Are DSLR Cameras DEAD?! (Picture This! podcast) What are your thoughts AFTER watching this in its entirety ?
May 26, 2019 01:29:09 #
Are DSLR Cameras DEAD?! (Picture This! podcast) Tony & Chelsea Northrup
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGTTbzx5ejM&fbclid=IwAR3eb9t9RUh8nkD5y6aDGC-_JxGfPR7KFyp37PKpYajcXSWC1Ad9_OFIjI4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGTTbzx5ejM&fbclid=IwAR3eb9t9RUh8nkD5y6aDGC-_JxGfPR7KFyp37PKpYajcXSWC1Ad9_OFIjI4
May 26, 2019 05:07:56 #
Come on, it's Tony and Chelsea! They are decent entertainers but not exactly the be all end all authority on all things photography. They have a nice YouTube show and make some nice videos and I like their educational material but, Tony can be a doom and gloom naysayer sometimes.
What exactly does, DSLR'S are dead mean anyway?! Are DSLR'S on the way out? Yes. Just like digital took the place of film, MILC'S will eventually take the place of DSLR'S. But what difference does it really make?! It's still digital photography with digital cameras.
I shot a child's birthday party recently with my Canon 5D mk IV. I got some really nice photos. This little girl looks like Shirley Temple. Anyway, the camera worked great and the images are really nice. No amount of Sony or Panasonic or Fuji or Nikon or Canon MILC'S will change that. People are making such a big deal of mirrorless cameras because they have a need to justify spending money to replace something that worked fine, in a lot of cases just for bragging rights or, they are using this normal progression in technology to further their own recognition.
Cell phone cameras have taken a big bite out of the dedicated camera industry, but they haven't killed it. For casual picture taking, cell phone cameras are fine, but for serious photography? Come on, get real, do you really think the tiny lens and the little sensor can truly out perform a good dedicated digital camera or most any MILC or DSLR? Not likely. How many people do you think do astrophotography with their cell phone? Probably none. Cell phones may dominate the snapshot world but they're still in the back seat when it comes to serious photography.
Will I ever buy another DSLR? Maybe, I don't know. Depends on what the manufacturers are offering. Will I ever buy a MILC? Already have. Not a full frame yet, a Canon M50. Nice little camera, kinda small but nice images. I looked at the EOS R but it doesn't really give me much that my 5DIV doesn't already. Sure, it has some nice feature the older camera doesn't but it's got the exact same resolution and for now I can live without the features it does offer. Plus, it's bleeding edge technology. Maybe when Canon drops the price to move inventory.
No, DSLR'S are not dead. Production of them will be phased out as demand and profits drops but the millions upon millions still in circulation will continue to work for years to come.
A while back someone posted something about Canon going under because Sony has cut into their profits, big time. Problem with that is, cameras are not Canon's only source of income or even their main source of income. LaserJet printers, and not just Canon LJ printers are a huge source of income. One of the largest if not the largest maker of LaserJet printers is Hewlett Packard or HP. Every HP LaserJet printer has a print engine made by, Canon. Sony doesn't make LaserJet printers. Canon even makes hospital diagnostic machines such as CT and MRI scanners. Sony doesn't make medical diagnostic machines. Some of the best, if not the best cinematography lenses are made by Canon.
No, Sony's mirrorless cameras are not putting Canon out of business and DSLR'S are not dead, and they don't drool either. Technology marches on, deal with it. It is what it is, and not the end of an era, more like the evolution of a technology.
What exactly does, DSLR'S are dead mean anyway?! Are DSLR'S on the way out? Yes. Just like digital took the place of film, MILC'S will eventually take the place of DSLR'S. But what difference does it really make?! It's still digital photography with digital cameras.
I shot a child's birthday party recently with my Canon 5D mk IV. I got some really nice photos. This little girl looks like Shirley Temple. Anyway, the camera worked great and the images are really nice. No amount of Sony or Panasonic or Fuji or Nikon or Canon MILC'S will change that. People are making such a big deal of mirrorless cameras because they have a need to justify spending money to replace something that worked fine, in a lot of cases just for bragging rights or, they are using this normal progression in technology to further their own recognition.
Cell phone cameras have taken a big bite out of the dedicated camera industry, but they haven't killed it. For casual picture taking, cell phone cameras are fine, but for serious photography? Come on, get real, do you really think the tiny lens and the little sensor can truly out perform a good dedicated digital camera or most any MILC or DSLR? Not likely. How many people do you think do astrophotography with their cell phone? Probably none. Cell phones may dominate the snapshot world but they're still in the back seat when it comes to serious photography.
Will I ever buy another DSLR? Maybe, I don't know. Depends on what the manufacturers are offering. Will I ever buy a MILC? Already have. Not a full frame yet, a Canon M50. Nice little camera, kinda small but nice images. I looked at the EOS R but it doesn't really give me much that my 5DIV doesn't already. Sure, it has some nice feature the older camera doesn't but it's got the exact same resolution and for now I can live without the features it does offer. Plus, it's bleeding edge technology. Maybe when Canon drops the price to move inventory.
