Browse millions of wholesale art prints from 1+ million independent artists and iconic global brands. Receive 25 - 75% off Fine Art America prices!

Return to Main Discussion Page
Discussion Quote Icon

Discussion

Main Menu | Search Discussions

Search Discussions
 
 

Dan Carmichael

1 Year Ago

Are Dslr Cameras Going Extinct?

Article, posted as FYI only
Are DSLR cameras going extinct?
https://www.blind-magazine.com/stories/is-the-dslr-going-extinct/
NOTE: website can be slow to load pages

Reply Order

Post Reply
 

Everything goes extinct. DSLRs are doing it rapidly, especially with the lack of significant new technology.

 

Brian Kurtz

1 Year Ago

DSLRs are not "going extinct" but they are going to come to a bad place.

They are not going to go extinct because cell phone cameras simply cannot do what my camera can do in my real estate photography business. And they never will be able to. The form factor alone allows me to move amazingly fast. Real estate photos need to be taken around waist height for proper composition. And the camera needs to be 100% level. No tipping up and no tipping down. So the "right tool for the job" is a camera with a flip screen. That way the camera can be at waist height but I don't have to "take a knee" to see what is in view. I can just flip the screen and see while standing up straight. A cell phone would require me to take a knee.

The zoom lens means I can put myself where I need to be and get the composition "just right" quickly and efficiently. I would lose a lot of that if I tried to do what I do with a cell phone. A DSLR can be fixed to a tripod pretty well and then I can take multiple images (one ambient and 3 or 4 flash frames) which can then be layered in photoshop and blended to create an idea final product. This cannot be done effectively with a cell phone camera.

Finally..."cropping to zoom" - which is what cell phone cameras basically do - is not the same as actually zooming in. There are two rules rule of thumb in architectural photography...

"If you CAN back up...DO back up...and zoom in."

...and...

"The main exterior shot of the house will almost always look better if you back up and zoom in than if you stand close and go wide".

These two are related. And it's true. You can literally stand close to the front of the house (on the front lawn) and shoot it wide and then walk straight across the street ...turn around...and zoom in to get the same composition and then take the second shot...and the second shot will basically always be better than the first. The reasons is because the perspective points are hitting the sensor at different angles. Angles that we naturally understand as "more pleasing". You can tell this by doing an experiment. Stand across the street from your house and look at it. It will "look good" then walk in a straight line toward the house...as you do pay attention to the roof line. The close your get...the more the roof starts to disappear. At some point....you won't be able to see the roof at all. So the closer you are to the house using a wide angle lens...the less pleasing the shot you will get. The further you are from the house...the more it will be pleasing to the eye. But of course...in order to be far from the house and still "fill the frame" you need to zoom in. With a good zoom lens. Which means... DSLR. (Note: you could "zoom in" with you cell phone camera too...but it does this by cropping out the edges of the photo and throwing them away meaning you are left with a much smaller file to work with in the end. A file that often lacks the detail you want.)

And this is just one business example. I'm sure many other businesses have similar types of things they could list off. So no. They won't get extinct. People like me simply will not use a cell phone for our work. And if our business grows...we'll have to buy more DSLR cameras for our new team members. So the DSLR is here to stay.

The problem is that they have become "too good". The cameras that I have right now for my real estate photography business are amazing. But they are a few years old. And I can't think of a reason to buy another one other than if I was going to hire a new guy and needed to kit him out. Even if my current body "died" because the shutter count was too high and it just kicked the bucket...why would I buy the "new" one? Why wouldn't I just buy my same model on eBay from someone who had bought it but barely used it and get right back in the saddle with the same camera I am used to?

 

Bradford Martin

1 Year Ago

Probably. But right now I am not convinced that a mirrorless is the best choice for everyone, especially considering the price. I am over the moon with my FF Nikon D780, which for me, is a significant performance upgrade from my D750, although some will say they are the same. For most of my tripod work, I don't even use the viewfinder. I just use the rear screen. It uses a lot of the technology developed for the mirrorless equivalent, but at a lower price. And it uses my current lens. The focus is spot on every time, even in low light.

