# Will DSLRs be gone by 2025 and CIPA shipment volumes for first quarter



## Diko (Apr 30, 2015)

Here are the shipment numbers of DSLRs.
*CIPA Numbers for First Quarter*

Having in mind the claim that *Full-frame DSLRs will be gone by 2025 *

What do you think? Will mirrorless be a good match for you to switch from DSLR by then?


----------



## Dylan777 (Apr 30, 2015)

Oh no, I need to sell my 200/f2 and 400/f2.8 IS II now before it too late ;D


----------



## distant.star (Apr 30, 2015)

.
The fat lady may not yet have sung in 2025, but for all practical purposes, the age of the DSLR is over.

For a year or so now I've been predicting mirrorless will be prominent at the 2020 Olympics. That's where the tide begins to really turn.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 30, 2015)

There are still plenty of DSLR's around from 15 years ago, in another 10 years, there will be a lot more. I'd like to see the mirror go away, but if more and more pixels are wanted, we will be seeing 150-200 mp by then.


----------



## privatebydesign (Apr 30, 2015)

distant.star said:


> .
> The fat lady may not yet have sung in 2025, but for all practical purposes, the age of the DSLR is over.
> 
> For a year or so now I've been predicting mirrorless will be prominent at the 2020 Olympics. That's where the tide begins to really turn.



I believe your timescale is off by some years. If the 1DX MkII comes out late this year it will only be four years old in 2020, having seen the improvements in EVF's in the last four years I don't see any way they are going to be replacing OVF's in the 1DX MkIII in another four years. 

Besides, the core aspect of the EOS system is the massive investment in EF lenses that are all designed for a 44mm flange distance, that makes many of the specialist lenses retrofocus and not easily redesigned to a shorter mirrorless appropriate flange distance.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 30, 2015)

distant.star said:


> .
> The fat lady may not yet have sung in 2025, but for all practical purposes, the age of the DSLR is over.
> 
> For a year or so now I've been predicting mirrorless will be prominent at the 2020 Olympics. That's where the tide begins to really turn.



LOL. The death of the dSLR at the hands of MILCs in 5 years was predicted...7 years ago. It's not going to happen in 2020 or 2025.


----------



## Orangutan (Apr 30, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> not easily redesigned to a shorter mirrorless appropriate flange distance.



Why does mirrorless *need* a shorter flange distance? For some people the draw of mirrorless is a smaller/lighter device, and that would be nice. However, I look forward to the improvements in function and performance possible when the mirror goes away, even if the body size and weight don't change at all.

Also, in 10 years computer lens design and optical materials tech may advance the point where replacement optical formulas can be cranked out as needed.


----------



## Orangutan (Apr 30, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> The death of the dSLR at the hands of MILCs in 5 years was predicted...7 years ago. It's not going to happen in 2020 or 2025.



I used to think DSLRs would succumb to advancing mirrorless tech in that 5-7 year range. Now I believe it'll surprise us: there won't be a slow incremental change that leads to the death of the DSLR, but a breakthrough that propagates quickly. For example, if there's a successor to Google Glass that has the power to act as an EVF, combined with a major advance in AF; we could then attach sensors to lenses the way we attach rear lens caps, and hold the lens at whatever angle we please.


----------



## Diko (Apr 30, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> LOL. The death of the dSLR at the hands of MILCs in 5 years was predicted...7 years ago. It's not going to happen in 2020 or 2025.


 Good point indeed. As every new emerging tech. There always appears to rise a prediction of the fall of an old tech. With many that was true. 

But so far many technologies (_such as *EVF*s and their lack of DR_) still are immature. Ergo perhaps DSLRs will stay in the past but not as early as predicted.



Orangutan said:


> Why does mirrorless *need* a shorter flange distance?


 Now this is a very good example of a strong argument yet to be solved by the MILCs.



Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I'd like to see the mirror go away, but if more and more pixels are wanted, we will be seeing 150-200 mp by then.


 What was this "_but_" for and how to relate it with "_mirror_" and "_150-200 mp_"? 

IMO they don't necessarily have something in common. 

