Canon KILLED the DSLR. It's a huge mistake.
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 09. 2024
- Go to squarespace.com... & save 10% off your first website or domain with code “Tony”
Canon has really killed the DSLR: www.yomiuri.co...
Tony Northrup discusses why Canon announced they had already discontinued the top-level 1DX series of DSLRs (in favor of new full-frame mirrorless cameras) and would soon be discontinuing low- and mid-range DSLRs, such as the Canon 90D and Canon Rebel series of cameras. Today, it makes sense, but Tony raises the question of whether transitioning form DSLRs to Mirrorless Cameras was the right way to spend Canon and Nikon's research & development budget.
Thank you for the excellent reporting on this Tony!
I am a full time professional photographer with 36 years in the field. I agree with Tony that for most, there is no need to go buy all the newest gear, instead, make the most of what you have if your dslr is working well for you. I, like many others fell into the trap early on in the digital realm (before mirrorless), of upgrading too often, thus affecting my profit margins. Now, in probably the last stretch of my career of shooting for commercial clients anyway, if I feel like any of my gear is not up to the requirements of a certain assignment, I simply rent a newer dslr body or lens. One of the benefits of this, is that it is a lot of fun to have some of the most recent gear in my hands for a week or so, then sending it back, not having spent thousands on it just to store it in my equipment locker during slower business cycles.
I would also like to add that with all of the amazing dslr cameras out there at this point, I can't imagine needing to go mirrorless for anything. Amazing images can be created with the existing cameras for years to come!
So, if you are on the fence about going out and spending a lot of money on the new camera systems, I implore you to consider what I have said.
I absolutely agree. I use an 'old' Nikon D3 and a 60/2.8 micro. Totally outstanding! Together they are worth less than £700/$1000 but are an amazing team.
At age 74, I am fairly certain that my Canon EOS 80D will be the last digital still camera I purchase for myself, and I couldn't be more pleased with it. I may end up buying a macro lens for it and/or a few other goodies, but I think this camera will suit me just fine in the time I have left.
@@ConwayBob Bob, I have a Canon EOS 70D and feel the same way as you do. Well spoken.
@@ConwayBob That's right Bob, totally agree here too. I am also with you on simplifying as you get older. I am 60 myself and find myself thinking more and more that way. Enjoy your 80D!
Reminds me of the old adage ' It is not the camera that takes the pictures but the person behind it!'😄 While the gadget certainly helps, understanding light and imagination wins over equipment.
I’ve been loving the transition to mirrorless. I can now afford my dream 1dx, 5ds and all the good glass. Keep moving people and sell your old stuff cheap to me 😀
Ummm, those bodies have been fairly reasonably priced for a while now. Even before the huge success of mirrorless......
The 1Dx has been discontinued for many years, so yeah. It's gotten to be pretty cheap, relatively speaking.
Agreed bud!
The beauty of everyone switching means there’s a huge supply of quality EF gear that’s only getting cheaper…
I have to find the place to Buy good Used DSLRs I've been looking and everyone is price gouging 🙄 . Unfortunately I won't buy sight unseen I need to look, touch and try a camera before I hand over any $$$$. I'm traveling on a long vacation I haven't found a shop where I can buy used DSLR equipment from. This might force me to jump the DSLR ship and go mirrorless. In trying hard not to.
@@KRich408 Not sure what you are talking about price gouging. I see great deals every day of the week on local classifieds. Most lenses and camera bodies are fairly priced.
If you consider that price gouging, you are obvious not in tune what this hobby/industry costs in the first place. Most listed items are well below MSRP depending on what it is.
I currently use a 5D Classic, mark ii, and a Fujifilm X-T2!!!!!!!
Great point around 7:20 about what “dead” means.
I just picked up a 5D MK1 with a lens for $188, including shipping.
Most people (like me) are not professionals and take pictures for fun. I do not need the latest and greatest just because it has caterpillar butthole detection.
What I got is what I “need” to take photos.
Keep up the good work! 👍
Same here, I wanted more capability having only ever owned an SL2 with 18-55mm. I just leveraged two sellers to firstly get a lightly used pristine 80D with an EF-S 10-18mm, then I got an EF-S 18-135 USM Nano plus a nifty fifty from another seller who had converted to mirrorless. All together paid 50% cost of a new 90D/18-135 kit. Couldn't be happier, it's all I'll ever need and will give me great pleasure for many many years. For me I was craving that bigger bodied SLR and I love the shutter sound...I know what I want.
The classic 5D is still an amazing camera. Not the best in resolution or dynamic range but there is just something about the images it creates.. I love mine.
I just want to know why you don't want caterpillar butthole detection?! That's why photography exists isn't it?!
LOL!
@@tomrandall6539 Indeed! - I think I need it (joking) and am still laughing!
We’ve seen this before. Remember that Kodak execs were preoccupied shopping for yachts, or something, and completely missed the change from film to digital. Any digital overtures they did make were strangled in the crib because film was so profitable. Now Kodak has licensed its name to crayons and alkaline batteries. Pity.
Especially if you consider that Kodak invented the digital camera to begin with.
If they had just been distracted, Kodak would have been in much better shape. They were actively trying to kill digital in order to preserver their film business without understanding how much potential there was to sell the cameras, sensors and the rest of it. To an extent, it's understandable, but once something like that gets out, it can be incredibly hard to put back into the bottle.
While I agree that no DSLR owner needs to switch gear, I understand that the manufacturers need to concentrate on one technology and discontinue old lineups. What they should do is provide spare parts for many years!
Seems like only Pentax left when it comes to dslr 😂
I just bought my sister a Polaroid. I thought instant cameras where "dead".
I remember, during an interview with a landscape photographer, that he was asked 'why did you buy a Nikon 850'.
He said, 'I want a high quality camera that provides sharp images and will last for 10 years. If it doesn't work out that way, I'll look at replacing it.'
Please don't mention this to the camera manufacturers.
I hope some disruptive techno startup watches this Tony, and says: "I think I'll FILL that gaping hole in the market...." 100% agree with everything you mention re how camera manufacturers have dinosaured themselves out of the mass-photography market. Can you imagine having an open development software platform on a DSLR or mirrorless camera, with the same features that we've become so comfortable with on our phones. Now *that* would be very, very cool & super useful, and a hungry mass of people would flock to such a manufacturer for all the right reasons!
2022 and people still don't know Pentax exists... Pentax have already positioned themselves to fill the small DSLR niche by doubling-down on their DSLR lineup.
The thing is that the image sensors are proprietary. I design hardware and firmware for a living - and I can put together an Android system using existing camera and phone parts.
But there is no documentation for sensors, no way to buy them, etc for the random guy who wants to make high end cameras in their kitchen.
The DIGIC and other series chips are all proprietary too to the point where the image sensor and the chip communicate over confidential protocols.
There is a series of camera modules, open source with many lenses etc called ArduCam. Haven't seen anything better. I'd love to make something like that or join in if someone has a plan!
I'm a dslr shooter and was completely embarrassed the other day when I could barely figure out my new phone's camera the first time I tried it lol
Wasn’t there a gofundme like that a few years ago?
@@mcuembedded That is exactly why they can be dinosaurs and still survive. They monopolize optics performance with subpart proprietary software.
I think they are going for reducing production cost.
Of course à mechanical dslr is complex and cost more than electronic components. And manufacturers are no longer interested in selling low price cameras
What I don't understand is, if this is the case then why do mirrorless cost more to the consumer than DSLR?
reducing production cost ... and still selling ML cameras at ridiculously high prices too!
@Yu Kay i'm not against innovation and new 'revolutionary' stuff as long as they are truly a needed item not one for an artificially created market ... ML cameras are fine, not problem with that ... but the current trend is trying to undermine DSLR cameras totally, selling ML models to replace them ... and the point is, why not make DSLR models that can also serve as ML cameras!? that is very easily possible!
@@whiteonrice04 inflation, and because people are willing to pay
Tony, your wish list for DSLRs is perfect - I guess manufacturers adding even a few of the items to DSLRs is a total non-starter.
I have often thought why not add computational photography to DSLRs i.e. large sensor cameras, the results surely would be stunning!
Which types of computational photography would you like to see?
Bursts for low light and noise reduction, crowd removal, auto subject detection/cropping, auto star/rating for bursts with all eyes open, subject identification for subject tagging (computer vision detection of things like dog/cat/car/bride/etc.), star alignment, etc.
I assume cause then they would have to invest in way faster architecture systems and chips, like phones are doing, for power and efficiency. Although it sounds amazing and something they should do, from a business standpoint I am not sure if it makes sense. Even if they do, I don't see cameras competing anywhere near with smartphones on sales and that would just bring their prices up considerably with no ROI.
@@rileypaulsen A number of mirrorless cameras already have some of these features. Sony's mirrorless cameras allow you to do multi-frame noise reduction handheld.
@@TechnoBabble exactly!
I love the "size" argument when all the lenses are the same and now the balance is even worse because all of that weight is forward. Also it's even funnier when you see people that add grips and viewfinders onto mirrorless cameras making them bigger haha.
i think it is good to have mirrorless option as the less bulk option and give people choise to add modules as they need. They just did not have to kill off dslr as it was a mature product and could be update with more tech...