To have purchased the mirrorless Z6II I would have paid more for the camera and would have had to buy an adapter to use my existing lenses.

I also use a crop frame dslr for wildlife. I have a crop frame mirrorless, but the delay in the screen activation makes it useless for wildlife, where you must instantly respond to sudden action.

But that does not mean I am not over the moon about my recently purchased mirrorless crop frame Z50.The lightweight body and lightweight Z lenses, as well as the increased screen articulation make it so much easier for my handheld food photography than the DSLR. And again, the focus is spot on every single time.
In the Nikon line the higher end mirrorless cameras have in camera stabilization which is an improvement. And the highest end Z9 surpasses any Nikon DSLR in many measures of performance. But right now it is not cost effective for me. I doubt I will be buying another DSLR, as long as the current ones are not worn out. BTW I am on actually my second Z50 body. ITHe first one I bought used and it broke. I sold it for parts. If this one breaks I will likely buy the newer cheaper Z30, with no viewfinder. I do look forward to another mirrorless in about 2 years. In the meantime I have to upgrade my drone and also need a good used car.

 

Lois Bryan

1 Year Ago

My vote is with Brian, above. I'm using D7000 and D750s, Nikons, and have no desire to upgrade. They're super! Maybe that's where the problem, from the point of view of the manufacturers, really lies. How can Nikon, Canon, etc. continue to bring in the profits if they're already as good as they're going to get? Well, you know, within reason.

I've done my share of real estate / model home photography ... Brian is spot on with all his observations.

Plus, I can't imagine doing macro and expecting to be able to create super fun dof images with a cell phone.

Plus, they don't generate images large enough unless you're planning to digitally paint them (like someone we know ).

Plus there's no control over the shutter speed, aperture ... well ... you get the idea.

Plus, they're just such FUN to twiddle with!!! I mean, can you beat that excitement when you finally get all the settings right and your little dslr pops out THE perfect shot?? (And the bird hasn't flown away in the meantime.)

... don't know beans about mirrorless ... I just realized they are in the mix of options. Sorry ... need more coffee apparently. I admit I've been tempted, but oh the expense ... and what to do with all my beautiful lenses and cool lighting thingies, etc., collected so lovingly over so many years?? Nah. I'm good.

 

David Ilzhoefer

1 Year Ago

I'm buying another DSLR replacement for my old one.... The more technology you put into these cameras, the more expensive it gets to repair them..... just like cars....
That's not to say I'm not going to get a mirrorless, I am, but I'm not giving up on DSLR's.
My 2016 7d mark II has around 300,000 shutter count and I'm just now starting to get errors, It's been dropped multiple times, it's a workhorse...... Not sure a mirrorless can do the same.... time will tell.

 

So glad to know the needs of the real estate market are going to save DSLRs from extinction, LOL!

I trust emerging technology, it hasn't failed me yet. DSLRs are going to go away but I certainly don't expect it to be a quick demise. Well, unless some amazing startup mesmerizes us with something spectacular and affordable... you know, like a camera that takes a 50 megapixel photo, uses AI to expertly edit it, keywords it and posts it for you automatically before it even saves it to the card.

A gurl can dream.

 

Abbie Shores

1 Year Ago

Some people here still use film cameras... Just saying

 

Peggy Collins

1 Year Ago

"I also use a crop frame dslr for wildlife. I have a crop frame mirrorless, but the delay in the screen activation makes it useless for wildlife, where you must instantly respond to sudden action."

Bradford, I bought a crop frame mirrorless camera and it just sits there because of this exact thing. I really dislike the camera. Aside from the delayed reaction though, I wondered if it's because I'm just getting too lazy to switch brands and really figure out the settings.

Problem is, I don't want to lug around a big ole DSLR anymore.