Or I misinterpret what you had in mind?


----------



## Bennymiata (Apr 30, 2015)

In answer to your question, absolutely not!


----------



## YuengLinger (Apr 30, 2015)

distant.star said:


> .
> The fat lady may not yet have sung in 2025, but for all practical purposes, the age of the DSLR is over.
> 
> For a year or so now I've been predicting mirrorless will be prominent at the 2020 Olympics. That's where the tide begins to really turn.



Yes! And the 2024 Olympics will be on Mars! And we'll have FLYING cars!


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Apr 30, 2015)

I don't think there will ever be a time when DSLRs are totally gone. We still have people writing with quill pens and shooting wetplate cameras.

Now will there come a time when the majority of a demographic will switch from DSLR to MICL? Well that will depend on the demographic. I think that for most casual and hobbyist shooters, yes, there will come a time. For professional photographers? Probably at some time, but not for a long time.

But in any case, there will always be a market for DSLRs, just like there is a market for buggy whips, quill pens, abacuses (abacusi? ;D)...


----------



## Maximilian (Apr 30, 2015)

Hi Diko! 

Firstly: The first hyperlink didn't work for me but I could get the right URL:
http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/cipa-numbers-for-first.html

Secondly: My answer is definetly "Maybe". It's too hard to predict.
Ten years from now is a long time and if you look back ten years and see what happened... quite a lot.
Will DSLR be dead then? Surely not dead, but maybe just for nice applications like sports and other high speed tracking. Worst case DSLR will become some vintage product for 

It all depends IMHO on three factors:
1. Technology: How good will be the improvement of the EVF?
2. Companies: 
Will the companies see a chance to gain/keep share in the development of a full mirrorless system with fast pro lenses with modern connectivity
3. Market: Will the market follow these companies. 
Will 95% use smart device cams and only 5% pros and enthusiasts use ILC or will something totally new apear (e.g. 3D holography for everyday use)




distant.star said:


> ...mirrorless will be prominent at the 2020 Olympics. ...


Don't think so yet. The majority of sports and press photogs will still be on DSLR. Maybe 2028. Maybe I'm wrong.

Maybe photography like we do now will be dead for 95% of the people.

Let's go shooting with our current equipment and spend our thoughts and money for 2024 gear later


----------



## YuengLinger (Apr 30, 2015)

Which system has the smaller carbon footprint?


----------



## dolina (Apr 30, 2015)

Nice headline, clickbait. ;D


----------



## privatebydesign (Apr 30, 2015)

Orangutan said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > not easily redesigned to a shorter mirrorless appropriate flange distance.
> ...



It doesn't. But why make lenses more complicated, bigger, heavier and more expensive than they need to be? Also, to suggest _"optical formulas can be cranked out as needed"_ illustrates a gross misunderstanding of manufacturing, designing things is comparatively easy and cheap, making them in the required numbers to the required specs isn't.

I don't see Canon moving away from the EF lens line soon, if ever. If they were going to do that then they could have done so in a measured way with the Cine line where the flange distance is much more flexible, but they didn't.


----------



## Orangutan (Apr 30, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> But why make lenses more complicated, bigger, heavier and more expensive than they need to be?


What I meant is why not just make an EF-compatible (or EF-S compatible) mirrorless? Why is does a mirrorless body *require* a new lens line? It doesn't unless smallest/lightest is the top priority for mirrorless. For pro/enthusiast it need not be.



> Also, to suggest _"optical formulas can be cranked out as needed"_ illustrates a gross misunderstanding of manufacturing, designing things is comparatively easy and cheap, making them in the required numbers to the required specs isn't.


Given the pace of tech advancement, 10 years is a very long time. I can easily see a few Ph.D. dissertations leading to complete end-to-end automated lens design and manufacture. Optics is physics: the only "art" in optical design is to compensate for inadequate computational methods, and computational problems continue to fall by the wayside.



> I don't see Canon moving away from the EF lens line soon, if ever.


Neither do I, and that was part of my point: just build EF-compatible pro/enthusiast mirrorless, and put it whatever size body you want.


