Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-14-2018, 01:30 PM - 1 Like   #61
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Alex645's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,373
QuoteOriginally posted by serothis Quote
To use the often loathed car metaphor. BMW, Mercedes Benz, and Mitsubishi use airplane propellers as their company logos,
For the record, the Mitsubishi 3 diamond logo is not from an airplane prop, although they are famous for their early Japanese development of airplanes.

Mitsu means three and hishi is a water chestnut. The water chestnut leaf is also the same word for a rhombus or diamond shape.

09-14-2018, 01:36 PM - 1 Like   #62
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2016
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 541
QuoteOriginally posted by Alex645 Quote
For the record, the Mitsubishi 3 diamond logo is not from an airplane prop, although they are famous for their early Japanese development of airplanes.

Mitsu means three and hishi is a water chestnut. The water chestnut leaf is also the same word for a rhombus or diamond shape.
Dang. I should have done more research. On the plus side, years of misconceptions are down the drain.
09-14-2018, 01:52 PM   #63
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Alex645's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,373
QuoteOriginally posted by serothis Quote
Dang. I should have done more research. On the plus side, years of misconceptions are down the drain.
....and the Mercedes Benz logo is really a three-pointed star that has it's own history...not related to airplane props. However, the original Saab logo had a twin engine prop plane on it.
09-14-2018, 06:11 PM   #64
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: NoVA
Posts: 396
QuoteOriginally posted by serothis Quote
To use the often loathed car metaphor. BMW, Mercedes Benz, and Mitsubishi* use airplane propellers as their company logos, but that hasn't stopped them from exploring other business ventures. Mazda still exists today because the extremely polarizing rotary engine. They were the first (and for a while the only) Japanese company to have won the 24hours of Le Mans. Winning with a rotary engine powered car. Mazda does not make a production rotary engine car today.



It's fine to be proud of your history. But it's foolish to adhere to nostalgia and not explore the possibility of new technology.



*Mitsubishi resemblance to a propeller is coincidental. But they did and still do make planes!


Yes, but there is no assurance that mirrorless cameras are actually more popular or a bigger market, despite the buzz they receive among a particular category of amateurs. Ricoh is conservative, and Fuji less so. But Fuji has introduced cameras that chased the current buzz in the past, and then discontinued them when the buzz wore off.

Is mirrorless just buzz? Maybe not. But I’m not sure we really know just yet.

Rick “who was not being merely nostalgic, but who also understands commitment to a brand image” Denney

09-14-2018, 07:13 PM   #65
Pentaxian
Paul the Sunman's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,971
QuoteOriginally posted by rdenney Quote
Yes, but there is no assurance that mirrorless cameras are actually more popular or a bigger market, despite the buzz they receive among a particular category of amateurs. Ricoh is conservative, and Fuji less so. But Fuji has introduced cameras that chased the current buzz in the past, and then discontinued them when the buzz wore off.

Is mirrorless just buzz? Maybe not. But I’m not sure we really know just yet.
I disagree. I think we can see very clearly that mirrorless is the future and SLR will recede to niche, especially as EVFs continue to improve. Holding onto the old technology and eschewing the new – think Kodak and film – rarely ends well.
09-14-2018, 08:45 PM - 2 Likes   #66
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: NoVA
Posts: 396
QuoteOriginally posted by Paul the Sunman Quote
I disagree. I think we can see very clearly that mirrorless is the future and SLR will recede to niche, especially as EVFs continue to improve. Holding onto the old technology and eschewing the new – think Kodak and film – rarely ends well.
Maybe, as I said. But grabbing the new, when it does not fulfill needed requirements as does the old, also rarely ends well.

I know a professional who gave up his pro Canon gear and went all in on a Sony A7R system. He used it for about six months, and then went back. Why? Because for event photography, the EVF was too bright, and it was too difficult to see the expressions of the people he was photographing. Will that improve? Probably. But looking at images on 300 pixel/inch monitors still lacks the same experience of looking at physical prints, even those printed at the same resolution. It's perhaps not a question of one being better than the other, but they are different, and fulfill different roles.

And it also depends on what you mean by "niche". Pentax is not looking to own the market--that is not their business model as it is with Canon. They don't have to sell millions of units a year to be viable. Their digital cameras are state of the art, not some throwback to the film era. But they use a viewing system that is still more popular than mirrorless, in the sector of cameras bought by people interested in phiotography for its own sake (and thus excluding the vast majority who are happy, at least some of the time, with the pictures they make and trade between their smart phones).

The mechanical watch industry is worth tens of billions a year (Rolex alone turns over more than 5 billion dollars each year), yet the technology has been out of date for over 40 years. Why is that? It's because the experience of owning a mechnical watch is simply different, and preferable to many of those who might buy a watch for reasons that go beyond merely telling time. It's not just status--$100 Seiko 5's have as much of a following as $10,000 Rolexes--but something more basic than that. It's also not merely nostalgic, like buggy whips. It's enthusiasm for a technology that represents something about human ingenuity far different from quartz watches, even expensive ones. Sure, it's a niche, but a large and viable niche.

