Is DSLR about to die off?

[Cagey75]

You keep a tight hold of those straws if you manage to grab them!

Dude, there's 39 other replies besides mine in here, you must have a hard'un for me or something. If we don't talk cameras in here, what do you propose we discuss exactly?

 

[Mr Badger]

Dude, there's 39 other replies besides mine in here, you must have a hard'un for me or something. If we don't talk cameras in here, what do you propose we discuss exactly?

I know it's Valentine's day but don't flatter yourself! Sorry to break it to you, but I've replied to several people's posts on this thread, not just yours!

Anyway, enough of the daft banter... I believe there's nothing wrong with putting things in context, and surely using a camera is one of the main considerations of buying a new one?

 

[Cagey75]

I know it's Valentine's day but don't flatter yourself! Sorry to break it to you, but I've replied to several people's posts on this thread, not just yours! I believe there's nothing wrong with putting things in context, and surely using a camera is one of the main considerations of buying a new one?

I'd love a card, you're a day late though

All i was saying was, a statement like "Who cares they are just cameras!" doesn't really fit into an area where maybe 80% of discussion is just that, look at the thread list - mostly camera body talk. Not my thread either way, I was just throwing tuppence in

 

[Mr Badger]

All i was saying was, a statement like "Who cares they are just cameras!" doesn't really fit into an area where maybe 80% of discussion is just that, look at the thread list - mostly camera body talk. Not my thread either way, I was just throwing tuppence in

OK, I can see the way you were thinking there, however, as you can probably tell, I (and some others) tend to go with the flow of 'conversation' rather than stick strictly to the title of the thread and/or sub-forum. Anyway, look on the bright side, we're half way down page 2 and no one has gone majorly off topic or mentioned art photography, so all is not yet lost!

Time will tell when/if mirrorless DSL cameras are going to totally replace DLSRs; ultimately I think market forces will decide, and that depends on lots of factors, not least of which is how much expendable money the consumer market has. Pop a major recession, war or other such factor into the equation and it's anyone's guess what might happen. Best laid schemes of mice and men. And in the meantime I'll keep on using and enjoying my DSLR and film cameras.

 

[johnf3f]

Tried most of the current top end Mirrorless cameras and they are still of little use for the majority of my photography. Great for landscapes and where things are not likely to move but they are severely limited by having no OVF - EVF viewfinders are still too slow especially responding moving from light to dark (or vice versa). I have had three operations on my "Camera Eye" and even I can see this - how others can't is beyond me! AF speed and tracking is still inadequate for my uses and there are no long native lenses.

They are the Bee's Knees for some but still pretty useless to me, though I have considered getting one for the odd time that I would appreciate their compact size but that is less than 10% or so of my photography. Not worth considering for quite a while yet in my case.

 

[simonbarker]

Conversely, when mirrorless is the same as DSLR, is there any point in switching your system? Surely, it would have to be markedly better to encourage people to part with a considerable sum of money to switch systems? And that's why I'd currently buy a 5D iv if I were going to upgrade my current camera body, and not a FF mirrorless system.

Having made the switch myself I'd generally advise anyone who's considering upgrading but doesn't have a specific reason to do so to just wait, that doesn't mean there aren't good reasons, high frame rate, silent shooting, electronic viewfinder, eye AF etc may be very important to certain people in certain situations. Being able to adapt lenses from different systems has been quite useful to me and it's something I hadn't really considered before.

I'm generally in agreement with your point but you have to remember people want to upgrade even if the changes are minor, pretend we're talking about DSLR's, you'd still find people upgrading even for minor improvements. I've said this before but I think new lens designs if nothing else will see people make the switch, might be a few years away for Canon and Nikon but it seems fairly inevitable.

