Nikon popularized the SLR camera in the 50s with the F, and its DSLRs have been a top pro choice for years. Now, Nikon has reportedly stopped developing new models, joining Canon and Sony, so why? The answer is that mirrorless cameras are finally fast enough for action photography and the latest EVFs are superior to optical viewfinders. And mirrorless now beats DSLRs when it comes to video, stabilization and more.
Get More Engadget:
• Like us on Facebook: / engadget
• Follow us on Twitter: / engadget
• Follow us on Instagram: / engadget
• Read more: www.engadget.com
Comparing top of the line DSLR vs Mirrorless and claiming Mirrorless is therefore a cheaper tech is ridiculous. Mid-line DSLR is half the price of mid-line Mirrorless, which is what normal people will be looking at.
Exactly what I was thinking. Especially in the used market. I have a camera, the holy trinity zooms taking me from 10-200mm, and two fast primes, and it all cost about 1500. That's not even enough for a 70-200 for mirrorless
@@djdoc06 I mean, it doesn't matter how much mirrorless is developed, dslrs will always be older and more basic technology. So until they become antiques and their prices rise again, they will always be cheaper than their mirrorless counterparts
@@djdoc06 DSLRs have an innate value due to the decades wide selection of excellent used lenses. The current crop of Mirrorless bodies are the ones that are going to depreciate more, since they are basically specialized computers. What is an 8 year old smart phone worth?
@@djdoc06 we will have to disagree. The value of any camera system is now in the lenses, not camera bodies. Especially true for Mirrorless due to the rapid technology improvements. And adapters are a compromise, adding weight/complexity and often not supporting older legacy glass (example: Nikon AF/AF-D). There is also uncertainty that all camera companies will survive, since the market for cameras has declined so drastically. The one thing that Mirrorless truly kills DSLR is video.. and those capabilities certainly fuel a lot of Mirrorless sales. But for budget photogs, DSLR makes a lot of sense.
Robert X What Camera u use now, need a mirror or not? iPhone cams are good enough for normal people!
Nice, so F mount lenses will get nice and affordable soon!
Counting on it and saving up!
SLR Resale camera prices oughtta go down too!
My immediate reaction as well lol
A fair number of Nikon DSLR lenses will soon begin the phase out process. It also makes one wonder how many parts are on hand in case a Nikon DSLR body or lens is damaged? Answer for the parts, not as many as one would like to think
Not so sure. They will be more sought after and therefore prices will unfortunately continue to rise, especially in the short to medium term.
Just bought a Nikon D50 as my first semi-serious DSLR. I know it’s a 17 year old camera but I was blown away by it. Now to see this just blows my mind
Nothing wrong with that! Used dslr cameras are such a good bargain today.
Remember: new technologies doesnt make your old ones obsolete-pros once considered those dslrs the top of the line
Don't worry, you'll get a huge advantage from 2nd hand lenses. After all if you shoot commercially, your clients are happy with the results and you know you haven't achieved a certain limitations of your hardware, then who cares?
Cute pfp 😉
Those are great cameras!
There's another big reason that many people overlook or don't think about. Mirrorless cameras have a shallow phlange distance from the rear element to the sensor compared to a DSLR that has a mirror box in between. Canon and Nikon also came out with larger mounts than their previous models. The combination of these two things allow them to redesign their lenses. The closer the rear element is to the sensor the less light the lenses have to correct. There's a lot of different elements inside a lens doing different things. The focal plane isn't flat. It's in an arc just like the front element. The sensor is flat. You need different lenses to directly place the light in focus on the sensor. Some elements focus the light that hits the center of the sensor while others focus the light onto the outer edges. This means there's little to no focus breathing or chromatic aberration. Nikon's lenses are superior to their previous models even if it's just by a small margin. All of their new z lenses are sharper. Not just in the center but corner to corner. Another big reason is that you get focus points across the whole EVF compared to just the center on a DSLR. No more focus and recompose! And then there's the eye auto focus. My keeper rate on my z6 II is much higher than it was with my d750. Don't worry about not seeing that little help l yellow box on the eye. If the person's face is inside the box,v they'll be in focus.
Fantastic explanation for why mirrorless cameras will ultimately exceed DSLRs. Lens and light geometry ultimately favours the new format and as they start designing lenses to take advantage of this, DSLRs will be obsolete.
I don't know who wouldn't want a Z9, but I still love the D500 - especially as I never feel worried taking it out in any weather and tough conditions for long periods. There's still a lot to be said for strong body and battery life, and if you need that kind of reliability and peace of mind, some DSLRs still beat many mirrorless options. That will change, of course.
I too have a D500 that almost permanently has a Sigma 150-600 attached for bird photography. However, for almost all other purposes I use an Olympus EM-1 MKII.
I want to buy a D500 or D850 whilst I can still get one new
Because the A1 is superior.
@@user-kcrpine superior my ass. A1 sucks.
I bought a Z9. It focused worse than my D850. I sold it.
Seemed to get to stage where the incremental differences in models was making it hard for some photographers to justify upgrading, i've known a few who were happy to stick with previous model and maybe miss one generation, or even use familiar cameras two generations old, so i guess manufacturers had to go with a big leap to convince people to upgrade.
Yeah there's no giant gap these days either. I bought an a7r2 a little over 2 months ago now and while it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of say the a7r4 which is the current one, it's still a damn good camera.
@D R it happened and faded away with Sony's A99II. The one system that allow users to use native lenses on film, DSLR & DSLT bodies with EVFs without the need for an adapter.
As long you don't do special things as astrophoto, taking good fotos is about the photographer not the gear!
It is like the mobile phone manufacturers, it’s great if consumer follow their yearly release schedule and keep spending year after year, but it doesn’t hurt them all that much if you only upgrade once every two or three years, because at any point in time, someone needs to have their cameras upgraded, it’s inevitable the camera manufacturers would keep minor updates with every release to make you feel your camera is “old” and need the latest tech.
@@lubricustheslippery5028 A photographer can only take good fotos if he/she can actually see what he is aiming at. If you only have a digital display at the back of the camera with a low resolution, or even a crappy slow electronic view finder with low resolution, you are going to have a very hard time taking good fotos. This only works if the camera is more or less point and shoot, doing all the settings automatically, in which case it is not the photographer but the camera taking the pictures. If the photographer is to be the one who is taking the photos, then a good view finder is absolutely paramount.
The Sony A9 has a stacked sensor and blazing auto-focus. It came out in 2017. Mirrorless didn't just now, in the past year, catch up and overtake SLRs. The reality is that they've been out long enough, and sold well enough, that the companies are willing to commit to the switch.
The A7III was really what changed things imo. Long battery life, fast autofocus, amazing low-light performance, affordable. It was just hard to argue against the results.
Good point. The A9 has been a DSLR killer for 5 years already! It just took CaNikon this long to catch up, like always. Sony many have officially killed their DSLRs last year, but every sane person has known they were dead for looooooong time.
@@logitech4873 The A7III came out 11 months and is essentially an A9 lite. Due to the A9II, you can now pick up a second hand original A9 for not too much more than the price of an A7III. I highly recommend it if you want speed and/or silent shooting on a relative budget, because it wipes the floor with the A7III (as well as every pro DSLR in existence).
@@edwardnoble9897 it came out April 2018
I went over to the dark side 8 years ago. Mirrorless is not without its flaws, especially in the earlier models (Sony A7R is a battery pig, Olympus EM1 has very ordinary AF for sports) but they still have some major advantages.
