Will the prolific expansionism of the MILCs - eventually, kill off the DSLR?
May 17, 2019 14:00:20 #
Chris T wrote:
Last year my wife and I attended dinner theater put on by the Music Department of the college where she works. If I had known that they would invite us to take photos, I would have brought my Pentax Q-7 with me, but I was surprised by that announcement, so I used the best {only} camera I had with me - aka my phone.I wouldn't know, Mike … as I don't have one …
Telephones are for talking on - not for shooting pictures. I use cameras to shoot pictures - NOT phones!!!
Telephones are for talking on - not for shooting pictures. I use cameras to shoot pictures - NOT phones!!!
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-522899-1.html
May 17, 2019 14:02:41 #
Notorious T.O.D. wrote:
I guess we will have to agree to disagree on your definition of simplification. Simple doesn’t always win... and where does that battery and card come from...
We are only misdefining simplicity. I don't have to manufacture the battery and card, but it would be a lot of work to make photos using a pin hole camera. The simplicity is in the end use. Simplicity means "easier. faster, or cheaper". And when you add up manufacturing difficulty and cost of manufacture, and weigh that against user difficulty and end result the MILC wins. And the market will always go towards "easier, faster, cheaper"
May 17, 2019 14:05:20 #
traderjohn wrote:
A year and a half ago my daughter got married. There were 150 people at the reception. The only cameras were the photographer and her two assistants. The bulk of the age group was in the late '30s and early 40's.age group. Cell phones were the weapon of choice.
When our older daughter got married in January, there was one DSLR on the property - my Pentax KP {I took over 50 photos}.
May 17, 2019 14:12:05 #
Chris T wrote:
Think about it, folks … ALL Fuji APS-C models, ALL MFT models, ALL Sony FF models, and half of their APS-C models, and now - two FF models from each - Nikon, and Canon … is the road ahead, pretty clear, now?
vinyl -> reel to reel -> 8 track tape -> cassette tape -> CD -> DVD -> ???
Film -> DSLR -> mirrorless -> ?? (smart phone?)...
Times change and so does technology. DSLR's will be around for a while but are already on the downslope of their era!
bwa
May 17, 2019 14:13:39 #
CaptainBobBrown wrote:
Always a hot topic...but until MILC's (and cell phone cameras) can produce long lens images with high resolution for birds, wildlife, and other fast action distant objects DLSR's with their much much better super telephotos won't supplant DSLR's.
How do you define "high resolution"??
Are you expecting the camera body to auto-focus with the lens?
There are some bridge cameras that provide effectively "really long" views
May 17, 2019 14:58:56 #
CaptainBobBrown wrote:
Always a hot topic...but until MILC's (and cell phone cameras) can produce long lens images with high resolution for birds, wildlife, and other fast action distant objects DLSR's with their much much better super telephotos won't supplant DSLR's.
...
...
Not too sure where you've been for the past few years? But MILC lenses are equal to anything you can find on a DSLR!
bwa
May 17, 2019 15:09:26 #
Mirrorless might eventually win out over DSLR but phone cameras have won the race with the public.
Saying you don’t have to make the battery is like saying you don’t have to make or develop the film.
Of course Steve Jobs would contend that consumers don’t know what they want until it is presented to them...
Saying you don’t have to make the battery is like saying you don’t have to make or develop the film.
Of course Steve Jobs would contend that consumers don’t know what they want until it is presented to them...
CatMarley wrote:
We are only misdefining simplicity. I don't have to manufacture the battery and card, but it would be a lot of work to make photos using a pin hole camera. The simplicity is in the end use. Simplicity means "easier. faster, or cheaper". And when you add up manufacturing difficulty and cost of manufacture, and weigh that against user difficulty and end result the MILC wins. And the market will always go towards "easier, faster, cheaper"
May 17, 2019 15:23:48 #
Chris T wrote:
Bebu … I guess - what I mean by that - is the mirrored camera, will cease to exist …
Not sure I like that picture, but … let's say … it seems to be in the works - doesn't it?
NO NOISE of a Mirror Slap, no waiting to go onto the next … more advanced electronics, smaller size ..
Shall I go on?
Not sure I like that picture, but … let's say … it seems to be in the works - doesn't it?
NO NOISE of a Mirror Slap, no waiting to go onto the next … more advanced electronics, smaller size ..