 

[simonbarker]

Tried most of the current top end Mirrorless cameras and they are still of little use for the majority of my photography. Great for landscapes and where things are not likely to move but they are severely limited by having no OVF - EVF viewfinders are still too slow especially responding moving from light to dark (or vice versa). I have had three operations on my "Camera Eye" and even I can see this - how others can't is beyond me! AF speed and tracking is still inadequate for my uses and there are no long native lenses.

Not what I shoot so haven't really tried but in those conditions shouldn't you just disable the live view effect?

They are the Bee's Knees for some but still pretty useless to me, though I have considered getting one for the odd time that I would appreciate their compact size but that is less than 10% or so of my photography. Not worth considering for quite a while yet in my case.

I'm expecting Canon to buck this trend, a mirrorless system doesn't dictate a specific size body but manufacturer's have chosen smaller bodies as it's what they believe their customers wanted.

 

[JJ!]

- EVF
- Full AF through the LCD screen
- Silent Shutter
- Near enough entire frame AF coverage
- No microadjust shennanighans

Size/weight would be waaaay down the list now, and I'm 100% certain that it won't be too long until we start seeing oversized mirrorless bodies to handle the big teles. The additional room can be used for bigger batteries and better heat management for high res video. The a7III already manages a DSLR matching battery life in what is only a slightly larger grip than the a7II.

The largest zoom I use is the 70-200 2.8 and was worried about the handling at first, but it balances just fine! Of course it’s not really a massive lens, so can’t comment on anything bigger.

Battery life is no longer an issue, both A73 and A9 do a whole shoot for me on one battery.

I was a late comer to mirrorless and I was so anti-mirrorless and was 100% sure the D750 was better option. Just need to check back on my older posts lol. Yep

Now, I would not go back. The features that I questioned before are just too good to go back now.

The EVF is superb and a far cry from how they used to be. The A9 especially.

Pure silent shooting, frame coverage, as quick using the EVF as it is the screen.

Also the ability to go small and light with such lenses as the 35mm 2.8 and 50mm 1.8 is nice.

 

[frod]

Film SLR cameras are still being made to this day so probably no.

SLRs could outlive DSLRs

 

[jonneymendoza]

Battery Life?

Handling (especially with larger lenses)?

Affordability (more mature market means that that its cheaper to pick up used DSLRs compared to mirrorless)

Battery life is better on my Sony then my 5d4. Handing is great on the canikon and did you not see the price of the Canon rp?

 

[ukaskew]

SLRs could outlive DSLRs

I'm certain that will be the case, they aren't going to offer anything that mirrorless cameras aren't more capable of doing but aren't different enough to create a legacy like film. The only sticking point will be the OVF, but I think EVF advances will just hammer their way through that issue. They are the CD albums of the photography world, likely to be outlived by older tech (vinyl) and the modern way of listening to music (streaming).

 

[Erty]

The current batch of mirrorless will go by the wayside when large fully shutterless sensors come in. Sony will probably make the chips that can do this first.

I think the thing that I think will kill current dslrs (and current mirrorless) is changes in computer operating systems, image formats and connectors. There is no point taking pictures if you can't get them off the camera easily and half your friends can't see them. Jpegs will go the way of WordPerfect documents.

In the meantime the mirrorless cameras are smaller but some of the lenses look like they were made by Duplo. If someone carries one camera and several lenses there is no saving in size.

 

[woof woof]

Tried most of the current top end Mirrorless cameras and they are still of little use for the majority of my photography. Great for landscapes and where things are not likely to move but they are severely limited by having no OVF - EVF viewfinders are still too slow especially responding moving from light to dark (or vice versa). I have had three operations on my "Camera Eye" and even I can see this - how others can't is beyond me! AF speed and tracking is still inadequate for my uses and there are no long native lenses.

They are the Bee's Knees for some but still pretty useless to me, though I have considered getting one for the odd time that I would appreciate their compact size but that is less than 10% or so of my photography. Not worth considering for quite a while yet in my case.

Have you seen this...

