"5 reasons to ditch your SLR"

[artyman]

............................The basic premise of oil paint hasn't changed in 100's of years.

Nah real artists use acrylics

 

[Kaouthia]

£100 says you're talking out of an orifice normally used for other purposes.

Rofl, never heard it put quite that way before, thanks for the chuckle.

 

[gingerjon]

Care to put your money where your mouth is?

£100 says you're talking out of an orifice normally used for other purposes.

That seems reasonable.

I'll hold the money.

So if you and HoppyUK could just paypal me £100 each I'll make sure the winner gets his dosh in five years.

Honest.

 

[HoppyUK]

Care to put your money where your mouth is?

£100 says you're talking out of an orifice normally used for other purposes.

I'll have £100 that says they will outsell DLSRs in five years time, yes, no problem. (Don't worry Stewart, your lenses will still fit them too )

And that will effectively wipe out DSLRs as a serious long term prospect for manufacturers. Of course, there will still be millions of DSLRs in use by the majority of enthusiasts, but in terms of new cameras sold DSLRs will be in second place.

That won't stop us using our DSLRs for ever and a day if we want to, they won't get any worse, and there will always be a high-end market which will be almost exclusively full-frame only. Manufacturers will continue to supply us with lenses for as long as there is a market for them - probably decades yet.

The other thing that is going to get hit very hard soon is low end compacts, but it's mobile phones that will see them off.

 

[goldenlight]

I'll have £100 that says they will outsell DLSRs in five years time, yes, no problem. (Don't worry Stewart, your lenses will still fit them too )

And that will effectively wipe out DSLRs as a serious long term prospect for manufacturers. Of course, there will still be millions of DSLRs in use by the majority of enthusiasts, but in terms of new cameras sold DSLRs will be in second place.

That won't stop us using our DSLRs for ever and a day if we want to, they won't get any worse, and there will always be a high-end market which will be almost exclusively full-frame only. Manufacturers will continue to supply us with lenses for as long as there is a market for them - probably decades yet.

The other thing that is going to get hit very hard soon is low end compacts, but it's mobile phones that will see them off.

I think Hoppy is right, in that EVFs will become so good that they will have many advantages over optical viewfinders but no disadvantages (at least no serious ones). That doesn't mean all cameras will be small, there will almost certainly be pro cameras the size and build of, say, a D3 if for no other reason than to counter-balance the big lenses that will still be needed. There is no reason why these "Pro EVILS" should not still have a full frame sensor, although by then there will be no need as APS-C sensors and even 4/3 will have caught up in meaningful terms.

The shape needn't necessarily chanage either; the distinctive SLR "hump" will still be there - to house the EVF. So we will get the best of both worlds; smaller, lighter high performance cameras for those that want/need them and big, heavy pro models for, well, pros .... and anyone else who has big hands/needs a rugged camera/uses long lenses/needs a durable shutter with rapid frame rate. The only difference is that you'll see the World through the camera electronically rather than optically. If you don't think that could ever be an improvement, just consider why it is that the military are developing electronic vision helmets for fighter pilots.

The single lens reflex viewing system was only ever a clever, but clumsy, complicated and expensive workaround to the problem of how to see through the lens what the film would ultimately see. Had an electronic solution been available from the start we never would have had reflex cameras, single, twin or otherwise.

I know fundemental changes are not always welcomed - my initial reaction to digital was "over my dead body," but it's funny how in just a few short years I've totally bought into the concept. Regarding EVFs, the future is comming so get used to it!

 

[HoppyUK]

<snip>

Very well put John

I don't know why some people are so anti, almost as a matter of principle. Nothing will replace DSLRs unless it is significantly better in meaningful ways, but if it is, it will.

I just happen to believe these cameras will be better, and really very soon. What's more, all the major manufacturers think so too.

Nikon, Canon and Sony will wade in this year. And an ILC/EVIL camera will be the hot new Xmas gift.

 

[King_Boru]

Thom Hogan uses an EP1. The dude over at Luminous Landscapes uses a Panasonic GF1. Both these cameras are partnered with Leica M9's, D3x's and various bodies and lenses that many of us on here can't afford. That there is proof that the EVIL camera has something more to offer than what some people realize.

Of course there will be a market for full bodied SLR's but you have to remember that there is a whole new generation growing up behind us. Chances are they will become accustomed to using an EVIL camera and consider an old fashioned (lets face it, it is) method of viewfinder photography too primitive. This in itself will drive the EVIL market forward eventually pushing the dSLR to one side.

I was out photographing the Olympic Flame pass through my town here in Canada last week and was amazed to see how many people use Live View. I am a bit of a purist (to a degree) and couldn't bear to look. The method behind holding your camera at arms length, framing and taking the photograph is backwards. But we have to face reality, it is only going to get worse (or better, depending on how you look at it).

