[nosnoop]

I keep repeating this because it is a fact.

Well then, show me the facts.
You are simply dismissing the data without producing any "facts" backing you up.

Concluding that DSLR are doomed from such data is folly. EVIL's are no more DSLR's than P&S's....
The fact is that DSLR's are continue to increase in sales volume in spite of EVIL's and in spite of the fact that DSLR sales was expected to saturate and flatten out and even sink several years ago.

No one is saying DSLR is doomed. The data just showed that the entry level DSLR market segment is being eroded by mirrorless.
Did you see the graph produced by Pentax in my post above? DSLR sales increase when compared with 2008 is only 7.9%; and if you take away mirrorless, it would be almost flat.

It is clear that people buy DSLR's from other criterias that they buy EVIL's from, and if EVIL's are eroding any sales it is most likely from upper end P&S.

No, it is not clear at all. Most first time buyers who bought into DSLR or mirrorless wants a large sensor and interchangeable lens camera, as they are perceived to be necessary for higher quality. So those buyers would not have considered P&S (high end or not) which do not possess those features.

[nosnoop]

An optical viewfinder will be prerequsite for serious cameras for years to come simply because it is the most important thing for serious photography. Serious photographers use the finder as compositional tool. For this nothing beats the real thing. EVIL's are about removing an extraordinarily important feature; the optical viewfinder.

Ironically, optical viewfinder is NOT the real thing. It is what you see, but not what the sensor sees! The real thing is the sensor output, because that's what would be captured in the flash memory! Optical viewfinder is simply a simulation of the image captured, and it can be a bit off from the "real thing" - dynamic range, white balance.... I mean most DSLRs do not even have 100% viewfinder!

You got this one right:
"Serious photographers use the finder as compositional tool." - electronic or optical.

[johnmflores]

I always have a chuckle when I hand my dSLR to someone weened on cell phone cameras and digital point and shoots and the first thing that they do is hold it a foot or more from their face and look at the blank LCD with a puzzled look. These are the folks that will step up to mirrorless cameras in droves. Unlike many of the folks here, they won't miss the mirror because they never had one to begin with.

Will EVIL kill dSLRs? Not a chance. We still have AM radio for crying out loud.

Finally, regarding the EVIL acronym and the term "mirrorless". Both are horrid in their own special way. EVIL for obvious reasons, and "mirrorless" because it's describing something that's missing, not what's there. It's like calling a car a "not-a-boat".

[Brangdon]

I see at least two possibilities to claim new territory here: They could be the first to introduce an FF-EVIL. Or they could make a camera that is significantly smaller than the current EVILs, i.e. which can compete also with high-end compacts.

It would be interesting to see a largish EVIL, one with a mount that accepts old Pentax lenses without needing an adaptor. The benefit would be in the bells and whistles that an electronic viewfinder can offer - for example, showing over-exposed highlights in the EFV as well as in LiveView.

However, I'm not yet convinced that electronic viewfinders are good enough. Currently the main benefit of EVIL seems to be their small size, with EVF bells and whistles merely a bonus rather than a reason to buy.

[nosnoop]

Unlike many of the folks here, they won't miss the mirror because they never had one to begin with.

Exactly! And Pentax research showed that this group of people is part of the 81% of the DSLR market for the year 2010.

[Torphoto]

I'll put in my .1 pence, I want to see Pentax do a nex style evil with full K mount, slap a 21mm, 40mm or 70mm limited and it can be a actually pocket sized killer range finder that I can carry around everywhere I want to go. It won't replace a Dslr bu it will make a great travel companion that my Girlfriend won't fuss about having to lug my huge camera bags around.

[junyo]

An optical viewfinder will be prerequsite for serious cameras for years to come simply because it is the most important thing for serious photography. Serious photographers use the finder as compositional tool. For this nothing beats the real thing.

Serious photographers... except street shooters, who often shoot quickly and/or discretely and can't bring the camera to eye level. And photographers looking for a unique prospective, sticking the camera somewhere they might not be willing/able to put their head. And 6x6 shooters that use the VF as a general guide and cropping to compose. And any photographer who uses a waist level finder (i.e. at arms length) or a rangefinder (not particularly precise). There have been a lot of people taking great pictures throughout the history of photography who are apparently non-serious shooters.

What makes a "serious photographer" is output; the specifics of the tool is meaningless. If you can't see the utility of an EVIL, fine, don't buy one. But denigrating everyone who does see a utility there is kinda sad and tired.

