[MJKoski]

Specs race produces dull and uninspiring cameras. Giving back movements to digital camera would be a grand step forward. And switching back to 1:1 sensors.

Time of puny FF format is over.

[Dan Rentea]

Strange is that A1 is already in the hands of reviewers but they are not allowed to post images or reviews about the camera until 4th of February. I can't wait to see ambassadors reviews for their gorgeous images they produce.

[Kunzite]

If the user base don't buy the cameras you release, you end up like Olympus. Demand and supply... I have the very best example with a mall from Bucharest who signed contracts with restaurants and shops that 3-4 months later were empty most of the time because what they had to offer wasn't in the target of the people visiting that mall. Once they replaced the restaurants and shops with different ones, things started to change... Canon users let Canon know they are ready for mirrorless in 2 ways: some switched to Sony and some invested in RP, R and RF lenses. Once R5 and R6 have been released, the user base of Canon responded and it's shown in the financial report. The same user base, for Nikon this time, let Nikon know that what they released in terms of mirrorless doesn't match their expectations. They also let Nikon know that D780 it's not attractive anymore and that's why Nikon is facing some problems now. And most of what I said it's what one of the Nikon managers said...

You wouldn't know Olympus had any issues by listening to their ambassadors Being transferred to JIP will allow unprecedented development like never seen before, it seems

Anyway, Canon and Nikon users didn't all jumped to mirrorless, even as the option became available (Canon and Nikon and Pentax users didn't all jump to mirrorless, with the option available from other brands, for years). And both Canon and Nikon will force their user base to "decide" on mirrorless by making their DSLRs less attractive, even by killing the DSLR lines. An EOS move.
Sony did it first, transforming their DSLRs to the SLT kludge, which quickly became pointless with the first decent on-sensor AF.
We have less control than you think.

Which they did by adding technologies advancement on the table and developing a need for certain features unique to their game called mirrorless (eye af, faster fps, silent shutter, lack of front/back focus, EVF, etc.). This need of new technologies made mirrorless gain the traction I wouldn't believe it can be possible 3 years ago given how bad the af or EVFs were back then.

I'd say the only "technologies advancement" is that some things are simpler with mirrorless; simpler mechanical construction, removal of several components with the addition of an electronic viewfinder. The development we're seeing happens because of that, and because companies would prefer to sell cheaper to develop products at a high price.
Except they got caught in a technology race... very expensive, they're basically trying to kill each other.

Of course they were still selling more DSLRs because until the release of R6 and R5, Canon just released a 6D Mark II and a 5D Mark IV in mirrorless bodies and their user base wanted something different to use with their lenses or with the new RF lenses. They wanted a true successor of 5D Mark IV and 6D which were their most wanted cameras. The successor of 5D and 6D came in mirrorless shape and people jumped all over them. The impact of R5/R6 is seen in the financial report and it will be seen many months from now given that R5 and R6 are still on preorder in some countries due to huge demand. Nikon representatives said that they weren't ready to invest in mirrorless and they thought people will still buy DSLRs. D780 changed their approach due to low sales. The problem was they weren't ready for mirrorless, as they said in interviews.

I would not be surprised if they're selling more DSLRs even now. Clearly they were, until November at least (as CIPA published their statistics up to November 2020); and last year the 6D Mark II was already 3 years old.

Voices are and will be long time from now regarding the release of new DSLRs, as we see voices in Pentax forum from Pentaxians asking for a mirrorless camera. In Canon case, the voices became less and less pro DSLRs since the R5 and R6 have been released. I expect some moves from Nikon also this year.

Perhaps people realized it's pointless to ask for improved DSLRs? I highly suspect people asking for more FD cameras similarly got quieter (except they didn't had the Internet to express their opinion on). You might even extend the analogy by pointing out the EOS/EF-mount was more advanced if you wish

Healthy companies look into future and one of the Canon's managers said more than clear that they made almost the impossible with 1Dx Mark III to offer such specs and features because and I quote "there isn't more room of improvement when comes to DSLRs". The mirror seems the limitation in his opinion in order to remain competitive with mirrorless on medium and long term. 1Dx Mark III looked impressive when it was released. But with R6 having the same sensor and close af performance at 4000$ less, you become aware of the advantages of the new mount.

I believe Ricoh has some good idea about how DSLRs can be further improved. I'm not sure if it's feasible, if they'll really try it or it's yet undecided, if they'll try it and succeed or fail; but at least they're thinking about ways.
Of course, when you're promoting your brand new mirrorless line and want your customers to go there and buy all your new shiny equipment, DSLRs have to be presented as a dead end.

