I promise, this is not another “DSLR is dead” article. In fact, as I was thinking about this post a few weeks back, I thought of ways not to make it sound like I am trying to bury any brand or camera system, as I am well-aware that discussing photography gear can sometimes bring all kinds of anger in people. Instead, what I want to do in this article, is talk about the state of the camera industry and where things are headed in the near and distant future, and what it means for DSLR owners.
Table of Contents
DSLR Development Has Stopped
The fact of the matter is, DSLR development has basically ceased across all camera brands (with Ricoh / Pentax being the only exception, as the company does not have any intentions or resources with pursuing mirrorless tech). Canon has already confirmed that it moved its lens development efforts to its RF mount, saying that it will not touch the EF mount “unless the market demands it”. Nikon recently said something very similar, pointing out that for the time being, the company will concentrate on mirrorless cameras. Simply put, this is a major shift of R&D resources towards mirrorless, and with the rise of the smartphone, as well as the economic effects of the global pandemic, a double whammy, the process is only getting accelerated. And it looks like things are going to stay this way, at least for a while, until the market stabilizes.
Just when we think that the camera market is about to recover, we get new reports of falling demand, significant losses among camera manufacturers, and reports of shifts in consumer behavior. Yes, the smartphone is continuing its devastating effect on the camera industry, and most companies, including Canon and Nikon, have not been able to really figure out the direction they should be taking. DSLR sales have taken a huge beating and basically plummeted to all-time lows, and the only part of the camera market that seems to be doing comparably better in terms of new sales is mirrorless. So it makes sense that the big two really have no choice but to embrace new tech, or they will be soon looking at the same fate as Olympus.
DSLR Has Already Hit the Innovation Wall
The thing is, DSLR development seems to have reached its maximum potential. What is there left to improve? Cameras like the Nikon D850 or the D6 are near-perfect DSLRs in almost every way, with blazing-fast autofocus systems, crazy continuous shooting speeds, huge buffers, and excellent image quality. You can’t really take phase-detection AF on DSLRs to a whole new level, because of physical and technological limitations. Canon has been adding its Dual Pixel AF (on-sensor PDAF) technology to its recent DSLRs to make them a bit more appealing, and Nikon did the same thing in its D780 DSLR for the same reason. However, it requires one to be in Live View mode (rendering the optical viewfinder completely useless), and it is not like this addition has somehow increased demand and interest in DSLR cameras.
CMOS sensor technology has not really advanced to new levels either, only incremental updates. While we have stacked BSI CMOS sensors now, such as the one from the new Sony A1, it is not like they take high ISO performance to vastly new levels. And even if there was new sensor tech, you can’t really push it as the only new feature – that would upset existing customers who want more features and innovation.
What else could you do? Add IBIS? While it sounds great, implementing IBIS properly on a DSLR is not easy. If you stabilize the sensor without stabilizing the mirror or the pentaprism in the same way, you are going to be looking at a jumpy viewfinder, and it will no longer represent reality. Imagine if your final photo has different framing compared to what you saw on the OVF – that would be frustrating. Pentax has implemented IBIS on its DSLRs, but if you ask any Pentax shooter, they will tell you that they wish the OVF was stabilized as well. Sadly, there is no practical solution to this. Anything you do will just increase the complexity and the size of the DSLR.
So aside from things like sensor resolution, shooting speed, more movie options, maybe some extra in-camera features, there isn’t much room left for real innovation with DSLR cameras.
Mirrorless is the Tech
Mirrorless technology, on the other hand, opens up all kinds of innovation potential. Just take a look at the recent mirrorless cameras like the Canon EOS R5/R6 and Sony A1. Crazy AF point coverage, advanced scene and subject recognition, face and eye detection that works not just on humans, but also on animals and birds. IBIS, pixel-shift, a boatload of advanced video features, better optics due to reduced flange distance…
I could go on and on, but you get the point. Mirrorless is where technology is today, and there is plenty of room for real innovation. With ever-evolving autofocus systems that utilize machine learning and AI, we will soon see automation that will take away the complexity of using an advanced camera. Point your camera at a subject, and your camera will be smart enough to know what you are trying to photograph. It will know where to focus, providing accurate and consistently good results.
