Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-30-2017, 04:39 AM - 1 Like   #541
Pentaxian




Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Iloilo City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,273
I'm basically new to Pentax as I have only bought my first DSLR last 2014. I've used Nikon and Canon since the 80s. So I'm an OVF lover. However, the younger generation are crazy about technology and, whatever is new seem to be the best thing for them. Looking at the choices they make, I think that the future will be EVF. But as long as Pentax will make good DSLRs, I will upgrade towards that direction. I just don't like the view inside the EVF. It doesn't look natural. To each his own I guess. Maybe in the future there will still be a market for us OVF lovers.

06-30-2017, 06:12 AM   #542
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,497
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
No.

You said it was 'dead', Yusuf, don't try to backpedal. That's a deception, and I'll remember it in future.

Actually, what's dead is Samsung that gambled on going entirely mirrorless. And mirrorless compacts - meaning the number of Sony cameras sold has dropped every year since the A7 came out, AFAIK.
oh that I still stand by, DSLR is a dead, well almost

it's not SOny cameras, every cameras sale has been dropped, but among that shrinking market, what will stay is mirrorless. like it or not
06-30-2017, 06:28 AM - 1 Like   #543
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
ffking's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Old South Wales
Posts: 6,029
QuoteOriginally posted by yusuf Quote
what will stay is mirrorless. like it or not
not quite logical - if enough people don't like it, then it won't - you might only be referring rhetorically to clackers, but he's not unique (well, in that respect)
06-30-2017, 07:49 AM - 2 Likes   #544
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,113
QuoteOriginally posted by yusuf Quote
Yes and no. Yes if you only see absolute number. No, if you see the trend and ratio between DSLR/mirrorless sale which has reduced drastically, approaching one from a large number and won't be long before mirrorless overtakes.



DSLR market is now mostly driven from a few loyalist and those who never owned a serious camera before & often end up buying DSLR just because that's what only thing they heard of serious cameras. Often people come to me to seek advice on their first camera purchase and sometime all they want to hear is Nikon/Canon. So if I ask them to go Sony mirrorless route, they are often surprised by the suggestion - this is not what they wanted to hear and most of them end buying Nikon/Canon. Reason, that's what they saw their friend and family shooting with it and that's where they want their first serious investment going. Do we call them market mover, yes, that's mostly working in DSLR favour for now but not for long.
The growth of mirrorless relative to DSLR has been slowing in a last few years. It's heading toward balance, not dominance for at least two main reasons.

First, you may be right about the loyalist/serious camera effect, but that too will never end. If a person is thinking of getting a serious camera and looks around at what they see others shooting, are the more likely to get a big pro DSLR or a Sony that is the size of the point-and-shoot? And the average bride knows even less about camera brands -- especially now that smartphones have taken over -- but they know a big "pro" camera when they see one and the A9 ain't a big camera. The Japanese tried to get Americans to buy small cars ( and some of them certainly did) but they were also forced by build bigger cars because size matters.

Second, EVFs are simply physically unpleasant to use for the 30-80% of human beings with some susceptibility to motion sickness. For some significant fraction of the population, EVFs induce headaches, eyestrain, and other unpleasant physical effects. Those people will never walk out of camera store with an EVF camera. And even if they are convinced to buy one sight-unseen online, they'll stop using the camera pretty quickly because of the unpleasantness of the EVF.

The point is there's a future for both types of cameras because there's more than one type of person in the photography market and they want diametrically opposite camera designs: an OVF on a big camera vs. an EVF on a small camera. Neither design can satisfy both types of camera buyer.

06-30-2017, 08:32 AM   #545
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
seagas's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: SWFL most of the year other wise NEWI
Photos: Albums
Posts: 85
QuoteOriginally posted by yusuf Quote
oh that I still stand by, DSLR is a dead, well almost

it's not SOny cameras, every cameras sale has been dropped, but among that shrinking market, what will stay is mirrorless. like it or not
I like how YOUR opinion has now become fact, hmmm you must be a multi-billionaire now with your ability to see into the future so well.
06-30-2017, 09:26 AM   #546
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 521
QuoteOriginally posted by yusuf Quote
Often people come to me to seek advice on their first camera purchase and sometime all they want to hear is Nikon/Canon. So if I ask them to go Sony mirrorless route, they are often surprised by the suggestion - this is not what they wanted to hear and most of them end buying Nikon/Canon. Reason, that's what they saw their friend and family shooting with it and that's where they want their first serious investment.
Or, maybe they're just afraid of getting root-kitted.
06-30-2017, 12:43 PM   #547
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,129
QuoteOriginally posted by yusuf Quote
oh that I still stand by, DSLR is a dead, well almost
Is that 75% of almost? OR 25% of almost? Which is almost the recent market share between DSLR and ML cameras which are able to change lenses.