Picked up an old Nikon D700 and it's more than enough for me. FX sensor, glorious 12 MP files, built like a tank and best of all, only paid $300. It doesn't have all the latest features or gimmicks but it's a beast of camera for little money.
I'm sticking to my D90 for now. I simply can't afford the upgrade, and I still get great photos from it.
@@fr2ncm9 D90 is great
This was always going to happen. I love my DSLR but a I also loved my film SLR before it. I still have that camera but I haven't given it a thought in years. In due course I will no doubt buy a mirrorless and my Canon DSLR will join my little personal camera museum. Technology marches on.
yeah, me too. Im still holding on to my 2014 Canon 70D and 100D and almost all the STM lenses. I hope there will be more Sigma lenses coming out for the Fuji cause I feel Im headed that way of the mirrorless.
Your first love: SLR!
While there is no inherent problem with mirrorless cameras, I have one (personal) issue with them: I absolutely need an analog eyepiece. I can't stand it to use a display. It's just not the same. Plus, (and thats really just cosmetic) I love the mirror/shutter sound when I press the button.
You're not alone
I predict people with these requirements will either adapt or go into extinction. Pick one.
@@McSlobo Wow, you must be fun at parties....
@@McSlobo I choose to drop photography as a hobby if I can't get analog eye piece. Count it as extinction if you wish.
Indeed
The transition from DSLRs and Mirrorless has not been easy for some photographers but with the latest improvements on Autofocus performance, they will surpass the DSLRs for sure
I've got a Nikon F and F2. I love them both and still use them.
Big head
Full frame!😁
First interchangeable lense camera I bought was mirrorless, Canon's M50 Mark II.
Not worth giving up my collection of F Mount lenses from the the 70's and 80's, of which I still shoot in manual mode. Some of them I shot with film back in the day. Old habits die hard :)
Old GOOD habits die hard. 😉
Over the years I been in and out of photography. I've been out for a few years mainly because of the cost. When I shoot, I shoot with a Canon Rebel XTi and an Elan 7e. My favorite lens is an EF 17-35 2.8 USM L. I scan my negs on an Epson 750 Pro and call it a day. With today's economy, upgrading to mirroless is not an option. It's nice to know about the new technology but I recently had my niece ask me what kind of film camera should she buy. Using film is truly a dying skill.
I wrote to Sony when they first announced they bought out Minolta/Konica to find out if my old Hexanon lenses would fit their new Sony cameras. They told me no. Then I found out adapters were being made to fit virtually every type of lens on Olympus' new mirrorless cameras so I bought my first Olympus mirrorless with one lens back in 2013. I also bought an adapter so I could use my old Konica Hexanon AR mount lenses. Manual focus of course, just like my Konica film SLR so no big deal. You could do the same with your Nikon I imagine.
Been using my manual F mount lenses on a Sony A7 for years now. I found I prefere them on the A7 to my D700 or D800 only reason I bought the A7 was for manual focus lenses.
You say that, but the pictures I took in the 80's and 90's with Canon pro SLR's with red-line lenses on slide film are not nearly as sharp and detailed as a decent DSLR today, particularly when you consider that 99% of how you view photos will be on a computer screen. I say this because we just finished scanning our entire set of slides from that era (with a Nikon professional slide scanner) and there's really no point in scanning at anything greater than 400 dpi. There's simply no more information there. What I will give Kodachrome is it's dynamic range is far greater than a computer screen, so in that regard they were better, but it had nothing to do with the camera.
I still use my Canon T90 from time to time when I can get film either colour or BnW. I do my own developing and printing (BnW) still when I get time. The thrill never goes away producing an image you shot.
I use my T90 often. Too bad the Provia 100 I like to use with it is now $25 per roll!
Technology marches on. I love my D750 and I have no intention of replacing it for the foreseeable future. But I understand why the industry is moving in a certain direction.
Fine with me, means I can buy more lenses for my Canon EOS cameras cheaper. I'll be sticking with the EF platform until they're all dead - they take far better photos than I'll ever need already.
If the lens mounts on these mirrorless cameras is different to the DSLRs, that would be one reason some professionals who have very large sums of money tied up in lenses won't be switching any time soon. You might even see more specialist lens prices go up as users with heavy investments seek to round out their equipment.
As a photojournalism student back in the day, I lusted after the Nikon F2. I was finally able to afford an F3…and shot sports using manual focus. Not even the decent auto focus of the F4 (my favorite SLR) could do as well as I could focus manually. Of course a bright viewfinder was essential. Today, I use a D850 which is a lovely camera, and I can still use some of my older F-mount lenses. Unfortunately, I don’t shoot enough anymore to make buying an entire new mirror less system from scratch. Best to buy another D850 and hope they last as long as I do.
@@OKuusava F3 was a tough engine, designed to stand 100 000 to 400 000 shots, main difference.
@@OKuusava I disagree. I had an FM, FE2, followed by two F3s, an F4s, a N90/Kodak digital, a D1, a D2s, a D90, and a D850. The FE2 was a toy in comparison to the F3. The F3 was a beautifully functioning tank. I shot anywhere from 100 to 800 frames a day, at least five days a week, and the FE couldn’t possibly hold up under that kind of use. My F3 is sitting next to me as I write this and it’s still in perfect working order. My FE is in a box in the basement largely forgotten. The F3 wasn’t as beautiful or feel as perfect in the hand as the F4s, but it still had (motor drive attached) the comfortable, solid feel of professional tool. I can’t imagine trying to use an FE attached to a 400mm f/2.8. The viewfinder alone made the F3 a much superior camera.
Very nice video... At the 12 second mark when you bring the camera to your eye... You looked like Peter Hurley (one of my favourite portrait photographers)...
Camera sales are down dramatically including mirrorless…they’re just bleeding money at this point
Which is sad because mirrorless cameras are so amazing and easy to use, people intimidated by the (false) complexity are really missing out.
Everyone I know uses their iPhone for picture taking. I still have my Nikon FG from 1983. Haven't used it in years. Not sure if they still make batteries for it. Cheers.
@@shauny2285 Yes they do, you can get them at Walmart. LR44/SR44, I believe two of them stacked is what you need. I used to shoot with an FG, it's a great camera.
@@grahamfloyd3451 everyone carries a mirrorless camera in their pocket. Sometimes they get texts and phone calls on them.
@@shauny2285 The film industry is picking up again now, just as the DSLR camera market is dying due to phones. I was shooting 120 film on a 1935 Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta yesterday and it's so much more fun :-)
I treasure my Nikon DX40. Don’t use it as often now because I use my iPhone for quick shots like the grandkids, but for nature photos, close up shots of small objects or insects, it’s my go-to device. Won’t buy into the new technology. What I’ve got works just fine!
People also held onto SLR's when DSLR's started gaining traction. They'll come around eventually.
No film will ever compare favorably to good digital image devices and no film camera can match a 64 Gig memory card in film capacity. No one wants to develop film anymore, we have been enjoying doing without such delays for so long. I don't understand why losing the mirror movement keeps it from being a SLR. There is still only one lens. Ron W4BIN
@@W4BIN With no mirror there is no Reflex.
@@W4BIN Mirrorless cameras are technically just DSL cameras. Digital Single Lens. No longer Reflex.
Loved this. Waiting for the Fujifilm X-H2S review 😊
Great summary and well paced video.