With the sensor technology’s current limitations, we will soon be seeing image averaging capabilities (which is already being utilized on smartphones) making their way into mirrorless cameras, so that your ISO 6400 image looks like an ISO 100 image. Pixel-shift for higher resolution images will eventually take place in-camera, producing a single RAW file. We should be seeing all kinds of smart in-camera image processing as well. And I am just scratching the surface here.
The simple fact is that most future camera innovations will involve heavy use of software and artificial intelligence. Whichever camera manufacturer is going to be stronger in software will ultimately become the leader. You can easily draw parallels from the smartphone industry to the camera industry – that’s eventually where the big camera tech is going to be heading.
Who Cares? I Love My DSLR!
You have probably heard some photographers say something like “you can only pry my DSLR from my cold, dead hands”. It is true that many photographers out there have zero interest in mirrorless technology and prefer using a DSLR. Some continue to use DSLRs for financial reasons, trying to avoid a costly system upgrade, while others have their own reasons, such as preferring OVF over EFV, wanting to shoot with a larger / bulkier camera, etc.
Some photographers have a stable of classic lenses that they want to continue using, and they have no intentions to part with any of them. Whatever the reasons, there will always be those who prefer something different from the masses. This is the same reason why we still have plenty of film shooters today. Technology moves on, but the joy of using classics will always stay for those who want it.
DSLR Production Will Continue For Some Time
At the same time, there are also plenty of DSLR shooters who are looking forward to getting more tech in the future. And for those folks, it is tough to imagine that whatever they have now, might be it. They might not get any more upgrades, and at some point in the future, they might not even be able to buy a brand new DSLR the same way they have been able to in the past.
However, I seriously doubt this will happen anytime soon. In the very distant future, maybe, but we are potentially talking about decades here. And that’s if manufacturing DSLRs for Nikon, Canon, and Pentax is going to cost more than the sales they generate.
How do I know this? Well, considering how long we’ve had digital cameras by now, Canon finally decided to stop the production of its EOS-1v film camera only three years ago. And it took Nikon even longer to discontinue its F6 in October of 2020 – that camera was in production for a whopping 16 years!
I expect DSLR production to continue for at least a decade by both Canon and Nikon. The only issue is the cost of production and upkeep of a large selection of EF and F-mount lenses, as well as a wide array of DSLR cameras. Both companies will need to trim their production lines to a handful of lenses and cameras, and minimize their product support costs. This is going to be difficult for Nikon, as the company has been struggling financially, so it might need to cut its F-mount selection significantly.
Why Manufacturers are Moving to Mirrorless
For many DSLR shooters, the sudden shift from DSLR to mirrorless might be hugely disappointing. I have heard many complaints from current Nikon and Canon DSLR owners who are very unhappy about the situation, and they seem to be confused why mirrorless is so hyped, to the point that manufacturers are transitioning to it.
Well, aside from the technological potential of the mirrorless technology I talked about earlier, moving to mirrorless also makes financial sense. Just think about it. If Canon makes a brand new DSLR like 5D Mark V, what is its sales potential? Existing 5D owners who might consider upgrading? Very few of those would buy lenses with the camera, as they most likely already have a bunch of EF glass to shoot with.
Now if Canon makes a brand new mount, it is not just camera sales we are talking about. There is a huge potential in selling brand new lenses with them as well. So with the launch of a new system, you have a lot more opportunity to upsell lenses and accessories for that system. That’s just business. Both Nikon and Canon are doing the same thing, and we should not be upset about it, as long as the new products are not inferior to their predecessors (and they most certainly are not).
I have already written about the marvels of the new Nikon Z lens trinity. Canon has done the same with its line-up, offering remarkable RF mount lenses that were simply impossible to design in the past. We will be seeing more innovations like that, and I am sure of it.
So if you want the latest tech, you will need to change systems at some point, which will be costly. And camera manufacturers obviously want you to do that, as long as you stay with them. That’s why they are all racing to get the latest and greatest features in cameras while trying to push out as many mirrorless lenses as possible. Some are doing it better than others, so there will be shifts in leadership and market share – that’s a given.
Embrace Mirrorless or Die?
Nobody says that you should be embracing mirrorless. Yes, mirrorless technology will advance and that’s certainly the future. I don’t think anyone can doubt that now. However, if you are happy with your DSLR and don’t see the point of changing systems, why worry? Why waste your time reading online comments from brand shills and fanboys who are only there to defend their purchase decisions? That’s just choice-supportive bias at play, fueled by Internet anonymity.