07-01-2017, 12:29 AM   #548
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,528
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Bright sunlight to dark shadow can be as much as 20,000:1 Far more than 5 stops
Only if you are trying to lift any data from those shadows do you need 5 stop. In your photo you are not lifting any shadows

Here I only needed to lift the shadows by 2 stops, I retain the majority of the highlights of the sky and sun while still being able to lift the shadows present in the for ground, this was all done with a bridge camera built prior to 2005 a far cry from 5 stops




QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I'm not really sure what you mean by 75% of the information is in the dark end of the scale. If the image is 75% dark, then 75% of the information is in the dark end of the scale. Maybe you can phrase this better.
I didn't say anything about the dark end of the scale, First 2 stops collected in a raw file contains 75% of any light data that you are hoping to collect and put in that raw file. If I have shadows that need to be lifted by 1 stop then those shadows contain half as much light than those areas that need no adjustment. If I have to lift the shadows 2 stop those shadow areas contain only 25% of the light data when compared to the areas of the photo that need no adjustment. So the first 2 stops contained within the raw file contain 75% of the light data you are hoping to gather. This is why exposing for raw data is so critical for achieving the full DR provided to you by the camera

Here is what how much lifting only 5 stops looks like


Here I have lifted the shadows 5 stops



It only took me 5 stops of lifting to bring up the shadows found on the back side of trees when a shot is taken directly pointed into the sun.

If a person finds that the noise taken at iso 1600 too much then the DR of the K1 for that person has dropped down to 5 stop anyhow.

Last edited by Ian Stuart Forsyth; 07-01-2017 at 01:03 AM.
07-03-2017, 04:53 AM   #549
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,497
QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
The growth of mirrorless relative to DSLR has been slowing in a last few years. It's heading toward balance, not dominance for at least two main reasons.

First, you may be right about the loyalist/serious camera effect, but that too will never end. If a person is thinking of getting a serious camera and looks around at what they see others shooting, are the more likely to get a big pro DSLR or a Sony that is the size of the point-and-shoot? And the average bride knows even less about camera brands -- especially now that smartphones have taken over -- but they know a big "pro" camera when they see one and the A9 ain't a big camera. The Japanese tried to get Americans to buy small cars ( and some of them certainly did) but they were also forced by build bigger cars because size matters.

Second, EVFs are simply physically unpleasant to use for the 30-80% of human beings with some susceptibility to motion sickness. For some significant fraction of the population, EVFs induce headaches, eyestrain, and other unpleasant physical effects. Those people will never walk out of camera store with an EVF camera. And even if they are convinced to buy one sight-unseen online, they'll stop using the camera pretty quickly because of the unpleasantness of the EVF.

The point is there's a future for both types of cameras because there's more than one type of person in the photography market and they want diametrically opposite camera designs: an OVF on a big camera vs. an EVF on a small camera. Neither design can satisfy both types of camera buyer.
I doubt that photoptimist!. DSLR was just a stop gap arrangement, putting a new age digital image capture sensor in an age old mirror based film camera technology which is so prone to focusing error because of two separate path light takes. It was a brilliant thing to be done with film as film was a passive medium, blocking light and had no assisting role in viewing. Moreover, it worked with film as film is more forgiving to focus misalignment than digital sensor.

For digital, the natural approach was to use the same sensor for capturing and viewing both, also to make use of it for feature like zoom-in to be sure the everything is being capture the way it is (like some of the MF camera did). However, it could not achieved then due to the limitation of liveview and EVF technology. Today, things have improved tremendously, all image sensors are capable of live viewing, and EVF has evolved from early day to what we see in Sony A7R2/A9. So now there is no reason to continue to use same old DSLR technology.

Being an owner of EVF based cameras from Sony NEX6 to A7r2, I would say, I would never go back to OVF. My in-focus rate have been improved even when shooting at f1.4, without fiddling with focusing screens and shims etc, never witnessed health issues (I don't to panning though where such issues where reported). Also let's remember that we are talking about the future, so even these technologies have any limitations, they will improve onward.

