Things looking less good for DSLRs?

[billtils]

I have a hate of changing lenses in the field, both for the time it takes, plus the opportunity for material to get into the body and put dust on the sensor when the body is open.

Fair enough! (Don't know that an accountant would agree though ).

[Tronhard]

Fair enough! (Don't know that an accountant would agree though ).

I haven't actually consulted one... and at this stage in my life, will likely not.

[Geoff F]

Because of all the pending camera model changes and confusion I recently decided to send my 7D Mk II away for a complete recondition including replacement of the rear reviewing screen assembly and shutter mechanism. My thinking was that this should give me about 4 or 5 years more camera life by which time most of the current mirror cameras will be obsolete and hopefully the current confusion will have settled somewhat before I need to consider replacements.

And by then, my Premium Bonds may have come up with a big win so I will be throwing all my Canon gear away to switch over to Haselblad, just to spend some money!

Consequently, I am rather out of touch with the recent mirrorless models. The last time I looked seriously in that direction was when I was looking for a small pocket sized camera but I didn't go mirrorless due to the lack of an old style viewfinder. There were models which had an electronic viewfinder which fitted to the external flash connection but that meant they weren't comfortably 'pocket sized'

So what are the latest viewfinder options? One of my main uses for cameras requires the use of a real viewfinder plus an external flash unit. Are there any models which allow for this option? Not that I will be purchasing anything soon; just a thought.

[rpcrowe]

"So what are the latest viewfinder options? One of my main uses for cameras requires the use of a real viewfinder plus an external flash unit. Are there any models which allow for this option? Not that I will be purchasing anything soon; just a thought."

Geoff... I totally agree that any camera I own must have an eye level viewfinder and capability to use off camera flash. If by "real viewfinder" you mean an optical viewfinder, I don't think that you will find one on a mirrorless camera of any brand. However, if you mean an integrated eye level viewfinder, there are many mirrorless cameras which include this feature with prices that range for a few hundred U.S.D. to many thousands of dollars. Most (if not all) are capable of being used with an external flash unit.

I also think that refurbishing your Canon 7D2 is a viable idea! The 7D2 was my favorite DSLR camera.

Since my transition to Sony mirrorless. I have also switched to Godox/Flashpoint branded flash equipment but, I still use many of my older studio flash units which work quite well with the Sony system.

I own many Godox/Flashpoint branded units and was pleasantly surprised that my favorite Flashpoint 360TTL unit which I used with my Canon gear integrates flawlessly with my Sony system by simply switching controllers from a dedicated Canon to a Sony controller. I can also control the Flashpoint 360 with a tiny Godox/Flashpoint 350 unit with a dedicated Sony hotshoe. I have three of these little flashes (purchased one and received the other two as part of a free package from Adorama when I purchased Sony cameras).

The little 350 unit is not only small and lightweight but, one of these units on the camera can control the other two units (or any other Godox/Flashpoint flash unit or units)... The 350 weighs only a few ounces and I carry at least one of these units everywhere. Modified with a small Joe Demb flash diffuser (FlipIt style) the little unit can provide some very decent lighting.

Yes, I have read about some folks having problems with Godox equipment and have also read postings about the lack of manufacturer support for Godox units. However, I have not had a single problem with a Godox/Flashpoint unit. I tend to purchase the Adorama rebranded flash units since Adorama backs up the unit's warranty. If a unit fails after the warranty, I could purchase and throw away several Godox/Flashpoint units for the price of a Canon/Nikon/Sony unit with similar capabilities...

[DanK]

Because of all the pending camera model changes and confusion I recently decided to send my 7D Mk II away for a complete recondition including replacement of the rear reviewing screen assembly and shutter mechanism. My thinking was that this should give me about 4 or 5 years more camera life by which time most of the current mirror cameras will be obsolete and hopefully the current confusion will have settled somewhat before I need to consider replacements.

And by then, my Premium Bonds may have come up with a big win so I will be throwing all my Canon gear away to switch over to Haselblad, just to spend some money!

