[aaacb]

Yes, the end of the DSLR as the main consumer market camera choice. Instead of Canon rebels we'll have some mirrorless option, assuming that type of (relatively) cheap camera will still be made. Maybe in the future, the end of DSLR in best-of-the-best, performance at all costs cameras.

Mirrorless isn't only about weight savings, maybe that's how it was initially marketed, but today I see it's about using processing power on a live image to improve AF, exposure. Similar lenses have similar weight for a given format, and more often than not you can save the same 200 -300grams (and money) in different ways (a lighter tripod, backpack, laptop, whatever else you're carrying). Right now, what I consider equivalent to my k3ii costs almost 2x in a mirror-less camera, and there are trade-offs in terms of viewfinder experience and battery life, I don't see it as a direct improvement because I have little interest in video.

[jumbleview]

The quality is at least as good as the KP and not far off the K1.

That alone persuades me that if I decide to buy a new camera that would be KP ( I own Pentax K5II now). That will allow me to keep all set of my APS-C modern and full frame legacy lens which I accrued during 10 years of shooting Pentax. Selling all this staff and buying Fuji with comparable set of lens will be not wise from price point of view.

[photoptimist]

Yes, the end of the DSLR as the main consumer market camera choice. Instead of Canon rebels we'll have some mirrorless option, assuming that type of (relatively) cheap camera will still be made. Maybe in the future, the end of DSLR in best-of-the-best, performance at all costs cameras.

Mirrorless isn't only about weight savings, maybe that's how it was initially marketed, but today I see it's about using processing power on a live image to improve AF, exposure. Similar lenses have similar weight for a given format, and more often than not you can save the same 200 -300grams (and money) in different ways (a lighter tripod, backpack, laptop, whatever else you're carrying). Right now, what I consider equivalent to my k3ii costs almost 2x in a mirror-less camera, and there are trade-offs in terms of viewfinder experience and battery life, I don't see it as a direct improvement because I have little interest in video.

Maybe the cheapest cameras will change from Canon Rebels to low-end Sonys but the economics at the other end are less clear as your K-3 example shows.

The money one might save in getting rid of the mirror ends up being spent on a high-res, low-lag EVF, a high frame-rate sensor, and all that extra processing power required to get decent AF from the millions of pixels of a giant sensor. There's a reason MILC ain't cheap despite the fake news that they are simpler to build.

[mikesbike]

Fuji has always made good photo products, among others. However, I have not re-looked at this, but a short time back I did compare APS-C Fuji (I'm pretty sure) with my KP and found my KP with my excellent DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 together were lighter or near same weight as the closest-quality Fuji with their 50-140 f/2.8, the KP being slightly larger than the Fuji body, but has a built-in flash and superior controls set. At that FL area, one can hardly tell any difference between 135mm and 140mm. I think Pentax has done a good job with the KP and certain lenses in competing with various APS-C mirrorless models.

[photoptimist]

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.

EVFs also have some entrenched disadvantages: EVFs will always have lag. EVFs will always have problems clipping the brightness of the scene (because the sensor has this problem). EVFs will always draw more power and make the sensor hotter. EVFs will always be like watching a TV version of the real scene.

EVFs may improve but they cannot escape their fundamental essence of being an electronic display using electronic data that is a subset of the optical image.

Thus, that "tiny minority" who prefer OVFs may be larger than mirrorless aficionados think.

[MarkJerling]

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...........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.

Weight is one thing. But, tell me: Do you not miss that lovely big, clear viewfinder on your K-1?

[lesmore49]

I dunno about the mirrorless taking over and pushing the DSLR over the cliff. The two biggest camera companies in terms of sales...Canikon just introduced their mirrorless cameras about a month and a bit ago...and these ones aren't cheap.

As an aside, I thought mirrorless were supposed to be cheaper as they had less parts, but are they cheaper?

Anyways back to the question at hand. Canikon still sell all sorts of DSLR models, have tons of lenses and accessories for their DSLR models.

I don't know what the current sales figures are for mirrorless cameras vs DSLR cameras are , but I think ...and I could be wrong that the top sales are DSLR at this time ? I'm not just thinking of Canikon mirrorless, but also Fuji.... et al.

Is it not too early to to determine that the DSLR is dead and the new king is the mirrorless ?

I like the DSLR...I like the way they work, I like the way they look...I don't really have any issues with a DSLR. I find my K10D, K5 and K1..all with attached battery grips and extra batteries give me the extra camera mass to get my big mitts better grabability ...to coin a word. I like robust build, some weight...I'm not sure how a small mirrorless would work for me...I like a bit of mass and good grip and when I've handled a small mirrorless...I don't get that feature.

