[biz-engineer]

The DSLR is likely dead as mainstream ILC camera technology. But with some luck, Ricoh will see new customers, coming from other brands, who prefer cameras with an optical viewfinder. Without doing anything, Ricoh might sell more and more DSLR cameras if all other camera manufacturers stop offering new DSLR models. Also, since mirrorless lenses can't be adapted to DSLR, Ricoh might sell more Pentax made DSLR lenses at the price they want to charge to it, because customers won't be able to find third party lenses or adapt mirrorless lenses on their DSLR (zero competition), which is good news (good business) for Ricoh.

[stevebrot]

Unsure where Pentax/Ricoh is heading

From a marketing perspective they are on record as being devoted to the pentaprism. 'Nuf said?

PENTAX PRINCIPLES | brand | RICOH IMAGING


Steve

[stevebrot]

I’ve never had luck buying with resale in mind.

Me neither. That probably explains why I have so many cameras.


Steve

[MossyRocks]

I’ve never had luck buying with resale in mind.

Neither have I. The 2 lenses I bought thinking I would resell them have resulted in me not reselling them and instead they have become some of my more used lenses.

I will probably keep with using DSLRs and SLRs going forward because I like the optical view finder and in some cases the optical viewfinder really is superior. For example when doing astro shooting and one need to reposition I don't have to look at an electronic one and lose my night vision and instead I can just look through the viewfinder and reposition. Having not used an electronic viewfinder I do wonder if they can they even show some of the faint stars you get in the field when shooting some objects. I know live view struggles with stars that aren't super bright.

[AggieDad]

Well, this is T-Rex central...

I love it!

It would be interesting to take a poll and learn how many of our members have had someone say "Okay Boomer!" to them. I suspect it is more than just a few of us.

People have resisted change throughout history – think of the Luddites of the early 19th century. If you are old enough, you remember folks who held out against television. Then there were those who saw no need for a home computer (I have family that still doesn't use email) or a cell phone.

If you are anything like me (old), then I suspect you may be up-to-date with some things and hopelessly living in the past ("retro" sounds better) with other things.

Change is hard. Change is uncomfortable. The fact is, change is almost always difficult, and we will almost always look for reasons not to change. But change always comes. There are no telephone booths anymore.

What's the future for DSLRs? Just look at the new Pentax K-3-III; incremental changes and honing and refining. Nothing new. Just smoother, more polished. That is what you will get with any "new" DSLR from any manufacturer. Honing. Refining. Polishing.

Mirrorless, on the other hand, is happening. It's the new stuff. Digital replaced film. Smartphones replaced point-and-shoot. Now mirrorless is on the cusp of replacing the DSLR.

[LeeRunge]

all interesting thoughts, thanks folks

The main opinion seems to be that I wont outlive the DSLR, and Pentax prices seem to have been on the up (esp in EU/Aus) recently, So I just ordered a 10-17 . . .

Its funny I *do* feel loyalty to Pentax, partly because they chose to make things backward compatible as much as possible (when Canon et al didnt) and they chose to make the digital image making process similar to film. And who doesnt like an underdog

I wouldn't stress about it and buy what you like. Nikon still produced film SLR's until very recently so I doubt they'll kill off the DSLR line for a long time as there are still ton's of users who will eventually replace those cameras and stick with F mount. Same with Canon. They'll probably just stop development on them or update once and a while with MILC improvements like they did with the D780 (added Z6 live view features).

For now the only thing as mentioned is what experience do you like EVF or OVF? Each has it's pros/cons but in the end both will take the same image. The mirrorless line does have an advantage for video as much more effort has gone into that and the newer lenses are all made with video in mind so quieter motors etc. MILC camera/Lenses are slightly smaller but not enough to really matter all that much, neither fit in a pocket. I have both currently and the DSLR's don't feel "outdated" other than video and live view use.

Pentax is full speed ahead and probably will be around for a while selling DSLR's as tons of users love OVF. And if Canon/Nikon do stop development even with Pentaxs long refresh cycles they'll eventually be top of the DSLR game in every way so a good brand to stick with for the long haul if OVF is your fancy and you don't need top of the line video features.

I think it would be worth renting a MILC for a week just to experience EVF though as you may enjoy it. I now prefer it over OVF as it's easier to get things right from the start and no "chimping". It's also nice in low light conditions. But OVF is nice for fast moving subjects so neither is perfect or will completely outperform the other, just depends on the use case.

