CCC Forum

DPReview has just started a series of articles which recommend the best cameras to buy in a number of different categories, starting with enthusiast interchangeable lens models. One surprising omission is that full frame does not get a mention in the list of topics and all the models mentioned in the first article are either APS-C or m4/3.

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/425969 ... uy-and-why

The biggest surprise of all, though, is the opening paragraph from the final section.

"Interestingly, at this point in the market, there's not a huge difference in capability or intent between the mirrorless models and the conventional DSLRs. As with less-expensive DSLRs and mirrorless cameras, there's no difference in image quality, but at this higher level, there's also no real difference in terms of controls or usability. Those differences that remain - which mostly relate to continuous focus ability - are decreasing all the time."

The article then goes on to recommend a m4/3 camera as the overall winner. So far as DPReview is concerned, unless a purchaser who has not already bought into a system is attached to the idea of using a DSLR, the only reasons to buy one are the requirement to use more specialist lenses such as tilt/shift which do not currently exist in m4/3 or needing a good continuous focus capability.

I would add a further reason for taking the DSLR route. Electronic viewfinders are useful, but do yet give a realistic depiction of colours. On more than one occasion I have gone to take a picture, then either not done so as the scene looked so bland in the EVF, or taken the camera away from my eye to recheck the scene before getting the shot. There might be issues with EVFs currently, but make no mistake they are improving all the time and it is only a matter of when, not if, they will completely replace optical viewfinders.

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/422756 ... -roundup/9

Don't forget the colossal and proven-supported existing lens lineups for SLRs and unproven, immature m43 lens lineups too.
I like knowing that not only do I have a proven upgrade path, the pros that SLR providers will continue to support are still using... SLRs.

When they start leaving in droves because their systems are superceded then I might reconsider.

davidc wrote:Don't forget the colossal and proven-supported existing lens lineups for SLRs and unproven, immature m43 lens lineups too.
I like knowing that not only do I have a proven upgrade path, the pros that SLR providers will continue to support are still using... SLRs.

When they start leaving in droves because their systems are superceded then I might reconsider.

It is certainly true that both Canon and Nikon have mature systems and some pros definitely need the robust build of the top end cameras, but not everyone is shooting with these nowadays. The Olympus E-M1 is more than capable of producing professional quality results and the m4/3 lens system is growing quite large, helped by having more than one manufacturer in the m4/3 consortium. All it is really missing is tilt/shift and decent optics for the longer telephotos. Olympus in particular is producing some cracking glass for the system, but even at the consumer end there are very few duff lenses. And being smaller and lighter, it is much easier to carry than a DSLR system.

The day is coming .......

I wouldn't write them off so soon - there has been very little visible professional uptake and the consumer market is a small fraction of what drives SLR sales. Also, Canon's consumer camera sales are a small part of THEIR sales, whereas for minor players like Olympus they have a much larger portion of their income from this market. Stronger CSC manufacturers like Sony and Samsung can likely afford to have the small market share but panasonic, olympus etc. don't have as strong a presence in other markets and therefore are a greater risk to invest in.

For me personally the smaller form factor is a hindrance. I have big hands and find it harder to wield a smaller camera - take cameraphones for instance, they are an absolute pain to use/hold, and I find the same is true for the current crop of CSCs like when I trialled the new samsung android camera. I nearly dropped it into a fishpond

davidc wrote:I wouldn't write them off so soon - there has been very little visible professional uptake and the consumer market is a small fraction of what drives SLR sales. Also, Canon's consumer camera sales are a small part of THEIR sales, whereas for minor players like Olympus they have a much larger portion of their income from this market. Stronger CSC manufacturers like Sony and Samsung can likely afford to have the small market share but panasonic, olympus etc. don't have as strong a presence in other markets and therefore are a greater risk to invest in.

All very true, but camera sales are falling in every category. Manufacturers such as Sony and Samsung are hoping that the small form factor will prove to be disruptive to Canon and Nikon, although neither company has helped itself by failing to provide a complete range of lenses. Sony in particular has been the worst culprit as it releases a camera in a mount with a few lenses, then within a short period there is another model with a different mount. They seem to be intent on peppering the market and hoping that something will stick.

That said, EVFs are much cheaper to produce than optical ones, which require accurate alignments, so I would be surprised if there isn't a manufacturer looking at introducing new smaller form factors based around this technology. Canon already has the EF-M mount, although the EOS-M seemed to be dipping its toe in the water to feel the temperature rather than a serious initiative for now. The 1 series seemed to be as much about preserving Nikon's DSLR markets and I very much doubt that it will be the company's only venture into CSC models.

davidc wrote:For me personally the smaller form factor is a hindrance. I have big hands and find it harder to wield a smaller camera - take cameraphones for instance, they are an absolute pain to use/hold, and I find the same is true for the current crop of CSCs like when I trialled the new samsung android camera. I nearly dropped it into a fishpond

I have a love/hate relationship with my Panasonic G3 due to the buttons being so close to the rear thumbrest. Usually it's the ISO which gets changed, but I axccidentally discovered that it possible to alter the preset white balance settings, which required several inadvertent presses in the correct order. The other day I even found that I was just one button press away from accidentally formatting the memory card. Despite those shortcomings, it is still preferable to lugging around a weighty DSLR kit and it produces good results.

And here is a serious photographer who sells his work being quite content to use a consumer level m4/3.

http://daily.lenswork.com/2013/11/panas ... anger.html

Interesting article but only one of those things is actually a current m43 benefit (and even that benefit isn't restricted to m43, other CSCs have it), specifically the electronic shutter. Even SLRs have mirror lockup to limit the slap and the newer models have silent shutter which slows it down, reducing sound and vibration. Everything else is available on SLRs these days.

Candlish returns serve to Farley

Alfred Schopf, Leica CEO, reckons there will not be a DSLR market in 10 years time. That's it, I'm definitely not buying a Leica S.

http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/leica-c ... we-go-mft/

Advantage Farley.

I thought that I would follow up my previous post with another about a professional also buying a Panasonic G6.

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.co.uk/ ... es-g6.html

I might well go for one of these myself, but I am waiting for the price to drop when there are close out deals available. Panasonic probably makes too many cameras and from time to time offloads excess stock at greatly discounted prices. Harrison Cameras currently has the G5 at £195, which is a lot of camera for the money and quite tempting in its own right.

http://www.harrisoncameras.co.uk//Camer ... -DMCG5.htm

Game, set and match - Farley?

Non-DSLR manufacturer in "I don't think DSLRs will survive, but we have these products" shocker From a site called "Mirrorless Rumors" no less... I'd call that a biased source!

Not convincing I'm afraid. While the low end of the market might split out amongst CSCs, smartphones and APS-C sized devices I think proper kit using FF or larger sensors is still going to be around, and the DSLR will be there.

The major advantage DSLRs have is that all the HUGE market for DSLR kit will still be there - I'll still be able to take photos on the platform I've invested in whereas the m43 crowd have shown they are changing tech all the time and leaving behind legacy platforms. Until a massive change in tech comes around and renders everything obsolete (like digital did to film, and even then the big guys lenses STILL work) the DSLR platform will still be the pinnacle in terms of quality. m43 is a trade off, no different to parts of the DSLR system, but the only real gripe people are levelling at DSLRs is "oh they are a bit heavy" which will a) improve, b) is highly individual and c) much less of a tradeoff than the limitations of m43.

The crowd goes wild!