[Pål Jensen]

Serious photographers... except street shooters, who often shoot quickly and/or discretely and can't bring the camera to eye level. And photographers looking for a unique prospective, sticking the camera somewhere they might not be willing/able to put their head. And 6x6 shooters that use the VF as a general guide and cropping to compose. And any photographer who uses a waist level finder (i.e. at arms length) or a rangefinder (not particularly precise). There have been a lot of people taking great pictures throughout the history of photography who are apparently non-serious shooters.

What makes a "serious photographer" is output; the specifics of the tool is meaningless. If you can't see the utility of an EVIL, fine, don't buy one. But denigrating everyone who does see a utility there is kinda sad and tired.

And what have this do do with a missing mirror? This can be done with a DSLR. Removing a good optical viewfinder is not a feature. Most DSLR already have an electronic finder and nothing prevents the manufacturers to make them more sophisticated or articulated.

[jon.partsch]

Okay, I am officially on the EVIL bandwagon now. I want to see a Pentax product! I want it to be fully compatible with K/KAF mount (via an adapter WITH SCREW DRIVE) and allow me to use my old Rokkor glass via a cheap third-party adapter.

My question to all of you is this - how does split image focusing in manual differ in an EVF from an OVF (if much at all)? Of course the Pentax EVIL MUST have a great EVF with the ability to switch focusing screens line in the Olympus cameras.

[jon.partsch]

Most DSLR already have an electronic finder and nothing prevents the manufacturers to make them more sophisticated or articulated.

Alright Pål, I've heard (read, I mean) you say this several times. What do you mean by "DSLR already have an electronic finder"? Are you talking about the big LCD screen on the back? That's an entirely different beast! The LCD can provide no focusing aid like a split screen, is difficult to use in bright conditions, is entirely non-discrete, and is often cumbersome to use in many shooting situations.

[uccemebug]

What makes a "serious photographer" is output; the specifics of the tool is meaningless. If you can't see the utility of an EVIL, fine, don't buy one. But denigrating everyone who does see a utility there is kinda sad and tired.

Nope, Junyo you're clearly not getting it. It's got a viewfinder or it's silly amateur stuff.

Okay, I am officially on the EVIL bandwagon now. I want to see a Pentax product! I want it to be fully compatible with K/KAF mount (via an adapter WITH SCREW DRIVE) and allow me to use my old Rokkor glass via a cheap third-party adapter.

I'll second that!

[junyo]

And what have this do do with a missing mirror? This can be done with a DSLR. Removing a good optical viewfinder is not a feature. Most DSLR already have an electronic finder and nothing prevents the manufacturers to make them more sophisticated or articulated.

If removing the mirror and prism makes the camera smaller/lighter/easier to live with, and size/weight/livability is your priority, then yeah, it is a feature. The point is, you can do fine work without the mirror/prism/OVF, contrary to your blanket assertion.

Look, I respect your opinion. I even share it somewhat. I haven't bought an EVIL yet because I want a compact one (not DSLR size/shape) with an integral eye level viewfinder. I personally could not live with just the back screen. But that's purely my personal preference, and I don't presume to say that if you don't share my preference then you're not a real photographer. These conversations get bogged down in people insisting that there is Only True Way to do something, and the fact is there's not.

[junyo]

Nope, Junyo you're clearly not getting it. It's got a viewfinder or it's silly amateur stuff.

It's funny, the Manhattan Miniature Camera Club, one of the oldest camera clubs in NYC, was formed for those whippersnappers using tiny cameras in a mini format... 35mm.

[dnas]

I'll put in my .1 pence, I want to see Pentax do a nex style evil with full K mount, slap a 21mm, 40mm or 70mm limited and it can be a actually pocket sized killer range finder that I can carry around everywhere I want to go. It won't replace a Dslr bu it will make a great travel companion that my Girlfriend won't fuss about having to lug my huge camera bags around.

That cannot happen. Even with the tiny Pentax "Limited" lenses, the registration/flange distance is still 45.5mm with a Pentax K mount. The Sony Nex is 18mm, while micro 4/3 is 20mm. This is what make the small form factor possible.

This is the distance from the mount to the sensor, so you can't have a "pocket sized killer" like the NEX based on a 45.5mm flange.

[Blue]

If removing the mirror and prism makes the camera smaller/lighter/easier to live with, and size/weight/livability is your priority, then yeah, it is a feature. The point is, you can do fine work without the mirror/prism/OVF, contrary to your blanket assertion.

. . .

To a point that is true. However, one of the reasons the rangefinders got dethroned as king of the 135 realm was the close focusing with macro lenses, closeup lenses as well as easier to use with longer glass. With a pancake lens this things have a nice slim, pocket size profile. However a zoom or tele knocks the ergonomics to an unwieldy and goofy looking system. Plus, the sensor size is currently a limitation on some.