[AstroDave]

Doesn't a laptop with an external mouse have the same interface as a desktop?

The interface may be comparable, but I really like my 19" screen (and will probably get a bigger one when the current one dies (if ever) - it is on its 4th or 5th desktop) and I LOVE my 40-year old genuine IBM PC/AT keyboards! They are on their 10th computer or so!

[Rush2112]

It doesn't seem all that many years ago when DSLRs were considered the top of the heap and mirrorless was a less relevant format. Nothing really wrong with it but the DSLR format was often considered superior. Not only that, the variety in brands and options available were so much greater for DSLR product. Possibly this changed due to new technology introduced to camera equipment or possibly it was due to a commercial need. Or, maybe it was a combination of the two.

Today, the majority of manufacturers of camera equipment seem to be firmly on the mirrorless bandwagon. I wonder if commercial realities have anything to do with this. In order to sell new product, you need to have new product. As the DSLR market has been a mature market for several years now and the sales figures for camera manufacturers have taken a nose dive in the recent past due in no small part to the enhanced quality of the cameras in cell phones, it is understandable that manufacturers thought that something new had to be introduced to jump start camera sales. Ergo: mirrorless. These have been a niche product category for years but now this format has the commercial advantage of not only making a new variety of camera readily available and commercially competitive, but you also get all the new mirrorless lens business to accessorize these cameras. It might not be surprising to see a switch back to DSLRs in about 5 to 10 years time, again to create a new product and therefore sell more product.

Turntables and LP records were considered an outdated and obsolete product 10 - 15 years ago but look at how that format has come back onto the marketplace. What was once old is new again.

As a dedicated Pentaxian, I just hope that Ricoh can keep Pentax equipment relevant as a niche product until the pendulum swings back again and DSLR comes back into vogue. Times are tough for all camera manufacturers now, regardless of which format they support. Let's hope that evolution will occur such that this product continues to evolve and succeed. Time will tell.

Interesting comments. I like how your brain works. Gonna think on it with my morning coffee.

---------- Post added 11-30-2022 at 06:45 AM ----------

This thread is full of great contributions and wisdom. I really enjoyed reading the entire exchange this morning, great way to start off the day.

I'd like to contribute the idea of how important the law of supply and demand is. When interesting goods are in short supply but high demand, that's when growth happens. It's going to take several more years for the robust used market to look more dated. Right now it's yet another big wedge in-between growth and camera sales, just as smartphones are. I think DSLR's are here to stay though, at the very least I know everything I've seen states that about half of photographers still want them (there is pent up demand, pun not intended). Currently they still have them available, mainly on the used market or what is still trickling out of factories. The slowing of DSLR production will catch up soon, used equipment only gets older and more outdated, eventually that has to catch up to the market.

Ricoh knows this, and they are now the sole competitor for DSLR sales (isn't that crazy, say that a few years ago and people would have you committed). All the years that Pentax has been behind, they now have a chance to catch up and surpass the big two in DSLR design and technology. The K-3 Mark III was a huge leap forward for the Pentax brand, and it showed what the engineers are capable of doing (i.e. beating the big brands). Right now it is better than any DSLR Canon or Nikon have made in APS-C.

So, I think if Pentax works on updating their lens lineup, keeps the price down a bit on the K-3 Mark III and KF, introduces another DSLR here soon for full frame to replace the K1/II, they can survive long enough to come out on the other side of the demand scale. That is where demand of "the old" will be their advantage. If the K-3 Mark III is the example of what the future will bring, then Ricoh is set to be "the old" and "the new" simultaneously. It's a remarkable achievement and banner for the camera division.

As Stuart used to say on Mad TV "Look what I can do!".

[Jonathan Mac]

I don't think that things will swing back to favour the DSLR, after all, mirrorless cameras are now so popular due to the things that they can do that DSLRs can't, and that's not going to change - video plus face, eye, animal, vehicle detect AF. They're all things that DSLRs can't do unless in live-view where they're essentially a bigger, clunkier mirrorless camera with no viewfinder. I very much hope that DSLRs survive, especially now that Pentax are the only show in town bringing out new models, though CaNikon may still be manufacturing some current DSLRs (I don't know if they are, just that they're still selling them).

[luftfluss]

The problem is that video isn't a massive driver of camera sales. If you look at overall camera sales, they are down 30 percent from 2017. The reality is that MILCs form factor is not ideal for dedicated video. It is true that if you want a few clips, you can work with it, but if video is your main goal, then I am not certain that you are going after an A9 or Z7 or whatever the hot MILC is.

Note that when I said "video is a massive driver of sales", I am not stating that sales (quantitiies) are massive, but that video plays a large role in developing and marketing. I know that camera sales have been declining - I've even posted recently about it - but video performance is helping keep the industry afloat and moving forward.