I'm very curious what features will have the next Pentax DSLRs if they remain as it seems the only DSLR manufacturer. We see big improvements in K3 Mark III over K3 Mark II, but except OVF which it's a very nice addition, it's still room for lots of improvements in video or af performance (the lack of a dedicated af processor, or the lack of more cross type af points that helps when tracking are the hints that made me say there is room for improvements). I'm curious because it will be interesting to see where mirrorless will be 5 years from now in terms of performance and where DSLRs will be, strictly from the performance perspective, not from the sales perspective. Will the next K1 Mark III can beat D850 in terms of performance? If so, in which areas and by how much?

The K-1 Mark III should be a K-1 with the K-3 III's innards (and, I hope, a similarly improved viewfinder). I care less about beating this or that camera, as how well does it feel when I'd be using it.
What would be truly interesting (and more expensive than I'd be willing to pay) is a K-mount flagship. Not "APS-C flagship", not "landscape oriented FF at entry-level FF prices" but flagship.

They were driven by Sony if we look at their market share and if their cameras or current Canon cameras weren't as good as they are now, it would have been impossible to fool so many photographers, professional and enthusiastic.

It's driven by everyone but Pentax.

[Kunzite]

Strange is that A1 is already in the hands of reviewers but they are not allowed to post images or reviews about the camera until 4th of February. I can't wait to see ambassadors reviews for their gorgeous images they produce.

DPReview has some samples: Here is what 8K footage and 50MP stills from the Sony Alpha 1 look like: Digital Photography Review
People are joking about "eyelash AF"...

[Dan Rentea]

You wouldn't know Olympus had any issues by listening to their ambassadors Being transferred to JIP will allow unprecedented development like never seen before, it seems

Bezergheanu is far from what I would want from an ambassador, but he seems to have quite a few fans that are willing to pay for what he is recommending.

Anyway, Canon and Nikon users didn't all jumped to mirrorless, even as the option became available (Canon and Nikon and Pentax users didn't all jump to mirrorless, with the option available from other brands, for years). And both Canon and Nikon will force their user base to "decide" on mirrorless by making their DSLRs less attractive, even by killing the DSLR lines. An EOS move.
Sony did it first, transforming their DSLRs to the SLT kludge, which quickly became pointless with the first decent on-sensor AF.
We have less control than you think.

They tried making DSLRs more attractive, Canon with 90D and Nikon with D780, both cmeras with great specs. Canon users in my opinion forced Canon to release mirrorless cameras, not the other way around. Canon only let them know that 2 mounts it's not productive from a business perspective. It depends from which way you want to see things.

I'd say the only "technologies advancement" is that some things are simpler with mirrorless; simpler mechanical construction, removal of several components with the addition of an electronic viewfinder. The development we're seeing happens because of that, and because companies would prefer to sell cheaper to develop products at a high price.
Except they got caught in a technology race... very expensive, they're basically trying to kill each other.

They were racing in 2 for a very long time. Canon vs. Nikon debates are famous on internet. Now they race in 3 with Sony being a strong contender. For me, as a user, I would love to see Panasonic solving their af problems and be the 4th contender so that all these manufacturers can push the technologies even further.

I would not be surprised if they're selling more DSLRs even now. Clearly they were, until November at least (as CIPA published their statistics up to November 2020); and last year the 6D Mark II was already 3 years old.

In Nikon case we know for sure that for the moment DSLRs represents their main sells because it's what Nikon said recently. With Canon it will be interesting to see in November some statistics.

Perhaps people realized it's pointless to ask for improved DSLRs? I highly suspect people asking for more FD cameras similarly got quieter (except they didn't had the Internet to express their opinion on). You might even extend the analogy by pointing out the EOS/EF-mount was more advanced if you wish

If the interest in DSLRs were as high as you think, 5D Mark V would now be on stores given that it was in advanced stage of development as it was said.

I believe Ricoh has some good idea about how DSLRs can be further improved. I'm not sure if it's feasible, if they'll really try it or it's yet undecided, if they'll try it and succeed or fail; but at least they're thinking about ways.
Of course, when you're promoting your brand new mirrorless line and want your customers to go there and buy all your new shiny equipment, DSLRs have to be presented as a dead end.

Photo stores and Youtube reviewers are the influencers, not me and you. They promote the things that help them to stay wealthy.

The K-1 Mark III should be a K-1 with the K-3 III's innards (and, I hope, a similarly improved viewfinder). I care less about beating this or that camera, as how well does it feel when I'd be using it.
What would be truly interesting (and more expensive than I'd be willing to pay) is a K-mount flagship. Not "APS-C flagship", not "landscape oriented FF at entry-level FF prices" but flagship.