 

Rick Berk

1 Year Ago

The big players are no longer developing DSLR cameras or lenses. When I was with Canon 10 years ago this was a major topic of discussion- and planning.

@Brian- you seem to be missing the idea of the interchangeable lens mirrorless cameras- Nikon Z, Sony Alpha, Canon EOS R, etc. THOSE cameras are what are killing DSLRs, not cell phones. Interchangeable lens cameras aren’t going anywhere, for all the reasons you state. But the mirror is going away simply because it’s unnecessary and in fact a hindrance to advancing imaging technology.

 

Bradford Martin

1 Year Ago

Well I did my previous post before I actually read the article. The article talks about how the cell phones are eating into the DSLR market. I suppose that is true, but my iPhone 13 pro max can't touch my DSLRs or the mirrorless. Yet they are a critical part of my arsenal. At the start of the pandemic I did a shot of some ethnically diverse seniors with masks on lining up at the supermarket for a seniors only shopping hour. Newspapers around the world picked up on it. I also like to use it in bars to take quick photos of bands as well as the servers. They all appreciate the value for social media. I often take some phone shots of food, while I am on commercial shoots and post them on social media. It's extremely effective in that it is immediate and I don't have to wait wait until I process the ones from my mirrorless.


I too do real estate photography. It is a significant part of my income. What Brian said about DSLRs also apples to mirrorless. I simply don't use the viewfinder for interior RE photos. So no need for mirrors! A mirrorless is fine there. At one time using the live view on a DSLR meant the focus was often off. But with my latest DSLR it is the opposite. I can quickly use autofocus with the flip up screen and it is perfect every time. It uses a focusing mechanism developed for mirrorless.

I absolutely can use my iPhone for RE photography. Sometimes my client wants it instantly. This is more right before a closing rather than for marketing. Also a major RE photography company I work for wants me to shoot video with an iPhone. I use a gimble of course. No problem seeing the screen. Just hold it away from you.

For me the camera I use is more of a selection from my arsenal rather than a choice of always using just one.

The next camera I buy, besides a winged one, will be a full frame mirrorless. One of the reasons is I don't want clients to think I am not up to date. Already I see how much my crop frame mirrorless helps my professional image. And that matters. And losing a bit of gear weight is a real plus. Already the crop frame mirrorless has allowed me to walk further and for longer.

I am also looking forward to the newer phones. iPhone increased the pixel count to 48 MP this year. And to say they only have digital zoom is not accurate. My Iphone 13 Pro Max has three lenses and it combines them for optical zoom. And while 3 lenses is limited, there are third party add on lenses which are useful and have their place in professional photography.

 

Bob Decker

1 Year Ago

I shoot Canon. They are not updating many, if any of their DSLR cameras. The 7D MKII for example, is well past due for an upgrade, but it's not going to happen. Same can be said of the 6D MKII. Mirrorless is replacing the market for interchangeable prosumer and professional bodies. That said, many of the DSLRs that are still on the market are quite capable. And bargains can be found! Gently used, new/old stock and even new stock can be had at reasonable prices. The last new body I purchased was the original 7D. I bought it the same year it was introduced. My "upgrades" were both lightly used. A 7D MKII and a 6D MKII. Both produce fine images. I'm in no hurry to shell out a ton of money for a mirrorless at this point. But that is where the industry is headed.

Then there's the cell phone camera. I doubt they're eating into the interchangeable lens market too much. However I have no doubt that have all but ended the consumer level, point and shoot camera business. Frankly the quality of the images produced by modern phone cameras is kind of amazing!

 

Douglas Brown

1 Year Ago

I have the iPhone 14 Pro Max (just got last week) and the quality of image is amazing, but the file sizes when using the main camera (48mp) can be over 100mb, i’m curious to know what file sizes are created with DSLR cameras?

I have no intention of buying a DSLR and i’m sure there is many more out there who feel the same in that cellphone photography is catching up and catching up fast.

