Why mirrorless sales are disapointing

I would suggest these cameras are not aimed at the pro world, who will get round to using them for street reporting first, but may never uses them for sports
as their main kit. I could eventually see them invading the wedding scene for the more reportage style. But the large and impressive Dslr Does carry some weight when trying to not look like a guest. I doubt that the image quality will show any difference very soon.... and in some cases that is almost true now.
 
Perhaps. But much of the online noise comes from pros and that forms the impression of widespread adoption.
 
I doubt that the image quality will show any difference very soon.... and in some cases that is almost true now.

There is nothing intrinsic in DSLR design that guarantees the ultimate in image quality and there's nothing intrinsic in CSC design that makes them inferior. It's just a form factor, how the device focuses and the EVF/OVF issue.

I'm pretty sure that there are a lot of DSLR's in use which can't match the ultimate image quality available from a FF Sony A7/r or even an APS-C Fuji CSC and I bet there are a few DSLR's in use that will be embarrassed by a top end MFT from Olympus or Panasonic too.
 
But the large and impressive Dslr Does carry some weight when trying to not look like a guest.
And that in my opinion is at the crux of the argument. The SLR is a big and impressive black box with a big black long and impressive lens. It seems everyone at a wedding cannot wait for that big camera to be pointed in their direction so that they can pose like the WAGS they see on TV. I mean, a Rangefinder wouldn't cut the mustard would it? Even if it was just as good?
 
I wouldn't want to shoot a wedding with a rangefinder. A pro shooting a wedding I wouldn't think a CSC would have any real advantage over a DSLR and introduce too many disadvantages. It also might look unprofessional to the person hiring you turning up with a CSC. I do quite like CSCs though, just not as a main camera to do everything.
 
I wouldn't want to shoot a wedding with a rangefinder. A pro shooting a wedding I wouldn't think a CSC would have any real advantage over a DSLR and introduce too many disadvantages. It also might look unprofessional to the person hiring you turning up with a CSC. I do quite like CSCs though, just not as a main camera to do everything.
Depends how you look at it really. But I always thought it was the results that count?
 
And that in my opinion is at the crux of the argument. The SLR is a big and impressive black box with a big black long and impressive lens. It seems everyone at a wedding cannot wait for that big camera to be pointed in their direction so that they can pose like the WAGS they see on TV. I mean, a Rangefinder wouldn't cut the mustard would it? Even if it was just as good?

Depends how you look at it really. But I always thought it was the results that count?

It's all about selling the sizzle, not the sausage.
 
That is a sack of arse though. Selling it as a bundle only at $1200 where mirrorless is performing worst.

Sometimes I wonder what Nikon are thinking.
 
So all those who said Nikon/Canon would do nothing useful with CSCs ...

I'm not sure that does count as Nikon taking mirror-less ILC market seriously. I don't see anything in a quick glance of the specifications that would worry Fujifilm, Panasonic, Olympus or Sony. How Nikon choose to market it will be interesting, which regions and sectors they target. Remember that Canon's most significant decision in terms of failing to present the EOS-M as a credible mirror-less camera has been their choice to not market it at all in some regions.
 
20 fps with AF seems very interesting. Proof of the pudding will be in the eating though.
 
It strikes me as completely pointless and a desparate attention grab. Why does this camera need a frame rate twice as fast as a D4?
Because the technology in it allows it to. The D4's doesn't. Even the D4s has a measly one more fps than the D4, still behind the 1DX.

It has phase detection of over 100 focus points, a 2.7x crop to 35mm and one can use any afs lens on it. For BIF for example, this would be a very good option.

Also, 120fps 720p - first interchangeable mirrorless to do that. Hopefully it will have manual control for that.

I congratulate Nikon on a good bit of tech in the V3, if I were to buy a mirror-less, it would probably be it.
 
Nikon need a smack in the head.
:agree:- twice:D

Personally I think Nikon has been going downhill for a few years now and continue to exhibit a poor understanding of the marketplace- that's taking everything into account clearly rather than looking at one thing in isolation.

Wholesale changes need to be made at the board- at the end of the day they are accountable and are clearly struggling to adapt their business in this changing era. Whether the entire company structure needs radical changes as well would depend on how some of these poor decisions are being made but I'm sure it wouldn't do any harm:D.
 
20 fps with AF seems very interesting. Proof of the pudding will be in the eating though.

I don't normally judge by sensor size, but Nikon are using the smallest sensor in the CSC marketplace and pulling consumer-compact numbers of pixels from it.

You can have EVF or flash or GPS - but only one at a time?

The launch price is pitching it against the top end flag ship models of the Fuji X-series range.


If this is Nikon being serious then they've misunderstood the CSC market. Perhaps they're banking purely on the Nikon name as a selling point.
 
If this is Nikon being serious then they've misunderstood the CSC market. Perhaps they're banking purely on the Nikon name as a selling point.

Theyve done that with all the Vs. Shame they havent learnt their lesson. Roll on V4.
 
I thought that rugged version was interesting, and I remmber reading someone using them to test dslr lenses as the resolution is very high for the sensor size
 
I think Hoppy uses a V1 as a test bed for his lens tests. I've yet to get my AW1 wet (and have no intention of testing the drop survival claims!) but enjoy using it (and the V1). Both are great for telephoto use where the 2.7x crop factor comes in handy. Not so good for BiF though but luckily that's "not my bag" so I don't miss the capability.
 