[Lowell Goudge]

It depends on how far you want to look into the future. Eventually the Universe will cool down to a uniform low temperature near absolute zero and cease to exist.

Yes but before that the sun will turn into a red giant with a diameter so big that it swallows up not just us, but also Mars, which makes one think why colonize Mars because it will only be temporary any way

I’m sure eventually they will die out, but, as many point out, when. Film cameras are back in vogue, people want to buy vinyl records again, high end analogue sound systems are the big thing in extreme audio.

The fact is that the dslr and high end ILC cameras will always have a niche, and the market for encapsulated cameras will be replaced with cell phones, but, thee is no substitute at some point for seeing optically what the camera sees, sure EVFs have improved, but they are not there yet. And I am sure thee will always be adaptors to take my lenses.

[Pål Jensen]

DSLR will still be thre for many years, mostly due to the large established users base. But don't expect much more than what is available right now. Canon already have said that they have stopped working on new EF products, but will continue to support existing ones as long as there's enough demand. For Nikon, although nothing official was published, it's quite obvious that all their efforts are now on the Z line. Pentax still is dedicated to DSLR, but it's not clear for how long it will make sense economicaly for them to do it as they already seem to struggle a lot to maintain the K mount.

Is this really the case? Seems like a strange business decision. Why would Canon and Nikon willingly abandon a marked segment they control 97% of? Last time I checked it was 50% of the market in spite of no new models for ages. I can understand that they want a slice of the mirrorless marked though...

[LeeRunge]

Is this really the case? Seems like a strange business decision. Why would Canon and Nikon willingly abandon a marked segment they control 97% of? Last time I checked it was 50% of the market in spite of no new models for ages. I can understand that they want a slice of the mirrorless marked though...

I don't see them abandoning it, they have a massive userbase of DSLR's. More likely they're going the route of the D780 by adding the MILC features into the older body's over time. There's supposed to be a D880 on the way from Nikon as well. Probably no or very few new lenses though but support nonetheless. Those cameras are researched and paid for and still work well, so why not sell them for a decade or more to that userbase who wants them. We are at a stage where sensors don't really do anything better than they did 5-7 years ago so I can see that happening. I doubt a sensor will be more than marginally better in a decade, just more megapixels.

Now if the MILC cameras get the computational imaging that smartphones are deep into I could see that being a major differentiator. For now, it's just mainly better video, really fast burst rates (niche) and EVF. EVF is so user dependant I don't see it as a revolution, just a different way of doing things, image from the sensors is still the same. Even the AF really isn't "better" compared to top DSLRs, it just has some conveniences like Eye AF or Animal eye AF, but older 3d tracking still holds up fine for action.

[lesmore49]

I've been using SLR/DSLR's since 1968, (50 + years) when I bought mu first one, a Pentax actually. Like you I prefer the DSLR format, more then other formats. I have a Canon G12 and a Ricoh GR...they're nice, but I like my K5 and K1.

I'm getting on , and I hope my DSLR's last and if they don't, I hope to get another DSLR, preferably Pentax. But if DSLR dom dies completely, I'll look at a mirrorless camera, if that is all that is available. If I can't use my plethora of Pentax lenses, then I get a fast wide angle, a moderate telephoto (100mm or so) macro, a telephoto zoom, say around a 100-400....to hopefully last me ...as long as I last.

[DeadJohn]

...And I got to wondering if it was time to sell up and move to mirrorless (or something) rather than spend more money on something that could soon obsolete, and un-sellable used...

If Pentax still meets your needs, keep using it. If a mirrorless system offers features that would greatly help your photography, though, that's a good reason to change. Fear of the future is not a good reason to change IMO.

The camera market is volatile. There's been a strong downward trend in sales for years due to smartphones, plus the recent covid-related disruptions on the component supply chain. Every camera company is vulnerable and it's tough to predict who will be around in 5 years. So, which brand do you switch to? I expect a few more camera brands to go bankrupt or merge within the next few years before the market stabilizes, but I have no magic powers to let me know which companies will die.