Which is better
I followed Tony's advice and as a hobby shooter, I am really enjoying the older professional DSLR and early gen mirrorless in the used market
@@ericsande5345 I`m still using my beloved D700 bought new in 2008 and I don`t miss anything .... I would swap to a modern camera, but I don`t need and want video functions and I don`t want to pay for functions I don`t need
@@ericsande5345 I learned that lesson decades ago when I bought my first new Nikon. A year later I was forced to sell it and got a third of what I paid for the kit. From then on, I only bought used. There has always been a ready supply of barely-used cameras out there, for half price.
The mirrorless segment is a great move for us hybrid shooters. It definitely bridged much of the gap between still cameras and video cameras finally allowing us to do pro lever photo and video in the same camera bodies. This is where I see a huge benefit for those wanting to do video.
They had to stop DSLR due to suspected chip shortage and falling revenue. Otherwise they could add same video capability to DLSR.
I get frustrated by the anti DSLR propaganda, I use both mirrorless and DSLRs and I really prefer DSLRs because I love the optical viewfinder, and the autofocus. I prefer mirrorless essentially only when I am using vintage glass and video, yet everyone acts like mirrorless is some huge advantage but, for the most part it just isn't.
Several more variables and dependencies to consider. However, you make a good point. Are you a pilot? If you know any, turbo props would be the future, and jets wouldn't cut it long run for commercial purposes.
In a way, I am really ticked off that 2020 is considered "back in the olden days' where it's barely 2022 right now. because as recent as January 2020 I entered the photography world for the first time, did my research and bought my first camera (that wasn't a point and shoot): the Canon 90D. It was all the rage!! Even the premiere camera store in my very main-stream city I live in had large signage displays for the 90D as soon as you walked in the store. I'm not talking Best Buy or Target, I'm talking a 50-year old photographer's hangout camera store. Skip to the very next year, 2021 and my new 90D, is "dead" ... no further development ahead for it's type (a DSLR). Really?? And now confirmed in 2022. Done. Dead end. Last of a kind. I even bought over $5,000 worth of (7) lenses to accompany my precious new DSLR -- some of them Canon L-series professional glass. So.. really?? Yes, in a way I'm ticked off as a new photographer that no one at the counter could tell me to hold off -- just one year. and invest in lenses for the R-bodies. But on the other hand, I also find a lot of joy in taking paths that no one else is taking; being different than the crowd, looking at everyone following along with the "in" stuff and being proud of being different. So in a way, i might even be more happy. I sort of feel I own something really special.. An instant set of classic gear in my camera bag.. the last DSLR of it's kind --ever --from Canon. and that's kind'a cool.
To stay out of the masses of mainstream tech, it will be my goal then.. to hold off buying a mirrorless for as long as I can and just keep this Canon with all of my lenses as my main collection -- hopefully there will be compatible batteries I can still buy in 10 years.. and I'll be fine. a proud DSLR Shooter. "Old School" baby!! Gonna love it.
Hello retro gamer here that is barely involved in photography but If you are concerned about battery's you can charge them to 50-80% (its a bit of a debate what is better) than freeze them and they will have perfect battery life when unfrozen in the future
I'm right there with u. The heck with those over price mirrorless cameras & lens. love my Canon SL2 & Canon T8i Cameras. Still does a Great job at half the cost. My nephew & I took a few pic at a family get together & when you put the two pic side by side ...Same pose, one from his Sony A7 & my Canon SL2 picture wise u could not tell much difference. My gear Camera & Lens was ab $1000 His Sony set up was ab $2800 but their was not &1800 dollars difference in our pictures. Not even $100 if you ask me. So buy what works for you. Get some good glass & work on you skills.
Why are you ticked off?
Is your new camera not working anymore?
Because of the investment in the surrounding gear (the lenses) which cost 3-4 times more than the camera body. I could have spent that on the newer R, RF equipment if the salesperson had only told me to wait just one year; that I would be buying in 2020 would have NO future support, nor development of new gear compatible to it just a mere one year later - and expert would have seen that coming as soon as it did. I am ticked that I was misled, not that my gear doesn't work, that's a mute point, but that I could have bought for the future instead of the past or a dead end. Money not as well spent. ticked. @@doctorcatnip2551
@@dirks4093 It’s a racket. They need to make money.
For photography cameras haven’t changed much over the last 10 years.
I don’t know the Canon 90d, since I only look at the camera market if I absolutely need a camera every 25 years or so, but that camera will probably be insanely good for the rest of your life.
Just live your life and ignore these people they are trying to sell you stuff you don need.
It was pretty clear the moment they announced a new mount. They took the FD to EF transition playbook and played it again 35ish years later. Not surprised in the least.
Man that was old school.
The huge difference is all the EF lenses work beautifully on the RF mount, unlike the FD-EF transition. You had to employ a rare and expensive 1.26 teleconverter to get the FD lenses to adapt to EF and keep infinity focus, so in reality not a proper option. Today you have no such issues because of the 20mm RF flange distance.
@@manilamartin1001 Reminds me of the days of my Canon A1.
And this is exactly why Pentax ftw !!
@@herambhaldankar4652 Nah, Pentax is sleeping unfortunately.
Holding on to my 6d II, 80d and SL2 -- great cameras! And when Canon and Nikon say "no more dslrs" and the prices drop (because they've become so "worthless" and "dead", ha!) I will happily buy the ones I could never afford before! 😄
More likely is that they will become artificially scarce and will cost more than ever
@@thenormalyears Another reason I'm holding on to the ones I have! For the first time, they will be APPRECIATING in value. There will also be those wanting to quickly unload their dslrs and switch to mirrorless because they think those wonderful dslrs have suddenly become an inferior piece of junk and they can't stand to use them anymore. And Canon/Nikon will want to unload their stock to make room for the new mirrorless inventory. Prices will drop on dslrs until the old inventory is sold out. Then the market price for dslrs increases due to scarcity. So if we hold on and wait awhile until that commercial dslr inventory is gone, our private dslr collections will be worth a lot.
1DX III waiting for you
You completely ignore Pentax. The K-3 mark iii DSLR, released earlier this year, is a great camera with terrific ergonomics and the best weather sealing. Also, and please correct me if I am wrong, it does have eye detect autofocus. And, the new larger viewfinder is a pleasure.
The most obvious reason to use a DSLR is the increased dynamic range in the view finder. There are some high contrast scenes that with the best electronic view finder, you just can't see into the shadows, for instance. There is a real pleasure in seeing the subject with your own eyes rather than looking at an electronic screen. Maybe everyone has gotten so used to looking at the world through an electronic screen that looking at the world directly with your own eyes is considered "old fashioned".
I know that you have looked at Pentax gear in the past. Perhaps you should give it another look. There may be no more DSLR's coming from Cannon or Nikon, but Pentax is still going for it.
"You completely ignore Pentax" -- Deliberately and strategic, I'd say, for unknown reasons..
@@drumsticksusa I think we know....
I lugged a 40D with several lenses around for two weeks on a trip in 2008. When I got home I put it down and never picked it up again. Such a waste on my part, but as a woman, it was just too much on my neck and shoulders. It was a beautiful camera, but it turned me away from photography for a long time. I just ordered a mirrorless camera and am getting excited again to see what I can do. I’m 79 now, and hope that the weight of this new one new one hasn’t passed me up on comfort.
I understand, I had the 40d also. Now I absolutely love my SL2.
For the time being, Ricoh Imaging keeps innovating on DSLR technology in their Pentax models (latest example: K-3 III). Admittedly, no quantum leaps and happening in a niche, but they do.
Excellent point that not many want to recognize or acknowledge?
Pentax has a new software for astrophotography out on test. The K3 Mark III does not have a built-in GPS. now they have a software that works so that you take a sample photo first in about 30 sec to follow how a star moves over the sensor, then the program calculates how the sensor should move to follow the star when you take the right photo. then you do not need to use O-GPS1. but it will probably take some time before they release it completely. then it is rumored that they are releasing different models of K3 MarkIII. type one where the filter is removed on the sensor so it can only take astrophotos.
The K3iii also has subject detection in a DSLR.
Interesting, the problem there is that for anybody that's not already bought into their particular system, you might as well just go mirrorless. I don't have any lenses that would work with their stuff, so it would be the same several thousand in replacement lenses as it would to go mirrorless. That's quite a bit of risk if there's no definite guarantee that they'll be supporting the technology indefinitely.
@@SmallSpoonBrigade But then again, none of the big companies is too big to fail, either. So, where's that "guarantee"? Olympus has ceased to exist as the photo brand it was, and not so long ago, Nikon's numbers were looking dismally enough for people to wonder if they might eventually fold. Granted, Pentax went from Hoya to Ricoh, but since then has weathered all storms reasonably well and might actually be able to survive for quite a while in its niche, despite the habitual doom-mongering on the web. As for supporting their own technology, there may be little more than corporate speak about Ricoh's commitment to the brand for the future, but the extent of the backward compatibility with regard to legacy glass actually puts some of the bigger brands to shame. And finally, people tend to come to the Pentax system not so much because they want something that everyone gets, but because they are curious about and come to embrace a photographic experience that is indeed a little different, but not necessarily worse than the big-brand mirrorless road.
The awesome viewfinder of a DSLR when looking straight through the lens is one of the key features that got me to switch to a (D)SLRs. I still consider the view finders of mirrorless cameras inferior in that respect in spite of all the other fancy things that can be done with electronic viewfinders. Well knowing and understanding why this was not going to happen I was really hoping to get a proper hybrid DSLR plus mirrorless in one body.