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/0...a-big-leap-forward-for-autofocus/1#video_demo

 

[Craigus]

I don't think they're going anywhere for a good 10 years or so. It seems that digital has plateaued in the same way that film did at a certain point. These little advances are ultimately just that, little.

 

[twist]

Tried most of the current top end Mirrorless cameras and they are still of little use for the majority of my photography. Great for landscapes and where things are not likely to move but they are severely limited by having no OVF - EVF viewfinders are still too slow especially responding moving from light to dark (or vice versa). I have had three operations on my "Camera Eye" and even I can see this - how others can't is beyond me! AF speed and tracking is still inadequate for my uses and there are no long native lenses.

They are the Bee's Knees for some but still pretty useless to me, though I have considered getting one for the odd time that I would appreciate their compact size but that is less than 10% or so of my photography. Not worth considering for quite a while yet in my case.

Have you tried the gen 3 Sony's and A9?

 

[woof woof]

In the meantime the mirrorless cameras are smaller but some of the lenses look like they were made by Duplo. If someone carries one camera and several lenses there is no saving in size.

If you look at the latest high end Mirrorless and DSLR lenses they're often big and heavy. This has little to do with having a mirror or not and more to do with the latest lenses being excellent. People expect lenses to be sharp across the frame from pretty much wide open and to lack just about any optical nasties. Doing all that in a small and light package is difficult to impossible and this is why the recent crop of fast primes and high performing zooms tend to be big and heavy.

Mirrorless does however give you the option of using smaller lenses and saving on the weight and bulk. Just look at my A7 and 35mm f2.8. It's tiny compared to my old 5D and is more in line with the 35mm film SLR's I had.

 

[ancient_mariner]

The battery life* thing is curious and disappointing when it comes to mirrorless. I've been considering a general upgrade to my D610 because I'd like a movable rear screen and better focussing, and have been looking at the D750, D810, D850 and most recently the Sony A99 II, which is pretty much up there in D850 territory for <£2000 grey. CIPA battery life is around 400 shots in the A99II, which is an SLT - effectively a mirrorless camera in a DSLR shaped & sized body. My Sony A58 (also SLT) will get >1000 frames from a fresh battery, so it seems really poor to me to only manage 400ish, but that seems to be the expectation for mirrorless now.

*Last week in Fuerteventura I took the D610 & shot about 1400 frames on a single battery with 2 bars remaining on the indicator - I'm scrupulous about turning the camera off between shots and seldom chimp. I would like at least 1000 frames from a single battery please.

 

[Mr Perceptive]

If you look at the latest high end Mirrorless and DSLR lenses they're often big and heavy. This has little to do with having a mirror or not and more to do with the latest lenses being excellent. People expect lenses to be sharp across the frame from pretty much wide open and to lack just about any optical nasties. Doing all that in a small and light package is difficult to impossible and this is why the recent crop of fast primes and high performing zooms tend to be big and heavy.

Mirrorless does however give you the option of using smaller lenses and saving on the weight and bulk. Just look at my A7 and 35mm f2.8. It's tiny compared to my old 5D and is more in line with the 35mm film SLR's I had.

The arms race has moved from High MP count sensors, to ultra perfect, zero distortion lenses, it will move on from this to something else (eye-AF speed/tracking seems to be gaining momentum!!).

Fuji though have realised that some people want a small lens package while others want the best that money can buy, and now have 4 small lightweight, WR lenses in their line up 16/23/35/50, in time the other manufacturers (or 3rd party ones) will also cotton on to the fact that there is a market not being addressed and make lenses to suit as well.

 

[twist]

The battery life* thing is curious and disappointing when it comes to mirrorless. I've been considering a general upgrade to my D610 because I'd like a movable rear screen and better focussing, and have been looking at the D750, D810, D850 and most recently the Sony A99 II, which is pretty much up there in D850 territory for <£2000 grey. CIPA battery life is around 400 shots in the A99II, which is an SLT - effectively a mirrorless camera in a DSLR shaped & sized body. My Sony A58 (also SLT) will get >1000 frames from a fresh battery, so it seems really poor to me to only manage 400ish, but that seems to be the expectation for mirrorless now.

