HHPhoto
Well-known
The value number simply shows how inflated / overpriced the current mirrorless cameras are.
Lots of features no one needs (like 8k video), but for what you have to pay a lot for.
Facts are
- the mirrorless market is declining since 2012, and that decline will continue
- the competition in mirrorless is more brutal, as more "fish is swimming in a declining pond"
- the majority of the huge DSLR user base is not switching to mirrorless, that is the reason why the mirrorless sales are declining for years
- from an investment perspective such a market belongs to the most unattractive markets.
Because of these reasons it makes sense for Canon, Nikon, Pentax to continue with DSLRs. The market will be much smaller than in the past, but there is a significant and loyal customer base for it. And the manufacturers have less pressure from competition.
In an overall declining market it would be the most stupid thing to say "goodbye" to a big customer group and ignoring their demand. The manufacturers simply cannot afford to loose more customers, if they want to survive.
There is room in the market for DSLM and DSLR.
Cheers, Jan
sooner
Well-known
A lot of this is like peering into the future and guessing when global warming will finally destroy humanity, ha ha. I see two periods going forward, one is continued industry consolidation among all these huge conglomerates--maybe only a Canon will remain? The second is potentially post-conglomerate, and the question is where is the sweet spot between investment versus return by smaller firms. How much R&D will be needed to service the non-cell phone camera niche, and how many firms will be willing to operate in that space with limited profits?
The real question is what is after cell phones? I mean, nothing stays the same, ever.
JeffS7444
Well-known
But it is not for you or I to decide what people should "need"
A number of years ago, I paid 5500 USD for a Leica M9: Today's Sony Alpha 1 @ 6000 USD is a bargain by comparison.
HHPhoto
Well-known
But it is not for you or I to decide what people should "need"
Of course not.
The market tells you: The declining sales for mirrorless for more than 8 years now tell us very clearly that less and less photographers from year-to-year are interested in these expensive cameras with features they don't really need.
A friend of mine is offering photo workshops. He has the "whole photo demographic" as customers, from beginners to semi-professionnals. By far most of the customers are using DSLRs, and want to continue that. Because it is the best tool for their photography.
Just recently he told me that none of his customers is interested in the latest "gimmicks" (his words) and cameras with "feature-overloads" and 500 pages instruction manuals.
His customers are only interested in real progress, with real benefits for their usage: Better ergonomics, easier operation, better durability and weather sealing, better service (in case of repairs), lower prices.
Most of his customers aren't doing video at all, only photography. And those who do video mostly use a real, dedicated video camera for it.
A camera in which all video functions are removed - a pure photo camera - offered at a lower price would be an interesting product for them, he told me.
I think the manufacturers will need such niche products in the future to stay in business. The more niches and market gaps they can fill, the more safe their future.
There is no "one fits all" solution. The manufacturers have to diversify their product range.
Cheers, Jan
p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
I hope I am not diverting the discussion but as someone who hasn't made the jump to the digital age, I am wondering what are the advantages of the DSLR vs the mirrorless design?
HHPhoto
Well-known
The DSLR design has the following advantages:
1. No health problems for the eye. With mirrorless you have an EVF = monitor in direct front of the eye, which has negative influence on the eye (danger of enhanced short-sigthtedness, and negative influence by high amout of blue light; My eye-docter had explained me all the problems in detail, but as I am not a docter myself I cannot explain all details as good as a medicine expert can. But if you google these topics you will find more than 200,000 sources).
2. Some photographers have problems with nausea / dizziness because of the EVF.
3. Optical viewfinders in DSLRs offer max. resolution, EVFs in mirrorless only an extremely low resolution (even with best EVFs only WUXGA or QSXGA).
4. With OVF / DSLR you see your subject in real colors and resolution, not as a monitor picture.
5. With an OVF / DSLR you see your subject in real time. EVFs have a lag.
6. The best DSLRs like Canon EOS 1DX Mk. III and Nikon D6 have still the best AF tracking performance. Best tools for sport and wildlife photography.