The experience of using an SLR is simply different. Seeing the image optically on a ground glass is different than seeing it with all manner of electronic enhancements on an internally illuminated screen. EVF's will be better and more popular with some, but even those who have only ever used EVFs are subject to "oh, wow!" moments when viewing the scene on ground glass.

Rick "old enough to have seen many 'inevitable' technologies come and go" Denney
09-17-2018, 12:48 PM   #67
Veteran Member
SunnyG.'s Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 323
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by rdenney Quote
Yes, but there is no assurance that mirrorless cameras are actually more popular or a bigger market, despite the buzz they receive among a particular category of amateurs. Ricoh is conservative, and Fuji less so. But Fuji has introduced cameras that chased the current buzz in the past, and then discontinued them when the buzz wore off.

Is mirrorless just buzz? Maybe not. But I’m not sure we really know just yet.

Rick “who was not being merely nostalgic, but who also understands commitment to a brand image” Denney
Kodak was committed to brand image. Film. Where are they now? The real commitment is when you listen to your customers. No one's telling Pentax to stop making DSLR. All we want is Pentax to add a new camera system to their portfolio.

---------- Post added 09-17-18 at 12:57 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by rdenney Quote
Maybe, as I said. But grabbing the new, when it does not fulfill needed requirements as does the old, also rarely ends well.

I know a professional who gave up his pro Canon gear and went all in on a Sony A7R system. He used it for about six months, and then went back. Why? Because for event photography, the EVF was too bright, and it was too difficult to see the expressions of the people he was photographing. Will that improve? Probably. But looking at images on 300 pixel/inch monitors still lacks the same experience of looking at physical prints, even those printed at the same resolution. It's perhaps not a question of one being better than the other, but they are different, and fulfill different roles.

And it also depends on what you mean by "niche". Pentax is not looking to own the market--that is not their business model as it is with Canon. They don't have to sell millions of units a year to be viable. Their digital cameras are state of the art, not some throwback to the film era. But they use a viewing system that is still more popular than mirrorless, in the sector of cameras bought by people interested in phiotography for its own sake (and thus excluding the vast majority who are happy, at least some of the time, with the pictures they make and trade between their smart phones).

The mechanical watch industry is worth tens of billions a year (Rolex alone turns over more than 5 billion dollars each year), yet the technology has been out of date for over 40 years. Why is that? It's because the experience of owning a mechnical watch is simply different, and preferable to many of those who might buy a watch for reasons that go beyond merely telling time. It's not just status--$100 Seiko 5's have as much of a following as $10,000 Rolexes--but something more basic than that. It's also not merely nostalgic, like buggy whips. It's enthusiasm for a technology that represents something about human ingenuity far different from quartz watches, even expensive ones. Sure, it's a niche, but a large and viable niche.

The experience of using an SLR is simply different. Seeing the image optically on a ground glass is different than seeing it with all manner of electronic enhancements on an internally illuminated screen. EVF's will be better and more popular with some, but even those who have only ever used EVFs are subject to "oh, wow!" moments when viewing the scene on ground glass.

Rick "old enough to have seen many 'inevitable' technologies come and go" Denney
Sorry to disagree. As much as it's fun to use an SLR, it's not something we are gonna use daily. No DSLR are not going to disappear over night. But they will eventually. Why? Evolution. The market has changed. Mirrorless aren't in their nascent stages anymore. They're fully formed. Almost every camera manufacturer has a mirrorless in 2018. But whether you accept it or not is your personal opinion. And I am stating facts.
09-17-2018, 02:28 PM   #68
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 666
QuoteOriginally posted by SunnyG. Quote
Sorry to disagree. As much as it's fun to use an SLR, it's not something we are gonna use daily. No DSLR are not going to disappear over night. But they will eventually. Why? Evolution. The market has changed. Mirrorless aren't in their nascent stages anymore. They're fully formed. Almost every camera manufacturer has a mirrorless in 2018. But whether you accept it or not is your personal opinion. And I am stating facts.
The last numbers I saw were that DSLRs were outselling "non-reflex" interchangeable lens cameras by about 2:1, so while that indicates growing strength in the mirrorless market, it doesn't mean that increasing mirrorless sales compared to DSLRs will continue forever. There may be a new equilibrium point, that equilibrium point might be more mirrorless than DSLR but we don't know and its just as possible that DSLRs will hold a significant part of the market. The late entry to mirrorless by Canon and Nikon (which is really only a late entry to full frame, both have had small mirrorless cameras for a while) could simply be that Canon and Nikon finally felt the demand for pro level mirrorless cameras justified their investment.

