[clackers]

In this week's Amateur Photographer magazine there is an article about the increasing popularity of mirrorless. I can't remember the exact phrase, but in essence the 'big two' are developing into that area, and Pentax were dismissed as irrelevant. The feeling was that mirrorless will be dominant, quite soon.

I have been a dedicated Pentax user for nearly four years, current kit K1 and KP bodies and six lenses, including the heavy 15-30. Fed up of tired arms, I have now bought a Fuji xe-3 and three lenses, giving a range of 12-200mm (apsc, 18-300, 35mm equivalent). That is now my outfit of choice, and I have carried it, literally, miles, in a small shoulder bag and with no ill effects. My carry-around one will be this camera with the 10-24mm, when I can afford it (see below).

This morning I replaced my desktop picture (large-screen Apple) with a similar one taken with the Fuji. Both look fantastic, the Fuji is possibly more 'lively,' has more presence. So I did what I don't normally do, and pixel-peeped several pictures of similar subjects! The quality is at least as good as the KP and not far off the K1. in fact for all my purposes (up to A3 prints) the Fuji is indistinguishable. The Fuji video is great too, and you can actually use the viewfinder to shoot, I hate using the screen.

There are some snags, of course. No weatherproofing on the Fuji, a limited range of third-party lenses (similar to Pentax), and no tilting screen. One quirk which struck me when i got the Samyang 12mm was the it stops down manually, so when you set f8 the lens focuses at f8. The viewfinder remains just as bright, and I realised that is because it actually gets brighter to compensate. Focusing is fine, though I remember to open up to F2 to focus, not that it matters much with 12mm anyway!

You might guess my conclusion - all of the Pentax gear will be sold! If I was sticking with DSLR I'd stay with Pentax, but i no longer see any great value in the extra weight.

Not sure I understand the weight part, Agp.

You're actually changing the type of pictures you take if you're going from a K-1 and the 15-30 f2.8 to the Fuji.

If what you're saying is that as a photographer you didn't take advantage of that setup even though others do, fair enough, it's your money!

A K-S2, the DA15, DA21 and DA70 make for a fantastic little combo to go in your bag if it's about size and weight.

That Fuji 10-24 f4 you're talking about is expensive, and nice, but the Pentax DA12-24 f4 is cheaper and the same size, so if that's the reason, you're just not saving anything there.

By now, I think people realize if you want the same features and performance as a DSLR, the mirrorless body/lens combos are going to have to be big enough that you will need the same size case or bag to hold them.

---

Last edited by clackers; 10-24-2018 at 03:56 PM.

[kypfer]

If the DSLR is about to die, I'm glad I've just bought a new K-70, with it's extensive "back catalogue" of lenses - 'cos my experiences with mirrorless cameras suggest they're only really practical with a compatible (read expensive) autofocus lens.


Yes, you can use manual lenses, with focus peaking, on a stationary subject, but out there in the "real world", where things move, sometimes quite fast, you just can't beat a good optical viewfinder to get the job done!

[Alex645]

How is sales of film cameras relevant to this discussion??

For years I've read or was told that film is dead, Pentax is doomed, it is the end of the SLR; etc. End to me means extinct, gone, vanished, no longer used, gone Dodo.

I respect that the OP has his reasons for switching from DSLR to mirrorless, and thus, it is the end of DSLRs for him. But it is not the end for everyone and if that is relevant to me, I believe it is relevant to others reading this thread. It is relevant because there is a historical basis that shows one technology does not necessarily replace or even outlive another.

I mentioned film cameras because "they" said it was the end of film more than ten years ago. They said it was the end of large format when 35mm was the rage, but now, new LF film models outnumber 35mm.

[tokyoscape]

If you move up to XT2 /XT3, you will get pretty good weather sealed body too. I have to admit I am envying their small & fast prime lenses. (Looking at my fuji friend's setup)

I still don't have much problems with K3's weight. If or when i move up to a FF, I will surely get a mirrorless regardless of pentax or not. Well, unless pentax manage to mak a ff dslr with k3 size and weight body. I will be sad if i have to move away from pentax because i has been using the brand since film's day.

