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
Guest
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
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

DSLR soon obsolete

 
smythie
I wasn't even trying
3,614 posts
Gallery: 30 photos
Likes: 575
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Sydney - Australia
     
Feb 28, 2015 04:00 |  #301

were they talking about live view or an actual viewfinder? an EVF as in a viewfinder, not live view, is no more or less a hindrance than an OVF in bright conditions. My wife's EM-5 (v1) and my A7R are no different to any of the DSLR's I've used


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Bob_A
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,438 posts
Gallery: 48 photos
Likes: 44
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Alberta, Canada
Post edited over 3 years ago by Bob_A. (2 edits in all)
     
Feb 28, 2015 12:53 as a reply to  @ smythie's post |  #302

They were talking about the actual viewfinder (the EFV). I believe the issue the author is referring to is that when you wear glasses light leaks into the viewfinder and washes it out much like looking at any digital display. You do not have this problem with an OFV. If you don't wear glasses there's less of a gap, and much less light leak, so you don't see the issue.

Makes total sense to me, and I'm certain it'll be resolved with some new technology some time in the future.


Bob
SmugMug (external link) | My Gear Ratings | My POTN Gallery

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
raptor3x
Senior Member
Avatar
727 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 77
Joined Aug 2011
Location: Rutland, VT
     
Mar 03, 2015 07:10 |  #303

Bob_A wrote in post #17453281 (external link)
In DPReviews "first impressions review" of the Oly E-M5 II and the reviewer, Dan Bracaglia, made the following comment:

"Bright conditions pose a challenge for anyone using an EVF, especially if you wear glasses. There were a couple of instances where I had to cup the entire front of the camera, above the lens, to my face, so as to try and block out the remaining light. This was effective, though only necessary at the one location. To be fair, we were shooting at noon, in direct sunlight. Non-glasses-wearers should have less of a struggle in these conditions."

I wear glasses and what the reviewer stated would drive me nuts. Sounds like another reason for "soon" being a few years away for me. I sure wish Nikon would release a mirrorless version of the D750 or D810 right away though ... so they'll have the kinks worked out by the time I'm ready to buy :)

Part of the problem is that pretty much all of the mirrorless manufacturers insist on using rock hard eyecups that don't do anything to seat themselves against you faces to block out light. The Fuji X-T1 is the best in this way as they use a Nikon style eyecup which works quite well. The Sony and Olympus eyecups are just terrible though.


Bodies: X-T1, E-M1, E-M1ii Lenses: µ.Z 7-14 2.8, µ.Z 12-40 2.8, µ.Z 25 1.2, X 18-55 2.8-4, µ.Z 40-150 2.8, µ.Z 45 1.2, µ.Z 60 2.8, µ.Z 75 1.8, Z 150 2.0, µ.Z 300 4.0

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LonelyBoy
Goldmember
1,241 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 460
Joined Oct 2014
     
Mar 16, 2015 10:36 |  #304

Not sure why I spent the time to read through this whole thread, when it can be summed up as:

"MILCs are better than DSLRs."

"Not really, no."

"Ok, but they could be."

"Well, they're not yet."

"But in the future they will be."

"But they're not now."

"But mirrorless is better!"

Over and over and over...

"Soon" is a weasel-word; ut a timeline on it. Otherwise it's like saying "the economy will go down soon" or "the economy will go up soon". For loose enough definitions of "soon", both are true, and meaningless.


Vice President of the No-Talent Gear Head club
SL1 | 24 STM | 18-135 IS STM | 55-250 IS STM
5D3 | 35/2 IS | 40 STM | Σ50A | 50 STM | 100L | 24-70L 2.8 II | 24-105L | 70-200/2.8L IS II | 70-300L | 100-400L II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scokar
Goldmember
Avatar
1,071 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 15
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Calgary, Canada
     
Mar 16, 2015 11:02 as a reply to  @ LonelyBoy's post |  #305

My Olympus OMD E-m1 is good enough for me, NOW




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
40,148 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2011
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 3 years ago by Wilt. (3 edits in all)
     
Mar 16, 2015 11:28 |  #306

LonelyBoy wrote in post #17477350 (external link)
Not sure why I spent the time to read through this whole thread, when it can be summed up as:

"MILCs are better than DSLRs."

"Not really, no."

"Ok, but they could be."

"Well, they're not yet."

"But in the future they will be."

"But they're not now."

"But mirrorless is better!"

Over and over and over...

"Soon" is a weasel-word; ut a timeline on it. Otherwise it's like saying "the economy will go down soon" or "the economy will go up soon". For loose enough definitions of "soon", both are true, and meaningless.

