Mirrorless and DSLR again, spot on

[Jorgen Udvang]

That is an interesting point. If sales drop, then staff get laid off. What we may see is a new model every two to three years rather than 6 months with even smaller improvement increments but also more likely prices could rise, dramatically.

We are mostly there already:

- Most brands upgrade much less frequently than they did 10 years ago, like the D500 and X-Pro2.
- Many of the upgrades are existing and minimally improved technology in a new packaging, like the X-T2.
- Most successful brands use the same sensors as the competitors, and the chips seem to stay in production longer.

The exceptions are lenses. There's a constant flow of new third party offerings, partly from the traditional German and Japanese brands, but even more interestingly from new Chinese and Korean start-ups. Many of those lenses work as well on my ten years old Nikon D2Xs as on a shiny new Sony A7RS III Special Edition. And for the record: That old Nikon is still capable of producing stunning photos, just as much as it was 10 years ago.

Technology can make it easier, and sometimes more complicated, to take photos, but photography as such doesn't change much.

 

[Godfrey]

We are mostly there already:

- Most brands upgrade much less frequently than they did 10 years ago ...

I, for one, am quite glad to see that. I really don't want my major-expense-item product cycles to be so fast. My 2012-2013 era M typ 240 and E-M1 technology has plenty of life left in it ... I really don't need a heck of a lot more. The new M-D is a step backwards and it is more than satisfactory. The SL is 2014-2015 technology and a nice addition, even though I know I underutilize it. Even my ancient E-1 is still a very competent camera.

It has long been the case that the cameras are over-engineered and under-developed. Engineering can be relatively quick; development takes years in the field. It's the strength of the top flight film cameras, like the Nikon F series, the Canon F1 series, etc, that they had many years in the field and small incremental development all the way through.

It's time the digital cameras moved in that direction, far as I'm concerned, because they certainly have enough basic capability to do the job now.

G

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

I, for one, am quite glad to see that. I really don't want my major-expense-item product cycles to be so fast. My 2012-2013 era M typ 240 and E-M1 technology has plenty of life left in it ... I really don't need a heck of a lot more. The new M-D is a step backwards and it is more than satisfactory. The SL is 2014-2015 technology and a nice addition, even though I know I underutilize it. Even my ancient E-1 is still a very competent camera.

It has long been the case that the cameras are over-engineered and under-developed. Engineering can be relatively quick; development takes years in the field. It's the strength of the top flight film cameras, like the Nikon F series, the Canon F1 series, etc, that they had many years in the field and small incremental development all the way through.

It's time the digital cameras moved in that direction, far as I'm concerned, because they certainly have enough basic capability to do the job now.

G

I couldn't agree more, and I'm very happy to see that the current 24MP APS-C sensor is being refined for each new camera model that comes out. If this continues, we will probably see a 24MP/4K Nikon D5600 with an image quality very close to that of the D810 and for less than $800 in a few months. There's also a rumour out that the GH5 will continue with a 16MP sensor, but with much increased video and stills quality, hopefully in the same excellent camera body with further refinements.