The DSLR is obsolete? Oh.

[astroNikon]

Once they make batteries that are small and can take a 1000 shots, that would be a major improvement.

Once they have smaller and more powerful batteries then DSLRs can get respectively smaller too.
And I want a clear BIG EVF .. sitting in the middle or left.

 

[nerwin]

Once they make batteries that are small and can take a 1000 shots, that would be a major improvement.

Once they have smaller and more powerful batteries then DSLRs can get respectively smaller too.
And I want a clear BIG EVF .. sitting in the middle or left.

I don't know about anyone else, but I really like having a optical viewfinder. EVFs are okay and they will only get better but like you...it needs to be BIG and CLEAR and NO DELAY.

 

[table1349]

Once they make batteries that are small and can take a 1000 shots, that would be a major improvement.

Once they have smaller and more powerful batteries then DSLRs can get respectively smaller too.
And I want a clear BIG EVF .. sitting in the middle or left.

I don't know about anyone else, but I really like having a optical viewfinder. EVFs are okay and they will only get better but like you...it needs to be BIG and CLEAR and NO DELAY.

Absolutely!!!

 

[robbins.photo]

I don't know about anyone else, but I really like having a optical viewfinder. EVFs are okay and they will only get better but like you...it needs to be BIG and CLEAR and NO DELAY.

Once they get that sorted out, EVF could be awesome. Being able to see the shot as the camera would see it would be a huge advantage, so if they can manage to make an EVF that functions well in low light and doesn't suffer from delay issues I think they'll have a real winner on their hands. If they can combine that with batteries that won't run out after a few hours of EVF use, yup.. then they'll definitely have something to write home about.

 

[nerwin]

I don't know about anyone else, but I really like having a optical viewfinder. EVFs are okay and they will only get better but like you...it needs to be BIG and CLEAR and NO DELAY.

Once they get that sorted out, EVF could be awesome. Being able to see the shot as the camera would see it would be a huge advantage, so if they can manage to make an EVF that functions well in low light and doesn't suffer from delay issues I think they'll have a real winner on their hands. If they can combine that with batteries that won't run out after a few hours of EVF use, yup.. then they'll definitely have something to write home about.

That wont be for a while though I'm guessing.

 

[robbins.photo]

That wont be for a while though I'm guessing.

Nope, probably not. The other major issue I see with most mirrorless systems is of course the autofocus, they've made some pretty good improvements of late but still a ways to go before they can match the DSLR.

Will be interesting to see though. I might eventually get a mirrorless as a supplement to my DSLR, but I would never consider it a replacement. Not at this stage.

 

[Braineack]

I want the DSLR to inherent things like the in body sensor shifting 5-axis stabilization. or like a firmware package that was written in this decade.

 

[nerwin]

I want the DSLR to inherent things like the in body sensor shifting 5-axis stabilization. or like a firmware package that was written in this decade.

I thought there was a DSLR with 5 axis stabilization? I'm probably confusing it with a Sony A7 with battery grip and external battery pack. Haha

 

[table1349]

That's why Canon and Nikon choose to stabilize the image BEFORE it gets to the sensor. Simple, easy and the most effective.

 

[nerwin]

That's why Canon and Nikon choose to stabilize the image BEFORE it gets to the sensor. Simple, easy and the most effective.

Would you say in-lens stabilization use less battery power than a 5 axis sensor stabilization?

 

[Braineack]

That's why Canon and Nikon choose to stabilize the image BEFORE it gets to the sensor. Simple, easy and the most effective.

most effective?

it's not simple and drives up the cost of lenses. Put it in the body (like the drive motor) and you don't have to worry about such things, then you can benefit from pixel-shifting tech and get incredible clean Super-MP images.

In body could take advantage of using an internal gyroscope and velocometer like your cell phone has and stabilize based on actual inputs. proactive instead of reactive.

 

[unpopular]

I'm not sure if "simple" is the right word, sensor stabilization is way, way simpler.

---

Anyway. Yes. The DSLR is not going to be around forever. I've said it before and I'll say it again: eventually there will be a push for larger sensors and the DSLR platform is awkward for medium format.

Second, mirroless is less expensive and mechanically simpler. Fewer moving parts means warranty service is going to cost less. Inevitable improvements will eventually permit a fast electronic global (or at least functionally global) shutter, and cameras will at this point no longer be mechanical at all.

EVFs have improved significantly over the last few years. a 4k display with a frame rate of 120fps (if taking into account latency) will likely be indistinguishable from an optical viewfinder, and a 6K display most certainly would be. These kinds of numbers are certainly rational expectations considering that VR seems to be a technology that people are at least excited about.

EVFs likewise perform better in low light provided that latency can be corrected, and even without latency corrected, I'd rather have a laggy viewfinder that I can actually see than one I cannot see anything at all, while focus assist is *significantly* more useful than a rangefinder or microprism, imo.

Video can also be viewed naturally from the viewfinder without having to add silly eyecups.

I do not think DSLR is dead, but I think it will be in a few years, my guess is in 10 years professional cameras will not be mechanical, and within 5 years Nikon and Canon will be very much on board.

From my experience, my X-E1 I bought on a whim with all it's flaws is a far superior shooting experience than my Sony A700. The a700 is a solid camera, and really does have a very nice viewfinder, too. But overall, the Xe-1 is just "better".

 

[nerwin]

So what should we do now? Keep using what we have until mirrorless cameras can fully replace DSLRs or should we sell now while they are still worth something?

 

[robbins.photo]

I'm not sure if "simple" is the right word, sensor stabilization is way, way simpler.

---

Anyway. Yes. The DSLR is not going to be around forever. I've said it before and I'll say it again: eventually there will be a push for larger sensors and the DSLR platform is awkward for medium format.

Second, mirroless is less expensive and mechanically simpler. Fewer moving parts means warranty service is going to cost less. Inevitable improvements will eventually permit a fast electronic global (or at least functionally global) shutter, and cameras will at this point no longer be mechanical at all.

EVFs have improved significantly over the last few years. a 4k display with a frame rate of 120fps (if taking into account latency) will likely be indistinguishable from an optical viewfinder, and a 6K display most certainly would be. These kinds of numbers are certainly rational expectations considering that VR seems to be a technology that people are at least excited about.

EVFs likewise perform better in low light provided that latency can be corrected, and even without latency corrected, I'd rather have a laggy viewfinder that I can actually see than one I cannot see anything at all, while focus assist is *significantly* more useful than a rangefinder or microprism, imo.

Video can also be viewed naturally from the viewfinder without having to add silly eyecups.

I do not think DSLR is dead, but I think it will be in a few years, my guess is in 10 years professional cameras will not be mechanical, and within 5 years Nikon and Canon will be very much on board.

From my experience, my X-E1 I bought on a whim with all it's flaws is a far superior shooting experience than my Sony A700. The a700 is a solid camera, and really does have a very nice viewfinder, too. But overall, the Xe-1 is just "better".

I have a feeling your probably right. Honestly I don't care if there's a little flippy mirror thingy inside or not as long as it works the way I need it to work.

 

[unpopular]

By the time dslrs are obsolete, your current gear will be obsolete anyway. Mirrorless cameras have a short film to flange distance, so all your lenses will likely be compatible.

I don't think there is any reason to run out and switch to Fuji.

Unless you value image quality. Then definitely switch to fuji