Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
This is, if my memory serves me right, what an 800 lbs gorilla looks like:
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
That's always a great graph, puts some perspective and reality in the discussion. I wonder if we'll be able to see a bump in July/August due to the A7Rii. Guess we'll know that in a few weeks.This is, if my memory serves me right, what an 800 lbs gorilla looks like:
A bulge in July-August ? They are not shipping fast enough for that. Way to difficult to get at, at least here were I live. Plus given the price, it isn't as if they were targetting the masses.That's always a great graph, puts some perspective and reality in the discussion. I wonder if we'll be able to see a bump in July/August due to the A7Rii. Guess we'll know that in a few weeks.
Your gorilla has lost a lot of weight lately.This is, if my memory serves me right, what an 800 lbs gorilla looks like:
This is some of the worst commentary I have read in this thread.While I second most of what you say - especially when it comes to what C/N can doe when they feel the time is right - I am absolutely not with you WRT Pentax/Ricoh!
They have shown in the past that they do not follow up the right way, have a miserable sales structure at least here in Europe and I would rate them not any better than Sony WRT interest in photography.
That is natural. The transition from film to digital is over and DSLR cameras were already more than good enough five years ago so the market is saturated. If photography was only a hobby for me, I would still be using a D700 only, or a GH3.Your gorilla has lost a lot of weight lately.
I don't think this graph shows anything that anyone here is not aware of. Traditional DSLR's are outselling mirrorless by a wide margin. And it clearly shows where we have been but does not paint a clear picture of where we are heading. Now speculating on the future is just that, speculation. But it would be hubris to believe that the status quo will be maintained irregardless of any outside forces acting upon it.This is, if my memory serves me right, what an 800 lbs gorilla looks like:
Seriously? The single "surprisingly large step" being a shutter mechanism that doesn't spray oil on the sensor? That's HUGE!DSLR cameras are improving too of course, making the competition harder. The D810 was a surprisingly large step from the D800, and one year after, it's still a camera that is very hard to beat when it comes to total usability.
I much prefer reflected via mirror or rangefinder view - because it is clearer/cleaner/crisper/sharper - I do appreciate some of the benefits of EVF though - focus peeking and amount of information ala HUD can be useful and no mirror CLUNK can be a real bonus...it all depends on what one is making a photograph of where the exact benefits/costs actually fall ...What surprises me about those that don't like mirrorless is they are happy to make an image using an optical viewfinder but they only ever look at the resulting output on an LCD screen or on paper. But they don't want to look at a LCD screen to make the image while using the camera?
How often do you look at the final image output using an optical viewfinder? A: Never.
I am glad there are a few laughs for you here. Often I click away from this site dejected. :facesmack:I much prefer reflected via mirror or rangefinder view - because it is clearer/cleaner/crisper/sharper - I do appreciate some of the benefits of EVF though - focus peeking and amount of information ala HUD can be useful and no mirror CLUNK can be a real bonus...it all depends on what one is making a photograph of where the exact benefits/costs actually fall ...
I do believe that a camera has idiosyncratic utility to each user - different marginal utility for each feature benefit according to individual indifference curves..
however all that being said ( basically - photographers as opposed to gear fetishists) will and do use what they like using...
I think your point above hilarious. What does a monitor looking at an image have to do with the capture process ? Nothing. Or are you accusing people who prefer optical finders of some form of techno retardation - ludditism? Funny dude very funny.
I'm not the programming guy here. LolWell do something about it...:ROTFL:
Oh? Really? Not for me. If I don't like the change, I don't buy into it. That "whether we like it or not" thing is something corporations try to convince us about, and very successfully so. For me, that has stopped in most areas. I decide what changes I'm going to adapt, and if my current supplier insist on change that I don't want, I change supplier. When conservative suppliers are drive out of the market, which very nearly happened with Leica a few years ago, I buy second hand (which I mostly do anyway).Change is coming whether we like it or not, whether we want it or not.
You're thinking about the D600/610. The D810 brought:[HR][/HR]
Seriously? The single "surprisingly large step" being a shutter mechanism that doesn't spray oil on the sensor? That's HUGE!
All this would make sense if the mirrorless market didn't look increasingly saturated. The curves of mirrorless mostly follow those of DSLR, and that's a very bad sign for manufacturers of mirrorless cameras. With lower production numbers (lower total sales volume and higher number of suppliers), plus probably higher development costs, that means lower profit if any at all for Sony, Panasonic, Olympus, Fuji and Samsung. The only reason why mirrorless cameras survive in the market at all is probably because it represents a tiny niche for the companies involved. It's not even close to being their core business. The disadvantage is that it's an easy product to ax if the going gets tough.So after someone gave me a polite explaining of what Jack most likely meant by his post and my possible (or actual) over reaction to it, I hereby retract any statement that I will be leaving GDPI. And thanks to the users who pm'd me asking not to leave, especially over something so silly. However, I still believe that one should be judged on the quality of ones postings. Not the quantity. Any troll can spam out post after post. Forums are full of them, including this one.
Now back to business.
I don't think this graph shows anything that anyone here is not aware of. Traditional DSLR's are outselling mirrorless by a wide margin. And it clearly shows where we have been but does not paint a clear picture of where we are heading. Now speculating on the future is just that, speculation. But it would be hubris to believe that the status quo will be maintained irregardless of any outside forces acting upon it.
So here is how I interpret this chart. First of all, you have a relatively new mirrorless technology (like within the last 5-8 years or so, 11 if you count the Epson digital RF) going up against a market of entrenched digital imaging machines which had their beginnings back in the film days of the mid 80's. And an important fact not be overlooked is that mirrorless FF cameras exploiting high quality EVF's and all sorts of interesting and new technology have been available for just about 2 years. Talk about a infant David product going up against the entrenched giant of Goliath DSLR's.
