No love for the DSLR alternative?

[usayit]

Just just realized that the camera forum has

Canon

Nikon

Pentax

Sony



No love for Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji, etc... etc...

 

[markj]

I know, I love my Panasonic plasma TV.

 

[Akvavit]

I would love a forum for mirrorsless/Compact System cameras - for me, and I bet many others - this is either our way (back) into photography, and also a format picked up by many already deep into DSLRs, as their go-to backup/no-excuse cameras.

Also - they are quite interesting, and does pack enough of a punch to have earned a forum of their own

 

[Overread]

The camera brand specific subforums are a slightly debatable point. On the one side this forum is totally not brand linked and so should stand that each brand can get equal standing and display. However we already have a lot of subsections and already many members who complain about that fact. In addition adding more brands increases the size of our gear section and pushes the galleries further down the page structure.

Personally I wasn't "for" having the brand sections added so, my own stance is that if a brand hasn't got a section of its own they can either ask questions in the open equipment subsection or the brand can sponsor the site and get their own spot there

 

[usayit]

I agree.. I personally and have always voiced that the less number of subforums the better... but...

TPF doesn't seem to attract many mirrorless camera users.... wonder why? (almost every other site I know has a place for them)

Figure it would help since most here are extremely biased towards DSLRs more specifically Nikon. Almost to the point that "others" don't take it seriously... the lack of a section simply reinforces that sentiment. Since its a growing fast (almost everywhere but here in the US), I figured.. heck why not. Request it and see what happens.

Took a while to get a response but I'm happy it eventually did.


Can I have a Leica section too? /joking.

 

[Overread]

I think the reason is simply that we don't have a larger population of established and older DSLR photographers. Most of the mirrorless shooters I know are generally those who already have an established DSLR setup and are looking for that smaller, portable camera with similar features.

TPF just has a much larger community and influx of new to intermediate photographers - many who are still building and getting to grips with the basics or building their gear up.

Asides which as a generalist forum I don't think we will attract that specific community toward us without a big re-working. A forum subsection might help - but if we were to add one I'd call it "point and shoot and mirrorless" or just "mirrorless" and wouldn't break it down into brands.

 

[skieur]

Well, obviously there is a market for mirror-less cameras or Sony, Nikon, Canon, and others would not be producing them with new features that are not possible in the same price range of DSLRs. The gap between the original point and shoots and DSLRs is closing with the hybrid compact cameras with interchangeable lenses such as the NEX line, the SLT Sonys, and the 4/3 format cameras from Panasonic, Olympus and others.

If the direction of technology is toward a mirror-less camera with more features, a lower price, and the same or better image quality, then the flipping mirror is dead and so are DSLRs. It is just a matter of time.

skieur

 

[Overread]

Far as I know Canon don't (currently) make a hybrid. Also the DSLR has way way too many years of brand and advertising power behind to be dropped. Though I suspect one day we'll all have electronic viewfinders (or very advanced overlays over the mirror box design) - but I think we've a long time before video is capable of beating the mirror box (esp on a price VS features front).

 

[skieur]

Far as I know Canon don't (currently) make a hybrid. Also the DSLR has way way too many years of brand and advertising power behind to be dropped. Though I suspect one day we'll all have electronic viewfinders (or very advanced overlays over the mirror box design) - but I think we've a long time before video is capable of beating the mirror box (esp on a price VS features front).

Well, if film can slowly disappear with Kodak, then so can the DSLR. It depends on the marketplace. Price, image quality and features will trump brand and advertising for any pro who has to compete in a tight market.

Look at it this way, film produced better quality images than digital for a very long time and some would say still does, but that did NOT stop the transition to digital photography and the slow demise of film.

So the direction is there. It really just depends how close mirror-less cameras can get to DSLRs in quality, price, system related accessories and features. I suspect mirror-less will surpass DSLRs in price and features, be behind in system accessories and be close in quality.

More pros will eventually start buying mirror-less cameras as backups to begin with and the transition will begin.