*Last week in Fuerteventura I took the D610 & shot about 1400 frames on a single battery with 2 bars remaining on the indicator - I'm scrupulous about turning the camera off between shots and seldom chimp. I would like at least 1000 frames from a single battery please.

No, the dslt is not a mirrorless and cipa ratings are often well under what batteries achieve in real life, most of the latest mirrorless cameras will get well over 1000 shots on a charge. I get about 1500 with the a7iii.

Why are you wanting to spend 2k on what is pretty much a dead system?

 

[woof woof]

The arms race has moved from High MP count sensors, to ultra perfect, zero distortion lenses, it will move on from this to something else (eye-AF speed/tracking seems to be gaining momentum!!).

Fuji though have realised that some people want a small lens package while others want the best that money can buy, and now have 4 small lightweight, WR lenses in their line up 16/23/35/50, in time the other manufacturers (or 3rd party ones) will also cotton on to the fact that there is a market not being addressed and make lenses to suit as well.

Someone said something to this effect recently, within the last few weeks or so. It may have been Sigma who said something to the effect that mirrorless users want smaller lenses not necessarily ever sharper lenses and this was something they were going to think about. Those wanting the exact quote may be able to find it with a bit of Googling.

I've been saying for years that it'd nice to have modern lenses of the same bulk and weight as my old Minolta Rokkor lenses which could mount direct without an adapter. I'd accept the optical compromises such as Vignetting at the widest apertures, some CA and less than state of the art performance away from the centre of the frame.

Thankfully we're now seeing some compact and relatively reasonably priced manual lenses from Voigtlander and others and there are some genuinely cheap Chinese lenses too. We've even seen some real bargain compact lenses from the mainstream guys, for example Sigma's really cheap primes for MFT and APS-C, and hopefully we'll see more and again hopefully we'll see more for FF mirrorless.

 

[ancient_mariner]

Why are you wanting to spend 2k on what is pretty much a dead system?

I prefer Sony kit to Nikon - better build quality, better menu system, better mount system, the same sensors, lenses just as good, near-D850 performance in a camera nearly 200g lighter. The SLT isn't mirrorless, but to the user it's very similar to mirrorless in an SLR shaped package. And wasn't the point of the thread that DSLRs are already a dead system?

I almost certainly won't buy an A99 II unless I can find a used one in good nick for the same as a D810, and even then the file sizes are much larger than I want, but otherwise it has a feature set that I really like and some aspects would make it much easier to take certain kinds of pictures.

 

[SFTPhotography]

Eventually quite probably but not for another decade

 

[SFTPhotography]

. I'd accept the optical compromises such as Vignetting at the widest apertures, some CA and less than state of the art performance away from the centre of the frame.

.

I don't. I like the latest lenses that barely fringe, and are almost uniform in sharpness centre to edge. Centre to edge sharpness matters.

 

[Faldrax]

The battery life* thing is curious and disappointing when it comes to mirrorless. I've been considering a general upgrade to my D610 because I'd like a movable rear screen and better focussing, and have been looking at the D750, D810, D850 and most recently the Sony A99 II, which is pretty much up there in D850 territory for <£2000 grey. CIPA battery life is around 400 shots in the A99II, which is an SLT - effectively a mirrorless camera in a DSLR shaped & sized body. My Sony A58 (also SLT) will get >1000 frames from a fresh battery, so it seems really poor to me to only manage 400ish, but that seems to be the expectation for mirrorless now.

*Last week in Fuerteventura I took the D610 & shot about 1400 frames on a single battery with 2 bars remaining on the indicator - I'm scrupulous about turning the camera off between shots and seldom chimp. I would like at least 1000 frames from a single battery please.