DSLR die hards will no doubt and rightly so stick true to the technology, but the balance of choice between DSLR & Cellphone photography is tipping in favour of the latter.

 

Abbie, some people here still have mechanical music boxes too. I would also classify them as extinct, I certainly couldn't go to a department store and buy one. Just the fact that I'm having so much trouble getting my film negatives digitized locally illustrates the extent of the decline of film cameras pretty succinctly.

 

Jason Fink

1 Year Ago

Couldn't read that entire article, but mirrorless cameras are killing DSLRs, not smartphones.

 

Ed Taylor

1 Year Ago

I think mirrorless camera will eventually replace the current DSLR. I just shot the Western Southern Tennis tournament in August and probably 40% of the pro photographers there were shooting mirrorless. Last year that number was less than 20%. (from my unscientific observation). Next year it was easily be over 50%. I saw the same numbers back in the early 2000s when it came from people moving from film to digital. It will happen, the only question, when. I'm too old to change and will hang onto my DSLRs but if I was just starting out mirrorless is the way to go. I believe in no way will smartphone replace the DSLR or mirrorless.

 

Bob Decker

1 Year Ago

Perhaps oddly, my first digital cameras were made by Fuji. The looked like mini-DSLRs but lacked interchangeable lens. The built in lens went from a mild-wide to a moderate telephoto length in addition to having digital zoom. They were mirrorless, including electronic viewfinders. However, the shutter lag made taking fast action shots next to impossible. In many ways they were predecessors of today's mirrorless offerings.

 

Bill Swartwout

1 Year Ago

I ditched (sold to KEH) my Nikon gear late last year and went all-in on Olympus Mirrorless - the smaller Micro Four Thirds system. I can now carry a quality body (23MP) with truly excellent IBIS (tripod stays in the car) and lenses reaching from 24 to 600mm (35mm equivalent) in a canvas bag - with the whole kit coming in at five pounds (5#). I am a happy camper.

I am also going to upgrade my iPhone 12 to the 48MP-capable iPhone 14 PRO. That will give me a very capable camera-in-a-pocket that will always be with me.

So, for me, the DSLR is history. But, that's just me and the way I choose to do photography. What's that old saying? Oh yeah - To Each His Own.

 

Dave Bowman

1 Year Ago

Probably about as extinct as film SLR's in the long run, although dSLR's are likely to have less of a long run due to their heavy reliance on electronics and non-standard batteries. Also sensor tech roles on and whereas film cameras are still attractive because of the process to some and to just try and look cool to others (i.e. hipsters), dSLR's don't have anything to offer in that space aside from a through-the-lens view and a flappy mirror mechanism. I moved away from my dSLR about 5 years ago and haven't looked back since.

 

Rudy Umans

1 Year Ago

The short answer is: yes
The long answer is: why not? there is no good reason anymore to develop and manufacture new models.


Personally I haven't touched my digital camera in a few years now. Except for my phone that I use for reference pictures. Went film all the way. (and no Dave, I am not "a hipster" and I don't need to look cool with my rather big 4 x 5, although I do lol)

 

John Twynam

1 Year Ago

My thoughts basically echo what others have already said - DSLR will still be around, but will be vastly overtaken by mirrorless at some point (similar to how film is still around, but has been overtaken by digital).

Bill, I'm curious what model Olympus you have. I'm becoming less and less taken with my Nikon D5600 DSLR, so I've been considering a replacement, but I'm not really tied to any specific brand. I'd also be interested to hear your thoughts on how it performs in low-light situations, given its micro 4/3 sensor. Also, I've seen a couple of your comments where you mention the IBIS - how slow can you set your shutter speed before you need to grab your tripod from the car?

 

Richard Reeve

1 Year Ago

I think they will likely become niche, and hence even more expensive.

I went from SLR straight to mirrorless; first to Panasonic m4/3 and then to Sony full frame, since I never saw the point of a dSLR for my use scenarios.