----------



## old-pr-pix (Apr 30, 2015)

Will DSLR's be gone by 2025? Well, I still have fully useable Canon A-1 and F-1 and Contax RTS III, vintage 1978 or so. So, my answer is no - they won't be gone. I think a more appropriate question would be: "Will DSLRs still represent the dominant share of interchangeable lens cameras shipped in 2025?" My answer to that question would be - I doubt it.

CIPA data shows DSLR's have fallen from ~5 to 1 DSLR vs. MILC shipments to currently ~3 to 1 in two years +/-. MILC's are not exactly becoming dominant; but reasonable growth anyway. The mass market is looking for easy to carry, easy to use, fun to use and share images, i.e. well connected to social media, etc. Rebels as we know them today will go away; but my guess is that serious users and pros will still rely on DSLR technology for many years.


----------



## old-pr-pix (Apr 30, 2015)

Oops, hit post before I added credit for the graphic...http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/12877/camera-sales-march-2015-data-decaying-skunk


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 30, 2015)

old-pr-pix said:


> CIPA data shows DSLR's have fallen from ~5 to 1 DSLR vs. MILC shipments to currently ~3 to 1 in two years +/-. MILC's are not exactly becoming dominant; *but reasonable growth anyway*.



I suggest you look again at the graph you posted. dSLR sales are shrinking, but MILC sales are *not* growing, they're basically flat. Yes, the MILC share of the ILC pie is getting bigger, but that's only because a big chunk of the ILC pie has been eaten by smartphones.


----------



## 9VIII (Apr 30, 2015)

We need to compare SLR sales over the last fifty years.

Between 2000 and 2010 we had an anomoly, every year new cameras were making last year's model obsolete. That had never happened before.
The 1DsMkIII is still an industry standard, 1Dx owners have a sport equivalent of that body only with exponentially better high ISO. 5Ds owners will be happy with the output from that camera in a studio setting for many decades.

The market is mature, and people don't need to upgrade anymore. Look at your sales of new bodies in the 80's and that's probably where the industry is headed.
And note that Mirrorless bodies aren't improving very quickly. Sure, they're building a nice ecosystem... of crop sensors and crop size lenses. Sony is the only one aiming for the professional market. If Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic and Samsung all announced full frame compact bodies today, it would be 2030 before they have a competent system. But no-one is doing that, and professionals or anyone else looking for the best capabilities in a system are still going to be buying EOS for the next 20 years at least (more if the crop companies don't give their head a shake sooner rather than later).
And even if a compact alternative exists, SLR has distinct advantages regardless of IQ parity.


----------



## dak723 (Apr 30, 2015)

Mirrorless will replace DSLRs when an EVF is virtually indistinguishable from an OVF. And when that happens - no one will care! In fact, no one should care now except the companies that make cameras. Users have both options now. Choose the one you like.


----------



## 9VIII (Apr 30, 2015)

And I totally agree that the best mirrorless camera is a 1D with the mirror removed.

Put all those features in an SL1 size body (still with integrated battery grip though) and you have me sold.


----------



## old-pr-pix (Apr 30, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> old-pr-pix said:
> 
> 
> > CIPA data shows DSLR's have fallen from ~5 to 1 DSLR vs. MILC shipments to currently ~3 to 1 in two years +/-. MILC's are not exactly becoming dominant; *but reasonable growth anyway*.
> ...



Good catch... better wording would have been "reasonable growth in share" or "reasonable growth in penetration." Clearly not absolute growth in anything other that total accumulated cameras in the field.


----------



## dolina (Apr 30, 2015)

Exactly 8 years ago ArsTechnica came out with this article dated May 1, 2007.

"Ballmer: iPhone has “no chance” of gaining significant market share"
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2007/04/30/ballmer-says-iphone-has-no-chance-to-gain-significant-market-share/

Where is Ballmer now?

Where is the iPhone now?

Where is Microsoft now?

Where is Apple now?

What about that $500 subsidized beginning price tag?

How many cellular (not smartphone) phones were sold in 2006/2007?

How many smartphones were sold in 2014?