The A58 is rated as 690 shots, the A99ii is 490, so if you are getting ~1000 from your A58, expect to get ~ 700 from an A99ii
The reason for lower battery life for mirrorless vs DSLR is simple - the EVF uses power, while the OVF does not.
The reason for lower battery life A99ii vs A58 is the A99ii is doing a lot more processing than an A58 for the larger image files, improved AF, etc. - but using the same battery (one thing Sony certainly has got right, keeping consistent with batteries, all the A mount use the same battery, the E mount has just 2 different batteries).

 

[Riz_Guru]

Bollards!

Do you not watch the news on TV... how many press photographers do you see with a mirrorless camera? Do you not watch sport on TV.... how many sports photographers do you see with a mirrorless camera? Taken over DSLR in every way? Far from it yet.

Do you think that press photographers have the bigger DSLR user base when compared to consumers? I think not .......
Sales numbers matter very little to me, in my opinion the top end Sony mirrorless bodies are the leaders now on so many different fronts.
Time for Nikon & Canon to play catch up.

The Sony A9 is a game changer lol

 

[ancient_mariner]

The A58 is rated as 690 shots, the A99ii is 490, so if you are getting ~1000 from your A58, expect to get ~ 700 from an A99ii
The reason for lower battery life for mirrorless vs DSLR is simple - the EVF uses power, while the OVF does not.
The reason for lower battery life A99ii vs A58 is the A99ii is doing a lot more processing than an A58 for the larger image files, improved AF, etc. - but using the same battery (one thing Sony certainly has got right, keeping consistent with batteries, all the A mount use the same battery, the E mount has just 2 different batteries).

I understand the reason for the shorter battery life, but when designing a new camera range that it was obvious would require more power, it also seems obvious to me to design a larger battery to match. And that's a problem across the whole field, although at least it's not as bad as Sigma's Merrell cameras.

 

[Ste_S]

Just this week I've swapped back to an APS-C DSLR from M4/3 mirrorless.... and I'm loving the DSLR again.

Ergonomics are a whole lot better. I was forever accidentally knocking buttons whilst holding the camera on the small bodied mirrorless.
Also prefer an OVF to an EVF. I'm sure EVF's are a massive boon for people who shoot jpg and like to get it right in camera. If you're shooting RAW and editing later than I don't find EVFs that helpful, and in some instances are a hindrance.

 

[snerkler]

Have you used any of the newer mirrorless cameras?

Sounds like something someone would have said 3-5 years ago.

They did & some of them still are, even though it wasn't much of an issue 5 years ago.
My point was people have heard of the lag early models had & know that getting rid of it completely will be impossible. So they will often assume it's a significant issue, while in reality for most uses even the G1's EVF was perfectly adequate.

Do you know what a pico second is? (1/1000 000 000 000s) I'd be vary surprised if any mirrorless can manage less than a microseconds lag as considerable signal processing is required before it can display an image in the EVF. This sort of time delay is totally irrelevant but will still be enough to make some avoid a mirrorless.

I use a mirrorless most days, getting my first one 6 years ago & currently have 3 of them.
Mine aren't newer models, but for most things I shoot they work better than my DSLR. I often use adapted lenses & shoot IR both things an EVF is a huge advantage for. Not only that none of my most used lenses will actually be usable (other than for macro) on any DSLR they are designed for much shorter registration bodies.

For the times I find my DSLR better it could be partly down to the lenses available (none of my long lenses AF on my mirrorless bodies) partly down to IBIS (something all my DSLRs have had but my mirrorless cameras sadly don't) and possibly partly down to the weather sealing on my DSLR (again lacking on my mirrorless bodies, but not available for most of my DSLR lenses either). My DSLR is part of a system I've been using since the 1980s so it's not surprising my mirrorless systems haven't fully overtaken it yet.

