The DSLR is obsolete? Oh.

[nerwin]

So apparently DSLR cameras are obsolete because of mirrorless cameras. Listen, I have nothing against mirrorless cameras. I think they are fine little cameras but the are not the end-all solution, they are simply just another different tool in the bag.

I have a little story to tell you from my experiences this past weekend. I attended this HUGE car show in Carlisle, PA which almost had 4,000 cars (by the way, we placed second!). Saturday was a really long humid gloomy day but it was packed full of people like it always is every year.

I brought my D610 + 24-120 f/4 VR and walked around all day using my blackrapid strap, I didn't have a single problem. It was comfortable. Why do mirrorless vs DSLR debaters ALWAYS insist that us DSLR shooters carry our camera hanging around our necks?

When I was sitting behind our car we had on display and watching it put smiles on peoples faces, I decided to observe how many were using a mirrorless camera. Guess how many? NONE. I didn't not see one out of the 20,000 people that probably walk by our car. Okay, I'm exaggerating and sure there were some but they were few and far in between. Most of the time I saw people using their smart phone or a cheap point & shoot from Nikon and Canon. But what I did see a lot of is people using DSLRs, some are using full frame bodies, some are just your entry level bodies. I saw one guy walking around with a 70-200 2.8, others with fish eyes, others with just a 18-55 and everything in between.

If DSLRs are "obsolete" why do I see more of them over mirrorless cameras? I'm sorry...but DSLRs are not obsolete, not yet anyways. Maybe they never will. Who knows.

A lot of these mirrorless vs dslr debate articles you find are clickbait. I read one this morning and he was writing about how DSLR are dead because they are big and heavy, but yet he personally uses one of those Sony A7 cameras....lol, they are pretty much the same size as a DSLR. What a joke.

I'm just tired of this mirrorless vs dslr debate. Who cares anymore? Just shoot with what you have.

/rant

 

[Peeb]

The interwebz mind is made up- don't confuse us with facts!

 

[Braineack]

I just did a two week tour of Italy. I saw so many Nikons it was crazy. Tons of D3xxx and D5xxx cameras with kit lenses; only a few Canons.

But there were quite a large number of mirrorless shooters, but they seemed to be the smaller, 1" to 1/1.7" sized cameras.

The size factor of my a6000 was great for my trip, I really didnt want to have to lug around my large D600 and 24-70; it becomes a bit unwieldy. I would have preferred it, but the a6000 did okay. It takes too long bumbling with settings, changing focus modes, etc. The DSLR is just so much easier to shoot with.

 

[nerwin]

I just did a two week tour of Italy. I saw so many Nikons it was crazy. Tons of D3xxx and D5xxx cameras with kit lenses; only a few Canons.

But there were quite a large number of mirrorless shooters, but they seemed to be the smaller, 1" to 1/1.7" sized cameras.

The size factor of my a6000 was great for my trip, I really didnt want to have to lug around my large D600 and 24-70; it becomes a bit unwieldy. I would have preferred it, but the a6000 did okay. It takes too long bumbling with settings, changing focus modes, etc. The DSLR is just so much easier to shoot with.

I saw quite of few Pentax DSLR shooters too!

 

[table1349]

Internet opinions are like armpits, everybody has them and most of them stink. 60 years ago we were all going to be riding around if vehicles like the Jetsons by now because automobiles were going to be dead. Film is dead. Yeah right.

The only thing that seems to be dead is the ability for the younger generation to hold something in their hands that weighs a pound or two for more than two minutes.

 

[robbins.photo]

Mirroless is great for some things, but the DSLR won't be "obsolete" until mirrorless or another technology can do everything it can do or better, and at this point in time that just isn't the case.

Mirroless is great from a size/weight perspective of course, which makes them a very attractive option for some. However for me personally one of the big drawbacks to most mirrorless systems is telephoto.

Ok, yes they do make telephoto lenses for them but the vast majority of the native telephoto's are of course designed to be small and lightweight which of course makes perfect sense. However it also limits their telephoto range, if I want anything bigger than a 300 mm I'm looking at buying a rather expensive adapter (unless I want manual focus only) and a lens from another camera system that is going to be rather unwieldy when attached to such a small camera. Even if I want to stick with native lenses, the telephoto's are usually pretty expensive when compared to their DSLR counterparts. Again that makes sense, they are newer designs, much smaller and lighter for the most part, and as such your paying a bit of a premium for being on that cutting edge.

So for me at least a mirrorless doesn't make good financial sense. I can get a lot more bang for my buck especially with the types of photography I do using a traditional DSLR.

For folks that shoot mostly at closer distances and those that don't need a monster stomping AF system that can track say birds in flight, mirrorless is a much more attractive option. I'll wouldn't mind having a mirrorless setup on occasion, something I could throw in a small bag and keep in the car for those times when breaking out the DSLR is just a bit of overkill.

In truth though even when mirrorless does eventually advance too the point where they can compete in all categories with DSLR, I'll still be using a DSLR. Having a smaller, more portable camera would be nice, on occasion. But if I'm going to be out for an entire day shooting, no, I don't want a tiny little camera like that. I need something my big bear paws can use comfortably. So I actually prefer the larger form factor of a DSLR in that regard.

