When will be the right time to ditch the dSLR

98%, sounds very specific? :)

I am in no rush to ditch the SLR as I prefer using it (the fact the IQ is better, it is more comfortable to use, functions faster, lower DoF etc,. etc.) are just more benefits.
 
When micro43 has matured:

- RF style body, I prefer optical view finders, the hybrid in X-Pro1 looks great, just need a more universal mount.
- Good AF speed, perhaps use of phase detect pixels
- Cutting edge sensor
- Good Dynamic Range.
- ISO 100 and reasonable higher ISO performance. ISO 6400 comparable to 5D mk2. (OMD came close?)
- Fully articulated rear screen that can be turned to the body to prevent it from getting scratched.
- a 8-15mm UWA lens that has filter threads.

When those are met, I'll happily go micro43. With: Panny 12-35 as main walkabout lens. I mean no one can say no to f2.8 at only 300g :D


Alternatively, when I win the lotto and able to afford the Leica M.
 
wuyanxu said:
When micro43 has matured:

- RF style body, I prefer optical view finders, the hybrid in X-Pro1 looks great, just need a more universal mount.
- Good AF speed, perhaps use of phase detect pixels
- Cutting edge sensor
- Good Dynamic Range.
- ISO 100 and reasonable higher ISO performance. ISO 6400 comparable to 5D mk2. (OMD came close?)
- Fully articulated rear screen that can be turned to the body to prevent it from getting scratched.
- a 8-15mm UWA lens that has filter threads.

When those are met, I'll happily go micro43. With: Panny 12-35 as main walkabout lens. I mean no one can say no to f2.8 at only 300g :D


Alternatively, when I win the lotto and able to afford the Leica M.
Click to expand...

Meh, I've done RF's and I wont be going back. Take the German badge off and I bet a very high percentage of people wouldn't go near them regardless of how good the lenses are (allegedly.)

Whilst it's strange that people want things from non DSLR's that most DSLR's struggle with I think that at least some of your wishes are true already. For example the cutting edge CSC's now have a greater DR than any Canon DSLR ever made :D and the fastest focusing CSC+lens combo's will blitz the fastest DSLR + lens combo's at least for static subjects and there's none of the front/back focus that seems to plague some DSLR's and people/cameras/lenses.

I'd be amazed if a RF style camera will ever have a fully articulated screen though, that seems to be reserved for SLR style cameras.

As I spent most of my working life staring at some sort of display or readout I'm happy with an EVF but I'd like less light output from them. Other than that and the loss of ISO 100 with some CSC's I think that CSC are now good enough and even my first generation MFT cameras produce images that are easily lost amongst my 5D shots :D

Other advantages of CSC's are... no mirror flapping about, clean sensors and no crap in the VF :D
 
While I love the portability of the XF-1 and X-10 along with the versatility of the HS-30, I've still got (and have recently increased the count of) the DSLR kit. For many uses the smaller cameras are plenty good enough but for the other times, the DSLR cannot be beaten (D700 and D800).
 
Well spotted/remembered! :D

I hope Panny / Oly / Sony will... but I wont hold my breath :bang:
 
kennysarmy said:
I wonder when the right time will be for me to sell up my kit and invest in something smaller that can perfectly well take 98% of the photos I post to my flickr?
Click to expand...
When you feel that you could have taken 98% of your photos with something else.

Simple really ;)
 
isnt the biggest real difference is the shape + size, and extra buttons and twiddly bits u get on a slr vs a compact camera?

sure view finder type matters abit, but should you really care if theres a mirror flapping about or being see through, in (sony) case?:)
 
What is a CSC? I have been in the broom cupboard sniffing hypo for far too long!
 
It stands for Compact System Camera.
 
CSC's will get to where DSLR's are now but DSLR's will also improve so they will probably never catch up plus you can't beat a BIG sensor!! :D

To be fair the Fuji X-F1, X-Pro1, X100s and Sony NEX cameras are very high on IQ and can rival DSLR's in that respect.
 
Last edited:
IMO the big problem facing CSC is Full Frame Sensors. Leica is manual focus, Sony RX1 is stupidly expensive with a fixed lens. They have to overcome this big hurdle to start getting closer to what DSLRs are able to offer
 
YOU ditch the SLR when YOU feel that YOU have no need for one any longer.

