canon is great or even good at writing software. If you have the IOS app for the 6D you would know exactly what I'm talking about. It's a turd. And so is trying to connect your camera wirelessly to remote capture.

They need real software developers, UX and UI people to make this happen.

Well, I have both and they work fine with me. Sony in this department seems to be behind Canon. Canon EOS operational interface is probably world's best or so I believe.

Eduardo

 

[Timbukto]

If I was Canon I would get into the cell phone business. Canon is great at writing software, probably the best at the camera business in the world. According to the great EOSHD article, the future (and present) is about software.

...

Eduardo

I wouldn't say Canon is great or even good at writing software. If you have the IOS app for the 6D you would know exactly what I'm talking about. It's a turd. And so is trying to connect your camera wirelessly to remote capture.

They need real software developers, UX and UI people to make this happen.

Well, I have both and they work fine with me. Sony in this department seems to be behind Canon. Canon EOS operational interface is probably world's best or so I believe.

Eduardo

I'm ok with Canon software but to consider them anywhere close to Apple/Google or even Facebook caliber software engineering is laughable. They don't have the capability to execute here (they are doing a good job so far but its not the same caliber of smartphone development. Sony at least has some development chops with Playstation development but I doubt those resources can carry over in any meaningful way.

But really the software is not *that* bad...I have some Lorex security camera software and mobile apps and those are horrid.

 

[Volksgti81]

Latest rumors point to a medium format Canon right? I also think they're strongly pushing for the video realm. Who knows maybe they'll surprise us. My main interests are still high quality images. I think we're in for some interesting times. Hopefully they push the envelope.

 

[riknash]

If I was Canon I would get into the cell phone business. Canon is great at writing software, probably the best at the camera business in the world. According to the great EOSHD article, the future (and present) is about software.

...

Eduardo

I wouldn't say Canon is great or even good at writing software. If you have the IOS app for the 6D you would know exactly what I'm talking about. It's a turd. And so is trying to connect your camera wirelessly to remote capture.

They need real software developers, UX and UI people to make this happen.

Real software developers? That would be a slap in the face to all those hard working developers at Canon, Nikon and most camera makers. Such arrogance, perhaps employed by one of those, Apple, Facebook, Google where billions are spent on the code and the products they run on because millions of users will buy and pay for it? There are few if any software/development of systems and applications which will ever come close to the number of monkeys developing code at those places. Even so with all those monkeys, their products are less than 100% reliable and many apps are simply "turds", deficient and defective.

Canon firmware in their DSLRs is quite good. I would expect that given some time, the smartphone apps for the Canon cameras will also improve greatly.

 

[biza43]

Many here make the mistake that the rest of the population that take photos care about image quality, sharpness, pixel peeping, and so on. Wrong... most folks want to take a snapshot, and have the App and connectivity to immediately share their snaps. Professional photographers also require the speed and connectivity to instantaneously upload their images and video clips to news agencies, for example. For that, we have the smartphones, and the pro DSLR cameras.

For the "serious hobbyist", the market is to shift away from the APSC DSLR, towards the many available high quality mirrorless system cameras. These provide as high or even better technical results as a DSLR. And the gap in the fields of AF tracking and speed has been closed already, as demonstrated by the Olympus EM1. And the gap in image quality to FF DSLR has been closed by the new Sony A7R.

 

[KatManDEW]

If I was Canon I would get into the cell phone business. Canon is great at writing software, probably the best at the camera business in the world. According to the great EOSHD article, the future (and present) is about software.

Samsung is shyly getting into hybrid cell phone/camera. In my opinion this is not going to work. They need to do it Apple style (with pomp) and with the decision to corner the market. It is the only way to do it these days.

If it would be possible to build a cell-phone as good as an iPhone, twice as slim and able to to have a 1" sensor or so and a short tele, I would jump immediately. Possibly I'm talking about the holy grail (for camera and/or cell-phone makers) but I'm sure this could be possible very soon.

My reason is everybody's reason. My cellphone is always with me. On the other end, specialized cameras will be the future for survival of the real cameras. Landscape cameras, street cameras, night cameras, action cameras, etc. Gopro Hero is doing just fine with one very specialized camera. Black Magic may well do it too.True enthusiasts and pros will always need fine instruments of precision to help them seek excellence.

Have a cellphone/camera division to stay alive and have the latest technology and then lend the technology to the more expensive specialized cameras.

Eduardo

Like Volksgti81, my main interest is still high quality images.