My Olympus mirrorless has the option to mimick a dSLR.
The flip-up mirror is pointless because the sensor allows you to see exactly what your picture will be.
@@dreamdiction Instead ones gets a laggy display of modest resolution that sucks power. If that's progress I'm not convinced. Yet?
At least Canon went with a bang and produced the 1dx mark III which is an amazing workhorse DSLR
I started photography this year with mirrorless, and modern viewfinders (EVFs) have nothing that is inferior to the mirror in my opinion. To me, seeing an almost real-time preview of my picture with all exposure values and such, is much more valuable.
Sure, the viewfinder gives you an amazing clarity, but you have to use the back screen anyways to properly expose your image (if the camera model has this). The EVF is not perfect (more power consumption and less detail in view), but with how tech has advanced these are handled better and better as time passes.
Not trying to be a hater, I was actually lucky to acquire a Full Frame Canon 6D for less than $300 in my country, and it surely offers and amazing image quality and I definitively enjoy using it. I guess that if you prefer using the mirror, that is totally fine, but as of now I do not see that big of an advantage of the traditional viewfinder vs the EVFs.
My hit rate for super sharp eyes with my EF 85 f1.2 with any Canon DSLR close up was only about 25% if that. From the moment I got the RP my hit rate went to around 75% and now about 90%+ on the R6. For eye focus that is so important to me for portraiture using fast lenses, I could never go back to a DSLR. For studio work using f8/11 it doesn't matter what you use.
Exactly my reason to switch from a DSLR first to the RP and then the R6. Choosing focus points on the touch screen while watching through the EVF is another perk. I would still be happy with a DSLR if my objects would be static. But cars and dogs move and that's what I'm hunting. Mirrorless it is.
I had a similar experience going from a Canon 90D to an R6... mostly taking vacation and hiking photos, but the auto-focus is so so much better. Sure I'd love some of the features Tony mentions camera manufacturers need to add, but I'd take the mirrorless AF systems over all of that... wireless file transfers are only useful to me if I get the shot, and with the R6 I usually get the shot!
Buy Nikon >> your Problem wont happen
Yea had a similar experience when I switched, the difference in autofocusing when going from dslr to mirrorless is night and day. If you're shooting wide open with fast lenses you need to use mirrorless.
Absolutely. I heard reviewers on CZcams say that using the R6 (or R5) + an adaptor with EF lenses produced better results than when they used the same lens on a DSLR body. I didn't fully believe it but I bought the R6 because I needed better video and burst photography (coming from the 80D). The autofocus accuracy was NEXT LEVEL.
The Pentax DSLR K3 mark III patch level 1.40 has computational astronomical photography WITHOUT the GPS attachment. Just set the camera on a tripod, set the parameters and the camera will do the rest. There are examples on the web.
While full smartphone ability would be awesome, there's no way current camera processors could support it and if you put in modern mobile CPUs overheating and battery life will be awful. As for Mirrorless, for me, the single biggest advantage that outweighs everything else is the AF accuracy and eye tracking. Maybe not for normal people, but as blind as i am, it's a game changer.
And they could have put that into DSLR's if they wanted, so still no reason for a mirrorless change.
I mean, canon uses the exact same sensor in the 90D and M6 cameras. There's literally no reason to not integrate these features into their DSLRs.
I was a dslr user, a 60d, as well as a 500d, and a 1000d, now i use the m10. And I miss my old dslrs for photography. For video though, I think I prefer the mirrorless. But for photography, I prefer dslrs. The fast response, the good battery life, the optical viewfinder, and the look of the camera, as well as the feel in my hand. Theyre all the nice things of dslrs.
Such a wise video, thank you. Don’t apologise for “transitioning” into the imaginary camera section. Often wondered myself why cameras can’t adopt some of the elements that are commonplace in mobile phones. Takes us back to the daydream ‘If Apple designed a camera’. I’ve been wondering recently, if plugins such as Topaz can do such a great job reducing noise and making ‘soft’ images sharp, why can’t camera companies adopt similar computational software? You’re correct, a primary frustration is the inability to transfer images wirelessly easily, to phone, laptop or web directly. Happy New Year - let’s hope ‘22 is a better one!
"If Apple designed a camera" - Oh hell no. That would be a camera without Av, Tv, Fv, M or P modes.
@@trouwfotomakerij im with you. Apple designs to the masses but leaves specialty behind. legit photography is all about specialty
@@trouwfotomakerij Could you imagine the cost and lack of support too?
@@trouwfotomakerij . . . and it would require ten steps to get to your photo layout, where right now it takes only 5 steps. Apple? Noway!
Why don't camera manufacturers put a cell phone function in their cameras?
I really love DSLRs, and am having a hard time switching to mirrorless. I just don't feel that they are as tactile, and one of the major (and often ignored) advantages of a devoted camera over a smart phone is the tactile nature of operating them.
I am devastated.
I guess you're talking electronic viewfinder, as mirrorless still have mechanical shutter to make you feel thing actually do take pictures. But I guess it's a matter of time and motivation to adopt. They are surely not a smartphone, and it's a good thing.
@@thehearsglow Aye. Definitely better than a smart phone. Useful for video work too. But when it comes to the view finder as you say, I still prefer old medium format. Massive, heavy, make a noise like a canon (no pun intended), and shake the camera so much you need mirror lock up, yet still it's the best viewfinder I've ever used. Just a shame the options are getting so limited.
Great video.
Greetings from the UK!
Thanks to you guys, I got my first DSLR in 2020, a new-old-stock 80D + Tamron 150-600mm G2, to learn wildlife photography.
And in 2021, also thanks to you, I got a new-old-stock 6D Mk2 + 24-105mm.
I love them both, they're chunky, even with battery grips they fit my large hands!
My dad had a 1973 Nikkormat, it was a tank. I saw him literally hit a nail with it!
Sounds silly but for me it was a little boy's dream to one day own a large "classic" camera... and today I'm lucky to have two!
So even if DSLR cameras slowly disappear, I'll be one of the few people still interested by these old things.
Just like classic cars & motorcycles, it's always non-professionals who keep the technology alive for decades.
My two pence.
Keep up the great work, and early Happy New Year to both. 🥳
This was super helpful! I have been doing some research to figure out what type of camera I should purchase as my first beginner camera. I was always leaning towards a DSLR, but then found out Mirrorless is the way to go, and Canon has stopped making DSLR's from now on. It has made trying to research cameras a bit disorienting on whether a DSLR is still the way to go or what this means for the average user or someone just starting out. It sounds like things will be find and the DSLR is the way to go as a beginner, especially for the price point of under $1,000. Im glad I watched this video before dismantling all of my research, and making the mistake of potentially over-spending on a Mirrorless camera. It sounds like I dont really need a Mirrorless camera.
Thanks to everyone selling off DSLR to go mirrorless, I just picked up a D850 for half the going rate on eBay for my wildlife. As Tony said, mirrorless is the 'upgrade' nobody asked for.
I know right! I'm dreaming of getting a used 1Dxii. By 2023, it will be really cheap or it might go the other way by then as it will become sought after in another 5 years.
@@JoaquimGonsalves I just got an used 1dx II last month for like one third of its original price. Shutter count is below 58000 so it is still very new. All the EF lenses are much cheaper than the RF lenses now, especially the used ones. It’s a big and heavy camera indeed but if I want to go light I will just grab my iPhone 12 pro.
@@betterserenity Amazing! Enjoy that beast of a camera.:)
nice choice, congratulations!! hopefully it does the same to D5/D6
I'm sure you're happy with the D850. Great camera. I am outdoors, and tramping around. Wish I had a person to just carry the D850 and lenses...but I understand.
As a photo-hobbyist who sells my images now & then, I love my Canon 90D.
I heard it was going to be their last DSLR.
It’s a semi professional, beast of a camera! And affordable at $1200 for the body.
I'm sorry it's not affordable for everyone.
🔥 Epic Rant! 🔥
The manufacturers fully deserve it.
Will they listen? No. 😡
Then they will disappear and Smartphone will be the new camera
@@MVMn True to a certain degree. If smartphones could have larger sensors (like the current 1" ones maybe), and powerful optical zoom lenses (not digital) then DSLR's/Mirrorless may struggle even more to captivate people.
@@koolkutz7 There were such smartphones (Galaxy K Zoom came out in 2014 for instance) and they aren't there anymore.
It's just not a good idea to make smartphone heavier, thicker and more expensive - without any serious benefits of SLR (the lens won't be changeable, it would still be way smaller than one on SLR etc).
@@koolkutz7 Well, can you imagine a proper piece of glass like you have on your DSLR on a smartphone? Not really. Maybe small lenses, but definitely nothing telephoto.
Anything smaller has to be weaker in terms of captured light - physics doesn't get cancelled by our will.
Computational photography might compensate for that though. So the only question is - how much in glass can be traded for computation.
I know Pentax isn't in the 'big league' with Canon and Nikon, but they haven't gone to mirror less technology and they have astro tracer (pixel shift) built into their cameras. The sensor moves and also useful for landscape photography. I know they have been doomed since I started using their cameras in 2006. They don't pump cameras out like C & N and don't advertise like them, but they are innovative and their old glass works great on the new cameras. The new K3 III is great for wildlife photography with great auto focus, something Pentax hasn't been known for in the past. It would be nice it they had anti theft and phone apps as you mentioned.
