Are DSLR's Dead?

[nwoods]

Ah! That makes sense, and is very interesting! I have only shot sports a few times, and always with a "proper" DSLR, so I've never ever considered this.

 

[DiploStrat]

I loved my old Sony F707, but it had two BIG problems:

-- Dreadfully slow auto focus, and,
-- As I discovered when trying to photograph some butterflies, a very slow scan view finder. (Before that, I have never noticed.)

My first Nikon SLR simply amazed me with its speed. (The carrier landing photos were all done as bursts - with a lot of discards.)

 

[Honu]

agree good post and the focus in low light

for me there are times I prefer to see what I am going to get
I really think we need a true hybrid some way without having to move a mirror of course but the rangefinder issues are not fun either so not sure how they would do it ? the sony translucent has its issues

so could be when they get the EVF to act better but for sure I love it more than I hate it

when I don't like it shooting with flash where flash is set higher than ambient ? but I can turn off the gain and have a normal view so not a big deal
super dark having it brighter is actually nice but the small down side is the grainy look ? but again not a huge deal

where its nice simple things backlit shots and anything where you might want something exposed dif and while most of us know how many stops it might take its nice to kinda pre chimp the shot

have to say two years of shooting the EM5 and EM1 and maybe 70 jobs with the M4/3 now I prefer the EVF over the optical I shoot about half my work with the EM1 now and think its kinda like the 1D was when digital started coming in to replace film as the main media
the 1D had some issues with its 4 MP but also had great flash sync speed the files were not as nice as film but the advantages were there kinda how I feel about mirror less its got some advantages but a couple things hold it back

now when the MKII came out IMHO that was the nail in films coffin I am just waiting for that camera to come out to replace the DSLR for good

the EVF the true live view not some laggy DSLR version touch rear screens for shooting super high super low are nice to have amazing enough I am finding face detect to be a feature I use more on portraits now and its working great can't use it at weddings to many people

the last part about pros ? I say in the 80s it was you had to shoot med format they laughed at 35 mm ? then in the 90s they said OK then in the 2000 the same ones said no way will digital replace film and sure enough about 2005 most limped in with tails between legs and now in say 2015 they are saying mirror less won't replace and I feel by about 2020 most are going to be using them

agree on legacy glass !!!! but some like me dumped all my L glass 2 years ago and replaced most of it IMHO I got some glass that was better the Oly 75 I rave about as others do is better or equal to the canon 135 L and that is about the best lens going and some other glass I am happy with my 24-70 was never that good the panny version I have is better edge to edge than my canon ever was and better then the nikon gear I replaced my canon gear with so that is also dumped

some of the glass like the new 55 for the sony is turning out to be insane good as the new sigma art series so I do think some will slowly edge in but its going to take the working pro a while for sure to dump legacy glass the thing will be a slow process I think quite a few other pro buds I know are introducing mirror less of course and some are embracing it %100
myself I have been 50/50 two years now and plan on dumping DSLR as soon as I can

so I think it will be a slow roll and glass will get replaced slowly

I don't care if the sensor is cropped or not ? I shot with the 1 series up through the MKIII they were all cropped sensors so the whole you need FF is stupidity IMHO and anyone claiming that my simple argument is why are you not shooting med format then ! most working pros don't care what it is as long as its the correct job and will use what works and what the package provides

I know some high end video guys some shoot video cameras still and some have embraced setups like the GH4 etc...

I now a few that shoot the D4s and the EM1 together IMHO that is huge and says a lot about a $1200 or so camera body that many like the EM1 in certain situations and grab it over the D4s !!!

I see Fuji files from various photographers around the world which is pretty good ( I have a post production company for pros) the fact I am seeing mirror less files now on a regular basis but its still a smaller % shows they are embracing it for sure


I do think the issue is some get the older tech that was not capable and then say well I tried it not good enough and move on ? photographers are often scrooge attitudes and don't like change

May work to pose the question this way: "Are the mirror less cameras, on sale TODAY, good enough to replace the best SLR's?"

That way we are talking about available products versus the theoretical limitations of the technology. If you want that, then the question may be: "Can you build a video viewfinder with enough resolution and a fast enough refresh rate and at a low enough cost to replace a pentaprism and mirror mechanism." That, I believe, is the only real limitation on mirror less cameras.

And to this, there may be a contributing factor - even if you could, would the pros believe it and embrace it when they next come to replace their camera bodies. (Because if you ask them to replace their lenses, you are wasting your time.)

 

[craig333]

Certainly would be easier to carry but for poor people like who just finally saw prices on used dslr's come down enough to buy one it'll be same for mirrorless. So definitely not dead for a few years at least.