How many were iPhones?

How many were Android?

How many were "Others"?

A lot of things can change in that length of time. What more 10 years?


----------



## old-pr-pix (Apr 30, 2015)

9VIII said:


> We need to compare SLR sales over the last fifty years.



We can do exactly that thanks to CIPA. Extrapolating the pre-DSLR, bubble boom era, it looks like shipments on the order of 4.5 million per year are the average. Peaking around 8 million. That means the industry still has a long way to fall even if we add some for the increased world population.


----------



## dolina (Apr 30, 2015)

Cool, they started recording digital sales when I got my first dSLR.


----------



## Diko (May 5, 2015)

Maximilian said:


> Hi Diko!
> 
> Firstly: The first hyperlink didn't work for me but I could get the right URL:
> http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/cipa-numbers-for-first.html


Hi Maximilian,

Thanks. Just fixed that.




Maximilian said:


> Secondly: My answer is definetly "Maybe". It's too hard to predict....
> 
> It all depends IMHO on three factors:
> ...
> ...



I think a *Professional generation* that is the trend setter is 20-30-40 years wide (I don't speak of the "generation" term in marketing which it is 10 years). 

However we saw in this thread the CIPA numbers of Film-2-Digital transition. Span is less than a decade. That means that photographers (no matter pro or hobby) are quite adaptable so far.

For the moment I must agree with 2 & 3. 



privatebydesign said:


> I don't see Canon moving away from the EF lens line soon, if ever. If they were going to do that then they could have done so in a measured way with the Cine line where the flange distance is much more flexible, but they didn't.


Good point. But I think that is due to legacy not future. Additionally for the EF there are *adapters *.


----------



## sanj (May 5, 2015)

Am not sure if I would be there or gone by then. But feel that DSLR - the top end only - will be around.


----------



## sanj (May 5, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> distant.star said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...



Sorry but no one has a way of knowing.


----------



## Diko (May 6, 2015)

sanj said:


> Am not sure if I would be there or gone by then. But feel that DSLR - the top end only - will be around.


 That makes a lot of sense.... Although when a new tech emerges one develops it for the flagship and then cripples it downwards.


----------



## dolina (May 6, 2015)

With how often gear is updated do you see yourself still using the gear you have today by 2025? It is like worrying your smartphone/computer will work by then.


----------



## tron (May 7, 2015)

DSLRs will not be gone. They will exist and will have better sensors 

Now how much better would be a nice subject for a rumors/technical site...


----------



## weixing (May 7, 2015)

Hi,
I had no idea, but when I still saw people using Core Duo PC, Windows XP, Office 97 ???, Windows NT 4.0  and etc, I think it'll take quite sometime before DSLR will be gone. 

Have a nice day.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 7, 2015)

weixing said:


> I had no idea, but when I still saw people using Core Duo PC, Windows XP, Office 97 ???, Windows NT 4.0  and etc, I think it'll take quite sometime before DSLR will be gone.



People still drive Studebakers, and I bet there's still a Model T or two on the road. Microsoft isn't selling Windows XP or Office 97 anymore, which is really more relevant as an analogy to the issue under discussion.


----------



## Moulyneau (May 7, 2015)

I think no. And allow me - just for the fun of it - to be a bit controversial here. Looking at my crystal ball (not made from Canon glass, thus a little blur), I see DSLRs still there as they were before the digital boom. To simplify, at the time, serious photogs had SLRs and others had Instamatic's, eventually replaced by smart-phones. RIP P&S. In 10 years, I see mirror-less eaten alive by ever-improving smart-phones (who really likes to carry heavier and bulkier lenses than their DSLR's equivalent and watch TV through a viewfinder anyway?). Unless a huge, though greatly improbable, revolution in glass tech allowing for much smaller lens design happens, DSLRs are there to stay. In greatly reduced number from the high but still there. The rest will be super-duper-smart-phones. That's what my crystal ball says. It also says that we'll have to pay the price for the reduced number of gear sold


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 7, 2015)

Moulyneau said:


> I see mirror-less eaten alive by ever-improving smart-phones



An interesting and quite plausible point. 'Big' offers certain advantages (ergonomics, shallow DoF)...and smartphones are clearly eroding the 'small' in the camera market. After P&S, MILCs are next on the menu.