It is a painful situation as many users haven't given up on DSLRs so sales will be down and the non professional will probably use the secondhand market. Could be why the contracting industry is focusing on professional kit and pushing full frame which is overkill for most hobbyists if the truth be known.
the camera market is not pushing anything. the customer decides. and the customer partially decided, that they use smart phones instead of APS-C. that is why FF stands out a bit more. APS-C has now a bit of a vlogger camera market, where you don't need FF all the time but want better quality than from a smart phone with an affordable amount of bokeh. i also do not think that it is a painful situation because you will be fine to upgrade and use the old lenses with an adaper. at least at nikon. and the Z9 shows, that the old DSLR lenses perform much better on the Z9 without front or back focus due to the new focusing system with the fast cpu. on a slower cpu, they did not perform that well (z6/7 I/II) this is why i am waiting for the Z6-III. nikon as other will produce old DSLRs as long as the customer wants it. but it is clear that they will fade out.
@@stefanweilhartner4415 The camera market is not pushing anything as a fact? That's a rare thing in the world of commerce nowadays. Do not forget the customer is forced to decide to buy what is available and these absolute statements are never really convincing. It works both ways. Using adapters are definitely not my cup of tea. We will see and I would not rule out aps-c yet. I use m43 myself which is affordable and compact. A Panasonic GX880 complete with the tiny excellent 12-32mm goes for £349 and I am not sure how much grasp full frame owners or the industry have of how tight people's budgets nowadays. The Nikon Z6 II body at £2,000 costs more than all my 3 m43 bodies did new. The full frame community does seem to be rather blasé at times about cost as a factor. it is difficult not to feel we are justifying our Ford Escort to a Ferrari owner. The Z9 should be good considering what it costs. You talk about all this expense for a bit more which is not convincing either.
@@michaeld5888 you don't have to go FF unless you need the bokeh or low light performance. it's not a philosophy or religious cult. it is simply about those facts. if you need/want it, you have to pay for it. digital FF never was cheap. i love to shoot 85mm at f/1.4. that is simply not possible with APS-C or m43
@@stefanweilhartner4415 50mm f1.4 or f1.2 on a Canon APSC will give 80mm Field of view. For $40, I adapted a 72-162mm f3.5 Vintage manual focus lens to my Canon APSC DSLR. I can get bokeh by simply increasing the focal length using zoom. And I can deepen the depth of field with a vintage "two field lens" I bought for $10. This will give instant "focus stacking"-like effect. Can't do that on a FF camera because the shallower depth of field of a FF camera is a liability. In low light situation? I can use in-camera multiple exposure or multiple exposure high-ISO noise reduction available on my APSC camera. Or just use a flash. FF is a also liability in MACRO.
@@stefanweilhartner4415 Consumers make the decision, but the companies manipulate the consumers’ decision.
5:53 I would disagree with the statement that mirrorless lenses are lighter, all the top pro level lenses are just as big & heavy as their DSLR equivalent as well as being far more expensive.
And in the case of Canon, even bigger and heavier
@@nickbailey202 Some of the Sony & Sigma lenses are too.
Ditto for Nikon. The Z mount lenses are enormous compared to the F mount ones. And the prices also reflect this fact.
Camera companies are bleeding money. This is just is way to revitalize their industry and sell you a whole new set of lenses.
It depends on the lens.
What about the issue of "noise" with longer low light exposures? With the CMOS "always on" - It seems to me this would add to heating of the CMOS chip thereby adding "noise" to longer exposure - low light shots?
from an old photographer, started in 1969...this is pretty interesting, thanks so much, Paul in Florida
That was… awkward at best. It sounded more like you were reading sales literature than researching and shooting the cameras.
this
That's all he was paid to do i guess..a relic of promo advertising from the television days.
How could anybody believe after the introduction of the digital CCD that this wouldn’t happen? The whole point of the moving-mirror SLR is gone.
DVFs suck. The point isnt gone its exactly where it was in the original design i.e. getting light from the subject into your eye.
What about heat? I know a couple of years ago, some of the early mirror less cameras suffered from over heating. I'm sure they have improved on that but I'm sure that's a limitation maybe on lower tiera
I've got one foot in each camp like so many of us, partly because I have some nice F-mount glass and still shoot film as well. I really love my Z7 but have not even seriously considered it for motorsports which is the main action shooting I do. However the aging workhorse D750 body I had kept using for that and as a general backup body just died and my even older beloved D3 is pretty well obsolete though it still functions. Really interested to see what may land between the Z7-II and Z9 in terms of capability and price point as the Z9 is obviously tough to justify for many of us
There is nothing inherent to a DLSR that makes it bad for video. It is just the companies needed something new for people to move their gears along so they put all the effort and new tech into the mirrowless products. It is a bit of a shame they will not update DSLRs with the new tech because they are synonamous with "old". I actually believe there is something EVF simply cannot replace in a OVF. OVF looked more natural than EVF and it reminded me what my photographs should look like (I prefer realistic lighting). EVF shows what the world looks like after processing through the sensor and processor and reproducing lightining condition becomes more challenging. It is still a matter of personal preference. Both types of cameras are fantastic for shooting. I don't believe mirrowless is cheaper if you consider the whole system. Lens designed for mirrowless are way more expensive than DSLR lenses. I hope DSLRs will make a comback after mirrowless had made their big splash.
the more expense of mirrorless is actually just more profit for the manufacturer; this is after all a business.
Wrong any SLR camera has to compromise the optics to get the mirror in between the lens and the film/sensor. You cannot break the laws of physics and this is one of those occasions. It's why rangefinders and twin lens cameras where a thing. The digital viewfinders are now sufficiently good that the advantage of compromising your optics to get an optical viewfinder don't make any sense, and the inevitable consequence is they stop being produced.
@@jonathanbuzzard6648 Live view is used by dlsr to capture video. Mirror is not even in the way of light transmission. Both types of cameras literally use the same mechanism to record video. It is just that better hardware and algorism was allocated to new mirrorless products because they could only concentrate on one. Lack of chips to make camera... Watch the video.
@@Guoenyi you simply don't understand and are hence wrong. With a camera with a mirror the first element of the lens has to be further from the film/sensor to allow for the mirror to swinge out of the way when taking an image or video. This is an inescapable truth of reflex mirror cameras. This increased distance between the film/sensor and the first element of the lens means that the optical quality achievable is degraded compared to a similar setup with no mirror and the lens closer to the film/sensor. You simply cannot break the laws of physics and this is one of those occasions. It's an obscure bit of optical lens theory that most people don't know. Doesn't make it any less true however.
@@jonathanbuzzard6648 I find it funny you keep talking physics but you don't care to elborate what that physics is. You see. I happen to know a bit of physics. Yes a shorter FBD can reduce chromatic aberration. So can a smaller aperture. The improvement in image quality is so marginal. I my post was never about the "physics" because it was not the differenciating factor as you make it out to be. DSLR never had the opotunity to get good full time AF when filming and none of that fancy intellengent tracking system. Mirrorless took that oppotunity away. That is way more important for hybrid shooters picking up mirrorless to do video and photo work.
I do a lot of night shooting and I can tell you that I will be able to compose the image through my optical finder LONG after your EVF is showing you a black square. I've used both types of machines and I know this.
I do a lot of day shooting and i can tell you thag i will be able to find a complete set of second hand lenses LONG before you earn enough to buy that fast 50
Owning an A7III, that's basically BS. The camera has better night vision than any human.
