# DSLRs a dying breed?



## normcorriveau (Dec 6, 2005)

Trey Ratcliff over at Stuck In Customs has a very interesting post arguing mirrorless cameras are the future. He's had a lot of reaction to his post on Facebook, Google+, and on his blog.

I agree that it's just a matter of time and this has made me re-think my purchase plans for lenses. I'm going to seriously consider this before I make any future purchases.

What do you guys think?

Norm


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

Well he is probably right. But he doesn't need to invest in more camera equipment because he has everything he needs already. There is not enough of a difference between the D3x he uses to the D4. So he can live and enjoy with what he has because he is at the maximum so no need for him to get the D4.

Versus I am using a D300s currently and want to move up to a full frame camera. So I was looking at the the D4 to move up to, but I think I will pass. So I will take a look at the D800 when it comes out. I could sit out and wait for these "3rd generation" cameras but I enjoy taking pictures


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Too many photographers have too much invested in their existing kits, all that glass and accessories, for mirrorless to take over mirrored DSLR's anytime soon. They are still a niche product and will remain so for quite some time to come IMO.


----------



## okcomputer (Jul 18, 2005)

Mirrorless has a long way to go. SONY's latest flagship biggie loses more than a stop of light due to the electronic viewfinder. 

With photographers paying hundreds more for lenses that offer 1/2-1 stop extra, losing a stop due to the camera is absolutely ridiculous. 

Also, there are no full frame mirrorless cameras. Their sensors are too small to compete when it comes to depth of field, noise, high ISO performance and large mp files. 

It's a cool concept, but we are a few years away from them standing major ground. Lots of pieces of the tech need to improve.


----------



## Niteshooter (Aug 8, 2008)

I have a mirrorless camera and it's ok. The lenses also have a way to go yet before they catch up to my DSLR glass. But I can put my old FD and Leica glass on it which makes it interesting. Overall though not there yet but who knows I seem to recall having a discussion about digital vs film and now we see where that has wound up but for now they just can't match the DSLR kit I work with. 

As OK mentions the sensor size limits their abilities in terms of low light, and resolution. Size is a bonus, at least with the little camera I have which is the GF2 Panasonic but the std kit lens is not terribly useful at 14-42mm (28-84) and a bit slow. Using my old Canon FD 50 f1.2L makes things interesting but still not on par with my 5D MKII and 7D.


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

okcomputer said:


> Mirrorless has a long way to go. SONY's latest flagship biggie loses more than a stop of light due to the electronic viewfinder.


with Sony SLTs the translucent mirror blocks a 1/3 of a stop of light - not more than a stop - and the in camera stabilization compensates for that with any lens mounted on it.

as for the other points :

- the sony alpha SLTs use the same glass that their older DSLR's use. I imagine as other companies jump on the bandwagon the same thing will happen. There is no need to make a new mount if they keep the same form factor.

- The current alpha SLTs have APS-C size sensors (which is what the majority of DSLRs use) I'm sure eventually Sony will introduce a full frame model.

I don't think the death of the current DSLR is here upon us, but i do think the writing is on the wall.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Sure...but when and for whom?

Technological advancements may one day replace the SLR paradigm and come up with a 5mm-1000mm ƒ1.0 lens for a xxxxx frame camera, but until then, I'll stick with my full frame dSLR with interchangeable glass.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Most point and shoot cameras still have a very tiny sensor, roughly 4.25x5.5mm. Actual image capture is 2-3MP. Despite the image size being less than half the area of the 6x8mm image of the old Kodak disc camera, these cameras produce remarkably good images and in a compact size that allows you to take these cameras every where. These are more than adequate for 95% of the amateur market. I have two very different cameras of this type and really only wish I had a DSLR when attempting moon shots or when I need to use an external flash. Since neither is routine I won't be shelling out the big bucks for a DSLR any time soon.

