Skiff
Well-known
That's correct.
I think that this "mirrorless cameras will kill DSLRs" is a myth.
That mirrorless is doing a little bit better in relative terms concerning sales numbers is more due to:
- more photographers who have used digital compact cameras with one built in lens in the past are upgrading to compact mirrorless
- quite a lot of bridge-camera type users are upgrading to mirrorless
- a number of DSLR users are adding a mirrorless to their DSLR system (not replacing it).
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
Add the video/cinematography users that have grudgingly used live view DSLRs in the past few years - these are generally converting now. Between unsuitable finders, the need for a clutter of outboard equipment, limited encoder formats and overheating issues, Nikons and Canons were a foul compromise for those who needed something upward of video format, but could not afford proper cinematography cameras. The Sonys are dramatically better in that domain, at a lower admission fee.
pvdhaar
Peter
Well, I did replace it.. and have come to regret it; switched back to DSLR again. Now how's that reflected in their relative sales figures?
willie_901
Veteran
Sales increased by one unit for each category. The difference between sales for each category remained constant. So in terms of relative sales it's as though you never existed.
Assuming you sold the DSLR and mirrorless bodies to people who would have bought new bodies, you also decreased sales for each category by one unit.
And if you bought both DSLRs and sold the mirrorless during the data collection period, you affected the DSLR-to-mirrorless ratio by one unit.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
For consumer monitors Samsung overpassed Sony long time ago.
They are doing great at local market with home appliances as well. They also have non-bit billion range provincial contract for wind power generators.
So, overall company is doing really well.
But their cameras never attracted me. I guess, I wasn't the only one. It was not their market from beginning.
They are doing great at local market with home appliances as well. They also have non-bit billion range provincial contract for wind power generators.
So, overall company is doing really well.
But their cameras never attracted me. I guess, I wasn't the only one. It was not their market from beginning.
pvdhaar
Peter
Now that's something to think about!
btgc
Veteran
Pentax K-S1 is barely bigger than K01 but has wonderful pentaprism powered VF, also provides Live mode with focus peaking like MLs do. Why someone would choose ML over entry level DSLR?
Upper deck DSLRs w/ full size bodies and grips can't compare to skinny ML in size and weight just like ML's can't beat 'em IQ wise. But then there are apples and oranges.
Frontman
Well-known
For Samsung, Germany was the third-largest market for cameras, as Samsung cameras are not sold in Japan (nor are Samsung televisions, for that matter).
Addy101
Well-known
The Pentax K01 is the worst example one can give - it has the disadvantages of mirrorless (no dedicated PDAF) and the disadvantages of SLR's (bigger flange distance). If you however compare the size of a Sony A68 to a Sony A6000, or a Canon EOS 100D to a Canon EOS M, you clearly see that mirrorless is smaller. For most people the autofocus of mirrorless is good enough, it is good enough for families in my opinion, why they still are buying bigger DSLR's is remarkable.
Still love my Sony A900 and Canon EOS 1DsII
btgc
Veteran
For most of people, phone is all they need. Small remaining part uses real cameras, I mean, devices with imaging as main function. I see family mothers using bulky DSLR w/ 24-80/2.8 and fathers using small ML and pancake lenses but those are someone who understand and/or care.
It this context MLs are just one step farther from disappearance than DSLRs in regular use. Phones, glasses and implants are future of imaging for masses.
majid
Fazal Majid
They own part of Schneider, IIRC, and in fact the lenses on some of the compact Samsung cameras were Schneider-branded.
I used to think that, but I am not so sure, since I got a Fuji X-T1 and my Canon 5DmkIII essentially gathers dust. DSLRs are mechanically quite complex and expensive to manufacture compared to mirrorless cameras. The economies of scale of Canon and Nikon in DSLR manufacturing have offset that, but the system camera market is not growing and to survive camera makers will need to wring out as much profit from each unit as they can.
The main advantage for DSLRs was autofocus speed, but newer mirrorless cameras like the Nikon 1, Leica Q/SL, Fuji X-T1, Sony A7RII and the Panasonic DFD technology are getting very close, not to mention that off-sensor contrast-detection autofocus is inherently more accurate than off-sensor phase-detection AF, which matters increasingly as resolution continues to march upwards.
Spanik
Well-known
Have to say that I looked at Samsung when the got the NX100 out. It was "different" in a way from other cameras. And the lenses got good marks, didn't look to large and were reasonably priced. What made me not do the switch was their (in a way understandable) choice of focal lengths. But I wanted the equivalent of a 35mm and they did 20mm and 30mm (so 30mmeq and 45mmeq). Would that work out in the long run? And there were no third party lenses, no Sigma or Tamron to go to if it didn't. And you couldn't find a shop that had it in stock so you could try.
And then they add a large 70-200 and a grip because you cannot hold that bar of soap.
Sorry but that mirrorless size advantage is just for the body and pancackes with a focal length up to the register distance. Once longer than that or large aperture lenses the size difference is minimal. And the bit that rests is all to often undone by adding a grip (ever tried to hold an EOS M?). And then you are still there with a smaller battery and more power consumption due to the screen of evf.
And then they add a large 70-200 and a grip because you cannot hold that bar of soap.