And that’s an argument for what? Illustrating 1 advantage that you have in one niche area of photography means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things. You should absolutely use the tool best suited for the 1 job you are doing, doesn’t stop that tool from being inferior overall to mirror less.
so will the D and G nikon lenses work on mirrorless or will i have to buy a completely new system?
I want help bro….i already have iPad 10 that record 4K 60fps video but I want to take a camera bcoz we can’t take the iPad in public and record something…so what’s ur opinion?
Although Dslr are slowly dying, I notice at over 90% of people using dedicated cameras still use dslrs, so I still think they have some time left
Those are mainly people who’ve already purchased them years ago, and are still using them. Not everyone is jumping to the latest and greatest, so it makes sense that you will see them often. The fact is that very few are actually still buying DSLRs, and especially if they’re doing research before purchasing a dedicated camera. Mirrorless cameras have been outselling DSLRs for a few years already, and the trend is not looking like it will slow down any time soon.
@@AbdonPhirathon most of the time those cameras are fujifilms and Sony Alpha 7 sold to casuals and street photographers if we are being realistic. Weeding photographers, sport photographers , landscaper, etc most of the time use DLSRs. Personally I like DLSRs more than mirrorles because of the feeling, simplicity and looks of it. Most of us like the cameras with the biggest amount of buttons, etc. Mirrorless might have some features that might sound great like top notch sound, fancy a displays, but being honest those features are rarely used, even videographers will buy a cinema camera rather than a Mirrorless for their projects.
@@Sebastian_Astudillo In my city, most of the working professionals, including myself are already using Mirrorless. I can count 3 that do not, but most people are in the process of switching if not already transitioned into Mirrorless. Obviously, this is not representative of all the photographers in the U.S, but I doubt that other places are far behind. In my corporate event team, 5 out of 6 are already using Mirrorless. On the Wedding/Sweet16 scene there are mostly Canon RF/Sony FE shooters with a couple of Nikon Z shooters. Then there are two other photographers I’ve seen still using DSLRs because they’re older and prefer OVFs. Also, most of the videographers in my city have been using Mirrorless as well. Cinema cameras are quite expensive, and not everyone requires all the features to make Wedding films and such. We’re past that threshold already, and it’s only going to continue.
@@AbdonPhirathon same here in Modesto and surrounding cities
They can sell you a new set of lenses and change more per lens. Genius!
Agree mostly, except for one point: an EVF will never be, can never be, "superior" to a optical viewfinder, not optically anyway. It's like saying a TV image of the sunset is superior to what you see through your eyes as you watch the actual sun go down on an actual beach. The EVF can be superior in terms of functionality, things like uninterrupted view during rapid shooting, and live monitoring of exposure But no image on any digital screen can ever be as good as what you see with direct vision.
These talking points sound great and all for action shots, but would it matter at all for macro photography? I have an ancient D3100 with a Helios lens from '82 and macro tube ring addons, but don't see how an upgrade would give better shots.
It entices only in the social media, DSLR is still king, I love my Pentax!!!
Just wait a little bit longer and Pentax will be the number one DSLR seller! And that's not a joke.
I was an old 35mm SLR devotee back in the 50's to 90's.....then in the late 90's I went digital with a Nikon compact and my latest is the (pre loved) Olympus OMD10E micro 4/3 and the 12-150 zoom tele lens.......I'm not a believer in the full frame DSLR ....lenses are too bulky and dammed expensive....anything with less moving parts is the way to go so I went with the micro 4/3 Olympus as Olympus make dammed fine cameras.
Any recommendations from this group for good low light DSLRs or low light point and shoots? The one thing I give phone cameras credit for is being able to take natural looking shots indoors or in late afternoon. My old DSLR has to crank up the flash every time for those situations, which make for very artificial looking photos.
Can mirrorless be modded for capturing infrared or UV like DSLRs?
I wish hybrid viewfinder would be a thing. I still prefer optical viewfinders. It just feels much more relaxing on the eye. Since transparant screens are a thing. It would be nice to have an open optical viewfinder with the ability to close the light from the lens off to just show the electronical one.
It doesn't seem impossible to put an optical viewfinder on a mirrorless camera, does it? It'd need a moving part or two, but I don't see why they can't put the two together.
@@Max.Paprika The part it would need is a mirror.
@@Max.Paprika Lmao
Fujifilm have some cameras with hybrid viewfinders, I have one, barely ever use the optical part though, the digital is superior in every way. The refresh rates are so high now that digital viewfinders are superior to optical.
Well I think this is a massive mistake..,I have a new mirrorless and it’s sadly disappointed me in use I am going to sell it and find another DSLR …yes speed is just absolutely is the biggest issue…they need to stay with both versions for the different styles that photographers use..,and Battery is another major issue…I have just finished a 2 month road trip around Canada and gave up trying to use my Nikon Mirrorless…especially in fast spotting situations which in my way of photographing is how I get my shirts, on the move and fast…it just can’t keep up and everything ends up distorted…tried every setting…I gave up and used my iPhone which can’t get distant shots….
THX I was thinking of getting another D850 as a backup at the moment have a mirrorless camera ( LEICA) but that''s another story .A Z9 doesn't interest me really not into video although the Sony point and shoot cameras that i've used are quite good just to quickly grab vids on the go.Don't need anything higher than 4k.The main task for me is to GO and find images that's all I seek.
OK I have a LOT of Nikon leses are those gong to be usable with these new camera bodies? ( pls say yes)
I tried out a sony A6000 for a while and wasn't impressed. Switching to a Nikon dx DSLR was a massive improvement. The problem is the lens sizes; they shink them down to match the size of the camera body, so they don't let in enough light, performing a whole sensor size category worse than expected. On the telephoto side you also had 100mm of max focal length less to work with... maybe things are better in the FF realm but the experience didn't convince me that mirrorless was "the future".
have you tried Nikon DX with 17-55mm f2.8 lens?
@@dr.franxx went straight for the sigma 18-35mm f1.8
Er, no. You can even get f0.85 lenses now for M4/3. The smaller sensors actually make it easier to produce brighter lenses.
@@trijezdci4588 that's f1.7 in full frame equivalent terms... not that big a deal
The biggest reason is many people have turned into a hybrid shooter working on both photography and videography. Video features from a midrange camera like the Fuji XT4 are vastly superior to anything any DSLR camera could ever provide and this camera can also do still very decently.
Wait, a 3000$ camera is mid-range? 😶
@@mbogucki1 Where on earth do you live so that you have somehow doubled the price?
@@mbogucki1 the XT4 doesn't cost $3000
@@stevess7777 Toronto. Fujifilm X-T4 with XF 16-80mm is $2,969.99. Granted I just did a quick Google search but they all seem to be in that range. Its $2200 or so without a lens.
@@mbogucki1 $2200 Canadian is $1700 USD. Yes, that's midrange.
The Nikon F eclipsed the Leica M-series rangefinder about 60 years ago and we are now going full circle back to a mirrorless, more compact form factor. And, the M mount successfully segued to the digital age so is it technically going to outlive the F mount?
