The Pseudo-Demise Of DSLRs (Page 6): They quit making them not because no one wants them but because too few people want them. That would be a problem if I don't have enough cameras to...

BebuLamar

BigDaddy wrote:

If they quit making them it would only be because ... (show quote)

They quit making them not because no one wants them but because too few people want them. That would be a problem if I don't have enough cameras to last my life time. For film it's a problem because film is a consumable and perishable thing and you can't stock pile them.
To you it makes no sense to use something few people do but to me I don't want nor should have to use the things other use.

FTn

rgrenaderphoto wrote:

Gear is irrelevant. I have taken some amazing images with my iPhone. It is the eye behind the viewfinder that captures the magic.

- FTn

anotherview Loc: California

In the Internet Age, we photographers have more ready access to facts and information about camera gear.
We do not have to rely mostly on sales hyperbole and shills when deciding which piece of gear to buy.

Instead, various sources at our fingertips present useful descriptions of gear for evaluating it.

In this case, an astute photographer will notice that the advocates of mirrorless cameras never claim that this innovation produces image quality better than that of a DSLR.

Country Boy wrote:

The manufacturers will drive the change regardless of how we feel individually. If they only add new features and build the best lens for a new design of cameras people will always change. It may take time but as photographers using the new style equipment display their works and brag about the new equipment people will start switching and soon it will be the new standard. They know how GAS works!

JDG3

BebuLamar wrote:

They quit making them not because no one wants them but because too few people want them. That would be a problem if I don't have enough cameras to last my life time. For film it's a problem because film is a consumable and perishable thing and you can't stock pile them.
To you it makes no sense to use something few people do but to me I don't want nor should have to use the things other use.

I doubt the manufacturers will quit making them for a long time. However, as I stated in my post, economics rules. Which means as the number of them made drops and other newer models increase in numbers it becomes less and less profitable to produce the older models. They will probably still make them but the prices will rise accordingly. Supply and demand - an economics truism as old a humanity.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

I thought the claim is that mirrorless focus better than mirrored...and have many more focus points...

anotherview wrote:

In the Internet Age, we photographers have more ready access to facts and information about camera gear.
We do not have to rely mostly on sales hyperbole and shills when deciding which piece of gear to buy.

Instead, various sources at our fingertips present useful descriptions of gear for evaluating it.

In this case, an astute photographer will notice that the advocates of mirrorless cameras never claim that this innovation produces image quality better than that of a DSLR.

Fredrick Loc: Former NYC, now San Francisco Bay Area

Mac wrote:

Ever notice that most of the articles predicting the demise of DSLRs are posted by people who have switched to mirrorless?

I’ll bet all the film shooters said the same thing about early digital shooters, as well.

It really doesn’t matter what you shoot. The more you do, the more you realize it’s mostly irrelevant.

papakatz45 Loc: South Florida-West Palm Beach

sabfish wrote:

The eye and the skill of the photographer in using the equipment to photograph what is in his mind's eye.

Partially true. Good tools do matter. Ask a professional carpenter, mechanic, plumber,..............., if their tools came from Harbor Freight. How many professional photographers use entry-level cameras. That's not to say you can't do a good job with tools from Harbor Freight or with an IPhone. Tools do matter and if you can afford to spend money for the best, go for it.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

Notorious T.O.D. wrote:

I thought the claim is that mirrorless focus better than mirrored...and have many more focus points...

It's true with Canon. The auto-focus of my EOS R out performs my 5DIV hands down.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Mac wrote:

Ever notice that most of the articles predicting the demise of DSLRs are posted by people who have switched to mirrorless?

People will always choose what to believe - and they will always choose an opinion that corresponds to their own view, in spite of facts and evidence to the contrary.

BurghByrd Loc: Pittsburgh

Mac wrote:

Ever notice that most of the articles predicting the demise of DSLRs are posted by people who have switched to mirrorless?

Or want to sell you one.

Fredrick Loc: Former NYC, now San Francisco Bay Area

JDG3 wrote:

I doubt the manufacturers will quit making them for a long time. However, as I stated in my post, economics rules. Which means as the number of them made drops and other newer models increase in numbers it becomes less and less profitable to produce the older models. They will probably still make them but the prices will rise accordingly. Supply and demand - an economics truism as old a humanity.

Actually, the prices will go down accordingly, because of supply and demand ... i.e. less demand = lower prices.

jakraig

Certainly shot selection is the first of important things that must be done, but . . .

Being able to crop, enlarge, white balance and color correct are pretty wonderful things that mostly I can't do on my phone camera or at least not as well. I have a really nice phone camera, my Note 8 but I am spoiled by my Nikon D810.

Camera selection is a relative thing. While at arches National park I ran into a couple of D850 shooters who said that if I ever tried the D850 I would throw my 810 away, well perhaps.

One nice thing about my phone camera is that I ALWAYS have it with me. The best camera to use is the one you have with you.

I may go mirrorless one day, but not today.

It was past sunset last night when I took a couple grandkid pictures, I could have gotten a picture with my phone but not nearly as nice as this.

jakraig

I should have included this one too, probably impossible to get this with my phone. I'm sure this could be taken just as well by most modern cameras, certainly including mirror-less. But what I have works, I'm not sure what would be better about mirror-less except for size and sound.

Camera technology is such today that nearly any digital camera on the market today is better than most any 35mm film camera. Medium format is still competitive with digital but it won't be soon.

The dynamic range on a quality camera today is nearly 15 stops. There isn't much film that can do that, certainly not many films that can do that in a wide variety of settings. I shot film for 45 years. I don't even know where my film cameras are now.

anotherview Loc: California

Maybe so, but I do not see this technical advance as productive of better IQ over a DSLR. That said, I can believe that better focus could contribute noticeably to the IQ of some photographs. This focus improvement, however, seems more like a technical improvement on the margin given that a skilled photographer can routinely take well-focussed photographs.

My reply here may appear argumentative to some, yet I reply in the spirit of skepticism regarding the advance of technology in the field of photography. After all, we live in a commercial culture. Marketing departments, slick advertisements, salesmen, and shills abound urging us to buy the latest and greatest. I resist this siren call.

Notorious T.O.D. wrote:

I thought the claim is that mirrorless focus better than mirrored...and have many more focus points...

JDG3

Fredrick wrote:

Actually, the prices will go down accordingly, because of supply and demand ... i.e. less demand = lower prices.

I think prices would go down only if the supply remained constant while demand went down. In that case prices would fall since there would be excess inventory. However, the most likely scenario would be both the supply and demand would fall. Once the supply fell to a certain point, the manufacturing plants would lose the effect of economies of scale and the items would become specialty items with higher manufacturing costs. Costs would rise due to higher parts costs, and plants would move to building items with higher demands and profits. Once that happened, prices would rise to at least a breakeven point if the company felt it was important to keep making it for marketing purposes. Otherwise, they would consider stopping production.