News for Tony, the Pentax k-3 iii has eye AF with the OVF that uses the AF sensor. Nothing like as good as mirrorless, but it works OK, mainly on head and shoulder photos where the eyes of the subject are larger in the frame. It also has IBIS, unlike most DSLRs, and you get silent electronic shutter and touch to focus with live view. Again, not as quick as EVF, but it is there if you need it
I used to shoot Pentax. They get so much right, but also so much wrong at the same time. Always a step ahead, yet still a decade behind. What a strange company. They are ahead in all the areas your mentioned in terms of DSLR. Have been ahead in IBIS for a long time including this like pixel shift mode and star tracer with canon and nikon still lack.... yet the latest K3iii still has poor buffer depth, still behind the D500 in autofocus, still no tilt or flip screen. Still no serious long lenses. 5-6 years after the K-1 and still no fast 24mm, 28mm, replacement 35mm, etc.... Wish they would have gotten it together. I'd rather go to them than go mirrorless.
@@brycepinson8641 The current vogue among camera companies is to have, one massively expensive, FF camera that does everything and cheaper crippled versions with a random subset of the capabilities of the expensive camera. PENTAX, however, produce cameras to fit a particular kind of photography. The K-3 iii is not aimed at Sports, but street and travel, and also for photographers that like using an OVF. So a deep buffer and superfast tracking are less critical, but ergonomics, control and a great OVF are most important. If you want a small, light camera with a flippy screen there is the K-70. If you want a FF camera designed for landscapes get the K-1. Not every camera needs to do everything!
@@matthewlemin5077 if you are like me and can afford but one camera, then the one camera does in fact need to be capable of everything. The k3III is marketed as a flagship, not a street and travel only camera. It’s also priced like a fligship that should be capable of everything…. Not saying any of this to hate on Pentax. I love a lot about Pentax. But they really miss the boat in some key areas unfortunately.
@@brycepinson8641 I agree that it is not marketed as a street and travel camera, but that is what it is, and concentrates on. I haven't seen it referred to as a "flagship". If you look at the flagships from C, N and S they are all about £5-6k. For £4.5k you could buy the K-3 iii, K-1 and K-70!! I own the K-3 iii and K-70. I use the K-70 for tripod work as it has the flippy screen and I use the K-3 for walkabout and portrait work. The combo suits me fine.
I'm not a professional photographer but i use DSLR as passion and capture moments of my life and your words compelled me to write something. We many belongs to the middle class who use to have less than 1000 Dollar to spend on camera, I also prefer DSLR specially Nikon to click pictures.
I still grab the 7D Mark II for both sports and wildlife, regardless of having 2 different newer mirrorless cameras. Surprisingly, the Canon m6 Mark II with the adapter and my sigma 150-600, can slightly outpace it, but in sports I end up with tons of larger files and so I prefer the 7D mark II. With wildlife that are slow moving I'll use the M6, but if there's any speed involved, again its the 7D. I have not yet purchased any high end mirrorless. The only one that appeals to me currently is the R3 and that is because the file size is not going to be huge, so if I take a bagillion sport photos its not so slow with the computer to edit. Plus its autofocus looks amazing. I was hugely disappointed that they didn't do a 7D Mark III as I figured it would probably have a better sensor, better autofocus and higher fps, but I don't feel the 90D was enough better to warrant an upgrade, even with the 30MP sensor. In a lot of cases I feel the 7D Mark II is still better than the 90D. So, I am in kind of a limbo area because my 7D is feeling the wear as I've had it 7 years now, and I want an upgrade but I'm not impressed with anything new out there except maybe the R3, but then again, look at the pricetag.
If you are willing to spend the money for an R3 then upgrading your computer for a fraction of that money shouldn't be the deal breaker to improve speed for editing bigger images.
Hey Chad, I share your feelings, but end of September I gave up waiting for the R7 unicorn, and replaced my 70D with the R6 and a TC1.4x. The eye-AF and low light power are truly awesome! What the last firmware update the AF is actually on R3 level. Even the EVF is so good I didn't regret the switch for a second.
It's a pity Canon (or Nikon has not yet made an aps-c mirrorless camera for the RF & Z mounts suited to wildlife photography such as the 7D series or D500. Here's hoping...
@@koolkutz7 I don't think they need to drop to aps-c sensor sizes to get speed. I think you could do it via software like they do with video. You just capture less of the sensor and that lets you do it faster. It would just be a software setting in a full frame camera.
Although the EOS RP has half the frame rate of the 7d2, but does it at full frame. Or for about what I spent on my 7d2 you can get an eos R and 8 fps. I don't think I will notice the 2FPS compared to the usefulness of having a full frame camera. The entry level 800mm canon lens may be at f11 but it solves birding for lots of people at around 1000$. It costs about what I paid for a 300mm l f4 and 1.4x teleconverter (I needed IS for video and couldn't afford the 400DO).
I totally agree with your sentiments. The only reason I sold my 7Dii and 80D few years ago was because I needed to up my video game and Fuji really helped me do that while keeping my crop EF mount glass. But none of the adapters for Fuji have managed to impress me till date for stills and I still hold onto my 2.8 crop zooms in hopes of an R7/XH2. Both of which I'm eager to see who fares better.
I will still keep my DSLR cameras. I already am used to them and so there is no learning curve. They are also well built than cameras of today. They can still take great pictures, there is no image quality loss. You’re correct, Tony. If it aint broke don’t fix em.
The audio on the RP video segments is better than what you're getting on the R3. I assume there is a configuration issue because you are dual recording. It isn't horrible on the R3, but just not as good as what you're getting on the RP. Just an FYI...
My G16 does a better job with IS than my 5D IV. Go figure.
I noticed that as well! I’m not all that blown away with what I’ve seen on the R3, especially when you factor in the price! Not knocking the R3, just MHO.
So I purchased a canon dslr in Singapore on my honeymoon in 2001, it was a film camera. I replaced that camera with 2 canon 50d bodies and kept buying different lenses whenever I wanted to shoot a new thing. I saw the film cameras die and now I’m seeing the dlsr die. Craziest setup for a picture is for a closeup of a dragon fly I use! I think it’s a sigma, 200mm? To 500mm telephoto. Then I take the pics at almost full zoom from about 8-10 meters. The dragonflies are to flighty to actually get close. Either way I think I’ll just keep my gear till it’s dead and then see what adapters I need to buy.
HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!
My biggest thing is mirrorless uses many times more power than DSLR and SLR. If the modern world is about saving energy and saving the planet, camera tech seems to be going backwards.
Agree, two years after this video, I'm still shooting 35mm and 6x7 film and occasionally a dslr. Admittedly, the film has some chemical waste byproducts but I can live with that. I just don't see a need for new technology.
In general the technology leap from film to digital cameras was suffice to relegate Kodak to the dustbin of history . The technology was first developed , as I recall not checking my facts , by Kodak . The development of the digital camera was ground breaking for the novice and professional.
The Mirrorless camera is an advancement BUT not a technological break through. Yes, it enhanced the ability of a photographer but it was not shattering .
Today , within the past “ plus “ ten years the late Steve Jobs considered a cell phone not an instrument to only call home but with a vision and R&D into what it is today !
The warning to the camera manufacturers… ( Tony you are correct with your presentation ) they better pay close attention to what fate Kodak found itself in . The key to develop a camera , if possible , that becomes seamless w/ a smart phone either Android/ Apple OS .
I understand that Android/ Apple will have a very limited vested interest with a working relationship w / camera manufacturers.. but my advice to the Camera “ Brain Trust “ in Japan take one look at what happened in Rochester, NY
( Tony thank you for your insight a fair play . Your observations on this matter is noted A camera manufacturers should establish working group w/ folks that are professionals and with enthusiast photographers…
So true. Kodak really missed the boat and did not market what they had. Much to their chagrin. I recently purchased a new DSLR, D500 because I am not going to give up my glass or pay money to affix my glass to a mirrorless camera. I know the D500 is 6 years old, but it is new to me. Additionally, I do not like the mirrorless viewfinder. Noise in low light and lag at high frame rates. It is not there yet and if you want it, it will cost an arm and a leg. No thanks.
For me, having a camera that connects through blue tooth, wifi, or whatever, is the reason I would _never_ buy that camera. I see the logic, but I'd rather have a camera that does one thing perfectly, vs one that can do that same thing half assed, but could also pick my nose and fling my boogers.
It's like video editing or browsing the internet on a phone: it sucks. I'd rather have a laptop / big computer, with a big screen and all the extra things you can do with it, vs a phone that does the same thing half assed. All these IoT things are mostly useless, and quite often insecure too.
To me, a smartphone is nothing more than a phone, with the ability to do various small tasks when in a pinch (calculator, notes, quick image, etc).
Speaking on your point;
Once upon a time ago, probably within a decade now. Samsung brought out one of the most sought after camera bodies; NX-1. 28.2MP mirrorless in the body of a DSLR. Those who had it said it was the first to be able to use with android, Samsung smartphones in particular, & transfer over media captured via wifi/bluetooth. But the thing was, like their 'point & shoot' line: Starting the SG6 & on. Samsung starting to input 'point & shoot' photography tech into the phone's camera capabilities and settings. In a sense, Samsung "shot themselves in the foot" with this business move. Still, they continued on with it and more. Thus making their cameras and the NX-1 obsolete. What most people don't understand is one of the main parts that is the camera sensor. The day a company, outside of the one brand in China that already made the unofficial 1st interchangeable lens smartphone, does decide to even a M43's size sensor into a smartphone without having it burn up your pants & leg. Phones can only do so much. Cameras don't just capture some information through a sized sensor. They paint moments and memories that last.
