[Boris]

It's interesting to see the polarisation created whenever someone makes an assertion about how mirrorless cameras are doing, or are predicted to do, in the general camera market. I think the best anyone can make of all this is that most people are expecting mirrorless cameras to do better than they actually are, which is a situation they've been in for some time now.

I suspect the main problem for makers of mirrorless ILCs is with convincing the majority of people who currently use DSLRs to change their perceptions that rear LCDs are only useful in some situations, and that EVFs are not big enough, true enough or fast enough yet to match an OVF. Perhaps a second-order problem is convincing people who have been brought up using digital point and shoot cameras (and now, increasingly, phone cameras, GoPros and the like) that there is a point to moving up to an ILC system.

As I've said before, once you've experienced a really good optical viewfinder, like the LX's, it's hard to see anything electronic matching it, but maybe there will be, someday. I'm not convinced EVFs are anywhere near there yet, not even against the smaller, dimmer APS-C viewfinders, let alone larger formats.

Well, I agree (re polarization). However it takes just one try for one to "convert". My friend and a co-worker bought Panasonic GM1 and now he's kind of contemplating whether he needs the whole huge bag of Nikon stuff with Nikon D600 on top of it... It took him pretty much one weekend and few days :-). Again, just one more sample out of great many other people.

[RobA_Oz]

And online articles written by selfproclaimed experts is absolute reality of course!?

Well, of course. Just ask them. Just like the naivety of marketing departments is real.

[jogiba]

The last time I checked none of the smartphones had a mirror box so they all have mirrorless cameras in them and they sold 1.81 billion smartphones this year or 5 million everyday.

[Nesster]

The last time I checked none of the smartphones had a mirror box so they all have mirrorless cameras in them and they sold 1.81 billion smartphones this year or 5 million everyday.

Terminology.

Smart Phone Camera
Compact (dedicated) camera - why does one need one of these if one has a smartphone?
High End Compact (dedicated) camera - with these one may have perceived quality - both IQ and physical - to add to a smartphone
Interchangeable Lens Camers - of any type, here's where the 'photo bugs' start, i.e. photography for whatever reason deserves specialized equipment

The ILC is give-or-take divided into mirrorrless and SLR. At this point, the larger sensor DSLRs (APS and FF) still retain the higher quality reputation, while the MILC has size and innovation on their side. While Leica is still around, there aren't many others in that 'quality' category - it's not like the 1950s with Canon and Nikon competing with Leica in the mirrorrless arena.

So while in some regions, and with some subcultures and maverics the MILC's advantages may be moving some sales, the general public still believes in SLR. MILC is not the same as cell phones gradually pushing aside land lines... the time may come when MILC pushes aside the SLR. While today this is far from clear, and the MILCs probably don't make a lot of money, or even lose money, those manufacturers betting on the format can't afford to leave it, for fear that soon after the MILC finally starts to push aside the SLR in mass sales.

[JPT]

I've seen a number of articles and posts the use current sales figures to claim that mirrorless cameras are losing ground to DSLRs. This approach assumes that mirrorless cameras are separate systems. But within our own K-mount system, we have an exception to this - the K-01.

The way I see it, there are cameras that use reflex technology and cameras that use mirror less technology. With the established DSLR systems, there is space for both technologies, so mirrorless will only take over when it surpasses reflex in almost every way. I think we are nearly there. Sony has been moving this way for a while and Canon's dual pixel AF has the potential to make the mirror completely redundant. I think this will happen from the low end up. In this sense, I think the K-01 was the first of a kind.

However, it is the manufacturers who are going to make this decision, not the customer. They will decide which technology is best for a particular camera at a particular price point.

So, my point is that customers want a certain level of performance from their cameras and they trust camera makers to make the necessary technical decisions for them. When Canon and Nikon start making mirror less EOS cameras, people will buy them.

And incidentally, I don't see many OVFs on the market that match the LX. So even now, the best EVFs are going to be better than APS-C DSLRs for many people. That's what I felt when comparing the K-5 to the A77.