I have been involved in digital photography for 15 years, I started with Pentax DSLR's and own some of the older models going back to the K10D and more new ones, all k3 models, the K1 MKII and a Kp, to expand my photography experience over the years I have added cameras from Panasonic ,Olympus and Fujifilm. Some of the photographer's on KZhead are saying that the modern day cameras have sterilized the photography experience long story short after using film cameras for years before digital photography i would not use film but the Digital SLR's that I have give me a more organic photograph experience than a mirrorless camera.i have enough DSLR'S to last me till I die .
For auto focus performance, mirrorless has caught up in speed. While on-sensor phase detect is less accurate since it is measuring phase differences across a space of a few microns, they have refined it with a closed loop phase detect and contrast detect system. With faster processors, they have gotten that process to a speed that matches or is close to matching that of separate phase detect modules, while offering the sharpest focus. Beyond that, it also eliminated the need for extensive lens calibration if you want the max sharpness that your lens has to offer. With a separate phase detect module, you need to calibrate the lens at multiple subject distances to correct for any nonlinear or manufacturing tolerances related issues. With mirrorless, since the phase detect plane is at the same level as the focal plane, the closed loop PDAF system automatically corrects for that. Beyond that, the eye auto focus is hard to pass up on mirrorless, and far outweighs any current downsides. While lens calibration issues have been largely solved, calibration is still an option for edge cases where a lens design may cause certain wavelengths of light to to not be handles well, and cause phase detect to not get the focus close enough for the contrast detect stage to take over and refine the focus. This is common with poorly corrected lenses. One example of this is the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 G DX lens. it is a poorly corrected budget optic (far worse than the cheaper Canon 35mm f.1.8). The optical elements caused strange focal shifts across the visible spectrum, The end result is on cameras that didn't automatically compensate for it, would exhibit behavior such as back focusing on low color temperature and low CRI lighting, and slightly front focusing at higher color temperatures. For a number of their cameras, in the D7xxx range, they included corrections for it. for example the D7000, D7100, D7200, and D7500 corrected for it, but the D5xxx series didn't even though they used the same AF modules, Nikon chose to not include all of the correction data when they disabled the AF fine tune function (disabled in the UI but left enabled in the firmware where if you could find their service center software, you could connect the camera over USB and recalibrate the AF to fix those issues. This lead to many issues with their budget line because many people were put off by poor indoor picture quality due to bad focusing, and no calibration options in the GUI.
Phase detection systems work by angles: they actually work better when there is less distance between angled sensors.
Nobody is gonna read your copy and paste article.
on-sensor PDAF doesn't automatically correct for focus offset, it doesn't have any offset.
@@edwardnoble9897 That is the major benefit of the technology. The only extra step that takes place is an additional contrast detect step. Since it only operates within an extremely narrow range, there is virtually no delay. Overall, it allows for better accuracy than older phase detect only methods. Before that, even DSLR models such as the Nikon D850 what had an extremely good track record for their build quality, would all show some issues due to the tolerances when tested with applications such as FoCal.
On-sensor is more accurate than a mirror-based system, where the distance between the mirror and the sensor is subject to certain tolerances - hence the need to calibrate lenses for DSLRs which no longer exists with mirrorless cameras.
I own both a D500 and D850 plus a slew of fast F mount glass from 17mm up to 500mm. If I was buying a new camera today, I would definitely go mirrorless. But what I currently own gives me all the essential features I need for the foreseeable future.
I still use a D3 and D800 professionally. Would love a D5 and D810 or D850 as I also have several pro grade lenses and what I have works great 98% of the time.
The D850 is still better than many mirrorless. I'll keep mjne. :)
@@ddmarty I agree and the reason why I will buy another.
@@Design_no "ANOTHER"!? You beast!! I would love to have another one as a back up, but, unless they come down to under $1800, no dice. And I'm not buying a used one.
@@batsonelectronics Just got a D800E, I have a D700 also and I continue to complete my F-system with AFS 24-70mmF2.8 E VR and AFS 70-200mmF2.8 E VR and I need to replace a AF 300mmF2.8 IF-ED screw drive with 400-500mm VR lens. Next camera will be a Z8 or D850 if Z8 is a bad landscape camera
I can't find an excellent mirrorless camera that isn't for vlogging. I am hoping to plane spot and need a stable shot as well. Should I get the Canon Rebel SL3 plus an excellent lens or add another 2000$ to my budget and get the mirrorless equivalent.
I hope Pentax (Ricoh) is paying attention, this could be a way back in for them. I still have one of their K-01 mirrorless digital cameras, it's one of the oddest-looking cameras ever made but surprisingly capable.
Nikon just put out a report that Nikon is still producing existing DSLRs for market demand and supporting / servicing them. The youtube message that came out recently elsewhere about the end of DSLRs for Nikon was partly in error. Nikon will most likely continue focusing on developing mirrorless and not develop many newer DSLR models but they will continue to produce existing DSLRs for now for market demand. There is also the point among several reviewers on KZhead that a lot of pros like using OVFs. More than half the user base still use DSLRs so Nikon is not abandoning this market. Personally, I think Nikon should give us an updated D780ii with z6ii sensor and dual processors and with IBIS in body stabilization, as the current D780 has the Z6 PDAF sensor inside and has BSI, but no IBIS and they should make a D880 with the Z7ii inside for people who like using the D850. There is a market there. I bought the D780 and love it!! Do I want to buy all new Z lenses. No, not really. DSLRs are not dead, just shrinking in sales as mirrorless grows. DSLRs in still photo mode use phase detect which is very fast to focus and track action, compared to some mirrorless models (except maybe the top expensive advanced models like Z9.) Some pros like the bigger body, long battery life and lots of external buttons, which make the DSLRs fast and enjoyable to use for pros and they want to continue using there FF lenses they already own.
OVFs only really get defended by photographers who don't own a decent/modern mirrorless cameras. PDAF has been in mirrorless cameras for nearly a decade now and since the Sony A9 AF has been way faster and more advanced (tracking & eye-AF) than all the best pro DSLRs for 5 years already. DSLRs are dead as a viable product right now, it just took Canon & Nikon a while to catch up. DSLR prices will drop like a stone soon. I don't think Nikon will produce any new DSLRs, they need to save money and DSLRs just don't make financial sense to them any more.
@@edwardnoble9897 Only Sony's A-mount DSLR/DSLT is dead. DSLRs by Canon, Sony and Pentax are still very much alive in 2022 From Jan-May 2022, 747,683 DSLRs were shipped worldwide. What got killed by Apple & Android phones are the Compact (mirrorless) cameras and MFT (micro four thirds) MILC (Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Cameras). Olympus is sold to a Fund Management Company. Panasonic-Lumix MFT "mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Cameras" got killed too. Since DSLRs made by Canon, Nikon and Pentax were NEVER in MFT format, DSLRs are NOT killed. From Jan-May 2022, DSLR sales in USA is 95% of same period 2021 - 5% drop because of some semiconductor shortage and temporary disruption due to Nikon's relocation of camera factory to Thailand.
@@set3777 Now compare that to numbers from 15 years ago and tell me again the DSLR's aren't dead.
You have no idea what you're talking about. The most expensive DSLR has significantly worse AF accuracy than even a cheapest entry level mirrorless cameras because of the antiquated flapping mirror. Why would you make such a long a long winded comment that says so little?
@@evrythingis1 NOT TRUE, Modern Canons DSLRs have 2 AF systems - one for the OVF and another for the Live-view. The AF system for the live-view are the same as their "mirrorless" cameras. The AF through the Optical view finders makes use of dedicated AF sensors lying flat under the translucent mirror of the camera. Since AF through the OVF has dedicated sensors and not using the image sensors, they are actually much faster. Have you heard of DSLRs users complaining of camera overheating or eye-sore and headache & low resolution of EVF?
