[repaap]

That may be due to the fact the Z7 has the same sensor as D850 and Nikon only has the $$$ to buy so many???



Yes, some people were silly enough to buy it....ive used the system,its OK but no where near lots of others.Its probably near the bottom of the tree imo.It sells on price and Brand awareness.There are plenty of better cameras available.

---------- Post added 09-21-18 at 02:20 PM ----------



Canon are,their people are calling the change of mount as significant as the FD to EF shift.they are saying this is the mount to "take us into the future".

Obviously,FF m/l was forced upon CaNik by $$$ony,but now PanaSigLeica are involved.

This is significant, the 3 big boys and "arguably" the video leader(in consumer cameras) going head to head....I'd say FF mirrorless is in the game....FF dslr only have 3 players(if we disregard $$$ony A).

canon is and has been big because of their really aggressive marketing. I could go to shop almots anywhere at Finland and buy one of these consumer Canon things, now also Sony is there, but lot of consumers will go for Canon. do you know why? availability one, prize another. can 2 million fly be wrong?

lot of these million buyers, who will go back to their phone when taking pictures, because it is more handy and what not, will not give a fly about prizey new flashy mounts.

canon say it is going to take them to future, they say a lot of other things too. we do not live in future, no one knows what is there, even if we are looking.

it has been interesting to follow you here at forums surfar, but honestly there is too much noise. g’day. -unsubscribe-

[Lord Lucan]

I'm still using a 7 year old computer, because I bought what I needed when I bought. It still takes all the latest Apple upgrades. so it's still learning new tricks. I'm seeing my K-1 along the same lines. I bought way more than I needed when I bought it, so it will last me a long time.

I'm glad for you that you've never had anything fail abruptly.

Normhead's computer sounds nearly new to me. Parts of mine are up to 30 years old, including an IBM Model_M_keyboard (a classic). If this keyboard failed right now I'd move to another PC FTTB - I have about five around the house including two excellent 5yo ones I bought for about £20 each. Computers are not a good example for reh321's case in fact, because even ones around 5 years old now are fast enough and have enough capacity for anything that most people want to do (anything but cutting edge games), which is one reason that PC sales have slowed so much in recent years; this is not the 1990's any more.

I shall use my DSLRs until they break unrepairably, or some very radical technical change takes place - a change much more significant than OVF to mirrorless, more like the change from film to digital. I don't understand reh321's problem with things failing "abruptly". If something of mine fails abruptly at 7 years, 10 years or 30 years I simply buy a new one (or mend it) and I am no worse off (in fact better off) than if I had bought a new one every 5 years as a routine as reh321 suggests. In fact, in my experience, many things fail in less than 5 years (I had three new water heaters fail in 4 months) in which case reh321 and I are in exactly the same boat.

[northcoastgreg]

Canon are,their people are calling the change of mount as significant as the FD to EF shift.they are saying this is the mount to "take us into the future".

It's just marketing. Canon is appealing to the kind people who are temperamentally restless and intensely desirous of buying a shiny new toy every two or three years and who for that reason have become bored with DSLRs (because DSLRs are mature product with little room for improvement). But mirrorless is also reaching a maturation point. Soon these mirrorless cameras will be just as boring as DSLRs. What are the upgrade junkies going to do then?

[reh321]

It's just marketing. Canon is appealing to the kind people who are temperamentally restless and intensely desirous of buying a shiny new toy every two or three years and who for that reason have become bored with DSLRs (because DSLRs are mature product with little room for improvement).

I cannot speak for others - I can speak only for myself. Beginning with the Yashica rangefinder camera I purchased in 1969 with graduation money, and including the Pentax K-30 I'm still using, I have had nine cameras in 49 years ... that is an average of 5.4 years each; remove the two "failures" from the list, and the average is nearly seven years per camera. I was a Canon user for twenty years; I got my first Canon, which lasted over eleven years, because I was attracted to the EF USM lenses - not because they were "shiny new toys", but because they worked so much better than what Pentax was providing at the time. I have no reason to believe that other Canon users think any differently than I do - Canon does cutting-edge very well.

[northcoastgreg]

got my first Canon, which lasted over eleven years, because I was attracted to the EF USM lenses - not because they were "shiny new toys", but because they worked so much better than what Pentax was providing at the time. I have no reason to believe that other Canon users think any differently than I do - Canon does cutting-edge very well.

My issue is precisely the fact that I don't see mirrorless as cutting edge --- not in the sense of constituting an appreciable step forward for photography. Canon's move from MF to AF really was (to use the well worn cliche) a game-changer, because it made it significantly easier to get sharp images, especially at telephoto FOVs. The move from film to digital also made it significantly easier to improve the image quality of one's photography. I'm not seeing a similar improvement in the ability to improve image quality with mirrorless FF. It's just a different format. People usually prefer mirrorless or DSLRs due to unique needs and.or temperament. One size, one format, does not fit all. However, it's those who temperamentally prone to be enthusiastic about mirrorless who are controlling the narrative and who are thereby having an undue influence on what camera companies like Canon and Sony are doing. Meanwhile there are quite a few serious photographers, a veritable silent majority, whose needs are being ignored.

