chrisg-optical Loc: New York, NY

Agree 110% ... the size/weight issue is moot if using long/wide aperture heavy lenses, especially FF. And yes there is Lv to simulate mirrorless when you need it....eventually mirrorless will take over but there is no rush, at least in my perspective, to dump DSLR for mirrorless... unless you have LTGAS ... latest tech GAS :) I do like the Sony and Fuji systems... wish Olympus was at least APSC and FF would be nice.

Blaster34 Loc: Florida Treasure Coast

Seems the trend is toward mirrorless including Medium Format and very high end systems....albeit FF will most likely be the standard.

Giorgio Loc: South Africa

👍 DSLR’s are far from done, mirrorless is just a fashion it could last or disappear very quickly.

tinplater Loc: Scottsdale, AZ

I suspect that will not prove to be correct. Why have the mechanical component of a mirror, flapping up and down, shaking the camera, making noise? Shooting silently with my A6500 and A7rII is wonderful. And the package is smaller. After 50 years with SLR's, haven't looked back (On my Minolta Slt, Canon Pellix, F!, AE1, EOS 5dII, etc) since I got my A7r several years ago. All the Canon is gone and remembered but not missed.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

When you have Canon looking at mirrorless now in a very serious way it is not likely something that is going away soon. Canon looks and watches and evaluates new technology, looks at the crap that is tried and sees how to improve it and yes also makes some small mistakes as it works out a real solution.
As said before.
Look at the EOS system that when it came out made all other AF completely obsolete as a buggy whip. Dominated pro market even still with the revolutionary system and only recently has anyone even come close to the EOS system and have had to do so sacrificing backward compatibility in a huge way.

Blaster34 Loc: Florida Treasure Coast

Hmmmm.....Nikon had already stated earlier in 2017 that it would be refocusing its efforts on mid- to high-end DSLRs and mirrorless cameras. C'mon in, the water's fine

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

A “fashion”.... like air travel. Get used to it: they are here to stay-until an even newer technology comes along. We still have film buffs so I won’t say that DSLRs will entirely disappear. Some people still experiment with albumen.....

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

WessoJPEG Loc: Cincinnati, Ohio

I agree, Live view, Nikon mirroless camera.

WessoJPEG Loc: Cincinnati, Ohio

chrisg-optical Loc: New York, NY

Nah ML tech and ILMCs are here to stay (certainly not a fad) but such as with all new technology the longer you wait the better, cheaper it gets.... in the meantime i will enjoy DSLR photography which will still be around for some years as folks transition. Actually I am surprised the DSLR lasted as long as it has...when I got my first digicam back in 2000 (Olympus 3030 - 3.3 mp!) I thought all would be mirrorless going forward...I was amazed to see the likes of Canikon keep the SLR format... I thought, why not an LCD with a hood just as on many video cams? We like looking through peepholes!

stevebein

Several years ago, I was at a seminar given by Nat Geo. Two Nat Geo photographers talked. Both used the Micro 4/3 system for some shoots. I am a friend of one and after some communications, settled on an Olympus E-M1. I then bought two bodies, 5 lenses ( with the 200% crop factor) and put them plus two flashes, 7 batteries, a charger, some filters, etc into a fanny pack. I went to Ethiopia for two weeks, trusting the recommendation. I have printed tack sharp images up to 30x45" ( some on aluminum, most on paper). Now the comparison. The 35mm equivalent range was 14 to 600mm. While I mostly used the consumer lenses, I had a super wide ( 7-14mm equivalent of 14-28mm )
My Canon system with equivalent lenses etc weighed nearly 45 pounds and required a large backpack. The Micro 4.3 system including the fanny pack ( well stuffed but manageable) weighed 10 1/2 pounds. I always had the two bodies and lenses available without having to take off a backpack and open it. It does not look like I an carrying blatantly expensive equipment in distant lands, inviting theft either.

Now that I have added the pro level lenses which weigh more, for some trips and uses, it weighs more and I have probably too many lenses and am sorting them out. I bought a 300mm f4 which is equivalent to a 600mm f4, amazing image stabilization and again very lightweight.
Since I wanted to be able to make larger prints of outstanding scenes so I also bought the Sony A7R II. I added a vertical grip with wireless remote and am delighted with that also, but take the Oly for most uses. The quality surprises, but with the small sensor, great low light performance is not as good as as the Sony.
While in full frame, there is little weight advantage, there is, with the Sony, greater dynamic range, and great low light useage. It is slightly smaller, but that is not the reason to change for me. The Oly or Panasonic Micro 4/3 systems are outstanding up to a point and it is for all of us to determine what that point is and what compromises you are willing to make for your needs. No system is perfect. I shot Nikon for 30 years, switched to Canon for 20 and how use mirrorless. All based on personal choices. My belief is that no system is the best, brand arguments are senseless since so many manufacturers make systems which are among the top used by professional and top rated amateurs. It comes down to what feels best, meets your economic choices and how each brand, with its individual pluses and minuses works for each of you. All have benefits and detriments and we need to see how things work for us, not what public opinion dictates, both in photography and our life choices.

HallowedHill Loc: Chattanooga, TN

I made the same switch a year ago. I never print larger than @16x20, I'll never sell anything, and the image quality is excellent for this range. I understand FF if you are a professional or do LARGE prints but otherwise this is just "mine is better". There are in fact limits on what the human eye can see at a given size.

Bill_de Loc: US

'

All that and nothing controversial.

Thanks

--

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Regular dSLR cameras are not mirrorless. Do not confuse raising the mirror to mirrorless. Mirrorless bodies have no mirror, period.
One of the greatest advantages of mirrorless bodies is that they are small and the majority of them light which makes them easy to carry all day without feeling tired. In a very small bag or a purse it is very possible to fit a mirrorless body with three lenses.
Another thing that separates mirrorless from dSLR is the distance from the rear of the lens to the sensor plane, called before film plane. The distance is pretty short what makes for sharper images.
I do not know about other brands because I use Nikon but try in live view to see if you can see the changes that take place when you change exposure, something that Olympus offer and I do not know about other mirrorless bodies.
Not all Nikon cameras can do that.