The way I look at it, if the Pentax brand dies because of obsolescence/bankruptcy/whatever, only 2 things can happen to the used market:

1. Used items are still sellable because enough of us stick with Pentax. I can sell my stuff then if I want.
2. In the unlikely outcome that used prices go exceptionally low, I can cheaply stock up on a few spare bodies to hold me over indefinitely. It's also an opportunity to buy lenses that I consider too expensive today.

[Benedict Michael]

Maybe we'll have to join up with the Daguerreotype folks. Yep, people still make them. Oh wait - that's a "Mirror With A Memory" - they're not Mirrorless either! We're doomed!

[Wasp]

Being an old-timer myself, I find mirrorless appealing in a number of ways.

Manual focusing something like a 50mm f/1.2, 85mm f/1.4 or 200mm f/2.5 on a DSLR while wearing multifocal glasses can best be summed up in two words: forget it. Focus peaking saves the day. Yes, you can do that on a modern DSLR but I don't have one of those at the moment. You have to hold the camera at arm's length, not ideal in bright sunlight. After decades of holding the camera up to my eye, I like it. A mirrorless body like a Samsung NX1 allows me to have my focus peaking cake and eat it. Yes, I am looking at a little screen and not at the directly at the subject. I may have lost that elusive emotional connection but I can get by without it.

I can use adapters to mount almost every old lens that is out there in junk shops and online auctions. I could get into the Nikon F mount or Minolta MD mount, not just K and M42 mount. The world of old glass is my oyster.

Using those old lenses on a mirrorless body means manual aperture as well as manual focus. Just like my first Pentax SP1000 with Soligor 90-230mm zoom. To really go back in time, I can switch to manual exposure as well.

[Rondec]

I think SLRs will be around for quite awhile. The reality for many is that the differences in terms of real world images are miniscule. I would say MILC benefits come down to two things: really fast frame rate/video (these two are linked together and are based on read out speed of the sensors) and "helps" in the viewfinder (these can be things like focus peaking, histogram, etc). The downsides are that you see the world through a tiny screen, the battery life isn't going to be as good, and you can get some artifacts due to a multitude of focus points on the sensor.

We have seen many people make the jump to MILCs and their photos really don't change much. It isn't as though SLRs are terrible.

Pentax has made it clear that they are going to continue making SLRs. They have doubled down in this by improving the pentaprism in the K-3 III. For them, it probably makes sense, as this is a niche that is not getting as much attention from the big brands, they can stand out to traditionalists and may actually even grow, even as they avoid the rabid, tech heavy MILC market.

Nikon has invested a lot of money getting their Z mount cameras and lenses out the door and for whatever reason, they haven't captured the market yet. This sort of investment could sink a brand like Pentax and so they are going to stick at what they are good at -- turning at SLRs and their mirrorless cameras will be in the GR line up.

[Dan Rentea]

Even the AF really isn't "better" compared to top DSLRs, it just has some conveniences like Eye AF or Animal eye AF, but older 3d tracking still holds up fine for action.

I see it differently. For me the mirrorless Af is better because I get the 1Dx Mark III performance at 2500$ which is the price of R6. Therefore, I don't need to pay extra 4000$ if I'm interested in Af and fps. R6 is the equivalent of 6D Mark II when comes to DSLRs and the difference in speed and Af is night and day between 6D Mark II and R6. That's the advantages I'm interested in and the ones I look for. Same when comes to 5D Mark IV and R5. It's quite a big upgrade the R5 in every single aspect.

Sure, given the huge number of lenses available for DSLRs, we may see a few more years DSLRs around us, especially due to the huge second hand market and the very cheap prices that comes with it. A Nikon D850 with around 40000 shutter clicks can be found in my country for 2100$ and a 5D Mark IV with 30000 shutter clicks for 1800$. DSLR lenses are also at the lowest prices I ever saw on the second hand market. The technology seems to move towards mirrorless and given the amount of money Canon and Nikon already invested in mirrorless, they will push as hard as they can the mirrorless trend. Once Canon and Nikon will launch their mirrorless flagship sports cameras and some of their sport and wildlife exotic lenses, I don't think they will release anything else for DSLRs... The good news is that the adapter work so good with my DSLR lenses that I don't have to worry about this aspect until my lenses will need a replacement. With the DSLR lenses I have, I'm good for the next 2-3 years. I usually upgrade my lenses after 4-5 years due to extensive use.