Consequently, I am rather out of touch with the recent mirrorless models. The last time I looked seriously in that direction was when I was looking for a small pocket sized camera but I didn't go mirrorless due to the lack of an old style viewfinder. There were models which had an electronic viewfinder which fitted to the external flash connection but that meant they weren't comfortably 'pocket sized'

So what are the latest viewfinder options? One of my main uses for cameras requires the use of a real viewfinder plus an external flash unit. Are there any models which allow for this option? Not that I will be purchasing anything soon; just a thought.

Geoff,

The era when many mirrorless cameras lacked viewfinders is long gone. Unless you look at very small cameras, the mirrorless market is very much like the DSLR market, with a few exceptions. Almost all of the larger mirrorless cameras have a built in viewfinder, just an EVF rather than an OVF, and a standard hotshoe mounted on top of the viewfinder.

One of the exceptions is that the APS-C format is somewhat limited in the mirrorless world. In the FF world, mirrroless cameras, all with EVFs, are overtaking DSLRs both in the number of options and sales volume. In many ways, Canon's mirrless R5 is the successor to the 5d Mark IV DSLR. The layouts are reasonably similar, and most of the controls are the same.

[Tronhard]

I agree with all of the comments about having a viewfinder rather than just the rear LCD. As always, a lot depends on:
Your budget
What you want to shoot
What you intend to produce
What you are prepared to carry
The ergonomics and interface

Because I shoot a range of things under a range of conditions I have a range of cameras (predictably enough)

I spent a lot of time looking at what was around when I made my choices, but I tended to stick with Canon because of the huge investment in their lenses, and my familiarity with their interface. However, I jumped camp for that general-purpose camera that is compact, light and shoots a wide range of things (i.e. super-zoom). For that it was clear that in that territory the Sony RX-10MkIV is the best unit of that type. It looks and feels like a miniature DSLR, has a 1in sensor, and a Zeiss zoom with an equivalent FoV of 24-600mm. There are many other features that make it class leading but you can look up the reviews yourself if you are interested.

If one is staying with the Canon brand, and want to replace the 7DII - and again, that makes sense if one has a significant investment in Canon glass or 3rd party Canon mount lenses - then in the mirrorless range there are two outstanding cameras that will offer brilliant service. The Canon EOS R5 (45MP) and the R6(20MP) - both full-frame MILCs.

They both offer class leading in body image stabilization (IBIS) that works with the lens stabilization of RF lenses, plus many EF-L lenses to give high levels of IS - up to 10 stops in some cases. For me, the biggest benefit is the Animal and Human Eye Auto Detect and Tracking (AEAD). Once this is turned on it is phenomenal in finding the eyes of animals and locking onto them. There is a separate version for humans and a third option that switches automatically.

First, don't be put off by the 20MP of the R6. Those MP are SHARP, and it about 1 EV better range over the R5. Check out YouTube for comparative reviews by Duade Paton, a birding specialist :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpEK5H2Riwg&t=9s and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhBqtxxc6Iw&t=112s
finally the in-depth review by Gordon Laing of Cameralabs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6E6aGswzcE&t=1679s.

I shoot mostly birds, being in NZ, but also go for large mammals when I can and I find the R6 excellent. As I alluded to before, a lot depends on what you are going to produce. If you don't need to produce large, details images, then the R6 is great.

It's about 2/3 the price of the R5 (in NZ anyway) and it has dual SD cards, while the R5 has on SD and one very expensive Express CF card to handle the 8k video recording capability of that camera. Essentially, though for a stills photographer, the only big difference is the sensor size. There is an RF-EF mount converter that works absolutely fine so you can use your legacy EF glass on the RF mount.

There are rumours of a possible R7, being the successor to the EOS 7DII, with an APS-C sensor. Check that out on Canonrumors.com, but they suggest it has been in the wild being tested around the new year. With logistics and other production disruptions Canon may delay such a release in favour of its other models but one can only wait and see. In the meantime you still have your wonderful 7DII!

[wide2tele]

DSLR's will undoubtedly go. The consumer always runs to the "new" regardless.
I'm using one body right now. It's a Nikon D3x with 55k on the shutter and I also have a D200 with 15k.
Sure, at some point I may buy a mirrorless but it won't be for a long time yet.

My enjoyment comes from the process of capturing an image over the final result. This process is the most fun and challenge with a DSLR camera for me.