----------



## sanj (May 7, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Moulyneau said:
> 
> 
> > I see mirror-less eaten alive by ever-improving smart-phones
> ...



No so soon. The ever evolving ML are far superior to the point and shoot which are disappearing. The ML cameras are now being bought not by point and shoot people but by DSLR users who find ML interesting alternate at times. Someone who is starting of any kind of serious photography has a legit choice of ML or DSLR. Earlier it was casual point and shoot vs serious DSLR. ML and DSLR are both for serious photographers. There is a difference here.

As we all believe that mobile will not substitute DSLR, I don't think it will substitute ML either.


----------



## Moulyneau (May 7, 2015)

sanj said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Moulyneau said:
> ...



Problem is that we dont not know for sure who are the main buyers of MILCs. I can see (is that only me?) a lot of push by what I would call the MILC lobby. I just do not understand the craze for MILCs seemingly fueled by the flattering talk of many review sites. Still, and despite the big number of new such cameras hitting the market every other months, MILCs sales are dropping. I guess the serious photogs have bought theirs while the would-be are realizing that MILCs or not, they still don't get this promised "professional look" they are after. Meanwhile, the light, "always with you" pocket-able, ever improving smart-phones increase in sales. And not just to make calls. Whenever I go now, I only see scores of SP, some DSLR's, hardly any MILCs!


----------



## sanj (May 7, 2015)

Mobile phones are shooting maximum photos is agreed. Outside of these DSLR are more visible, agreed again. But then they have been around much longer and used by many more. 

Disagree with: they still don't get this promised "professional look" (with ML). 

Have you shot with a ML personally? Here is a ML photo taken 2 years ago. ML must have only improved...


----------



## Sith Zombie (May 7, 2015)

Lots of interesting theories here. Mine is that we will start to see the EF canon range adopt evf's and dual pixel af instead of a phase detect module. In 10 years maybe most of the rebel, xxD and an entry level full frame will be like this, similar form factors but no mirrors. Top end stuff will probably still be DSLR as the tech is refined. This way they have new products for their most profitable lines, i.e. rebels, still have the advantage of the ef lens range and keep pros happy by still providing top end DSLR lines. So to answer the question, no I don't think they will be gone but I don't think they'll be as many to choose from as we do now. If you look at the choice we have now, I think we're all extremely lucky!


----------



## romanr74 (May 7, 2015)

Not sure what this discussion is about really. I'm not sure i care if my camera has a mirror inside or not. I want a good viewfinder (i'm not religious if this is electronic or not - maybe I should be?), I have obviously nothing against good live-view capabilities and I want top-notch ergonomics (which the EOS dSLR cameras offer). I'm not after a smaller camera at all. I love shooting with my EOS 5III and a solid lens attached to it. I believe I have fairly good control with this type of gear...


----------



## jcarapet (May 7, 2015)

If there is anything I have learned from this forum, it's that people are stubborn about keeping their DLSR's

mirrorless will get an increased market share, but 10 years is a little soon. Unless people really step up their game. Personally, I like my ergonomics on a fat DSLR and don't want that to go away. I'll have to get into the business of fat aftermarket grips if they do go away. 

on the mirrorless front, mark my words. If Samsung had any good marketing, their newest camera would be blowing everybody out of the water. You can't beat it's features for the price.


----------



## Valvebounce (May 7, 2015)

Hi Sanj. 
Very nice shot, but then you seem to be very good at creating pro level images, I think the inference was that P&S, DSLR, MILC or Medium Format, these people would still fail to achieve that "professional look!" They still look like Smart Phone pictures! ;D

Cheers, Graham. 



sanj said:


> Disagree with: they still don't get this promised "professional look" (with ML).
> 
> Have you shot with a ML personally? Here is a ML photo taken 2 years ago. ML must have only improved...