Well no doubt the CSC fan boys will be using the 20fps as yet another reason why you should throw your dslr away
 
Well no doubt the CSC fan boys will be using the 20fps as yet another reason why you should throw your dslr away

Gerard.. the needle is stuck, time to change the record.
 
Well no doubt the CSC fan boys will be using the 20fps as yet another reason why you should throw your dslr away

It's an abilitry that some people will value and use. Those who'll do neither needn't worry about it.

Really it's a bit like DSLR owners insisting that they need to print clean ISO 128000 shots of birds in flight to A0 and their DSLR is the only device that'll do it.

In reality some folk do need the pushing the envelope type features that some cameras offer for some shots but most of the time it's just bragging rights and the vast majority of us would if we were being honest with ourselves be able to manage perfectly well with pretty much any interchangeable lens camera from pretty much any manufacturer. How many people are honest with themselves though, I'd guess that it's not too many.
 
Went to jessops and had a good play with the A7.

I must admit, it's quite nice. The EVF isn't even that bad...as in, I'd use it.

Still, it's an either or situation and I wouldn't ditch my D7000 for it because I just wouldn't be speedy enough for professional use.

Anyway, nice product - no denying that...just isn't as good as a DSLR for my personal needs.
 
It can be a nice place for those that are. My £60 DSLR and £100 prime are all I have and all I need

Indeed and I'm quite happy with my old manual primes even though I had to shell out on an A7 to be able to use them with ease at their intended field of view.
 
Went to jessops and had a good play with the A7.

I must admit, it's quite nice. The EVF isn't even that bad...as in, I'd use it.

Still, it's an either or situation and I wouldn't ditch my D7000 for it because I just wouldn't be speedy enough for professional use.

Anyway, nice product - no denying that...just isn't as good as a DSLR for my personal needs.

Yes, the A7 is a nice camera if you don't need the ultimate focus tracking of a top end DSLR and if you are not a machine gunner and to balance these deficits on the plus side it's capable of image quality that only a very few top end DSLR's can match let alone exceed and then there's the (few, as yet) lenses which seem to be top notch quality.

I wont claim to need the potential image quality of the body or lenses as my reason for buying was that I wanted a small form body to use my manual lenses on and the FF A7 with its focus peaking and magnified view is just a dream for a manual lens user.
 
Last edited:
I was never really likely to buy the Nikon 1, V1 or V2 but the release of the V3 puts the final nail in the coffin for me as they have removed the viewfinder.

When I was looking for a decent quality 'street' camera, I looked at the Nikon A and it was just what I wanted, small, good quality, the Nikon menu's I am used to and a fixed-focus lens...but no viewfinder. I can see through a viewfinder without my glasses but to see a screen on the back of a camera I need reading glasses or my varifocals and that kinda removes the 'instant' photography aspect. in the end I plumped for the Fuji X20. Same quality, maybe better, not quite fixed-focus but near enough, and a viewfinder. The Nikon 1 V3 and the Coolpix A offer external viewfinders but what's the point of that?! And the price!! The Nikon Coolpix A viewfinder is two hundred and fifty quid!

I love Nikon DSLR's, wouldn't have anything else, but their other ranges fit no market that I can ever fit in to.
 
I was never really likely to buy the Nikon 1, V1 or V2 but the release of the V3 puts the final nail in the coffin for me as they have removed the viewfinder.

When I was looking for a decent quality 'street' camera, I looked at the Nikon A and it was just what I wanted, small, good quality, the Nikon menu's I am used to and a fixed-focus lens...but no viewfinder. I can see through a viewfinder without my glasses but to see a screen on the back of a camera I need reading glasses or my varifocals and that kinda removes the 'instant' photography aspect. in the end I plumped for the Fuji X20. Same quality, maybe better, not quite fixed-focus but near enough, and a viewfinder. The Nikon 1 V3 and the Coolpix A offer external viewfinders but what's the point of that?! And the price!! The Nikon Coolpix A viewfinder is two hundred and fifty quid!

I love Nikon DSLR's, wouldn't have anything else, but their other ranges fit no market that I can ever fit in to.

IMHO if you are after a good mirrorless system then Nikon/Canon are the wrong place to look for one
 
Last edited:
I like my mirrors.
 
IMHO if you are after a good mirrorless system then Nikon/Canon are the wrong place to look for one

I honestly don't see why not, my Canon mirrorless works just as well for me as does my Olympus mirrorless (and in my experience both work better than the Panasonic mirrorless I have owned).
 
I honestly don't see why not, my Canon mirrorless works just as well for me as does my Olympus mirrorless (and in my experience both work better than the Panasonic mirrorless I have owned).

I was only speaking from my experience with mirrorless cameras. I thought Canon was too slow and Nikon didn't give me the image quality I would like
 
I was only speaking from my experience with mirrorless cameras. I thought Canon was too slow and Nikon didn't give me the image quality I would like

I know, everything is relative to personal experience, the M after the firmware update (and the M2) have AF that's good enough for the majority of everyday use.
 
Back
Top