Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS News & Rumors Camera Rumors and Predictions
Thread started 25 Dec 2014 (Thursday) 10:15
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

DSLR soon obsolete

 
DC ­ Fan
Cream of the Crop
DC Fan's Avatar
5,871 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Jan 03, 2015 10:21 |  #76

I approach this subject with a certain prejudice, since I've actually attended and photographed a Mad Ants game (back when Joey Meyer was the coach) and think the nickname is the best one in basketball.

There's another prejudice in this sort of discussion. Some forum members object to the use of digital cameras to capture available light sports action or the use of long lenses. They'd be happier if camera use was exclusively limited to wide to normal lenses and static subjects such as portraiture or landscape.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
mystik610's Avatar
Joined Jan 2012
Houston, TX
Post has been last edited over 2 years ago by mystik610. 5 edits done in total.
Jan 03, 2015 12:00 |  #77

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17363830 (external link)
Once I see smartphones being used at weddings and sporting events, then I will start to believe DSLRs are becoming obsolete. That is my personal litmus test.

I have yet to see a smartphone, or even a point and shoot (not sure about mirrorless), be able to take shots of a full speed layup or get into the thick of the action, or take shots in such low light, I need ISO 25600. They might be out there, but I haven't seen them. Once I start to see that kind of progress, I can start to rethink my gear. Otherwise, I really don't get into all the rumors of DSLRs becoming extinct. I have seen those same rumors for over a 1/2 decade now. The extinction of EFS glass has now exceeded an entire decade too, as a related topic.

QUOTED IMAGE
QUOTED IMAGE

The a6000 could have shot the first and second shot. Just about any mirrorless camera (including micro 4/3's) could have shot the second one...the a7s (which outperforms any DSLR Canon makes, in terms of low light performance) in particular, would have shot it with less noise.

Attend a wedding I'm shooting, and you'll see me using an a7r along with my 5DIII.

Mirrorless cameras use the same sensors as DSLR's (sony's sensors are actually better than Canon's), so there's no technical reason a mirrorless camera can't do what a DSLR can. The big hurdle to overcome has been AF performance, but as of the past year or so mirrorless cameras have bridged the gap, and are basically on par with or better than DSLR's. We're very close to the point where including a mirror in the design of a camera will offer little benefit, and will sooner than later be at a point where the inclusion of a mirror will actually be detrimental to the design, relative to what's possible with a mirrorless design (I'd argue that in many ways, we're already there).

That said, the obsolescence of DSLR does not necessarily spell the end of large cameras, or even lenses made for DSLR's. There will always be a need for physically larger bodies, if only for ergonomic purposes, but at some point, the mirror will disappear for even cameras like the 1D. EF glass will also likely outlive DSLR's. The backwards compatibility of mirrorless cameras via adapters has always been, and will always be an attractive quality.

In terms of ergonomics, those needs can basically be met the way they are now: grips, and body attachments. The option of a having a smaller set-up is better than being stuck with the larger body for most (i.e. look how many people are turned off with the 'built in' grip on the 1D).


focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀII - RX1ʀII - α7ʀIII
Zeiss Loxia 21 - Canon 24-70 2.8LII - Sony/Zeiss 35 f1.4 ZA - 85GM - Sigma 135 f1.8 ART - Sony 70-200GM

LOG IN TO REPLY
iowajim
Senior Member
iowajim's Avatar
Joined Mar 2011
North Central Iowa
Jan 03, 2015 19:16 |  #78

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #17350215external link
A lot will happen in 3-5 years for sure.

Yeah, its not really a question of "if" as much as "when". Image something the size of a pack of cards to attach to a lens. Forget live view-examine the image in real time on our google glasses.


Jim, in Iowa
80D / T2i / Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 / Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 / Canon 24-105 f4 / Tamron SP VC 70-200mm f2.8 / Sigma 150-600mm C

LOG IN TO REPLY
benji25
Senior Member
benji25's Avatar
Joined Jan 2010
Twin Cities
Jan 03, 2015 23:57 |  #79

Phones will never replace DSLR for prothusiast and pro's. They may have the auto focus, ISO performance, dynamic range and everything better than a dslr - but they will still be a phone and as such camera comes second. The form factor will just never be comfortable to hold for a whole day when shooting - pressing small side buttons and holding with just your fingertips.

Form factor is a factor. Some people like DSLRs.


Websiteexternal link
flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
Joined Dec 2008
Melbourne, Australia
Jan 04, 2015 02:42 |  #80

benji25 wrote in post #17364939external link
Phones will never replace DSLR for prothusiast and pro's. They may have the auto focus, ISO performance, dynamic range and everything better than a dslr - but they will still be a phone and as such camera comes second. The form factor will just never be comfortable to hold for a whole day when shooting - pressing small side buttons and holding with just your fingertips.

