Reign of DSLRs almost over?

[mcasan]

"Dpreview is now convinced Canon and Nikon will go full monthy with FF mirrorless. And this will be the sign that “The reign of the DSLR is almost over”."

This could make for a very interesting time.

CP+ 2018 interviews: The reign of the DSLR is almost over...

 

[Ian.B]

DSLRs are bit old fashioned these days --- I have never regretted going with a mirrorless camera but I have no use for a FF these days

 

[Replytoken]

I have use for both at this time, but I suspect that technological improvement in the mirrorless word will close the gaps over the next few years.

--Ken

 

[PhilBurton]

I have use for both at this time, but I suspect that technological improvement in the mirrorless word will close the gaps over the next few years.

--Ken

And if mirrorless is as as good as a DSLR, then great. The key to a SLRs is that they addressed a key issue with rangefinder cameras. If I no longer need the "reflex" pentaprism, why should I care? That is, IF the mirrorless camera gave me a viewfinder that was as good as, if not better, than a DSLR viewfinder.

(Oh, I would only buy a Nikon mirrorless camera that could mount all my F-mount lenses.)

Phil

 

[davidedric]

I do wonder if a new photographer handled both a dslr and a mirrorless (assuming they are at a similar level) they would much notice how the image looked different through the viewfinder.

 

[Johan Elzenga]

I do wonder if a new photographer handled both a dslr and a mirrorless (assuming they are at a similar level) they would much notice how the image looked different through the viewfinder.

Both have their strengths and weaknesses. When it gets darker, an EVF inevitably becomes noisier. The image you see may be brighter than with an OVF and that's an advantage, but noise and a lower refresh rate will start to take its toll. By the time you are talking astrophotography, an EVF is pretty much useless. You see more noise than stars. An OVF will be very dark, but every star you do see is real, not just noise.

 

[Ian.B]

nothing is perfect; but I do like the EVF; they have greatly improved and there is something about seeing the subject very much like it will be recorded. The bonus is having a live histogram in the viewfinder and being able to quickly adjust the exposure if need be. No need to check the recorded image on the screen as it was seen before capture. Apart from when weird camera angles are used; I very seldom need to look at the screen at all. In fact, the Lumix swivel screen is usually against the camera
What camera style suits really comes down the subjects most photographed -- the smaller m/less cameras suit my subjects very well.
Someone mentioned Nikon --- so how much is Nikon 24-70 F2.8 lens these days? The Oly version is around $800!! The 70-200 2.8 is around $1500/$1600 with a converter lens. Both brilliant lenses too!! We will not mention weight
[Australian dollars and stock BTW]

I am again enjoying photography now I have scaled back size and quantity

 

[Replytoken]

That is, IF the mirrorless camera gave me a viewfinder that was as good as, if not better, than a DSLR viewfinder.

Very true, and EVF's are not always everybody's cup of tea, just like some swear by their rangefinders and others swear at them! Having shot with all three over the years, I think that Johan and Ian summed up my thoughts pretty well. I love my Nikon bodies for action, and my Olympus and Panasonic bodies for travel and still objects. For the time being, I am going to enjoy the best of both worlds.

--Ken

 

[davidedric]

If you've been photographing more than a few years you'll have certainly used an OVF, and if you've used mirrorless an EVF too, so you're in a good position to appreciate the differences.
However, if a new photographer starts with mirrorless, I suspect they'll think that's just how viewfinders are and get very used to that. Unless they wanted to move into a field where dslr's currently have an advantage, such as sports, or an OVF has an advantage, such as astro photography as Johann points out, I doubt they'll ever experience an OVF.
That's a long winded way of saying that I think the pool of people who can say I've tried both and prefer X will slowly reduce.

Dave

 

[Laura Smith]

EVFs drive me nuts, because when I use a viewfinder I keep both eyes open (to watch for things outside the frame with the other eye). But the difference in focal distance makes that a headache (literally!) with an EVF. But I love my EOS M3 without a viewfinder at all (I even love it despite sometimes having time for a cuppa before it autofocuses). I just pretend I'm looking at a ground glass on a TLR .