Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
The future of the DSLR body
Page <<first <prev 4 of 34 next> last>>
Jun 3, 2015 06:50:38   #
Impressionist
 
Change in this regard is evolutionary. There will still be a DSLR market but most research and development money is in mirror less. As long as our systems are supported we will be fine. The question of resale will come up. Glass in interchangeable and prices stabilize. Won't be true for the bodies we put them on. Technologically speaking they will still be fine but price point will be far below what we paid. The last point isn't one I ever worry about. What it is worth to me is what matters. If it does what I bought if for I am satisfied. Resale is gravy.

Reply
Jun 3, 2015 06:52:34   #
Dbotnick Loc: Cherry Hill, NJ
 
It's all about economics... As sales/production drops for DSLR this will create a high cost structure over time and will also contribute to the lower volume. I truly think both Cannon & Nikon are laughing behind closed doors, as mirroless manufactures keep their prices high which in my mind, prevents DSLR users from converting. Has anyone thought about what the next major technology jump will be beyond mirrorless?

Reply
Jun 3, 2015 06:57:06   #
photon56 Loc: North America
 
kwbybee wrote:
I watch video's of "professional" photographers saying that the DSLR is going to fade out and that mirror less is the future.
Opinions?


Sony has the translucent mirror technology that I think is pretty cool. It eliminates the mirror flip but you still get TTL view. That's also why they have such a high fps rate. I think this is the first step towards the marriage between mirror and mirrorless cameras.

Reply
 
 
Jun 3, 2015 07:06:50   #
Boentgru Loc: Boston, Massachusetts, USA
 
kwbybee wrote:
I watch video's of "professional" photographers saying that the DSLR is going to fade out and that mirror less is the future.
Opinions?


The DSLR configuration is most likely obsolete and will continue to go away.

The SLR configuration was developed for film, to allow for thru-the-lens (TTL) viewing and metering before exposing the film; to see what the film would see before exposure. Now the film had been replaced by a sensor which is not "exposed" and can be electronically viewed before the shutter is pressed. The electronic viewfinder (EVF) can be used continuously without a mirror, mirror box box, mechanism, cost, and extra optical room. The mirrorless system will get better. The SLR configuration is obsolete for digital photography. IMHO.

Reply
Jun 3, 2015 07:19:41   #
Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida
 
kwbybee wrote:
I watch video's of "professional" photographers saying that the DSLR is going to fade out and that mirror less is the future.
Opinions?


Watch different videos.

Reply
Jun 3, 2015 07:24:52   #
Karl Shuffler Loc: Weinert, Texas
 
What do you want as to photographic hardware? Satisfaction? The best available? How much better can technology take us? Is this the time now to say I am very much satisfied with a 36 pixel camera. If not there's Canon's 50+ pixels. You think you need more? Most are not taking billboard size photos. Any great photo in which one will admire, will never know what camera in which that photo was used unless mentioned or perhaps blown to some sort of large in size. This is the time for getting the best. The future can only bring, not better cameras, but cheaper prices. For the money.... Sony leads. Why? Just like the calculator, everybody has one....... For me to buy another..... Pricing. Last purchased....... Nikon D810, great 36 Mp for cropping. Canon 6D....Great using an appropriate adapter in order to use c/y Carl Zeiss optics.

Reply
Jun 3, 2015 07:43:23   #
camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.
 
kwbybee wrote:
I watch video's of "professional" photographers saying that the DSLR is going to fade out and that mirror less is the future.
Opinions?


Chances are excellent that it will happen although I cannot predict when.
dSLR cameras without mirror can be made smaller, lighter and most probably better. Without the mirror the back of the lens in use will be closer to the focal plane of the sensor which means that sharpness could be improved.
Till now mirrorless cameras have not been very good for action and wildlife photography because they have used contrast detection instead of phase detection but that is changing. As soon as the first big name (Canon or Nikon) introduce one of those cameras there will be a shift to mirrorless.
Just my opinion.

Reply
 
 
Jun 3, 2015 07:49:37   #
Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA
 
jerryc41 wrote:
Some professionals (They do it for money) have already switched, but I don't see DSLR's going out of production any time soon. It's all about profit. When the camera companies see more profit from something else, the DSLR will die.


I've spent several months shooting a Sony a6000 (Which is now up for sale.) This has taught me a few things:
1. The mirrorless has some distinct advantages, not limited to weight. I really liked the EVF, the speed of firing as well as the weight and the ease of handling.
2. Being able to see the effects of settings directly in the viewfinder, before firing contributed to better images.
3. An ILCE is quicker to handle.
4. An ILCE with APS-C sensor produces just as good an image as the same sensor in a DSLR.
5. It's not impossible, but it is hard to teach an old dog new tricks. But it is impossible for me to go back and forth between my Nikons and a Sony ILCE. They are both great cameras, but they do things differently. (It might be almost as difficult to go back and forth between Nikon and Canon.)
6. If Nikon comes out with a decent ILCE, I'll probably try it.