No, DSLR'S are not dead. Production of them will be phased out as demand and profits drops but the millions upon millions still in circulation will continue to work for years to come.
A while back someone posted something about Canon going under because Sony has cut into their profits, big time. Problem with that is, cameras are not Canon's only source of income or even their main source of income. LaserJet printers, and not just Canon LJ printers are a huge source of income. One of the largest if not the largest maker of LaserJet printers is Hewlett Packard or HP. Every HP LaserJet printer has a print engine made by, Canon. Sony doesn't make LaserJet printers. Canon even makes hospital diagnostic machines such as CT and MRI scanners. Sony doesn't make medical diagnostic machines. Some of the best, if not the best cinematography lenses are made by Canon.
No, Sony's mirrorless cameras are not putting Canon out of business and DSLR'S are not dead, and they don't drool either. Technology marches on, deal with it. It is what it is, and not the end of an era, more like the evolution of a technology.
May 26, 2019 05:48:52 #
May 26, 2019 07:55:57 #
It's a discussion of various aspects of possibilities. They are in this to inform, educate?, and get hits.
Just another "TV show".
It's too early in the game to say which way things will go. If anyone does, it's conjecture and guessing.
Maybe it will, maybe it won't, maybe it'll be 50/50...
Just another "TV show".
It's too early in the game to say which way things will go. If anyone does, it's conjecture and guessing.
Maybe it will, maybe it won't, maybe it'll be 50/50...
May 26, 2019 08:06:39 #
rmorrison1116 wrote:
Come on, it's Tony and Chelsea! They are decent en... (show quote)
My 5Dm4 will do much more than the R/RP for what I need. (FPS in Continuous AF most notably).
Silent shooting is an attraction to mirrorless for me for weddings and other solemn events as well as eye AF that actually works (ie Sony)
Sony A7iii is so far ahead of any FF (mirrorless or dslr) at that price point, it has changed the game. If I was starting out in FF, I would be a Sony shooter. Dont see Canon even trying. Will wait for their pro mirrorless to come out and if it is a pig, then I will just keep shooting on my 5d4. Cant afford the switch to Sony and hey, the pictures look great on my 5D. Dont need 100mp since I am not doing fine art prints at poster size. I can see wanting 47mp for cropping sports shots from distance but you are at the mercy of the resolving power of the glass...I don't have 10k to spend on a tele prime.
DSLRs will die out eventually. But for the Canon shooter, not any time soon.....and Canon glass is still the best value/price (.. the RF mount offerings beating the competition right out of the gate however the price is $$$)
May 26, 2019 13:18:47 #
zug55
Loc: Naivasha, Kenya, and Austin, Texas
Ironically, the fact that the mirrorless offerings by Canon and particular by Nikon have have not been very successful may be putting a damper on mirrorless technology--this is basically Tony Northrup's argument. Both Nikon and Canon have a huge customer base that is invested in DSLR systems. They make their money on lenses for those systems--less than one percent of their sales actually are in the mirrorless market. So it is in their economic interest to continue to serve their DSLR customer base. And as crazydaddio pointed out, they put out great lenses at a better price point than Sony.
A complication is that the digital camera market has been shrinking dramatically over the past few years. The point-and-shoot segment has almost disappeared, and the high-end market is under pressure to be better than smart phones.
So Canon and Nikon are faced with a difficult decision: pleasing their large but shrinking customer bases by producing more DSLRs and lenses or investing in the new technology that may not make them any money for years but, in my opinion, is the more viable long-term strategy. I still think that mirrorless technology is more advanced and will be in the future. So surrendering the full-frame mirrorless market to Sony (and some of the smaller players) may be a risky gamble. Canon may be able to do both, but Nikon's pockets may not be deep enough. Thus it certainly possible that the DSLR market will not disappear anytime soon.
As a happy Sony A7 III shooter I do not take solace that the Canon and Nikon mirrorless systems may falter (I am particularly concerned about Nikon). A healthy competition is good for all of us.
A complication is that the digital camera market has been shrinking dramatically over the past few years. The point-and-shoot segment has almost disappeared, and the high-end market is under pressure to be better than smart phones.
So Canon and Nikon are faced with a difficult decision: pleasing their large but shrinking customer bases by producing more DSLRs and lenses or investing in the new technology that may not make them any money for years but, in my opinion, is the more viable long-term strategy. I still think that mirrorless technology is more advanced and will be in the future. So surrendering the full-frame mirrorless market to Sony (and some of the smaller players) may be a risky gamble. Canon may be able to do both, but Nikon's pockets may not be deep enough. Thus it certainly possible that the DSLR market will not disappear anytime soon.
As a happy Sony A7 III shooter I do not take solace that the Canon and Nikon mirrorless systems may falter (I am particularly concerned about Nikon). A healthy competition is good for all of us.
May 27, 2019 08:22:59 #
Regarding this subject, and specifically Smartphone Cameras, their Sensor are sucnifintly smaller, thus it is almost impossible to produce a quality sized enlargement of their images. ex. 5x7, 8x10, etc. So, Smartphone prints are questionable. I have a Nexus 6p Smartphone and attempted to aquire a 8x10 print, found it was not available size. 4x6 prints were Ok.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.