The DSLR has an image size of 12x16mm. For bigger enlargements, cropping to the max, extreme closeups, and/or external flash, the DSLR is absolutely the way to go. Greater focus control and faster or longer lenses are also extremely useful to some photographers. OTOH Not really a camera that can be tucked into a jacket pocket.

To me what is missing is a camera with a sensor size roughly 7.5x10mm. Does not really need the mirror and prism bit but does require something better than sunlight viewing of an LCD screen. Interchangeable lenses would be nice but most critical is a manual override of focus. It should be possible to put these out with reasonably good optics in the $300-$400 range and to keep them a good deal more compact than a typical DSLR. Any more than $400 and the only reason to buy one is if small size is the only factor in choosing a higher resolution camera. Rather than making a dozen very similar cameras, a camera maker should go with just one or two in this line but try to make them as pro/semi-pro friendly as possible.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Personally in terms of size I don't really see that much advantage to a mirrorless multi-lens system, it is still too big to put in a pocket and if you have more than one lens and a flash and other accessories you still need a camera bag. Sure it may be a smaller and lighter bag but it still means you have to carry a bag around.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

screature said:


> personally in terms of size i don't really see that much advantage to a mirrorless multi-lens system, it is still too big to put in a pocket and if you have more than one lens and a flash and other accessories you still need a camera bag. Sure it may be a smaller and lighter bag but it still means you have to carry a bag around.


+1


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

screature said:


> Personally in terms of size I don't really see that much advantage to a mirrorless multi-lens system, it is still too big to put in a pocket and if you have more than one lens and a flash and other accessories you still need a camera bag. Sure it may be a smaller and lighter bag but it still means you have to carry a bag around.


For many uses I would prefer a 35mm Leica rangefinder to almost every 35mm SLR. Having lugged Linhofs and Nikons for many years and many, many miles, I have happily retired from carrying anything but reasonably compact cameras. While I would like a step up from point and shoot quality; size and price are both limiting factors. I have zero interest in having to sell images to help pay for equipment.

Given the slightly smaller sensor I suggested, it should be possible to make a quality camera that will still fit a hiking vest pocket. That said, to be viable price is critical. Something the same size and price as a DSLR will not fly. Will such a camera replace DSLRs? No but it can fill the current void between an adequate point and shoot, and the pricey DSLR.


----------



## normcorriveau (Dec 6, 2005)

Interesting points. Thanks for the discussion. I just wanted to add a little more detail.

I would want the sensor to be at least APS-C size (like the just announced Fuji X-Pro1). I would image that considering you can now also get that size sensor in a Canon point and shoot (also just announced PowerShot G1 X) we will soon see full frame sensors in cameras this size.

I would also want my existing Canon L lenses to work on the new camera with an adapter. Hopefully 80% of my photos could be taken with two or three "native" lenses but the adapter would allow the other 20% to be handled by the camera.

Norm


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

eMacMan said:


> F*or many uses I would prefer a 35mm Leica rangefinder to almost every 35mm SLR. *Having lugged Linhofs and Nikons for many years and many, many miles, I have happily retired from carrying anything but reasonably compact cameras. While I would like a step up from point and shoot quality; size and price are both limiting factors. I have zero interest in having to sell images to help pay for equipment.
> 
> Given the slightly smaller sensor I suggested, it should be possible to make a quality camera that will still fit a hiking vest pocket. That said, to be viable price is critical. Something the same size and price as a DSLR will not fly. Will such a camera replace DSLRs? No but it can fill the current void between an adequate point and shoot, and the pricey DSLR.


Indeed, I agree, if price were no object.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

eMacMan said:


> For many uses I would prefer a 35mm Leica rangefinder to almost every 35mm SLR. Having lugged Linhofs and Nikons for many years and many, many miles, I have happily retired from carrying anything but reasonably compact cameras. While I would like a step up from point and shoot quality; size and price are both limiting factors. I have zero interest in having to sell images to help pay for equipment.
> 
> Given the slightly smaller sensor I suggested, it should be possible to make a quality camera that will still fit a hiking vest pocket. That said, to be viable price is critical. Something the same size and price as a DSLR will not fly. Will such a camera replace DSLRs? No but it can fill the current void between an adequate point and shoot, and the pricey DSLR.