Only you can answer that.
 
woof woof said:
Whilst it's strange that people want things from non DSLR's that most DSLR's struggle with I think that at least some of your wishes are true already.
Click to expand...

But not in the same body or in one system.

Main thing I'd miss ditching the DSLR is the optical view finder. I don't care for parallax error, can use Live view to get around that on the few occasions when it matters (eg long lenses or doing macro). 90% of the time I shoot between 35mm and 50mm, so a range finder style body with live view would be perfect for me.

Can't wait to ditch the flapping mirror, it's just so big and heavy for no good reason.
 
ernesto said:
But it doesn't have to be does it. Canon 100D, 400g and pretty small.
Click to expand...
I'd be all over that as travel camera if there was a pancake lens that is equivalent to 35 to 50mm field of view. 40mm doesn't work on crop, too long.

Most of the weight and size comes from the lens though. 24-70 f2.8 weights 800g, 17-55 f2.8 weights 650g, Panny 12-35 f2.8 only weights 300g. Plus OMD E-M5 425g. Whole system weights less than a full frame f2.8 lens.

My current lightest take-everywhere gear is 1100g, 35/2 on 5D2. Going mirrorless saves over a third weight yet gains me f2.8 IS zoom. So it's safe to say I really can't wait for a micro43 that satisfies what I've outlined above.
 
architectfadi said:
Sony RX1 is stupidly expensive with a fixed lens. They have to overcome this big hurdle to start getting closer to what DSLRs are able to offer
Click to expand...

But it isn't stupidly expensive is it? Look at the price of the RX1 with its very nice lens and then look at the price of a FF DSLR with an equally nice lens.

RX1 = £2499, camera body with a nice lens.
5DIII - Body Only = £2335.
D800 - Body Only = £1944.
Add the cost of a lens to a FF DSLR and can you really say that the RX1 is stupidly expensive?
 
I think in the next couple of years youll start to see way more compacts and CSCs with full-frame or APS-C sensors, theyll probably still be similar in price to DSLRs just like they are now though. It certainly seems like its the way to go, when you look at changes between recent DSLR models you can see that not a great deal is being done; Canon 550D, 600D, 650D, 700D anyone?
I dont think theyll ever really replace DSLRs anytime soon, or at least not for everybody. As much as I love my X100 I still miss my DSLR, they just dont feel the same.
 
wuyanxu said:
I'd be all over that as travel camera if there was a pancake lens that is equivalent to 35 to 50mm field of view. 40mm doesn't work on crop, too long.

Most of the weight and size comes from the lens though. 24-70 f2.8 weights 800g, 17-55 f2.8 weights 650g, Panny 12-35 f2.8 only weights 300g. Plus OMD E-M5 425g. Whole system weights less than a full frame f2.8 lens.

My current lightest take-everywhere gear is 1100g, 35/2 on 5D2. Going mirrorless saves over a third weight yet gains me f2.8 IS zoom. So it's safe to say I really can't wait for a micro43 that satisfies what I've outlined above.
Click to expand...

You can't compare the extra weight of the lenses as they are for a bigger sensor. My point was directly about the fact that a camera with a mirror in it does not have to be big or heavy and the 100D proves that well (being lighter than your OMD example)
 
End of the day the sensor size is everything.

APS-C in DSLR world is seen as low end, whereas seen by Fuji X series as high end. Selection of light weight lenses for 100D are all plastic and have poor IQ while the Fuji 18-55mm offers excellent image quality. Being APS-C lens, still on the big and heavy side though.

I believe micro43 offering by Olympus and Panasonic are their best offering. Unlike Canikon, OlyPany doesn't have anything else that might get undercut by their micro43 selection, so they put all their effort in making the best lenses.

So when the micro43 body is able to compete with DSLR's (with RF style view finder hopefully), it'd be a good time to invest in micro43.
 
All true but nothing to do with your comment "Can't wait to ditch the flapping mirror, it's just so big and heavy for no good reason." which I was responding to.