What may drastically speed the demise of the DSLR is the development of a new inexpensive technological approach that makes the flipping mirror totally obsolete and over-priced.

skieur

 

[Derrel]

Far as I know Canon don't (currently) make a hybrid. Also the DSLR has way way too many years of brand and advertising power behind to be dropped. Though I suspect one day we'll all have electronic viewfinders (or very advanced overlays over the mirror box design) - but I think we've a long time before video is capable of beating the mirror box (esp on a price VS features front).

Well, if film can slowly disappear with Kodak, then so can the DSLR. It depends on the marketplace. Price, image quality and features will trump brand and advertising for any pro who has to compete in a tight market.

Look at it this way, film produced better quality images than digital for a very long time and some would say still does, but that did NOT stop the transition to digital photography and the slow demise of film.

So the direction is there. It really just depends how close mirror-less cameras can get to DSLRs in quality, price, system related accessories and features. I suspect mirror-less will surpass DSLRs in price and features, be behind in system accessories and be close in quality.

More pros will eventually start buying mirror-less cameras as backups to begin with and the transition will begin.

What may drastically speed the demise of the DSLR is the development of a new inexpensive technological approach that makes the flipping mirror totally obsolete and over-priced.

skieur

That is some seriously, seriously flawed "logic". Beginning with this farcical comment: "Well, if film can slowly disappear with Kodak, then so can the DSLR." Excuse me, but WHAT are you talking about? That is a preposterous statement. Let's look at the "logic" you began with. Let's try a couple other examples to examine the validity of your opening premise.

"Well, if film can slowly disappear with Kodak, then so can private automobiles. Low fares, clean trains, and convenience will trump the freedom and independence that having a private car brings. Mass transit will kill off the private automobile."

"Well, if film can slowly disappear with Kodak, then so can canned beer. Big 15.5 gallon kegs of cold, delicious beer will replace 6-pack and 12-pack buying in a tight market for beer. Canned beer will become obsolete, and the keg, the big, single container that lasts for weeks, will become dominant."

"Well, if film can slowly disappear with Kodak, then so can fast food burgers, taco and pizza. Healthful foods, rich in vitamins and minerals, will cause McDonalds, Taco Bell, and Pizza Hut to go bankrupt.The rush to health foods will kill off the ancient, obsolete fast food business."

Do you see how your opening premise is nonsensical, and everything that follows is dubious? Out of over 1,000 regular members, it seems like there are eight to perhaps ten mirrorless afficionados here. Huh...the "direction" seems to be little more than an arrow pointing east...the elimination of the d-slr is not imminent...and the rise of the mirrorless camera does NOT, I repeat, does NOT mean the death of the d-slr...

The idea used to be that the movies would kill theatre. That TV would kill the cinema. That FM radio would kill off AM radio. That the DVD technology would RUIN the movie-house business. But, you know what??? NONE of those exciting, new technologies really managed to "kill off" the earlier ones. The "totally obsolete flipping mirror" dates to the ancient behemoth Graflex cameras of the 1880s--before World War I!!! Yeahhhhh...a new camera style's gonna kill it off....sure...

 

[usayit]

That is some seriously, seriously flawed "logic". Beginning with this farcical comment: "Well, if film can slowly disappear with Kodak, then so can the DSLR." Excuse me, but WHAT are you talking about? That is a preposterous statement. Let's look at the "logic" you began with. Let's try a couple other examples to examine the validity of your opening premise.

"Well, if film can slowly disappear with Kodak, then so can private automobiles. Low fares, clean trains, and convenience will trump the freedom and independence that having a private car brings. Mass transit will kill off the private automobile."

"Well, if film can slowly disappear with Kodak, then so can canned beer. Big 15.5 gallon kegs of cold, delicious beer will replace 6-pack and 12-pack buying in a tight market for beer. Canned beer will become obsolete, and the keg, the big, single container that lasts for weeks, will become dominant."

"Well, if film can slowly disappear with Kodak, then so can fast food burgers, taco and pizza. Healthful foods, rich in vitamins and minerals, will cause McDonalds, Taco Bell, and Pizza Hut to go bankrupt.The rush to health foods will kill off the ancient, obsolete fast food business."

.... snip....

Do you see how your opening premise is nonsensical, and everything that follows is dubious?

