Will Mirrorless "kill" DSLR?

http://www.slrlounge.c​om …meratalk-matthew-saville/

https://fstoppers.com …nonnikon-can-beat-it-8436

I found these two articles rather interesting in the ongoing debate of mirorless vs. DSLR.

After a lot of thought however, I'm left wondering what the real advantage of mirrorless is. Aside from size and weight, what is the advantage? Will EVF ever really be better than an OVF? One advantage might be focus peaking, and maybe exposure simulation, but that only assumes you need a view finder to do those things (we can do these in LV with something like ML installed)

At some point, I'm not convinced a camera smaller than say a Rebel is a huge advantage. The form factor of a DSLR is nice, and has a very organic feel to it. Though smaller, an A7 isn't leaps and bounds smaller/lighter.

What tech is there with mirrorless that is so much better? Sensors can be upgraded. Features can be added. So, no real advantage there. There isn't any groundbreaking tech with mirrorless that is vastly superior to DSLRs.

I'm not trying to say mirrorless isn't a good thing, or that it's not the future of APS-C/35mm format digital, but I think with photographers' current investments in Canon & Nikon, there is quite a few years before everyone dumps their DSLR gear to go mirrorless. Heck, if Sony could put an A7r in my hands for say $1000, I'd probably be all over it. Right now though, I'll play it out.

Thoughts?

Never.

Mirrorless is 10 years away from matching the speed of a 1DX and/or 7D2. yes it's a bold statement but I just made it so nanana.

However... this new G7x has me interested in a smaller zoom alternative. Or the Lumix DMC-LX100

The compact cameras are making a move in the right direction for a light alternative for me.

Not Gonna happen

Talley wrote in post #17171420
Never.

Mirrorless is 10 years away from matching the speed of a 1DX and/or 7D2. yes it's a bold statement but I just made it so nanana.

However... this new G7x has me interested in a smaller zoom alternative. Or the Lumix DMC-LX100

The compact cameras are making a move in the right direction for a light alternative for me.

Interesting. Those compact systems are failing from what I understand, could they be extinct in a few years? I think it's going to be difficult to dethrone APS-C and 35mm formats for serious photographers based on the difficulty of creating f/0.whatever lenses to match the larger formats. For someone looking to get serious into photography, it's a hard sell for the smaller formats.

Imo no way. I have an olympus omd m1 i thought would replace my canon gear. If your subject is moving dslr all the way. All the fancy tricks the camera can do is useless if you have to track anything.

10years off id say is correct. As a still camera i love it especially with my pl 42 f1.2 lens.

I sold my 1dx last year and regret it every day. Have a 7d2 on preorder so all my olympus gear is up forsale or trade soon.

For my kind of work i need fast accurate focus tracking and speed. After having the 1dx im betting big the 7d2 will fit all my current needs.

To clarify my original post, I just don't see a huge difference between mirrorless and DSLRs in APS-C/35mm format. The cameras will remain similarly sized, similarly featured, sharing the same types of incremental upgrades, etc. They are much more similar than they are different IMO. So why would someone dump everything to go Sony when invested in Canon or Nikon? Because it's the "latest and greatest tech" syndrome? I'm just not seeing it.

My personal bias is that Sony is like the Walmart of tech. They have their hand in a bazillion different tech areas. Canon and Nikon are optical companies first and foremost. I'd hate to send my camera off to the Sony repair place...

anyway, rant over.

Yes.

you can ask bird shooters
can they live without big white primes ?
you can ask sport shooters
Can they live wothout the same big primes and zoom lenses ?
you can ask macro shooters
Can they live without good power macro lenses ?
and so the other kinds of photography

hiketheplanet wrote in post #17171431
Interesting. Those compact systems are failing from what I understand, could they be extinct in a few years? I think it's going to be difficult to dethrone APS-C and 35mm formats for serious photographers based on the difficulty of creating f/0.whatever lenses to match the larger formats. For someone looking to get serious into photography, it's a hard sell for the smaller formats.

IMHO there is and will always be a need for a good quality small pocketable type camera.

The compact has been dying because of the cameras on phones. I do believe the phones have caught up to the quality that a regular el cheapo point and shoot can provide. The only benefit they have now is a flash and zoom lens.

So I see the industry turning for the compact segment. More raw capability, more dedicated dials, more manual features, 4k video etc.... and most importantly bigger sensors!

They are finally getting micro four third sensors stuff into a body thats smaller than a G1XII.

You give it another 5 years and they will have ASP-C sized sensors in a S100 sized body with a standard zoom lens with a lens that offers F2-2.8 and also provide seamless 4k video etc.

I'll be the first in line for an aspc S100 type camera that match the current crop sensor high iso performance. Will be my travel camera for sure.

hiketheplanet wrote in post #17171444
To clarify my original post, I just don't see a huge difference between mirrorless and DSLRs in APS-C/35mm format. The cameras will remain similarly sized, similarly featured, sharing the same types of incremental upgrades, etc. They are much more similar than they are different IMO. So why would someone dump everything to go Sony when invested in Canon or Nikon? Because it's the "latest and greatest tech" syndrome? I'm just not seeing it.

My personal bias is that Sony is like the Walmart of tech. They have their hand in a bazillion different tech areas. Canon and Nikon are optical companies first and foremost. I'd hate to send my camera off to the Sony repair place...

anyway, rant over.

I don't know. I see some specific advantages to mirrorless. Granted one is the size, but for my uses the shorter registry distance is nice. I can't afford a MF digital back, yet I like to use a technical camera in the studio. This leaves me adapting an SLR. The longer registry distance of the SLR means that I'm stuck using long lenses (think 150-200mm). The dramatically shorter registry distance would open up lens options for non macro work. Like I said, it's a very specific benefit. Outside of that the big temptation I see in mirrorless is less about the format itself and more about the A7R.

I like the fact that I can pretty much use any lens from any manufacturer on my a7R. Not sure if the dslr will ever die off though. If I shot stuff that required tracking focus I would own a canon body but right now the a7R gives me everything I need. If the 5D III had the a7r sensor I would probably own a 5D III. That said if sony expand their lens lineup with glass as good as the zeiss 55 I may end up with no canon lenses at all

I don't think so. They have their place and I own two different brands of mirrorless cameras. But, none of them that I've seen can compete with the detail a full frame dslr gives you. At least for now. But don't rule anything out in the future. There was a time folks were saying the same thing about digital - that it was ok for snapshots but couldn't compete with film cameras for detail. And we've seen how that has changed and what's happened to film.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #17171498
I don't think so. They have their place and I own two different brands of mirrorless cameras. But, none of them that I've seen can compete with the detail a full frame dslr gives you. At least for now. But don't rule anything out in the future. There was a time folks were saying the same thing about digital - that it was ok for snapshots but couldn't compete with film cameras for detail. And we've seen how that has changed and what's happened to film.

Well technically the A7 series are using the same FF sensors that are used in SLRs, and they have Zeiss glass (or you can use whatever lenses you want) so I'd say that technically there are mirrorless cameras that can match the level of detail in a FF SLR.

I'll never say that my Fuji X-T1 will 100% replace the 7D I sold, but I am not regretting selling off my gear and dropping a very quick $4k on my new kit.

The A7r certainly compete with the detail a full frame dslr gives you. The sensor is similar to the d800 and the d810 sensor