[stevebrot]

So you won’t buy a Canon in 2020 because they did something kinda crappy in the 1980’s?

Don't forget the declared orphaning of a second mount in 2019.


Steve

(...and I don't mean Canon EF-M...)

[Alex645]

DSLR deal breakers? This wasn't always the case, but as of today if buying a DSLR.....

a) Pentamirror
b) Non-weather sealed
c) Smaller than FF sensor
d) Canon (I was scarred in my youth by a series of unfortunate Canons)
e) Serial number missing (bad kharma)
f) 2 control wheels

[Serkevan]

Don't forget the declared orphaning of a second mount in 2019.


Steve

(...and I don't mean Canon EF-M...)

I think there is no current camera company that has not orphaned at least one or two mounts.
Canon will stop development of new EF lenses (or at least drastically slow it down), but their portfolio is large enough for that to be a veritable "first world problem".

[Ivan]

And that will be the day I stop this hobby. An EVF is beyond worthless to me. Why should I settle for a low quality screen? An OVF shows substantially higher dynamic range, follows action much faster and, most importantly, does not give me a headache with massive motion blur.

---------- Post added 02-11-20 at 08:32 PM ----------


I kinda just got out of a wedding with a big bunch of good shots. And that was shooting as a guest (no good positioning), with a lens from the early 90s (Tokina 70-210/4.5) and the situation being literally the first time I ever used AF.C on the K-1...

Don't blame the gear. Definitely not the mirror.

The statements are controversial. Time will tell. Soon.

---------- Post added 02-12-20 at 12:47 AM ----------

I think there is no current camera company that has not orphaned at least one or two mounts.
Canon will stop development of new EF lenses (or at least drastically slow it down), but their portfolio is large enough for that to be a veritable "first world problem".

The project EF is closed.

[Serkevan]

The statements are controversial. Time will tell. Soon

I don't need time to know that an EVF is useless to me, for several reasons. "It gives me a headache" is really, really not a controversial statement

Regarding Canon, sure. As I said, the EF mount is probably *the* best supplied mount today. There is basically nothing (apart from, I'm told, a refresh of the EF 50/1.4 lens, and even then you have Sigma or the Pentax D FA* 50/1.4 in Tokina flavour) that people can ask for and is unavailable.

This idea of "new = good, always" has to go out the window soon, and not only in photography.

[Ivan]

I didn't say the new one was good.I'm sorry you misunderstood me. I wrote about technology. EVF is only a small part of the future.By the way, I think you have come across not the best samples... New raw systems are now generously paid for by customers, because there are already obvious advantages over the classic.Then all the same, Professionals will either be squeezed into new systems or they will switch themselves, since it is easier to work.Time is money.No one will turn to the secondary market or to Amateurs.Support for old lenses in new systems will be incomplete.This is capitalism.Yes, and new lenses will be-there is better...English is not my native language, I don't want to write nonsense.Thank you for your gentle reactions to my words.And Canon has officially announced that it has stopped developing the bayonet EF.

[Dan Rentea]

I don't need time to know that an EVF is useless to me, for several reasons. "It gives me a headache" is really, really not a controversial statement

I think on the contrary, time and practice are the 2 main thing that will make headaches disappear. I was one of the people who had lots of headaches when using EVFs. After 10-15 minutes I had to take a pill due to headaches. But things have changed with the latest EVFs in the new cameras. I'm still not 100% comfortable with EVFs (I'm close to 95% at this point), but after playing with lots of mirrorless cameras in the last 2 years and after I bought one to shoot side by side with my DSLR, I can tell you that we can adapt to EVFs. To some (myself included) it takes more time than to others, but it's doable. The latest EVFs are far away in terms of usability than the one used in A6000/A7 II cameras... I found out that mostly when constantly panning some eyes strain may occur, but for portraits or events the headaches are gone in my case. Again, it takes time to become comfortable with EVFs if you are (like me) among the ones with headaches from EVFs, but given the improvements in this department (resolution, refresh rate, etc.), things are easier for people with headaches to adapt.

[Ivan]

I've been reading a bit.Richard Shepherd said that the company is ready to produce EF optics if the market demands it.So we can sleep in peace).

[Rondec]

For a new camera for me I would want at least two control wheels, 100 percent pentaprism viewfinder and at least equivalent image quality to what I have now -- and of course a k mount (all my lenses are k mount lenses). For me to want to buy it, it would have to offer some feature (s) that my current cameras don't -- and features specifically related to still photography. I shoot occasional video clips, but not enough for me to really care about what that looks like on my SLRs.

