[patrickw]

Yes absolutely.

And I based this purely on the very familiar pattern of the old analog to digital conversion era which took place long ago. At which point, there was no shortage of audiophiles clinging to the antiquated tech like old religion, though I also know that most people knew deep down that it was only a matter of time before progress ran its course. And so I suppose, in much the same way, that many people can see the very pattern taking place in the photography industry as well. That is to say that the inevitable truth is that we know what needs to be done in order to improve things, as we continue to strive to achieve it. Well... in all fairness, it's more along the lines of the manufacturers who are achieving it so as to continue delivering new and exciting things though in the end, it's our need for bigger and better than does us in.

Nevertheless, I simply see no way around the obvious personally. That is to say that the next big revolutionary step in digital photography will undoubtably be the elimination of the old mirror box system.

Actually vinyl record sales today are on the rise and especially amongst younger music listeners.

Anyway it's a bad analogy (audiophiles to photographers) because audiophiles are consuming sound while photographers are producing (not consuming) images. The better analogy would be to recording engineers, and in that field tube gear is still among the most prized and is used every day to create records (which are then consumed digitally).

[patrickw]

To the original question, no, I don't think mirrorless will replace DSLR's amongst professionals, or enthusiasts who aspire to shoot like professionals. Regular people who just want a nice camera to take pictures of the family? Sure. It's already happening, much to Pentax's dismay.

As much as everyone would love to see a full-frame Pentax DSLR, the place where they are really getting their butts kicked IMO is from the other direction, by the exciting mirrorless cameras like the Olympus E-M5 and the Fuji X-system cameras. It seemed a few years ago that Pentax had thoroughly outpaced Olympus as a serious camera manufacturer, but suddenly Olympus has a trump card in their mirrorless system that makes them look a lot smarter than Pentax.

While it's impossible to imagine a world where Pentax overtakes Nikon and Canon as the dominant full-frame system, it's painfully easy to imagine one where Pentax instead of Olympus produced the hip mirrorless camera that sells like pancakes. Instead they gave us the stillborn K-01. (But, hey, it was designed by Marc Newson....)

The closer attention I pay to mirrorless developments, the more I think Pentax is deeply "out of it".

[JohnBee]

...Anyway it's a bad analogy (audiophiles to photographers)...

While I agree that audio isn't a very fitting analogy, I'd point out that the illustration wasn't intended as a product comparison per say, but more along the lines of the pattern and behaviours exhibited by consumers at the site of change. ie, which can be observed in areas such as; cars, audio, etc. etc. And though there's no denying that preservations can and does exist following such advancement(ie. film shooters, tube amps, classic cars etc), I'd also point-out that such advancements seem to run along outside our control. IOW. and it is based on this that I believe the substitution of the mirrorbox is destined for retirement in the near future.

[Clavius]

To the original question, no, I don't think mirrorless will replace DSLR's amongst professionals, or enthusiasts who aspire to shoot like professionals. Regular people who just want a nice camera to take pictures of the family? Sure. It's already happening, much to Pentax's dismay.

As much as everyone would love to see a full-frame Pentax DSLR, the place where they are really getting their butts kicked IMO is from the other direction, by the exciting mirrorless cameras like the Olympus E-M5 and the Fuji X-system cameras. It seemed a few years ago that Pentax had thoroughly outpaced Olympus as a serious camera manufacturer, but suddenly Olympus has a trump card in their mirrorless system that makes them look a lot smarter than Pentax.

While it's impossible to imagine a world where Pentax overtakes Nikon and Canon as the dominant full-frame system, it's painfully easy to imagine one where Pentax instead of Olympus produced the hip mirrorless camera that sells like pancakes. Instead they gave us the stillborn K-01. (But, hey, it was designed by Marc Newson....)

The closer attention I pay to mirrorless developments, the more I think Pentax is deeply "out of it".

This is the best sum-up of the current Pentax situation ever.

Pentax has this brand image of being innovative and even tell their users to "be different" like them. But it has been a long time since they have been living up to that. Currently: "fear change" would be a more appropriate slogan for them and their very conservative users.

[tclausen]

To the original question, no, I don't think mirrorless will replace DSLR's amongst professionals, or enthusiasts who aspire to shoot like professionals. Regular people who just want a nice camera to take pictures of the family? Sure. It's already happening, much to Pentax's dismay.

As much as everyone would love to see a full-frame Pentax DSLR, the place where they are really getting their butts kicked IMO is from the other direction, by the exciting mirrorless cameras like the Olympus E-M5 and the Fuji X-system cameras. It seemed a few years ago that Pentax had thoroughly outpaced Olympus as a serious camera manufacturer, but suddenly Olympus has a trump card in their mirrorless system that makes them look a lot smarter than Pentax.

