There's no doubt that the future of the photography industry is mirrorless, but that's certainly not going to be an overnight transition, and just when each manufacturer is going to stop manufacturing DSLRs isn't clear. It appears Canon will release at least one more generation of their professional DSLRs.
Canon Rumors is reporting that Canon will likely announce an update to the 1D X Mark II in late 2019 and that the 5D Mark IV will too get another update (though it's not clear when) before that series goes mirrorless. Canon's thinking seems to be that both lines are coming due for an upgrade (both having been released in 2016) and that their current mirrorless technology is not of a level that would warrant it replacing those DSLRs (particularly the 1D line). We were big fans of the 1D X Mark II in our review, and it's still a highly capable and refined camera that any mirrorless camera seeking to replace it would have to live up to and surpass. Seeing as the EOS R has been met with very mixed reviews, it's probably a wise decision to give that line time to mature before they replace their top DSLRs.
Head over to Canon Rumors for the full story.
Well... DSLR or not... when will they finally add body stabilisation? :(
I'd settle for a considerably wider dynamic range.
Well actually I don't miss DR that much as I miss the body stabilisation - probably because I tend to do more of a movement around my models, change perspective often and get so many missed shoots cause of that :(
If you believe the rumors, it will be in the next Canon EOS R already: https://www.canonrumors.com/5-axis-ibis-coming-to-next-canon-eos-r-serie...
I doubt the future of the photography industry is mirrorless. :-/
where do you see it going ?
I don't see it going anywhere. Some people will shoot with mirrorless and some, with DSLRs and still others with smartphones, etc, etc, etc
Nope. Given the current state of technology, the only ones who need advances are the manufacturers. Increasingly, the market demanding new tech isn't photographers with a need for it but, tech geeks who use photography as one of their outlets, who'll never be satisfied. When mirrorless no longer provides their "fix", they'll move on to something else, similar to Michael's comment below.
"... tech geeks who use photography as one of their outlets, who'll never be satisfied. When mirrorless no longer provides their "fix", they'll move on to something else, similar to Michael's comment below..."
Brilliant! I have thought the same thing. All you have to do is look at NFL sidelines and government press conferences---no mirror less bodies for people who have to get the shot and get it right. Mirror less seems to be a prosumer phenomenon.
"There's no doubt that the future of the photography industry is mirrorless".... where did you get this from? Quite a definitive statement, isn't it?
I think you'd have to be a pretty deep denial at this point to believe that DSLR development will continue on a large scale for much more than a few generations at best. At least in the digital world, SLR technology is going the way of the TLR and Rangefinder.
A few companies might hold onto it the way that Leica still makes rangefinders, but even if they could manage, it's going to become a niche market and the larger manufacturers will most certainly move away as mirrorless technology continues to develop and surpass the capabilities of DSLR's. It won't be long before the mirrorless optics for all of the major manufacturers surpass the optics available for DSLR, too.
Ultimately, the DSLR will die simply because they are complex electronic devices (as are their lenses) that can't be repaired as simply as mechanical film cameras. Once new bodies and lenses cease to be manufactured and the repair support ceases, their days are numbered.
Now whether that will happen in the next decade or whether it will take 50 years, who knows?
In that case, I can say, 'All cameras will cease to exist and, being connected telepathically, all imagery and writing will be unnecessary someday.' 😎
I know you say it jokingly, but I actually don't think that dedicated cameras will continue to exist by the end of my own lifetime... at least certainly not in the form that we have them today. We're already seeing the convergence of stills and video cameras, massive advances in AI, and advances in drone technology. We'll always have hobbyists who use old technology just like people still use film cameras or explore alternative processes today, but I highly doubt that the bulk of photography will be done in any way that's recognizable to us by the end of my own lifetime.
DSLR or MILC, I'm rather skeptical that the future of photography will lie in dedicated devices that we carry in our hands.
I think the end of photography, as a discipline, is just as likely as your scenario. Luckily, I'm old enough there's little chance of much, if any, change in MY lifetime! :-)
LOL! There will always be photography just as there will always be painting. It's just that the photography that we know and enjoy is not likely to be widespread or commercially viable. Personally, I think that's fine. Let technology make life easier for work where it helps and at the same time, those of us who want a different experience can continue to use the devices that we prefer.
While I don't think that DSLR's will continue to be produced for much longer, there are still enough of them already out there that the people who enjoy them today will still probably be able to find working ones for the foreseeable future even if fixing them once they break becomes impossible.
Fortunately, it's generally the mechanical parts of a DSLR that wear out much more often than the electronics so there's some degree of hope in that.