 

Doug Swanson

1 Year Ago

About half of what I have sold came from an older iPhone. I'm thinking that between mirrorless cameras with fewer parts and better phones, the DSLR days are numbered. Ironically, before there were so-called mirrorless cameras, there were so-called "superzoom", all-in-one cameras. I had one, and it's been working since before I got a DSLR and is still working while my DSLR gets cranky with age. My guess is that digital DSLRs will increasingly become the turf of equipment geeks.

Being a one time psychology guy, I'd love to see a study done on regular folks (not photogs) looking at images to see whether they can tell which ones were done on which camera. You'd need a double blind study, so that subjects and experimenters don't know which is which. My bet is that most people, presented with the same picture, but shot with the different camera formats, won't know which is which.

Once you add in some processing that goes to "enhancement" the difference will be even less.

 

Doug Swanson

1 Year Ago

"Personally I haven't touched my digital camera in a few years now. Except for my phone that I use for reference pictures. Went film all the way. (and no Dave, I am not "a hipster" and I don't need to look cool with my rather big 4 x 5, although I do lol)"

I'm curious....why?

 

Rudy Umans

1 Year Ago

Why?

Simply, I got tired of digital photography and I just couldn’t find any satisfaction in the type of craftsmanship needed. (I needed) Especially post processing seems to be heading into a direction I don’t want to go. So I wanted to go back to my roots so to speak.

I do scan though, but my processing is limited to some housekeeping and at the most some dodging and burning on B/W. like what one would do in a darkroom. Color is usually as is

 

Cathy Anderson

1 Year Ago

I have been wondering the same thing myself. Like film there will always be those people who love the technology of understanding which lens to use and the camera settings but I think there will be a shift to using the cell phone as those cameras improve. It's all about convenience. If it's convenient and the photos are good enough for most people who view or receive them then there will be that shift ..the emphasis is on convenience. The other factor underlying the shift is the prevalence of photo editing software and the availability of filters that improve almost daily. At one time only a few people had the patience to work with photoshop to get the desired results, now cleaning up and denoising photographs can be done with the touch of a button. A lot of "average users," who in the past might have picked up a DSLR, might feel that cell phones and little free photo editing and filters are just the right learning curve for now. I have an upcoming trip planned to New Orleans and I am debating on whether or not to take just my Sony A7 however, I am leaning strongly towards not taking it because I have a new cell phone and I think I might happy with just using that for photos there. We'll see.

 

Bill Swartwout

1 Year Ago

Hey, John, I'll try to answer both of your questions with one example. Not too long ago I shot the interior spiral staircase of a 160+ year old lighthouse not far from our home.

The interior was dark with one lightbulb and some light coming in from a doorway.

Link: https://bill.pixels.com/featured/looking-up-inside-the-fenwick-light-bill-swartwout.html

EXIF: Camera Olympus E-M10 Mark IV; 12mm (of my 12-40 2.8 zoom); 0.5 sec; f/9 ISO 1600.
There is a bit of motion present - but that was hand held at 1/2 second with no tripod. I could have used a bit higher shutter but I wanted some depth of field and didn't want to go too high with the ISO. Stand relaxed, with elbows tucked into sides, deep breath, hold and gently squeeze...

 
 

John Twynam

1 Year Ago

Thanks, Bill! That's an impressive shot in the example you gave. I may have to add something in that line to my research, since it's a much more reasonable price than some of the other ones I had been looking at (Amazon lists it at $999). Unfortunately, that particular model doesn't have a fully articulating display, which is a deal breaker for me.

Susan, while I think it's cool that it's potentially possible that smartphone cameras will "eventually" equal DSLRs in quality, I'll believe it when I see it. So far, I haven't been able to get anything out of my Samsung S22 Ultra that's even close to my DSLR.

 

Bill Swartwout

1 Year Ago

@John. Yes, the display tilts up or down (I have often used both) but doesn't not go side to side. On the rare occasion I've needed that I tilted the camera and shot portrait mode - if doing vegetation/flowers, orientation doesn't seem to matter as much (to me).