I think cell phones are killing DSLR's because they're killing DSLR manufacturers meat and potatos - the P&S camera sales.

I have thought for quite awhile that DSLR's might eventually have a cell phone built into them. Not for phone calls or texting (which would be a sideline bonus), but for the connectivity and the software capability. Forget WiFi, give the DSLR full time connectivity anytime anywhere. And with a smart phone in the DSLR the software capability becomes almost limitless. For instance, imagine being able to talk to your DSLR to change settings while you're in the heat of the moment capturing action (just thinking outside the box)...

And for crying out loud, put tilt screens on DSLR's. Holding a WiFi connected camera in one hand and a phone in the other hand is ridiculous. It's an accident waiting to happen and it makes proper camera holding techniques totally impossible (without a tripod). And a tilt screen gives DSLR's a capability that cell phones don't have - the capability to point the camera in one direction with the screen facing in another direction. Take it one step farther and make the tilt screen a removable cell phone. Think outside the box...

Many cell phone photographers would like better image quality (and better camera capabilities). There are lots of photographers still making money from senior protraits, baby portraits, weddings, etc., etc. So people still care about image quality... Cell phone shooters can't get pics worth keeping in many situations with their cell phones (sporting events, low light situations, etc.). I've actually had many cell phone shooters tell me that they would like to have a better camera, but they can't afford one because their cell phone (+ service contract) costs so much! It's shocking how much people are willing to pay for cell phones and service. 15 years ago they would have laughed if someone told them how much they would be paying today for a cell phone and service.

Cell phones (and video) are "dumbing down" photography if for no other reason than they're forcing DSLR manufacturers to devote resources to things other than traditional photographic wants and needs, like lower noise, more DR, more mpix, basic camera features, etc.

 

[meland]

Cell phones (and video) are "dumbing down" photography if for no other reason than they're forcing DSLR manufacturers to devote resources to things other than traditional photographic wants and needs, like lower noise, more DR, more mpix, basic camera features, etc.

You're assuming that the market for 'traditional photographic wants and needs, like lower noise, more DR, more mpix, basic camera features, etc.' and devoting their resources to that would sustain the market. Unfortunately it would neither provide us with the excellent (mostly) equipment we have today, nor would it be profitable enough to provide investment for the ongoing improvements that many of us say we want. And the prices that would have to be be charged for this 'traditional' equipment would make your eyes water.

No, the dumbing down also enables a mass market and that makes the stuff you and I like possible.

 

[KatManDEW]

Cell phones (and video) are "dumbing down" photography if for no other reason than they're forcing DSLR manufacturers to devote resources to things other than traditional photographic wants and needs, like lower noise, more DR, more mpix, basic camera features, etc.

You're assuming that the market for 'traditional photographic wants and needs, like lower noise, more DR, more mpix, basic camera features, etc.' and devoting their resources to that would sustain the market. Unfortunately it would neither provide us with the excellent (mostly) equipment we have today, nor would it be profitable enough to provide investment for the ongoing improvements that many of us say we want. And the prices that would have to be be charged for this 'traditional' equipment would make your eyes water.

No, the dumbing down also enables a mass market and that makes the stuff you and I like possible.

You missed the point, but I don't have countless hours to waste on DPR debating it with you.

 

[meland]

Cell phones (and video) are "dumbing down" photography if for no other reason than they're forcing DSLR manufacturers to devote resources to things other than traditional photographic wants and needs, like lower noise, more DR, more mpix, basic camera features, etc.

You're assuming that the market for 'traditional photographic wants and needs, like lower noise, more DR, more mpix, basic camera features, etc.' and devoting their resources to that would sustain the market. Unfortunately it would neither provide us with the excellent (mostly) equipment we have today, nor would it be profitable enough to provide investment for the ongoing improvements that many of us say we want. And the prices that would have to be be charged for this 'traditional' equipment would make your eyes water.

No, the dumbing down also enables a mass market and that makes the stuff you and I like possible.

You missed the point, but I don't have countless hours to waste on DPR debating it with you.

Sorry to hear that.

 

[Dan_168]

Read this fascinating post at EOSHD:

http://www.eoshd.com/content/11409/consumer-dslrs-dead-5-years

What do you think?

i will believe when i see image coming out of a phone that is as good as my d800E+14-24 and 1Ds3 + 300 2.8.

 

[joema1]

Read this fascinating post at EOSHD:

http://www.eoshd.com/content/11409/consumer-dslrs-dead-5-years

What do you think?

i will believe when i see image coming out of a phone that is as good as my d800E+14-24 and 1Ds3 + 300 2.8.