While I love my D810 and plan to keep shooting with it as long as possible it really doesn’t make much sense in this day and age to continue building cameras on a framework that was designed for film.
True. Mirrorless film bodies (except those view cameras) have at least 2 main limitations: pain in the a** for using zoom and tele lens. That's why in photojournalists in the 1960s switched from Leica M to Nikon F system. Of course the digital mirorless don't pose such limitations anymore. Why keep the mirror box, then?
In other words, the discontinuation of DSLR was long overdue. It should have been gone the same time with film-based SLR.
@@shooting4star2023 rubbish
The SLR wasn't designed for film (which had been around for ever) - it was designed for interchangeable lenses. Whatever lens you put on - and however you focused it - and whatever you put on the lens - and however much you stopped it down, etc. - you could see the exact image that would make it on to the film. And you weren't looking at a laggy pixelated screen or draining a battery.
@D R That is what I like best about DSLRs. Even with landscapes it’s so nice to be able to look through the viewfinder as the light changes without having to wake up an EVF. I debate between getting a D850 or mirrorless for my next serious camera.
4:16 What's going on with the wonky sensor mount?
As an olympus user hoping to upgrade from E5 to a newer oly model. Big thing putting me off is I've already had to change most of my lenses due to olys ridiculous change in lens mount from film to digital and now to jump to micro 4/3 means another lens change. Even the 4/3 to micro adapter is still silly money for the enthusiast and as its now discontinued by oly themselves so I'm at the mercy of 2nd hand or 3rd party. Suggestions?
Olympus is hardly unique in changing lens mounts - look at the list of canon and nikon mounts to navigate when trying to use an older lens on a newer body. You certainly have waited a long time to do an update!
@@markhoffman9655 thanks for the info. I am disabled on small income and any big purchases take a lot of savings and now with cost of living crisis V my dereriating health if I don't seriously think about doing it now I never will. I like my E5 but find is getting old tech now compared to the advances over the last few years. Also it maybe either a tech or an age issue, I have to do a lot of 2nd guessing as raw taken shot on preview screen is not always as accurate when viewed on PC. It also sometimes has a mind of its own and I have a hell of a job getting usable images. From what I gather is not unknown with digital cameras. I'd appreciate your thoughts.
I love my Nikon DSLR bodies. They helped me back into a medium that I love. But I also got a Z50 and started seeing why Nikon went the route they have. I'll be sticking to mirrorless for work from here on. I'll hold onto my DSLR bodies for different reasons and thankfully people are dumping off their old gear. It'll be less expensive to find those nice lenses for next to nothing. (:
I have both systems here as well. Various Nikon DSLRs including a Nikon D6 and D850, but also three Nikon Z series - including the Z9. Unless Nikon comes out with news of another DSLR soon, I'll be entirely selling out of the Nikon DSLR gear
@@ronaldckrausejr7762 Wow a total dump off?
It has little if anything to do with the picture taking ability of DSLRs and everything to do with marketing, the current economy and Nikon's failure to stay current iin regards to what video capabilities were expected. If you are not interested in video then DSLRs are as useful as any tool and in some cases are the better tool (EVFs still leave a lot to be desired).
Agreed, I prefer using DSLRs for professional photos. Mirrorless is fine for lightweight video users. Camera manufacturers like mirrorless because they are less expensive to produce so profits in new tech in higher in the shrinking market of camera users. Pros love DSLRs and may buy a mirrorless as second camera. Consumers just want light cameras for travel and family.
@@adrianvanleeuwen Mirrorless cameras see tons of use as primary cameras for professionals.
Strange how we progress, I am 70, when 15 I developed my own from 35mm film then moved to a SLR (film) then to a kodak digital, then a digital SLR. Now I still like photography but dont want to carry a load of gear as I always carry a camera so moved to a Nikon pocket camera which in conjunction with photoshop I can get results that satisfy me. P.S. I still have an old Victo (c1900) with the black cloak and expanding bellows, and uses glass plate film (never used it)
noticed a shelve behind the man with some classic macs at the beggining)
The battery point always felt a bit moot anyway since extra batteries tend to be one of the smallest and cheapest parts of my kit.
Added to that, the batteries on the big DSLR cameras are typically double the size of one that goes in a mirrorless body anyway!
Yes I carry extra batteries already with DSLRs. It is not like they are difficult to bring anyway... Yes it is a bit annoying having to charge them more often but it is really not worth mentioning as a problem.
When you go on extended backpacking trips battery life becomes very important. The CIPA ratings don't work that well in real life as I've never gotten 1350 shots off of 1 battery. The CIPA rating for mirrorless is half that of DSLR, and genuine batteries are somewhat expensive when you have to buy 5-6 of them to match DSLR performance. For me having the option to photograph during backpacking is more important than having cool mirrorless features, despite the fact that I don't backpack 90% of the time. If I could afford it I would own both a mirrorless system and a DSLR system. Nikon EN-EL15 battery is $69, I would need 6 in total to match my DSLR, that's 474 grams of batteries (1lb).
@@uniktbrukernavn Where are you going you need to take 1000+ shots and you cannot recharge them at the end of the day?
@@Guoenyi I just came back from a 2 week long backpacking/canoe trip to Sweden. There aren't any outlets in the wilderness. I took around 700 photos + 50 short video clips and I had 2 bars left on my last battery, 3 batteries in total. This is why the CIPA rating is theoretical and not real world. It's not possible to bring all my camera gear on a trip like this because of the weight.
it's crazy how far mirrorless cameras came in just a few years....
Yes it is and thankfully so.
they’re a bit too expensive tho, some of them cost as much as a house in some parts of europe, that’s ridiculous, a price disruption needs to happen in the camera space
That's what she said 🙂
Yet depressing how little anonymous cowardice has improved.
@@Archonsx no camera costs nearly as much as a house. A good prosumer camera costs less then $2000. That’s two months rent in most big cities around the world, especially in Europe.
What is the intro song at 0:53 ?? So good!
i think the biggest issue with DSLR's is they eventually break, it might take 150,000 shutter clicks before it happens, but it's mechanical so it will eventually fail, i just bought a Canon 90D a few months ago, i love it, i didnt like the mirrorless versions, they felt weird in my hands and i just liked the 90D chunkiness better, espeically with a battery grip on it, and with the battery grip , the thing shoots for a whole week without needing charged, ive accidentally left it on for a few days and only lost about 35% lol, but i'm not a pro, i'm just a regular guy who enjoys photographing bugs and flowers and nature and animals and stuff, so i dont care that much about super perfect auto focus or 90 million frames a second or whatever, the 90D is gonna be fine for me for a long time, probably until it just stops working tbh, i'll probably be forced to buy/use mirrorless eventually though , kinda like when CRT PC monitors and televisions all went away, progress is progress, and cellphones are kind of killing the camera world and i think it's also killing photography in general (not just cell phones, social media is doing cameras in also, everyone wants videos now, nobody wants to look at pictures, they want moving photographs, film is barely hanging on, and digital is okay for now i think but i think as phones keep getting better it could cause some issues (my current phone has 5 bloody cameras on it FIVE! it's totally insane) it's kind of funny i still carry my 90D around and even though i got a 1200$ (us) phone with 5 cameras on it, i still like the 90d way better.