[Takumar55]

Terminology.

Smart Phone Camera
Compact (dedicated) camera - why does one need one of these if one has a smartphone?
High End Compact (dedicated) camera - with these one may have perceived quality - both IQ and physical - to add to a smartphone
Interchangeable Lens Camers - of any type, here's where the 'photo bugs' start, i.e. photography for whatever reason deserves specialized equipment

The ILC is give-or-take divided into mirrorrless and SLR. At this point, the larger sensor DSLRs (APS and FF) still retain the higher quality reputation, while the MILC has size and innovation on their side. While Leica is still around, there aren't many others in that 'quality' category - it's not like the 1950s with Canon and Nikon competing with Leica in the mirrorrless arena.

So while in some regions, and with some subcultures and maverics the MILC's advantages may be moving some sales, the general public still believes in SLR. MILC is not the same as cell phones gradually pushing aside land lines... the time may come when MILC pushes aside the SLR. While today this is far from clear, and the MILCs probably don't make a lot of money, or even lose money, those manufacturers betting on the format can't afford to leave it, for fear that soon after the MILC finally starts to push aside the SLR in mass sales.

I fully agree. But this is also why I find what Sony is doing to be exciting. They are taking the MILC and making it SLR-like with APS-C and Full Frame sensors and real pro/prosumer features. If you haven't seen the A7/A7R in person yet, they will blow you away; the EVF is amazing. Sony has the best shot of legitimizing the MILC to the casual/new user market, as well as experienced users, and they have the resources to pull it off.

I think compact is in trouble, and I think the smaller MILC is in danger, if only because they don't look "big and serious enough" to attract new consumers wanting to move up.

I think (hope) Pentax is in a good spot, because they've established a solid base in APS-C and are well respected by experience users.

[Takumar55]

I've seen a number of articles and posts the use current sales figures to claim that mirrorless cameras are losing ground to DSLRs. This approach assumes that mirrorless cameras are separate systems. But within our own K-mount system, we have an exception to this - the K-01.

The way I see it, there are cameras that use reflex technology and cameras that use mirror less technology. With the established DSLR systems, there is space for both technologies, so mirrorless will only take over when it surpasses reflex in almost every way. I think we are nearly there. Sony has been moving this way for a while and Canon's dual pixel AF has the potential to make the mirror completely redundant. I think this will happen from the low end up. In this sense, I think the K-01 was the first of a kind.

However, it is the manufacturers who are going to make this decision, not the customer. They will decide which technology is best for a particular camera at a particular price point.

So, my point is that customers want a certain level of performance from their cameras and they trust camera makers to make the necessary technical decisions for them. When Canon and Nikon start making mirror less EOS cameras, people will buy them.

And incidentally, I don't see many OVFs on the market that match the LX. So even now, the best EVFs are going to be better than APS-C DSLRs for many people. That's what I felt when comparing the K-5 to the A77.

Yep. Well said.

[philbaum]

The last time I checked none of the smartphones had a mirror box so they all have mirrorless cameras in them and they sold 1.81 billion smartphones this year or 5 million everyday.

Thanks - had a good laugh at that - its so right.

I fully agree. But this is also why I find what Sony is doing to be exciting. They are taking the MILC and making it SLR-like with APS-C and Full Frame sensors and real pro/prosumer features. If you haven't seen the A7/A7R in person yet, they will blow you away; the EVF is amazing. Sony has the best shot of legitimizing the MILC to the casual/new user market, as well as experienced users, and they have the resources to pull it off.

This is exactly my feeling as to what went wrong with the early MILC models. Sony, Pentax, Canon, Nikon mirrorless models all lacked the more sophisticated features that DSLRs had, almost as a matter of course. Then the pundits spouted this conclusion that MILC just can't compete with DSLRs.

Sony, in their admirable fight to gain market share, has thrown out the preconceptions and decided to give enthusiasts the same features that one finds in DSLRs. As much as possible, anyway.