Shall I go on?
The mirror is a kind of Rube Goldberg solution to valid problem. Find a way to see exactly what the camera “sees” through it’s lens. View cameras have one solution but a rather awkward one. The very latest MILCs have another than I think is better than the mirror but is not perfect - instead of seeing what the camera sees you see a small jpeg on a tiny monitor that simulates what the camera sees. Although in my opinion this works better than the mirror apparatus it has its own inherent issues - reread the previous sentence slowly and you will think of some issues.
So as to the original question: yes, I think they will supplant DLSRs because they are a better compromise. But just at view cameras, film SLRs, rangefinders and TLRs are still around DLSRs will persist for a considerable time.
May 17, 2019 15:43:49 #
Are mechanical parts in a DSLR more likely to fail than the electronics in a Mirrorless or DSLR? Of the 3 DSLRs I have owned one failed electronically and none mechanically. I suspect for example that for the average user a shutter failure is quite rare and few people, especially non pros, ever hit the number of shutter actuations that the camera is rated for. I’ll still contend that every camera is a compromise in several ways.
May 17, 2019 15:57:05 #
We need a new forum for this stuff. "Marketing trends in the electronic industry" would be a good name, I think. Then we could stop pretending that any of this has much relevance to photography.
Mike
Mike
May 17, 2019 15:58:03 #
LMurray
Loc: North Orange County, CA
Notorious T.O.D. wrote:
Electricity is not a simplification if Fire. The ... (show quote)
Without electricity it wouldn't be today's world. We'd all be back in the 1800's.
No cars, refrigeration, a/c, personal entertainment in it's many forms, computers/phones in their many forms, etc., etc. Without electricity I'd get out one of my FMs or F2 and take pictures on film ad they work fine without batteries just no meter. Could probably even figure out how to develop the film somehow without electricity probably not easy. I agree most people wouldn't want to live in or lose today's world without electricity, I have no desire to go back to the 1800's or even the early 1900's.
May 17, 2019 16:04:44 #
Notorious T.O.D. wrote:
Are mechanical parts in a DSLR more likely to fail than the electronics in a Mirrorless or DSLR? Of the 3 DSLRs I have owned one failed electronically and none mechanically. I suspect for example that for the average user a shutter failure is quite rare and few people, especially non pros, ever hit the number of shutter actuations that the camera is rated for. I’ll still contend that every camera is a compromise in several ways.
I've owned 25+ cameras over the past 40+ years and the only thing I've ever had fail was a shutter button which stuck after getting salt water in it. Two of my Canon DSLR's were sold with in excess of 100,000 shutter activations and are still going strong. My ol' Pentax Spotmatic from the late '60's still functions, although I gave up on film several decades ago. I've now have six Sony cameras and suspect they'll easily out last me...
Yes, many things in life are a 'compromise', not the least of which are cameras! Manufacturers can NOT afford to wait for designers to create the perfect camera before releasing a product. As a software developer I well know the old saying, "progressive improvement beats delayed perfection"!
bwa
May 17, 2019 16:22:42 #
Yes, I did my share of software and systems development and implementation. I also worked in the automotive and aerospace and defense industries. That is why I reject the idea that simplification always rules. Functional requirements have to be met and that is not always simple or easy especially when you are dealing with complex machines like aircraft carriers, submarines and fighter jets. Automotive must factor in quality, functionality and mass production.
I guess that the idea of a mirror system being such a huge negative in DSLRs just doesn’t fully ring true to me. If you build the reliability and ruggedness of say a 1Dx series into a Mirrorless body with similar functionality do you really save much size or weight in the end. It will be interesting to see how it all evolves.
I guess that the idea of a mirror system being such a huge negative in DSLRs just doesn’t fully ring true to me. If you build the reliability and ruggedness of say a 1Dx series into a Mirrorless body with similar functionality do you really save much size or weight in the end. It will be interesting to see how it all evolves.
bwana wrote:
I've owned 25+ cameras over the past 40+ years and... (show quote)
May 17, 2019 16:35:09 #
If I ever buy a mirrorless camera I at least want to be able to watch the game of thrones on it
May 17, 2019 16:41:48 #
karno wrote:
If I ever buy a mirrorless camera I at least want to be able to watch the game of thrones on it
I've never watched it on TV, so I'm not sure why I would peer through a viewfinder to see it.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.