----------



## sanj (May 7, 2015)

The discussion is about some people thinking that the ML technology is moving ahead so rapidly that DSLR will eventually become archaic. While others feel that will not happen ever. 

It is becoming a discussion akin to religion on this forum. Lol.


----------



## gsealy (May 7, 2015)

I believe that DSLRs will definitely be around in 10 years. Canon and the other manufacturers are continuing to pack more and more features into them. The latest Canon high end cameras now have two processors. Technology continues to evolve. 4K video is still in its infancy. 

The thing is that with cell phones people are taking more pictures than ever. There are people taking pictures that never took pictures before. Grandmothers and grandfathers are sharing pictures with their families. They are posting them on Facebook, Instagram, and G+. For right now that is hurting DSLR sales. But there will come a time for a lot of these people when they look at their pictures and compare them to what other people are posting. They will realize that they could do better, and they will look to higher end cameras to help them do that. So in my opinion the current explosion in mobile phone picture and video taking is going to create a future market for the DSLR.


----------



## Sunnystate (May 7, 2015)

DSLR are great and really fascinating piece of machinery, no man would resist the charm of it, just like well crafted collectible guns or certain tools. 

The problem is that there is nothing to add or improve on it, just by adding FPS or buffer size etc will not constitute real progress. Real progress and potential ground breaking inventions are in electronic viewfinders, just like in all electronic gadgets, look at smart phones, who would have thought what they can be used for now! 

When Mirrorless technology will finally cross certain thresholds, and they are almost there, nothing will stop them from becoming tools of the wet dreams of every photographer, think global shutter and superior autofocus. With Canon and Nikon finally on board (if they survive) There is no way to tell what camera may be in 10 years from now, and again it is plan stupid and shortsighted (as always) to frown from a good things that will come no matter what you guys are thinking or wishing for. I am sure some of you more senior guys were fighting against autofocus 30 years a go.


----------



## Maiaibing (May 7, 2015)

gsealy said:


> there will come a time for a lot of these people when they look at their pictures and compare them to what other people are posting. They will realize that they could do better, and they will look to higher end cameras to help them do that.


Its the emotional attachment - not photographic quality - which make people "like" a picture. What photogs consider technical quality is largely irrelevant.

This is what the we-hate-mp3-music-files-because-they-sound-bad crowd got wrong. Most people happily listen to sub-par music files through seriously bad sound systems every day. However, music quality matters very little as long as people can recognize it enough to make the emotional connection. 1$ iPhone ear plugs easily satisfy that quality level.

Meanwhile smartphones deliver more than enough visual and sound quality to satisfy the emotional threshold. People's favorite pictures on social media are thus not even even remotely correlated with traditional photographic quality norms - they are in stead correlated with emotions.

Ordinary people are thus not defining the future of the DSLR market. Because they have no conception of picture IQ above current smart phone levels. This is the realm of image geeks such as us.

Personally I think DSLRs are more likely than not to stay due to the geek factor. But its anyone's guess.


----------



## sanj (May 7, 2015)

Maiaibing said:


> gsealy said:
> 
> 
> > there will come a time for a lot of these people when they look at their pictures and compare them to what other people are posting. They will realize that they could do better, and they will look to higher end cameras to help them do that.
> ...



Well written. But I, on my knees, pray that high quality camera gear be affordable and available to those who want to pursue serious photography. There are plenty of magazines, books and artists in this world who require high end photography gear so I am not worried. ML or DSLR? WHO CARES? It should be better than today, thats all.


----------



## sanj (May 7, 2015)

Valvebounce said:


> Hi Sanj.
> Very nice shot, but then you seem to be very good at creating pro level images, I think the inference was that P&S, DSLR, MILC or Medium Format, these people would still fail to achieve that "professional look!" They still look like Smart Phone pictures! ;D
> 
> Cheers, Graham.
> ...


----------



## AcutancePhotography (May 7, 2015)

Maiaibing said:


> gsealy said:
> 
> 
> > there will come a time for a lot of these people when they look at their pictures and compare them to what other people are posting. They will realize that they could do better, and they will look to higher end cameras to help them do that.
> ...