@@ActionJackson321 Sadly people like us are in a very small minority. Every day a new thing is bundled with bluetooth or wifi, with an app, for no reason; cameras as we know them will certainly be gone in the next decade or two. sigh
Hmm I think mirrorless was quite revolutionary - I moved to it all the back with the Sony Nex-3. Also Sony imaging edge desktop for android/iOS is pretty nice. Could use a couple tweaks but as a feee app to remote control the camera works pretty nicely!
Hello Mr Nortrup
I am a 60 year old female and I agree with every word you say in your video. I am a Nikon user, D500. I’m not hung up about sensor size and chose this camera in 2020 over mirrorless as I personally felt that I would not make the most of the technology present in a mirrorless camera, being primarily only a stills photographer with zero interest in video. I photograph wildlife, flowers and gardens as these are subjects I’m interested in.
I’ve learnt over a long time going back to my film days that yes, you do need a camera with a bit of weight to it to balance the longer focal length lenses. I also have very small hands but I don’t have a problem with the size If the D500.
Personally,I feel that the D500 is a much underrated rated camera as it can cope with any situation where I wish to take photographs, especially with the xqd cards in it; it doesn’t hit the buffer, it just goes on and on ….. . if I want a light snap camera, then, as you rightly say, the phone is excellent for this.
The lens that I use most on the D500 is an old Nikon 105mm series D macro lens. Yes it does hunt sometimes, but I’m not in a rush.
Plus I love to hear the sound of the shutter going off, just as much as I loved the sound of my old FM2s with the MD12 drives on. Silent shooting has its place, but it freaks me out when I don’t hear a click!
I preferred the cheaper Canon camera on the video as I thought the rendition of the skin tone was more pleasing to the eye, but everyone will have a different opinion as we are all different and unique.
Please pass my good wishes to your wife, whose ability to hand hold those long lenses reminds me of days gone by.
As a photographer, I love light and its countless nuances. DSLR show me this light, mirrorless boxes show me a screen. And that's a huge difference.
If i wanted to look at light and its countless nuances, i wouldnt stare through a camera, but look directly. Only reason to look through a cam is the framing, and that i can do using any camera, by mirrorless even without blackout
@@scannorse If that's enough for you, go ahead and do it. For me, natural light is an inspiration and I enjoy seeing it through the camera.
That is my #1 hangup when using mirrorless. And for that reason my DSLRs are still my primary cameras. When I look through an OVF I feel connected to the scene. When I look through an EVF I feel like I'm looking at a VGA monitor from the 1990s. To be fair, I have not had the chance to use the very latest/greatest EVFs such as the EVF in the Canon R3.
Can I work with mirrorless and still get the shot? Of course. But I prefer an OVF.
Awww wow. Beautifully said.
This is ridiculous. You know you can take your eye away from the EVF to look at the scene, right?
Tony, you NAILED IT in this video. The manufacturers seem to be living on another planet entirely.
I still love my Canon 80D, and someday I would also consider a full frame, but for what I shoot, this works well for me. I agree that having a better OS on the camera and some more features would be great, but I still choose my DSLR over a smartphone any day as I enjoy looking at my pictures on a computer screen, and smartphone pics mostly lack the quality when viewed at full size.
I recomend Canon 6D or 5dmk2. Used are very cheap now.
Sold my 80D just recently. Just couldn't justify investing in any lens for this system. Sigma 18-35? Only useful in Live view only, otherwise there is always front/back focus issues. Canon 17-55 2.8? Expensive, discontinued, has a history of failing IS, and somewhat useless on mirrorless full frames (no Full HD video, only 8-12 effective megapixels and so on). And every full frame lens is "cropped" (duh) and you never get the full IQ out of it on with a cropped sensor (just look at the graphs on DXOmark). Horrible noise on ISO higher than 800. Love the images I took with it though (in good lighting), so I'm looking into buying a new camera which will most likely be a Canon RP. It's a bag full of compromises, but its a full frame in a compact size for an affordable price. I could get a Canon 135 Soft-focus and have every inch of it.
@@marshmellowash if you don't have too much invested in glass and are ok with crop and non swivel screen, usedFuji's might be a better option.
@@marshmellowash Since I wasn't sure if I would stay with my 80D, I purchased the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM and a Sigma 24mm F1.4 Art DG HSM, then I could switch to a full frame later if I like it better. I was planning on renting a full frame Canon after I move back to the states. I love both lenses and between these 2, that's all I need in my bag. I also invested in some really good Freewell magnetic filters, and so far I really like them.
@@marcingardyjan6680 Thanks. I plan to rent a full frame some time this year and then if I like it better I'll give/sell my 80D with the kit lens to my son and buy a used full frame. It will be a tough decision though, one of the main reasons I went with the 80D was for the quality, weather seal, and price as this was my first DSLR, before this camera I used to shoot with a Canon PowerShot S5 IS, so I'm still learning and in no rush.
To comment on the video quality. I'm watching this on my 5k iMac. The R3 image is noticeably sharper with higher resolution. You can clearly see the difference, particularly in the split-screen at the beginning. The R3 image looks like high-quality 4k video, while the RP image looks like good quality 1080p footage, scaled up to 4k. I didn't look at the specs, so I don't know if the RP footage is supposed to be native 4k video. If it is, it's not quite there compared to the R3.
I love my Canon R6 and it was a huge upgrade from my 5D Mark III. The most important feature in the R6 was the eye tracking and follow focus. I think it is a game changer ... for me. That said, if you wanted to mass market these cameras these features would never get my wife and friends to purchase a mirrorless camera. It is to inconvenient and clunky to carry a big camera that is only a camera. Your list would move some of them to a "real" camera or at least a point and shoot.
This is key... a phone is with you anyway and it's good enough mostly. Camera manufacturers should improve the software side of things, but having the same features as a phone...not going to convert many people. It'll just make things more convenient for current shooters.
Completely agree. I‘ve had Canon DSLRs since the 10D waaaaay back, and I loved my 5D Mark III. But with the R5, I can shoot with the MP-E 65/2.8 macro lens without even using a flash. I can go on 20 km hikes with the new 800/11 and, when I‘m up that mountain, take in-flight pics of falcons. Handheld. I would never have done that with a 600/4! The AF, the stabilization, the viewfinder - that was a game changer for me. Completely changed the way I take wildlife pictures. I‘ll never go back.
I've been saying this for years. The current mirrorless camera is not the equal of the DSLR and shows no sign of ever becoming so. Mirrorless has nothing to compare to the magnificent optical viewfinder. In 14 years the mirrorless has yet to even come close to the battery life of the best DSLRs.( Hint to mirrorless manufacturers: make the battery bigger until battery life is competitive. It's not brain surgery.) It's a huge mistake to ignore the massive number of older photographers and professionals with all that disposable income who want these things in favor of the young cell-phone jockeys who just want the latest gimmicks. I fully expect the camera of the future to be mirrorless - just not the mirrorless of today. I think these cameras are just transitionary. The camera of the future will have an optical viewfinder, possibly using something like fiber-optics and a large battery. When that finally happens there will be a glut of the current mirrorless on the used market.
I just bought a D500 for wildlife and a D850 for everything else. I won't be buying any of the current crop of mirrorless so these two DSLRs will get me through the lean years until the big manufacturers wise up.
I went from Canon 5D Mark IV and 7D Mark II to the R5 and R6 not because of mirrorless, but all the other new capabilities the new cameras and lenses have. Yes, Canon could have put much of that new tech into their DSLRs, but they didn't. Sony's success dictated otherwise.
TBH I don't miss the additional weight of DSLR bodies and zoom lenses. They're not as small as Sony bodies (thank God) but the difference is significant. But that's not why I switched. Did Canon err? The market will give the answer, and I say no.
I too went from the the same bodies to the R6. I am not a fan of change, but I remember when I went from film to digital and almost immediately after I sold my film gear (a Canon 650 and K2), the market value of those bodies PLUMMETED (in 2003). I run a very small company, and want to be able to get a good price on my used gear.
Thank you Tony so much for this video. I disagree with many that say "everyone" wants a mirrorless. I love the feel of my DSLRs. Unfortunately, for those of us who are still using them we are experiencing quite the snobbery from the mirrorless folks, especially in the wildlife genre. All of a sudden our DSLRs now "scare birds away." We have even been asked to leave the scene because our cameras are too noisy. I personally find their attitude to be so rude and arrogant.
I mean they arent wrong. I've noticed that i scare birds and other animals sometimes with my camera "click" on my 90d but if i use my phone they dont notice me. Just depends how close you are
It seems like dickheads are everywhere all of a sudden. I say, "come at me bro!".
DSLR mirror noises have annoyed me for years, I hate watching videos of airshows where all you can hear is DSLRs in continuous shooting mode with the mirrors making constant noise. If you want to do that shoot video.
@@owensmith7530 You must attend glider airshows because as a pilot and a photographer, I find your triggered, hilarious!
@@SuperEddietv No, never been to a glider airshow. I'm talking about airshow videos on youtube where it's all going fine and then some numpty with a DSLR starts up with the mirror clanking away like crazy near the person trying to take a nice video.