---

Last edited by tokyoscape; 10-24-2018 at 03:03 PM.

[The Squirrel Mafia]

Like Adam said, we are definitely in a transitional point of camera tech. Fujifilm themselves stated that competition is not coming so much from the other camera manufacturers. They see smartphones as their biggest competition right now. With so much advancement in the phone industry, it might come to a point where even mirrorless cameras will become dinosaurs.

I don't think DSLRs are going to disappear within the next 10 years, but given that Nikon & Canon have decided to stick their foot in the mirrorless door, I think that the majority of cameras will eventually transition to mirrorless & only the supreme DLSR AF kinds like the 1DX & D5 type of cameras will remain for the pros & maybe some higher end DSLR cameras for those that still like to shoot them.

As for now, I'm shooting my K-50 bodies, still waiting for the K-3II replacement, & still looking at other options from other camera manufacturers. I can't lose any which way I go. All is well.

[automorphism]

Has the dominance of zooms meant the end of primes?

Has the dominance of color photography meant the end of black-and-white?

Has the dominance of 35mm FF meant the end of APS-C, M4/3, 645, etc.?

The popularity of one thing rarely means the end of everything else.

Primes still offer advantages over zooms (either higher IQ or lighter). Black and white offers something different than color (emphasis on texture without the distraction of colour). Different sensor sizes offer compromises between IQ, pixel density, and price.

On the other hand, digital has meant the virtual end of film. Sure people still shoot it, but for practical purposes film is niche and used by very few. Digital is superior in every way for most people. I think something similar will happen with the DSLR. Mirrorless is superior in every way for most people.

Does the DSLR have advantages? Sure, right now. Native supertelephotos, for one. That will certainly change. EVFs will get so good that all but a tiny minority will prefer OVFs. EVFs are already pretty great. There are more rugged FF flagships like the K1, D850, and 5dIV, though I suspect the successor to the Sony A9 will solve that.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I think in 5 years very few new DSLR cameras will be released. I wouldn't be surprised if Ricoh was one of the last holdouts. But we're only upset because we have a choice.

Some day when I wake up in the future I might be using a mirrorless camera. It won't be today but I'm sure it will be soon. Hey! I'm fine with that. All these current high-end cameras are pretty darn great. If I have to use one, I won't be complaining -- I'll be out there taking pictures as always!

-Signed happy DSLR user

[Docrwm]

You had what 5 years ago??

Referring to the OP stating he went mirror-less, I had a mirror-less camera 5 years ago.

[Bruce Clark]

I don't often read articles of this type and even more rarely do I respond to them.


However the OP has revealed one important fact. For the majority of amateur photographers the quality of output from the range of digital cameras is virtually indistinguishable. Given the use for which the photos are used: display on a monitor of some sort. This could be a PC, laptop, tablet, smart phone, TV or website. There is little point in buying the latest, greatest, heaviest, costliest, megapixel camera available. In the OP's words "in fact for all my purposes (up to A3 prints) the Fuji is indistinguishable.

Is weight then, the deciding factor?



To the best of my limited knowledge the SLR was developed for one reason. Through the lens, composition. The addition of a mirror and prism added weight and bulk and complexity but it did solve the parallax problem. Later developments added wide open through the lens metering, auto focusing, focal plane shutters, and so forth but the real real reason for its development was through the lens composition. The elimination of parallax error. EVF may one day perform this function better than mirror and pentaprism. Admittedly I have not looked through an EVF for some time but the last time I did, I did not like it. An EVF camera will no doubt produce an image quality equal to a DSLR, there is no reason that it would not. .An EVF may be able to give some extra features such as certain on screen overlays, but as I see it the only reason to go down the EVF route is size and weight. This is not yet an issue for me but when it does, I will more than likely ditch the whole camera thing altogether. (Well sell the Sigma 150-500mm, bloody hell it's heavy.)