I can't tell the future but you would expect the same trend in any market with a new entry. Those who would have preferred the new item, had it been available all along, will buy into it before their normal replacement cycle while those preferring the historically available items will replace theirs at their normal pace. The additional context from studying history tends to make one more conservative in their prognostications. You could argue the example of film to digital but that was a much more dramatic shift. DSLRs to MILCs, while a technological leap, has relatively little impact on the act of photography and none on processing.
I don't think it's a flash in the pan. I just think it's another option. And I think for *serious* advanced amateurs and professionals, the ability to see the exposure in advance isn't that big a deal. I don't feel hampered in any way by using a DSLR. I've always thought the groups with the most to gain from MILCs are beginners and casual users but, increasingly (speaking of trends), they're happy with their phone cameras.
I do enjoy my DSLRs, as well as SLRs and Rangefinders. I'm stubbornly attached to my cameras but don't really care if most photographers move to mirrorless or not. I do think these kinds of advances are slowly sucking the soul out of photography but that's happening anyway. The quest for technical perfection (sharpness, exposure, etc.) is taking emphasis away from the art. You rarely see articles on art but gear reviews and comparisons are everywhere!
As usual, you (and most others) don't understand my points so it must be me. :-(
It appears dead squirrels aren't quite the unifier I'd hoped they would be. ;-)
I disagree that the shift from DSLR to Mirrorless is comparable to the shift from range finders to SLR in the '60s. In the '60s, the major shift was from the control restricted Brownies and other compact point and shoot pocket cameras to controllable RF and SLRs. During the '60s and '70s, the photography explosion led the middle class hobbyist to want more in their photography.
At the same time, there were explosions in tech and sales for near everything. Kitchens filled with appliances, living rooms filled with large screen TVs, yards filled with pools and toys, and cars became bigger, V8s with auto transmissions, and air-conditioning. Cameras were the same. As much as homes also had hand wisks instead of electric beaters, manufacturers still sold RF and P&S cameras on the bottom end and Large Format on the other end.
- someone who was there.
A lot of people predicted cars replacing horse and buggies but no one predicted the traffic jam. While many predicted refrigerators in every home, no one forecast the avacado green or sun gold yellow refrigerator. We'll know when we get there what the future holds.
I don't understand your logic. Please elaborate.
The 50 f/1.8S is heavier and larger than the 50 f/1.8G or the f/1.4G.
I guess I don't really pay any attention to where photographers are going (cameras can't go anywhere).
I'll forget in a … what were we discussing? ;-)
:-)
Now that nearly all cameras used in professional settings have a digital señor as opposed to analogue film, seeing what is being recorded by the sensor is superior to merely seeing through the lens. Most pros especially doing product photography shoot tethered which is essentially the same as shooting with an EVF except in how it is displayed. EVFs can potentially use low light enhancement to allow you to see in the dark when shooting in dark spaces. You can also zoom in through the EVF for critical focus. Mirrorless cameras can truly shoot silently which is ideal on film sets, during small church services or other live performances. The shortcomings are resolution of EVFs and performance in all conditions.
Big fail by Canon. Late, very late and really too late is the epitaph to be written. They may still sell more cameras in the world but many photographers have chosen more suitable alternatives. The Sony a9 shows what's possible in a mirrorless replacement to a 1DX Mk II and even the missing potential of the EOS R proves the 5DMk IV can be easily replaced with a mirrorless. Canon's lackluster approach to leading current trends will simply continue to drive more photographers elsewhere.
"There's no doubt that the future of the photography industry is mirrorless, but that's certainly not going to be an overnight transition" - For all of you who'd like to transition overnight, I'm happy to take your EF glass off your hands and give it a good home. ;)
Well, i just hope DSLR's don't go away anytime soon. Can't trust mirrorless cameras, seem too fragile.
In reality, they don't have to be any more fragile than a DSLR. I think Nikon's Z-series looks pretty robust.
DSLR is so dead and its funny to hear people deny it . Even Canon is saying they'll release "one more." I don't care for 4K so I am really happy with the video in the 80D. But i think it suffers in the photo department compared to the new mirrorless competition.
Good for you?
You base that from comparing an 80D to a new mirrorless camera? :-/
Yeah. That was the point of my comment. DSLR vs Mirrorless. Especially when comparing a comparable DSLR that came out around the same time (80D vs A6500 for example). So while there should be some competition the a6500 blows it out of the water: has IBIS, higher ISO, more focus points, more FPS etc. These camera came out in the same year so one would think they were competing. Like I said, it really isn't a competition. In fact I don't get your point.
Sorry. You didn't mention which model of ML so I assumed (I know, I know) you were talking about Canon's EOS R, mentioned in the article, which is FF and newer.