Just like any stop gap technologies, DSLR may still survive a few more years but is it a future? definitely not.

[On a side note, can you guess how many percentage of novice DSLR users uses LCD to compose than OVF? you will be surprised, it's quite a large number.]
07-03-2017, 05:08 AM - 2 Likes   #550
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 15,132
The SLR design is not a stop gap arrangement, but a solution to a specific problem. It remains the only practical solution for having optical TTL viewing, even with digital sensors.
Disparaging it doesn't make its benefits, nor its larger user base. Frankly, those attempts by Sony-or-whatever users to force their preferences on us are a bit boresome; it's as if you can't stand when people make different choices than you.

Last edited by Kunzite; 07-03-2017 at 05:14 AM.
07-03-2017, 06:13 AM   #551
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,497
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
The SLR design is not a stop gap arrangement, but a solution to a specific problem. It remains the only practical solution for having optical TTL viewing, even with digital sensors.
.
what I said is that using SLR design in DSLR was a stop gap arrangement, please do not twist my words.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Disparaging it doesn't make its benefits, nor its larger user base. Frankly, those attempts by Sony-or-whatever users to force their preferences on us are a bit boresome; it's as if you can't stand when people make different choices than you.
Can your optical TTL viewer do?
- Focus magnification
- Focus peaking
- live histogram
- view in dark (low light)

Attempt by Sony is not boresome, it's just awesome.
07-03-2017, 06:31 AM - 1 Like   #552
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 15,132
The SLR viewfinder system has the same function, be it in a film camera or a digital one. It remains a solution addressing the exact same problem.

Sony propaganda has no place on this Pentax forum. Who cares that you, personally, like EVFs better, and Sony better than Pentax?
07-03-2017, 07:22 AM - 3 Likes   #553
Veteran Member
CarlJF's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Quebec City
Posts: 1,185
QuoteOriginally posted by yusuf Quote
Can your optical TTL viewer do?
- Focus magnification
- Focus peaking
- live histogram
- view in dark (low light)

Attempt by Sony is not boresome, it's just awesome.
But the point that you're seem to be missing is that for most people these pros (the only real one being focus peaking, all the others being quite arguable for most people) don't overweight the disadvantages. If it works for you and if these points are crucial for you, then good for you! But why can't you understand that for many people EVF, as they are today, aren't acceptable ? Why do you want to convince us that EVF is THE universal solution for everyone, when it's not ?

You know, we know what an EVF is. Most of us have tried one or even already own a camera with EVF. If we still prefer an OVF, have you thought that maybe it isn't because we don't understand ? Rather, maybe it's because we understand and when we weight the pros and cons of each options we still find OVF is better suited to our needs and prioroities, which may be different than yours ?
07-03-2017, 07:53 AM   #554
Veteran Member
altopiet's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: The Gem of the Karoo, South Africa
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,307
Photography is a hobby for me, as with probably the majority of all camera users. I've been with Pentax since my first SLR in 1981, with a few compacts of various brands in between. I am probably in for one more upgrade from my K5iis in my lifetime, and with all my lenses, it'll have to be something I can use my lenses on even if I have to use an adapter.

I can see EVF and OVF co-existing for a few years to come, but it would be nice if Pentax can bring us the option of a MILC with a dedicated adapter for use with our old lenses, and perhaps even other brand lenses.

I've been contemplating getting the K-1 for a while now, but am not getting younger, and if I make my last purchase, and still want to use it in 10 years time, it would be good if it is actually smaller. I can see the positive in seeing real time exposure changes through EVF, but what I find most impressive in reports on the A9, is the focus....(tracking and all the points all over the sensor). As I get older, I want life, and my hobby to get easier, not more of a chore.

I've never tried EVF before, and am not an expert in anything "computer stuff", but have always been a "gadget man", and seeing how fast technology have come in a relatively short time, and the acceptance and use of it by a new generation, it might be possible that MILC's sales and use, will eventually surpass OVF cameras.

"Propaganda"...perhaps... (business is business), but how do the major players react to it, are they countering it with propaganda for DSLR's or are they starting to follow the MILC trend? I also think mainly new entrants into the market will probably be influenced by it (IMO), your basic DSLR user would probably only change for realistic and practical reasons.

