You Might want to re-think that 7DII Purchase

kin2son wrote in post #16412985
That has already happened. The article is about what will happen in the next 5 years. I see entry-level dslr's on a daily basis while out and about, so it hasn't happened yet, although I think it might

Personally I think m43 is overpriced, but A7/A7R is priced extremely competitively. It's not. It's very expensive

A7R is basically a D800E but ~$1000 cheaper. It's the sensor from the D800E

It's ironic that ff is getting cheaper by the day, whereas m43 is going the exact opposite. This is true and quite baffling

Whilst true, consumer who buys consumer DSLR don't care about that as much as enthusiasts/pros. Touchscreen, wifi and such is actually preferred by consumer and a plus. They might, but might only be able to afford an entry level dslr and would take one over a MILC any day because of the way it feels in the hand

Historically, I have been the only one from my circle of friends who has been remotely interested in photography. However, I've recently been approached by two of them for buying advice.

Friend #1, really likes some of my photos I've printed and framed around the house and likes the subject separation in them. I suggested a D7000 and 50/1.8G, see how he likes them and move on from there. He bought them and I think is going to stick with photography. He said he didn't think the mirror-less alternatives I showed him looked like "real cameras" and preferred the way his D7000 felt.

Friend #2, has a recently adopted daughter and wants to start collecting photos/videos of her.
I suggested a D3200 with kit lens = Too big,
EOS-M with pancake = Too big,
Sony NEX5R + kit lens = Too big.
I showed him my wife's RX100 = Loved it, how much ?
£400-ish = WAY too expensive (he's quite wealthy...)
How much do you want to spend ? £100
Still got that Galaxy S4 ? Yes
Use that.

Most camera phone users probably do not think about DSLR's, let alone whether what they are using is inferior or not. In fact, most are probably impressed by how much better their new camera phone is compared with their older .05 megapixel variant, if not their 110-film camera.

As others have noted in this thread, the fact is that the image quality of camera phones are more than sufficiently sharp and colorfully saturated for most folks' needs. Add on the convenience and various modes of instance distribution, and you have a future in which DSLRs will increasingly struggle to compete.

That a camera can or cannot perform well on the proverbial "sideline" is only relevant to sports photographers; and by that, I mean serious amateurs or professionals. The photography world and its associated needs extend well beyond this this segment.

Also, when looking five years down the road, however sufficient camera phones are for most people now, they will be even better.

Given this, it's not unimaginable that 'crop' sensor choices will begin to diminish, leaving companies to concentrate on full frame offerings. If this will happen, I don't know. There are certainly strong proponents of crop sensors on this site, and I don't see their needs just suddenly vanishing because the 'future' dictates. If these proponents will be strong enough to form a sustainable market is another question, especially since companies are often more concerned about their investors than about their customers (in the sense that they will dump one set of customers to attain a larger but different set).

Personally, the 'feel' and ergonomics of a camera phone is, as others have expressed, unpleasant, but this is a subjective matter, and one that apparently hasn't deterred the average consumer.

I don't see the crop sensor going anywhere, there's too many applications (consumer and professional) that gain advantages from its use. Now, will DSLR's disappear? I think that they will, at least in the way that we currently use the word DSLR. I think that it's very likely that as battery life improves manufacturers will begin removing the prisms from their current DSLR bodies and converting them into mirrorless systems. These new designs will be a hybrid of current DSLR and current mirroless designs, picture the same ergonomics, feel, and build quality, but with a weight savings.

I don't think this process will be completed 100% within the next 5 years for DSLRs (crop and/or FF) but I do think we'll see significant progress. Now, whether it will be successful or not only time will tell.

kin2son wrote in post #16412123
I agree, and I think it will happen much less than 5 years.

The future is ff mirrorless (just look at A7/A7R) and mobile device. Nobody needs crop DSLR.

From a USA Today article, "Of the 1.8 million cameras shipped in the Americas (not just the USA) in April 2013, a measly 38,843 of them were mirrorless — 2% of the total."

I think the "coming mirrorless revolution" isn't coming at all, and it is just as likely that mirrorless is a dead product in 5 years. There are several technical advantages of the traditional DSLR (OVF, better battery life, much more suited for moving subjects). Mirrorless is a niche product for a few enthusiasts and there is *no* indication that it is gaining traction in the general marketplace.

jase1125 wrote in post #16412274
There will be a place for crop. Especially wildlife and sports. Even more so when considering budget implications. Crop plus 300 2.8 is much cheaper than full frame plus 400 2.8.