3:41 - not true, batteries aren’t a problem on a Sony A7r4. For example, I shot an event on Sunday from 9-5pm almost non-stop, taking 1700 shots on just one battery. Sure, a DSLR would have more charge left over, but to suggest there’s any kind of problem with modern Sony’s is fanciful.
plus, if I was shooting anything important, I would carry extra batteries regardless.
I have a D500 and I would still love to have a D850
I'm saving for a D850
The d850 is a great camera, and is a tank. I take it hiking and backpacking all the time. The weight is not a problem.
@@DC-cj9se I'm getting old so I may have to take a Fuji X-T1 or Pro 1 on long walks. But for serious work the D850 and in the future Z8 or Fuji GFX 50Sii will also be good to use.
Save up for it man. You won't regret it. I went from a D7200 to a D850 and wouldn't take anything for it. It has better dynamic range than a Hassleblad XD100. It's still ranked in the top 3 by DxOMark. This camera is a beast. And with people going mirrorless, it's only going to drive the price down.
@@ddmartyI don’t do video but if Z8 is 55 Mix its interesting (for printing A2 without using an AI enlargement program) but it’s also a matter of cost. I'm going to get AFS 24-70mmF2.8 E VR and AFS 70-200mm E VR first then hopefully I can afford a D850 or a Z8 but that will take longer to save too. Regarding the HB, I thinking of getting a used Fuji GFX 50Sii camera and adapters for my HB and Mamiya 7 lenses after I upgraded my Nikon equipment.
I just bought a new Nikon D3400 DSLR camera last month! Now what am I supposed to do...? 😭 I need advice. (I'm a complete beginner in photography. Nikon D3400 is the first camera I've ever bought)
You keep taking photos. Don't worry about the gear of you're new
Man, I remember buying semi new 35mm Nikon stuff just because it felt so cool to open the gold boxes lol Nikon knew what they were doing
I dabble in wild life photography, as an amateur. Started with film. I do miss the days when the battery for the light meter lasted 7 years. Now a days i dread the "Wow what kind of phone did you use to take that photo?" comment. Doesn't seem to long ago i was reading some tech article about how phone technology was going to eliminate dedicated camera systems. I recall thinking wow the writer of the article really dose not understand the purpose of interchangeable lenses, and must only take selfies. Now phones are starting to come festooned with multiple focal length lenses. My DSLR has this really neat feature where the mirror and shutter can be locked in the up position bypassing the mirror. Yea i don't think the tech geeks understand the full purpose of the analog mirror. I really see no reason all that advanced mirrorless tech can't be stuffed into a DSLR. Nope the mirror isn't going to disappear entirely.
The mirror is going to disappear in new cameras entirely because of cost. It has nothing to do with what you could do. It has all to do with what it would cost. Cost is even more important as there are fewer and fewer people buying cameras as more and more people seem to be satisfied with taking pictures on their smart phones. As a result, the camera manufacturers have fewer and fewer customers, so they need to focus on that which has the best cost/performance ratio. And that means mirrors will completely disappear. They will likely remain a feature on many medium format cameras for much longer, but even there, manufacturers have started to offer mirrorless cameras and mirrors will eventually disappear there, too.
I mean to be fair, as soon as I activate the GPS on my DSLR, the long battery life and just leaving it on by default is already out of the window.
Why do u need to activate it in the first place. Its a useless tool. Keep it off and enjoy.
@@Bardamu3000 because it makes finding and organising pictures easier
I own a Canon DSLR with four lenses. Would I be able to use the same lenses on a new mirrorless model?
I upgraded to a Z6 mirrorless camera last year. I like all the bells and whistles, but I miss the optical viewfinder and speed of taking that initial shot
5:39 top notch audio capabilities and more (with a big external mic). I think top notch audio has been possible with DSLR and mirrorless for a long time, you just have to pay for it, and carry it, and know how to use it. I don't think people realize how much fuzz it is to get decent audio, you're not popping a mic on top of your rig in the middle of some random event; let me just plug in the cable, adjust the gain, where's the dead cat...alright you guys can do the spontaneous thing again, I'm ready to record it for posterity. Later that day; Audacity time. Just one click away from making your audio sound like it was recorded in the room next door.
I must admit despite all this I still want to purchase the Canon 90D and Nikon D780 and Nikon D750
I bought the D780 and is has the Z6 sensor inside with 2 focusing system and BSI. The BSI sensor gives larger files in Raw than my D750 so it records more details. I love my D780!
I have D780, prior to purchasing it I did research whether i should get mirrorless but I still find it D780 works for me better.
Any benefits over the D800?
Very nice presentation and explanation
I've been wanting a mirror less camera and I think now is the time to get one. They have improved so much since 2014. I think it's time to put away my D3300 😔
One thing no one ever mentions. Professional wedding photographers, like me, won’t switch to mirror less until they find a way to make a focusing assist lamp work on a flash. In low level light, like dancing in near darkness, all mirrorless cameras cannot focus fast enough for quick flash shots. My DSLRs focus nearly instantaneously, while my Z6 cannot even come close to matching it.
One of my D810's broke today and i have to replace it by the weekend. The the focus assist light is so good, will it not work on a Z camera?
I NEVER focused with my wedding business. I can shoot in barely lit scenes. I know my fStop & depth of field. I set my focus to the desired distance usually 6 or 12 feet, compose and shoot. No focus required
Modern mirrorless cameras have basically instant autofocus. What are you on about?
Sounds like you haven't tried a mirrorless in the last 3 years.
I own a Nikon Z6ii, and and it focuses very fast in fairly low light. But I assure you it will not focus fast enough in dim light like you find in reception dancing. And the focus assist lamp on my SB800 flash will not illuminate. The flash will fire every time before the camera can achieve focus and the images will all be soft.
I see no reason to switch to mirrorless except for maybe video. Now there are some great bargains on used DSLR's. Best time to pick one up!
Are you shooting on a Panasonic, cause the Eye AF is terrible?
I have a Canon EOS R. It teams well with EF-mount Canon image stabilizing lenses. The in-body stabilization cleans up what the lens does not.
But the R doesn't have IBIS. You thinking about its usage of electronic stabilization?
@@gameshoes - Yes, the R has digital image stabilization. Most Canon EF lenses have physical image stabilization built in.
Now is an excellent time to grow up and buy a quality dslr. So many of them are going on the market because everyone who fancies themselves a photographer and there are alot of us are busy making sure they don't get left behind. You can get a world class 850 in excellent condition with battery grip tripod, lenses, bag, batteries, flash, acceleromete,r and filters for about 4k usd the whole schlameel. You can't even get a full frame camera body for that in mirrorless. Ninety percent of photographers have no valid reason for upgrading their gear only their skills. But someone has to lead the sheep to the shed how else are they going to get sheared.
Baa baa baa...
A mirrorless camera like the A7iv, R6 and Z6-ii allows you to shoot both photo and video without needing to buy 2 separate cameras for those purposes. You're forgetting that back then, Canon didn't included amazing video features in their 5D series because they wanted the consumers to buy their cinema cameras. Now today, its worth paying $2,500 u.s. dollars for a hybrid mirrorless camera that can capture great photo and record amazing 4K videos with the fast accurate autofocus. Even for your average user, mirrorless is still better because with Eye-AF, they just point that camera at the person and capture away. You stick with your old DSLR while pro photographers moves on with the best gears because they know how much more efficient and convenient mirrorless cameras has done for their workflow.
