Don't know why this makes me bristle

[dbutler]

DSLRs are a dying breed – 3rd Gen Cameras are the Future

Wasn't sure where to share this post but I'm sure PJ and/or Wombat will move it to where it needs to go

Part of me likes the idea but another part of me just feels ticked off for some reason that I can't quite put my finger on (though may have something to do with the fact that I have a few thousand invested in my equipment and the damn geeks are trying to ruin it by making it all null and void).

Is this the future? Of course, that's also what they said about film, large format, medium format, TLRs, etc. But those all still enjoy a section of the market.

Just was wondering on opinions.

Dee

[Photo-John]

This is a fine place to start a thread on this subject. Although it could also be posted on the Digital SLRs or EVIL & Micro Four Thirds Cameras forums. I already saw it today and although I think I understand how you feel, I am ok with it.

The first thing you need to do is put the article in the context of the author who wrote it. He's primarily and HDR travel photographer. He doesn't really need all the speed and performance of a digital SLR. And I'm sure he'd rather travel with something smaller and lighter. That's why I took the Olympus E-P3 with me to Europe on my honeymoon last summer. And it was great!

The truth is, most photographers will be giving up little or nothing if they choose a compact system camera over a digital SLR system. The image quality and overall performance is as good and sometimes even better than a digital SLR - especially with Sony's NEX cameras, which have excellent APS-C sensors. I can totally see digital SLRs becoming specialty cameras for pro sports photographers or commercial photographers who demand the image quality of a full frame sensor. Lately, I've only been using my EOS 7D for sports events where I want my best glass and I need reliable continuous auto focus. For everything else, I've been using compact system cameras.

[OldClicker]

I think that it is normal for those who have honed a technique to near perfection to resent the technology that makes it less necessary. - Terry

[Axle]

A very well written article. And I'm not going to lie, I use a D300, I like my D300 (I like my Leica IIIc and Rolleiflex 2.8F more...put I'm just weird).

But there is a certain advantage to my E-P1 (which has been seriously beat to ****), it's small, I can toss it in a pocket. When it finally get's replaced it'll probably be a Fuji X-100, or an E-P3 whatever I dicide and it will be the camera I bring when I go to Europe in a couple years along with the Leica, because when I'm out travelling and on the move, I want cameras that I know I can carry without needing a second pack.

I will still use my D300 for professional assignment, weddings, formal and informal portraits and of course capturing abandoned spaces.

[OldClicker]

A very well written article. And I'm not going to lie, I use a D300, I like my D300 (I like my Leica IIIc and Rolleiflex 2.8F more...put I'm just weird).

But there is a certain advantage to my E-P1 (which has been seriously beat to ****), it's small, I can toss it in a pocket. When it finally get's replaced it'll probably be a Fuji X-100, or an E-P3 whatever I dicide and it will be the camera I bring when I go to Europe in a couple years along with the Leica, because when I'm out travelling and on the move, I want cameras that I know I can carry without needing a second pack.

I will still use my D300 for professional assignment, weddings, formal and informal portraits and of course capturing abandoned spaces.

I think it is a mistake to think of the "3rd Gen" cameras only as small. - Terry

[armando_m]

I think the translucent mirror cameras from sony also fit into the next generation of cameras, although they are bigger, like small DSLR

[Photo-John]

I think the translucent mirror cameras from sony also fit into the next generation of cameras, although they are bigger, like small DSLR

I agree. I was going to mention that in my post but forgot. In general, I think he's talking about mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras. But the Sony SLT cameras, with their transparent mirrors and electronic viewfinders are certainly "3rd Gen" cameras, even if the body is mostly the same as a digital SLR.

[Anbesol]

I've been saying it for a while, ever since the mirrorless cameras were released. Fortunately for us DSLR lovers, I think its going to take a very long time before the shift finally happens. I think I may still end up with the Sony A77, though that will probably be my last DSLR>

*edit - also, this transition is one of the reasons I was so let down the by Nikon 1, it doesn't give itself room to grow into a much larger category. I suppose Nikon could create a different additional mount. Pentax is supposedly in development of a new mirrorless mount for full frame sensors. I bet once released its likely to be price competitive with DSLR's and full frame sensors. Right now the Leica M9 is the only option, and it is not price competitive.

[SmartWombat]

And then there's the 4th Gen
Lightfield imaging like the Lytro.

[Photo-John]

And then there's the 4th Gen
Lightfield imaging like the Lytro.

Now that's something that I am skeptical of. But I was also skeptical of Live View and now it's something I use every time I'm in the studio. So what do I know?

[Anbesol]

Personally I doubt the Lytro will pick up much, if any steam with professionals and serious photographers. Its best to make focus placement a part of the technique before the shutter release. What benefit does lytro have outside of a lazy inattention to focus placement? (seriously, I don't know that there is any, is there?)

[OldClicker]

Personally I doubt the Lytro will pick up much, if any steam with professionals and serious photographers. Its best to make focus placement a part of the technique before the shutter release. What benefit does lytro have outside of a lazy inattention to focus placement? (seriously, I don't know that there is any, is there?)

The same benefit as AF has outside of a lazy inattention to focus. Or post processing WB adjustment has out side of..., etc. - TF

[Sebastian]

damn geeks are trying to ruin it by making it all null and void)

Stop.

Breathe.