And it's not just my opinion. Here's a snippet from Dave Etchells' interview with Sony earlier this year:

Oshima-san: So far, the mirrorless market is growing, even in this tough situation. Fortunately, we have been leading this market, although as you said, we have been affected some by the COVID 19 impact, especially for still shooting. But when it comes to video shooting, video recording demand keeps increasing even in the current situation so that’s why we’re continuing to lead in this market. We assume that this trend is going to continue, so that’s why we never stopped our development.

DE: So the still market has been declining, but video is increasing?

Oshima-san: Yes, because of the COVID 19 impact, the customer couldn’t go out to shoot, so that’s why in this period the still-shooting demand has been decreased. We think once people can go out again, the still-shooting demand will also return. And video demand is continuously growing, so we believe the mirrorless market will not shrink, but will continue to grow.

Pentax has always been niche and they will probably always be niche. Somehow they have out lasted all of the others in their niche area and if they can figure out how to properly advertise the differences between their SLRs and MILCs and get people to see that functionally the still images are the same, but in use, the SLRs can be more enjoyable than maybe they will continue to sell enough cameras to be viable.

IMO that's the key. The EVF in my Panasonic G9 is larger than anything Pentax offers - even the 645Z has a smaller VF - and has a decent resolution (3.69M dots), but in anything approaching decent light I find the OVF even in Pentax APS-C cameras to be a more pleasurable experience.

[luftfluss]

It's interesting to look at Amazon's Best Sellers in Digital Cameras...

The top positions for Interchangeable-Lens Cameras are occupied by various packages centered around the bargain basement Canon Rebel T7 DSLR, the Canon EOS M50 II (with the seemingly abandoned EF-M mount), 2 Sony A7-series FF MILCs, and a smaller Sony and Panasonic cameras targeted at vloggers.

Probably very few additional lens sales generated there.

[reh321]

But human nature is a fickle thing and when you look at history and notice how people leapt enthusiastically into the horrid instamatics and even more horrid 110s , forked out fortunes for 1/2 megapickle digital and currently live in that cozy paradise that their phone cameras are the end all o
photography evolution and then you realise that rational thought can not forecast the road ahead.

It depends entirely on why you photograph. Mostly, I capture my world as it is today before tomorrow comes and everything changes. For that purpose, I did start with a Kodak Instamatic - which was not “horrid” for that purpose - then I got a 110 camera - which was not horrid for that purpose - and now I have a smart phone - which is not horrid for that purpose. I could/can always have some kind of camera with me, and they allowed me to record things without my standing out. True, I cannot isolate the subject from the blackground - but I never do that. Even when I had 50mm F/1.7 lens, I showed the background if I had enough light, because it put the foreground into context. Typically, I have been more interested in ‘stopping motion’ - the reason I got into Pentax in the first place.

Incidentally, I also do not try to eliminate crowds - they are an indication of popularity today …… the reason something is important and a reason to expect it to continue to exist tomorrow.

[CristiC]

I do believe that analog film photography, especially medium format, will not die out. Ever. There will be film cameras, for taking pictures, 10 years from now, I'm confident about that. A very small, niche segment. SLR cameras will exist. Not so sure about DSLRs. Neither about mirrorless digital cameras.

What definitely will happen is this: people will be walking around with augmented reality glasses, 2027-ish, much the same way as people walk around with smartphones today. Augmented reality (AR) will replace the pentaprism and the EVF. Computation will happen in a second wearable device that feeds content to the AR glasses. Yet another device can be hand-held and will feature a sensor and interchangeable lenses, but it will lack buttons and controls. The whole system will be gesture-controlled. While one hand is holding the sensor/lens unit, the other hand will control a virtual panel, generated by the computational unit and displayed by the AR glasses. This will be possible with a new kind of energy storage (high energy-density) batteries, both powerful and portable, in conjunction with the immense computational power that will need much less energy than today. Moore's Law is still alive and going strong. I know that. I also know the forecast on this topic.

Just look at the energy efficiency and size of EyeQ chips produced by the company Mobileye for automated driving vehicles today, compared to devices/systems used by others, basically power-hungry computers on wheels. If automated driving, based on vision (optics), which is a reality today, can happen within the power envelope demonstrated by Mobileye, then I'm sure that computational photography, based on AR and ubiquitous portable computing devices, will definitely happen soon. Cameras will need even fewer parts than today's DSLRs. The user interface will be virtual, defined by software, controlled by gesture, displayed by AR glasses - that will happen anyway, for other reasons than photography. What parts are then missing from a camera system? Sensor & lenses. BTW, a novel kind of lens design has been researched already, dispensing with the heavy glass. The future is bright!