ALL cameras -- including MILCs -- and smartphones will be obsolete VERY SOON...the Apple watch is here!


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support http://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LonelyBoy
Goldmember
1,241 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 460
Joined Oct 2014
     
Mar 16, 2015 15:53 |  #307

Wilt wrote in post #17477432 (external link)
ALL cameras -- including MILCs -- and smartphones will be obsolete VERY SOON...the Apple watch is here!

Ha!


Vice President of the No-Talent Gear Head club
SL1 | 24 STM | 18-135 IS STM | 55-250 IS STM
5D3 | 35/2 IS | 40 STM | Σ50A | 50 STM | 100L | 24-70L 2.8 II | 24-105L | 70-200/2.8L IS II | 70-300L | 100-400L II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Jun 2008
     
Mar 20, 2015 05:20 |  #308

LonelyBoy wrote in post #17477350 (external link)
Not sure why I spent the time to read through this whole thread, when it can be summed up as:

"MILCs are better than DSLRs."

"Not really, no."

"Ok, but they could be."

"Well, they're not yet."

"But in the future they will be."

"But they're not now."

"But mirrorless is better!"

Over and over and over...

"Soon" is a weasel-word; ut a timeline on it. Otherwise it's like saying "the economy will go down soon" or "the economy will go up soon". For loose enough definitions of "soon", both are true, and meaningless.

;-)a;-)a




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dolina
Goldmember
Avatar
4,796 posts
Likes: 223
Joined Mar 2009
Location: 34109
     
Apr 19, 2015 05:09 |  #309

Actual shipments in 2014
Forecasted shipments for 2015

IMAGE: https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7610/16573061874_fbbcef8d4e_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/rfvg​U7  (external link)
CIPA2015Forecast (external link) by alabang (external link), on Flickr

Point & shoots is the most affected in drop in sales.

Interchangeable lenses and bodies the least affected.

People on photo forums will still buy dedicated still cameras.

People who dont will probably use what they have until it is too expensive to fix or just get a new smartphone.

Visit my Flickr (external link), Facebook (external link) & 500px (external link) and see my photos. :)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scottsoutter
Member
Avatar
202 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2013
Location: Portland, Oregon
     
Apr 19, 2015 13:11 |  #310

LonelyBoy wrote in post #17477350 (external link)
Not sure why I spent the time to read through this whole thread, when it can be summed up as:

"MILCs are better than DSLRs."

"Not really, no."

"Ok, but they could be."

"Well, they're not yet."

"But in the future they will be."

"But they're not now."

"But mirrorless is better!"

Over and over and over...

"Soon" is a weasel-word; ut a timeline on it. Otherwise it's like saying "the economy will go down soon" or "the economy will go up soon". For loose enough definitions of "soon", both are true, and meaningless.

I didn't, but I'm glad you did so as to put together this excellent summary.

By the time it gets to the 21st page there is very little new to say. So I'll (likely) repeat a few ideas others have undoubtedly said more eloquently:
1) disruption is good and it makes the whole ecosystem evolve
2) imagine that, we all choose different things
3) photography forums are 90% about the gear, if there are painters forums no doubt they would yell at each other about the relative merits of boar vs mink bristled brushes. Still, in five years though none of this will matter and the mark of success will be if you have 5 to 10 pictures you took this month which you still like to look at or share (or for those hard working pros you can still pay the rent). What ever it takes to make the picture you want... that's the right tool


5d ii, 17-40 f/4, 24-105 f/4, 35 f/2.0 ze distagon, 50 f/1.4 ze planar, 50 f/1.8, 70-200 f/4 is, 135 f/3.5 sonnar, 420ex, 430ex ii

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nqjudo
Goldmember
Avatar
2,832 posts
Likes: 800
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Canada
     
Apr 19, 2015 13:48 |  #311

I have absolutely no idea why this whole talk of obsolescence started. There are photographers out there still using view cameras and others producing images with wet plate collodion and daguerreotype processes. If you have a camera and it works well for you then great. It doesn't mean doom and obsolescence for every other technology. Does it matter how many units of x camera type is projected to be sold in the next year? I tried mirrorless and it didn't work for me but understand it is a better solution for some and that is all that really counts. Just having the tool you feel good with. I think the only thing from this thread that should become obsolete is superfluous, inflammatory thread titles.


No photographer is as good as the simplest camera. - Edward Steichen.

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

42,872 views & 12 likes for this thread
DSLR soon obsolete
FORUMS News & Rumors Camera Rumors and Predictions 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is simon milton
702 guests, 298 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.