[reh321]

two is enough. F-I-R-M-W-A-R-E and long product generation is the future.

Some features depend on hardware.

The weaknesses people here see in the KP, the reason they want a K-3ii followup, are entirely hardware.

All of the differences I know of between K-70 and KP are hardware.

Three levels of APS-C camera, defined by hardware differences.

[Rondec]

Firmware updates are fine assuming the hardware is up to the improvements and also assuming a company has enough revenue coming in from other sources or charging enough for said firmware improvements to pay for them. Most of the time firmware updates smack more of a company that rushed a product to market and has to fix things or enable things that should have been right from the beginning.

[BigMackCam]

It seems many people were convinced that MILC would kill DSLRs once Canon and Nikon joined the MILC wagon. So what does the jury tell us so far?. The sales and production figures for November 2018 (which should surely show the MILC launch peak for Aug/Sept/Oct launches of the new cameras) still show DSLRs had 28% more units made and 38% more units shipped than did MILCs. Even with Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic, and Leica now all offering MILCs, DSLRs still beat them.

I've never understood the view that MILCs are somehow "better" than DSLRs. I'm like a scratched record repeating myself, I realise, but both tools have advantages and disadvantages depending on the use case and user preferences. I can see why manufacturers might prefer building MILCs due to the reduced electro-mechanical complexity.

There are situations where I undoubtedly prefer using my A7 MkII - but they're surprisingly narrow in scope... specifically, if I'm adapting old manual focus glass. For that, it's wonderful. And yet, still not perfect... but very good. Oh, and I occasionally shoot my A-mount glass on it, either on the very rare occasions where I want my HV set up with one lens and the A7II with another, or because I've forgotten to charge my HV batteries But if I'm shooting modern AF glass, most of the time I'll pick one of my older or newer DSLRs. EVFs have their uses, but I do like a good OVF.

Of course, I'm still hopeful that one day we might see an ILC with hybrid viewfinder. My fantasy for day-to-day shooting

MILC may have dominated the internet chatter stream, but that noise was not reflected (HA! ;) ) in the actual sales figures.

I see what you did there. Nice

[clackers]

Firmware updates are fine assuming the hardware is up to the improvements and also assuming a company has enough revenue coming in from other sources or charging enough for said firmware improvements to pay for them. Most of the time firmware updates smack more of a company that rushed a product to market and has to fix things or enable things that should have been right from the beginning.

Yep, firmware is software. The camera can never do anything (GPS, WiFi, 4k video, IBIS) the hardware wasn't capable of in the first place.

[Mistral75]

In the CP+2018 Ricoh interview, Ricoh said that according to CIPA, the total camera market is decreasing due to compact cameras but not related to mirrorless or DSLR.

Which was not correct at that time since 2017 (latest data then available) was a rather good year for compact cameras (and cameras in general) in comparison to 2016, which was adversely affected by the Kumamoto earthquake (mid-April 2016).

Shipments, CIPA data, 2017 compared to 2016, evolution in units / value:

• Compact cameras: +5.7% / +12.5%
• Interchangeable lens cameras: +0.6% / +11.3%
  • of which DSLRs: -10.1% / -3.6%
  • of which mirrorless cameras: +29.2% / +48.2%

Source: http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-2017_e.pdf

The situation was different in 2018 (read: worse, in particular for compact cameras).

Shipments, CIPA data, January-November 2018 compared to January-November 2017, evolution in units / value:

• Compact cameras: -35.7% / -26.2%
• Interchangeable lens cameras: -7.2% / -1.7%
  • of which DSLRs: -11.2% / -14.9%
  • of which mirrorless cameras: +0.3% / +19.5%

Source: http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-201811_e.pdf

[aurele]

Which was not correct at that time since 2017 (latest data then available) was a rather good year for compact cameras (and cameras in general) in comparison to 2016, which was adversely affected by the Kumamoto earthquake (mid-April 2016).

Shipments, CIPA data, 2017 compared to 2016, evolution in units / value:

• Compact cameras: +5.7% / +12.5%
• Interchangeable lens cameras: +0.6% / +11.3%
  • of which DSLRs: -10.1% / -3.6%
  • of which mirrorless cameras: +29.2% / +48.2%

Source: http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-2017_e.pdf

The situation was different in 2018 (read: worse, in particular for compact cameras).

Shipments, CIPA data, January-November 2018 compared to January-November 2017, evolution in units / value:

• Compact cameras: -35.7% / -26.2%
• Interchangeable lens cameras: -7.2% / -1.7%
  • of which DSLRs: -11.2% / -14.9%
  • of which mirrorless cameras: +0.3% / +19.5%

Source: http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-201811_e.pdf

numbers clearly shows that each unit sold was tendentiously more expensive than in the previous year.