 

[matcooper]

The challenge these days is Grip and Accessories,
The argument over whether Dslr bodies are relevant any more could go on for quite some time but as it stands currently there is not a great ecosystem to support the M4/3 and other mirrors world. The Lens used on Dslrs whether 35mm or APC are used via adaptors on many M43 cameras. Take the GH3 or Blackmagic PCC, with any canon zooms or similar they feel usable, the form factor is more comfortable and the optics are robust and reliable. On top of that getting repairs, parts, filters and rigs is all quite simple. SLR's have been around for a long time and are well supported. So if you have a shed of Canon or Nikon slr kit then changing the body that you use is not too painful. Also its cheaper than changing everything.

Our current Rigs (for Video Primarily) are
2 x Blackmagic Design Pocket Cinema Camera
Blackmagic Design Studio Camera
Canon 7d

as well as others with their own lenses. But all of these are supported by our original Canon kit. We've got something for all occasions, Thats important when you aren't sure what may be round the corner.

 

[kojackJKU]

Yeah, I wish I could get a grip for my Fuji x-s1. that would be bee's knee's. I had one on every camera I owned since my Olympus E500. They make the camera much more comfortable and user friendly.

 

[Honu]

never had grips till the EM1 ? but always shot the 1 series canons so was built in for sure makes it more comfy

now on my 5D I did not want the grip cause I wanted the smaller size the whole grip thing is interesting for sure

if I got the sony A7 I would want the grip from talking to folks that use them

 

[kojackJKU]

Yeah, I miss mine for sure. I am almost thinking of getting a 3d printer and design one for my x-s1. At least I have the better balance when shooting then. Ownuser makes a lot of grips I may get a petition going on the Fuji site to see if we can get enough interest to get one produced. That way it would be functional too. if not with the trigger, at least you could have double battery life.

 

[robgendreau]

I think DIY is the way to go. Go over on cheesycam.com and look at some of the stuff people come up with; more for video, but still. Hot shoe grips, sugru grips, steady cams, it's amazing the ingenuity of people.

With a flip LCD camera, even one of those cheap flash bracket handles can be very handy for macro and low angle shots. I'd like to see something like the POV camera pole things they use with GoPros with a shorter length and a good swivel, sorta like a very mini monopod. Most I've seen are too long or don't have a regular tripod mount. With a remote shutter, or better with a smartphone and wifi capable camera, it would be great for getting shots without bruising knees and elbows. And some more interesting perspectives.

 

[kojackJKU]

Yeah, I have never used a 3d printer, can you get solid objects or are they hollow?

 

[richard310]

Yeah, I have never used a 3d printer, can you get solid objects or are they hollow?

Either solid or hollow, your choice. Solid interior uses more build material; Shelled out uses more support material. Overall cost depends on size and how your part was built in CAD. Utilize ribs and structural supports with adequate wall thickness, and you'll be fine.

 

[kojackJKU]

hmmmm, now the wheels are turing.

 

[aluke0510]

Seems that there are at least three elements at play here, and only one concerns a mirror.

-- Lens quality. There is no reason why the lens on a mirror less camera cannot be the same quality as the lens on an SLR. In fact, it could be the same lens.

-- Sensor system quality: Again, the system could be exactly the same, so there is no inherent real for a mirror less camera to produce a lower quality image.

-- Viewfinder quality: This is the real issue. Can the viewfinder be bright enough, have a fast enough refresh rate, etc.?

Get the viewfinder right and suddenly a full frame mirror less camera looks awfully nice. But it won't be much smaller than a comparable SLR.

The fact that the first mirror less cameras used smaller sensors and special lenses doesn't mean that they all have to suffer these restrictions. The viewfinder impacts the ease of use, not the quality of the image.

First mirror less cameras used large plates and had no electronics. They have a rich history. Later in the more modern era they were utilised as the compact rangefinder designs of 35mm and medium format films. Advantages were clear in the compact side and ability to have the lens elements very close to the film plane. It is only in the last 5years we have seen a strong re-emerging in the digital age.

Lens quality and sensor quality noted above are quite linked. Mirrorless is rather restricted in the current to micro 4/3 and aps-c sensors. Starting to emerge 35mm FF. Not there as a real implementation as medium format yet. Smaller sensor demands far more out of a lens than a larger sensor when pixel capture quantity is equal. So it will still be some time before the high end 35mm and medium format dslrs are dead; and likely never to happen. The real advantage of mirror less is when things start to come together more when we make larger high end sensors and start to design and optimise lenses to take advantage of the shorter registration distance and optimised to sensors as well. Leica, Mamiya, lots of rangefinder companies took advantage of being able to have lens elements very close to the film plane back in the day; advantage they had is film was easier to work with than a sensor and didn't change from model to model...

 

[kojackJKU]

As I said earlier, DSLRs will never be dead, just as film is not dead. There will always be photographers using all forms of cameras. Just different tools to use.

 

[arlon]

I make big prints and there is not a mirrorless option out there yet that can give me the detail in a large print I get from my D800E. Until they can produce a PRINT better than a high quality DSLR, there is no point for ME to even pick one up to see what it feels like. If all you do is post selfies on FB, that's a different situation.