The Canon S95 and S100 are both very nice point and shoots with larger than average sensors for point and shoot cameras and have a lot of manual control. Aside from the sensor size the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 is also a very nice point and shoot that takes very high quality photos with plenty of manual control.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

ncorriveau said:


> Interesting points. Thanks for the discussion. I just wanted to add a little more detail.
> 
> I would want the sensor to be at least APS-C size (like the just announced Fuji X-Pro1). I would image that considering you can now also get that size sensor in a Canon point and shoot (also *just announced PowerShot G1 X*) we will soon see full frame sensors in cameras this size.
> 
> ...


Looks like a nice camera Norm but pricey. Also for me I don't want a camera that isn't "pocketable" as an alternative to my DSLR.

I think if one wants an "all in one camera" i.e. without interchangeable lenses this could be an option... compact enough with enough focal length options not to need extra lenses and a reasonable amount of manual control, but not having to carry around a large or medium size camera bag then this could be a good *single* camera choice. Especially with the really quite large (relatively speaking) sensor.

But for me personally it is too large to be a supplement "take with me everywhere I go" alternative to a DSLR. 

I love my D300 for more serious work and recently got a great deal on a Canon S95 ($299) as a "pocketable" camera to take with me for more causal shooting when I want a small camera that takes very good photos and is very compact with plenty of manual control.

The great thing is that in the age we are living in we have so many choices to be able to "kit" ourselves in a way that suit our own individual needs. I hope you find the right combination that suits you and your pocketbook.


----------



## Niteshooter (Aug 8, 2008)

The new Powershot is what Canon should have done a while ago. The thing that I think is limiting is the lens.

Guess the other part of the equation is most people are not that critical when it comes to their photographs, Annette put together a photo book in iPhoto for her parents for Christmas and they loved it. I thought it was pretty amazing though I could see a lot of technical things but the average person doesn't. With that in mind I notice I'm using my Panasonic ZS10 more than anything else. It has a small sensor as all P&S do but a killer lens and is fast on AF and other than the other photogs I work with everyone else is very impressed with the results it gets. Plus B&H was blowing them out just before Christmas for $199.


----------



## Kleles (Jul 21, 2009)

In the day when when I had two Nikon bodies and four lenses (28, 50, 135, 70-210mm), a focal length doubler, Vivitar flash, and accessories, I was burdened by the equipment bag I lugged around. I created many great shots, but, looking back, it seems that photographing was more important than the photograph. 

I have downsized, and I’m enjoying my hobby even more than before. Carrying a premium P&S camera (Panasonic ZS8) has allowed me to take my ‘entire’ camera kit packed in a small case, which itself is almost pocketable. Of course, there are limitations with a small camera, and I sometimes wish I had the big format equipment. But, when I think of the amount of equipment, not to mention the cost, my wishes dissipate. All of life is an adjustment, and that includes photography!


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Kleles said:


> In the day when when I had two Nikon bodies and four lenses (28, 50, 135, 70-210mm), a focal length doubler, Vivitar flash, and accessories, I was burdened by the equipment bag I lugged around. I created many great shots, but, looking back, it seems that photographing was more important than the photograph.
> 
> I have downsized, and I’m enjoying my hobby even more than before. Carrying a premium P&S camera (Panasonic ZS8) has allowed me to take my ‘entire’ camera kit packed in a small case, which itself is almost pocketable. Of course, there are limitations with a small camera, and I sometimes wish I had the big format equipment. But, when I think of the amount of equipment, not to mention the cost, my wishes dissipate. All of life is an adjustment, and that includes photography!