Excellent points. This concept of "good enough" may be linked to your definition of emotional threshold. 

A lot of people want a photograph to remind them of something they experienced, or to convoy emotions/feelings to someone who did not experience them. For them a cell phone is all they need and want and there is nothing wrong with that. 

Trying to sell these customers on DR, pixel density, CA, coma is trying to sell the wrong thing to the wrong people. 

What is important to pro/skilled amateur photographers may be completely unimportant to these customers.

Different things appeal to different customers. The best camera is the one that is best for the individual. For many people a cell phone camera is best for them. For others a MICL camera is best for them. and for some a DSLR is best for them. Who is right? They are all are... for them.


----------



## Moulyneau (May 7, 2015)

sanj said:


> Mobile phones are shooting maximum photos is agreed. Outside of these DSLR are more visible, agreed again. But then they have been around much longer and used by many more.
> 
> Disagree with: they still don't get this promised "professional look" (with ML).
> 
> Have you shot with a ML personally? Here is a ML photo taken 2 years ago. ML must have only improved...



You sure provide a great demonstration here that it's not the camera but the photographer... That aside, I do agree that MILCs can produce great photography. As do the latest smart-phones. Just have a quick look at: https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=iPhone6

Lots of snapshots but I think some are quite amazing. I also guess that for now, the general assessment of the IQ of the MILCs is somehow compounded by the advance tech of the Sony sensors. How long will that last? Canon have no choice but to catch up.

I'm just saying that unless we see a big glass technology revolution, MILCs are not really meant to be attached with a 300mm/2.8 or even a 70-200/2.8 for hours on end, are they? So, we talk about general photography, say 16 to 100mm. In that segment, for now MILC's rule somehow, but my take is that over the next 10 years or so, smartphones are going to eat on this one. But not on the heft, ergonomics, pro features of the DSLRs.


----------



## Chucho (May 7, 2015)

No, everybody will be shooting film by then.


----------



## RGF (May 7, 2015)

we will all be shooting smart phones with attachments from our long lens


----------



## unfocused (May 7, 2015)

RGF said:


> we will all be shooting smart phones with attachments from our long lens


 
You might not be far off. 

The only truly disruptive technology out there right now is light field focusing. If that can be perfected over the next decade, it's entirely possible we may be operating our lenses from a smart phone and then focusing the images later in post.


----------



## sandymandy (May 7, 2015)

Doubt so. Even if....things will change slowly so there is nothing to worry about. Its not a smart move to throw out something instantly and render the products that came before useless. So im all chill.


----------



## PhotographyFirst (May 7, 2015)

As long as there is any viewfinder lag and the EVF still uses power to allow you to see through the camera, then DSLR cameras will never go away. I personally like that I can shoot without drawing power to compose my shots and not create added heat on the sensor from constant activation. On Sony mirrorless cameras, the viewfinder or LCD is always drawing from the sensor when the camera is turned on. Not a good implementation for conserving an already miniscule battery supply. Carry a bunch of extra batteries completely defeats the idea of using mirrorless to reduce gear weight. 

I can see viewfinder lag getting good enough over time, but it will be impossible for an EVF to ever be in use without drawing battery power.


----------



## Lurker (May 8, 2015)

The DSLR will go the way of mainframe computers and paper checks.
Both are alive and well after 25+ years of doom and gloom predictions from the new technologists.
Certainly not in their hay day but still good business.


----------



## Aglet (May 8, 2015)

SLR designs will be produced for quite a while yet, altho there's a good chance they'll become more and more relegated to higher-end niche areas with EVIL/ML taking over more of the low and midrange sales.
I won't be surprised to see Canon, Nikon, etc. produce a ML version of the Rebel and d3000 equivalents within the next few years. They're just easier and cheaper to produce and will be fast enough and become more battery-efficient by then to be viable.
They can even keep the same register distance as the "legacy" lenses.
Then again, as more production methods become even more automated, it'll be possible to maintain mirror-box production for competitively lower costs too.