NOW. I want you to look at the images that your current setup produces. The day mirrorless cameras came out, did your images all of a sudden start looking like crap? Did your lenses suddenly turn into f/11s? Did all the branding on your gear suddenly change to Kiev?

No? Then who gives a rat's ass what new has come out?

I have thousands of dollars worth of Canon gear collecting dust while my NEX setup with a few decades-old Nikon MF lenses is letting me have some of the most fun I've ever had in my life behind a camera.

If you don't buy these things, then you will have LOST NOTHING.

If you do buy them and find out they work for you, you will have GAINED EVERYTHING.

To be more clear: worst case scenario is absolutely nothing changing for you.

Now, be calm and carry on.

[Sebastian]

You know what this new generation of cameras is all about? Lack of compromise. You can have performance on par with or close to SLRS in the size of a P&S. Why anyone would get upset over this is beyond me. I don't have to choose between my old olympus P&S and my DSLR anymore. I grab one camera for all situations. The weight of my gear bag has dropped by at least two thirds. When traveling I am no longer a target for theft, nor do I intimidate the locals, I blend in with the rest of the tourists. This new breed has made great photography infinitely more accessible due to the size/performance ratio alone, let alone all of the intangibles.

People used to be terrified when I pointed my 70-200 2.8 at them. I can understand, it's scary as hell to be on the receiving end of that thing. Now I'm just casually looking down at my NEX with the Nikon 100mm f/2.8 and I have the same (actually better, my DSLRs are showing their age) image quality with none of the associated BS.

These things are a win. All around.

[Anbesol]

Good point Terry. Still I have a hard time seeing lytro integrating with pro-gear any time in the near future.

Sebastion, excellent points, well put! Ditto, couldn't have said it better myself. I'm psyched to see the future developments in compact mirrorless cameras.

[OldClicker]

Good point Terry. Still I have a hard time seeing lytro integrating with pro-gear any time in the near future.

"near future" - I agree, and maybe never, but I would welcome it. - Terry

[Greg McCary]

Sebastian you are right I am having a blast with my new Sony outfit and my NEX 7 gear bag weighs half of what my Olympus bag weighs.

[Sebastian]

Greg,

That's true for any of the new compact systems. At least with Sony we get the option of using the entire line of SLR lenses as well. And with full-blown SLR AF to boot.

[Anbesol]

Seb - The M43 has a 4/3rd lens adapter as well, though it doesn't implement a PDAF mirror the way sony does with the LA-EA2, it still keeps AF.

[Sebastian]

Charlie,

You're right, I just don't really consider anything with a sensor smaller than APS-C to fall into my definition of SLR. Basically, in my narrow view any image circle smaller than what existed before DSLRs was grandfathered in. Especially since APS systems shared lenses with the full-frame counterparts.

If that makes any sense.

[Anbesol]

The NEX is also limited to an APS image circle, they may be able to make it expand out on aspect ratio, as with the M43, but not up to 35mm. So the difference between APS and M43 is small, and for people who shoot on the more telephoto range, as in ~ 35mm equivalence +, the difference is isolated to a subtle increase in resolution and not performance difference and little dof. The M43 still produces a good sized digital resolution. Nikon seems to think there is a future in things even smaller than 4/3.

[n8]

I've personally never put much attention towards these newer 4/3 and mirrorless cameras, but even with couple minutes of scanning over the nex-7, I'm sure wouldn't mind having one. Thinking of those as replacing dslr's is a bit of a leap for me though. I have a hard time with camera's that are touted as pocketable, but still have several inches of lens sticking out, which means I might as well have a dslr out. I can see the benefits of them being less intimidating and good for travel, and who knows...maybe the future wife will let me get one before we go to Greece to seal the deal. However, I'm the type that likes the feel of the heft of a big solid camera, and I doubt I'm the only one. I hope to see the new technology make it into similar bodies, even though it may not require that form.

[Franglais]

It doesn't bother me if an electronic viewfinder replaces the optical viewfinder in a "expert-pro-DSLR" type camera - as long as the result is better. There's an obvious advantage for video but even for stills the electronic viewfinder could add useful information.

Having said that - none of the current electronic viewfinders that I've seen come close to an optical viewfinder. This isn't going to happen soon.

I think the article is overdoing the "cameras get smaller" idea. The lens is the biggest thing and that's going to stay the same size. I just compared my D200+18-200 with a NEX-5+viewfinder+18-200. The NEX package is smaller but not by much. And that external viewfinder looks awfully exposed - the D200 is a solid (i.e. heavy) brick by comparison.

[Anbesol]

Having said that - none of the current electronic viewfinders that I've seen come close to an optical viewfinder. This isn't going to happen soon.

You haven't seen the A77's...

Sony's kit 18-55mm is not a good example of compact lens. Check out the Olympus 14-42mm, now THAT is compact. Making the shorter back-focus does allow manufacturers to make smaller, more efficient optics. Though again, you can't really tell based on Sony's 18-55.

[Franglais]

You haven't seen the A77's...

...

I'm afraid I have. And the NEX-7. I didn't like either. However I only did it once and I will give it another try when they become more widely available.

My benchmark for travelling is the APS-C Nikon 18-200 VR. Just one lens to do everything. I just saw the Olympus Pen with the 14-150 (which is the equivalent of the 18-200). It's smaller but it still makes quite a big package. And I can't find any mention of an image stabiliser either in the camera or in the lens. Tell me it's not true..