Even if we never see another DSLR from Nikon and Canon, that’s perfectly fine. It has happened before, and I am sure it will happen again. If someone comes up with some new crazy technology that is far superior to all the mirrorless tech we have today (curved sensors, simplified optics, etc), we will be once again dealing with the transformation of the whole camera industry…
I have been using DSLRs for many years, and if I had the means to support multiple systems, I would have kept my most favorite DSLRs and all the lovely F-mount glass that I had used for so many years (it was especially tough to part with the Noct-NIKKOR 58mm f/1.2, but at least I know it is in very good hands). I am sure others have a similar sense of attachment and memories, at least to some of their gear.
It is not like my photography has vastly improved since I switched to mirrorless. I cannot say that I am enjoying photography a lot more either, and I am sure many others who switched would say the same. I have always been a geek, so technology excites me and fuels my passion. This is also my job, so it is in my best interest to keep up with the latest trends so that I can talk about them here at PL. Keep this in mind when you read my articles and reviews. I am not here to sell you anything. I don’t get paid by any brand to say what I say, and I will always enjoy my freedom. As I have said before, take everything you read on the Internet with a grain of salt, and that includes me.
Ending this post with one of my all-time favorite shots, captured with the Nikon D3S DSLR – an incredible camera for its day:
P.S. It has now been almost 10 years since I wrote my article on the “Future of Digital Cameras“. It was fun to go back and give it a read… will need to revisit this article after a few years and see where we are at!
It’s happening too late to be of any possible interest to me.
I have the gear I want.
In mirrorless, most of it simply doesn’t exist.
By the time it does, I’ll probably be dead.
The cost, if it did exist, of making the switch would be prohibitive. As against the cost of simply continuing to use what I already have, which is negligible.
Ands there’s a huge learning curve, with each and every new camera – at the moment, I’m still plowing through over 6,000 pages in four text books on the two DSLRs I shoot with.
For the next generation, terrific – go for it – but you’re in for a very long wait, before you can get all the lenses I have, in a form designed specifically for your choice of mirrorless camera.
I feel the same way. I’m also not going to invest in new technology just because it’s new. I was especially drawn to Nasim’s comment “It is not like my photography has vastly improved since I switched to mirrorless.” To me, that is the critical element. I love my D850… perfectly fine with it’s quality, but my photography skills are always improving regardless of what equipment I use.
100%agree.. love my D850 too.
Totally with you there Chip. If it is not broken, why fix it?
Also in agreement. Although it’s not bedtime reading, my D810 manual has yet to be fully dog eared. There’s simply a whole lot of learning to do – and I’m still satisfied with my results, thank you very much.
Thank God for KEH!
What is so funny is I have barely ever cracked the owners manuals of my D850, D750, D500 and D700. I have no desire to spend days reading an owners manual on items I will never use. I am as old school as you can get. All of my lenses are manual focus. There is an incident/flash meter, color meter and 1º spot meter in my bag all the time. I am in manual about 98% of the time and usually do not use the camera’s meter at all, opting instead to meter externally, still using Ansel Adam’s zone system and my spot meter. For me, my DSLR’s are little more than electronic, digital versions of my beloved F2A. If someone would make a 24MP back to fit on my F4E, I would probably ditch all of my DSLR’s.
Exactly and for me, nothing I own that’s DSLR or F-mount is even available for Z mount. I have two D5 bodies and a D500, the Nikon 500mm f/4E VR FL, 70-200mm f/2.8E VR FL, Tamron 35mm f/1.4E SP, Nikon 28mm f/1.4E and some flashes. Not only does Nikon not even come close to matching the AF or speed performance of the D5/D6, but they have no lenses to replace my F-mount glass. Sure they do have a 70-200mm, but honestly I’d rather have my F-mount FL version. As for my other lenses, well nothing exists or is even rumored in the Z-mount to replace those primes. Even if Nikon does someday release all of those primes, I’m not sure they will be any better. I’m fortunate, but I’m a professional photojournalist, so yes I have the best gear. The three prime lenses I mentioned that have and use, well all three are basically perfect optically. The 500FL, the Tamron 35mm f/1.4E and the Nikon 28mm f/1.4E can’t really be beat. Even if they can somehow due to the bigger mount and shorter flange, how much? I bet very little if any at all in the image quality department. Then if we compare my DSLR’s to Nikons mirrorless, well the Z system loses again, in pretty much every area. I’m not here to bash the Z cameras, but for what I do, they kind of suck. The AF tracking and high frame rates both are nowhere near being ready for action, sports or wildlife. Maybe one day in the future Nikon will have a camera that compare to the D5/D6, but they certainly don’t yet. So for me it’s not just that I prefer DSLR or OVF, it’s that for now it’s also superior to the mirrorless options.