So with regards to Hoppy UK's comments, I think he is correct in thinking that EVIL cameras will surpass dSLR sales in the next 5 years. I wouldn't be half surprised if it were sooner.

 

[NorthernNikon]

I'll have £100 that says they will outsell DLSRs in five years time, yes, no problem. (Don't worry Stewart, your lenses will still fit them too )

Well that's a completely different argument to the original one.

And that will effectively wipe out DSLRs as a serious long term prospect for manufacturers. Of course, there will still be millions of DSLRs in use by the majority of enthusiasts, but in terms of new cameras sold DSLRs will be in second place.

So how exactly will that wipe out DSLRs? Compacts already outsell them, so by your thinking compacts have wiped them out already? Even if DSLR sales fall as a result of the success of EVIL cameras, that doesn't preclude them being a viable profitable market. If anything, the market will be more profitable because higher end models carry greater margin than entry level ones.

That won't stop us using our DSLRs for ever and a day if we want to, they won't get any worse, and there will always be a high-end market which will be almost exclusively full-frame only. Manufacturers will continue to supply us with lenses for as long as there is a market for them - probably decades yet.

So they won't be 'wiped out' then.

The other thing that is going to get hit very hard soon is low end compacts, but it's mobile phones that will see them off.

That's already happened.

 

[HoppyUK]

Well that's a completely different argument to the original one...

<snip>

Barney, I know what I wrote, but that doesn't seem to be the same thing as you are reading. I have not changed my mind, or altered my argument.

Nobody has to agree with me, although some folks obviously do; nobody is forcing you to buy one, and the DSLR market is rock solid for as far ahead as I can see (it had better be, as I've just ordered a 5D2 ). These new cameras will compliment existing products, replacing sales of high-end compacts and entry-level DSLRs, which will co-exist very happily. Then specifications and performance will improve, and this will inevitably eat away at mid-range DSLRs. How can it not do that, if the camera is 'better' in every respect? Just sticking my finger in the air, in terms of new camera sales, I think this will mean that they will outsell DSLRs within five years, which I don't think is an outrageous claim at all. There will still be many, many more DSLRs out there in total market volume, which is why that side of things is secure for a very long time yet.

The only sector I don't see being hit, is full frame, at least not for a very long time, if at all. The bigger format with longer lenses has room to accomodate the mirror and optical viewing system. The benefits are less in all sorts of ways, even if they still apply in therory, and given the relatively tiny market share that full frame occupies, I think manufacturers will look at this sector absolutely last.

I can't see a downside to any of this, for anyone, regardless of whether my predictations come true or not

 

[Squawk]

Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but isn't the main critique of a number of entry level DSLR's (such as my own 400D) that they are too small? Too fiddly, don't feel balanced with a big lens on.

Smaller doesn't always mean better.

 

[HoppyUK]

Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but isn't the main critique of a number of entry level DSLR's (such as my own 400D) that they are too small? Too fiddly, don't feel balanced with a big lens on.

Smaller doesn't always mean better.

Smaller size is just a by-product, and you can always make things bigger with a grip or whatever.

The point is, they do not have a mirror clunking around in there, which is a complex mechanical intrusion. It causes delay, creates vibration and costs money, but most of all it forces the lens to be further forward than is ideal from an optical point of view.

If you can take a viewing image off the sensor itself, and present that via an electronic viewfinder, you have both solved a major problem and at the same time created a big opportunity for better viewing, digital lens performance enhancement, and other significant performance improvements.

The net result is a camera that does everything a regular DSLR already does, but does it better. It can also be smaller/lighter/cheaper, but that's not the main advantage as I see it.

 

[King_Boru]

The net result is a camera that does everything a regular DSLR already does, but does it better. It can also be smaller/lighter/cheaper, but that's not the main advantage as I see it.

Here's an interesting proposition for ya Hop, Olympus are on the verge of possibly releasing a 4/3rd's Trine CDD professional camera. In doing so they will need to remove the mirror and pentaprism essentially creating a dSLR the way you describe it. If this pulls off, would you be interested in using it given that in reality it would be better that a traditional mirror / pentaprism combination. No vibrations, no mirror, EVF (HD, lag free), and many other benefits.

Its an interesting subject.

 

[NorthernNikon]

Barney, I know what I wrote, but that doesn't seem to be the same thing as you are reading. I have not changed my mind, or altered my argument.

Well I read, "In five years, I believe they will have wiped out DSLRs pretty much completely." which is what you wrote, isn't it?

 

[HoppyUK]

Here's an interesting proposition for ya Hop, Olympus are on the verge of possibly releasing a 4/3rd's Trine CDD professional camera. In doing so they will need to remove the mirror and pentaprism essentially creating a dSLR the way you describe it. If this pulls off, would you be interested in using it given that in reality it would be better that a traditional mirror / pentaprism combination. No vibrations, no mirror, EVF (HD, lag free), and many other benefits.

Its an interesting subject.

That's news to me, but sounds interesting - link?