If the Pentax K-01 would have had a good EVF we would have seen the birth of a proper MILC. Instead they delivered a funny-looking, if ergonomically excellent MILC body, with terrific IQ, that worked with legacy lenses but was often nearly useless outdoors because of the too dim rear display. I had and sold 2 of those because they were really only good for studio work and, well, so was the Pentax K-30 which also came with a nice OVF & PDAF system for the same price and worked as well in live-view mode as the K-01. I chose to keep the more versatile, cost-effective option.


----------



## sanj (May 8, 2015)

Moulyneau said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > Mobile phones are shooting maximum photos is agreed. Outside of these DSLR are more visible, agreed again. But then they have been around much longer and used by many more.
> ...



Thank you much. 
Yes of course Iphone is making nice photos. But when put side by side to 'proper' cameras, their shortcomings become evident. 

"But not on the heft, ergonomics, pro features of the DSLRs." Maybe in time ML will have all the ergonomics and pro features we all desire. Possible?


----------



## Diko (May 18, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Moulyneau said:
> 
> 
> > I see mirror-less eaten alive by ever-improving smart-phones
> ...


 I think not -due to the Sensor form factor. APS-C will and already have gone 35mm. This is a dedicated MILC territory full of life and opportunities. 



gsealy said:


> ... But there will come a time for a lot of these people when they look at their pictures and compare them to what other people are posting. They will realize that they could do better, and they will look to higher end cameras to help them do that. So in my opinion the current explosion in mobile phone picture and video taking is going to create a future market for the DSLR.


 I began using Facebook in February 2007. Since then it's easily to find the drastic improvement of people shooting pictures therefore I dismiss this argument as totally out of the question for regular family albums. 

I think that the poll is relevant to the PRO segment only. 



unfocused said:


> ... The only truly disruptive technology out there right now is light field focusing. If that can be perfected over the next decade, it's entirely possible we may be operating our lenses from a smart phone and then focusing the images later in post.


 It can and it has been ;-) One of its commercial names is *Lytro* and the tech is "Light-field camera". 

Smartphones have been trying to boost and helped in developing of new light-gathering approaches for sensors, but as you noted there are some limits. One barrier is already off the vendors' shoulders. One can suppose this tech to come to Smartphones, but currently new options arise as well.

There are a few very promising new ideas for next concept of future camera sensors. *Eric Fossum* (the father of current CMOS) is working on  *Quanta Image Sensors*. Additionally there are new materials like *graphene* , *molybdenum disulfide*, *carbon nanotechnology* or even *germanium * that can help in sensort sensitivy advancment.

Will see what and when. So far the big issue is the pixes size VS light wave legnth a.k.a Diffraction limit. It is more of a lens problem actually.

All this said - makes me believe that for smartphones, DSLR, MILCs we have much more to see. Most probably DSL will die. The question is WHEN? And is Ergonomics the only pitfall to its total downfall.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 18, 2015)

Diko said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > ... The only truly disruptive technology out there right now is light field focusing. *If that can be perfected* over the next decade, it's entirely possible we may be operating our lenses from a smart phone and then focusing the images later in post.
> ...



I presume unfocused is aware of Lytro. But surely you're not suggesting that the Lytro cameras represent the perfection of light field technology for commercial/consumer application? 

Then again, maybe you think the original EOS 1D was 'perfection'. It had a 4 MP output, too.


----------



## Diko (May 19, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Diko said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



ROFL. No no no. ))) That with the 1D was a nice one. 

As for the Lytro IMO it's still in its infancy. And honestly never had the chance to play with one around (yet). So maybe they will think something even more interesting. 

So far I believe that "Light-field cameras" are great for smartphones. IMO they should be implemented there for simple end consumers that would enjoy it most. 

I personally am not fan of post-focusing. The Photography for me is an art of statement (video is the art of storytelling). So the photo should be well created on concept level prior to shootin.

Who knows? Perhaps in photojournalism there could be a good use of Lytro-like-cameras too.


----------



## PhotographyFirst (May 23, 2015)

Diko said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Diko said:
> ...



I thought Lytro gave up on stills and are now only doing video related products?


----------

