dsmeltz wrote:
However in our post to which I responded, you did not make any case for why MF's disappearance would or should parallel the demise of M 4/3. You linked them not by format but by brand name in a discussion of M 4/3. I fyou thought you were making a point about MF, you should have said so and tried to make the case, not just hang it out there like it was an obvious truth. Because it is clearly not obvious or truth.
Sorry for the lack of clarity on my on my part. Obviously FF and APS-C will continue to be the mainstay for the camera world. Until cellphones, as good as they are, find a way to put in larger sensors and true interchangeable lenses and zoom lenses, the mainstream camera market will fill the needs of people wanting something better than a cellphone. Having said that, that leaves MF, 4/3rds, and smaller sensor cameras outside the mainstream. In my opinion, those three sizes are competing for the market that isn't cellphone, FF, or APS-C. Each of them, MF, 4/3rds, and smaller sensor, have their own pros/cons.
MF is superior to other formats from IQ. But even the mirrorless is bigger than any other format. Even with an electronic shutter, 15/20 fps is just a dream. They require massive amounts of memory for both shooting and processing (think $$$$). And we haven't even talked about any other cost. It is more for the elite not the beginner. How many people are there in the elite to spend that kind of money for a market that has been encroach upon by FF and APS-C increased image acceptable?
Small sensor cameras are for the beginner because they are the most affordable. They are usually the first step to better than a cellphone. They are also used by photographers that want an alternative to carrying a larger interchangeable lense camera (they buy the best quality of this type camera). And although the IQ has greatly increased and still tends to be better and offer more than a cellphone, they are not as good as larger sensored cameras, are required to be carried along with one's cellphone, and still cost money in addition to the cost of a cellphone. This is why the market for these is very small. Their main competitor is still the cellphone and that competitor is massively huge.
Along with MF, FF, and APS-C, 4/3rds cameras are for people that have made the conscious decision to carry a quality camera for its abilities despite how good a cellphone camera or bridge/P&S can be. Since 4/3rds will be used mostly when someone is traveling, its size, weight, and cost lends itself to that market. It offers a lot more than the smaller sensor cameras in versatility and less size, weight, and cost than MF, FF, and APS-C. It is because of this that I think it will increase more so than the MF market.
Since my wife is a travel agent, I have to travel for both opinions from a spouse/male point of view, along with pictures, for her business (not as glamorous as one would think; have seen as many as 8 hotel rooms in a day). Over the years, I have seen the cellphones and tablets take over the camera market. Instead of pulling out a camera from their pocket or camera bag, they pull out their cellphones to try and capture that church, that scenic, that once in a lifetime shot. I have seen no resurgence in FF or APS-C in my travels. But I have seen the Fuji and Sony names, in that order, appear more often on the APS-Cs. The biggest increase I have seen is a slight increase in 4/3rds cameras taking the shots (cellphones have truly decimated the market). Maybe with the new FF mirrorless that will change. Then again, maybe it won't.