Exactly, Jean-Pierre. Were I age 40, sure. But now, I’m happy just to be making images on a daily basis.
Perfectly happy with my Nikon D850 with its AF speed … until it breaks; won’t be looking at a ML.
Same here, both my D850&D500.
Same here, and add a D750 to that list.
I’m in the same boat. I have so much good glass for the F mount that I’ll use it as long as I can. I’ll probably make the change to ML SOME day but not TO day!
Ok, you are joining the mad dash to mirrorless. I have used both mirrorless and DSLR’s side by side for some time and now have a Z 6, D850 and D500. Are my DSLR’s dead? Not for me! I will not part with any of the three for as long as I can still raise my camera to my eye. I do see some benefits to mirrorless, but nowhere near what so many others seem to see. I also see things I don’t like, and further development won’t change them. Same with DSLR’s, but DSLR’s have lots of advantages too. One big factor proclaimed by so many is size and weight difference. Granted you save a little with a mirrorless body, but you still are using big lenses and the balance between them just isn’t the same. At 84, the weight of my D850 is an advantage to me for holding steady while shooting. I like the preview ability of mirorless, but so far that is the only advantage I find for me, other than lenses that seem superior in the new mount. Otherwise, I still find the DSLR’s have several advantages. But to many the highly refined and perfected DLSR is all of a sudden obsolete.
I came away from your article more impressed with the photography than with the prose. The photos were top notch. Now if everyone got that quality in their work, they could get fine result with a point and shoot. Mirrorless is not a super camera that is going to make everyone better. Basically, it is a different type of camera that has really appeared to boost sales of manufacturers. It is definitely not due to failure of the DSLR to perform. When pictures appear in print, you will not be able to tell whether they were shot with DSLR or mirrorless unless the caption tells you. So what makes the DSLR obsolete? If the reverse were true and the mirrorless cameras had been out for a long time and the DSLR was new technology, people would be flocking to it. Part of the reason for the rush is the hype in the press. People can get top notch pictures with DSLR, as well as mirrorless. Your article just proved that to me.
Thanks for hearing me out.
Vern
Actually the mirrorless cameras are not so new – the issue is that people are so stuck to their DSLR, they fail to comprehend that Nikon was actually an early one in mirrorless – ten years ago – it failed due to a number of practical issues. Other companies however cooperated to form a new platform. It is my opinion that that platform is superior on a few levels – that are helpful to me as a photographer. Just as important, the top tier camera bodies and lenses are lighter, less expensive, and take a fraction of the space – yet producing excellent results that many working pros are selling as large prints. I have the fortune to travel – hauling the big stuff is a challenge. The micro four thirds mirrorless platform IS substantially smaller, yet the lenses are possibly sharper and in my comparisons, I’m having a very hard time telling the difference, for example between images taken with the D5 with the 600mm f/4 gear and the mirrorless equivalent – yet the cost and size difference is so great. I promise, more bird and wildlife people would invest in better gear if they were aware of the micro four thirds options. I know for the dozens of conversations I have with people envious of the big lenses I use. Few can afford the Nikon big glass. A lot more can afford the cost in the micro four third world. Those are practical reasons well worth considering.
Timely subject Nasim. I have bought and sold or traded four D850’s over the last few years in favor of Nikon Z and Fuji systems. After more than a year missing the mechanics and pristine operation, albeit loud, of the 850 – I bought a new one a month ago and will never abuse the privilege of loving that camera again!!!
+1 I have used the Z7 and some lenses, but reaaly love the D850.
Having said that; lens development will stop for the F-mount and Mirrorless will become better… Still – the quality you have will stay for a long time since these Nikons are made to last.
You bring up a good point. After achieving a quiet shutter in the D810, why on earth did they put a noisy shutter in the D850? I’ve always wanted to know the answer to that question. To me, doing that was totally illogical, and a major annoyance.
Have you ever tried to photograph a solemn church service with the d850 or during the vows of a wedding? The shutter sound echoes off the back walls of the sanctuary. That said I’ll take it!