I'm one of 'those' people who can still see a lag even with the best EVF's such as the A7RIII, even with refresh rate etc maxed out. At first I found it annoying, but having recently just tried out the Olympus EM1-II and trying some BIF it is something that I got used to pretty quickly and tbh don't think in the real world would affect my hit rate. I'm sure my technique will be the limiting factor rather than the lag.

As to the OP's initial question, I don't think DSLR will die out, at least not in my lifetime, but I do think that it will become less and less popular to the point you will only see the minority of people using them, much like film cameras and rangefinders.

 

[woof woof]

I don't. I like the latest lenses that barely fringe, and are almost uniform in sharpness centre to edge. Centre to edge sharpness matters.

It's nice to have the choice though isn't it?

You can have a huge heavy modern f1.4's (Sigma Art and Sony GM spring to mind) for when it really matters and you need across the frame performance into the extreme corners at 100% on screen but I think it's also nice to have a compact and light and much cheaper f1.8/f2 for when you want cheap, compact and unobtrusive kit and a nice whole image even if it's relatively poor in the very corners at 100%.

 

[ancient_mariner]

It's nice to have the choice though isn't it?

You can have a huge heavy modern f1.4's (Sigma Art and Sony GM spring to mind) for when it really matters and you need across the frame performance into the extreme corners at 100% on screen but I think it's also nice to have a compact and light and much cheaper f1.8/f2 for when you want cheap, compact and unobtrusive kit and a nice whole image even if it's relatively poor in the very corners at 100%.

I really like the rednering from some of my old manual lenses, but OTOH I also wish they were sharp edge to edge sometimes. C'est la vie.

 

[woof woof]

I really like the rednering from some of my old manual lenses, but OTOH I also wish they were sharp edge to edge sometimes. C'est la vie.

Some of my film era lenses are IMO respectable even into the corners but you have to be at f8-11 or so whereas these days the performance of some more modern lenses is really quite amazing from f2 to f4.

 

[addicknchips]

DSLR is alive and kicking for the sports togs. the brands will need to get the telephoto primes sorted. im not seeing any mirrorless gear being used at football. it'll be a good while before those togs feel a need to switch.

 

[woof woof]

DSLR is alive and kicking for the sports togs. the brands will need to get the telephoto primes sorted. im not seeing any mirrorless gear being used at football. it'll be a good while before those togs feel a need to switch.

For some or indeed many pro uses I'd imagine a DSLR will be more than adequate and the users will probably see no advantage at all in switching to mirrorless but for others there must be clear advantages. Silent shooting and the latest eye detect systems spring to mind. There must be some pro uses for which these things are a real step forward and even the much used phrase... game changer

 

[jonneymendoza]

For some or indeed many pro uses I'd imagine a DSLR will be more than adequate and the users will probably see no advantage at all in switching to mirrorless but for others there must be clear advantages. Silent shooting and the latest eye detect systems spring to mind. There must be some pro uses for which these things are a real step forward and even the much used phrase... game changer

Golf and tennis is where silent shooting will be a massive benefit

 

[Deleted member 49428]

Do you think that press photographers have the bigger DSLR user base when compared to consumers? I think not .......
Sales numbers matter very little to me, in my opinion the top end Sony mirrorless bodies are the leaders now on so many different fronts.
Time for Nikon & Canon to play catch up.

The Sony A9 is a game changer lol

Furthermore as long as what the photographer has got works and does what he/she needs why switch? maybe the A9 is actually better than the DSLR's now but how much? and does it matter? Any professional will only change tools if that change translates into value on the bottom line. If its just the same or the change provides more hassle than benefits there are no reason to do it.

 

[Deleted member 49428]

And then there is ofcource the price of gear. If Canikon offers some good discounts and sony dont why pay more for basicly the same?

 

[Faldrax]

Furthermore as long as what the photographer has got works and does what he/she needs why switch? maybe the A9 is actually better than the DSLR's now but how much? and does it matter? Any professional will only change tools if that change translates into value on the bottom line. If its just the same or the change provides more hassle than benefits there are no reason to do it.