I am with you. When I first bought a digital camera I photographed everything double, Olympus 3MP 3:1 zoom head to head against my best Nikon lenses. Truth is at 4x6 and even 5x7 my original inexpensive Olympus point and shoot produced prints as good as I could get from my Nikons. For me that's all I ask. I know a good 11x14 or 16x20 print is a bit out of reach with most subjects, but truthfully I have all the wall art I need at the moment. 

One big plus is if I see something I want to photograph my camera is usually at hand. Even if I am just walking to the post office.

Were I still making a living with my cameras my attitude would of course be different. Then again the cameras would be paying for themselves so price would not be as much of a limiting factor.


----------



## okcomputer (Jul 18, 2005)

I have taken thousands of photos with my iPhone 4, and its quality is better than a lot of point & shoot cameras, in good light. So, for me, the micro 4/3 and small mirrorless cameras, and pocketable P&S's aren't attractive. I have my iPhone with me wherever I go, and I have my DSLR (and whichever lenses, flashes, etc. I bring with) for when I want to take serious shots or need more control, definition, dynamic range, etc. Or, as eMacMan says, when I know I'm going to want to print something bigger than a 5x7.

I definitely would love something like the Leica M9, though. That's something I can get behind, except for the price. That is the perfect combo of large sensor, awesome image quality, incredible lenses, and pocketable size.

I agree with a point above that the 4/3s cameras and the like are still too big to fit in pockets, and you still have lenses and flash and accessories you need to cart around. Sure, it saves a few pounds compared to a full-size DSLR, but you are also sacrificing quite a bit when it comes to the sensor and (so far) the lenses.

Yes, you can get great results with some of the good point and shoots like the S95/S100 and others mentioned here. But none of them can give me the extra light and depth of field I get with my f/1.4 50mm lens. And my 60D or 50D without battery grip and that 50mm isn't very heavy or annoying to carry around. I'm used to it!


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Looking at all the reviews on the Panasonic G2 and the G10,
Both of which were on sale at Henry's recently, But sold out fast.

Great reviews on the G2, I'd considering buying one.





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

I think a fell asleep with that review.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Joker Eh said:


> I think a fell asleep with that review.


I can't stand the CNET reviews,
The Youtube reviews are refreshing now and again.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

I was bidding on a used PANASONIC DMC-G2 12.1MP 4/3 MICRO/w/14-42 on ebay,
But...In the last 5 seconds...I got out bid, Oh well, Stuff happens.
I really didn't want to spend a lot on a used camera anyways.

The final bid was $338., My highest bid was $300.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

Lawrence said:


> I was bidding on a used PANASONIC DMC-G2 12.1MP 4/3 MICRO/w/14-42 on ebay,
> But...In the last 5 seconds...I got out bid, Oh well, Stuff happens.
> I really didn't want to spend a lot on a used camera anyways.
> 
> The final bid was $338., My highest bid was $300.


 I bet you that camera will be on sale again.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Joker Eh said:


> I bet you that camera will be on sale again.


Actually, After reading some more reviews on it I'm kind of glad I didn't get it.
I've found that the Nikon D80 is a much better buy second hand,
It's only a 10 mp camera, But it can use a plethora of old Nikon lenses.

It's a different breed of camera, But it reminds me of my old SLR days in the 1970's.
Also, The Nikon has a Pentaprism, Great for shooting endless jpegs.


----------



## dstanic (Feb 18, 2012)

I was realllllly tempted to buy a M4/3 for my last camera, since they do have excellent performance and a smaller size (with a pancake lens anyways). For $300something I think it was a GF2 with a zoom kit lens but the problem is the zoom kit lens is too big. I got a Canon S100 as I was intending to buy, which is a nice portable camera. I decided portability was ultimately more important than the "cool factor" of M4/3 because I have gotten tired of lugging around my 5D or 30D gear around and find I am just not taking as many pictures as I used to. 

When using my S100 I often wish it had an optical viewfinder, and a mirrorless would be no different, unless it had a really good EVF or possibly rangefinder.


----------

