Will DSLR be replaced by mirrorless?

[spiritoftheeast]

And I'm not sure we the consumer will see lower cost - camera companies will economize for sure, but they will use that extra cash to strengthen their own financial positions since they've been in this drought for so long.

I'd be perfectly happy with that situation, if it helps keep camera companies in business and putting significant money into R&D.

 

[stevo23]

And I'm not sure we the consumer will see lower cost - camera companies will economize for sure, but they will use that extra cash to strengthen their own financial positions since they've been in this drought for so long.

I'd be perfectly happy with that situation, if it helps keep camera companies in business and putting significant money into R&D.

Yep.

 

[bjn70]

People get used to holding their cameras out and looking at the screen on the back, they will decide they can do the same thing with their cellphone. DSLR is a whole different animal that distinguishes it from a cellphone which is why people still will want to use them.

 

[gary0319]

It seems like some mirrorless owners on DPReview feel like they need to prove their cameras are better.

Why do we want to keep an "anvil" (mirror) chained to our ankles ???

I think this demonstrates insecurity. Mirrorless does not make the quality of the image better. That’s the function of the sensor.

Maybe mirrorless will replace DSLR, maybe not. The market will decide. Who cares?

Actually, my experience with teaching members of my camera club on the differences in shooting a mirrorless camera as opposed to their DSLR cameras is that it does improve image quality, sensor size/quality aside. The simple concept difference between DSLR shooting and Mirrorless improves the photographers ability to properly expose and focus images.

So the difference in image quality is not due to the camera... it's due to technique.

Add to that, that the less post processing of properly exposed and focused images results in superior results when compared to images needing more adjustments by Lightroom, Photoshop or whatever your PP software is.

I realize you're referring to students, but people who know their cameras can properly expose, focus, etc.

Regardless if there is a mirror or not.

And despite a certain person's NEED for his celebrated "zebras" to produce a decent photo.

That's true, but even those experienced photographers I have taught, will admit to realizing better images with mirrorless techniques. Just an observation, your experience may differ, of course.

 

[gary0319]

People get used to holding their cameras out and looking at the screen on the back, they will decide they can do the same thing with their cellphone. DSLR is a whole different animal that distinguishes it from a cellphone which is why people still will want to use them.

I don't know about you, but I hardly ever hold my mirrorless camera out like my cell phone. I use it just like I used my DSLR, with the viewfinder. How do you use your mirrorless camera?

 

[Rexgig0]

And, I used the last of my tea leaves yesterday. Plus, the dog found the magic bones. So, my best guess is that market forces will determine when the last SLR will be manufactured, and polls do not predict market forces.

I handled the Z7 at a Nikon USA launch event. Nice camera, but it would be a step downward/backward from my D850 and D5. Everything I have read about the EOS R indicates that it is not nearly the equivalent of my 5D IV; less capability, and no toggle/joystick for moving the AF point. (I have no problem with touchscreens; they are, well, cool, but “laggy” touchscreens are a BIG problem, and my aging, aching hands need gloves in cool/cold weather, which means I consider a toggle/joystick necessary.)

I would have some amount of fun with either a Z or an R, but it would supplement my DSLRs, not replace them.

 

[Gerry Winterbourne]

People get used to holding their cameras out and looking at the screen on the back, they will decide they can do the same thing with their cellphone. DSLR is a whole different animal that distinguishes it from a cellphone which is why people still will want to use them.

I doubt this. I see many people holding DSLRs out using the rear LCD instead of the viewfinder. I think what actually happens is the reverse of what you suggest - people get used to holding their phones that way and decide it works for cameras too.

 

[TeddyD]

People get used to holding their cameras out and looking at the screen on the back, they will decide they can do the same thing with their cellphone. DSLR is a whole different animal that distinguishes it from a cellphone which is why people still will want to use them.

I doubt this. I see many people holding DSLRs out using the rear LCD instead of the viewfinder. I think what actually happens is the reverse of what you suggest - people get used to holding their phones that way and decide it works for cameras too.

I don't think there's any difference between MILC and DSLR in this regard. Just use the screen or VF depending of the circumstances and user priorities..