It’s a good thing, it help to keep everyone awake. People are still getting married, especially guys, why would any sane man do this to himself.
I think you meant, why would any sane woman do that to herself? ;-)
That said, lots of very happy long-term married couples out there (far more among my friends than divorces) and I’m sure that none of them wanted that sound in their church during their wedding. I managed to figure out how to turn it off on my DSLR for my sister’s wedding–once I realized how loud it was.
My mirrorless gear is completely silent – and the wildlife I capture images of may never know I’m there. Can’t say that when I use my D5, nor D500.
Marriage has no benefits for the man, except a lifelong servitude, and all the benefits for the woman. I suggest you go read the book by Esther Vilar “The Manipulated Man”.
Here you go, someone reading it for you, if you are not into reading.
The manipulated man by Esther Vilar.
youtu.be/v2687RHEhGI
If you’re attending a wedding you should expect to see a photographer and hear cameras taking pictures. Unless the women are afraid the guy may bolt if startled by the sound.
Have you ever used the D850 in the silent mode?
Agree… I use a mirrorless for quiet situations… Z7s are getting cheaper second hand recommend get one for backup… I won’t change to exclusive mirrorless because they feel wrong. But they have use cases.
From my personal experience, I gravitated away from cell phone camera a couple years ago with the purchase of a Nikon D5600 and have purchased several lenses for it since and greatly enjoy nature photography.
Financially, that’s where I need to be and can’t afford full frame sensor gear and lenses. My concern is that as manufacturers continue to push technology, will they drop so-called “entry-level” product lines and lenses? For many of us, that’s our only option financially, otherwise more and more people will continue to whip out their cell phone to snap pictures.
I do very minimal post processing in Lightroom, some may call my images dull or bland, but it’s what I see and the camera sees, it’s what nature presented to me and the camera in it’s natural state. So long as we continue to be more and more accustomed to always laying our eyes on highly processed and edited images I think the hardware will become more and more of a moot point, and it will be the software and editing that continue to rule and either make or break an image in the mind of the majority of the audience who are accustomed to always seeing those highly processed and edited images (unfortunate in my opinion).
It’s not camera makers that are dropping the entry level interchangeable lens cameras – it’s consumers that aren’t buying them, starting with the better consumer point-and-shoot cameras. Nikon sales of cameras and lenses are dropping by the many thousands quarter by quarter. They recently let go of 2000 employees and are moving more of their production from Japan to Taiwan. Consumers are the ones making these calls, not the companies.
Well said. Better, better lol. It’s like chasing a rainbow. The gear you have now is perfectly fine.
I think I read that sadly, Nikon are discontinuing the D3500 and D5600 lines. I have a D850 and a D3500 – two opposite ends of the spectrum. I often just take out the D3500 as it is very simple to use and is light and small and easy to carry. What is more, it produces excellent photos.
I think one area where mirrorless cameras can appeal to diehard DSLR users is to make some of the mirrorless bodies larger and bulkier to accommodate those with big hands and fingers. I don’t mind the current size of the Nikon Z bodies, but smaller does not necessarily mean better especially when you take into account how large and bulky some of the S-line lenses are for the Z mount. A Nikon Z8 or Z9 camera with an exterior body the size of a D850 would be an excellent option for many professional photographers.
I love My Canon DSLR’s and L Series Lenses. I have too much invested to throw them away. I do not see any reason, at this time, to spend globs of money on Mirrorless camera’s and use adaptors for my lenses.
It just doesn’t make sense.
I also do not need, nor want, 50+ MP Sensors. The file sizes get huge, noise creeps in etc.
Mirrorless, from my perspective, is just a marketing scheme to boost sales by introducing something new.
Mirrorless is not new – Nikon jumped into the game nearly ten years ago. Ten years – hardly new.
What does it say about mirrorless that in all that time they are just catching up to the DSLR now?
Until you have used mirrorless in the micro four thirds world, you can’t make that observation. I would suggest they are well ahead of mirrorless in Nikon land for sure – on many levels. I am not saying you get BETTER pictures – that will always be on the photographer, but the cameras offer more options and/or some of them work a lot better – the latest mirrorless options from Nikon are like the Ford and GM EV options compared to those of Tesla – Nikon’s tech is easily a generation or two behind. Not bashing on Nikon – I own a ton of their DSLR gear and have learned so much using it, but my world is opening up as I get into the mirrorless options I’m finding elsewhere. I mostly liked the Z7, but it seems outdated compared to what I am finding elsewhere.