I started my photography with a SLR and film. This is how I began, it's what I like, it's nostalgic.
With DSLR's we changed the storage from film to digital media but cameras mostly stayed the same with the exception of the ability to instantly review an image. (Never liked this feature either!)

I enjoy the challenge of photography with a DSLR camera. I'll use my D3x till it breaks. Then I may very well switch to my D200 and use that till it breaks before going mirrorless. The only thing that may make me switch earlier is if one of my lenses break before the cameras do.

It really has become panic stations for many DSLR users but it doesn't need to be. Even cameras of the D200 era can produce great images. There is no need to move on from what you have unless you specifically wish to do so.

In the end, imagine how much fun it will be when you see some user post an image taken with his top of the line mirrorless and you know you have a similar image that's better taken with your 15-20 year old DSLR!

[rpcrowe]

We are fortunate to be in an era where superb cameras from many manufacturers are available...

[wide2tele]

I'm hoping Nikon will hold on too and keep a DSLR camera like a D850 in their lineup for a long period after mirrorless have taken over similar to what they did with the F6 when digital took over.
In my case, I would buy this camera in the future when my D3x broke. I think a D850 kept in the lineup would be more viable than keeping the F6 was so hopefully it's something Nikon will do.

[Manfred M]

I'm hoping Nikon will hold on too and keep a DSLR camera like a D850 in their lineup for a long period after mirrorless have taken over similar to what they did with the F6 when digital took over.
In my case, I would buy this camera in the future when my D3x broke. I think a D850 kept in the lineup would be more viable than keeping the F6 was so hopefully it's something Nikon will do.

I expect that Nikon will come out with a DSLR to replace the D6. The fast autofocus that sports photographers need does not appear to be available in mirrorless (yet?). The D850 replacement could go either way, but I wouldn't be too surprised to see them go mirrorless only like they did when they brought out the Z7 which matches the D850 capabilities. I expect that a lot of their direction will hinge on the success of the D9 when it launches later on this year.

[rpcrowe]

One of the best DSLR cameras for sports/action, when price is entered into the equation is/was the Canon 7D Mk-2... The 1D (series) of Canon DSLR cameras were/are great cameras for action (sports, etc.) photography and the Nikon D850 is certainly one of the top performers in that venue.

However, if I were wanting a mirrorless camera for professional sports photography, I don't think that I could find a better choice than the new Sony A1, closely followed by the Sony A9 Mk-2. Certainly, both of these cameras are very expensive (especially the A1) but, Michelangelo did not use a paint by numbers set Additionally, to make another ridiculous analogy, professional carpenters don't purchase their tools from K-Mart Blue Light Special Sales. In other words, professional sports photographers need to invest some serious money in equipment in order to remain competitive...

I have not found a head to head comparison of the Nikon D850 / Latest Canon 1D series / Sony A1 or A9ii cameras but, one thing that was holding Sony back in the world of pro-sports photography was the lack of appropriate glass. This has been remedied in recent years.

I strongly suspect that the success a sports photographer might have using any of the cameras from the brands I mentioned above would be based more upon that photographer's capabilities rather than the limitations of the equipment he/she was using!

However, again if price were the major factor in choosing equipment, the auto focus capability of the "lowly" Sony A6400 (less than $900 USD) combined with a fast focusing lens is certainly nothing to sneer at...


Here is an in-depth video by Mark Galer regarding action photography with Sony mirrorless cameras - note: this review doesn't include information on the Sony A-1...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcihJikc7m8

Note: the Sony A7iii has been around for several years (which is an eternity in the world of digital photography). I suspect that the replacement for the A7iii will incorporate many AF features of the A9ii or A1 and I am sure that CANIKON will be coming out with more sophisticated cameras than their present flagship models. As I mentioned before, we are fortunate to have these cameras available...

[Manfred M]

Richard - the D850, like the D800 and D810 before it are NOT action cameras. They were primarily targeted at the landscape and portrait market. The D5 and D6 are sports / action cameras due to their extremely fast frame rate and fast autofocus capabilities.

I'll know the mirrorless cameras have caught up in focus when I see the press areas of major sporting events full of mirrorless bodies.

[rpcrowe]

Richard - the D850, like the D800 and D810 before it are NOT action cameras. They were primarily targeted at the landscape and portrait market. The D5 and D6 are sports / action cameras due to their extremely fast frame rate and fast autofocus capabilities.

