Where are we headed?

[Abitconfused]

I read an article concerning falling profits and disappointing sales of Canon's Mark III. I have also read quite a number of reviews concerning why anyone would buy a D750 when the D7100 is such a fine instrument and cost much less (unless you really need the benefits of higher and higher quality ISO and a FX sensor). And then there is the D810 many pixels many bucks. There seems to be a shotgun approach to innovation here that is troubling. And so very many are asking where the update to the D300 is. What do we really want? Perhaps a camera with greater dynamic range, about 32 megapixels, a superb focusing system, FX DX options (like the D7100), WiFi, GPS, weather sealing and most of all, superior quality control in the sensor. This could be done for $2600 retail and capture the market for all time. Just saying.

[pnodrog]

Apart from the fact the FX DX option is only available on a FX camera (I assume you meant D810 or D750 not D7100) I agree completely and what's more I think it is the general direction that is developing. Your price indicates it will end up being equipped with an electronic viewfinder.

[dubaiphil]

There was a time when FX held a high ISO advantage over DX, way back when. Unless you're shooting in really low light that's not so much of an issue any more. How many MP is enough? For me, I don't need over 20MP. If I were a landscape guru printing big then I'd want as much real estate as possible, but I'm not so I don't. Just how many people are using a 24MP + sensor for posting on the internet and printing 6x4 or 7x5 occasionally - quite a lot, I'd imagine!

There will always be people willing to upgrade to the latest and greatest, without ever touching on the capabilities (or getting anywhere near the average shutter count that the mechanism is generally tested to) of their existing camera body.

Wifi - yes I can see the advantage of that in certain circumstances
GPS - I know where I am, thanks, and have a good memory for remembering where I was too
Weather sealing - yes, that's important, but only as long as your lenses don't compromise your rig's overall robustness

When comparing 5D II to D700, the Canon was up on MP, down on fps, seriously down in certain circumstances on AF, but walloped the D700 on video (because it didn't have it, and further down the line Nikon's lineup still isn't up to scratch even though I personally would add it to the gimmick list like GPS and wifi)

Roll on the 5D III and they aimed it more at where they thought the D800 was going, but the D800 whooped it with the MP count. I see a lot of 5D II users migrating to D800/810 on forums, but not so many going the other way. This has always been the way over the past few years, with Nikon users going to Canon for video and other advantages as well.

Nikon are seriously hinting at mirrorless in the near future - it's clearly the way things are going, despite the large increase in FF bodies on offer. But please, Nikon, keep an optical viewfinder (FF rangefinder, hint hint). The Df is to some crippled by it's D600 ancestry AF (to name just one point), yet for others is a dream for it's backward compatibility to pre AI Nikkors and is surely a MF shooter's dream (if it wasn't for the fact that it doesn't have a split prism focus screen!). Sounds stupid, but a big bright viewfinder is a must to some and the circular D700/800/810/3/4 viewfinder with manual shutter blind is quite important and can be a dealbreaker if it's not there (D750 and Df (no shutter blind - just crazy stupid)). It just seems as if in defending DSLR territory against the rising sales of mirrorless Canikon are creating lots of niche products at the high end which dip into various parts bins. That's your shotgun approach, and the parts bin raiding is surely maintaining profit levels while they do it in most circumstances.

The clamour for a D300 replacement - full size DSLR, with optional grip and higher fps, which is weather sealed and balances better with longer lenses, with the DX reach advantage - aviation and wildlife photographers have a need, to name just a few. It's still not been addressed fully by Nikon. As with the D700, there's been no direct replacement.

So for some, technology is king, for others simplicity and pureness is king. But mirrorless is the future.

Now where's my Leica M360 that I've pre-ordered...?!?

[pnodrog]

I find the GPS adapter I have attached to my D800 very very useful and most of the time I know where I am...(even if my wife doesn't)

All we are now basically talking about between a DX and FX camera is pixel density and cost (provided we ignore size etc etc) The reach advantage of a crop sensor is really a myth in that there is no advantage if the pixel density is the same as that of a non cropped sensor which can either be cropped in camera or latter in PP with far greater crop options if lens was FX.

Actually the developments in technology and photographers reactions to it is starting to get very very interesting.

[loosecanon]

I was happy a few years ago with the 12 MP of the Canon 5D for A3 prints, the extra with the 5D III helps a little if I need to crop, Would more be better - not sure, the low light preformance of my 5DIII is excellent, no problem using 3200 ISO. Colour reproduction very good (this aspect doesn't seem to feature much in reviews). In raw development the dynamic range really comes out. In the hand it handles excellently - as a tool should do. A little less weight would be nice, built in GPS would be nice, (Canon add on GPS is not that good).

I wonder how how many changing system to higher MP have the lenses to match the camera resolving power?

We can all hope for something better, but that can wait, my kit can do almost all that I need, and I certainly cannot afford wide aperture very long lenses which are too heavy to carry so I never have them on the odd occasion when I could make full use of them.