[reh321]

My issue is precisely the fact that I don't see mirrorless as cutting edge --- not in the sense of constituting an appreciable step forward for photography. Canon's move from MF to AF really was (to use the well worn cliche) a game-changer, because it made it significantly easier to get sharp images, especially at telephoto FOVs. The move from film to digital also made it significantly easier to improve the image quality of one's photography. I'm not seeing a similar improvement in the ability to improve image quality with mirrorless FF. It's just a different format. People usually prefer mirrorless or DSLRs due to unique needs and.or temperament. One size, one format, does not fit all. However, it's those who temperamentally prone to be enthusiastic about mirrorless who are controlling the narrative and who are thereby having an undue influence on what camera companies like Canon and Sony are doing. Meanwhile there are quite a few serious photographers, a veritable silent majority, whose needs are being ignored.

What particular item needed by a professional isn't being provided?

[mecrox]

My issue is precisely the fact that I don't see mirrorless as cutting edge --- not in the sense of constituting an appreciable step forward for photography. Canon's move from MF to AF really was (to use the well worn cliche) a game-changer, because it made it significantly easier to get sharp images, especially at telephoto FOVs. The move from film to digital also made it significantly easier to improve the image quality of one's photography. I'm not seeing a similar improvement in the ability to improve image quality with mirrorless FF. It's just a different format. People usually prefer mirrorless or DSLRs due to unique needs and.or temperament. One size, one format, does not fit all. However, it's those who temperamentally prone to be enthusiastic about mirrorless who are controlling the narrative and who are thereby having an undue influence on what camera companies like Canon and Sony are doing. Meanwhile there are quite a few serious photographers, a veritable silent majority, whose needs are being ignored.

It’s quite hard to believe a silent majority of serious photographers are being ignored with cameras like the D850, D500, the 5D Mk 4, 5DS, Hasselblads, PhaseOnes, Fujis big and small, Pentax K1s, KPs and 645s, Sony A series etc., mostly with a plethora of top lenses. In fact probably a golden age of kit never before seen. What really substantial things do this silent majority want they don’t have?

The companies have to plan for a future with high-end video, global shutters, software integration and features taken for granted in other things like smartphones, automated production lines which save costs, etc. That’s why there is a change of format. It’s not just a con. For the companies it’s about the business cases and revenue. We can’t expect anything else. They have to find the customers of tomorrow who’ve grown up with high tech and software everywhere, not just cater for the older guys of today who didn’t. There is no future for the companies in that. Of course there is a huge busload of hype and nonsense marketing talk around especially on YouTube et al but so what? That’s what these companies do to sell the stuff. No one has to take it at face value or pay attention to it at all.

---

Last edited by mecrox; 09-21-2018 at 11:30 AM.

[northcoastgreg]

What particular item needed by a professional isn't being provided?

Professional photographers are always well looked after; it's the non-professional serious photographers I'm concerned about.

What really substantial things do this silent majority want they don’t have?

The biggest complaint I hear from photographers is not that don't have enough choices in gear, but that cameras have become too complex. I remember once having a conversation with a former student of Ansel Adams. He told me he was avoiding digital because the complexity took all the fun out of photography.

They have to find the customers of tomorrow who’ve grown up with high tech and software everywhere, not just cater for the older guys of today who didn’t.

It's not just old guys. There are quite a few female photographers, many of them quite talented, who struggle with the technical side of photography.

[reh321]

The biggest complaint I hear from photographers is not that don't have enough choices in gear, but that cameras have become too complex. I remember once having a conversation with a former student of Ansel Adams. He told me he was avoiding digital because the complexity took all the fun out of photography.

It's not just old guys. There are quite a few female photographers, many of them quite talented, who struggle with the technical side of photography.

They need to stop reading manuals - purchase a "for Dummies" book and then get out and take photos. The controls I change on my camera are essentially the same I changed on my rangefinder Yashica in 1969 - ISO, shutter speed, and aperture.

added: some years ago, my mother purchased a Canon SLR at a local camera store - then took lessons there on how to operate it. If these companies don't still provide that kind of service, they don't deserve to stay in business!!

[reh321]

Meanwhile, what Canon and Nikon are seeing is a net loss of upper echelon photographers - who are going to Sony ..... of course, the companies are going to explore MILC!!

[lesmore49]

Well....this past week at Photokina has certainly been an interesting one with all the additional release of more Full frame and other format size... Mirrorless cameras.

I originally asked in this thread if they're (mirrorless) going to dominate the market ? I know just because a bunch of anything has been released doesn't necessarily mean they are going to be the dominant product in the marketplace...but...I guess we will see.