In the meantime I will leave the debate to those who really matter, the engineers and executives of Ricoh, Canon, Nikon, Fuji, etc and the next generations photographers who will ultimately determine their fate.

[lesmore49]

My wife and I were on a day trip today. We were driving down back roads in our province...curvy roads, up and down hills like a rollercoaster, narrow in width, lined with forests and a small river running parallel with the road. Great trip. I took my K1 and 28-105 and my K5 with the Sigma 150-500. I like to take this equipment as I'm ready for anything I may see. Missed out on a photo of a Bald Eagle close by...but spent about an hour in a salvage yard with many very old automobiles in a salvage yard. I was glad I had my K1 and 28-105. I wandered around with this unit...also has the battery grip with an extra battery installed...for about an hour. Up and down steep inclines...must of walked about a mile or so...bending down for different angles, etc.

I'm no spring chicken...at 69...but I wasn't really all that tired hauling around the K1 and lens....and I really enjoy having the K1 full frame...lot's of margin for cropping, etc.

The K5, also with extra battery and battery grip...attached to the 150-500 isn't a lightweight, but I do carry around that combo in a semi regular basis going down forest trails.

I'm not Superman, not by a long shot ...but although I admit that this camera (both) equipment ain't light...I can still carry it around without too much difficulty and do so...on a regular basis. The image quality I've got from both combos ...I find just great. I have no plans to change anytime soon. Maybe in another 5-10 years when I get more elderly I'll want something lighter...who knows .

But then I'll take my small, lightweight Pentax Km/K2000 body with the lightweight 21mm Limited and my old, reliable 55-300. A lighter, smaller package that should be almost perfect as my old body 'seniors'...

I don't know how much lighter or smaller my Km/21 Ltd... is compared to the latest Fuji mirrorless...with lens...but I would be surprised if there is a great difference. I dunno, I bought my Km new in 2009...maybe Pentax was ahead of the pack with light, small cameras.

BTW, the Pentax Km uses a ASP-C sensor (think it is only around 10+ MPs) and the pix are great IMHO. I know it's old technology, obsolete, no new and improved factor, etc., etc...but other than those disadvantages it works real well. Ahh.... what to do ?

[Digitalis]

Has the dominance of 35mm FF meant the end of APS-C, M4/3, 645, etc.?

I have publications from the 1930s complaining about the rise of 35mm consumer photography will be the end of 4X5 and 8X10 commercial photography. In retrospect, their arguments were based on the classic fallacy of the slippery slope. Large format is still with us.

[clackers]

I know a rich Nikon owner (has a D5 and a 600mm f4 for birding) but he bought a Pentax KP and all the DA Limiteds 'because they were pretty'.

Such an elegant system as this reviewer explains:

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

[disconnekt]

Canon & Nikon aren't going to suddenly stop making DSLR's in the next 5 years.
Why? Because they both have such a huge cataloge of lenses spanning ~15+ years still available/being used (and more to come), which people aren't going to suddenly stop using them/sell them off to go mirrorles.

Plus lens-wise for mirrorless, it'll take them both ~10 years to bring out maybe half of what they offer for dslr's. Hell, even $$$$ony doesnt even have half as many lenses out as CaNikon does on the Dslr lens front and they've had FF Mirrorless cameras out for how long? Even 3rd party options have been barely becoming more available the last year or so.

[monochrome]

I’ll be dead before the mirror.

.:

[skierd]

If anything Pentax better situated to take care of a drastically smaller DSLR market than Canon or Nikon. Economies of scale and all, Canon and Nikon have to make a lot of cameras and sell a lot to stay afloat or at least Nikon does since that’s their primary business to stay afloat or at least Nikon does since that’s their primary business. All Pentax has to do is maintain their current volume and gain marketshare.

[RJDavis-OK]

For my amateur use I couldn't imagine much better that my K3ii and the good assortment of Pentax lenses that I have. Smaller and more compact doesn't really appeal to me. Here is to hoping that DSLR doesn't die before I have my money saved for a K1ii