The Future of Digital Still Photography

DSLR

2 (6.5%)

mirrorless camera with interchangeable lenses

21 (67.7%)

mirrorless with fixed lens

1 (3.2%)

pellicle with interchangeable lenses

1 (3.2%)

something completely different

6 (19.4%)

Total Members Voted: 31

[jfirneno]

I've asked this question on different sites but I think I might get a different split here.

Regards
John

[feppe]

I've asked this question on different sites but I think I might get a different split here.

Regards
John

Same as in 2010: cell phone.

[BJL]

Same as in 2010: cell phone.

Yes, "mirrorless with fixed lens" will clearly be the top-seller, and the same even if phones are excluded thanks to the domination of small sensor compacts over all larger formats.

So this poll would be a lot more interesting if it compared only options with "DSLR-sized" sensors -- then I would vote for "mirrorless camera with interchangeable lenses".

[Wayne Fox]

I can't answer the question without first understanding the definition of "mainstream".

I think cell phone is a good answer if "mainstream" implies everyone.  However, I doubt if many of the users on this forum will be using one as their main capture device.

I actually see the point and shoot category getting more challenged as cell phone cameras get better and better and features are added to them.  I'm using my s90 less and my iPhone more to grab quick shots.

[jduncan]

Same as in 2010: cell phone.

Yes I vote for Mirroless SRL, thinking of Pros, but you are right on the money ...

[jfirneno]

Okay, I edited the question to clarify that by mainstream I mean what would be the enthusiast/pro level type of still-photo camera.

Regards
John

[jfirneno]

What's a reasonable time to keep a poll like this open?  Is this kind of a typical number for this forum (20 respondents)?

[feppe]

What's a reasonable time to keep a poll like this open?  Is this kind of a typical number for this forum (20 respondents)?

I think it's more of a reflection of how interested people here are about the question.

[BJL]

What's a reasonable time to keep a poll like this open?  Is this kind of a typical number for this forum (20 respondents)?

Given the utter dominance of one option in the responses so far, the poll could safely be closed!

[BernardLanguillier]

I guess that the answer will be pretty different depending on whether we ask:

- what we think it will be,
- what we would like it to be.

I answered the first because it seems to be the obvious direction but I do personally believe that optical viewfinders will still deliver a superior experience and should therefore remain the best option for my usage.

Cheers,
Bernard

[jfirneno]

Bernard:
With respect to the optical viewfinder (OVF) I fear that what may happen is manufacturers may jump to the electronic viewfinder (EVF) so completely that we won't have the best choice of viewfinder available.  I shoot with a Sony A850 and I feel the viewfinder is excellent and much better than any EVF currently available.  There has been some talk of Sony completely abandoning the OVF.  If I believed that to be certain I would feel forced to either buy additional A850s to tide me over until Sony's EVF would be good enough or switch mounts.

Thanks for the feedback

John

[Dick Roadnight]

How do you define mainstream enthusiast/pro?

These would be the people who are now mostly using Nikon, Canon, Hasselblad or Phase?

A high proportion of Hasselblad and Phase cameras are bought by semi-pros or amateurs, but they are a small proportion of the total photo market.

You would be asking what people will be buying then, as most of them will still be using the system they have now.

...and will there still be a market for for high-end specialist pro cameras like Sinar?

The Problem for Sinar is that their kit lasts for ever and does not go out of fashion, so surviving on replacements would be difficult, with so much used kit out there, and fewer people "taking the trouble to do it properly".

The irony is that Sinars and other Medium Format Digital View Cameras (MFDVCs) come in the "mirror-less with interchangeable lenses" category,,, but they are at the other end of the spectrum from the pseudo-SLRs that you would think of, but are they mainstream enthusiast/pro? ...and should you re-phrase the question categories?

With the growing popularity of TS adapters and lenses, I ask myself if there will be mainstream cameras with body movements... as this is so easy without a mirror.    

