In defence of the DSLR.

[Murchu]

please don't misquote me, it's rude.

Wouldn't want that, now. Would hope my edited post reflects my comment was an edited version of something you said, rather than a misquote.

 

[nobbylon]

Wouldn't want that, now. Would hope my edited post reflects my comment was an edited version of something you said, rather than a misquote.

Actually if you read your post it quotes me and doesn't do correctly so by changing my words you have misquoted me.
And NO I don't want you changing my wording in an attempt at being word clever.
If you don't like what I said then say so in a sensible and polite manner.

 

[giellaleafapmu]

In any case, the next few years should be very interesting. For me, sensor technology is not too far away from all I will ever need in it. Resolution and high iso performance are there, and the push is now on dynamic range to do the same. Accompanied by the development that AA filters are being left out of more and more cameras, with moiré likely to become a problem solved entirely by software in the future, soon I feel digital will be at the point where I no longer see a need to upgrade for reasons of sensor technology. Those will be interesting days, and feel we are not too far away from build quality and durability determining how long we keep our digital cameras, no longer upgrading to keep up with the tech curve and to gain valuable improved image quality, but rather that our camera actually wore out.

I heard this many times and I think this will never happen. I mean, I am not discussing what you say, just we get used to new quality standards as they come out and we all want to have the best tool available. I remember that at the beginning it was: "I would be happy with a 5Mpx sensor and a good lens at affordable price". Then the Olympus E-10 and E-20 hit the market and people asked for: "The same level with interchangeable lenses". Then a lot of cameras come out and we wanted full-frame (as if somewhere in some holy book there was written a "Thou shalt not use anything else than 24x36mm!"). Then we had it so we wanted 22, 38, soon 100Mpx... And so on and so on. Maybe in thirty years we shall all have 100Mpx cameras with 30 stops range, the size of a compact camera at 200US$ but then for sure "pros" will be using something ever more amazing, able to do much better, with possibility of much more radical crops, with faster lenses, faster AF, implanted in the eyes, with solar batteries...whatever crap you can imagine, and we will all lust after those incredible tools. Problem is that taking pictures is funny but looking at camera catalogs, discussing in the Internet, and enjoying new toys is also funny...😀

GLF

 

[jonasv]

I heard this many times and I think this will never happen. I mean, I am not discussing what you say, just we get used to new quality standards as they come out and we all want to have the best tool available. I remember that at the beginning it was: "I would be happy with a 5Mpx sensor and a good lens at affordable price". Then the Olympus E-10 and E-20 hit the market and people asked for: "The same level with interchangeable lenses". Then a lot of cameras come out and we wanted full-frame (as if somewhere in some holy book there was written a "Thou shalt not use anything else than 24x36mm!"). Then we had it so we wanted 22, 38, soon 100Mpx... And so on and so on. Maybe in thirty years we shall all have 100Mpx cameras with 30 stops range, the size of a compact camera at 200US$ but then for sure "pros" will be using something ever more amazing, able to do much better, with possibility of much more radical crops, with faster lenses, faster AF, implanted in the eyes, with solar batteries...whatever crap you can imagine, and we will all lust after those incredible tools. Problem is that taking pictures is funny but looking at camera catalogs, discussing in the Internet, and enjoying new toys is also funny...😀

GLF

I agree. For my use, my X100 + Nikon D7000 have replaced my M4-P and F4s very adequately, in some fields even surpassing them.

So me is a happy man.

But if I can get a Nikon D8000 in a couple of years which performs as well at 30,000+ ISO as my D7000 at 1600 ISO, I'd buy it in a heartbeat!

 

[moreammo]

I don't think it is about "replace" or even "complement" other systems but rather having the right tool for the right job. Your OM-D might seem like a useless toy for that context. For my style and interests, I need a DSLR like an archer needs a gatling gun. I realized for me a DSLR was overkill. It is nice to know I have it if I need it, though.

I am an Archer; though I only have three long bows at the moment 🙂

and I NEED a gatling gun... just throwing that out here 😀

... still point taken 🙂

 

[Murchu]

I heard this many times and I think this will never happen. I mean, I am not discussing what you say, just we get used to new quality standards as they come out and we all want to have the best tool available. I remember that at the beginning it was: "I would be happy with a 5Mpx sensor and a good lens at affordable price". Then the Olympus E-10 and E-20 hit the market and people asked for: "The same level with interchangeable lenses". Then a lot of cameras come out and we wanted full-frame (as if somewhere in some holy book there was written a "Thou shalt not use anything else than 24x36mm!"). Then we had it so we wanted 22, 38, soon 100Mpx... And so on and so on. Maybe in thirty years we shall all have 100Mpx cameras with 30 stops range, the size of a compact camera at 200US$ but then for sure "pros" will be using something ever more amazing, able to do much better, with possibility of much more radical crops, with faster lenses, faster AF, implanted in the eyes, with solar batteries...whatever crap you can imagine, and we will all lust after those incredible tools. Problem is that taking pictures is funny but looking at camera catalogs, discussing in the Internet, and enjoying new toys is also funny...😀

GLF

Well, can understand where you are coming from. I meant more in my post, that sensor performance would be there for me. I am sure camera companies will not stop adding more/ incremental improvements, or that people will not be encouraged to upgrade, just that I would have a hard time being convinced to upgrade, unless there is a paradigm shift in imaging technology. Something like 3D imagining, ala Bladerunner, 500 frames per second video cameras with stills quality resolution, or even camera implants in our eyeballs.

With regular old still image technology, I will be happy as soon as the dynamic range thing gets there. Know it was easy for people for people to say that before, but it was hard for people to be completely satisfied, when 35mm film still bore technical advantages over 35mm digital. Once the dynamic range thing is broached in 35mm digital, am sure sensor development may move onto medium format, or even large format, but as a guy that likes small cameras 35mm digital will suit me perfectly.

 

[isoterica]

Different tools for different situations. Who says there has to be one camera for it all? It would be great if that were possible but currently it isn't. Enjoy the diversity 😉