I just checked, the E-M10 Mark IV is $799 at Amazon.

@Susan - Interesting article and I agree with much of what is stated. The "techie" part of picture-taking will be effectively automated and will produce outstanding results. But there is a difference between "picture taking" and being a photographer. The "AI" will not put one in the right place at the right time for most effective lighting. The "AI" will not create the composition that separates a photograph from a snapshot. And on and on...

 

It's not an argument I'm making, it's just information I'm sharing.

 

Rudy Umans

1 Year Ago

Well I think that they might be right for lower and medium SLR's (mirrorless or not), but not (yet) for the high end full frame and medium format cameras.

All this "fly by wire" stuff is nice, but if I understand anything about human nature, they like to be in control, especially pros, so pro cameras will have at least features to override AI for the foreseeable future.

These developers should worry more about the quality of the pixels instead of conveniences

either way whatever the future might hold, I am happy I went back to film ....It seems like a good move on my part (for me anyway). The only competition for 4 x 5" is 8 x 10"

I have my cell phone for images for memory sake. No use wasting film on friends and family pictures lol

 

Roy Erickson

1 Year Ago

Oh well - I'm going to go extinct as well. I NEED a new DSLR. I'm not into mirrorless - and with me price IS thing I must watch. rd

 

Oh egads, I do not miss the costs of shooting on film. And yeah, friends and family are not film worthy, LOL! Dogs are tho =)

 

Bill Swartwout

1 Year Ago

Dogs? Definitely!

 

Rudy Umans

1 Year Ago

Are you kidding, dogs are definitely worth it.

I develop myself, so the cost are not too bad

 

Gary Whitton

1 Year Ago

There will always be a place for large cameras like DSLR's and there will be a place for cellphones. I would have to agree that cellphones produce some amazing images, in fact for expanding the dynamic range on the fly of an image, a cellphone kicks my Nikon D600 every which way. But if I put in the work, my DSLR's HDR image will be superior in the end, it just takes a lot more work. And that's the best way to put it, if you don't care to much about the details, cell phones produce great images. But you simply will not get the same optical quality out of a tiny lens that works on cellphone, and big lens. You have make compromises with every small lens, and quality is one of them. Granted there is software that corrects some of this, but the larger the print you want to produce, the more likely the weaknesses of the cellphone image will show. And there is something to be said about the interchangeability of lens, and being able attach a lens of extremely high quality, or a high macro capability to your camera if you choose. All of this is lost with a cellphone. A 1000 MP cell phone camera will never produce a better image than the top of the line quality DSLR lens that's been stabilized to eliminate shake.

Its the same principal that dictates that my DSLR, will never be able to produce an image of the same quality as the James Webb Telescope, assuming I could achieve the same level of magnification and shoot outside the atmosphere.

 

Chris Wetherill

1 Year Ago

Gary, it's not quite the new space telescope, but take a look what an amateur with just an everyday 11" telescope did with the DART impact the other day: https://twitter.com/DPolishook/status/1574727091307831296 . In terms of cost per photon it beats anyone else, hands down.

I don't know if it's just what the astronomy magazines are all currently agog about, but it sounds like mirrorless is taking over the world for people who don't want a special astronomy only "camera".

 

Bradford Martin

1 Year Ago

"for expanding the dynamic range on the fly of an image, a cellphone kicks my Nikon D600 "

Apples to oranges. A D600 is pretty much a dinosaur already. When the D600 was released the 5MP iPhone 4 was a new model. The Nikon D780 has amazing dynamic range. I can't speak for on the fly as I never shoot jpeg images, but the single click auto processing in Lightroom produces excellent results and if you put in the work you don't even need to blend exposures to achieve even higher dynamic range. That said both my D780 and my iPhone 13 Pro Max produce excellent images with very little ambient light. I can shoot in almost any light now, but clearly the D780 beats the iPhone 13. I haven't used the 14 yet. But, while there is likely to be no improvement in DSLRs, full frame mirrorless cameras such as the Z9 blow away everything.