Form factor is a factor. Some people like DSLRs.

A camera with an SLR form factor doesn't have to be an SLR.

I'd welcome a full-sized mirrorless camera with the dedicated buttons and functions of an SLR, including a similar length and width to have space for the buttons and to hold it, but not depth or weight, since there's no mirror box. On-sensor phase detection means you no longer need the mirror, which means fewer moving parts, no more mirror slap, less weight (large size is fine, large weight is not) and faster potential frame rate.




LOG IN TO REPLY
CamaroSS
Senior Member
Joined Sep 2006
Tampa, FL
Jan 06, 2015 00:35 |  #81

Anyone that comments that the a6000 can do everything the 7D MkII can do is absolutely ignorant to how a true sports photographer uses a camera system. It is a very methodical process with precise targeting and the a6000 is very far from precision on how it locks on and tracks. I've used the Sony and learned the tricks to get it to track "Sports" and it's an absolute bust. I would not risk my paycheck on such a dodgy system just yet when I can pull out a camera that balances with a large lens and precisely focuses on what I want.

Just my $1.25.
- Kevin


- Kevin Kevin DiOssi Photography (external link)1DX Mark II/5D Mk IV/Mk III/SL2/M5
- Flashpoint XPLOR 600s
M-Mount: Pancake 22mm f/2| 15-45mm | EF-EOSM Adapter
Primes: 40mm f/2.8| 50mm STM | 50 Art | 85 1.4L | 85 Art | EF 100L Macro | 135L | Zooms: EF-S 10-18 | 16-35 f2.8L III | 24-105 f/4L II | 24-70mm f/2.8L II | 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM | 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM

LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
JeffreyG's Avatar
15,187 posts
Gallery: 34 photos
Joined Jan 2007
Detroit, MI
Jan 06, 2015 07:30 |  #82

Bob_A wrote in post #17362877external link
Is the AF speed for the A6000 really as fast as the 7D MKII and the a7rII AF is as fast as the 6D, particularly in low light?

No. I just had a chance to use a Sony A6000 and I would say the claims that the AF performance is now equal to SLRs is hyperbole.

It's fast and snappy for one shot mode in good light but not as good in lower light.

It's better overall for AF, but this is still not a sport camera and the death of the SLR is proclaimed prematurely.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII

LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
TeamSpeed's Avatar
32,424 posts
Gallery: 63 photos
Joined May 2002
Northern Indiana
Post has been last edited over 2 years ago by TeamSpeed. 3 edits done in total.
Jan 06, 2015 07:32 |  #83

mystik610 wrote in post #17364006external link
The a6000 could have shot the first and second shot. Just about any mirrorless camera (including micro 4/3's) could have shot the second one...the a7s (which outperforms any DSLR Canon makes, in terms of low light performance) in particular, would have shot it with less noise.

Attend a wedding I'm shooting, and you'll see me using an a7r along with my 5DIII.

Mirrorless cameras use the same sensors as DSLR's (sony's sensors are actually better than Canon's), so there's no technical reason a mirrorless camera can't do what a DSLR can. The big hurdle to overcome has been AF performance, but as of the past year or so mirrorless cameras have bridged the gap, and are basically on par with or better than DSLR's. We're very close to the point where including a mirror in the design of a camera will offer little benefit, and will sooner than later be at a point where the inclusion of a mirror will actually be detrimental to the design, relative to what's possible with a mirrorless design (I'd argue that in many ways, we're already there).

That said, the obsolescence of DSLR does not necessarily spell the end of large cameras, or even lenses made for DSLR's. There will always be a need for physically larger bodies, if only for ergonomic purposes, but at some point, the mirror will disappear for even cameras like the 1D. EF glass will also likely outlive DSLR's. The backwards compatibility of mirrorless cameras via adapters has always been, and will always be an attractive quality.

In terms of ergonomics, those needs can basically be met the way they are now: grips, and body attachments. The option of a having a smaller set-up is better than being stuck with the larger body for most (i.e. look how many people are turned off with the 'built in' grip on the 1D).

I have looked at high ISO Sony images in detail, they are not better. Sony's strength is at low ISO low light, not high ISO low light. Since you shoot both, at the next wedding take the same shots at ISO 25600 as I did with both, and provide the raw for others to compare. I haven't seen it yet to date, but perhaps all the other raws and comparisons made were flawed and yours will be accurate.

Also I have not seen anyone say how the Sony A6000 can track erratic movement with a 2.8 lens and shoot sports. I would like to see actual examples, not theory or opinion due to brand bias. ;) I personally don't care what I shoot with, I just want a tool that works 80-90% of the time for what I shoot, and where I shoot 500-1000 shots a game, not a few fan shots from the sidelines or stands.