The flapping mirror does not need to be big or heavy and the reason is to get a through the lens optical viewfinder (which is a good one)

In theory you could put a 4/3 sensor in a 100D body and use 4/3 lenses.
 
Not yet for me, MFT is still too immature, and I dipped my toe in the water twice, and really went for it the second time, before deciding it wasn't for me. Perfomance and control weren't as good as my Nikons, which I'm loving using again.

Sold entire MFT collection and bought an X10 which is much more portable than a bag full of lenses, and has some nice trick modes too. Once MFT stabilises a bit and new bodies stop coming out seemingly every few months, I'll think about it again, but my fat hands prefer a DSLR :)
 
When they can fit a FF sensor inside a cigarette packet sized compact body and provide L-like optics.
 
Why do new models have to stop coming out?

Different manufacturers are competing for your money so of course each is going to bring out a new model in response to what the competition does.

You don't have to buy a new camera every few months and every time a new model comes out your existing camera - miraculously - carries on working.

Read what Thom Hogan has to say about Last Camera Syndrome.
 
Personally I don't think there will be for myself.

I love the SLR, and as stupid as it sounds I don't care about carrying around a honking great lens or two.

My back does mind you. haha
 
ernesto said:
All true but nothing to do with your comment "Can't wait to ditch the flapping mirror, it's just so big and heavy for no good reason." which I was responding to.

The flapping mirror does not need to be big or heavy and the reason is to get a through the lens optical viewfinder (which is a good one)

In theory you could put a 4/3 sensor in a 100D body and use 4/3 lenses.
Click to expand...
The way to achieve smaller and lighter lens is without the mirrorbox, with shorter flange distance.

Think Leica 35mm f1.4 vs DSLR 35mm f1.4.

You are right, you can make a small body. But the lens is often determining factor in how portable the camera is.
 
wuyanxu said:
The way to achieve smaller and lighter lens is without the mirrorbox, with shorter flange distance.

Think Leica 35mm f1.4 vs DSLR 35mm f1.4.

You are right, you can make a small body. But the lens is often determining factor in how portable the camera is.
Click to expand...

My 5D fitted with a legacy Zuiko lens and next to it a Sigma 20mm DSLR lens...

 
woof woof said:
Why do new models have to stop coming out?

Different manufacturers are competing for your money so of course each is going to bring out a new model in response to what the competition does.

You don't have to buy a new camera every few months and every time a new model comes out your existing camera - miraculously - carries on working.

Read what Thom Hogan has to say about Last Camera Syndrome.
Click to expand...
Tad condescending, but I'll bite ;) I like to chop and change my gear, hence used value is important for me. The more new models that come out, the more used values start to suck, and the new models tend to feature significant improvements. DSLR refresh rates are to my mind a lot slower, and there aren't really many quantum leaps with successive models. Each to their own :)
 
ronnus said:
Tad condescending, but I'll bite ;) I like to chop and change my gear, hence used value is important for me. The more new models that come out, the more used values start to suck, and the new models tend to feature significant improvements. DSLR refresh rates are to my mind a lot slower, and there aren't really many quantum leaps with successive models. Each to their own :)
Click to expand...

I wasn't aiming to be condescending at all but I was a little amazed by your initial statement.

Cameras aren't investments, they're largely consumer electronics these days and it's the exception rather than the rule to retain any significant value and whilst it's true that new cameras tend to incorporate a mix of significant (and irrelevant "improvements" depending upon your PoV, wants and needs) it's also true that what gives you good image quality today will continue to do so even after the MK2 appears.

New models come out all the time in just about every market segment from DVD players to shoes and that's life and it's perfectly normal.

As I said, read Thom Hogan's Last camera syndrome... what he basically says is that cameras are good enough... to be your last camera.
 
woof woof said:
As I said, read Thom Hogan's Last camera syndrome... what he basically says is that cameras are good enough... to be your last camera.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with that but it is too much of a blanket statement as in 30 years times does everyone want to use something that was good enough 30 years ago?
It is also the same for most other things (bicycles and guitars are my other interest which fall into this)
 
Too many people think semi-profound, blanket statements such as Mr Hogan's are the answer to these sort of questions. They're not, everyone is different and everyone is entitled to have their opinion. As I said, to each their own :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top