 

[MarshallG]

Honestly... When the new Nikon D850 comes out, people who went out and bought it didn’t tell the D810 owners they were wrong or stupid for not replacing their cameras right away.

This seems to be either A) an irrelevant, random statement or B) a straw man argument implying that I tell people they are either wrong or stupid for choosing to buy a DSLR. That's something I've never done in this thread or any other, or in person, over the phone, email, snail mail, carrier pigeon, or smoke signals. Heck, I don't remember every dream I have but I'm fairly certain I've never done it there, either.

Maybe mirrorless will replace the DSLR completely some day, but it doesn’t really matter if you already have a camera system. It only matters when you’re ready to upgrade. It seems like some mirrorless owners on DPReview feel like they need to prove their cameras are better.

Again, irrelevant or you're implying I'm one of those people - as you replied to me.

I just want people to like my photos, and 95% of that is me, not the camera features.

I don't even care if people like my photos. I enjoy photography for me. I enjoy using the cameras and lenses, process, interactions, challenge, post-work, and looking for opportunities to improve (which are innumerable). If other people like my photos, great! If not, it doesn't impact my enjoyment of gear, desire to shoot, drive to improve towards my goals, etc.

Jonathan, I didn’t mean to cast any aspersions towards you. But there are a lot of people on this board who have a very strong attitude towards mirrorless cameras. It seems they want to insult anyone who still owns a DSLR.

As for your original question, I still think it depends on what the market wants. Canon is the best selling camera brand, and they have a very competitive mirrorless APS-C system, and it sells well, but their APS-C DSLR’s still sell better, to the best of my knowledge. Maybe if they put out a 1Dx replacement which is mirrorless and better in every way, then consumers may be swayed by seeing what the pros are doing at the Olympics. We’ll see... I think it will take many years.

 

[TeddyD]

Honestly... When the new Nikon D850 comes out, people who went out and bought it didn’t tell the D810 owners they were wrong or stupid for not replacing their cameras right away.

This seems to be either A) an irrelevant, random statement or B) a straw man argument implying that I tell people they are either wrong or stupid for choosing to buy a DSLR. That's something I've never done in this thread or any other, or in person, over the phone, email, snail mail, carrier pigeon, or smoke signals. Heck, I don't remember every dream I have but I'm fairly certain I've never done it there, either.

Maybe mirrorless will replace the DSLR completely some day, but it doesn’t really matter if you already have a camera system. It only matters when you’re ready to upgrade. It seems like some mirrorless owners on DPReview feel like they need to prove their cameras are better.

Again, irrelevant or you're implying I'm one of those people - as you replied to me.

I just want people to like my photos, and 95% of that is me, not the camera features.

I don't even care if people like my photos. I enjoy photography for me. I enjoy using the cameras and lenses, process, interactions, challenge, post-work, and looking for opportunities to improve (which are innumerable). If other people like my photos, great! If not, it doesn't impact my enjoyment of gear, desire to shoot, drive to improve towards my goals, etc.

Jonathan, I didn’t mean to cast any aspersions towards you. But there are a lot of people on this board who have a very strong attitude towards mirrorless cameras. It seems they want to insult anyone who still owns a DSLR.

As for your original question, I still think it depends on what the market wants. Canon is the best selling camera brand, and they have a very competitive mirrorless APS-C system, and it sells well, but their APS-C DSLR’s still sell better, to the best of my knowledge. Maybe if they put out a 1Dx replacement which is mirrorless and better in every way, then consumers may be swayed by seeing what the pros are doing at the Olympics. We’ll see... I think it will take many years.

What comes to Canon I really believe with their marketing skills they can sell what ever models and lines they prefer. The culmination point will be when their expected revenues from ML compete the DSLR's.

 

[Jonsi]

No; it's perfectly true. Mirrorless and DSLR are different but neither is better or worse than the other.

While this is true for the photographers (consumers), the new mirrorless review/profit advantage for the camera/lens manufacturers will tilt the field away from DSLRs.

Probably, but not until they start producing $500-$600 entry-level ML cameras, since that is the biggest market for cameras (by far) and no one is going to abandon them without a replacement.

Nikon's biggest selling camera is the D3400.

A $2,000 MILC will never be.