[feppe]

I answered the first because it seems to be the obvious direction but I do personally believe that optical viewfinders will still deliver a superior experience and should therefore remain the best option for my usage.

I've said it before: OVFs will be a niche feature (if at all) in a few years. Good riddance.

[jfirneno]

The majority opinion in the poll agrees with my belief (but not my preference).  I think in the next five (or so) years the major manufacturers of digital still cameras will feature as their top of the line (flagship) cameras a mirrorless device.  So I guess that assumes that the sensor based AF and the EVF will surpass the current AF and OVF systems.  Interestingly a good chunk of people think it will be something "completely different".

What I would prefer to see would be a DSLR (mirror/OVF) that also allowed lifting the mirror and then allowing an alternate arrangement of LED screen and on-sensor AF.

With respect to the posts, it's always interesting to see how variedly people interpret a particular set of words.  It definitely made me smile.

When last I looked, the ratio of views vs votes was ~ 5% (30 / 600).  Seems like a decent response rate.  I think I'll clse the voting now.

Thanks everyone who voted,

John

[BJL]

... I do personally believe that optical viewfinders will still deliver a superior experience and should therefore remain the best option for my usage.

I fear that what may happen is manufacturers may jump to the electronic viewfinder (EVF) so completely that we won't have the best choice of viewfinder available.

Bernard and John,
   I see no reason to fear for high quality SLRs with OVFs in the forseeable future: Canon and Nikon will take care of you, even if Sony's participation on the high end true SLR sector turns out to be short-lived.

Despite being one who is happily predicting that mirrorless systems will take-over the market sector now dominated by entry-level (digital) SLRs, and more specifically SLR's with penta-mirror OVFs rather than the penta-prism OVF's of higher quality SLRs, I see not the slightest hint that the high-end SLR with high quality penta-prism OVF is going away anytime soon. Even if Sony does join Olympus, Panasonic and Samsung in abandoning the SLR high end in favor of cameras with only video VF's (eye-level EVF, LCD or OLED rear screen, or whatever) none of those companies was ever a major player in the high end SLR sector: Canon and Nikon have continued to dominate there, perhaps even more so in the digital era than with film. Even Sony, despite several years of building SLR market share with heavy spending on SLR product development and aggressive pricing, has never made a significant dent in Canon or Nikon SLR market share, especially at the high end, and Sony has never turned a profit on SLRs, according to reports I have read (while the Olympus and Pentax SLR divisions have had a mix of annual profits and losses and only Canon and Nikon have reported consistent, healthy profits on SLRs.). So it is no surprise if the electronics giant Sony joins its electronics bigger brothers, Panasonic and Samsung, in a transition to more purely electronic types of system camera, where its technological strengths are most beneficial.

And if Canon and Nikon do replace their high end OVF's by EVFs, it will only be if and when EVF and AF performance is up to the demanding requirements of sports photography and other key parts of the high end SLR market. The worst that can happen is that this sector shrinks and thus becomes more expensive, stranding advanced amateurs ... the way that formats 35mm and larger have since the digital transition.

[feppe]

When last I looked, the ratio of views vs votes was ~ 5% (30 / 600).  Seems like a decent response rate.  I think I'll clse the voting now.

Not sure what you mean by "decent," but 5% response rate renders the poll utterly devoid of any form of statistical significance.

That's compounded by the fact that the poll respondents are self-selecting, and LL forum readership is not a well-defined (or even known) sample.

[jfirneno]

Feppe:
By decent I was comparing it to levels of response on other forums.

Statistical significance I will have to leave to someone else.  Photography is a pleasure for me and I wouldn't want to mix it up with anything that feels like work.  Let's just say I was interested in seeing what folks were willing to write about the question I asked.

