larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I just did some interesting research on the Compact Disc. Introduced in 1982, peaked in 2002, now dying and being replaced by...nothing! There is no tangible physical means of storing and trading (buying/selling) music replacing the CD. Vinyl records (both good and awful) are now outselling CDs, and together they represent about 15% of the trade in music programming. And by several accounts, the loss of a viable, tangible "currency" is taking the music industry down with it. You may or may not believe me. I'm not completely finished researching this phenomenon anyway, mostly because I was unprepared for what I am finding. Essentially, almost no one is interested in "having" music anymore. The same is true for videos/movies, although I've not looked at that in detail yet. And interestingly enough, the new formats are NOT superior to the old ones, because they all involve high levels of compression to make storage cheaper. No "voxel peeping" (my word, just made it up) at the streaming store.

So there is a message here for purveyors of progress. And also a call that harks back many years to a time when my parents cautioned me to "be careful of what I wished for." There is absolutely nothing wrong with seeking a better camera. But there can certainly be danger in chasing progress. Make certain where you are really going.

I've decided that for a number of reasons, this will be my last post on the forum here. While I really enjoy trying to help others move forward on their path, it seems to be time to find a different venue for it. You guys have fun and have a good time capturing those photons.

radiojohn

My design gripe was the deliberate effort to save money and remove optical viewfinders from most compact cameras and even some DSLR-looking bridge cameras. Now people don't even know how to use one of the had one. Composing a photo in bright light is impossible...and some have touch screens!

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The harder you work, the more likely you need a mirrorless camera.

radiojohn

Playing devil's advocate here: Aside from an optical viewfinder via pentaprism, etc., what advantages does a flopping, vibration producing, noisy mirror have to offer? They have been in use since the late 1800's in one form or another and the needed viewfinders finally got bright enough to use in the mid-70's (unless your lens only opened up to f/4.5). ;)

jerrye1000 Loc: New Jersey

Sounds like you never owned or even tried a mirrorless camera. "Dumbed down video camera"???
If that was true, then why are Nikon, Canon and all the rest jumping on the mirrorless bandwagon and trying to catch up to Sony?? They know that if they don't, then they will fall by the wayside.
I gave up my Nikon and Canon DSLR equipment years ago and never looked back.
I will put my Sony a7riii up against any DSLR. Look online at the pros. So many are using mirrorless, particularly Sony.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

The optical viewfinder. I switched to mirrorless in 2013. I really missed my optical viewfinder, I considered it much better and five new mirrorless cameras and 7 years later I still miss my optical viewfinder and still consider it much better. But it's not enough to tip the scale for me. I can see however that it might be for someone else. Otherwise the DSLR offers no advantage.

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

That’s too bad Larry. Rather liked reading your posts and your points of view. All the Best Wishes. Ron

gwilliams6

Wallen Loc: Middle Earth

This is an interesting read. A view from the other side.

https://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sonys-full-frame-pro-mirrorless-fatal-mistake/
https://petapixel.com/2018/11/28/sony-we-could-make-f-1-0-lenses-but-photographers-dont-want-that/
https://petapixel.com/2021/03/27/sony-sued-class-action-lawsuit-says-a7-iii-shutter-is-bricking-cameras/

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

The third linked article has nothing to do with mirrorless. It's about Sony shutters.

The first two links are old (a lot changes in 5 years) and not so much about mirrorless as about old Sony cameras. Gripes about Sony's poor design of old cameras doesn't have anything to do with my 5 mirrorless cameras none of which are Sony.

How about we assume that all the article writers old complaints about old Sony cameras have been addressed and avoided in new Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Leica, Panasonic, Olympus and new Sony mirrorless cameras.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Agreed, 2016 is pretty ancient history in digital photography. But, if you want to go 'old', try this comment first posted in December 2017:

The Sony A7R III is the best mirrorless camera ever introduced for consumer photography. It's super easy to shoot, with clairvoyant autofocus and exposure that makes it trivial to get hundreds of ultrasharp photos every day — especially of moving subjects!

When photographing people it has an instantaneous and clairvoyant ability to find and just focus on faces and track them as they move. If you're a people or event photographer, the A7R Mk III is going to make your life much simpler; you'll never have to manually select AF areas again. It's that good. Ken Rockwell, Sony A7R III review

https://www.kenrockwell.com/sony/a7r-iii.htm

gwilliams6

First of all, I used pro Nikon and Canon gear, SLRs and DSLRs for 40 years and had shutter failures with both Nikon and Canon cameras during that time. It didn't make me stop using my Nikon and Canon cameras. Since I made the move to Sony mirrorless back in January 2017 I have owned Sony fullframe mirrorless cameras A7RII, A7RIII, A7III, A9 and presently own A1, A7RIV and A7SIII Sony bodies, and I have never once had any shutter failures or issues in heavy professional use around the world, ever.

Yes the A7III, introduced in April 2018 has had unusual shutter failures, but NO other Sony models, before or since have had this shutter issue, none. And not all A7III have had it either.

AP (Associated Press) the worldwide news service has dumped its Canon DSLRs and moved to all Sony mirrorless gear for its staff photographers and videographers worldwide. AP shooters have to be able to rely upon their gear to hold up under the heaviest load and severest working conditions imaginable . AP has NOT had shutter failures with its Sony gear at all. AP could have chosen any brand they wanted but they chose Sony mirrorless for a variety of reasons, including durability and reliability. Cheers

https://www.dpreview.com/news/8983805391/ap-partners-with-sony-to-exclusively-provide-its-visual-journalists-with-sony-camera-gear#:~:text=from%20The%20Associated%20Press&text=This%20opens%20in%20a%20new,visual%20journalists%20around%20the%20globe.

https://alphauniverse.com/stories/why-the-associated-press-just-switched-to-sony/

Wyantry Loc: SW Colorado

Ysarex stated he missed the optical viewfinder: “. . . I switched to mirrorless in 2013. I really missed my optical viewfinder, I considered it much better and five new mirrorless cameras and 7 years later I still miss my optical viewfinder and still consider it much better . . .” Although he would not go back to a DSLR.

I have a Canon Pellix camera that did NOT have the dreaded flopping mirror— yet was quite useful. It is too bad that concept has not made the transition to digital.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

Yep, I've thought of that. I remember the Pellix. It's still a mirror and it's still in the way of non-retrofocus wide angle lenses which is one big reason I made the switch to mirrorless. There's also an efficiency issue. There's only so much light coming through the lens. In low light conditions the last thing we need is to cut out .3 stop of that light from reaching the sensor and then there's the dim viewfinder that's missing .7 stops of the available light when viewing the image.

petrochemist Loc: UK

It did. Sony made several 'DSLT' models that used the same flawed idea of a fixed semi mirror.
Always seemed to me it shared the major disadvantages of a SLR design (long rear focal length needed etc) while giving reduced light transmission.