 

Andrew Pacheco

1 Year Ago

I'm currently shooting my over decade old Canon 6D. It is working great for me, but I do notice that some of the newer cameras have sensors that capture a wider dynamic range. I have been thinking about getting a newer camera...but I'm likely to stick with a dslr if I do.

First of all, I just simply like the mechanism of the mirror and hearing it move into lock up mode when I'm doing landscape or still life photography. I also really enjoy the simplicity of my older body compared to newer cameras that I've seen.

I have some reservations about mirrorless as far as battery life and heat from always running the lcd. Even those mirrorless cameras with a view finder, really have you looking at an LCD. I doubt very much that the battery life on those cameras is anywhere near as good as my old 6D. When the technology allows for cooler running mirrorless with longer battery life, I may switch if I need a camera far in the future. Of course, eventually we'll all have no choice because that's all the camera manufacturers will be offering in the near future.

 

Mike Savad

1 Year Ago

Mirror based cameras, probably. Its cheaper to make mirrorless i'm guessing. But slr itself, no, I don't see that happening in a long time. Phones are nice to have but a pain to shoot with. They do make them with optical zooms, but it won't match an slr... Well yet anyway. I just don't see them vanishing. They would have to make an all seeing camera that is slr like for the mechanical/digital version to leave.


----Mike Savad

 

David Smith

1 Year Ago

The R in DSLR stands for reflex, so a mirror.

Yes, cameras with mirrors will go the way of the dodo.

Hopefully the EVF's in mirrorless cameras will get better.

 

Doug Swanson

1 Year Ago

I'm definitely thinking that mirrorless is the way to go for my next camera. The floppy mirror thing in DSLRs always seemed like a crazy kludge. I used to use one of those all-in-one superzoom cameras and a version of that with more pixels and better lenses just can't lose. Battery life might be an issue, but I always carry a spare anyway, so no problem there. Once I spring for the new one, I don't think I will look back at all.

 

Gary Whitton

1 Year Ago

Bradford,

Only in the realm of megapixel chasing is the D600 a dinosaur, and I stopped worrying about that long ago. Most people don't buy prints larger than 60 inches, and it shoots those perfectly well.

What's most important is the lens, and the ability to attach more than one. The only aspect of it that is annoying related to HDR is its limited bracketing ability, and sure at the time I could have gotten at $10k camera that could do a whole lot more. Everything's a choice, including the $60k Hasselblad I didn't need.

I suspect something akin to a Nikon Z7 is my next choice, but not there yet. Perhaps when the D600 starts misbehaving, I will worry about it.

 

Mike Reid

1 Year Ago

My camera progression:

Fuji Digital 4800> Canon Digital Rebel > Canon 5D > Canon 5D 2 > Canon 1Ds mk2 > Sony a7r > Sony a7r2 > Fuji GFX100s 102mpx Digital Medium Format

Lens lineup: Mostly acquired for the Canon, then adapted to the Sony and GFX:
Canon 200mm f/1.8
Canon 100-400 ii
Canon 70-200 2.8 ii
Zeiss 85 Otus
Zeiss 28 Otus
Zeiss 100-300
Zeiss 35-70
Zeiss 135/2
Sony 50/1.4
Sony 28/2
Sony 16-35/4
Minolta 58/1.2
Fuji 23mm
Fuji 45-100mm
Laowa 17mm

All bought used btw, I follow people with gear ADHD.

I still sell images from the first Fuji and many from the Canon 1Ds2. Most of the GFX100s images need to be sized down by half for uploading.

In the end, whatever camera you have, mirror or not, get the best lenses on it.

It matters at all levels. The cameras with tiny sensors: drones, phones etc can be limited by uninspired optics. The DJI Mavic 3 drone, for example, has a great sensor but is held back by cost cutting on the optics.

 

This discussion is closed.