On top of that I just can't see at this juncture in my life, unloading all my Pentax stuff...for something else. I like what I got and I suspect I'm not alone out there in the consumer world. I think there are a lot of people who have DSLR equipment...Canikon, Pentax...who like what they got and have no intention of dumping it for something new and different.

I think that the DSLR will keep on evolving...and so will the mirrorless. Choice in market is good. Competition among companies making similar products is good for the product(s) and good for the buyer.

I guess we might have an idea how mirrorless vs DSLR will do in the coming months to Christmas. Always big sales. I do expect the new mirrorless from Canikon to do reasonably well...new product novelty usually has appeal for many .

The big thing is how will things be sales wise...after the novelty wears off...and the mirrorless goes from the latest thing to just another model on the sales shelf . It will be interesting. We camera enthusiasts do live in interesting times.

[dbs]

Mirrorless rule the market.....maybe
DSLR dead ? not likely there are too many around, only if they change the mount for mirrorless camers and only make lenses in the new mount. By the time that happens phones will rule everything
Just my 2 cents now only if they would only cost that much
Clackers an interesting video I liked it

Dave

[Digitalis]

EVFs also have some entrenched disadvantages: EVFs will always have lag. EVFs will always have problems clipping the brightness of the scene (because the sensor has this problem). EVFs will always draw more power and make the sensor hotter. EVFs will always be like watching a TV version of the real scene.

EVF's like our monitors experience colour shift over time, so they may not be 100% accurate over time. EVFs can also suffer from flickering due to the light sources they are used under. [ think HMI or Fluorescent lamps with old bulbs and dodgy ballasts]

I have pre-ordered a Nikon Z7 and the 35mm f/1.8S - i'm interested to see how it stacks up against the K-1 and FA31mm f/1.8 Limited.

[Pioneer]

EVF's like our monitors experience colour shift over time, so they may not be 100% accurate over time. EVFs can also suffer from flickering due to the light sources they are used under. [ think HMI or Fluorescent lamps with old bulbs and dodgy ballasts]

I have pre-ordered a Nikon Z7 and the 35mm f/1.8S - i'm interested to see how it stacks up against the K-1 and FA31mm f/1.8 Limited.

And I for one will be interested to hear your report.

But I know that I won't be turning loose of my 31 Limited anytime soon. It not only looks good on digital but it still renders just as beautifully on Portra as it always has.

[Billk]

Look through a viewfinder on a K1. Then look through any electronic viewfinder. I rest my case.

[Lord Lucan]

I thought mirrorless were supposed to be cheaper as they had less parts, but are they cheaper?

They may well be cheaper to make, but the makers are not necessarily passing on the savings to the buyer. That usually happens when some new tech makes a gizmo cheaper to manufacture. Instead the new tech is hyped by the marketing people as a reason in itself to ditch your old gizmo and buy a new one, whatever the price.

[Rondec]

I'm not sure I totally understand how mirrorless plays into this. agp1337 is basically saying that he didn't need full frame and could get by with an APS-C camera and lenses. I really don't know that keeping his KP and filling out his Pentax line up with similar lenses would have been vastly different either in size or in image quality -- I doubt it, particularly not when you compare zooms. For instance, Pentax's 50-135 f2.8 runs 740 dollars and weighs 685 grams, while Fuji's 50-140 f2.8 is 1399 and weighs 995 grams (B and H prices). Slower zooms and primes might tell a different story, but honestly, somehow the K-1 was thrown into the mix with f2.8 zooms and that is a whole different animal.

If you are going to compare mirrorless to SLRs in terms of size, you just have to consider similar size sensors and apertures. That means comparing a K-1 with f2.8 zooms to something like the A7III with G master zooms. Some size benefit, but nothing like what was mentioned in the initial post.

As to the overall question, I don't really know the answer. It does seem as though there is a gradual shift, but I think it has to do with the maturing of the SLR market and stagnation of their sales as a result, rather than some particular need that mirrorless cameras offer that SLRs don't.

[reh321]

EVF's like our monitors experience colour shift over time, so they may not be 100% accurate over time.

So what? My only use of viewfinder is to frame the view. I look through the viewfinder only after setting up the shot with my eyes looking directly at the scene.

[agp1337]

As for Amateur Photographer, it's published by and for Amateurs.

No significance in the word 'amateur', it simply derived from the Latin, doing things for the love of them.

It's the only magazine which does actually cater for experienced photographers. The others are full of basic stuff, and endless 'free gifts,' that is CDs full of stuff from the web. 'Outdoor Photography' is the only other one worth getting. To be fair, 'Professional Photographer' and 'Black and White Photography' are also good, but rather niche and specialist.