Sorry but that mirrorless size advantage is just for the body and pancackes with a focal length up to the register distance. Once longer than that or large aperture lenses the size difference is minimal. And the bit that rests is all to often undone by adding a grip (ever tried to hold an EOS M?). And then you are still there with a smaller battery and more power consumption due to the screen of evf.
I'm not sure... and I mean I really don't know, but I don't think these consumer electronics companies can survive catering to legacy lens geeks. Most of the public doesn't particularly care about that type of stuff.
uhoh7
Veteran
Nex would have gone nowhere without it. Without Nex there would have been no A7 (it was cancelled twice as is) The legacy use gives you the Buzz of vocal camera experts. Make their old favorite lens work well and they will tell the world your camera is fantastic. Priceless.
Sony is making a killing on the A7 cameras and lenses which have incredible margins compared to Canikon stuff. This line has given the whole company the best year in many. See the quarterly report and refer the boost in operating capital.
It's only a matter of time before the EVIL cameras replace DSLRs for many or most pros, but it may take 10 years.
The APS-C EVIL market is already saturated. The real money will be in the gap between the Sony A7, which is very immature as a system, and the only true "systems" Canikon.
People need "a reason to buy". Sony knows what it is: "smaller", but their delivery is piecemeal to say the least. Leica did alot of interesting things with the SL, but it's huge, and can only get away with that because the M primes are tiny and the overall build of the SL is exquisite.
Here is what will make somebody a fortune:
FF Body 75% of the size of A7r2, BSI sensor, thin cover glass, 1500 shot battery, two cards, great SL level EVF, very wide short register mount. Slick build and highly programable firmware so profiles can be created. 4K video on one version: charge more for that one.
Be sure the buyer can use any lens like with the sony but again with thin cover so they really work. Don't worry you will still make a fortune because only your lenses will AF properly.
Development priority: make on-sensor PDAF follow focus well with your natives. Absolute must for sports and the large market of bird chasers. Start with the "holy trinity" 3 fast zooms. Pull out all stops to make them as small as possible. With your wide short mount it should be easy to reduce size and weight by 25% over current Canikon. Then fill the system ASAP up to 500/4 and with some exotic AF primes. Make them all as small as you possibly can, but at least 25 % less.
If you are Canikon of course you have a LAEA4 type adapter ready to AF your big lenses of the past.
Such a new system is entirely possible today, and pros would fall over themselves to buy in if it was done right.
Size matters. Size matters. Size is a reason to buy a new system. Sure there will be people who deny this. Then they will buy one too.
Leica created an entire system, spawned an industry and this forum with a single original priority: small size, high quality.
Spanik
Well-known
I won't deny that. But too small is just as bad as too large. What all those companies can not seem to grasp is that size isn't as important as weight. I would prefer a large light camera to a small light one every day.
Being able to grasp it without worry where you place your fingers, no worry you push 2 buttons at the same time (maybe there are too much buttons), a natural uncramped hold while at the same time not weighing like it is sculped out of depleted uranium would be a dream camera.
So I got a nex and dumped it because too small. A Fuji is a bit better but still no useful grip without adding one, don't use it either.
Same goes for batteries. The Sony is empty if you don't use it a week, the Fuji lasts a bit longer but the 5DII I can put away for a month and it will only cost a single bar.
photomoof
Fischli & Weiss Sculpture
Sort of -- they share a panel manufacturing plant 50/50 ownership. It is Samsung managed, but SONY is not using the same panels as Samsung.
uhoh7
Veteran
Sure, newspaper men still used Speed Graphics.....for a time.
Is this too small?
or this:
These are cameras that changed history and made fortunes. DSLRs are simply devices of mass image production: little picture factories. They are very good at "churning it out", but point one at someone and yikes......hike, climb or ski with one? Yes it's possible, but it takes over the whole experience.
Barnack knew the truth and he set the bar. As to the Nex: for all it's imperfection, if it had a proper FF sensor friendly to M lenses, I'd still be using one
With a well designed small camera you can always add a grip, right? Trouble with the Nex (among numerous issues) was the EVF had to go on top like a 240, where it got beat to pieces. I think you do hit a real issue: ergonomics. The camera should feel right in the hand. The m6 feels fine. The M9 (my love) does not. A great modern digital camera should actually have "sizes" for different hands, like ski boots. Common guts, but a variety of outer frames, as do many modern cars. The camera makers today are so narrow minded: even sony, always the newest sensor tech wedded to menus from the dark ages. LOL
btgc
Veteran
Little colorful Pentax DSLRs have changed that. One is to point big black blob even with kit lens and person feels uncomfortably. Small colored fun cam with current sensor and incredible processing inside this fun looking body...even their lenses look like a toys but deliver real pictures.
Hiking, not sure, when extra 500+ grams counts a lot. Probably small 1" compacts are better there. Or even film camera with compact lens. Personally I wouldn't carry anything heavier than film mju there, or phone. But then I'm sissy and enjoy walking with occasional pictures more than pictures with occasional walking.
photomoof
Fischli & Weiss Sculpture
ZivcoPhoto
Well-known
My $49 Samsung b&w wifi air printer works great.... That is until I have to replace the toner cartridge which costs $80😨
Some companies should remain niche manufactures rather than try to grab a piece of every product market and make mediocre products that outshine in public eyes their very excellent products.
All about $$
Some companies should remain niche manufactures rather than try to grab a piece of every product market and make mediocre products that outshine in public eyes their very excellent products.
All about $$