[NorthernFocus]

Where we are headed is really up to us, the consumers. Clearly the manufacturers don't have a clear vision and are simply thrashing around trying to figure out what we will buy (notice I did not say what we want). Like others have said, the current crop of gear exceeds my needs. But if I see something that looks "better" in the future I'll likely buy it. What is "better"? I'll know it when I see it

...I wonder how how many changing system to higher MP have the lenses to match the camera resolving power?....

I continually see statements like this. It really doesn't matter. More pixels will render more detail regardless of lens quality.

[davidedric]

There is a proliferation of cameras and formats right now, with a flood of new releases especially outside the Canikon space. This is set against stagnant or decreasing sales, which will only spiral down as increasingly capable Smartphones capture the lion's share of the market for people whose main interest is family snaps and the like. There has to be a major shake out coming, though it's rather hard to guess what might happen

Dave

[John 2]

I couldn't argue with that Dave but it's bad news because it will hike the price for the rest of us.

As to direction, it has to be mirrorless. Not because of IQ or any other functional consideration. There isn't really that much to choose between the top end prosumer cameras these days and the latest EVFs are so good. It's the size and weight advantage that the absence of the penta-prism and mirror mechanism brings. That is certainly true for me. My XT1 and five lenses all fit easily into a messenger bag that I can just pickup and go. Much lighter and much more accessible than the backpack I used before. Pros are claiming this advantage as well in fact the only downside that I have heard voiced is that a small mirrorless camera tends not to impress the client in the same way as a big beefy SLR.

When it come to gimmicks, I guess it depends on the situation. I have no use for GPS but someone on a three month trek returning with several thousand images may well see it as a life saver. I do have Wi-Fi and on occasion, find it very useful. Not for uploading images (I prefer a USB 3 card reader), but because I can use my mobile or tablet as a remote screen or to control the camera. Less back breaking for those very low angle shot (especially for natural history) and saves the cost/wieght of a wireless remote and/or angle finder.

Phil, if an optical VF is a must, Fuji are promising the X Pro2 for next year. If it has all the progressive improvements that Fuji have built into the X pro1 successors so far, it should be worth a look.

[chauncey]

Cost of new camera, in 2008 I paid 8K for my 1Ds3...stupidly obscene wasn't it? But I wanted a
camera that could do it all and it can, mostly, assuming that I can, do it all I mean, which I can't.

Anyway, I'm too heavily vested in Canon gear to jump ship to anything that uses a Sony sensor...
kinda assuming that Canon is trying to "best" that sensor. When will they, no clue, but I'm hoping.

The MP thingy...my work-around is getting close and merging numerous images. Mostly it works.

[lukaswerth]

Never in my life, and not also when I look beyond my life further into the past, have I seen anything like the perfect camera. Not that I was not also dreaming about it. What one wants to look for is probably a tool suited as nearly as possible to one's aims and needs. For me, the issue is about image quality and getting the best sensor I have access to. Issues like GPS or WiFi are very much on the periphery for me, as are different jpeg modes or the highest frame rate. This is me; if I would do news covering or shoot sports or wildlife, my demands would certainly be different.

Mirrorless? Certainly, very interesting, probably at least one important future, and if there is one camera line which might interest me it's Fujifilm. But speaking of MP, I would wait anyway until they bring out their announced 24MP sensor, and see how that will be, and even then I would always ask myself, what if I had taken this picture with my Nikon sensor... I live now, this is the best one available, and being used to lug view cameras around, size is really not such an issue for me, well, most of the time...

Lukas

[Abitconfused]

Well the D750 review I just read December's Popular Photography concludes for the D750 over the Canon Mark III by a hair. However the Cost of the D750 is much less. However, however, I am not sure reviewers have given Canon enough credit for their work in focusing modes within the Mark III which, while a little hard to wrap your mind around at first, are quite innovative. Now I find that some cash may be drifting my way and the D810 has a sudden appeal. But I would have to add another grand US bucks over the D750. So I am thinking will I ever need that much horsepower...36MP!!?? Owning it would be like having a vehicle capable of doing 200 MPH only to be stuck in LA traffic much of the time. BUT what if? What if I find myself face to face with a "Kodak Moment?" That ... if you seek you WILL find moment ... A beautiful rainbow shining over a monastery in Tibet for example. Then I would have the power in my hands. POWER! The potential has gone to my head and, like a happy tune, I cannot purge it. That is one powerful portable camera. POWER!! Am I a sick photographer?

[pnodrog]

Am I a sick photographer?

No Ed with a D810 you will be a slick photographer....it's an l of a difference ... One advantage that is often overlooked but can be very important is the cropping options the FX at 36MP offers.