Ricoh choice to go after upper value lenses and body was a decent strategy.

[Mistral75]

(...)

(*) apparently the Nikon FTZ doesn't support screw-drive AF

(...)

No, it does not. Thanks to an actuator it supports the lenses with a mechanical aperture control system but it doesn't include any autofocus motor. The latest Nikkor lenses relying on screw-drive AF were launched in 2000.

Sony have two Sony A --> Sony E adapters. Both include an actuator to support the mechanical aperture control system of the A-mount lenses. One of them (LA-EA4) includes an AF module and an AF motor. The other one (LA-EA3) does not.

The various EF --> RF Canon adapters don't include and don't need any of this. Since day one in 1987 any and all EF lenses include their own AF motor (EF is for Electro-Focus) and an electromagnetic aperture control system (EOS is for Electro-Optical System).

[punkrachmaninov]

Some features depend on hardware.

The weaknesses people here see in the KP, the reason they want a K-3ii followup, are entirely hardware.

All of the differences I know of between K-70 and KP are hardware.

Three levels of APS-C camera, defined by hardware differences.

the sensors have all basically hit the wall... since 2015 we have been in a 20ish megapixel era. heck, just yesterday sony announced their autofocus on the a9 had finally caught up to the canon 70d... huzzah!

idk, i haven't seen any substantive innovation since the panasonic gh4, or the minolta innovations that are still cutting edge: stabilization, phase-detection autofocus... what has changed since then?

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

the autofocus of the minolta maxxum is as good as my pentax k5... (shoutout to excellent film-centric youtuber Azriel Knight for the pudding! probably not his real name?)

sure, maybe video keeps incrementally getting better - but we have the "team" at magic lantern to inculcate the canon gatekeepers with their nightly builds. manufacturers have been preventing progress in video since the Lumiere brothers.

we have pixel shift too... maybe it will come up in the super awesome trade-war? i could go on like this, but really the point is that the tech only changes every 10 years or so. suffice it to say it would also be much more environmentally friendly and customer conscious if a company like nikon or pentax decided to offer substantial upgrades to firmware instead of renovated cameras with debatably similar tech.

the best example of this would be the sordid history of the SD vs XQD card debacle... why would we collectively even want or prefer to use the SD format anymore? it is the inferior format, it isn't future proof, and it has been obsolete when compared to the XQD (cfast) format for years... since before they even went pci-express. if Pentax released the exact same camera as the KP with a single XQD card slot it would be up to them to decide the buffer, not the sd card format... potentially a company such as pentax could release a camera with the intent to develop based on a plebiscite of it's own purchasers!?!

yet we continue to accept mediocrity in the face of superior technological advancements, the only discernable justification for doing so is greed. ironically it has been companies that appear to be doing their customers favors instead of nerfing their purchases who seem to be building a brand lately.

[Mistral75]

numbers clearly shows that each unit sold was tendentiously more expensive than in the previous year.

Ricoh choice to go after upper value lenses and body was a decent strategy.

Indeed. Manufacturers are trying to mitigate the impact of the declining market on their revenues and profits by moving upmarket. This can't however be done indefinitely.

I already posted the graph below in another thread.

[punkrachmaninov]

Which was not correct at that time since 2017 (latest data then available) was a rather good year for compact cameras (and cameras in general) in comparison to 2016, which was adversely affected by the Kumamoto earthquake (mid-April 2016).

Shipments, CIPA data, 2017 compared to 2016, evolution in units / value:

• Compact cameras: +5.7% / +12.5%
• Interchangeable lens cameras: +0.6% / +11.3%
  • of which DSLRs: -10.1% / -3.6%
  • of which mirrorless cameras: +29.2% / +48.2%

Source: http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-2017_e.pdf

The situation was different in 2018 (read: worse, in particular for compact cameras).

Shipments, CIPA data, January-November 2018 compared to January-November 2017, evolution in units / value:

• Compact cameras: -35.7% / -26.2%
• Interchangeable lens cameras: -7.2% / -1.7%
  • of which DSLRs: -11.2% / -14.9%
  • of which mirrorless cameras: +0.3% / +19.5%

Source: http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-201811_e.pdf

(punk is heard evil laughing from far, far away...)