Regards
John

[Pacific Photos]

The mirror less, small, sneaky, quiet rangefinder Leicas share a lot with these "new" mirror less designs and catapulted Cartier Bresson to unimaginable heights because he could and would always have the little "beasty"  cocked and at ready.
  Combine a huge sensor with accurate focusing and a wide to long zoom ability in a Leica like small package...you have my dream camera.....the future is now.  Of course this wide zoom would have "prime points" along the way to say 650mm so that interchangeable lens' would be a moot point.
 In these economic hard times, it would be wise to be packing all this in a breast pocketable, hidden away mode....or better yet  include a small locater module in case of theft?
maybe work it the other way..."up" from a cell phone size...but keep remembering the beauty of the full frame Leica, alway in the pocket, always ready for another magnum shot.

[jfirneno]

Pacific Photos:

If the poll was still open I guess you would have been a vote for the mirrorless w/ fixed lens option.  I don't have alot of experience with photojournalism but I know that there is a good sized contingent of folks who like to get candid photos on the street.  I've always wanted to try out a rangefinder type camera.  And of course everbody likes the convenience of a camera that can fit in a coat pocket.  Nice to hear from someone on that side of the field.

Regards
John

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

My view may be that once a new technique is better and cheaper than the existing one the old technology will die quite quickly. Little doubt in my mind that we are going to see a rapid development in electronic viewfinders. An obstacle is that contrast detection AF is much slower than phase detection AF normally used in DSLRs. Sony's translucent mirror technology is a way around that problem, but better solutions will probably be found. I believe Fuji has patented a method for implementing phase detection AF using sensor pixels.

The reason we have SLR is that we wanted to have an accurate representation of the image in the viewfinder. Using the actual signal from the sensor to billed that image is obviously ideal. The SLR was an elegant solution from the fifties in the previous century, but it's not more elegant today.

Another aspect is cost. Electronic viewfinders will probably go down in cost. Manufacturing costs will be much lower on EVIL cameras as the moving mechanical assembly can be eliminated. If sensor based focusing improves it may be possible to get rid of the phase detection AF, so the only alignment problem that remains is that of sensor and lens.

So I'd suggest that EVIL will dominate SLR and do that pretty soon. The best technique always wins especially if it is also cheaper. In my view the question is not if but when?

Best regards
Erik

Bernard and John,
   I see no reason to fear for high quality SLRs with OVFs in the forseeable future: Canon and Nikon will take care of you, even if Sony's participation on the high end true SLR sector turns out to be short-lived.

Despite being one who is happily predicting that mirrorless systems will take-over the market sector now dominated by entry-level (digital) SLRs, and more specifically SLR's with penta-mirror OVFs rather than the penta-prism OVF's of higher quality SLRs, I see not the slightest hint that the high-end SLR with high quality penta-prism OVF is going away anytime soon. Even if Sony does join Olympus, Panasonic and Samsung in abandoning the SLR high end in favor of cameras with only video VF's (eye-level EVF, LCD or OLED rear screen, or whatever) none of those companies was ever a major player in the high end SLR sector: Canon and Nikon have continued to dominate there, perhaps even more so in the digital era than with film. Even Sony, despite several years of building SLR market share with heavy spending on SLR product development and aggressive pricing, has never made a significant dent in Canon or Nikon SLR market share, especially at the high end, and Sony has never turned a profit on SLRs, according to reports I have read (while the Olympus and Pentax SLR divisions have had a mix of annual profits and losses and only Canon and Nikon have reported consistent, healthy profits on SLRs.). So it is no surprise if the electronics giant Sony joins its electronics bigger brothers, Panasonic and Samsung, in a transition to more purely electronic types of system camera, where its technological strengths are most beneficial.

And if Canon and Nikon do replace their high end OVF's by EVFs, it will only be if and when EVF and AF performance is up to the demanding requirements of sports photography and other key parts of the high end SLR market. The worst that can happen is that this sector shrinks and thus becomes more expensive, stranding advanced amateurs ... the way that formats 35mm and larger have since the digital transition.