 

[nerwin]

For folks that shoot mostly at closer distances and those that don't need a monster stomping AF system that can track say birds in flight, mirrorless is a much more attractive option. I'll wouldn't mind having a mirrorless setup on occasion, something I could throw in a small bag and keep in the car for those times when breaking out the DSLR is just a bit of overkill.

That's why I bought the RX100 M3 because there are times when a DSLR is just bit of an overkill. But often people will argue a smart phone would be better in that situation. While I think smart phones are getting better in the camera department, there is just no way they can compete with larger sensors from cameras like the RX100 or mirrorless cameras with APS-C or M43 sensors. I only use my phone for snap shots.

I've played around with mirrorless cameras and some of them are just too dinky and often the options that are mapped to physical buttons on a DSLR are now require you to scroll through the menu system to find it.

 

[SnappingShark]

So I had a large DSLR with grip and many lenses. I thought Mirrorless were compact, the future, the next best thing - so I got one - the OMD-EM1 from Olympus - I had 5 lenses for it. It was a great little setup. However, the images were limited in terms of size, and the colors weren't that great. The auto focus was sluggish compared to a DSLR, and the noise was pretty apparent.

So I switched BACK to a DSLR. I carry a few lbs extra, but at least I know that I now don't have to worry about any limitations outside of myself.

However, that said, I can see them being the future when they nail down their flaws.

But back to post - I see many DSLRs out and about - and the only "mirrorless" I see are Leica replicas - such as the fujis!

 

[table1349]

That's what I don't understand, the whole size weight argument. If someone has disabilities that is one thing, but if not it's not like we are talking about the difference between holding a pencil and a baseball bat.

Some specs based on a previous thread on mirrorless.
Fujifilm X-T10: 4.7 x 3.3 x 1.6", 381 g
Sony Alpha a6000: 4.7 x 2.6 x 1.8", 344 g
Olympus O-MD E-M10: 4.7 x 3.2 x 1.8, 396 g
Canon T6i: 5.2 x 4.0 x 3.1, 555 g

The DSLR is Less than 1/2 pound heavier than lightest of the three mirrorless. If that half a pound is that big of difference then FYI. Walmart sells 2.5 pound wrist weights. Check them out.

 

[astroNikon]

So apparently DSLR cameras are obsolete because of mirrorless cameras. Listen, I have nothing against mirrorless cameras. I think they are fine little cameras but the are not the end-all solution, they are simply just another different tool in the bag.

I have a little story to tell you from my experiences this past weekend. I attended this HUGE car show in Carlisle, PA which almost had 4,000 cars (by the way, we placed second!). Saturday was a really long humid gloomy day but it was packed full of people like it always is every year.

I brought my D610 + 24-120 f/4 VR and walked around all day using my blackrapid strap, I didn't have a single problem. It was comfortable. Why do mirrorless vs DSLR debaters ALWAYS insist that us DSLR shooters carry our camera hanging around our necks?

When I was sitting behind our car we had on display and watching it put smiles on peoples faces, I decided to observe how many were using a mirrorless camera. Guess how many? NONE. I didn't not see one out of the 20,000 people that probably walk by our car. Okay, I'm exaggerating and sure there were some but they were few and far in between. Most of the time I saw people using their smart phone or a cheap point & shoot from Nikon and Canon. But what I did see a lot of is people using DSLRs, some are using full frame bodies, some are just your entry level bodies. I saw one guy walking around with a 70-200 2.8, others with fish eyes, others with just a 18-55 and everything in between.

If DSLRs are "obsolete" why do I see more of them over mirrorless cameras? I'm sorry...but DSLRs are not obsolete, not yet anyways. Maybe they never will. Who knows.

A lot of these mirrorless vs dslr debate articles you find are clickbait. I read one this morning and he was writing about how DSLR are dead because they are big and heavy, but yet he personally uses one of those Sony A7 cameras....lol, they are pretty much the same size as a DSLR. What a joke.

I'm just tired of this mirrorless vs dslr debate. Who cares anymore? Just shoot with what you have.

/rant

Isn't this a rehash of one of your posts from a couple weeks ago ?

I'm just tired of this mirrorless vs dslr debate. Who cares anymore? Just shoot with what you have.[\quote]
YES!! and stop reposting about it every few weeks!!
Just go out and shoot with what you have.

 

[robbins.photo]

Isn't this a rehash of one of your posts from a couple weeks ago ?

Of course not, don't be silly. A couple of weeks ago only Nikon was going out of business. Now all DSLR manufactures are going out of business.

See, completely different.

 

[nerwin]

Its official, Sony is no longer making mirrorless cameras.

 

[robbins.photo]

Its official, Sony is no longer making mirrorless cameras.

Wait, Sony completely abandons a format and leaves all of the people who own it high and dry?

Umm... ya.. well love to say that's never happened before but...

Lol

 

[astroNikon]

Isn't this a rehash of one of your posts from a couple weeks ago ?

Of course not, don't be silly. A couple of weeks ago only Nikon was going out of business. Now all DSLR manufactures are going out of business.

See, completely different.

No, not the last post about this, but the previous post. lol

 

[nerwin]

YES!! and stop reposting about it every few weeks!!
Just go out and shoot with what you have.

Its all the mirrorless propaganda man, its messes with my head.