While it's impossible to imagine a world where Pentax overtakes Nikon and Canon as the dominant full-frame system, it's painfully easy to imagine one where Pentax instead of Olympus produced the hip mirrorless camera that sells like pancakes. Instead they gave us the stillborn K-01. (But, hey, it was designed by Marc Newson....)

The closer attention I pay to mirrorless developments, the more I think Pentax is deeply "out of it".

Let's not forget two things, though...

1) Olympus abandoned their OM mount entirely. They had, quite simply, no legacy users to carry over to digital since they utterly dropped the ball on auto-focus. So, the came up with 4/3.

2) Olympus also was able to go "exciting mirrorless cameras" by way of shortening the register distance (micro-4/3).

I was one of the old OM users, who stuck, stuck and stuck it through, but Oly never came through with a decent AF System, and my investment in OM mount was wasted, worthless even as resale....so my switch to Pentax was explicitly as they'd committed to the K-mount through the times. That /was/ the sales argument for me to go to Pentax, not Canikony.

Olympus burned me, and so I turned to the one company that hadn't "burned its users" for their investment in lenses.

If Pentax is to "go exciting mirrorless cameras", they likely will have to also do away with the mirror box, slim the camera, and....suddenly be incompatible with all the K-mount lenses.

The /only/ way that Pentax could do this, without making me feel burned, would be if they - for free - offered one micro-K-adaptor per K-mount lens I offered, and, if that would not add much bulk (a couple of mm would be acceptable, more than that, no) to the lens length.

That's likely entirely impossible.

I think that Pentax competing with the micro-4/3 should go through the Q-mount.

MILC K-mount, like the K-01, is also welcome, but I think that this should compete in a different league than the Olympus OM-D cameras. I think that the K-01 was a quite worthy test balloon: an extremely competent camera that I think that Pentax learned a ton from, and I really believe that a K-02 is in the future.

[PiDicus Rex]

bu that means not compromising to support a 30 year old mount.

There is absolutely no reason for the choice of any mount, new or old, to impact on the performance of the sensor and the display screen.
All choosing a new mount does, is allows the newer camera bodies more control of the lens, something which is at odds to the professional use of any stills or moving picture camera.

The choice of an older, standardized mount means owners of expensive and high quality lenses can continue using them with newer cameras - we see this every day in TV Broadcast, where nearly every lens in current use for SD and for HD television production, is a B-Mount lens.
The only exceptions being where individual directors choose a different camera format to make their program look different.

This in fact was one of the reasons I chose a K-01 over a Nikon or Canon - because the Asahi/Pentax and Sigma lenses available do not 'look' the same as what everyone else is using on screen.

Now, addressing the OP's question,..
Yes, Mirrorless will take over.
When was the last time you saw a point n shoot with a viewfinder?
What about a Tablet or Smart Phone?
It's from these devices that new buyers are looking to step up to professional level gear, and they will buy the format they are most familiar with, which will be mirrorless and LCD.

Timeframe? The way things are changing right now, 5 to 10 years, max.
By then the majority of cameras being sold in the pro-sumer/professional level will be mirrorless, just as anything less then full-pro camcorders have already dispensed with viewfinders for flip out screens.
After that, it will only be high-end and specialty cameras that retain a viewfinder, and I'm betting most of those will be 'stills only'.

[arnold]

I'm trying to picture following fast moving subjects without a view finder.

[Adinfinitum]

Interesting concept, and in part is being enacted as we speak

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/general-photography-industry/230353-hello...ntax-well.html

and video discussion

You Tube

You Tube

I'm still not convinced myself, but I've been around long enough to know that change is inevitable.

[PiDicus Rex]

I'm trying to picture following fast moving subjects without a view finder.

I'd suggest that with the right tripod and a viewfinder shade, it's easier.

I used to film Sportscars and Formula 5000's at Phillip Island GP Circuit, Sandown Raceway, Calder Park, and a few other Victorian (AUS) race tracks, using an XL-1 on a tripod and the eye-piece viewfinder.
More often then not, with the XL-1, I used to end up using a battery powered LCD monitor with a shade to aim and frame, after setting my focus marks on the lens.

In comparison, using the K-01 is like using a studio camera -> the ones with meter long box lenses and a 7" screen on top.
It's the same arrangement you'll see used on platforms at the Cricket, Rugby, NASCARS, Formula One, Tennis, Golf, etc.

You stand back from the camera, watch the screen, and have both hands on the focus and zoom remotes.

For the K-01, I can zoom and focus left handed, and pan/tilt the tripod head around, without trying to keep my eye stuck to the viewfinder, so it's more like when I had the monitor hooked up to the XL-1, then using the viewfinder.