Exactly
Great article, Nasim.
It makes sense to go into the mirrorless world for an uninitiated one. I am yet to come across a photog professional who shifted over to the mirrorless just because they make her/his pictures look better. They have moved over for other reasons.
For the people like you and me who have been with DSLRs and SLRs before, why would you move over this ML world after having spent years in learning the art and science it and investing a large sum of money in building a kit. I also represent the photogs who probably never pressed the video button on their cameras because we are passionate still photographers.
For the new generation starting with mirrorless makes sense, definitely not for people like me who are in the middle ages of their lives.
I have no reason to move away from my D7100, D750 and D500 with lenses covering 15mm to 700mm. It took me almost a decade to build this inventory. I am still learning photography but it took me only a couple of years to talk to my cameras without looking at them. Now the point I am making is, for passionate photographers (who are also tight on the budget, they are the majority) this ML technology is going to add very little value to the outcome.
Bottom line .. like you said my DSLR can only be snatched away from my cold dead hands. :)
Ok, I’ll bite – I have invested in DSLR, too – including going through D4, D4s, and D5 (which I still own). I shoot wildlife, primarily – so at the long end with a lot of big glass, big tripods and have gone through the D8xx series, selling the D850 to fund the D7. The Z lenses are sharper, IMHO – that matters to me.
I think there are two key points that are being missed:
1) We are now using computers that can take pictures. So many settings are, in essence AI and computer based options. About the only carryover is aperture, which is still a function of blades in a lens. ISO is fully electronic and influenced by the sensor.
2) Quality of image has been great for many years, regardless of brand. Sure, many of us can take poor images, but it’s not on the cameras – it’s on the one taking the image. Few of us need more pixels or more sensitive pixels for the images we want to take.
Beyond my investment in Nikon mirrorless (and I was an early adopter and own a ton of Nikon 1 gear), I started looking seriously at the micro four-thirds options. The platform name is terrible. That said, I have been amazed at the capability I am finding. Yesterday I shot the FOV of 1200mm handheld and the image was of a Sharp-shinned Hawk. The IBIS and lens IS work together. That said – I’m a tripod guy and shot the same critter later – on a tripod – better image from lower ISO. The big attraction for me is simple – IF it can give me sharp images – comparable to what I get with D5 on the 600mm f/4 – then I can travel the US and world with gear that fits in a smaller backpack. And, the cost of the gear is a fraction of DSLR or full frame mirrorless – yet so far the image results are very comparable. For me, I’m evaluating IQ – once I get good weather – setting up cameras and tripods next to each other and shooting the same subject, same light and pixel peeping. And Olympus does simple things Nikon refuses to – lens support with Arca-Swiss already and well designed lens feet, not the stupid ones Nikon provides, which cost me $90-250 per lens to get me the support correct. And, Nikon lens hoods are monsters – a real pain to travel with. In Olympus land they fit entirely on the lens. The AF tracking and camera/lens stabilization is second to none I’ve ever used. I was shooting handheld at 200-300mm at 1/5 – 1/10 in ambient light and out of 50 images, only two or three were not tack sharp.
Oh, and while the sensor is 20mp, like the D5 – it can take either a 50mp image handheld, or 80mp from a tripod. And that 80mp is a RAW file with absolutely more detail – and clean.
The Olympus computer that takes pictures is superior to anything I’ve used from Nikon, from my first D300 to the D5, or Z7. Am I hating on Nikon. No way – I have learned so much using their computers that take pictures and they do have amazing lenses, most of the time. But, so far, the f/2.8 and f/4 glass I have from Olympus is holding it’s own. I’ll know more once I have the chance to really do my side by side comparisons.
The world is changing. Ultimately, we have more options than ever before. The main thing is – HOW we capture our images should not be so important as that we are capturing great story-telling images. Use what works for you and respect that others might prefer differently.
(NOTE: I still own the D500 – wonderful with the 200-500 f/5.6 and the D5 with the 600mm f/4, and 300mm f/2.8, TCs, 70-200mm f/2.8, etc. Will only part with these IF the Olympus camera and glass I’m testing serves MY interests and IQ standard.)
I know what you mean, I still have 4 Nikon bodies but now when I want to grab a camera and catch some interesting scene its my Olympus. I don’t know what the future of Olympus looks like but for now I have lighter gear and very pleasing image quality.