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
mystik610's Avatar
Joined Jan 2012
Houston, TX
Post has been last edited over 2 years ago by mystik610. 3 edits done in total.
Jan 06, 2015 08:56 |  #84

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17368662 (external link)
I have looked at high ISO Sony images in detail, they are not better. Sony's strength is at low ISO low light, not high ISO low light. Since you shoot both, at the next wedding take the same shots at ISO 25600 as I did with both, and provide the raw for others to compare. I haven't seen it yet to date, but perhaps all the other raws and comparisons made were flawed and yours will be accurate.

The a7s, which I do not own, is the camera with a sensor that will outperform anything Canon makes, in terms of low-light performance. I'm shooting with an a7r, which doesn't perform as well in low-light as my 5DIII, but its close enough that I don't mind it.

I rarely shoot at ISO 25600, as the ambient light in those conditions are usually so unflattering and poor, that I'm using speedlights to light the scene. If you really want comparisons between the two in the range of 3200 and 6400, then I have no problem sharing those, but again, I'm shooting with an a7r, not an a7 or a7s.

Edit: found some comparison shots, in poor light situation (evening ceremony, no flash allowed) Not a direct comparison, as these are completely different focal lengths (which is the point of having two cameras), but I didn't shoot these with the intention of directly comparing the two

Also...not my best work...but this is usually the case of anything shot at 12800


a7r ISO 12800

IMAGE: https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7355/12571080655_2ccbf245eb_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/k9S5​iV] (external link)DSC00960 (external link) by Carlo Alcala (external link), on Flickr

5DIII ISO 12800

IMAGE: https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5509/12570785983_f9c0a428e1_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/k9Qy​Hn] (external link)DZ2A4805 (external link) by Carlo Alcala (external link), on Flickr

focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀII - RX1ʀII - α7ʀIII
Zeiss Loxia 21 - Canon 24-70 2.8LII - Sony/Zeiss 35 f1.4 ZA - 85GM - Sigma 135 f1.8 ART - Sony 70-200GM

LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
TeamSpeed's Avatar
32,424 posts
Gallery: 63 photos
Joined May 2002
Northern Indiana
Jan 06, 2015 12:00 as a reply to mystik610's post |  #85

Your white balance and exposure is off on the 5D3, thus why the difference in those two pics. Not really the best comparison of the two there, but I appreciate the effort. Again, two identically exposed shots between the two using the same scene and lighting is really the only way to compare. But it is good that there is a sensor that beats Canon at high ISO levels in low light then, but for a multi-purpose shooter, that is only part of the equation.


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
mystik610's Avatar
Joined Jan 2012
Houston, TX
Jan 06, 2015 13:03 |  #86

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17369031external link
Your white balance and exposure is off on the 5D3, thus why the difference in those two pics. Not really the best comparison of the two there, but I appreciate the effort. Again, two identically exposed shots between the two using the same scene and lighting is really the only way to compare. But it is good that there is a sensor that beats Canon at high ISO levels in low light then, but for a multi-purpose shooter, that is only part of the equation.

Yeah don't usually host the weddings I shoot online, so I'll have to dig and see if there are comparable shots when I get home. Probably don't have a direct comparison, as I usually have different focal lengths mounted to each camera, but may have something close.


focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀII - RX1ʀII - α7ʀIII
Zeiss Loxia 21 - Canon 24-70 2.8LII - Sony/Zeiss 35 f1.4 ZA - 85GM - Sigma 135 f1.8 ART - Sony 70-200GM

LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
TeamSpeed's Avatar
32,424 posts
Gallery: 63 photos
Joined May 2002
Northern Indiana
Post has been last edited over 2 years ago by TeamSpeed. 2 edits done in total.
Jan 06, 2015 13:29 as a reply to mystik610's post |  #87

Lenses don't really matter much, similar white balance and exposure (histograms) matter most with ISO comparisons, unless you were looking at detail retention at the same time.


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
Joined Dec 2008
Melbourne, Australia
Jan 06, 2015 20:24 |  #88

Sensor performance has no bearing on whether the SLR mechanism is obsolete - the same sensor can go into everything from point-and-shoots, to SLRs, to video cameras.

What the SLR system has offered is WYSIWYG image capture as well as fast phase-detection AF. The advent of digital sensors and LCD screens allowed every camera to be WYSIWYG, negating one of the SLR's advantages. Now, on-sensor phase detection obviates the need for a mirror at all and also negates microadjustment errors, since the AF sensor and the image capture sensor will then be in perfect alignment.

