I wonder what “improvement” will be next for cameras or are mirrorless the pinnacle of camera technology?

In times before SLRs, most improvements and refinements involved film.

After that the standard (as in the universal 35mm camera built by most manufacturers) was SLR technology; basically what you see is what you get in addition to easily interchangeable lenses. Most improvements involved optics. At the very end auto focus and exposure came about.

Then the industry standard became a SLR with a sensor instead of film. Auto focus and exposure were refined and “new” improvements involved sensors, processors, and image stabilization. Good optics had pretty much already been perfected and so called improvements were mostly in reduced weight, reduced cost and greater zoom lengths. No real earth shattering leaps in image quality due to improved lenses.

In recent years the mirrorless (SLR without the mirror) has become the industry standard. Unless I’m mistaken, most new mirrorless sensors, processors, auto focus-exposure, etc aren’t much different than their DSLR predecessors. The selling point seems to be no mirror and increased frames per second plus a few other things already mentioned here. It doesn’t sound like there has been any major leap in image quality between DSLR and mirrorless.

It seems to me that image quality because of optics has pretty much leveled out and can’t be made much better, at least in consumer grade products. Sensors and processor improvements may have leveled out as well. Unless someone comes up with some radical new concept in photography, mirrorless (to me at least) appears to be better at applying or taking advantage of current sensor and processor capabilities.

The point is that most things, especially mechanical items, can be improved upon only to a certain point. The time comes where you can’t make good any gooder because it’s as good as it’s ever going to get.

Anyone have any ideas of where consumer camera technology may go from here, at least without implanting a sensor and processor inside your brain?

I wonder what “improvement” will be next for cameras or are mirrorless the pinnacle of camera technology?

In times before SLRs, most improvements and refinements involved film.

After that the standard (as in the universal 35mm camera built by most manufacturers) was SLR technology; basically what you see is what you get in addition to easily interchangeable lenses. Most improvements involved optics. At the very end auto focus and exposure came about.

Then the industry standard became a SLR with a sensor instead of film. Auto focus and exposure were refined and “new” improvements involved sensors, processors, and image stabilization. Good optics had pretty much already been perfected and so called improvements were mostly in reduced weight, reduced cost and greater zoom lengths. No real earth shattering leaps in image quality due to improved lenses.

In recent years the mirrorless (SLR without the mirror) has become the industry standard. Unless I’m mistaken, most new mirrorless sensors, processors, auto focus-exposure, etc aren’t much different than their DSLR predecessors. The selling point seems to be no mirror and increased frames per second plus a few other things already mentioned here. It doesn’t sound like there has been any major leap in image quality between DSLR and mirrorless.

It seems to me that image quality because of optics has pretty much leveled out and can’t be made much better, at least in consumer grade products. Sensors and processor improvements may have leveled out as well. Unless someone comes up with some radical new concept in photography, mirrorless (to me at least) appears to be better at applying or taking advantage of current sensor and processor capabilities.

The point is that most things, especially mechanical items, can be improved upon only to a certain point. The time comes where you can’t make good any gooder because it’s as good as it’s ever going to get.

Anyone have any ideas of where consumer camera technology may go from here, at least without implanting a sensor and processor inside your brain?

All the arguments for the mirror less as being 'progress' are valid - IF one uses them.

Burst shooting? I do not use that.
Less noise (sound)? I could not care less
Compact, takes less space... Really? Add a lens... You will right back to being bulky, especially if you have to use an adapter to use your existing equipment (to protect your investment). Good for storage only, then? Naw, not a valid argument.
Faster focusing? I use manual most of the time and yes, a D850 as well as a D500 have focus peeking.
Live histogram? I shoot raw. The histogram seen in camera is based on a reduced JPG and will present anomalies (blinkies) that would not exist if the raw was used as sampling.
Preview when using a ND filter? One, I do not use them, two, if there is a need to have a preview to make sure of what is being shot, what does that say about the photographer's mastery?
Weight unbalance? It already is an issue even with my cameras as any heavy long lens demand a better handling (support), even more so on a mirrorless.

I have a friend who has a Z8. He is ecstatic. I tried it, I was not seduced.

That said, while I will stick to my existing camera and expressed my opinion about the mirrorless it is far from being a put down on this technology. It just does not address any of my needs so... Useless TO ME

Thread title: Mirrorless vs regular cameras... Opinion