Olympus M43 has a place in my kit…fabulous stuff you can jump on a light plane with easily and still be able to reach 1200mm. I hope low light performance will improve. I will never get rid of my huge Nikkor collection or D850/810 though…once set up the results are fab. Get a cheap second hand Z7 for the times want a silent shutter….re-use is good. Don’t fall for the Z lenses are sharper rubbish… that’s an illusion created by the IS system and marketing hype. Z lenses are cheaper to make and more expensive to buy.
I would see different than you on this. The Z lenses are sharper. I usually shoot from a tripod, so IBIS is less important to me. And, unless you have shot 200 f/2, 300 f/2.8, or the 400 f/28 you really don’t know sharp. The last 70-200 f/2.8 was very close to these (two of which I own and have used extensively). The Z 70-200 is, in my experience, as sharp as the primes – and that is saying something because the last 70-200 f/2.8 – and even the f/4 version were very very good.
I very much admire the work of people like Steve O’Nion, who mostly uses film and medium format cameras of some vintage. If I could emulate the standard of his work I would be very happy. I have a feeling certain people using Box Brownies could produce fantastic images. As a hobby we are very much equipment obsessed.
I agree with what Nasim is predicting, and would not be surprised to see some financial failure in either Nikon or Canon, whether or not they can catch Sony/Fuji in the mirror-less chase. Smartphones have replaced point and shoot cameras for the general public and their minimal technical requirements. My very basic Google Pixel 4a takes surprisingly good photos, as its phenomenal software rectifies blown out skies, shaded areas and even makes a best choice from a series of shots. It constantly surprises me, but has very obvious limitations with it’s single 12 MP sensor and tiny lens.
I would ask this question of the people using this site. How many of you have reached the point where your equipment has started limiting your art? I hear the wildlife folk supporting ML because of weight and rapid exposure rates, and I think that is valid to some extent. The weight is also a factor for some landscape people but that is a fitness factor too. I am in my mid 70’s and happily lug around a D810, several lenses ( including a very heavy Zeiss), an old Gitzo tripod with a heavy Lindoff head, all along with the various paraphernalia we photographers seem to need, plus food and drink for myself. Yesterday I climbed a 1400ft forested knoll in 16deg F temps., through virgin 8″ of snow with this gear and wasn’t deterred by the backpack. I doubt a new ML camera would have made the climb any easier.
I picked up my very lightly used D810 for $1000, from someone going mirror-less, and it will probably see me out. It is far more complex than I had imagined, the learning curve is going to be steep and long, but I hope enjoyable ( currently frustrating as my fingers are D7100 oriented). The hardest thing about photography to my mind is never the equipment, it is seeing the possibilities in a scene and knowing what looks good to the eye doesn’t always make a good photo, mirror-less or not. Remember the art, forget angsting the equipment.
If I was starting anew I would go mirror-less, probably Fuji, but I see little photographic value in swopping systems, when so heavily invested in a perfectly adequate (for me) system. I doubt seriously that my D810 will ever limit my capabilities.
Good article Nasim. I think you have touched on all valid points, and as always, you have not bashed DSLR’s, or specific brands like some websites do.
I am a Nikon user, and have not switched or bought into MILC’s at this time. I am certainly considering it though, but I also will not get rid of my DSLR’s at this point. I am 70, so for me, the cost of switching entirely to mirrorless is a cost vs. how much benefit/usage will I get from a new system if I switch at this point. I agree that for new users buying into their first camera system, especially someone younger than myself, mirrorless is the way to go, as it definitely is the future tech in cameras. In the same sense as those who predicted film was dead when digital cameras first appeared, DSLR’s are not dead yet, They will still be around for awhile.
I am not a “Pro” making my living from photography, just an advanced amateur shooting for my personal enjoyment. I certainly do not have the funds to buy one or two new mirrorless cameras now, and also replace my F mount lenses with new Z mount ones. If and when I do decide to get a Nikon Z camera, (I am thinking the Z6ii at this time), I will more than likely use it with the FTZ adapter with my current F mount glass. I could see purchasing maybe one S lens at this time, but probably not more than that due to my age and financial limitations.
These are just my thoughts on switching to/or trying mirrorless based on my situation. I think everyone has to consider their own situation and needs when thinking about making a move to mirrorless as well.
Vinnie