What are these features:

a. a decent menu system - lacking in early NEX models - but not in K01 - go Pentax :-)

b. No separate AF button - Nex 7 has a switchable ael, afl button, but even Nex 6 only has ael

c. Flexibility to call back customizable groups of settings and more buttons in general to prevent menu diving, Nex 6, 7 and the A7 series all this in varying degrees.

d. At least an EVF, My Nex 6 has this and i love it on sunny days and also when i need to improve the stability of the camera.

e. Weather proofing - in the A7 series - why not

In any case, cheers to Sony for the A7 and A7r.

There have been tiny glimmers of progress in other mirrorless ILC designs, like the dual function AF in the Canon 70D sensor, the fast AF in the Nikon 1 system, Pentax's small Q system, but in general most MILCs were not all they could be to compete with the DSLRs. I think this was done on purpose to prevent cannibalizing larger dslrs, but now that the A7 series is out there - can Nikon and Canon continue to dither on the mirrorless front? We live in interesting times for sure.

For those out there that love their optical VF without blackouts - i get that. But why can't there be really good MILCs and really good DSLRs and let the consumers decide based on their own uses. We aren't all interested in the same fields of photography.

[K-9]

Soon, there will be only DSLRs and phones, with no in between. How long do you think the Targets and Walmarts will keep carrying compact cameras that don't sell? Compacts and EVIL cameras may be all but gone sooner than we think. The iPhone and 41 megapixel Nokia phones will make sure of that.

[philbaum]

I don't think thats true k9. The world loves more diversity than that.

[jogiba]

Soon, there will be only DSLRs and phones, with no in between. How long do you think the Targets and Walmarts will keep carrying compact cameras that don't sell? Compacts and EVIL cameras may be all but gone sooner than we think. The iPhone and 41 megapixel Nokia phones will make sure of that.

There is zero chance of that.

[K-9]

I don't think thats true k9. The world loves more diversity than that.

There is zero chance of that.

I think you are both underestimating camera phones and how much more people using them over cameras each and every year. Diversity won't help electronics brands stay afloat. Each year, another brand's models are cut from store shelves. It won't happen overnight, but the flip flopping of phones vs. compact cameras has already begun and growing in favor of phones by the minute.

The top image makers on flickr are phones, not cameras, and that includes dslrs.

[jogiba]

I think you are both underestimating camera phones and how much more people using them over cameras each and every year. Diversity won't help electronics brands stay afloat. Each year, another brand's models are cut from store shelves. It won't happen overnight, but the flip flopping of phones vs. compact cameras has already begun and growing in favor of phones by the minute.

The top image makers on flickr are phones, not cameras, and that includes dslrs.

I never said anything about smartphones, YOU said there will only be DSLRs and smartphones and nothing else. There is no way people are only going to buy big cameras with a flipping mirror box in the future.

[monochrome]

I think you are both underestimating camera phones and how much more people using them over cameras each and every year. Diversity won't help electronics brands stay afloat. Each year, another brand's models are cut from store shelves. It won't happen overnight, but the flip flopping of phones vs. compact cameras has already begun and growing in favor of phones by the minute.

The top image makers on flickr are phones, not cameras, and that includes dslrs.

FWIW, my 29 y.o. daughter dumped her film rebel and got a Nikon compact a few years ago, but has exclusively used her iPhone for the last 4 years. Home for the holidays, she tried my wife's Q / 02 - and was delighted!! Just so happens I had a deal kit on the shelf - one more Pentax re-convert (she started on a K1000).

[JPT]

The top image makers on flickr are phones, not cameras, and that includes dslrs.

It stands to reason that a cameras that are permanently connected to the Internet are used to upload pictures to the Internet more often. I think the number of pictures put online is a very skewed measure of the popularity of camera models. I'm not denying that smartphones have significantly damaged compact sales, though. Lucky that Pentax never relied on compacts to pay the rent.