It's driven by everyone but Pentax.

Of course you care less about beating camera x or y, but in this topic we were discussing also the benefits of Pentax remaining the only DSLR manufacturer and I don't think that only OVF alone can have an impact on Canon and Nikon DSLR users willing to stay in DSLR boat. And I say this because they are used with things that for the moment aren't available in Pentax boat.

[gatorguy]

The thing is that they(wife’s) do know already what is going to happen. They play along and hope that you(husband) will do as little damage(spend money) as possible. Forever going on game of survival. (Disclaimer: this goes other way around too. And this applies to children-parent, relationship too)

Oh, she's already figured out the game. She's talking to a tradesman about changing out the countertops in our master suite bath and knows I'm not going to say a word about it. At all.

[repaap]

Oh, she's already figured out the game. She's talking to a tradesman about changing out the countertops in our master suite bath and knows I'm not going to say a word about it. At all.

Silence is gold/peace. I live by that. As much as I can.

Edit:there is 2 kind of silence. And we know it.

[Kunzite]

Bezergheanu is far from what I would want from an ambassador, but he seems to have quite a few fans that are willing to pay for what he is recommending.

Bezergheanu might be jumping to Sony. He already made a first step, and I can't imagine OM Whatever keeping him.
But, yeah, his aggressive hype pushed people to a non-optimal choice.

They tried making DSLRs more attractive, Canon with 90D and Nikon with D780, both cmeras with great specs. Canon users in my opinion forced Canon to release mirrorless cameras, not the other way around. Canon only let them know that 2 mounts it's not productive from a business perspective. It depends from which way you want to see things.

Our opinion differs somewhat: I'd say Canon and Nikon didn't wait for their users to force a move to mirrorless; just like the jump from FD to EF wasn't user driven.

If the interest in DSLRs were as high as you think, 5D Mark V would now be on stores given that it was in advanced stage of development as it was said.

Not exactly, and that's not exactly what I'm saying. Canon is trying to set themselves for the #1 position, remember? - so they're putting all effort into surpassing Sony. They can't afford to divest effort into DSLRs, regardless how many of their users would prefer those.
Actually I think that, for most people, DSLRs or MILCs (i.e. the type of viewfinder) is not that important. Canon users stayed with Canon, and many will still stay with Canon even if that means moving to the MILCs (it doesn't hurt that MILCs are so capable).
But - getting back to my point - this isn't exactly a choice between DSLRs and MILCs.

Photo stores and Youtube reviewers are the influencers, not me and you. They promote the things that help them to stay wealthy.

That was the generic "you", i.e. the manufacturers switching to MILCs - not you, Dan Rentea. Sorry if it seemed I implied something else.

Of course you care less about beating camera x or y, but in this topic we were discussing also the benefits of Pentax remaining the only DSLR manufacturer and I don't think that only OVF alone can have an impact on Canon and Nikon DSLR users willing to stay in DSLR boat. And I say this because they are used with things that for the moment aren't available in Pentax boat.

And I realize how off-topic I am
The benefit is, from the little I know at this moment, potential. Having the OVF should give them an edge, but of course they will have to continue improving and offering compelling products.
I believe that reinventing the SLR will become necessary at some point. We'll see.

[repaap]

What is really underestimated in this conversation(we know about how good MILC is if you get it right:lashes/eye = the main advantage of micl) it is the OVF vs EVF.

That is it.

Interesting talk in general about tech and all. Also you could really remember that this means as much as rats arse to many photographers. And they prefer OVF and the way they have been shooting for many yrs and will(would) be.

The thing which has been said before by some, it just does give completely different feel to be able to see -it- with your own eyes. And live it as it goes by. The magic moment in photography.

Sure. Tech is nice and all but it is not for everyone. Many will hold on to that. Some camera manufacturers would like to ditch mirror, not just to avoid the technical problems around that dated tech, but also expenses. Let alone if someone would be crazy enough to reinvent prism and tech around that instead, to give the pleasure for just those few old poor souls seeking for that moment.

[Rondec]

I do think there is a group of people (no idea how big) who will continue to prefer OVFs to EVFs. I happen to fall into that camp.

At this point, I think the tech is good enough in both SLRs and MILCs that if you aren't getting your shot, it isn't the camera's fault.

[biz-engineer]

Specs race produces dull and uninspiring cameras. Giving back movements to digital camera would be a grand step forward. And switching back to 1:1 sensors.

I totally agree. For me (for stills) I don't see the point of having 8K, I don't see the point of having 30 FPS instead of 10 FPS. And I rather frustrated by the lack of choice of sensor aspect ratios, I feel bored by the ubiquitous 3:2, and far behind 4:3, with total absence of native 5:4 and 1:1.