 

[StewartR]

In five years, I believe they will have wiped out DSLRs pretty much completely.

I'll have £100 that says they will outsell DLSRs in five years time, yes, no problem.

You've changed your tune entirely here.

According to AP, DSLRs have less than 10% of the UK camera market - and that's excluding camera phones. So compact cameras have already "wiped out DSLRs pretty much completely", haven't they?

 

[artyman]

Miniaturisation has it's limits unless the NHS is going to offer some radical new procedures, fiddly buttons on a mobile phone are bad enough :shake:

 

[HoppyUK]

Well I read, "In five years, I believe they will have wiped out DSLRs pretty much completely." which is what you wrote, isn't it?

You've changed your tune entirely here.

According to AP, DSLRs have less than 10% of the UK camera market - and that's excluding camera phones. So compact cameras have already "wiped out DSLRs pretty much completely", haven't they?

No tunes changed. In the interests of clarity, maybe this line says it better:

"...[ILC/EVIL cameras] will effectively wipe out DSLRs as a serious long term prospect for manufacturers. Of course, there will still be millions of DSLRs in use by the majority of enthusiasts, but in terms of new cameras sold DSLRs will be in second place."

I'm simply saying volume, in camera units. Value is a very different measure, and so too is profit. But whichever way you look at it, the biggest sellers have never been SLRs or DSLRs, and neither will it ever be ILC/EVILs. Compact sales are huge, only eclipsed by disposable film cameras I think briefly at one time (volume) and camera-phones of course.

Do you guys have a serious point to make here?

 

[King_Boru]

That's news to me, but sounds interesting - link?

Theres a whole shed load of stuff but this thread sums it up nicely. Note the replies from RRiley. He seems to know what he is on about.

Trine CCD

Make sure you read the linked thread from the OP's post.

 

[collins82002]

After scimming through the article and threads about the EVIL. I think it is just a smaller version of the dslr with attachments to fit our lenses. The price band would be the issue? I think that price would decrease better for us? For example look how the mobile phone has changed over the past 10 years? They have got smaller and better and have more functions like the camera and bluetooth. 10-15 years ago, if you'd have said your gonna take a photo with your phone you'd be carted off to the looney bin. It is down to the individual on how good the quality of the photo is! A pro would weight the angles, light etc etc and maybe edit. Worrying about the ameteur is not an issue I don't think (ooooooo that would be a nice picture)(click). Technology will only get better

 

[mrtoad]

'Shallow' depth of field isn't the Holy Grail, but it is nice to have the option to easily achieve a shallow Depth of Field, given a suitable lens, should you want to.

The smaller the sensor, the harder it is to achieve a shallow Depth of Field.

isnt it the other way round...my small sensor goes down to f8 but no more
so shallow isnt what springs to mind
at full zoom and f 3.8....the dof is quite shallow

what exactly are you saying

 

[King_Boru]

Discussing DOF without a subject matter is kind of pointless tbh. The 'correct' DOF would depend on how it has been implemented.

Yes an SLR with the right lens and focal length can produce creamy bokeh but there are many factors determining its final appearance.

 

[mrtoad]

Discussing DOF without a subject matter is kind of pointless tbh. The 'correct' DOF would depend on how it has been implemented.

Yes an SLR with the right lens and focal length can produce creamy bokeh but there are many factors determining its final appearance.

i always thought dof...DEPTH of field...was an attempt to get more field rather than less...:shake:

 

[cyclone]

Well I read, "In five years, I believe they will have wiped out DSLRs pretty much completely." which is what you wrote, isn't it?

You've changed your tune entirely here.

According to AP, DSLRs have less than 10% of the UK camera market - and that's excluding camera phones. So compact cameras have already "wiped out DSLRs pretty much completely", haven't they?

You two are correct, but good luck with it


On the subject of the EVIL thingermebobs killing off the pro tog? WTF?
Has a new type of camera ever stopped pro's existing? Well, they are still about...

For a camera to kill off a tog, it's going to have to understand photographic briefs, have legs, know how to use them to move about and into the right places, at the right time. It's going to have to interact with people and give them direction, understand their responses, be patient and understanding. It's going to have to want to go out and capture moments important in news, nature, sport, lives and events in peoples lives.

It might happen, but I don't think we're quite there yet.

 

[King_Boru]

You two are correct, but good luck with it


On the subject of the EVIL thingermebobs killing off the pro tog? WTF?
Has a new type of camera ever stopped pro's existing? Well, they are still about...

For a camera to kill off a tog, it's going to have to understand photographic briefs, have legs, know how to use them to move about and into the right places, at the right time. It's going to have to interact with people and give them direction, understand their responses, be patient and understanding. It's going to have to want to go out and capture moments important in news, nature, sport, lives and events in peoples lives.

It might happen, but I don't think we're quite there yet.

Wonder what would happen if Honda taught their little robot man to take photos.