If there's plenty of light, bump the shutter speed up and close down the iris to about f-11, and the K-01 is pretty close to any other consumer camcorder for depth of field, and better on IQ.

[philbaum]

Mirrorless ILCs will demolish sales of APSc DSLRs within 10 years. Within a total of 15 years, sales of FF DSLRs will have been demolished by FF mirrorless ILCs.

Canon and Nikon are loathe to kill their cash cows, but Sony is forcing their hand. Both those companies are now learning their lessons on mirrorless with the Nikon 1 systems and the Canon M system. It took many years to develop today's DSLRs, and now we're seeing Mirrorless ILCs making progressive improvements, but at a faster rate.

My record of body purchases is: K10, K20, K5, Nex 5n, Nex 6 to arrive this week. In the last 2 weeks, i have discovered that macro lenses are much easier to use with mirrorless cameras than they are with APS DSLRs. I first bought a M series 100mmF4 and had tremendous fun finding different angles to take macro pictures, using the Nex 5N tilt display. A few years ago, i had bought the DA 35/macro lens and never really felt any enthusiasm for it, without knowing why. So after i enjoyed the Pentax M 100mm macro, i pulled my rarely used DA35/macro off the shelf, and tried it out on the Nex. I found that it was entirely a different and much more satisfying experience than using it on a Pentax DSLR. I was planning to sell it, but now will keep it for solely NEX use.

Why do macros work so much better on a mirrorless than on an APS DSLR? Well its because the Nex cameras have two effective manual focusing methods, focus peaking and secondly, magnified view. Combine those 2 methods with a Nex tilting display, and I have found that Pentax macro lenses just come too life and are a joy to use in creative ways. I believe from what i've been told that FF cameras also provide an ease of focusing so i have been careful to explain my opinion of mirrorless macro use as superior over APSc only DSLRs.

I still keep my K5 and some good Pentax zooms, because Sony just isn't there yet with quality zooms. I hope that Pentax comes out with a successor to the K01 because I'm confident that is where the future resides, i.e. with mirrorless ILCs.

[Rondec]

Basically, the question is whether EVFs will replace OVFs in the forseeable future and the answer is yes, mainly because they will eventually be of decent enough quality and will be cheaper for the camera companies to manufacture. But we are still a little way off, particularly for upper end cameras -- full frame with fast frame rates, fast continuous auto focus. There is still far too much lag on EVFs to allow for a decent experience in those type of situation.

[philbaum]

Basically, the question is whether EVFs will replace OVFs in the forseeable future and the answer is yes, mainly because they will eventually be of decent enough quality and will be cheaper for the camera companies to manufacture. But we are still a little way off, particularly for upper end cameras -- full frame with fast frame rates, fast continuous auto focus. There is still far too much lag on EVFs to allow for a decent experience in those type of situation.

My view is different. EVF is not the most important thing to me about mirrorless. Its that the video feed of mirrorless enables articulated and tilting displays, AND allows a superior manual focus process over APS cameras. Since APS cameras make up, perhaps 90% of dslrs, this is a big deal. Does Sony think that tilting displays are a big deal - apparently, because they added it to the RX100 II and they even have it on their A99.

Does one need tilting displays for some kinds of photography work - probably not - but it works well in other areas.

[monochrome]

According to Jim Malcolm in the Q User's conversation, Pentax believes current technology EVF's aren't quite there yet whether articulated or fixed. Pentax believes the eventual winning technology with evolve out of the current OLED stream. IIRC he inferred that opinion covers viewfinders AND viewing panes.

[Rondec]

My view is different. EVF is not the most important thing to me about mirrorless. Its that the video feed of mirrorless enables articulated and tilting displays, AND allows a superior manual focus process over APS cameras. Since APS cameras make up, perhaps 90% of dslrs, this is a big deal. Does Sony think that tilting displays are a big deal - apparently, because they added it to the RX100 II and they even have it on their A99.

Does one need tilting displays for some kinds of photography work - probably not - but it works well in other areas.

How is this different from live view that is capable on most DSLRs at this point? Seems like a tilting display would be capable whether or not you have mirrorless. Pentax just hasn't chosen to offer that feature on any of their SLRs to this point, although the K30 does feature focus peaking.

[philbaum]

How is this different from live view that is capable on most DSLRs at this point? Seems like a tilting display would be capable whether or not you have mirrorless. Pentax just hasn't chosen to offer that feature on any of their SLRs to this point, although the K30 does feature focus peaking.

I think you're right. I had assumed there was a reason Live-view wasn't being used with a tilt screen but that doesn't make sense. So customers could have an OVF and a articulated screen if some vendor chose to produce it. The live view on my K5 was pretty clunky operation, but i've read that follow-on cameras were much smoother with it.

K01, K30 and K50 all offer focus peaking which is great. I don't think the K5 successors have it though.