When will mirrorless take over DSLR ... and time to sell mirror DSLR equipment??

kallisti

macrumors 68000
Apr 22, 2003
1,570
5,155
As I said previously, I’m happy with my optical viewfinder. No one, including you or ClixPix, is going to change my mind.
That's obviously fine. I was just pointing out that there are potential objective advantages to mirrorless. They may not be important to you or outweigh your reasons for preferring an optical VF. But they are real and not just marketing fluff. I respect your opinion however.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mollyc and Clix Pix

guzhogi

macrumors 68040
Aug 31, 2003
3,003
872
Wherever my feet take me…
Go with whatever you need. If your current DSLR works for you, keep it. If the new mirrorless ones have new/better features you need, get that. Whatever floats your boat.

I'd consider getting mirrorless if a) I had the money, b) I did more photography, and c) I'd like one with GPS. I sometimes like doing outdoors photography (architecture, landscapes, etc.), and would love for it to automatically add location data.
 

QuantumLo0p

macrumors 6502a
Apr 28, 2006
988
28
U.S.A.
My short term plan is to go to an 850 as soon as come across a bloke that feels like he is somehow missing out, panics then dumps his little-used 850 for 25 cents on the dollar which he paid for it.

My longer term plan is to move to mirrorless after there are no more high end DSLR's to snap up dirt cheaply. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: r.harris1

arogge

macrumors 65816
Feb 15, 2002
1,060
19
Tatooine
Mirrorless cameras will replace SLRs when the viewfinder in the Mirrorless body looks like an optical viewfinder without any jumpy distortions, and when the auto-focusing of the Mirrorless body works like the auto-focusing on a very good SLR camera. So, maybe soon. The Mirrorless technology seems to have improved considerably over the last decade.
 

Darmok N Jalad

macrumors 68020
Sep 26, 2017
2,223
7,643
Tanagra
Mirrorless cameras will replace SLRs when the viewfinder in the Mirrorless body looks like an optical viewfinder without any jumpy distortions, and when the auto-focusing of the Mirrorless body works like the auto-focusing on a very good SLR camera. So, maybe soon. The Mirrorless technology seems to have improved considerably over the last decade.
Curious what you mean by jumpy distortions. I know my old GX85 had some tearing issues, but the G9’s is very smooth, and I don’t even have 120fps enabled as I didn’t feel I needed it and 60FPS saves battery.
 

fcortese

macrumors demi-god
Apr 3, 2010
2,104
3,017
Big Sky country
I plan on moving over to mirrorless real soon. I'm going to be lightening my heavy load of Canon gear and switch to the Fuji system. This Old Geezer is looking towards a smaller, lighter camera body and lenses that are less expensive than the full frame mirrorless body and lenses. Funny isn't it. I started out with a cropped sensor all those years ago and HAD to switch to full frame. Now I am going full circle and will go back to a cropped sensor! I am comfortable with my decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: someoldguy

tcphoto1

macrumors 6502
Aug 21, 2008
341
1,703
Nashville, TN
I have been shooting for 25+ years and have shot with Nikon 35mm, Mamiya 645Pro, RZ, Pentax 67 and Canon FF DSLR's. Now that I'm in my mid 50's, I sold the 1Series bodies and bought a couple 5DIV's in September '18 because of the weight. Considering my usual projects, I see no advantage to mirrorless yet.

As I've said on other forums, the EOS R is new and immature as far as bodies and lenses available. System roadmaps don't account for real world results. Besides, have you seen the price tags of the R lenses compared to EF's? It looks like Canon wants to recoup their investment at twice the pace as previous generations.
 

MCAsan

macrumors 601
Jul 9, 2012
4,545
415
Atlanta
Those who do Canon DSLRs might want to check out the R5 announcement. Evidently it will be released this summer just before the Olympics.
 

someoldguy

macrumors 68000
Aug 2, 2009
1,947
5,327
usa
I ended up with a mirrorless a few months back (DC-G9) mostly to cut my camera bag weight down when I travel . So I ended up downsizing to mu43 . The weight/size difference of the camera body wasn't that great , compared to a full frame mirrorless ; but I cut the weight of lenses by around half . I'd rented both an EOS R and a RS over last summer and realized there was no weight advantage for me as the glass weighed about the same as EF glass ,hence the move to mu43 . The difference between EVF and OVF is irrelevant to me . Ended up dropping my carried weight from a bit over 20lbs down to around 14 while retaining about the same range of focal lengths .
 

Darmok N Jalad

macrumors 68020
Sep 26, 2017
2,223
7,643
Tanagra
I ended up with a mirrorless a few months back (DC-G9) mostly to cut my camera bag weight down when I travel . So I ended up downsizing to mu43 . The weight/size difference of the camera body wasn't that great , compared to a full frame mirrorless ; but I cut the weight of lenses by around half . I'd rented both an EOS R and a RS over last summer and realized there was no weight advantage for me as the glass weighed about the same as EF glass ,hence the move to mu43 . The difference between EVF and OVF is irrelevant to me . Ended up dropping my carried weight from a bit over 20lbs down to around 14 while retaining about the same range of focal lengths .
The G85/95 are considerably lighter than the G9, but they still have the same pro body style. The G9 is heavy for m43, but boy does it exude quality. It feels great in hand, it’s eager to shoot, and you might be able to pound nails with it. Like most of us, I look around at what else I wish I had, but I keep coming back to my G9. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: someoldguy

Erehy Dobon

macrumors 6502a
Feb 16, 2018
528
374
As far as seeing your gear as an investment, IMO it indeed is an investment.
It's an expense not an investment. An investment is something like shares of BRK-A, AAPL, QQQ, Treasury bonds, REITs, etc.