I feel like camera manufacturers need to work on computational photography the most. It’s what’s keeping smartphones in the game with their smaller sensors.
Agreed!
Yes agree
It's a reason why Sony is jumping in to lead the industry...those pure camera companies can't compete.
Absolutely . I am constantly amazed by what I can achieve with my midrange smart phone in , what for my DSLRs , would be challenging conditions .
Except for the fact that video is becoming more popular. So, sure, ignore that to their own demise.
My last Canon was the 5D MK IV which had a serious banding issue and Canon support in New Zealand would not fix even though it wasn't even half way through it's warranty. This is a known issue with certain units of these cameras. The technical support person who dealt with my issue was sadly seriously thick. He had absolutely no understanding of photography needless to say I've moved on to Panasonic (G9 & GH5s). I would not touch Canon with a barge pole. Over Xmas 2020 I had the extreme pleasure of using my friend's Nikon D850 - man what a camera. At least a decade ahead in technology compared to Canon. Most of the canon lenses are way overrated. The fact that there are about 50 Nikon DSLRs on ISS vs zero Canon backs up my short experience.
there is one big advantage to mirrorless though : with the reduced flange distance, you can adapt pretty much every vintage SLR lens, and as you know those are very cheap.
For the hobbyist, going mirrorless is an argument cause it's easier to learn how to expose your image, it's easier to find lenses for it, and even in the mirrorless market there is good options that you can get for kind of cheap (Sony A6000, Fuji X-T1 and X-T2 and all their variants, Canon M5 and M50 mark 1, etc)
Even looking at current generation stuff like Fuji X-T3/X-T4, Nikon Z50/Zfc, those cameras are fairly afforadable compared to their full frame cousins like the R6, A7III/IV etc
Exactly.. Wish the market in Dubai was more mature. No one's looking for my well kept M5.
Literally my favorite part about my Canon dslr, because I also decided to shoot film and ended up reducing costs significantly by sharing gear! (The film rolls are another story)
I tried several thing to try to evaluate your video cameras. I ended up (with CZcams set for 4K) on my 4K monitor. To be honest, the R3 looks like it's over sharpened. To my eye, the RP looks more pleasing. To be honest, I'm not sure why anyone would bother with 4K and a high frame rate, especially on CZcams.
I'm wondering if companies like DJI, Black Magic Designs, Apple, Samsung, or Google will come up with a camera that we all want like the one you explained.
That's what I am wondering as well or any new company might do. But actually Samsung tried that 8 years ago with the NX1. At that time they might have been a little bit early to the market. And actually it would be better if one of the established one would try it to make use of the huge lens lineup.
I hope DJI can enter the game and they are a relatively innovative player right now. But at the same time I doubt they are interested in this ever shrinking market
The question to ask in 2022 is why you cannot upload pictures from your camera directly to the cloud? As iPhone and Google phone cameras get better, I see no reason for anything resembling a travel camera for most people and for most people, they always have their phone and not some mirrorless camera with a selection of lenses unless they are doing a specific shot which is mostly what pros do. Weddings, events, sports, landscape, nature...
Meh! People buy into marketing hype all the time.
Like you Tony, I also recommend DSLRs to beginners/hobbyists. It just makes sense cost-wisre.
I am a 30+ year hobbyist and I really have no intention to switch to mirrorless at 61 years old.
Great video.
I don't get why you guys want to push DSLR so much. When the difference between DSLR and Mirrorless was explain to me, Mirrorless seemed better for me. After spending most of the year using mine and getting to look at other people's Rebel T7i (probably the closest DSLR equivalent to the M50), I'm so glad I spent the extra money on Mirrorless. I can understand already having a history with DSLR that you want to keep with that, but for someone who is brand new, I don't see why you would think DSLR is automatically better for them.
the existence of EVF is enough for me to scrap the idea of owning a DSLR...
@@arthurmarshall6825 to me the only advantage, for now, is cost. Eventually that will shrink more and more.
@@arthurmarshall6825 dslr can still get work done, but generally people sticking to dslr are either old or dumb, or both.
Same. If the budget is below $800 I recommend used DSLRs, otherwise small mirrorless like Fujifilm's XE-4. I would prefer mirrorless cause of the size. Way more likely to take it with you and shoot more with it. Or get both lol
I started my professional photographer career in 1974.
I also worked in the retail and wholesale photography areas. Including Nikon as a Sales Representative. Most of my photos were shot with a Mamiya RB 67 Pro S. Weddings and anywhere where larger images were needed. I started with Canon and switched to Nikon in 1980, when I started with them.
My whole career was shooting film. I'm now interested at some point getting a new Nikon digital camera. Because of its features and lens comparably, the D850 is my choice. I can't use my F mount lenses that focus with the screw, on any of Nikons mirrorless cameras with any of their adapters. The adapters don't have the screw connection.
Just electronic connection. So I'm wanting Nikon to keep the DSLR models going strong.
Or come up with a way the screw focusing can be used along with the electronic focusing on either a DSLR or mirrorless.
All Canon and Nikon did when they decided to drop DSLR development was bring their competitors in the mirrorless market to a level playing field against them with their customers. Since my only upgrade path as a 5D and 1D series shooter is the R5 or R3 in the Canon lineup, I have every value based incentive to look at Sony, Panasonic, and Nikon for other options at perhaps cheaper costs. At this point, a used A9 and an A7RIII seem like a fantastic way to save money on bodies that are feature filled and leave me something of a budget for lenses.
But havent SONY not also stopped the DSLR cams?
@@rasmuspedersen3563 Irrelevant. He is saying that because Canon has stopped making new high end DLSRs the only option for him is looking at mirrorless. He might as well look at other brands because he would need new lenses anyway. And some of the other manufacturers make a more compelling mirrorless option.
@@atilliar just don’t buy new lenses and it’ll all be alright! 👍
Canon is 2nd place in the mirrorless game. And what do we call 2nd place? 1st loser.
@@rasmuspedersen3563 yup but Sony had a huge lead back in 2014 and the lens choices are a lot compared to the current available RF mount lenses
Tony
I have Pentax Cameras all are APS-C I have no problems with DSLR cameras I ignore all the hipe about mirrorless. I prefer good IBIS , weather sealed cameras. As far as better focus my cameras focus good enough for wildlife as well as birds in flight photography. The only shot coming I find is Pentax needs a 150- 600 wildlife lens to use on the new flagship APS-C camera. As the Pentax 150-450 lens is a heavy full frame lens not suitable for hand held photography
Love my Canon 90D and have no desire to get any other camera...
Ricoh/Pentax have stated they will continue to invest in DSLRs. In fact, they think that in a couple of years many who switched to mirrorless will come back to DSLRs. Hence, their decision to stand behind their DSLR production.
With the size and cost of Nikon Z and Canon R lenses.....when l go mirrorless, it will be Micro 4/3.
I think Olympus was the closest to doing some of the features Tony was talking about; hope somebody from OM Digital is watching and makes many of the features mentioned available, I think it would revitalize the brand. The major reason I switched to Olympus was because of some of the in camera computational functions. If the big companies don't see the light, eventually it might just be "Smartphone" or "Medium Format". Micro 4/3, APS-C, and Full Frame need to make a big enough reason to not just use a Smartphone.
Good points, Tony. But I much prefer my R5 over my 1DX2 for wildlife. Silent electronic shutter, 20 fps and amazing AF make the R5 my preference.
He didn’t say you wouldn’t. It’s a great camera. It’s just very expensive. He meant price point. He’s right. I bought a Sony a6500 and hate it. Love my Nikon full frame. If I got any mirrorless for wildlife - it would have to be high end.
@@sherylkingstone For $5000, an R5 with a 100-400mm would be fantastic. Or a A92 with a 150-600. Mirrorless has far too many advantages.
@@djack4125 but you can’t get it at that price. I wish
@@sherylkingstone Try a new Canon R6 at $2500. Add a used Ef 100-400 ll from B&H at $1900 and an RF adapter at $99. Good to go for $4500.
@@djack4125 A great, not terribly expensive, setup!
Also, there’s the OM-D E-M10 Mark III, with M.Zuiko Digital ED 75-300mm F4.8-6.7 lens. The whole kit price is just $1,200.00 (U.S.). An equivalent of 150-600 in FX format. It takes some sharp images too. A 2X teleconverter for an extra $495 comes to $1,695.00. You can add the fast M. Zuiko Digital ED 300mm Pro f4 lens for $2,749.99. Total cost $4,349.99, plus whatever taxes and shipping. A complete birding and wildlife package for less than $5,000. If I get a mirrorless then I’d get the OM-D-EM-10 Mark III. Perfect for traveling and hiking, at less than $650, with lots of lenses .
Wow! Tony you make such good points in this video. I hope your voice reaches some of the powers-that-be among camera manufacturers to update their cameras to the possibilities of what has been created by smart phone technology.
I think this change is doing the camera industry even more damage and sales will tank even further. This is a short sighted attempt to make consumers change without realizing many of them (consumers) will quit their cameras completely rather than cover the added expense of upgrading, and even more will rely only on their phones. I certainly have no intention of changing. At all.
The name “mirror-less” has always sounded weird to me. Naming the current generation of a technology by describing a feature from the last generation that it no longer has. It would be like calling an electric car a gas-less car.
