The decline and fall of Reflex.

[FrantzM]

On the first note, that is what touch screens are for

On the second note, you could just stop down the 44*33 lens end up in the same situation as the iPhone, but then you lose your speed of course and the effect you were trying for. Let's hope we get more computational photography in high end cameras.

Exactly. All those scenarios can be addressed by the flip screen on many mirror less .Touch your point of interest and the autofocus locks on it. Or you do it manually with focus confirmation.

 

[JeffGB]

I have several cameras including 3 mirrorless. The mirrorless cameras tend to be MUCH slower to take images with. I've pretty much stopped using them. It's hard to even get the film in the holder in the dark and then composing is upside down and reversed . The lenses tend to be very large as well. My standard lens is a Kodak 300mm f4.

Ignoring the BIG mirrorless cameras, I have to say I would someday like a Nikon or Sony mirrorless but can't justify it's purchase. My Nikon D600 and apsc Canon kit will probably suffice. Photography has become much less of a draw since smart phones made it so simple and multiplied the number of images taken by orders of magnitude.

 

[FrantzM]

Thing is mirrorless are maturing... they will get better, meanwhile the SLR ....

 

[Chromatischism]

The single Lens Reflex was a solution to a problem: How to accurately see what the lens saw. The problem is no more ... Mirrorless have the advantage of simplicity to boot. No more complicated mechanisms to move the mirror up and down... No more bulky prism to correct the view from the lenses..

Agree, so:

Digital Electronic View Camera

On the mirrorless side Sony has a serious advance on everybody else

Yes, they were early to the full-frame "mirrorless" game. But Canon and Nikon are not new to these types of systems in smaller form. Look the Nikon 1 system that came out in 2011. Canon and Nikon dismissed full-frame mirrorless as they didn't think (at the time) that serious photographers would find the tradeoffs worth it. EVF's were not as good as OVF's and battery life was much less, to name two of the big reasons. Technology has changed though and those developments gave Nikon the confidence to pursue the Z system, released in 2018, and Canon, not to be the odd man out, shortly after.

The 2 DSLR kings : Canon and Nikon are chasing Sony. They haven't produce anything to dethrone the A7Siii...

The Sony A7SIII was released only 6 months ago. Chill. It is also a video specialist camera with a 12 MP sensor which compromises stills shooting. I don't see Nikon or Canon chasing that, but who knows.

 

[Chromatischism]

But in fulfilling one set of requirements, it violates another set of requirements. It's impossible to see what's in focus, because apparent focus is limited by the low resolution of the EVF or screen. So, you have to have additional visual clutter to check focus, such as focus peaking, or zooming the image in. That's fine in some scenarios, but in most active situations, all that stuff just separates me from the subject. Then there's the (albeit short) time lag and smear of the EVF. Mirrorless is designed around the expectation that autofocus works perfectly. But then I have to move the focus points around to make sure what I want focused is in focus--more slowdown. What's supposed to be faster ends up being slower.

I have to ask, have you used any of the better EVF's?

I don't have these issues on my Z 6II. Granted, it has one of the best EVF's, but I can see what's in focus without aids. Peaking and/or zoom are nice aids to have that my DSLR's didn't, but are not required for most autofocus shooting. There is also no lag or "smear" in most shooting situations. The only time I see lag is in very low light or if I'm doing high-speed burst shooting. This continues to improve.

By the way, even using manual focus with my DSLR's, I didn't rely on my eyes. I always used the on-screen focus dot and arrows for confirmation on my Nikons. How is this different than using focus aids with an EVF?

 

[rdenney]

Exactly. All those scenarios can be addressed by the flip screen on many mirror less .Touch your point of interest and the autofocus locks on it. Or you do it manually with focus confirmation.

Yeah, whatever. I need what I need.

Rick “don’t try to fit your favorite design into my use cases ” Denney

 

[audio2design]

Performance has almost commoditized. Not much raw performance increase in last 5-7 years. Better read speeds for video and live view but raw SNR has not improved much as we are often glass limited for full frame no matter how many pixels are down. SNR has only made small improvements. Denoising has gotten better but best is still offline.

 

[Chromatischism]

I have several cameras including 3 mirrorless. The mirrorless cameras tend to be MUCH slower to take images with. I've pretty much stopped using them.

Which cameras do you own?

My Z replaced my DSLRs mostly due to productivity increases. I can take great images with either, but there are differences in ease of use, accuracy of focus, and size and weight, and they all favor the mirrorless camera.

 

[rdenney]

I have to ask, have you used any of the better EVF's?

I don't have these issues on my Z 6II. Granted, it has one of the best EVF's, but I can see what's in focus (peaking and/or zoom are nice aids to have that my DSLR's didn't, but are not required for most autofocus shooting). There is also no lag or "smear" in most shooting situations. The only time I see lag is in very low light or if I'm doing high-speed burst shooting.

By the way, even using manual focus with my DSLR's, I didn't rely on my eyes. I always used the on-screen focus dot and arrows for confirmation on my Nikons. How is this different than using focus aids with an EVF?

Yes, I’ve worked with several interesting mirrorless cameras of high repute.

I preferred my Canon F-1 to a Leica M3, too.

Rick “who has spent time with the latest Fuji MF camera, among others” Denney

 

[audio2design]

Yeah, whatever. I need what I need.

Rick “don’t try to fit your favorite design into my use cases ” Denney

Hard to give up old habits but the low light autofocus is better than my eyes now.

 

[rdenney]

I’d make better tuba sounds with a sampler, perhaps, by any objective measure. Should I give up the tuba and play a keyboard?