That article title stated *consumer* DSLRs, not high-end DSLRs. The article body specifically stated "low end DSLRs" as being at risk.

A mirrorless camera cannot currently match a D800E, 1DX or D4 in every parameter -- but this is not what the article was discussing and is not an accurate leading indicator.

The *last* DSLR market segment to be overtaken by mirrorless cameras will be high-end DSLRs. That is technically the most difficult task for a mirrorless EVF camera -- low light, high frame rate, extremely responsive AF.

The continuing presence of high-end DSLRs against a rising tide of mirrorless cameras no more indicates their safe future than the smokestacks of a sinking ocean ship remaining above the water for a time. Just because they go under last doesn't mean the ship isn't going down.

 

[RogerWS]

I do not agree with EOSHD. If the DSLR market went a bit down it is due to high quality pictures produced by cameras manufactured for about 3 four years. The older camera could be improved in several ways, and now we are on the edge of a change, but not the one foreseen by EOSHD.

For me the future will clearly be the "modularity".

You will buy, once for ever, or let's say, for some for years if your are pro and some decades if you are expert, the essential of a well strong built magnesium body which will have interchangeable modules including the entire electronic hardware. We cannot produce "ad vital eternal" expensive rare earth camera bodies which are on an electronic point of vue, obsolete after 3 years and throw them trough the windows.. That's is simply not possible if we want the planet to recover.

We will probably buy different kind of sensors, as we bought for years 35mm or 65mm film. The sensor market cannot produce the finest sensor @ 50 iso and the best one @ 100.000 iso. It is only a software gimmick which allows to get both extreme settings possible. The market will be huge, for BW only dedicated sensor, high Iso, low Iso, type of colors and so on.....

Some Sensor will need some different quality of chips. You will be able to slide them in and out, as well a the Lcd screen.

Once that type of market will have reached maturity, you will see emerge some Open Source Cameras build using 3D printers, as well as Open Source hardware and sensors.

Optique is a matter of physics. You cannot change the rules of physics, that's why a small camera with a 1/3 inch sensor will,l even with gigabytes ccd, never produce the image produced by a Medium Format Camera and the compatible lens.

I believe that we will re-visit the history of photographie and we will see in the next years very large sensors as well as for photographie as for cinematography.

 

[meland]

I do not agree with EOSHD. If the DSLR market went a bit down it is due to high quality pictures produced by cameras manufactured for about 3 four years. The older camera could be improved in several ways, and now we are on the edge of a change, but not the one foreseen by EOSHD.

For me the future will clearly be the "modularity".

You will buy, once for ever, or let's say, for some for years if your are pro and some decades if you are expert, the essential of a well strong built magnesium body which will have interchangeable modules including the entire electronic hardware. We cannot produce "ad vital eternal" expensive rare earth camera bodies which are on an electronic point of vue, obsolete after 3 years and throw them trough the windows.. That's is simply not possible if we want the planet to recover.

We will probably buy different kind of sensors, as we bought for years 35mm or 65mm film. The sensor market cannot produce the finest sensor @ 50 iso and the best one @ 100.000 iso. It is only a software gimmick which allows to get both extreme settings possible. The market will be huge, for BW only dedicated sensor, high Iso, low Iso, type of colors and so on.....

Some Sensor will need some different quality of chips. You will be able to slide them in and out, as well a the Lcd screen.

Once that type of market will have reached maturity, you will see emerge some Open Source Cameras build using 3D printers, as well as Open Source hardware and sensors.

Optique is a matter of physics. You cannot change the rules of physics, that's why a small camera with a 1/3 inch sensor will,l even with gigabytes ccd, never produce the image produced by a Medium Format Camera and the compatible lens.

I believe that we will re-visit the history of photographie and we will see in the next years very large sensors as well as for photographie as for cinematography.

The concept of modularity and upgradeable components has been evaluated in the past, by Canon anyway - I can't speak for other manufacturers. Probably the last product that was sort of modular was the New F-1 but that was way before digital of course.