This is why we will continue to see large numbers of pro photographers with older DSLR's for some time - unless the new camera provides something that is impossible on the older camera (and silent shooting is the obvious one here, where we could see venues begin to permit only 'silent' cameras for some events).

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

We have reached the tipping point stage when what the customer thinks between the two systems hardly matters.

The move to mirrorless is now the direction that the economics of manufacturers is taking everyone
The precision needed to manufacture and set up mechanical mirror boxes and focusing mechanisms has always been a thorn in the side of makers.
by comparison mirrorless cameras are like peas in a pod.
The recently announced Fuji XT30 has the same sensor, processor and the same image capability as the much higher priced XT3 in fact the Focusing is even more advanced in terms of face, eye, and follow focus detection over the entire screen.
The difference is in the size and quality of the body, waterproofing, card slots, sockets and controls. ( the advances in the focusing will be available to the XT3 as a firmware upgrade.) this ability to mix and match is a huge advantage to manufacturers, and may one day lead to swap out components.

Quality of the image no longer needs to be a choice defined by the model of the camera. that choice has now reverted to things like size robustness, sealing and additional specialist features.
As with film cameras, where the quality of the image was limited by the chosen film processing and lens, now it is limited only by the sensor and built in processor and lens choice., any number of cameras in a manufacturers price range can share these features. though it seems only Fuji has chosen to do so so far.

 

[simonbarker]

The battery life* thing is curious and disappointing when it comes to mirrorless. I've been considering a general upgrade to my D610 because I'd like a movable rear screen and better focussing, and have been looking at the D750, D810, D850 and most recently the Sony A99 II, which is pretty much up there in D850 territory for <£2000 grey. CIPA battery life is around 400 shots in the A99II, which is an SLT - effectively a mirrorless camera in a DSLR shaped & sized body. My Sony A58 (also SLT) will get >1000 frames from a fresh battery, so it seems really poor to me to only manage 400ish, but that seems to be the expectation for mirrorless now.

That's not true of modern mirrorless cameras, they can and do get more shots out of a single battery than DSLR because it's not wasting power on moving a mirror but won't last as long just left on because they're powering more things than a DSLR which isn't really doing much at all.

The CIPA rating is misleading for mirrorless, they cycle power then take a shot which can be almost instantaneous with a DSLR but that's not the case on current mirrorless cameras. I think a A73 pulls out around 6 hours of constant light usage from a single battery but that could be a couple of thousand shots, long story short it's how you use it which dictates if it's better or worse.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The battery life* thing is curious and disappointing when it comes to mirrorless. I've been considering a general upgrade to my D610 because I'd like a movable rear screen and better focussing, and have been looking at the D750, D810, D850 and most recently the Sony A99 II, which is pretty much up there in D850 territory for <£2000 grey. CIPA battery life is around 400 shots in the A99II, which is an SLT - effectively a mirrorless camera in a DSLR shaped & sized body. My Sony A58 (also SLT) will get >1000 frames from a fresh battery, so it seems really poor to me to only manage 400ish, but that seems to be the expectation for mirrorless now.

*Last week in Fuerteventura I took the D610 & shot about 1400 frames on a single battery with 2 bars remaining on the indicator - I'm scrupulous about turning the camera off between shots and seldom chimp. I would like at least 1000 frames from a single battery please.

Battery life is a total red herring, and non issue. Most of us rarely if ever need to change a battery when out.
I always carried spare batteries with a SLR, and with a DSLR, so the situation has not changed for using a Mirrorless.
In the days of Film I also had to carry at least a pack of five films, which needed changing regularly.
These things are a routine part of photography, and while an Everlasting battery would be nice, it is also a pipe dream.

When ever I finish using a camera for the day, I remove the battery and put in a spare, then immediately put the removed one on charge. That way I always have fully charged and rotated batteries.