---------- Post added 31-01-21 at 12:10 ----------

I do think there is a group of people (no idea how big) who will continue to prefer OVFs to EVFs.

Personally I could say the EVF was pleasant experience, I had at least some discomfort with every EVF camera I tried, but I'm not blocking on it. It's just that I don't see the point of upgrading a camera just for the EVF, there must be really good features other than the EVF itself for me to accept the discomfort induced by the EVF. As of today, I don't see significant improvements in image quality of EVF cameras over DSLRs, so for me the mirrorless thing is very much a marketing thing. But if Ricoh doesn't make their DSLR evolve like mirrorless cameras, the inner guts of Pentax dSLR are going to be obsolete, then we will have no choice but to made do with the EVF discomfort.

[Rondec]

I totally agree. For me (for stills) I don't see the point of having 8K, I don't see the point of having 30 FPS instead of 10 FPS. And I rather frustrated by the lack of choice of sensor aspect ratios, I feel bored by the ubiquitous 3:2, and far behind 4:3, with total absence of native 5:4 and 1:1.

---------- Post added 31-01-21 at 12:10 ----------


Personally I could say the EVF was pleasant experience, I had at least some discomfort with every EVF camera I tried, but I'm not blocking on it. It's just that I don't see the point of upgrading a camera just for the EVF, there must be really good features other than the EVF itself for me to accept the discomfort induced by the EVF. As of today, I don't see significant improvements in image quality of EVF cameras over DSLRs, so for me the mirrorless thing is very much a marketing thing. But if Ricoh doesn't make their DSLR evolve like mirrorless cameras, the inner guts of Pentax dSLR are going to be obsolete, then we will have no choice but to made do with the EVF discomfort.

The sensors are the same between SLRs and MILCs. There is no particular reason that you should get different results (assuming your photos are well exposed and in focus) between say, a XT-3 and a K-3 III. Pentax's issues over time aren't because they use mirrors, it is that they haven't invested a lot of money in bringing their auto focus specs up to where other brands have. Hopefully that will change.

[MMVIII]

Quite interesting posts here, with positions I can well relate to.
I think it should not be forgotten that if this new camera is compared to DSLRs you are not comparing ownly two technologies but two totally different price brackets and two different generations.
If you take the α1 from 2021 for €6500,- and compare it with e. g. a K1-II from 2017 for €2000,- or D850 from 2017 for €3800,- it is to be expected that there are differences. Not all are because of DSLR vs. MILC or even less OVF vs. EVF.
As I said, the novelty is the readout speed of the new sensor and the lack of rolling shutter for electronic shutter, which might make a focal plane mechanical shutter redundant.
I don't see a reason why this could not be implemented in a mirrored camera in which the sensor could get the same percentage of light as now is split off by the mirror for the AF sensor while the other part is now directed to the metering system and VF. Thus the sensor would work permanently like in a mirrorless camera. Just get rid of the secondary mirror for AF and let the light through on the whole mirror area. The viewfinder would be optical with the same brightness as now and the sensor would have to compensate for (half?) an EV light loss in the metering and AF tasks.
Just as an extreme example, but I do think that development would be possible also in mirrored technology and tracking eye(lash) AF would not be a problem here either, despite keeping the so much valued OVF. If there is enough market to get to this development is another question.

[KiloHotelphoto]

The sensors are the same between SLRs and MILCs. There is no particular reason that you should get different results (assuming your photos are well exposed and in focus) between say, a XT-3 and a K-3 III. Pentax's issues over time aren't because they use mirrors, it is that they haven't invested a lot of money in bringing their auto focus specs up to where other brands have. Hopefully that will change.

Yea the images are no different between dslr and mirrorless, I had a 1DX2 and replaced it with a R6 and they use the same senor and the images are the same but the autofocus of the R6 is so much better.

I have a feeling that when the K3 III is released a lot of people here will be really upset over reviews it will get about its autofocus ability. I'm sure it will be the best Pentax ever when it comes to autofocus but when a camera reviewer test it after using a Canon R5 and 6 and then a Sony A1 it will be a huge step back in performance. I know you will say they are more expensive but the R6 at $2500 focuses better than a $5500 1DX2 it's just a benefit of mirrorless.

[MMVIII]

Not saying this was not a right observation, but the 1DxII is from 2015. And also not saying a new Canon DSLR would be just as good as the R5, or claiming the K-3III is going to be. But still, the viewfinder technology is probably not the decisive factor. It is the development funds and energy, here I see the clear advantage of mirrorless.