Of course the DSLR will show current market dominance over the new product. How could it not? It will continue to do so for many, many years to come as a majority of professional photographers are using these cameras as their bread and butter machines. But if you put your ear to the ground or your eye to the keyhole (or whatever silly metaphor you like) and actually listen to the subtle clues then you can begin to posit that a change is not just coming, but beginning right here, right now. The easy clue that anyone should get is that once technology is out of the bag, there is no way in hell to put it back in. Take the EVF for example. Most diehard pro photogs today (and there have been several in this thread) say that there is no way they will choose an EVF over an Optical. And there is nothing wrong with that. But we are forgetting the up and coming generation of photographers who will replace us. The ones going to school for photography right now. Or in high school right now. Or in elementary school right now. They will not be weaned on the subtleties of the optical VF and will instead expect the best that technology has to offer them. They have also grown up, I mean from the get go, with a cell phone or tablet in their hand. They are familiar and comfortable with little TV screens in their hands and when these photographers mature into the market place I wager that most of them will want to see another little TV screen when they look into their camera, along with all of the useful information and exposure options clearly visible. These photographers will expect professional quality mirrorless cameras.
What is also interesting about this chart is that mirrorless is holding its own. While the compact market has tanked and people rely on cell phones as their primary imaging device sale of mirrorless are doing quite well. Im pretty sure the market is driven more by enthusiasts at this point but the number of pros who are making the switch, and doing so publicly, is increasing. Just google it. There has also been quite a lot of discussion on the force of mirrorless in the prof market recently on many podscasts. If you don't already listen to the TWIP podcast (This Week In Photo) then I highly recommend it.
Change is coming whether we like it or not, whether we want it or not. I have to accept the fact that my next high end mirrorless will probably have 4k, which I neither need nor want.
I don't expect anyone to share my view on this. I am not trying to convince anyone that this camera is better then that one, or that my version of the future is 100% gonna happen. It is what I believe, and you are neither required nor expected to share it. But I do fervently hope that Canon will enter into the mirrorless market soon with a high end device supported by Canons legendary service. I cant say this loudly enough....I believe Canon can build a better mirrorless system then Sony and I want it in my hands now.
Here's an idea. How about everybody interested in Canon (or Nikon) making a pro level mirrorless chime in with a wish list of what you would like to see. And I mean anything...form factor, sensor type(FF or crop), lenses, flange distance....whatever you can think of. And I suppose it doesn't even have to be limited to Canon or Nikon.
I want to see Fuji skip the whole FF thing and go straight to a pro level mirrorless medium format camera with great set of prime lenses in something about the size or a little bigger then an a7. Talk about my dream camera.
I think you misunderstand me. I meant change is coming to the established markets due to continued advancements in technology and a changing (over time) user base. Which doesn't take a crystal ball to predict, just common sense. And you are entirely right. The personal choices you make can always, to an extent at least, mitigate the effects of change from larger, external forces. People still shoot with film and how many times have we heard 'film is dead'? Hell, people still shoot with collodion wet plates....Oh? Really? Not for me. If I don't like the change, I don't buy into it. That "whether we like it or not" thing is something corporations try to convince us about, and very successfully so. For me, that has stopped in most areas. I decide what changes I'm going to adapt, and if my current supplier insist on change that I don't want, I change supplier. When conservative suppliers are drive out of the market, which very nearly happened with Leica a few years ago, I buy second hand (which I mostly do anyway).
I don't know if I quite buy into the 'mirrorless is saturated' idea very strongly right now. Sure, there are plenty of choices to choose but the variety in those choices are staggering. You want a really compact, small sensored camera with a great line up of lenses. Then buy into Micro 4/3. How about apsc with a great lens selection and the ability to use speedboosters for vintage lenses. Fuji has you covered. How about Full frame mirrorless in your choice of budget friendly, resolution beast or Jedi Master see in the dark? Step right up to the Sony booth sir they have all three.All this would make sense if the mirrorless market didn't look increasingly saturated. The curves of mirrorless mostly follow those of DSLR, and that's a very bad sign for manufacturers of mirrorless cameras. With lower production numbers (lower total sales volume and higher number of suppliers), plus probably higher development costs, that means lower profit if any at all for Sony, Panasonic, Olympus, Fuji and Samsung. The only reason why mirrorless cameras survive in the market at all is probably because it represents a tiny niche for the companies involved. It's not even close to being their core business. The disadvantage is that it's an easy product to ax if the going gets tough.
Remember also that, although Canon and Nikon are very small players in the mirrorless market, they do make mirrorless cameras, and at least in Nikon's case, they are rather advanced. That means that they have done their homework and continue to develop the concept. If the market changes, they will be able to come up with a product with a larger sensor relatively fast. I have predicted earlier that this could happen within the first half of 2016. Then the question will be: If Canon and Nikon both launch full frame mirrorless cameras that are as good as or better than the Sony A7R II and with adapters that offer full compatibility with older lenses, what will Sony do then? Their market share in the mirrorless market would be reduced overnight to a tiny fraction of what it is today, since it would be no point for current Canon and Nikon users to buy a Sony camera due to compatibility issues with legacy lenses. Their mirrorless camera division will be fighting for their survival, plain and simple.
Maybe Sony users should be happy for the status quo.
You're right (every once in a while ). I was confusing the D600/610.You're thinking about the D600/610. The D810 brought:
- Less noisy shutter (and much less noisy than most mirrorless shutters, in spite of flip-flopping the mirror)
- Better low ISO, extended down to ISO 32
- Better video with much better auto ISO for video
- Low contrast option
- Improved ergonomics
- Better AF with the option of clustered AF points
etc.