09-17-2018, 02:38 PM   #69
Veteran Member
SunnyG.'s Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 323
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by abruzzi Quote
The last numbers I saw were that DSLRs were outselling "non-reflex" interchangeable lens cameras by about 2:1, so while that indicates growing strength in the mirrorless market, it doesn't mean that increasing mirrorless sales compared to DSLRs will continue forever. There may be a new equilibrium point, that equilibrium point might be more mirrorless than DSLR but we don't know and its just as possible that DSLRs will hold a significant part of the market. The late entry to mirrorless by Canon and Nikon (which is really only a late entry to full frame, both have had small mirrorless cameras for a while) could simply be that Canon and Nikon finally felt the demand for pro level mirrorless cameras justified their investment.
But will there be an equilibrium between DSLR and Mirrorless? Considering the fact. That we more dependent on electronic products for our needs. The DSLR is not electronic, it's part mechanical. Because we as human beings are more drawn towards more advanced things!
09-17-2018, 02:52 PM   #70
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2016
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 541
QuoteOriginally posted by SunnyG. Quote
Kodak was committed to brand image. Film. Where are they now? The real commitment is when you listen to your customers. No one's telling Pentax to stop making DSLR. All we want is Pentax to add a new camera system to their portfolio.[COLOR="Silver"]
I think SunnyG's point needs to be emphasized .

When DSLR first hit the market they were obscenely expensive; the bodies were HUGE; they had have a smaller imaging area; And they had a limited memory capacity/batter life (sound familiar?) compared to film which you could just load roll after roll.

And just like today the transition won't be instantaneous. There are still many of us who shoot film. It would be foolish not to recognized a growing market.
09-17-2018, 05:27 PM   #71
Veteran Member
SunnyG.'s Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 323
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by serothis Quote
I think SunnyG's point needs to be emphasized .

When DSLR first hit the market they were obscenely expensive; the bodies were HUGE; they had have a smaller imaging area; And they had a limited memory capacity/batter life (sound familiar?) compared to film which you could just load roll after roll.

And just like today the transition won't be instantaneous. There are still many of us who shoot film. It would be foolish not to recognized a growing market.
Exactly! You nailed! That was a really good explanation!
09-17-2018, 07:55 PM   #72
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 666
QuoteOriginally posted by SunnyG. Quote
But will there be an equilibrium between DSLR and Mirrorless? Considering the fact. That we more dependent on electronic products for our needs. The DSLR is not electronic, it's part mechanical. Because we as human beings are more drawn towards more advanced things!
I don't know, but then, neither do you, and you're stating that is is a "fact". Its not, its a prediction. Thats the point of the future, you can guess, you can predict, but you don't know.
09-18-2018, 03:00 AM   #73
Forum Member




Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Paris area
Posts: 86
I am under the impression that the market pushes toward EVF / mirorless, while I am not interested in (reluctant would be a better description). I don't like EVF at all, and it destroys completely my pleasure to use a camera. The marketing is full throttle on mirorless because it helps camera brands to force people to buy whole new systems, but what if user interest is different ?
I am also under the impression that I am not the only one interested in having an OVF alternative.
09-18-2018, 12:04 PM   #74
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2017
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 383
For his 14 September "News" article comparing three mirrorless cameras, Ken Rockwell links to a commentary of his ( https://kenrockwell.com/tech/mirrorless-vs-dslr.htm ) that makes a series of assertions about the superiority of the mirrorless camera architecture. While his arguments aren't going to get me to put my cameras up for sale, I believe that in the long run DLSR has to have merits that dominate those of mirrorless; else future DSLR camera sales will depend on preference inertia from an ever decreasing number of DSLR photographers.
09-18-2018, 01:27 PM   #75
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,031
QuoteOriginally posted by SunnyG. Quote
Sorry to disagree. As much as it's fun to use an SLR, it's not something we are gonna use daily. No DSLR are not going to disappear over night. But they will eventually. Why? Evolution. The market has changed. Mirrorless aren't in their nascent stages anymore. They're fully formed. Almost every camera manufacturer has a mirrorless in 2018. But whether you accept it or not is your personal opinion. And I am stating facts.
Actually, some of us are going to use our cameras daily and find that DSLRs are ergonomically or aesthetically better for us for our kind of intensive use than are MILCs.

Evolution does not mandate advancement at all. In fact, MILCs are a primitive throw-back in that they are losing technological features.

Nor are MILCs inevitable even if some find them better. Regardless of how much camera makers push products on the market, the personal opinions of all photographers matter more because they dictate which cameras move off the shelf. Camera companies are in this to make money and don't care about technological religious wars. As long as a sufficient number of photographers (and it may only take 1% of the photography population or maybe 1-in-20,000 middle class consumers) keep buying DSLRs, camera companies will keep making them.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
300mm, 645d, 645z, art, benefit, bodies, camera, cameras, cost, day, defect, film, format, generation, hasselblad, lens, lenses, medium, medium format, pentax, phase, price, sensor, sensors, sony, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax Adapter K for 645 Lens (645 to K mount) Read more at: http://www.pentaxforums Uplander Pentax K-1 5 10-05-2016 11:41 AM
Framing real solutions to REAL problems jeffkrol General Talk 0 12-10-2012 08:15 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:45 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top