7. DSLRs respond immediately, if you switch-on a mirrorless camera you have a lag before it is fully operating.
8. As the EVF needs power, but the OVF not, DSLRs have much lower power consumption and better battery life.
9. Less problems with dust on the sensor with DSLRs, as the mirror also works as a kind of dust protector.
10. Better lens selection / more variety of lenses for DSLRs, especially concerning specialist lenses.
11. DSLRs are perfect for those photographers who are shooting both digital and film on parallel, as you can use the same system for lenses and accessoires (Nikon F, Canon EF, Pentax K, Pentax 645, Hasselblad H, Hasselblad V, Rolleiflex Hy6).
12. Using a DSLR system is in most cases cheaper than using a mirrorless system.
That are only some advantages. There are some more, but let's not get into much details here. Because as you said, that is not the topic of this thread.
Cheers, Jan
p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
Thanks Jan, that was very detailed.
css9450
Veteran
I'd be curious to know: what are some of these gimmicks and expensive features they don't need? Video? GPS? WiFi? Heartrate monitor?
I don't even know if my cameras have those features, and if they do, I just ignore them.
Range-rover
Veteran
The problem to me is price of the wonder cameras. To the regular people
who are not into cameras they don't get into the SLR cameras anymore;
they stay with their cell phone cameras.
who are not into cameras they don't get into the SLR cameras anymore;
they stay with their cell phone cameras.
benlees
Well-known
So Jan can sleep at night: https://www.canon-europe.com/pro/stories/future-of-dslrs/
JeffS7444
Well-known
Shall we agree to disagree? I see the same data but arrive at a different conclusion: That all camera sales are declining, but high-end mirrorless is declining less.
There are older DSLRs like Nikon D700 and Canon 5D which should serve them nicely and last for many years.
JeffS7444
Well-known
Need to ensure that eye is relaxed and focused to ~infinity when adjusting viewfinder focus. This is true of EVF, OVF, even binoculars.
I am happy enough with EVF but this is not a religious issue for me: I mostly want higher performance in a smaller camera.
HHPhoto
Well-known
- video in general (more than 50% are using their cameras for stills only, and not for video)
- 8k video specifically (completely worthless)
- often also 4k video, as full HD is absolutely sufficient (is in-line with a report I recently read that 4k video has only a market share of 3-4% in all video applications, the rest is HD / full HD)
- frame rates of more than 10 fps
- high megapixel count (as 99,9% of all the pictures are either only viewed on a 2k or 4k computer monitor - or on a tiny smartphone monitor - or printed at max. 30x40 centimeter)
- GPS.
Cheers, Jan
HHPhoto
Well-known
Thanks.
The article make some of the DSLR advantages even more clear.
I hope Canon will stay with this assessment, and make a successor to the 5D Mk.IV and 7D Mk.II.
Both would definitely benefit from some improvements of the 1 DX Mk.III.
Cheers, Jan
HHPhoto
Well-known
High-end DSLR segment is also decling less than the average market. The bigger decline of DSLRs in the total market is simply because the extremely cheap low-end / entry level DSLR market (Nikon D3500, D5600, Canon EOS 200D, 250D) is shrinking more.
Because that market
- is completely oversaturated
- is demolished by smartphone competition.
This market segment of extremely cheap, but nevertheless quite capable cameras has never existed in the mirrorless segment. And what does not exist, cannot shrink.
Cheers, Jan
HHPhoto
Well-known
Well no, it is not true for EVFs. With an EVF you are looking at the surface of the EVF monitor, there is the picture physically. You are not looking at ~infinity.
Cheers, Jan
DSLRs will be to mirrorless, what RFs were (are) to SLRs in the film world... an alternative. I love how Pentax has committed to still making DSLRs. I could also see where certain DSLRs become retro and desirable later.
css9450
Veteran
Sure, video. That's one button; I've never even pressed it. Never even cracked open the manual to that section.
Problem solved!
JeffS7444
Well-known
Your eye should ideally be relaxed and focused more or less at infinity regardless of whether the viewfinder image is being formed upon an OLED or the focusing screen of an SLR; this is what the eyepiece focus adjustment is for.
If you don't believe that you are viewing a 2D image formed upon the surface of the SLR's focusing screen, try removing it.