The equivalent of the strapless bra. 😄
Sort of like the word "wireless"
I agree: it is a huge mistake. I think with today's technology reflexes could be even better than before. The point is that, as with all fields, we should have more balance and not think about canceling everything. There is a physical part of photography that cannot be replaced. An optical viewfinder cannot be replaced by an electronic one because it is completely another thing, despite the great strides made. One thing I really don't like is the idea of definitively setting aside the optical viewfinder. Because the hybrid viewfinder can only be proposed for a fixed lens camera, as the optical viewfinder would only make sense for a given focal length.
But the optical viewfinder allows you a completely different experience. Long live Pentax that resists! I was one of the first pro photographers to switch completely to mirrorless in 2010 but since 2 years I am back to work with DSLR cameras.
The 90D is a great DSLR and it’s a camera that will be relevant for some time to come. I own the 70D and love the results it gives me. No 4K but I do have a GoPro 10. Canon lenses for the DSLR are still usable with an adapter. My gripe with Canon is producing a affordable camera and lenses. Canons biggest competition is the cell phone.
Pentax is keeping the DSLR alive. You can use any Pentax K-mount lens made since 1975. Heck, I have a third-party (Sigma, if you're curious) lens from the 90s that still works with autofocus. Pentax has been consumer friendly (keeping autofocus lenses working, making it easy to use vintage lenses, adding weather resistance to their prosumer level cameras, etc) for years. Come, join us.
I've been buying up some great deals on DSLRs, I've been shooting with Canon for 30 years now, and my collection of lenses make it a no Brainerd to stay with an SLR BASED CAMERA. I'm also not real impressed with the mirror less systems I've got to try, may be a boomer thing, but I prefer the function and feel of my SLR cameras.
It would be nice if the companies would listen. I am not professional and not a rich person, it is a hobby I really enjoy. It has taken me along time to save up and work my way up to pretty good equipment. So to have to change from DSLR to Mirrorless, basically starting over, would be a hardship to say the least and take quite a long time to do it again. I started with a Cannon 35mm film and the went to a Nikon D50 and worked on getting some good glass then moved up to a D750 and continued to improved on lenses. I was hopping eventually to move up to the Nikon D850 or the next upgrade D860. I mainly shoot sports and wildlife, so a good upgrade with several of the items you talked about in the article and a upgrade on the camera would be what I would love to have and would buy. I don't want to start all over. I would be willing to say I'm not the only one in this boat! As always I really enjoy your information and watching you all, thanks.
I agree. And let's hope Nikon keeps the DSLR around for those of us that prefer them.
Yes, it would be great to have some smartphone technology migrate to cameras, but what is happening instead is camera technology is migrating to smartphones: bigger sensors, longer and wider lenses, wider apertures. Just imagine if you could mount a smartphone "back" on some real dslr or mirrorless lenses! A couple of small companies have tried it, but if Sony, or Canon, or Nikon created a mount that would put an iPhone on some real lenses, we might really have something.
On my TV, the RP shots looks so much sharper that it became hard to tell what I actually prefer.
Spot on, Tony. I can't afford to grow my mirrorless kit because the lenses and accessories are too expensive. Best deal in town - a used Canon. Plenty of gear on the market at good prices. Nikon is a close second.
And yeah, the camera manufacturers have to up their software game. Nothing worse than coming home from a gig and only sending pics out a day later as you cannot simply edit and share them via your DSLR/Mirrosless device.
I did exactly like you said. I purchased a D500 and 200-500 lens last year, and am a happy camper. Wildlife is my main reason. I was not sure I would be gaining anything with mirrorless and was limited in available funds. About $3,000 put me in business. I still also use my D7200. When I do photography I usually use both cameras. Nice production.
Not a fan of Canon (I know they are super popular with CZcams photographers). I bought a new Canon as a total new photographer, and I bought a couple of generic speed lights. That’s when I found out that my “hot shoe” wasn’t industry standard. Canon tried to lock me into buying their proprietary accessory. My next camera was a Nikon. Very happy with it. Now I don’t buy Canon. Problem solved.
To answer most of Tony's points:
1. It was known in advance that only wide lenses* (for Canon, from ~20-45mm) are going to benefit from shorter flange distance. Tony is stating the obvious.
2. Power consumption is a 20 years old tend. My first DSLR could operate on an AA battery, because it had so few electronic parts in it. The PowerShot A610 needed 4 AA batteries, because it needed to operate a sensor, a chip to convert images to JPEG, write images to a memory card, etc. Nobody expected mirrorless to consume less power.
3. Mirrorless has nothing to do with market share. People prefer a smartphone because they already have it in their pockets, the image quality is good enough, and it has great connectivity, e.g. they can upload the images immediately to social media. Removing the mirror isn't going to improve any of that. Another reason for sales dropping is photographers already having a good enough camera. The Canon EOS 10D had a distinct advantage over film. Then people kept upgrading, because 6.3MP isn't enough. But cameras have become good enough some years ago, so photographers aren't quick to upgrade anymore.
In other words, the "mirrorless is a response to smartphones" is as ridiculous as complaining about power consumption.
4. Apps and speed will improve with time. The camera will transfer images to a smartphone, and the smartphone will back it up to wherever the photographer wants.
5. There's a reason camera manufacturers don't want on-camera apps. They don't want to deal with compatibility issues (on works on R5 mk X, but not X+1), viruses, etc. Anything safe, e.g. a limited scripting language, will be too limited to be useful.
6. Searchable menus requires a convenient text input method. There isn't any on a camera.
7. Better screens will come with time. And require more battery power.
8. Wireless mics, headphones, and flashes will come with time. 3rd party manufacturers are making a profit on it, and Canon would love to share it. And require more battery power.
9. Internal memory? Like there was no backlash when phone manufacturers cancelled the SD slot.
10. Computational photography has two aspects to it. One of the reasons to buy a camera, rather than a smartphone, is post processing. And Canon cameras have started doing it, e.g. correcting vignetting. The RF 24-240mm doesn't cover the whole sensor on the wide end, and RF cameras correct that in body. And, of course, computation requires more battery power.
11. Anti theft goes back to the same issues as on camera apps. Canon isn't interested in dealing with people who forgot their passwords and taking Canon to court over damages due to not having a lab available to crack it in time to deliver wedding photos to clients.
12. Android OS see on camera apps. And a big commercial OS running apps would require, wait for it..., more battery power.
Great list of features needed. One thing not on your list is GPS - that should just be built in as well. Currently (if I don't forget) I start a GPS tracker on my phone and then use that to add GPS to all the pictures taken, a painful process.
I bought a Canon R5 Mirrorless for wildlife and it was a complete game-changer for me.
I threw my DSLRs in the garbage...smartphones have improved a lot and good for snapshots and not terrible for landscape...not adequate for wildlife.
Ricoh/Pentax would disagree with you, they are smarter than the average bear and will rise again ;)
Hope so. I was hoping to see a 645z mk ii
I've been a photographer for over 40 years and am frankly disgusted with the fixed obsolescence in cameras. I got the Nikon d810 for around #3,000 because Canon was dragging its feet in coming out with any new additions. I HATE MY NIKON. The autofocus sucks and I could rant on and on. The bottom line is I'm not dropping $3,000+ every/other year. I'm considering a mirrorless. I'm done with Nikon and don't care about the hype because as soon as the dust settles the truth will surface about its functionality. Mirrorless is a new technology that's being hyped and pushed out to the public without getting the kinks out. That's fine if you have the money and are okay with being the industry's guinea pigs. BACK IN THE DAY a camera didn't need all the bells and whistles that are expected of today's camera. The photographer was just expected to know what he/she was doing. I
Well done, someone has finally spoken up on this subject.
Android was originally designed for cameras, so I wonder what went wrong?
Cameras need to be instant-on. No one wants to wait for their camera to boot up.
Fragmentation of hardware but I may be mistaken.
@@definedphotography Good point.
Maybe the camera could have an "instant on" option many laptops have this option. Just a thourght😀
Having tried Android phones, no thank you. I don't need Google tracking me any more than they already do. Add in WiFi image transfer with GPS data and other copyright meta/exif data and it's one more way for Google to pry into your private life. Now, make Android divorced from Google and it may be a viable alternative to the current mess.
One other problem too is that each of the camera manufacturers have proprietary CPU's on board their cameras which would make a universal OS problematic. Another issue is the way each of them processes their raw files which is also proprietary.
@@rcfalcon56MkII I agree, its the reason why my next phone will be an iPhone even though I don't trust them entirely. To add to your excellent point on the camera, most apps don't even use the main camera sensor it literally takes a screenshot and uses that as the picture.
I used to sell cameras at camera stores. When Fuji came out I was the first person to buy them. When Sony Mirrorless came out I was the first to get into the system and get rid of my Canon system. I might have lost money selling them but not as much as those who kept holding on. It just made sense to me to buy a smaller lighter system that has instant review in viewfinder and can see in the dark.
When I worked at camera stores I converted every every Every dslr seeking customers into Sony system. From just showing the difference they changed their mind. Now to take This in context, I sold 880,000$ in one year alone. I’m a top sales person
My 5D Mark IV is still my go to camera over my R5 and R6. Both the R5 and R6 are awesome, I do prefer the R6 over the R5 but 5D IV is just the best ever in my opinion.
The eye focus for birds is the only advantage for me.
What is the reason you rank 5DIV > R6 > R5 for your work?