Who knows Ricoh's plans for Pentax, but if they are satisfied with a high margin, reactionary (slow to adapt to change) path to demand, they will stay a small player, who might ensure Pentax future with a good quality product at reasonable prices and a dedicated, but probably aging and eventually declining, user base.

If I can't physically handle my DSLR anymore, and Pentax do not have an alternative, where I can use my lenses, I might be tempted to look around at other brands that caters for my needs, even if the bodies are more expensive. If I can use all my Pentax glass on such a body I might be tempted to jump ship. I love my Pentax gear, but I also try to be realistic in my approach to life. As I get older, I realize more and more that time is not to be wasted, and if I can save time doing anything and getting acceptable results the same time, why not?

I think Sony is at the forefront of change in the industry, which will probably gather steam sooner than expected, whether we like it or not. Camera manufacturers that do not adapt to changes and demands of a new generation, will probably die, or stay a small fish in the pond, like Pentax probably will do.

For those with physical problems using EVF, and as I haven't used it before, might even be one myself, don't despair, life will go on and as long as you are prepared to pay, someone will keep making OVF products
07-03-2017, 09:16 AM - 4 Likes   #555
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,113
QuoteOriginally posted by yusuf Quote
I doubt that photoptimist!. DSLR was just a stop gap arrangement, putting a new age digital image capture sensor in an age old mirror based film camera technology which is so prone to focusing error because of two separate path light takes. It was a brilliant thing to be done with film as film was a passive medium, blocking light and had no assisting role in viewing. Moreover, it worked with film as film is more forgiving to focus misalignment than digital sensor.

For digital, the natural approach was to use the same sensor for capturing and viewing both, also to make use of it for feature like zoom-in to be sure the everything is being capture the way it is (like some of the MF camera did). However, it could not achieved then due to the limitation of liveview and EVF technology. Today, things have improved tremendously, all image sensors are capable of live viewing, and EVF has evolved from early day to what we see in Sony A7R2/A9. So now there is no reason to continue to use same old DSLR technology.

Being an owner of EVF based cameras from Sony NEX6 to A7r2, I would say, I would never go back to OVF. My in-focus rate have been improved even when shooting at f1.4, without fiddling with focusing screens and shims etc, never witnessed health issues (I don't to panning though where such issues where reported). Also let's remember that we are talking about the future, so even these technologies have any limitations, they will improve onward.

Just like any stop gap technologies, DSLR may still survive a few more years but is it a future? definitely not.

[On a side note, can you guess how many percentage of novice DSLR users uses LCD to compose than OVF? you will be surprised, it's quite a large number.]
The fact that you love EVFs and have no ill-effects using them may be nice for you but it does not mean your experience is universal. It's like saying you love white cars therefore car makers should only make white cars. There's plenty of people on these forums and elsewhere who have complained about EVFs and there's plenty of science to explain the biological phenomena that cause their complaints.

I agree that the SLR design has inherent disadvantages and yet the EVF design also has inherent disadvantages from cramming a bunch of electronics and computer chips between the optical scene and the photographer's eye. Its' pretty stupid to convert photons to electrons and then back to photons when a simple mirror can send those original photons directly to the photographer's eye. The basic physics inherent in an EVF's sensor-readout-process-display design cannot get around the fact that it limits the DR of scene (clips both highlights and shadows), adds lag, and adds grain. No doubt EVFs can improve (as can SLRs) but EVFs will always be limited by the physics of the light levels of the scene (and the biology of some photographers).

Thus, even if some people prefer EVFs for good reasons (and EVF cameras have a future), others abhor them for good reasons (and OVF cameras have a future, too). You and Sony may think there is one best way to design a camera but other camera buyers and camera makers disagree with you. And it is those other camera buyers and other camera makers who control the future of DSLRs.
Closed Thread

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!
aps-c, camera, cameras, canon, century, company, dslr, dslrs, ergonomics, ff, film, fountain, future, ideas, lenses, level, market, mirrorless, niche, pens, pentax, photography, reason, ricoh, sony, technology, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sony A9 Officially Announced Today Winder Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 552 07-20-2017 07:03 AM
Sony A9 D1N0 Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 2 04-19-2017 02:50 PM
Sony A9 $6799 surfar Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 9 04-02-2017 01:51 AM
Sony A9 to be a DSLR-Like Camera with Unlimited RAW Burst: Report Sliver-Surfer Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 8 04-07-2016 07:13 PM
New Sony A7II and A9 with IBIS Clavius Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 206 12-12-2014 05:37 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:05 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