[reh321]

Note that when I said "video is a massive driver of sales", I am not stating that sales (quantitiies) are massive, but that video plays a large role in developing and marketing. I know that camera sales have been declining

Several years ago, my family attended a concert by a group called “SNC”. They began as a student group at Indiana Univ., then became popular because of video shared online by fans, so despite usual auditorium rules, {because of their past} I was allowed to bring a Pentax camera in with with me. I did take my Q-7, but I could have brought my then brand-new KP {with it’s much-better DR}.

[biz-engineer]

There will be no turning back to DSLR, even in 20 years time, no more than film cameras returned other than used equipment.

[Steve Beswick]

Doesn't a laptop with an external mouse have the same interface as a desktop?

But the screen size is different, which is more important than you might think.

[luftfluss]

What definitely will happen is this: people will be walking around with augmented reality glasses, 2027-ish, much the same way as people walk around with smartphones today.

Ugh, I can't even say for certain that I can handle the current reality, much less "augmented".

[Steve Beswick]

I just don't see a massive return to the DSLR, especially in the next decade or so. Yes, DSLRs might shift to a somewhat higher percentage of the advanced camera market, but that market isn't going to get dramatically bigger anytime soon. While the majority of members on this forum clearly prefer OVFs to EVFs, many people do not, or are indifferent. A lot of early DSLR adopters wanted something digital to replace their film camera, or simply wanted something better than a point and shoot. The price they paid was not in dollars, but in size and weight. Once mirrorless cameras were comparable in quality to DSLRs, they bailed, and they are not coming back.

I'm not saying any of this to bash on Ricoh's decision to stick with DSLRs, I just want to look at this from a practical point of view. I do, however, see two areas where Ricoh could easily increase Pentax sales:

1. For the people that do prefer an OVF, but are prepared to move to mirrorless for the size and weight advantages, Pentax should release their own version of the Canon SL1. Small used to be Pentax's thing! Why can't they do it now? Like the SL1 it could largely be a parts bin camera. The two key phrases are small and light. As I said before, Pentax used to be good at the small thing, but not so good at lightweight. But I think they can do it, and I for one would very much like to see that camera.

2. Release a 35mm SLR. This one seems so incredibly obvious to me, but maybe I'm wrong? No, a new K1000 is not going to happen, and Pentax shouldn't try for that. Simply put, it would be too big of an undertaking. But something akin to a P3n or a ZX camera could easily use the shutter, mirror box, and pentaprism from the K1. All they would need to do is make sure it has a shutter speed dial, and un-cripple the lens mount, and every college film photo program in the world would buy multiples of them, and I wouldn't be surprised if a few influencers would make sure they were out of stock for a long time.

I'm sure there are other ways Ricoh could leverage the SLRs strengths, but the two I listed above are easy, and relatively low risk. They just need to make sure to stay away from bad solenoids and plastic motor gears.

[Rondec]

Pentax has had a very small segment of the market for a long time. They do not need to sell a million cameras in order to make a go of it. In fact, it probably wouldn't be healthy for them to have an increase like that.

On the other hand, if they can continue to sell as they have and make a profit on each camera, they should be fine.

It is telling that Panasonic says they aren't going to invest much in still photography and Canon says they are dropping entry level cameras. All is not well in MILC land.

[Des]

mirrorless cameras are now so popular due to the things that they can do that DSLRs can't, and that's not going to change - video plus face, eye, animal, vehicle detect AF. They're all things that DSLRs can't do unless in live-view where they're essentially a bigger, clunkier mirrorless camera with no viewfinder.

The K-3iii has PDAF eye-detect, which (according to the e-book) works well. It's part of a system of AI-based subject recognition. As the first iteration of this system, there's probably plenty of room for improvement, but if this nut can be cracked it would undermine one of the axiomatic advantages of mirrorless.

The other thing about MILC v DSLR is the more compact/lighter weight bodies - e.g. 820g for the K-3iii v 607g for the Fuji XT-4. For those using lightweight, compact lenses, especially for travel, that would be a significant advantage. (For those of us who use heavier or bulkier lenses, not so much.) That is a point that reviews always dwell on.

Is there anything you miss about a DLSR Jonathan? OVF, for example?

people will be walking around with augmented reality glasses, 2027-ish, much the same way as people walk around with smartphones today.

That seemed to be Mark Zuckerberg's big idea. How's that working out for him?

[Wasp]

My Samsung NX1 bodies make it possible for me to manual focus my classic Pentax lenses - kinda ironic. Yes, modern Pentax bodies has focus peaking too, but the Samsungs were way, way cheaper.