Derrel,

none of what has been said in your post nor skieur's are logical statements to be argued. Skieur is simply stating that the marketplace is very unpredictable and the POSSIBILITY is very true. Especially in the world of technology. There are a number of technological advancements that have rendered previous technologies to the niche market. There can be no "nonsensical premise" when no premise has been offered. A premise is statement deemed true based a foundation of claims. Skieur made no such claims but simply opens the doors to possibilities. You are just being emotional and looking for a fight.

"if film can slowly disappear with Kodak, then so can the DSLR. "

"DSLR will slowly disappear because film is slowly disappearing" (A logical Fallacy)

See the difference?




With that said, war photographers prior to the 50s typically shot with clunky cameras of medium format and large format prior. At that time the 135 film cameras were considered a toy. That is until cameras advanced enough that allowed war photographers to properly document the conflict while being embedded in the conflict (Korean War). Literally in just a few years, all major war journalists were shooting with the smaller format. It spread into the consumer market thus moving the medium and large format to more of a niche driven either by professionals with a certain necessity or aficionados of the formats. The same goes for rangefinder cameras versus SLRs, SLRs versus DSLRs, and so on. So the possibility that some day (maybe never) the mirror box truly can be replaced is very real. After all, the mirror box hasn't changed or improved in decades and electronic view finders are being improved at an astonishing rate.

Out of over 1,000 regular members, it seems like there are eight to perhaps ten mirrorless afficionados here.

Correct but it might have more to do with not making the forum welcoming to those people. Unlike the Canon and Nikon specific forums are specific to a specific type or brand of camera, the TPF is targeting all audiences...

Here's something kinda related:

43 Rumors | Blog | Impressive in Japan: Mirrorless surpasses DSLR market share. M43 surpasses Nikon and Canon!

* 1st graph: Micro 43 has surpassed sales of other mounts in Japan.
* 2nd graph: Mirrorless (not micro 4 3 specific) has been increasing marketshare WORLDWIDE. I stress WORLDWIDE specifically for Derrel since he usually counters with "Them Japanese are different"
* 2nd graph: Marketshare of mirror less cameras in the USA is FLAT and DEAD LAST. Why? is up for debate. My feeling is rooted in our culture (different discussion related to BIG versus small cars) Just because the TPF (highly USA biased membership) doesn't have many mirror less shooters doesn't equate to the mirror less concept not being a popular in other marketplaces.
* 3rd graph: In the DSLR market, Nikon and Canon are still kings. More importantly, is the downward trend.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

Film hasn't disappeared. Kodak film has.

 

[skieur]

Gee, you get emotional Derrel! My point is that if technology and the marketplace can result in the gradual demise of both film and the Kodak company which most would have said was ridiculous and impossible a number of years ago, then the demise of the DSLR equally due to the marketplace and technology is certainly not an impossibility. All that is necessary is what I mentioned: improvements in mirror-less cameras that match or surpass DSLRs at a lower price.

What pro, competing in a tight market, for example would not consider a smaller camera with better quality images and more features than a DSLR and a lower price tag? This is NOT the case at present but the gap between the two is closing. The OLED viewfinder of the Sony SLT for example is certainly far better than any previous EVF.

The basics of the marketplace: price, features, image quality, value, and reliability will determine whether DSLRs retain their top rung or lose ground to mirror-less cameras if DSLRs are surpassed in the above areas.

skieur

 

[manaheim]

I've never really understood gear-specific forums, personally.

 

[manaheim]

Gee, you get emotional Derrel! My point is that if technology and the marketplace can result in the gradual demise of both film and the Kodak company which most would have said was ridiculous and impossible a number of years ago, then the demise of the DSLR equally due to the marketplace and technology is certainly not an impossibility. All that is necessary is what I mentioned: improvements in mirror-less cameras that match or surpass DSLRs at a lower price.

What pro, competing in a tight market, for example would not consider a smaller camera with better quality images and more features than a DSLR and a lower price tag? This is NOT the case at present but the gap between the two is closing. The OLED viewfinder of the Sony SLT for example is certainly far better than any previous EVF.

The basics of the marketplace: price, features, image quality, value, and reliability will determine whether DSLRs retain their top rung or lose ground to mirror-less cameras if DSLRs are surpassed in the above areas.

skieur

That may be what you meant, but it's a far cry from what you said.