Who will buy? Not an old timer like me...I'm too firmly ensconced in th world of DSLR and SLRdom to be a typical candidate for the new technology (to me) mirrorless. But the marketplace isn't interested in my demographics...old, set in my ways...old.

But for those just coming into the marketplace..whether potential enthusiast or just a guy who wants to get a basic but good camera to record family events...mirrorless will tempt them...probably to the point do I get a mirrorless or a DSLR.

Also I wonder how the Leica L lens mount in partnership with Panasonic and is it Fuji (?) is going to affect the mirrorless and general camera market(s) ?

[reh321]

Well....this past week at Photokina has certainly been an interesting one with all the additional release of more Full frame and other format size... Mirrorless cameras.

I originally asked in this thread if they're (mirrorless) going to dominate the market ?

Actually, you asked whether "FF mirrorless" were going to dominate the market.

I would say that the odds are more favorable for each than they looked at the beginning of this thread.

In their interview with @Adam;
Interview with Ricoh Imaging - Photokina 2018 - Photokina 2018 | PentaxForums.com
Ricoh representatives were even more coy than usual, but they indicated that they are exploring both format and viewfinder issues.

My biggest concern is that of lenses. They have produced very few FF lenses since the K-1 was released; if they switch to FF, I would almost have to depend on old film lenses, because virtually no DFA lenses are anywhere near to my budget. I have no personal opinion about DSLR vis MILC.

Of course, I have already said I would purchase a KP some time in the future, so if they switched entirely to FF using a different mount, I would purchase a KP + PLM lens .... and then forget about them; I am 70 years old, so I am already thinking in terms of my next camera being my last camera.

[Kim Coxon]

Well....this past week at Photokina has certainly been an interesting one with all the additional release of more Full frame and other format size... Mirrorless cameras.

I originally asked in this thread if they're (mirrorless) going to dominate the market ? I know just because a bunch of anything has been released doesn't necessarily mean they are going to be the dominant product in the marketplace...but...I guess we will see.

Who will buy? Not an old timer like me...I'm too firmly ensconced in th world of DSLR and SLRdom to be a typical candidate for the new technology (to me) mirrorless. But the marketplace isn't interested in my demographics...old, set in my ways...old.

But for those just coming into the marketplace..whether potential enthusiast or just a guy who wants to get a basic but good camera to record family events...mirrorless will tempt them...probably to the point do I get a mirrorless or a DSLR.

Also I wonder how the Leica L lens mount in partnership with Panasonic and is it Fuji (?) is going to affect the mirrorless and general camera market(s) ?

I too am an old guy set in his ways. But an interesting thought has struck me. Asahi were one of the first to put a mirror in a camera. Until then, there hadn't been a need for them. Thinking back, the original Optio's has a viewfinder but they went out years ago. TLR's went a long time ago. So a whole generation of people has become used to taking photos without a finder. It was the Asahi "Optical" Company who put a mirror in a camera. And for a while even after that, most of the players were about mechanical perfection and glass design. In reality very few or perhaps none of those original companies really had any "expertise" or the ability to produce electronics. Nor have they now. Leica source in their sensors (as do many others). They have been in partnership with the likes of Panasonic for a long time. What has happened and is happening is that there is a coming together of the electronics Industry with the optical one. A mirror was needed with film to compose and focus a camera with interchangeable lenses above about 90mm (35mm equivalent), Below that, you could use a mirror or a rangefinder/viewfinder. That is no longer the case.

Electronics have progressed to a stage where a mirror is no longer needed. If you like it has gone full circle. Pentax dropped the finder from the Optio's a long time ago. Fuji had an optical finder in the X10 and X20 with an electronic overlay. That went fully electronic with the X30. Long before digital, Pentax started going away from dials etc with the Z1. True there is a market for "retro". Fuji exploit it with some of their designs and use dials and aperture rings. Many of the Leica's have very simple menus. But then they don't need AF ones etc.


APS and the other smaller sensors have been without a mirror for a while Even in MF, there is ML. So in reality, I think the mirror will die. If it is not needed, it adds complexity and therefore cost to the design. Another advantage is that with a new mount, you can have a clean slate and design for operation rather than be constrained by compatibility. Nor do you have to rely on menus. As Fuji have shown, you can produce an ML camera with a shutter speed dial and aperture ring, ie traditional controls. So really the only thing you need a mirror for in any format is if you want an optical finder. And in the "overall" imaging market, there is really only a small proportion of those. So yes, I don't think it will happen overnight but I do believe to days of the SLR are numbered. And when it happens there will be some who will continue to use their "old" gear for a long time. Just as a few now still enjoy using film rather tha digital sensors.

[Winder]

As the latest Photokina shows, the trend towards mirrorless is still going strong. DSLRs aren't going away just like range finders are still around, but I think the writing is on the wall and mirrorless is the future.