Each to his/her own. I found my R6 and R5 outperformed my 5D Mark IV in every way, including shadow recovery and high ISO performance. The only detriment to the R6 for me is the 20 MP. I sold my beloved 5D Mark IV and have no regrets.
@@nubscrub Several reasons, mainly opinion. Now I do believe the R6 and R5 can out perform the 5D4 once you get used to the mirrorless camera, they are newer and more advanced. Maybe because I have used SLR/DSLR's for 40 years and love the chunky feel and reliability for my studio. Portrait/wedding/commercial/products and in the field landscape/wildlife. Will I switch to a mirrorless? Maybe or forced when and if mirrorless forces the DSLR out completely. For video, the R5 and R6 for sure, the 5D4 4K files are massive, not fond of the crop. The best camera is the one you are using and comfortable with.
I also kept my 5DlV, for about 6 months after purchasing the R5, mainly because the trade in value was ridiculously low and I felt that a backup camera can come in handy. But after using the R5 I saw that the advantages of a mirror less were some much better that I basically never touched my 5DlV. The only small advantage was the battery life, but that’s it. So I realize back then that I better sale it before DSLR’s get discontinued. I was right….
Advertising on mirrorless cameras has brainwashed people very well to think that dslrs are dead. Still using my canon 600D and 400mm f5.6 L USM lens for wildlife
Amazing Video Tony! Im going to recommend everyone who says "you don't need extra dynamic range in controlled lighting" to watch this. The EOS R3 extra dynamic range looks absolutely beautiful, from the skin tones to the black blazer, RP just can't resolve them the same way and R3 image just looks so pleasing. I sold my 5Divs for the A7siii and Panasonic S5, Canon seems to be knocking it out the park, but at a very expensive level.
I’ve owned the R3 since launch and compared it directly against my Red Komodo (see my channel ). Imo the R3 more than holds its own. There’s so much more to an image than resolution… Highlight roll off, how colors transition, noise… it all comes into play. The Canon Eos R3 is, I believe, the best camera that Canon has produced to date. Even beating out the R5 and C70. It’s a very refined image.
What do you say about the cost of the Canon mirrorless cameras and the mind numbing cost of the limited number of native lens originally offered by Canon ?
@@robertcudlipp3426 that’s the reason I left the system, I get the whole CPS thing and the amazing benefits but Sony has caught up in after sales services to some extent. Also the nail in the coffin for me was the artificial thermal limit on the R5, hence I sold my 5div and went with the A7siii. I have to say I’m very happy with the Sony system. The only thing I haven’t tested yet is working in the rain, I know A7siii has good weather sealing but it’s the A7iii I’m worried about, something I never thought on the 5diii and 5div.
@@angryrabbitproductions1690 I haven’t seen a lot of footage from it, will definitely check your channel. Judging by Tony’s footage I did the find the roll off very pleasing. I think canon finally giving the mirrorless the video image it deserves and not keep it for their cinema line. I only wish they kept this ideology since the beginning of the mirrorless trend. I have so many memories with the brand and was so heartbroken when changing system 😂.
A professional photographer has sold his 1DX3 for half the price to me, because he wanted to get a mirrorless. The camera had around 2000 actuations, half the price...Dude! I immediately bought it and sold my 5D4. In my opinion, the 1DX3 is the queen of all cameras and it is a great photography gear. Very good in low-light conditions, perfect for sports and portrait etc. I simply love it! Get yourselves the 1DX3 and you will not regret it.
Well better buy a 5D IV and Nikon 850. Those will be collector items.
TLDR: Handling a mirrorless camera is easier, faster and more reliable than a DSLR for amateur photographers that don't have the ability to calculate exposure on the fly. It's better to get the exposure right than having to fix photos slightly off the proper exposure.
I once encountered this situation. I was shooting video for my sister and she received an offer from a girl to do a photoshoot, so i was recording video as she took photos, i did snap some photos with my gear and my sister ended up liking them more than the girl's photos.
Her gear: Nikon D3300 with a couple of zoom lenses.
My gear: Canon M50 with adapted EF and EF-S lenses.
I did put more money into my lens collection, but what had happened was this.
Neither she or me are very good at shooting, we're pretty much amateurs but she has a beauty saloon so she complements her job with the camera. She had a harder time nailing exposure and adjusting the settings, while i didn't have to worry about it (because of the inherent live view) and the touchscreen helped me to change settings faster.
I do wish that companies keep making lenses for DSLR, because that expands the lens selection for mirrorless cameras 😁 I'm not one of those who say that adapting lenses is a hassle (no pun intended), i actually see a benefit in being able to get good quality glass at affordable prices, it also makes switching brands much easier, i only own 1 EF-M lens and it's a Sigma 16m f.14
I’d love some “smart” features on my camera. But I don’t want the clunkyness of an Android OS on my camera.
Exactly. Wait for a minute to boot. Requires a google account. App store stops working after a couple of years, and before that the updates make the hardware obsolete. Unnecessary power consumption. Annoying google stuff. Soft buttons preferred. Slow, and occasional hangs. Ads. Etc. Or maybe it could be android without the google stuff at least.
I'm an amateur photographer & decided to upgrade my DSLR 2 years ago. I asked a professional I knew whether I should go mirrorless & he recommended I stay with DSLR- I could still use my existing lenses without an adapter, the need for which negated any weight savings. This was important to me as I'm a backpacker & ounces count! I was hugely disappointed with Canon's software for transferring photo files wirelessly- endless frustration, utterly, utterly useless & I bought a cabled card reader eventually. Why are 3 different software packages provided that apparently do the same thing? Software navigation is stuck in the age of DOS. The camera makers deserve to go bust...
Learned quickly that battery life on the mirrorless wasn't nearly as good as my old D7100, or other DSLR's. A weekend of shooting at the races and a few thousand shots later, and I went back to good ol' DSLR for large count events..... and with big hands, I appreciate the larger bodies.
@yo yo i dont understand why the simple acts of changing a battery is so painful to certain people. Ill take any portion of those features over a few more hours of battery life. Camera's have stunted software ever since their inception... really, its the only thing I've seen that's been holding back the entire industry yet has never progressed ay any significant pace whatsoever
@@enkaphalin1111 I shoot outdoors, mobile, with only a backpack as storage, at 8 hour events, with 2-5000 shots a day, depending on how many participants and how many races. Having tote around 10 batteries, keep track of them, and don't run short at critical times, makes the current crop of mirrorless camera a total pain to use. Action and DSLR still are a better match.
@@mcoffroadinaz4075 jeez, in that use case that would me more practical to use a dslr then.
I shoot as a hobbyist, i almost never fill up my card on a "full" day shoot. At most I'll need to change my batteries once if I didn't come out of home with a full charge. Should add I never use auto focus glass, so that might impact battery life too.
However, I'd argue a lot of the issues with battery life are down to optimization of the software. There is very little incentive for camera manufacturers to focus on actually making the software more efficient on their bodies, let alone have the budget or will to develop them further. I'd wager that a lot of the issues with bloat causing the power consumption issues would be sorted out with better optimized software and better power allocation to the different functions.
I don't think the issue of battery life will plague us in the coming decade. Or you know, camera manufacturers just keep going down the stubborn route of using proprietary and crappy menus while selling us battery grips.
@@enkaphalin1111 I'm sure we aren't that different. Any moneys I make rarely cover more than fuel and lodging, and are done mainly for love of the sport, and the photography. That makes me an enthusiastic amateur. The exciting part for me, is that with mirrorless becoming more mainline, these high end DSLR's are approaching affordability for someone like myself. Exciting times!
Wow. I used to shoot with Hasselblads and I bought the first Sinar "P'' 4x5 in North America long ago. In those days all the photography was done in front of the camera now it's all done inside the camera or in Photoshop. I had spent about 30 years not doing photography and when I decide to pick it up again I completely lost interest within one year because of how things have changed. I remember throwing a Nikon at an art director and hitting a brick wall and still being able to use my 135 mm lens for years after. Try that with a Nikon or Canon today see what happens, ha. I got fired that day unfortunately.
Tony,a camera under $2000 for birding with a 600mm lens is a Sony RX10 iv.I know it's a 1 inch sensor,the image quality is good enough for hobby people.
That is an excellent camera.
Yes Steve, and that is the general problem of the entire industry (including lenses). They almost refuse to make cameras / lenses which are simply 'good enough', and simply very affordable (just like SLRs/lenses in the film days).
Currently, the industry chokes itself to death, the same way the HiFi stereo industry choked itself to death 20~30 years ago: everything had to be "high end" only, and absurdly expensive, for better profits. But no-one wanted this overpriced sh*t any more, so that having HiFi went out of fashion altogether completely. That story is currently repeating itself in the photo industry.
Pentax: *still exists*
Tony: Excuse me did I say you could be here?
14:00 yep, I would take a good DSLR with all the awesome software you mentioned over a mirrorless any day. I mean frame averaging, astro tracking, in camera focusstacking and so on outgweight the benefits of a mirrorless for me, any day of the week. Sadly Pentax and Olympus who delved into this territory never got much traction.
Another aspect of phone cameras is that when you take a photo or a video the time is the correct always so does not matter if you forgot to change from summer to winter one hour less in November or an extra hour in March, the time metadata it is always on time, you do not need to synchronize your phone camera time even if you travel to another time zone the same day but your camara time yes
Mirrorless, maybe. Phone cameras, no. Please, no.