I'll know the mirrorless cameras have caught up in focus when I see the press areas of major sporting events full of mirrorless bodies.

I totally agree that the press area in major sporting events have few mirrorless cameras. However, it has only been a relatively short time that we saw anything but Canon "White Lenses" in the press boxes.

There seem to be a growing number of non-white lenses being used by professional sports photographers. I would assume that these might be Nikon because I don't readily know of any fast super telephoto lenses except those made by Canon and Nikon - with Sony appearing just a short time ago.

Obviously when a rather large paycheck is dependent on the results achieved, the pro photographer wants/needs the absolute best camera available and damn the cost... That doesn't mean that other equipment cannot achieve similar (perhaps 90% but, I am guessing) efficiency in sports photography. I doubt that there are any but pro (or very rich amateur) photographers shooting with the latest Canon 1D (series) or Nikon D5 or D6 cameras.

Come Olympic time. we will very likely see several articles or YouTube videos which show the equipment selection used by the major contributors (like Sports Illustrated) to sports photography, I would be very surprised to see many (or any) mirrorless cameras in that grouping. I would expect that the majority of photographers would still be shooting with "White Lenses" followed by a growing number using "Black Lens" cameras (almost exclusively Nikon)...

I am also sure that Canikon as well as other manufacturers are striving to place their cameras at the Olympic games. What better advertising could you have for a camera?

However, I doubt that we will be seeing any of these
https://petapixel.com/2016/12/06/fir...ot-smartphone/

[DanK]

It's interesting in this regard that Canon says that the pending R3 will be "Landing between the robust EOS R5 and Canon’s flagship EOS-1D X Mark III". That suggests that they plan on keeping the 1D as their top sports camera for a while.

It's a moot point for me. The AF in an R5 would be more than ample for my uses.

[rpcrowe]

It's interesting in this regard that Canon says that the pending R3 will be "Landing between the robust EOS R5 and Canon’s flagship EOS-1D X Mark III". That suggests that they plan on keeping the 1D as their top sports camera for a while.

It's a moot point for me. The AF in an R5 would be more than ample for my uses.

As was the Canon 7D Mark-2 for my uses and actually, the Sony 6600 or A7iii is for my uses now... At my age, I don't plan on replacing any of my cameras UNLESS someone comes out with a camera that incorporates a built-in espresso machine for those long days of shooting

[billtils]

Richard - the D850, like the D800 and D810 before it are NOT action cameras. They were primarily targeted at the landscape and portrait market. The D5 and D6 are sports / action cameras due to their extremely fast frame rate and fast autofocus capabilities.

I'll know the mirrorless cameras have caught up in focus when I see the press areas of major sporting events full of mirrorless bodies.

+1 to all that Manfred has said here.

[Karm Redland]

On the other side of the ledger, I was out with a bunch of hardcore bird photographers and they all were using DSLR's with Canon and Nikon long lenses.

Karm

[Dave Humphries]

At my age, I don't plan on replacing any of my cameras UNLESS someone comes out with a camera that incorporates a built-in espresso machine for those long days of shooting

... and if it had that, it would need something else too

[Tronhard]

Trev,

I do print large; I print A3+ routinely and 17 x 22 (roughly A2) sometimes, and particularly if one crops, that's not ideal with 20 MP. In fact, I upraded from the 5D III to the5 D IV primarily for three reasons: better dynamic range, somewhat better noise performance, and an extra 8 MPX.

Dan

You might be interested in this review from Pangolin Wildlife: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EN2PZmf5u6Y

[DanK]

You might be interested in this review from Pangolin Wildlife: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EN2PZmf5u6Y

It's clearly a superb camera, but I still want somewhat more pixels. A 17 x 22 print at Canon's native 300 dpi print resolution requires 33.66 MPX to avoid uprezzing. Assuming even a modest degree of cropping, this is double what one gets from a 20 MPX camera. It would be interesting to have someone do an A/B comparison of prints to see how different they are--the otherwise better sensor of the 6D possibly offsetting the effect of more uprezzing.

The 20 MPX size makes perfect sense for people who need low-light sensitivity and for people doing sports, birds, and the like. Just not what I do.