Agreed, the smaller sensor market will not be abandoned, but why would a camera manufacturer continue to add new APSC DSLR models when new mirrorless models could be offered at a lower manufacturing cost (notice I did not say sale price, since profit is the overriding parameter)

Could be, sure... I'd assume that also.

What we know is no one can abandon the $400-$800 demographic. What we don't know is if Nikon, for instance (I don't really pay attention to anyone but Nikon, so that's all I know), is planning on any APS-C ML. At all. What I do know is that they are planning on APS-C DSLRs as they launched their newest one less than a week before they launched the Z6/7.

Nothing about that says they are planning on "moving" to mirrorless.

So again, like you, I assume once they can get the cost/profit/whatever down low enough they will target that group. That group has to be the $400-$600 buyers.

My guess though is since they have 4 lines of DX cameras, one or two of them will go when that happens. But it won't be the lowest end D3xxx.

 

[gary0319]

No; it's perfectly true. Mirrorless and DSLR are different but neither is better or worse than the other.

While this is true for the photographers (consumers), the new mirrorless review/profit advantage for the camera/lens manufacturers will tilt the field away from DSLRs.

Probably, but not until they start producing $500-$600 entry-level ML cameras, since that is the biggest market for cameras (by far) and no one is going to abandon them without a replacement.

Nikon's biggest selling camera is the D3400.

A $2,000 MILC will never be.

Agreed, the smaller sensor market will not be abandoned, but why would a camera manufacturer continue to add new APSC DSLR models when new mirrorless models could be offered at a lower manufacturing cost (notice I did not say sale price, since profit is the overriding parameter)

Could be, sure... I'd assume that also.

What we know is no one can abandon the $400-$800 demographic. What we don't know is if Nikon, for instance (I don't really pay attention to anyone but Nikon, so that's all I know), is planning on any APS-C ML. At all. What I do know is that they are planning on APS-C DSLRs as they launched their newest one less than a week before they launched the Z6/7.

Nothing about that says they are planning on "moving" to mirrorless.

So again, like you, I assume once they can get the cost/profit/whatever down low enough they will target that group. That group has to be the $400-$600 buyers.

My guess though is since they have 4 lines of DX cameras, one or two of them will go when that happens. But it won't be the lowest end D3xxx.

And that seems to be the wild card in all of this movement within the camera industry. It seems unlikely that Nikon will continue to support all the DX and FX derivatives. And, what will Canon do with the beleaguered M Mount that they have so far seemed to relegate to poor step sister status with nary an L lens to be found for the mount, Panasonic now rumored to go to a Full Frame option (albeit maybe only for video centric guys). Fuji seems to have it mind made up as does Sony, but Olympus (my personal pick) is just hiding in the weeds, I hope. Interesting months ahead...

 

[tbcass]

And I'm not sure we the consumer will see lower cost - camera companies will economize for sure, but they will use that extra cash to strengthen their own financial positions since they've been in this drought for so long.

Yes Mirrorless cameras have the potential to have a greater profit margin. That is why manufacturers are pushing them. Because manufacturers are going to push them and let DSLRs fall by the wayside is the real reason DSLRs will eventually fade away. The advertising will push mirrorless to the point that younger people entering photography will go mirrorless and view DSLRs as quaint relics, not because mirrorless cameras are in any way "better".

 

[stevo23]

And I'm not sure we the consumer will see lower cost - camera companies will economize for sure, but they will use that extra cash to strengthen their own financial positions since they've been in this drought for so long.

Yes Mirrorless cameras have the potential to have a greater profit margin. That is why manufacturers are pushing them. Because manufacturers are going to push them and let DSLRs fall by the wayside is the real reason DSLRs will eventually fade away.

Bingo. Ding ding ding.

 

[PhotoTeach2]

But I won't be spending my time trying to convince people online how much better my camera is than theirs.

Do any people really need convincing anymore? I thought it's pretty much settled that MILC offers significant advantages. Now, a few people don't need those advantages, but that doesn't mean those advantages don't exist.

Your linguistic logic is flawed. Something is only an advantage if someone wants or needs it - so if they don't need it it isn't an advantage.

I think the issue arises when a few people claim MILC isn't better, which is an inaccurate assessment.

No; it's perfectly true. Mirrorless and DSLR are different but neither is better or worse than the other.