As far as the whole EVF thing, I too get headaches/eye strain with them. Perhaps I could learn to use them given enough time, but I remain to be convinced that they provide a whole lot of benefit for people who (a) don't shoot manual lenses (I don't) and (b) who don't shoot out of camera jpegs (I always shoot RAW and develop post facto). In point of fact, people who have transitioned from SLRs to MILCs and post their images here seem to have similar results from before and after. Maybe their keeper rate has gone up, but certainly it doesn't change the quality of their images. But as with all these things, there is no right or wrong and if you like EVFs, more power to you.

[Jonathan Mac]

I'm wondering why is this feature needed. Are you a photo-journalist?

A feature I hardly ever used. I tried couple of times, but with not so good results. (Could be that I don't know how to use this function correctly .)

I use the RAW development feature extensively in order to make changes before sending photos to my phone to share either on social media or to send to friends and family. While some changes could be made on the phone to a jpeg, others can't, and the whole process would lower image quality.

Focus peaking is not as accurate as a good split-prism screen but it's usually better than the optical viewfinder with standard screen for critical focus. I like to use old manual lenses so I need to be able to accurately focus them.

I won't buy a camera where the manufacturer changes the mount in a way that you cannot use new lenses on older bodies (KAF4 springs to mind). I won't buy a camera anymore that has Pentax on the front but is not made by Pentax in Japan but by a company that acquired the brand name. Neither would I buy a camera that is branded Canon, Nikon or Sony. Neither would I buy a Tamron or Tokina lens, because of their poor quality in the film era. Unfortunately I cannot say that I won't buy a camera that has video capabilities, because all those new camera's have that .... on board. I just want a camera to make stills. I won't buy a camera that uses film, because I am too fond of seeing the result immediately and not having to wait till the moment the whole film is exposed. I won't buy a lens that has "limited" engraved on it, because it just means that it is not affordable for some of the people that like to make good pictures. Neither would I buy a star version of a lens because they are not affordable for most of the people that like to make good pictures. I'd rather not buy a camera that has Wifi on board, as it is a totally useless gimmick. I will not buy a DSLR that has a tilting screen.

Wow, you've really narrowed down your choices there, and I have to say a lot of them are not really based on anything that seems like solid logic.

I believe Ricoh bought the camera arm of Pentax, rather than just buying the rights to the name.

The DA limited lenses can be had for reasonably prices on the used market. All of mine came from there bar the 35mm. It's true of all photographic equipment that it's not affordable for "some of the people that like to make good pictures". Not everyone has the luxury of having money to spend on a hobby, especially a potentially expensive one like photography.

I find wifi indispensible (see above). I added it to my K-3 using a Toshiba FlashAir card in one of the two card slots. I didn't list a lack of it as a dealbreaker because it can be added in this way.

[ThorSanchez]

The DA limited lenses can be had for reasonably spectacular prices on the used market.

I'll brag a little. I look for deals, and am pretty patient. Here's what I've paid for my limiteds:

15mm: $275
21mm HD: $292
40mm: $135
100mm Macro (not really a limited, but close): $175

All of them in excellent to like-new condition, optically flawless at least to my eyes. If you can't afford prices like that you probably need a new hobby. That's four excellent lenses for just a little more than a KP, or about what I paid for the K-3ii.

[brewmaster15]

The biggie for me is it has to have an optical viewfinder. I don't use the rear screen as a viewfinder.

Agree 100 %.. no optical viewfinder, I want nothing to do with it .
AL

[Steve Beswick]

Absolutely.

You do understand that the executives that made that decision are likely all retired, right? You really aren’t dealing with the same company anymore. Heck, many of them are probably dead. The EOS mount has now been around much longer than the FD mount was.

It’s a bit like saying you won’t watch the Red Sox play because of Pete Rose.

Or that you won’t buy Pentax cameras until they bring back the mount and linkages from the Spotmatic F.

[The Squirrel Mafia]

These 3 are my main deal breakers:

• No IBIS
• No front AND rear control dials
• No pentaprism viewfinder

This pretty much eliminates Canon & Nikon. Sony makes DSLT cameras, so no pentaprism there. So yeah. Just about everyone outside of Pentax is eliminated. Hahaha!

Mirrorless would be my next choice if I had to buy something outside of Pentax right now.

[BryantCP]

I won't buy a DSLR that is designed to use Canon lenses. This has no technical basis it is personal. I also don't care for their interface. I'm certain I could find my way past the interface without too much trouble but the personal dislike of that company isn't going away.

While I don't dislike Canon as a company, I really dislike the ergonomics of their DSLRs. They do have at least one lens an ultra-wide perspective control lens I would love to have. If I did commercial architectural work I might buy a Canon DSLR just for use with that lens. Otherwise the only Canon cameras I would consider are some of their higher end compact & maybe one of their new mirrorless full-frame cameras. As for DSLRs I much prefer Pentax and to a lesser extant Nikon. As far as "deal breakers" as long as Ricoh doesn't significantly change the Pentax design philosophy & ergonomics I can't think of anything that would be a "deal breaker" for me.