The problem has always been that cameras are small and replacing certain components, e.g. the sensor, is not something that could be done that easily by the user while keeping the product compact, unlike changing fairly large components in a PC with its large housing. The alternative of having the camera sent back to the factory or service centre to have it upgraded would be expensive. In many cases you could buy a complete Rebel for the cost of upgrading a sensor for that Rebel, so such a strategy would only really work for expensive, top end models. And even then I'm not sure many consumers would be prepared to pay a lot for such a thing when a complete new camera would have had all its components upgraded in tandem (and have any potential bugs ironed out by the manufacturer by extensive testing). So for example you might be able to slot in a new sensor but for it work properly you might find you also also need to add the new Digic 9 processor. And at the same time you find your shutter has done over 300,000 exposures so you need a new one of those as well. Cost all of that out and a complete new camera (with all its additional incremental improvements in the meantime) sure looks tempting!

The other problem is whether the manufacturer can make a profit making such a product. Most camera manufacturers have a business model which depends on products being made in large quantities with relatively low profit per unit but with objective of the customer replacing or upgrading (hopefully) on a fairly regular basis. That's not to say it couldn't be done but would we be prepared to pay the cost?

 

[Plastek]

For me the future will clearly be the "modularity".

That's not going to happen. It's against interests of... well: every manufacturer on a market.

Why would anyone create a modular camera for people to upgrade 1 part for 300 or 400$ when now they buy a new camera for 1000-2000$ is beyond me.

 

[Plastek]

Read this fascinating post at EOSHD:

http://www.eoshd.com/content/11409/consumer-dslrs-dead-5-years

What do you think?

i will believe when i see image coming out of a phone that is as good as my d800E+14-24 and 1Ds3 + 300 2.8.

That article title stated *consumer* DSLRs, not high-end DSLRs. The article body specifically stated "low end DSLRs" as being at risk.

Yes and no. High end DSLRs can't exist without low-end - as low-end gear is what FEEDs the high-end market. Imagine that low-end DSLRs die tomorrow. How long it would take for companies producing high-end DSLRs to go bankrupt? 1 year? 2 years? No new users means nothing else than a slow death.

Besides - DSLR form-factor and DSLR capabilities got so much appeal in low-end market that even cheapest mirrorless can't compete with them in terms of sales. And seeing how mirrorless sales stagnated in last 2 years - I doubt they will.

More likely we will have a repeat of a story from film age. When SLRs were outselling rangefinders even though rangefinders were smaller, lighter, got ridiculously tiny uber-sharp lenses and 35mm film. (meanwhile current mirrorless don't offer any of these two advantages)

The continuing presence of high-end DSLRs against a rising tide of mirrorless cameras

Rising tide? What rising tide? It was rising 3-4 years ago. Right now it's something closer to "crawl" if not: full stop or retreat (in 2012 sales of mirrorless dropped by roughly 40% in Europe)

 

[RogerWS]

We cannot continue to produce entire cameras and waste them 3 years after having been bought. Those times are gone. Your opinion is a fact TODAY, but not a vision of TOMORROW

 

[gipper51]

I would agree it's the beginning of the end for the DSLR. The low end will erode first, the high end will be the last to go.

Every advantage a high end DSLR (D4/1DX) has over a mirrorless camera today will eventually be overcome by technology. It might be 10 years or more but one day we'll fondly look back on the days of noisy, flappy mirrors and their limitations. The lone exception may be the viewing of a scene for hours without needing battery power. Beyond that, eventually:

• EVF response will be within milliseconds of instantaneous even in very low light.
• EVF resolution will be high enough to make "OVF clarity" a moot point
• Contrast detection AF is already more accurate than phase detection, only a matter of time before they solve the tracking issues.

For those who cite EVF lag as a limitation for shooting action today (which it is), remember that even a 1DX has "lag" from the time you press the shutter. The mirror flipping up and the shutter opening still induces a lag time, it's just very short. EVF lag will one day be less than the 60ms or whatever time the 1DX has today.

I don't own a mirrorless camera system, and plan to hang on to my 5D and 5D2 for a few years yet. But I have funny feeling my next body purchase won't have a mirror. I just hope it's a Canon body.

 

[Canoman21]

Hardly facinating!

Mirrorless cameras are replacing compacts. Most are purchased by techno junkies who need to have the latest toy or gadget.

They like the novelty of changing lenses but the majority have no clue about the difference an aperture f? stop makes to a picture.

DSLRs still have thier place in the market and there has never been more choice than what we see at current times. Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Sony, Sigma, Olympus etc!

They are all competing for the $$ sale so inovation will win over with the benefits filtering down to the consumer.

It's just the same as the car market. Ford, GM, Chrysler, Toyota, Nissan etc, still sell cars....

Dont believe everything you read just because some jouno likes to promote themselves with (so called) shock tabloid trash!