Completely disagree,

Your prerogative ...

especially potentially for the future.

What has the future to do with my statement about the present?

But I suggest additional options and features (on ML) NOT POSSIBLE w/ dSLR does indeed make them "better", even today.

Both equivalent dSLR and ML may even have the same sensor, so inherently the "same" (IQ), BUT ... with (live) histogram/zebras and resulting easy/quick ETTR, the IQ can be better on ML.

And frame-rate is faster on ML, (again "better").

But the OP is SPECIFICALLY about the FUTURE, ("When Will ML 'outsell' dSLR ???")

Seriously how much have "basic" spec's, (fps, shutter-speed, flash-sync, AF, etc) of SLR/dSLR's w/ FP-shutter progressed in the last 50-years -- compared to ML (w/ leaf/electronic shutter) in only the last 5-years ???

I'm describing how they are now, not how long it's taken to get to now.

But they are already "better" (NOW).

Their historical (PD) AF advantage has slowly eroded ...

Battery-Life and "0" EVF-lag is the only serious remaining "difference" (advantage).

But most important ... what can dSLR's do in NEXT 5-years -- compared to ML in next 5-years w/out "mirror" limitations (and possibly "global" shutter) ???

The QUESTION is still a valid one, (that you are so obviously ignoring and evading).

 

[PhotoTeach2]

The BAD, (or GOOD), part of the low-cost dSLR vs ML debate is that there are no ML's with so FEW features as the D3xxx.

I don't recall them all now, but lists's of their missing options/features have been printed and I was even surprised at (so) many of them.

Not insignificant is that their lowest-cost camera cannot use (admittedly older) lower-cost (used) lenses.

There also have been (buyers) in the BEGINNERS forum that bought low-cost kits w/ a NON-VR 300mm (450 EFL) lenses.

I originally thought this was a low-ball tactic by a SCAM retailer.

BUT ... I now find out that NIKON ITSELF is selling that specific (in my opinion SCAM) kit.

Note that then they come into the beginners forum and wonder by their 300-450mm images are "shaky"/blurry.

 

[PhotoTeach2]

It seems like some mirrorless owners on DPReview feel like they need to prove their cameras are better.

Why do we want to keep an "anvil" (mirror) chained to our ankles ???

I think this demonstrates insecurity. Mirrorless does not make the quality of the image better. That’s the function of the sensor.

Many dSLR and ML have the exact same sensor, so no inherent difference in IQ.

But I do suggest that (LIVE) histogram/zebras can indeed assist easy/quick ETTR and thus better overall IQ, (especially with "first" shots when there is no-time for a second shot).

Maybe mirrorless will replace DSLR, maybe not. The market will decide.

Of course the "market" will decide ...

Who cares?

I care !!!

I would like expanded shooting "opportunities", (ala additional options & features), and ONLY ML can continue to offer ADDITIONAL options/features we don't have today.

(ala 60fps w/ global-shutter and 1/4000s flash-sync and "PRE-BURST")

 

[PhotoTeach2]

And, I used the last of my tea leaves yesterday. Plus, the dog found the magic bones. So, my best guess is that market forces will determine when the last SLR will be manufactured, and polls do not predict market forces.

I handled the Z7 at a Nikon USA launch event. Nice camera, but it would be a step downward/backward from my D850 and D5. Everything I have read about the EOS R indicates that it is not nearly the equivalent of my 5D IV; less capability, and no toggle/joystick for moving the AF point. (I have no problem with touchscreens; they are, well, cool, but “laggy” touchscreens are a BIG problem, and my aging, aching hands need gloves in cool/cold weather, which means I consider a toggle/joystick necessary.)

I would have some amount of fun with either a Z or an R, but it would supplement my DSLRs, not replace them.

I have to agree with that.

Neither are A7 or A9 competitive. (and A9 is the new bar)

Underwhelming and possibly an economic mistake for both.

 

[Donald B]

mine was 3 years ago

Don

A safe move if bug macros are your main subject material.

I wonder if he has any photos in that realm that he can share?

I wonder if you care to look.

Don

 

[Donald B]

mine was 3 years ago

Don

A safe move if bug macros are your main subject material.

What about studio portraits ?

Don