Originally posted by Paul the Sunman 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tens of billions a year (Rolex alone turns over more than 5 billion dollars each year), yet the technology has been out of date for over 40 years.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