[Pål Jensen]

A mirrorless camera is a camera that lack a feature. A feature that most photographers, as oposed to causual shooters, find crucial.

[lytrytyr]

A mirrorless camera is a camera that lack a feature.

But one person's feature can be another person's bug!

[lytrytyr]

there'snothing a mirrorless can do an SLR cannot do.

No DSLR can do small the way my mirrorless Q7 can!

[Mark Ransom]

No DSLR can do small the way my mirrorless Q7 can!

Small sensor camera can be smaller than large sensor camera? Check.

But all the latest hype is about mirrorless FF cameras. There's a definite minimum there.

[RGlasel]

Sales of Other \ Smart Vision = ¥4.4bn = $40.35m.

Just a minor point, but Q1 is historically below average and annual revenue to Ricoh (not retailers) for Smart Vision should be over $200 million US. If total production volume (including lenses, accessories) is 400,000 pieces, that's an average of at least $500 per unit. Surely that is enough volume to pay to keep building current cameras and the pieces that go on those cameras, but it might not be enough to launch a completely new system (especially when Other is barely profitable).


The entire MILCs eliminating DSLRs argument is based on a fallacy that mirrorless cameras have inherent advantages that will make DSLRs obsolete. For a camera that one holds in their hands and puts to their face (which leads to all such cameras having relatively close dimensions), there are zero advantages to taking photographs with a mirrorless camera. MILCs were never mainstream, mass market products like DSLRs, and the launch of new mirrorless products to a mature industry where the mass market DSLRs have been rapidly declining for 6 years, should result in some growth. Instead the market for MILCs has been flat. Anyone can pull out a single year's statistics to make their desired argument, but in no marketing textbook will the the long term growth pattern of MILCs be used as an example of a new technology overtaking an older one.


Having the two largest camera manufacturers launch new MILCs at the same time should boost the overall numbers for a short period of time, but unless there is something about Nikon and Canon MILCs that is head and shoulders better than Sony MILCs (so that a large number of people purchase MILCs who would never consider buying a Sony), after the initial surge the MILC market will be back to flat. This is the two-edged sword for Sony, they need to show growth in the MILC market to get Sony Corp to invest in developing new camera models, but if the number of Sony cameras sold declines because of Canon and Nikon displacing Sony models, the camera division is no better off.

[RonHendriks1966]

Just a minor point, but Q1 is historically below average and annual revenue to Ricoh (not retailers) for Smart Vision should be over $200 million US. If total production volume (including lenses, accessories) is 400,000 pieces, that's an average of at least $500 per unit. Surely that is enough volume to pay to keep building current cameras and the pieces that go on those cameras, but it might not be enough to launch a completely new system (especially when Other is barely profitable).

Last years sales where 177 million USD. The Yen is up now, so that looks a little better for them now. Their forcast is 160 million USD on sales in the current fiscale year.

[MMVIII]

No DSLR can do small the way my mirrorless Q7 can!

Pentax Auto 110 - Wikipedia

This could be with a sensor instead of 110film. If there would be any sense in making it.

[Mistral75]

Just a minor point, but Q1 is historically below average and annual revenue to Ricoh (not retailers) for Smart Vision should be over $200 million US. If total production volume (including lenses, accessories) is 400,000 pieces, that's an average of at least $500 per unit. Surely that is enough volume to pay to keep building current cameras and the pieces that go on those cameras, but it might not be enough to launch a completely new system (especially when Other is barely profitable).

(...)

Sales of Smart Vision:

FY2018/03
Q1: ¥4.3bn
Full year: ¥19.4bn = 4.5x Q1.

FY2018/03 Q1 (¥4.3bn) is below average (¥4.85bn).

FY2017/03
Q1: ¥7.8bn
Full year: ¥25.3bn = 3.2x Q1.

FY2017/03 Q1 (¥7.8bn) is above average (¥6.33bn).

Hard to infer any 'historical trend' when there is no trend nor history.

[awscreo]

Historically, we did have format wars where one comes out on top and other one dies out. Hopefully dslr and milc can live side by side for at least the next decade)

[Kunzite]

The very same discussion was held in the 1960s when SLR cameras started to outnumber rangefinder systems, aka mirrorless cameras in today's speak. SLRs won big time. AF mounts replaced classic mounts in the 80s and 90s. Change is happening. If you are happy with your current camera or want to keep it for many more years, do so. No manufacturer has funds to throw away and there is a market for the new camera systems. The majority of lenses will be much smaller than classic design and the camera do offer new features.
In 3-5 years time no manufacturer will release another SLR again. For more than 15 years the switch to mirrorless is obvious, now it is happening.

The analogy with SLRs vs. rangefinders is not pertinent IMO, as the SLR was significantly more flexible due to the through the shooting lens viewing system. People were able to use a huge range of focal lengths with proper framing, no parallax and while being able to confirm focus.
In contrast, mirrorless is doing the same thing as SLRs, just differently.

The last part, sorry, but I'll call it FUD - and there's no way the DSLR market could possibly disappear "in 3-5 years time". Despite Sony&co flooding the market with MILCs, DSLRs are still dominating - they're not bought for the lack of choice, but because people want them.
I do not get why some people wish so much to see them disappearing. It's as if us being able to choose is some sort of an insult.

You must also think that camera makers are stupid for continuing releasing long term products (like the D FA* 50mm f/1.4, and the Canon lenses mentioned by Dan Rentea).

[Rondec]

At present there is no reason to believe that one style of camera will "win" over the other for a little while. Clearly both have advantages. With SLRs, it is the lens portfolios available without adapter, ability to see optically without lag, and better battery life. For MILCs, focusing is done on the sensor so there is less need for adjustment, they are able to mount multiple lens mounts (using an adapter), they can shoot really fast frame rates (SLRs can shoot similar frame rates using the same sensors in live view, but cannot do tracking auto focus with it) and they have better implementation of video.

To me, however, it feels a lot like those who predicted for years and years that APS-C would go away, superseded by full frame cameras. Of course, that hasn't happened and there are still some very nice APS-C cameras out there like the D500. Camera brands want to shift consumers in a particular direction, but the reality is that most folks will continue to shoot what they are comfortable with.

SLRs and MILCs in the sub-2000 dollar market offer similar enough performance that I don't see either going away unless Canon and Nikon decide they are just going to quit making them (and they've signalled that they will still make them and their lenses).

[Pål Jensen]

DSLR are popular because of the mirror, not in spite of it....

[RonHendriks1966]

Camera brands want to shift consumers in a particular direction, but the reality is that most folks will continue to shoot what they are comfortable with.

To me it feels like camera brands are trying to poke customers to start spending more money on gear like they did some years ago. Something new to drop money on....

[lytrytyr]

Pentax Auto 110 - Wikipedia

This could be with a sensor instead of 110film. If there would be any sense in making it.

That's why I wrote "DSLR."

The sensor size for 110 is 13 x 17 mm,
or what we now call four-thirds.

We can idly speculate about what would have happend
if Pentax had gone digital in that format, like Olympus,
rather than chasing FF with Contax and the Philips sensor.

[Racerdew]

How about a mirrorless body, 12 F/second with killer ISO in low light. Rocket fast focus with eye detection and all the great Pentax features! Oh... FF