Before they completely shut down their DSLR production, could each of these manufacturers possibly use the equipment and modify their production lines to release one last film SLR that incorporates all of their DSLR technology (AF systems, GPS, EXIF data, etc.)? Just a request if anyone at those companies reads this stuff. :P
Nikon F7 with D5 Autofocusing and ability to use the 105mm f/1.4E....
It's simple... When there are still advantages to having a mirror, dslrs should exist. When there are more advantages to not having a mirror, a company should go mirrorless. Just because you get rid of the mirror doesn't mean the body needs to get smaller, have worse ergonomics, fewer features, and slower speeds. We have absolutely reached the point that there are more benefits to getting rid of the mirror. It's up to the manufacturer to put those features in the cameras but this debate that dslrs are the future is stupid. A dslr is just a mirror...and it's time to get rid of it
Speaking of stupid, the idea that any manufacturer of any technology should stop production of those items, some arbitrary group of people deem to have fewer advantages, is foolish. There have always been multiple products to serve the various needs of disparate customers.
I'm sure if anyone with a clue is running the company, they'll continue to produce whatever product sells and is profitable. If there was a consumer demand for a film camera, I'd bet they're start making those again.
You can get a nintendo classic for $60. Why would nintendo re-release a product from the 80's that's completely out of date? Because people are buying it!
Problem is that the infrastructure to manufacture those products cost money so not only would the market for the continued manufacturing of said products have to be large enough to justify the infrastructure, it would also have to be profitable enough to justify the continued allocation of those resources to producing that line of products instead of something else that might be more profitable.
I guess that's why nobody makes 800mm lenses and why Nikon isn't making a 58mm f/0.95 lens or still manufacturing a film SLR or ...
I'm pretty sure that Nikon is no longer actively manufacturing the F6. More likely than not, Fuji-style, they did one huge final batch years ago and at this point they're just selling off whatever stock is left over. I would genuinely be surprised if they were still making them... particularly given their financial state.
The 58mm lens is basically a peacock lens for their Z system and most likely will be absurdly expensive to make up for the ridiculous engineering costs combined with the low amounts that they'll likely sell since it's a manual focus lens. As for the 800mm lenses, have you seen how much those things cost?
How much do you think these companies would have to charge for each DSLR to justify their production in a decade? How many people do you think will be willing to pay that price? If they're still making DSLR's ten years from now, they'll likely be the cost of modern Leicas to justify the cost to the manufacturer in relation to the sales volume.
If I last another ten years, and need one, I'll let you know how much Nikon's DSLRs are. :-)
Honestly, I feel like you're better off just buying two more D850's right now and just keeping them in storage for ten years. LOL
Nikon is so much smaller than Canon that I feel like they're going to have a much more abrupt transition away from DSLR production than Canon.
I'm pretty sure Canon doesn't sell SLRs anymore. When the bulk of your business is photography, unlike Canon or Sony, you have to be dedicated to it.
Their last 10 years since the 5D2 have all been incremental tweaks. I'm not holding my breath.
Like the 5DSr??
My problem with that is they just packed a 7D2 pixel pitch into a full frame sensor. Nikon had already completely eliminated the low-pass filter whereas Canon just included it and then canceled it. Okay, it brought Canon in the super-high-res. game (and I own one) but it had none of the Wow factor the 5D2 had when it came out or the D850.
Personally I'm fine with both but mirrorless does have a few advantages that I don't see mentioned too often. Less mechanical parts to wear out or fail with no mirror box. The mechanical shutter may even be completely eliminated too if future technology allows for it. Even less mechanical parts to fail. No separate AF sensor needed either. Mirrorless should be cheaper to produce without previous mentioned parts too. On the other hand DSLRs are pretty reliable and technology obsoletes most cameras before those parts wear out anyway except for pros that really put the clicks to them.
This comment is not a brand verses brand or DSLR vs Mirrorless. Just an observation.
Whatever new DSLRs being introduced nw have been in the pipeline for a couple years. From the first "let's make a _____" to "order now". So they aren't going to pull the plug on the thing, maybe ramp down the number of units that pop out at the end of the assembly line but it's still going to sell.
DSLR, Mirrorless means nothing to me. I am satisfied with my Hyperdyne ASPH-315. The Proton multi mega pixel manipulator enchances a 36.3 file into a 75mp file with relative ease. The 8K video recording with Vidplex 5A file driver is enough for me. The 10G resonator 4 inslet sensor is remarkable technology. Just remarkable. It has a wide array of lenses fir the ZZ mount. I just purchased a F -2.15 variable apature with a zenon plus 4 image enhancer. Im happy with it.