This. If FF DSLRs like the 6D get below $1500 retail they will begin to eat into the crop camera market - but some of us still need crop for the reach. And as noted above crop cameras tend to make sports/wildlife photography much more affordable - it's nice that my $800 135L on a 70D has the same reach as a $6000 200 2.0L on FF.

jrbdmb wrote in post #16413124
From a USA Today article, "Of the 1.8 million cameras shipped in the Americas (not just the USA) in April 2013, a measly 38,843 of them were mirrorless — 2% of the total."

http://business.financ​ialpost.com …ackberry/?__lsa​=d8f2-52a7

kin2son wrote in post #16413129
http://business.financ​ialpost.com …ackberry/?__lsa​=d8f2-52a7

Nikon - "They're not going to be around in five years"

http://investorplace.c​om …and-cameras/#.UnJoQhAav4E

"So it’s really bad news for camera makers that even that mirrorless segment is showing signs of slowing too. According to the Camera & Imaging Products Association, sales of mirrorless cameras are down 18.5% compared to last year."

Looking at Nikon's 5YR share prices, they look like they're settling after a three year surge and are back to where they were mid 2010 when they released the D7000 and, essentially, started taking the market from Canon. This level is still roughly double what it was prior to the D7000 release.

My question is when did the average consumer truly concern himself or herself with image quality? This is all anecdotal and speculative on my behalf, but growing up, most folks had either Polaroid or Instamatic cameras.

I wonder if the popularity of the SLR format didn't jump until digital models became increasingly affordable for whatever reason. I recall just a few years ago on POTN when some people were complaining about the number of 'novices' toting around DSLRS, as though they were not worthy. Perhaps the surge of DSLRS sales was from the onset largely based on an inflated bubble just waiting to burst.

sjones wrote in post #16413220
I wonder if the popularity of the SLR format didn't jump until digital models became increasingly affordable for whatever reason.

Perhaps the surge of DSLRS sales was from the onset largely based on an inflated bubble just waiting to burst.

I agree. And I firmly believe that the big camera companies were acutely aware of this also, and therefore will still be making dslr's for the foreseeable future in one way or another.

quickben wrote in post #16413200
Looking at Nikon's 5YR share prices, they look like they're settling after a three year surge and are back to where they were mid 2010 when they released the D7000 and, essentially, started taking the market from Canon. This level is still roughly double what it was prior to the D7000 release.

Exactly, all of the cited articles are comparing this year to last year. I think the consumer market surged into consumer grade DSLR's over the last several years without fully understanding how they worked. I believe that most of these consumers would have been happier with less expensive and simpler options. I think the sudden drop in DSLR sales reflects these consumers returning to more basic options as they come to this realization on their own. (Point and shoots or mobile devices such as phones and tablets.)

I often wonder what POTN members photograph by percentage. I shoot mostly landscapes, gardens including flowers, etc. and wildlife, mostly large wading birds. My gear reflects my interests.

At the moment, a crop camera is better suited for my all around needs. If I had unlimited funds, this story would change, I suspect, but at the moment, the longest focal length I have is 300mm which is barely adequate for wading birds. I"ll eventually get something in the 400mm range unless I go Sigma 150-500mm.

So for me, none of the other non-DSLR alternatives would work, at least at this time. Who knows what technology will bring over the next 5 years. I plan to shoot thousands of photographs in the meantime.

There'll still be a market for cheap entry level DSLR's. I don't think crop will be killed off until entry level FF prices drop sub $600. (yes, used FF prices might go that low, but the consumer is afraid of buying used gear)

jefzor wrote in post #16413252
There'll still be a market for cheap entry level DSLR's. I don't think crop will be killed off until entry level FF prices drop sub $600. (yes, used FF prices might go that low, but the consumer is afraid of buying used gear)

What you need to understand is most consumer careless about ff, nor know what ff is.

Entry level mirrorless has better feature, just as good IQ and ISO performance, and most importantly, smaller and lighter than entry level DSLR. Exactly what most consumer wants and prefers.

kin2son wrote in post #16413271
What you need to understand is most consumer careless about ff, nor know what ff is.

Entry level mirrorless has better feature, just as good IQ and ISO performance, and most importantly, smaller and lighter than entry level DSLR. Exactly what most consumer wants and prefers.

And yet the market for mirrorless started off small and is getting smaller, by all accounts....