The thing is, no-one has actually put a full-size, full-featured AF system into a mirrorless body as yet. That's not to say it can't be done - on-sensor phase detection works the same way and is just as fast as an off-sensor system built in the same way. But mirrorless systems to date have all been about small size rather than performance. Hopefully the next generation, starting with the Sony A9, changes this focus - there's no reason a full-width-and-length (but thinner and lighter due to no mirror box) mirrorless camera with all the same buttons, features and battery power as an SLR, can't perform just as well or even better for capturing action. All they need to do is change the emphasis from small size to maximal performance.




LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
mystik610's Avatar
Joined Jan 2012
Houston, TX
Post has been edited over 2 years ago by mystik610.
Jan 06, 2015 23:23 |  #89

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17369133 (external link)
Lenses don't really matter much, similar white balance and exposure (histograms) matter most with ISO comparisons, unless you were looking at detail retention at the same time.

FOV matter a lot, as it dictates how much of the ambient scene is pulled into the background, and what/how much light is pulled into the exposure.

That said, I dug through my albums, and couldn't find any comparable shots at extremely high ISO's between the 5DIII and a7r. Again, I avoid extremely high ISO's with speed lights and fast aperture lenses, and I don't shoot weddings with two cameras to take comparable (redundant) shots, so I don't really have good comparisons.

Instead, here's a shot at ISO 12,800 that shows that the a7r is plenty capable for wedding photography

IMAGE: https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8637/15598879903_696790837a_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/pLqk​xe] (external link)DSC01746 (external link) by Carlo Alcala (external link), on Flickr


If you're really interested, I can post some test shots between the 5DIII and a7r. I'm not a fan of these though, and I can tell you anecdotally, that the 5DIII will have less noise than the a7r in really low light, but the difference is not significant enough to really matter.

The initial comment was in response to someone who said that mirrorless cameras won't mean a thing until they can be used for wedding photography, because they don't have the low-light capability of a DSLR. Utter non-sense of course, since they use the same sensors as DSLRs.

Shadowblade wrote in post #17369826 (external link)
Sensor performance has no bearing on whether the SLR mechanism is obsolete - the same sensor can go into everything from point-and-shoots, to SLRs, to video cameras.

What the SLR system has offered is WYSIWYG image capture as well as fast phase-detection AF. The advent of digital sensors and LCD screens allowed every camera to be WYSIWYG, negating one of the SLR's advantages. Now, on-sensor phase detection obviates the need for a mirror at all and also negates microadjustment errors, since the AF sensor and the image capture sensor will then be in perfect alignment.

The thing is, no-one has actually put a full-size, full-featured AF system into a mirrorless body as yet. That's not to say it can't be done - on-sensor phase detection works the same way and is just as fast as an off-sensor system built in the same way. But mirrorless systems to date have all been about small size rather than performance. Hopefully the next generation, starting with the Sony A9, changes this focus - there's no reason a full-width-and-length (but thinner and lighter due to no mirror box) mirrorless camera with all the same buttons, features and battery power as an SLR, can't perform just as well or even better for capturing action. All they need to do is change the emphasis from small size to maximal performance.

If the a9 hits the market as is currently being speculated (a7r sensor, a6000 AF, in body image stabilization), it would be a legitimate contender to the 5D III.


focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀII - RX1ʀII - α7ʀIII
Zeiss Loxia 21 - Canon 24-70 2.8LII - Sony/Zeiss 35 f1.4 ZA - 85GM - Sigma 135 f1.8 ART - Sony 70-200GM

LOG IN TO REPLY
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
Joined Dec 2008
Melbourne, Australia
Jan 07, 2015 22:32 |  #90

mystik610 wrote in post #17370066external link
The initial comment was in response to someone who said that mirrorless cameras won't mean a thing until they can be used for wedding photography, because they don't have the low-light capability of a DSLR. Utter non-sense of course, since they use the same sensors as DSLRs.

If the a9 hits the market as is currently being speculated (a7r sensor, a6000 AF, in body image stabilization), it would be a legitimate contender to the 5D III.

It's not the sensor - it's the AF, dedicated buttons and other 'usability' features.

It's hardly fair to compare the performance of a full-sized SLR with what's essentially a point-and-shoot camera with a huge sensor.

Switch the emphasis from 'small' to 'powerful', add in the functionality and AF systems of an SLR (albeit on-sensor rather than off-sensor phase detection) and you'd end up with a camera that works just as well as an SLR and is as easy to use, but still weighs less and is thinner and easier to hold. And the thinner camera and smaller flange distance is an asset - just add on various adapters (packaged together with the camera) and you can use any lens on it, with lens-specific profiles for AF easily uploaded to the camera via firmware.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

40,672 views & 12 likes for this thread
DSLR soon obsolete
FORUMS News & Rumors Camera Rumors and Predictions


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00174 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.05s
Latest registered member is xeunskate
882 guests, 430 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017