Reply
Jun 3, 2015 07:50:14   #
camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.
 
Leitz wrote:
There are no interchangeable lens point and shoots in MY future!


Could I assume you are using your dSLR camera as a point and shoot?
Mirrorless cameras are very capable and they allow the same shooting modes of a dSLR including the manual mode. Sony is using an APS sensor which means that you should have the same quality of a similar sensor in a dSLR.
These cameras have excellent interchangeable lenses and I do not know if there is a point and shoot in the market with interchangeable lenses.
Many professionals are using mirrorless cameras not as a point and shoot but as a tool in their business.

Reply
Jun 3, 2015 07:56:47   #
zigipha Loc: north nj
 
PCity wrote:
Profit is no doubt a part of the manufacturing process, but one has to also consider the evolution of photographic cameras. We've come a long way since the Box Brownie.


Profit is the ONLY reason a company is in business. To do otherwise would be a disservice to the stockholders/investors. How to keep the profit is always a tough question.

Reply
Jun 3, 2015 08:01:48   #
zigipha Loc: north nj
 
HOT Texas wrote:
I agree with that 100% DSLR's are going to be history.


EVERYTHING will eventually become history..question is when? 2 years? 5 years? 20 years? 50 years?

Reply
 
 
Jun 3, 2015 08:05:27   #
LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY
 
f8lee wrote:
This is actually incorrect . I worked at Sony America in the strategic planning department in the early 80s, and I can tell you the actual story of why Betamax fell to VHS. It has everything to do with corporate hubris.

Betamax was in fact technically superior, which makes sense since it was the second generation videocassette that Sony made - The first being U-matic, which used 3/4 inch tape and was used in schools and industry. As technological progress continued, Sony managed to fit the video signal on half inch wide tape and at the same time created a better cassette mechanism which was Betamax .

However, the problem with Betamax was it's one hour maximum recording time - remember this was in the days when the networks had their Sunday movie of the week which lasted for two hours. Sony America went to headquarters and ask them to make a version that could record for two hours, but Tokyo refused because from an engineering standpoint this would have reduced the quality of the video image. At least if you watched on an oscilloscope ...

Anyway, then RCA went to Sony Tokyo and asked them to make a version that would last for two hours and put the RCA name on it so there will be no quibbling about the image quality. Again, Sony refused. So RCA then went to Matsushita (who made the Panasonic brand sold in America) and ask them to create a two hour capacity videocassette system. And that is what became VHS-ironically, using the same older cassette mechanism technology as the original U-matic.

So, because Sony in Japan did not want to listen to their US counterparts (there were no television shows in Japan that were longer than one hour) they ended up going from having 100% marketshare to a small percentage in a very short time. While it is certainly true that the porn industry was the major propellant behind the success of videocassettes ( as it has been for newer technologies as well), it was not the reason Betamax died.
This is actually incorrect . I worked at Sony Ame... (show quote)


I like my story better! It's shorter and, since porn is involved, people pay closer attention! Still, it's good to have the facts behind any story. Now that you mention it, the 1 hour limitation does ring a bell. Thank you!

Reply
Jun 3, 2015 08:17:16   #
ole sarg Loc: south florida
 
As I read these comments I think of all those SLRs on the trash heap.

Don't know if it will be mirrorless or something else but the DSLR will go by the wayside just as film did.

Hey can anyone help me find my slide rule it was on my desk just 40 years ago!

Reply
Jun 3, 2015 08:25:27   #
Jcmarino
 
I have both a DSLR and a Mirroless. I find I use my mirroless more and more. Mainly because of the weight and EVF. It has a very fast focus, its amazing in low light, the images are sharp, excellent quality, works great with my existing flashes and transmitters, lenses are lighter, so why carry all that heavy equipment. I love the Ziess glass, just can't afford a lot of it. My Nikon has a Sony sensor in it. However, I do find that people and other photographers do not take me seriously when I show up with my Sony as opposed to my Nikon and huge glass. I have too much money in my DSLR to just jump and switch. But I see Nikon and Canon moving in the direction to lighter, faster, sharper, faster Wifi, does that mean mirroless, I don't know.

Reply
Jun 3, 2015 08:30:50   #
Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI
 
Jcmarino wrote:
However, I do find that people and other photographers do not take me seriously when I show up with my Sony as opposed to my Nikon and huge glass.


As coined back in 1997 by Apple...Think Different.

Don't worry about what others may think. Let them go home with the sore backs, arms and necks.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 4 of 34 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.