Rick “um, no” Denney

 

[Chromatischism]

Performance has almost commoditized. Not much raw performance increase in last 5-7 years. Better read speeds for video and live view but raw SNR has not improved much as we are often glass limited for full frame no matter how many pixels are down. SNR has only made small improvements. Denoising has gotten better but best is still offline.

True as far as sensors go, and since you brought up glass: we've seen pretty solid improvements in image quality from better lenses each year for the last 5-7 years and that continues with new releases in 2021.

 

[rdenney]

One thing I like about the big Pentax is that the old glass from the late film era was solid professional stuff and wasn’t cheap when new. But it is dirt cheap now. I bought a dozen lenses that each make excellent large prints for little more than I paid for the one modern zoom I bought—the stunning 28-45. I’ve used everything from Canon L glass, premium Nikkors, high-end Schneider and Rodenstock large-format lenses, to Pentax 67 lenses, and I don’t feel as though I am compromising with older late-design autofocus Pentax 645 lenses, at least for what I do. A full complement of lenses for the 645Z cost what two (admittedly excellent) Fuji GFX lenses would cost (new, because they are too new to be widely available used).

The Pentax has enough buttons not to have to play menu games, too. It’s not just a great sensor—it’s great camera to use.

The 50-mp sensor doesn’t embarrass these lenses at all—a testament to the larger sensor not needing the same degree of enlargement, and the bigger pixels not being as demanding of ultimate lens resolution.

I considered the Fuji GFX-100, but I simply don’t need that kind of resolution for prints I make, and I’d rather not have to store files four times larger. I’ll let other people be disappointed in files viewed at 100% on their monitors.

Yes, I like traditional SLR designs, with optical viewing. That doesn’t mean I don’t sometimes make use of live view—I do. It does mean I know why I don’t want to use it all the time. And it doesn’t mean I have dallied with rangefinder cameras, but I have always returned to SLRs.

Rick “finding heavier cameras are more stable, too” Denney

 

[JeffS7444]

It's ironic how camera-industry history has repeated itself: In the 1950s, companies like Nippon Kogaku (Nikon) and Asahi Optical (Pentax) were once the upstarts that dethroned the dominant German firm with advanced 35mm SLRs, while in the 21st century, Nikon themselves get caught flat-footed by a new wave of un-SLRs introduced by leaner and hungrier firms. It'd be tempting to say that success breeds complacency, but I imagine that what Nikon management really saw were solid SLR profits well into the mirrorless era.

 

[audio2design]

True as far as sensors go, and since you brought up glass: we've seen pretty solid improvements in image quality from better lenses each year for the last 5-7 years and that continues with new releases in 2021.

I would argue no, not really. There has been little improvement in the best lenses. Cheaper lenses have gotten better, and cheaper zooms have gotten better, but not much improvement in the best glass.

 

[JeffS7444]

While I enjoy a bit of history lessons as seen through the lens of the camera industry, I'm not too ideological about what I use to take photos, and so far as I can tell, viewers generally don't care about the equipment that I used unless they're camera enthusiasts.

 

[audio2design]

Sony is hardly an "upstart" having bought Minolta (& Konica), and being the biggest producer of high end sensors. Canon was already ahead of Nikon. They just extended the lead.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/19718...-with-canon-close-behind-nikon-in-distant-3rd

According to the Techno System Research’s data, there were a total of 5.65 million interchangeable lens cameras produced in 2020: 3.26 million mirrorless cameras and 2.39 million DSLR cameras.

Of the mirrorless cameras manufactured, Sony produced 1.15 million, Canon produced 1.05 million and Nikon was trailing, having produced just 250,000 units. The remaining 810,000 mirrorless cameras were split amongst other manufacturers, including Fujifilm, Leica, Panasonic, Olympus (now OM Digital Solutions), Sigma and others, but no specific production numbers were given for any other manufacturers. As for DSLRs, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that Canon and Nikon led the pack with 1.71 million and 650,000 units produced, respectively.

 

[Chromatischism]

I would argue no, not really. There has been little improvement in the best lenses. Cheaper lenses have gotten better, and cheaper zooms have gotten better, but not much improvement in the best glass.

Well, that may be the case, but if the rest of us can finally get our hands on great glass outside of the exotics (better by some metrics – looking at you, Nikon Z S-line), that is a major improvement in the market.

 

[Chromatischism]

Of the mirrorless cameras manufactured, Sony produced 1.15 million, Canon produced 1.05 million and Nikon was trailing, having produced just 250,000 units. The remaining 810,000 mirrorless cameras were split amongst other manufacturers, including Fujifilm, Leica, Panasonic, Olympus (now OM Digital Solutions), Sigma and others, but no specific production numbers were given for any other manufacturers. As for DSLRs, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that Canon and Nikon led the pack with 1.71 million and 650,000 units produced, respectively.

Note that Sony and Canon produce a lot more lower-end mirrorless cameras (as in, not the full-frame variety). I think the topic of the post was mostly geared toward full-frame cameras which is where reflex dominated (though I admit there were significant APS-C sales up until a few years ago).

 

[JeffS7444]

Sony is hardly an "upstart" having bought Minolta (& Konica), and being the biggest producer of high end sensors. Canon was already ahead of Nikon. They just extended the lead.

Until around 2010, Sony was the camera industry's perennial underachiever at a distant #3, known more for posh compact cameras in pretty colors, and sometimes interesting technology that few people actually bought, like the SLT-series of A-mount cameras descended from the Minolta Dynax / Maxxum. Panasonic made a popular compact camera along with some Leica-branded products,, while Olympus's original 4/3rds series of SLRs had no obvious advantages versus Canon or Nikon SLRs.