[Andrew1]

Ed, on this subject I think the camera manufacturers were their own worst enemy. Not too many years ago the changes between upgraded offerings were quite large. As an example, the D100 to D200 to D300 leaps were too much to pass up for serious amateurs. As engineers offered even more sensor speed, the midstream users start to question the need for the next generation. Sensor speed advanced much faster than other options so while you were getting a faster camera there was really a limit to other beneficial features. Do I really need full frame 36 meg files if all I'm doing is posting on-line or printing nothing larger than an 8X10? Obviously not, so those mid range purchases start to slow down. Take into account the electronic cameras depreciate much faster than their mechanical counterparts did during their time of being in circulation. You could easily sell your F3 for an amount that would help ease the step into an F4. Not so anymore. Digital cameras depreciate at the speed of the latest flat screen tv so more people are questioning the specifics of the their next upgrade. Yes there are newer 'nice to haves' but are they worth $2K for occasionally used features? Especially when you only got $400 for your last one or weren't able to sell it at all. It appears not. The only other option is to turn it into an infrared.

Also, new photographers requiring purpose-built equipment is also down. Why get into an expensive DSLR or some of the more advanced P&S when the $400 cellphone you already have fulfills your needs and it fits in your pocket. There are more photographs being taken than ever before but they are snapshots and most seem quite content with the results they get. Many don't go any further than facebook anyway and a lot I've seen are quite good.

For those of us in the middle who still enjoy photography I personally believe what attracts us is the whole process from taking to editing to producing and learning or experimenting the whole time. We've gone through the dark ages of digital photography as well as the golden years and now have a competent camera that fits 90% of our needs. Would I like a D610 or D750? Sure. Is it worth the difference to me for the hit I'd take on the very competent D300? Nope. I've got good lenses and quite frankly I can't out-shoot the body I have. When I get to that stage I might take a look but right now it doesn't make sense.

[HaseebM]

Today's generation cannot live without seeing newer models hitting the market. Just like in the mobile phone segment and to the more expensive car segment, it does not come as a surprise to see a new camera model sprouting up ever more often. If the line builders and marketing people in earlier days relied on quality, presentation and flair, today's marketing guru's rely on heavy hype. Even our television screens are not spared. The amount of publicity and hype that surrounds each and every new release, it would appear that the idea behind is to ensure older models are things of the past and the 'new you' is the one with the new product. I am tired ( just came from work ) and I can perhaps explain in more detail so pardon this shortcut.

[Slipper]

Today's generation cannot live without seeing newer models hitting the market. Just like in the mobile phone segment and to the more expensive car segment, it does not come as a surprise to see a new camera model sprouting up ever more often. If the line builders and marketing people in earlier days relied on quality, presentation and flair, today's marketing guru's rely on heavy hype. Even our television screens are not spared. The amount of publicity and hype that surrounds each and every new release, it would appear that the idea behind is to ensure older models are things of the past and the 'new you' is the one with the new product. I am tired ( just came from work ) and I can perhaps explain in more detail so pardon this shortcut.

So true. I have a 5D and a new 70D, but I kinda prefer using the old 5D, just has a nice feel to it.
However the hype does get to me, now a new 7DII or 6D, what a mind puzzle those are for a decision.

[rpcrowe]

Hiking the price! IMO, if we had a total still camera without video (it probably would not sell) but, Canikon could have used the R&D funds as well as the manufacturing costs to create a superb still camera for us folks who would rather shoot stills with one camera and use a dedicated video camera for video.

[Abitconfused]

Very true...I saw a new 5K monitor and I really didn't see a 100% improvement over my 10 year old Apple Cinema. But I did see a 50% improvement. So future improvements are incrementally less necessary. At this point the corporations freak out. They need a constant revenue stream. So software companies, for example, want to rent you their services. In the future you won't own a camera or TV or anything. You will lease it for a period of time. You won't be allowed to purchase your own groceries or grow your own food. Poppa Daddy Most Loved Fearless Leader will give it to you and you will give back...your life.

OK somewhat perhaps a little science fiction but maybe not!

[NorthernFocus]

...In the future you won't own a camera or TV or anything. You will lease it for a period of time. You won't be allowed to purchase your own groceries or grow your own food. Poppa Daddy Most Loved Fearless Leader will give it to you and you will give back...your life...!

Now you've done it. If you start noticing a lot of helicopters everywhere you go it won't be coincidence

[charzes44]

Well, I know where I'm headed! I have just traded in all my Nikon equipment for a Fuji X100T. Why, you may ask. Because I am in my mid 70's, and carrying a D7000 with whatever lens is no longer pleasurable. Not to mention the backpack full of stuff that I may or may not use. Ah, but will the little Fuji do everything that the Nikon outfit will do you may ask? Possibly not, but the question I asked myself was, will it do everything that I will want to do with it? And the answer to that is emphatically yes! Very sharp lens, choice of B/W or colour film rendering, high quality JPEGs straight from camera, very small and light and easy to carry around, the list goes on and on! Read the reviews of it's predecessor, the X100S, there are plenty on the web. These are 2 that I particularly like:
http://zackarias.com/for-photographe...ks-into-a-bar/
and
Http://www.luminous-landscape.com/co...s_review.shtml
For those members who are in a simlar situation to myself, check out the X100T, or the XPro 1 if you need interchangeable lenses.

[John 2]

..............................For those members who are in a simlar situation to myself, check out the X100T, or the XPro 1 if you need interchangeable lenses.

XT1 rather than Xpro1 Charles. It's less expensive and better.