[BigMackCam]

the sensors have all basically hit the wall... since 2015 we have been in a 20ish megapixel era. heck, just yesterday sony announced their autofocus on the a9 had finally caught up to the canon 70d... huzzah!

idk, i haven't seen any substantive innovation since the panasonic gh4, or the minolta innovations that are still cutting edge: stabilization, phase-detection autofocus... what has changed since then?

Minolta Maxxum 7000 | This Old Camera #14 - YouTube

the autofocus of the minolta maxxum is as good as my pentax k5... (shoutout to excellent film-centric youtuber Azriel Knight for the pudding! probably not his real name?)

sure, maybe video keeps incrementally getting better - but we have the "team" at magic lantern to inculcate the canon gatekeepers with their nightly builds. manufacturers have been preventing progress in video since the Lumiere brothers.

we have pixel shift too... maybe it will come up in the super awesome trade-war? i could go on like this, but really the point is that the tech only changes every 10 years or so. suffice it to say it would also be much more environmentally friendly and customer conscious if a company like nikon or pentax decided to offer substantial upgrades to firmware instead of renovated cameras with debatably similar tech.

the best example of this would be the sordid history of the SD vs XQD card debacle... why would we collectively even want or prefer to use the SD format anymore? it is the inferior format, it isn't future proof, and it has been obsolete when compared to the XQD (cfast) format for years... since before they even went pci-express. if Pentax released the exact same camera as the KP with a single XQD card slot it would be up to them to decide the buffer, not the sd card format... potentially a company such as pentax could release a camera with the intent to develop based on a plebiscite of it's own purchasers!?!

yet we continue to accept mediocrity in the face of superior technological advancements, the only discernable justification for doing so is greed. ironically it has been companies that appear to be doing their customers favors instead of nerfing their purchases who seem to be building a brand lately.

I don't even know where to begin with this... I certainly haven't time tonight....

Shocking differences between AF performance in two totally different cameras (70D DSLR vs A9 MILC), zero sensor progress since 2015, 1985 Minolta film camera stabilisation and PDAF up to modern digital standards, tech staying relevant in ten year chunks... As posts go, it includes more than its fair share of questionable - dare I say, "tongue in cheek" - references.

I can only assume you're posting this to "shake things up" as you've mentioned before. I'm tempted to bite, yet on second thoughts, I think I'll step aside... for this post, at least

[punkrachmaninov]

I don't even know where to begin with this... I certainly haven't time tonight....

Shocking differences between AF performance in two totally different cameras (70D DSLR vs A9 MILC), zero sensor progress since 2015, 1985 Minolta film camera stabilisation and PDAF up to modern digital standards, tech staying relevant in ten year chunks... As posts go, it includes more than its fair share of questionable - dare I say, "tongue in cheek" - references.

I can only assume you're posting this to "shake things up" as you've mentioned before. I'm tempted to bite, yet on second thoughts, I think I'll step aside... for this post, at least

if you like, i could make a spreadsheet of the megapixels vs. year released... ��

[BigMackCam]

if you like, i could make a spreadsheet of the megapixels vs. year released... ��

It's not all about the megapickles. Resolution is just one property, and arguably the least important, depending on the user's needs. If you'd like to include dynamic range, sensor noise, readout speed, on-sensor PDAF (the good and bad therein) and a whole bunch of other stuff in that spreadsheet, then yes... that would be interesting reading indeed. I'd love to take a look at it. We could even make it a resource here on the forums for everyone's benefit (subject to review)...

[photoptimist]

Indeed. Manufacturers are trying to mitigate the impact of the declining market on their revenues and profits by moving upmarket. This can't however be done indefinitely.

I already posted the graph below in another thread.

This data says just as much (or more) about consumers moving upmarket. An average price won't go up if consumers keep buying products that are priced below average (and, by mathematical necessity, there must always be some products at a below-average price point). Similarly, even if camera makers put out ever more expensive cameras, the average price won't change unless consumers move upmarket, too, and buy the high-end.

It's ILC consumers that have moved upmarket and the makers have followed. Or, more likely, many of the downmarket ILC buyers have disappeared. The low-end ILCs don't offer enough of a performance/feature boost over everyone's smartphone to justify buying.

[punkrachmaninov]

It's not all about the megapickles. Resolution is just one property, and arguably the least important, depending on the user's needs. If you'd like to include dynamic range, sensor noise, readout speed, on-sensor PDAF (the good and bad therein) and a whole bunch of other stuff in that spreadsheet, then yes... that would be interesting reading indeed. I'd love to take a look at it. We could even make it a resource here on the forums for everyone's benefit (subject to review)...

do i get an assistant?