@@harryvuemedia5106 most modern dslr do both video and stills I can't recall the last camera release that didn't. Correction I just realized my d700 doesn't capture video amazing photos for a 16 year old 12 megapuxel camera, in the right hands of course. The fact remains that something In the order of ninety five percent of the pictures and video taken recently or in the future will never become part of the global art portfolio and by this I mean the works that will endure for generations. The number if slots available for that kind of photography are very limited. If you are silly enough to believe that likes on Instagram make you an artist then you carry on. in two or three years the camera industry will sell you the next six thousand dollar camera that will take your work to the next level. May I sugest you start saving now.
@@harryvuemedia5106 my studio made 87k usd last year total I dont take pictures digitally I use a homemade 8x10 view camera all my lighting equipment is home made my business cards are scraps of paper I jot my phone number on. my usual customer pays between 3k and 5kusd and I average two sessions a month. By the time I subtract development printing and framing I take home 50 52k maybe. A wooden box with a lens and a bellows is how I make a living. The thing I noticed about your response is that you need the camera to do everything for you, one can only assume that this is because you don't know how to. Any how good luck with your new camera.
@@carlosenriquez2092 🎯
My hesitation to switch has always been the lack interchangeable lenses and having a viewfinder. This doesn’t seem to be an issue anymore. The new specs are astronomical compared to when I purchased my D80.
Almost every platform has an adapter to their prior glass system, so using your old glass really isn't a problem. I shoot with the R5 and use the EF 100-400 over the RF 100-500 simply because it's a better lens (f4.5-5.6 vs f4.5-7.1). I think some of these new mirrorless lenses were a little too in a hurry to get out the door, but others just knocked it out of the park.
@@AustinRoss after watching this video I see you’re right I was blown away by some of those specs, being able to use my “old” lenses is a definite bonus too
Thank you for your video
Interesting that the more power consuming mirrorless are replacing more efficient DSLRs in an energy focused modern world.
DSLRs are mute? Hogwash. There's an active market for used DSLRs, and new ones still sell everyday at Amazon & B&H. Yes, mirrorless has benefits. No one argues otherwise. They are lighter and have vastly superior focus systems. However, I've yet to meet an EVF that doesn't have at least some lag, even in high performance, super battery-draining mode. People with older eyes, whose vision might not be the greatest, still benefit from an OVF. With an OVF one need only adjust the diopter to read read viewfinder. With an EVF you have to continually fiddle with the diopter adjustment to get the image in focus---to your eyes, not the camera. I also believe DSLRS, especially prosumer and pro bodies, are vastly more rugged than their mirrorless counterparts. If I'm going into a rugged environment, I'm still picking my 1DX over my R6, despite the increase in weight.
Take a mirror less camera with an EVF in to the mountains of Montana and trying to capture action will be challenging do to lag in the view finder itself and the refresh of OLED is impacted negatively by cold. Not the case with my DSLR with an OVF. Additionally the cold weather tends to pull batteries down a lot faster, my mirror less Cameras battery life has been knocked down my as much as 75% in the mountains. I have never even noticed a difference with my DSLR. And personally I want to see through the lens, no matter how fast the make it, the conversion of light to an electrical signal the send to the EVF and back to light, will always have more lag then the light going straight into your eye.
@@anthalas9 Oh, I agree with all your points.
@@michaeltuffin8147 sorry, if I sounded argumentative, because I completely agree with yours as well. I just wanted to pile on from my own experiences.
@@anthalas9 That "lag" hardly exists and literally doesn't matter when the cameras can all shoot at 20 frames per second and higher. What's the weight of an extra battery vs the extra weight of the DSLR, it's extra huge lenses, not to mention it's flappy mirror which is the number one point of failure in harsh weather conditions? It sounds like you are either using old crappy mirrorless camera, or trying to justify the money you've suck into DSLRs. You're talking about shooting wildlife in Montana but don't mention things like animal tracking phase detection algorithms, how convenient for you to leave that out of your comparison of random BS statements that make you feel better about your DSLR.
That last argument about DSLRs being more rugged you pulled out of your butt. Less moving parts, less points of failure. That's a basic rule in mechanical engineering.
The only reason why they stopped dslr is that eventually everybody will be forced to invest in new mirrorless mount lenses with better technology when we get bored with limitations of using an adaptor.. imagine all those photographers around the world investing on new lenses.. where in earlier we used to update only the new camera body n retained the lenses.. that's a huge sale
It's also kinda ... bad because before you could get away with slightly soft images. The lenses weren't the sharpest but the sensors couldn't see it so it didn't matter. Now... you better have an extremely sharp DSLR lens you're adapting to mirrorless or you're going to see it in a big way.
Not economically viable for me and I guess many others. My camera gear buying ceased with my Canon 5d Mk4 and Pro lenses. I have no interest in mirrorless cameras. Instead I bought an i-Phone 13 Pro which shoots more than good enough images for what I need. I already shot 3 weddings with it and got great results.
@@alexmorgan3435 Why did you buy thousands of dollars worth of photography gear if you find your MIRRORLESS smart phone camera good enough to shoot weddings with!?
@@evrythingis1 I've had my DSLR Canon Pro equipment for many years. The i-phone 13 Pro came out end of last year 2021/start 2022 which is when I bought it. Go and troll some where else.
@@alexmorgan3435 So your disinterest in mirrorless cameras is because of how badly your DSLR performs compared to your phone's mirrorless camera?
"Stacked Sensor"? I don't follow the industry, so this is new to me. How similar is this to the Foveon sensor that Sigma used in their camera 20 years ago?
So it means i ll be getting dslr's lenses cheap super soon?😁 coz i want to buy 85mm and 100mm coz they are eeeeexpensivee
Its a mistake to stop making DSLR's
It's an even stupider mistake to continue making DSLR's when phones are now taking over most every day photo and video shooting. for posting to various platforms in the media world.
Seems that, unlike the move from film to digital, the biggest potential advantage is for the camera manufacturers.
Sure, if all you know about the entire subject is what you gleaned from this video.
@@evrythingis1 no - I said _biggest_ advantage.
@@dungareesareforfools I never said you didn't, why would you post nonsense?
That was a great explainer
Can we shoot vedio in SLR camera? Not even Google search showing any thing on this
You don't need to.
If this means that I never have a shot again where the autofocus picked the eyelashes instead of the eye, it's worth it in my book.
basically sony came around with their mirrorless and changed everything
I remember when all they made was cheap radios that blew the competition away.
@@ddmarty if by competition you mean the government, sure
@@janeblogs324 I meant the competition here in the US. Like Magnavox, etc.. I was 12 when Sony first hit the market around here. Everyone thought they were the cheapst thing until they listened to them. Then Sony started selling radios like crazy. That was my experience at least. No one had heard of Sony one day, and then the next they were all over the place.
I went from from a Canon eos 400d to a Sony nex-5 with a 18-200 lens back in the day, even than i knew mirror less would be the wave of the future.
DSLRs arent limited by sensors; you can put a MILC sensor in a DSLR (Z780 has a Z6 sensor). So DSLRs could have all the sensor tech, video etc. Just can't access any of that tech through the viewfinder. The old SLR mounts are also limited in optical designs. Biggest issue though is that if you're still shooting a DSLR in 2022 you probably aren't interest in new gear anyway, so there's no point in further updates.