[luftfluss]

DSLR's, Pentax, the camera industry, the capitalist global market system, man and all other life on earth, the planet and god is - DOOOOOOOOOMED
But Sony will go on.

As long as there is one smartphone camera to record the carnage, it's all good.

[luftfluss]

Anyhoo, back to the OP's (has he visited his thread recently?) intended topic... when I see a wunderkam like the A9, I do marvel at the technology involved, but I never actually consider - even for a second - that I would own it. It's like a supercar or iPhone - impressive, but not attractive.

[wildman]

Anyhoo, back to the OP's (has he visited his thread recently?) intended topic...

OK.

the concept of the process we go through got submerged beneath the ability of the technology to do it all for us.

Not all technologies's purpose is the same.
I think the highest order of technology is that which logically follows out of the purpose of the tool. Back in the 19th century the "shutter" was a lens cap over the lens. With the increasing speed of emulsions it became obvious that the shutter had to become automatic and predictable and it did. The same sort of thing can be said when SLRs got the auto diaphragm - it's purpose logically follows from the purpose of a camera. I don't hear photographers wishing they could go back to using a 1932 Exacta SLR for the sheer joy of experiencing the technical process of using that level of tech.

For me "process" can mean the technical or creative process. I highly value gear that technically gets out of my way and allows me to concentrate on the one thing that technology can't do - create a meaningful beautiful image. To the extent that the A9, for instance, allows the rather specialized sports-action shooter to do that it's a good tool for their purposes and if not then not.

[photoptimist]

Excellent points, wildman.

What's interesting is that there's clearly a segment who see EVFs as "in the way," another segment that sees the SLR mechanism as "in the way", and probably other segments that think both are obtrusive and that a rangefinder or simple framing sight is best.

What's especially interesting is there's also a segment of photographers who seek a challenge and mastery. They may intentionally pick cameras (e.g., a 1932 Exacta SLR or a large format film) in which the quirks and complexities of the technology are totally in the way but that's what makes it interesting to them.

Finally, there's the segment who seek prestige of owning the most expensive, latest gizmo.

Clearly, there's some A9 buyers in all those segments but there's also a fair fraction that would never want the A9.

[35mmfilmfan]

But Sony will go on

Sony - but yet, so far.

[Digitalis]

Sony A9 enabling you to take 20fps using an untold number of AF points at 1/32,000 at ISO 204,000 and therefore capture the ultimate picture of a bee in flight?

If you have a good pair of wireless flash units, and the knowledge on how to light your subject properly you won't need all that crap.

I find it is better to leave a bit of motion in bees wings as their translucency makes them difficult to spot when they are still. A bit of blur adds to the sense of realism, when was the last time you saw a bee flying around with its wings perfectly still?