Retina Loc: Near Charleston,SC

It doesn't make sense for most companies to spend large sums to replace their perfectly good equipment and force their staff to convert just to have the newest thing. There would have to be reasons that made sense for the business.

BebuLamar

Is the Petri a 7s? I love that thing but can't find a good condition one these days.

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

Thanks, I'll have to go check one out. But at this point I'm staying where I am. I have too much $ invested

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Well, as noted before, statistically your equipment may turn to dust ....

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

I think I'll turn to dust before my equipment does.

traderjohn Loc: New York City

That mirrorless of the future is called a; Cell Phone.

khorinek

I received my second mirrorless Canon EOS RP this week. It will eventually replace my Canon 5D Mark IV. I'm already shooting 100% mirrorless. The next step is to start looking at the RF lenses.....

BebuLamar

The DSLR just like anything will turn to dust some day but that has nothing to do with the mirrorless and of course it too will turn to dust including all of us here at the UHH.

Haydon

Those RF lenses are ridiculously expensive but look to be definitely impressive. I have a good collection of L lenses in EF mount that will be staple if I ever see a ML from Canon that suits me. Personally I could never see a RP replace a 5DIV. It's in a different class altogether.

throughrhettseyes Loc: Rowlett, TX

If I wanted to shoot with a video camera I would buy a video camera not a DSLR. Mirrorless cameras are nothing but video cameras with fancy shutter settings to emulate true DSLRS.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The reality is the differences are minor, at least at this point, for DSLR to MILC. I'm much more dependent on the EVF of my Sony a7II because of my use of old Canon FD lenses adapted to this mirrorless body rather than autofocus lenses. I can't focus these FD lenses sharp enough through a film view finder and had reached the point I was going to sell off all this old equipment. The EVF gives me a 100% zoom within the view finder while held to the eye. So I now have two options. The EVF can 'shimmer' a color in the EVF showing the plane of focus to help see where I'm focusing. This works good for 'quick' shooting with these manual focus lenses and is a great improvement compared to older film camera viewfinders. But, I prefer the 100% zoom in the EVF (like Live View on a DSLR, but in the view finder) to get the focus exact. The Sony and Nikon models also provide in-body stabilization greatly enhancing lenses that don't have this modern feature within the lens.

What will change over time is the quality and capability of the lenses. Sony / Zeiss have been putting out phenomenal lenses for years. Canon's L-entries so far for their mirrorless RF mount already present compelling options to change for lenses that are both faster in aperture and are much sharper wide-open to the corresponding EF models. Canon's adapter enables their EF and EF-S lenses to operate on the MILC models with no difference in performance compared to the native EOS body. For me, when it comes time to change bodies, I envision the Canon MILC allowing me to use a single body for all the lenses / lens types I shoot. Hopefully, my DSLR doesn't get turned to dust because of someone else's purchase before I'm ready ....

khorinek

The Canon EOS RP takes excellent video. The video is one big reason I'm switching. The video on the Mark IV requires the user to switch to live view then push a video button. With the EOS R, you just push a button on the top and you are in video mode, push again and your back to taking photos, very easy.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Historically, there have been any number of battles between fiercely competing technologies. Here are a few that I could recall quickly:

2 stroke vs. 4 stroke engines
Alternating vs. direct current
Vacuum tubes vs. transistors
Germanium vs. silicon transistors
Electronic calculators vs. slide rules
Algebraic vs. "reverse Polish" calculators
Beta vs. VHS
Intel vs. Motorola microprocessors
Plasma vs. LCD television screens
Macintosh vs. Windows PCs
iPhone vs. Android vs. Windows Phone

In some cases, there was a fundamental underlying reason that one was better than the other. In some cases, it was just someone wanting to differentiate the market.

In most cases, there was a winner. In many cases, the inherently 'better' technology won. In a very fewcases, the competing technologies continue to coexist, at least for now.

In some cases, failure of the unsuccessful option was a real loss. In some cases, no one cares.

The battle truly is very interesting. But we may or may not end up having any real say in the results.

Save some energy for later.

DoyleY Loc: Worland, Wyoming

I like the feel of my D7200 and I don't mind the weight. I haven't tried the Z6 or Z7. I'd kinda like it if they would make a mirrorless in the frame of a regular sized DSLR. I guess for some folks this would defeat part of what they are trying to accomplish. Smaller isn't always better.

nikonnate Loc: Woodbury MN

I just bought my D850 late last summer, and had the chance to look at a mirrorless at the time because I was starting out from a blank slate. I opted for the DSLR because I liked the feel when I picked it up, held it, etc and frankly don't give a damn if someday it's all "worthless" on the resale market because I really like what I have now and am quite happy with it. I don't see how manufacturers will ever make all these lenses useless on mirrorless bodies. Someday - hopefully a long time from now - my D850 will die, and I'll have a pile of F mount lenses to work with. Maybe it's pie in the sky but I'm not at all worried about running in to an invisible wall with my Nikon gear.