Unless you are buying collectible camera gear like vintage Leicas, etc. it's all expense and it all depreciates.

My guess is that 99.9% of used camera equipment is sold at a price lower than the acquisition price. That's a terrible "investment" [sic].

Same thing with computers. There are people here who refer to their Mac purchases as "investments." They aren't. They are expenses.

Same thing with cordless drills, kitchen knives, sewing machines, whatever. That doesn't mean people should refrain from buying nice things and enjoy using them.

I have some nice photography equipment most of which is collecting dust. I sure enjoyed using those items when I was doing the type of photography that utilized that gear. But I never ever thought of it as an investment.

My house? Maybe, but certainly non-liquid. The various negotiable securities that have lived in my retirement accounts? Absolutely.

But not my camera gear.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: smirking

baypharm

Contributor
Nov 15, 2007
1,665
533
So very true about vintage leicas. I found one at a garage sale and paid less than $25 for it. I had no idea of its worth but the serial # ended in a one, so I figured what the heck. After much research I discovered it was collectible. It ended up selling at an art auction in NY for over $45K. Not too shabby. Of course I paid about $4K to have it professionally cleaned/restored by a Leica specialist.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Clix Pix

Clix Pix

macrumors demi-goddess
I did not and do not consider the Nikon gear that I recently traded in or the new Sony gear that I acquired during that transaction/process as being "investments." Sure, the money that I spent though the years in which I had accumulated the Nikon gear was much more than what was deemed appropriate at the time of trade-in, and I was fully prepared for that. I used and loved my Nikon gear for many years. It served me well. So, yes, the camera bodies and lenses are and have been in the past (Nikon gear) very wonderful tools that I have enjoyed using for hours on end and which gave me much, much pleasure, and I am now (with Sony) currently enjoying again using (newer) gear for hours on end.....deriving much emotional satisfaction, finding and exploring new challenges and enjoying figuring them out -- in short, just plain having fun..... Never mind the monetary aspect of this, what the gear cost. It wasn't meant to be an investment in the first place. Isn't that sheer emotional pleasure I am getting and have in the past gotten from using my photographic gear worth something, too?
 
Last edited:

baypharm

Contributor
Nov 15, 2007
1,665
533
I did not and do not consider the Nikon gear that I recently traded in or the new Sony gear that I acquired during that transaction/process as being "investments." Sure, the money that I spent though the years in which I had accumulated the Nikon gear was much more than what was deemed appropriate at the time of trade-in, and I was fully prepared for that. I used and loved my Nikon gear for many years. It served me well. So, yes, the camera bodies and lenses are and have been in the past (Nikon gear) very wonderful tools that I have enjoyed using for hours on end and which gave me much, much pleasure, and I am now (with Sony) currently enjoying again using (newer) gear for hours on end.....deriving much emotional satisfaction, finding and exploring new challenges and enjoying figuring them out -- in short, just plain having fun..... Never mind the monetary aspect of this, what the gear cost. It wasn't meant to be an investment in the first place. Isn't that sheer emotional pleasure I am getting and have in the past gotten from using my photographic gear worth something, too?
Wow!! That last sentence really hit home with me. You and I definitely think alike. For me it is the feeling I get when I’m holding my camera and then the shooting experience. The piece de resistance is seeing the imagery. I previously used a Pentax K1 Mark II - mainly because of the amount of vintage PK lenses I’ve collected over the years. I fell in love with the optical VF. A friend suggested I try a Q2 and that was all I needed. I have jumped ship with the Pentax and now use only the Leica. Just love the 28mm focal length lens. It gives me such a huge surge of adrenaline when I use it. I never liked an EVF until I got hooked up with this one. I am with you all the way Clix Pix - monetary value means nothing. You cannot put a price on the joy and happiness high you get from shooting with a camera you just love. Awesome post you wrote.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clix Pix

arogge

macrumors 65816
Feb 15, 2002
1,060
19
Tatooine
Curious what you mean by jumpy distortions.
I tried a Canon RP, and noticed that the viewfinder is far from being equivalent to an optical viewfinder. It's better than Mirrorless viewfinders have been, noticeably sharper and larger, but maybe there is a way to make it refresh faster.
 

s66

macrumors regular
Dec 12, 2016
103
58
I've asked myself a year or so ago the same question: do I jump ship from the Canon EF to the Canon RF product line ?
I didn't jump and bought an other body and another lens I wanted.
Why did I do that while it was clear to me the mirrorless is without a doubt the future ?
- First off: missing features I absolute need in the R body at the time: GPS receiver built-in is essential for what I do
- Next the lens I needed was the EF11-24 and while the RF mount and short flange distance of the RF system should be ideal for the extreme wide lenses, Canon had not (still has not) deemed it a priority to make an RF version of it.
So in essence: the RF system was not for me yet. Will the next year be the one where I do jump: unlikely as I now have the all the gear on my wish list, so they'll have to convince me with not just a little better, but with a lot better.
They might be able to do it once I see actual pictures made with the gear they have in development right now (the R5) and once they add a few more RF lenses (not a fan of the convertors).

Selling 2nd hand: sure, but while I'm not a fan of the convertor, an RF body can actually use EF lenses (and for long lenses, that might not be the worst thing.

FWIW: I'm mostly picture only, I hate video - and know I suck at it -.
 
Last edited: