DSLRs are dead ... long live "3rd gen cameras" ?

[sunny6teen]

photographers are fickle lot though. everyone complains about the camera's excessive weight whilst simultaneously deriding lightweight low-end slr's because they feel like a toy in their hands.
I doubt weight will sway many in the pro market.

the other issue is changing a lens system to accomodate the evils. it would have to be something pretty amazing for everyone to change lens systems.
journalists and sports shooters used to favour nikons up to about 1990ish when canon developed a faster and more reliable autofocus. nikon were slow to respond and everyone switched to canon. nikon eventually caught up but no one could be bothered switching back. canon dominated that market ever since. not because it was better but just because everyone already had a collection of canon glass.
my point is...how keen would nikon/canon etc be to adopt cameras with a new lens system unless it does something great. is there a risk of losing current clientele that are locked in to your brand.

[TOM]

EVF's have come a long way in the last couple of years. Handled an X100 for the first time last week, and the VF on that looks better than that of my D3 with 1.4 glass on it*. Still no match for a nice optical finder on a rangefinder, but pretty close. Can't wait to see the new X-Pro 1.

*admittedly this was outside at noon, may be a different story in low light.

[Steve Axford]

I can see one big advantage of EVFs and that is video. Currently you can't use the viewfinder for video and that is a disadvantage, particularly in bright light.

[zollo]

i think trey ratcliffe is dead wrong.

[farmer_rob]

People have been complaining about the mirrors in SLR cameras since they first came out. However, they are the best compromise, and have yet to be killed off in 50+ years.

I don't think there will ever be the "ultimate" camera. The needs of photographers vary too widely, and people do not want to pay for features they never use. What I think will happen is increasing fragmentation of the market, with specific camera types filling niche roles even more. The DSLR may be one of those niches. (by numbers, it is a niche already compared to camera phones and P&S cameras)

Me - I want to see how the picture is framed - not interpreted through EVF electronics, and so I am willing to deal with the flaws of the mirror. I suspect that there will continue to be manufacturers who will market to my niche.

Other photographer's mileage will vary. As it should. Diversity of interest keeps everything interesting.

Regards,
Rob

[arthurking83]

I've always been a vocal proponent of the EVF.
Mirrors are great, they can be quite good when done properly, but are generally cumbersome and ultimately slow(er) than a non mirrored camera.

DPR don't seem to give the EVF of the XPro1 a good wrap, and it makes sense.. it's quite a low res implementation compared to the likes of the current Sony versions.

There is a manual focus switch on the front of the camera's body that decouples the focus system entirely too.

I think that ultimately an EVF will eventually better the ability of the mirrored system, so an almost perfect camera will eventually come to the fore.
That camera is probably a while off yet tho!

[TOM]

I could be wrong on this, never played with one, but my understanding of the x-pro is that the optical finder is with the digital overlay is the standard for the camera, and you might say that "it also has an EVF".

[Bennymiata]

The only "perect"camera is our eye, and aren't we all supposed to have a "photographic" memory?

Mind you, some of us don't have any film!

[arthurking83]

Of course I've never played with one either .. but that's the way I'm reading it too.
It has both an optical vf with overlays and some interesting auto magnification system built in, and an EVF too.
It's the EVF that DPR's reviewer was a little disappointed with.

If you want framing accuracy the optical vf will probably be a bit disappointing with it's guide lines and approximately 90% frame coverage!
I doubt that this type of vf is going to be as good as a D3's vf tho!
Of course I'd have to actually try an XPro1 to see this for myself, but my experience with the Rollei aren't favourable. There's no point in having a nice bright vf is it's only a rough guide as to what you're about to shoot.
I remember the D3 pretty well, and it's nice bright vf .. D300 is close to 100%(I think 99.5%) and that occasional errant twig/branch/fence post used to infuriate me.
Of the two vf types, I'd take the D3 any day.

One thing I'm curious about is why they'd disable raw shooting at ISO100 and from 12800 and up?
At higher ISO I can (partially)understand where there'd be a need to process the noise out of the the image so it's kept to the jpg format to appear as a low noise high quality image.
Makes sense, but a stupid decision!

..... but at ISO100?

[TOM]

Framing accuracy can be important in certain circumstances, I just favour discreetness and the other advantages that go with mirror less cameras and standardl lenses.

I would be disappointed if the viewfinder isn't as good as a D3 with a 1.4 lens on. I've seen a review where the shooter had said it was somewhere between an SLR (can't remember whether he mentioned a model) and a Leica M.

BTW, Rolleis are a PIA to frame close up, much worse, in my experience than a rangefinder.

[arthurking83]

.....

BTW, Rolleis are a PIA to frame close up, much worse, in my experience than a rangefinder.

My Rollei is the small 35 model .. not a TLR(but I want one of them too!)

I'd be worried about using the XPro1 in optical vf mode and manual focus. Trying to focus without the ability to see what's coming in through the lens would be a right ol PITA ... Rollei 35 style.

[TOM]

I can see from the videos that the X-Pro is horrible to manual focus, no matter what viewfinder is used. The throw is just too long. For manual focus work, there's no substitute for a rangefinder......yet.

[peterb666]

Modern DSLRs suck immensely for manual focus too. No split prisms or micro prism focus screens and the exceedingly short rotation of most AF lens focus rings is bad news. Many lenses now have no focus scale or hard stops.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

[Chris C]

I'm still waiting for video to kill the radio star

Yes, things don't seem to die these days they just "lose market share". Somewhere people are still making harpsichords, despite the fact that the pianos that 'killed' them are themselves now being thrashed by sales of electronic keyboards. Vinyl "albums" are still being pressed and eagerly collected, etc, etc.

Who's to say that EVILs won't be swamped by something like this anyway?.... Lytro's new camera.

Cheers,

Chris

Who is reputedly losing market share in 'Life' and expecting to be eventually amalgamated into either Alleged Afterlife Inc or Infinite Nothingness Co at some unspecified future date.

[swifty]

Speaking of EVFs and removing the mirror, I always wondered why these aren't a revolution in medium format. All the activity seems concentrated in the compact class (which is fine as I guess that's the mass market).

But imagine medium format bodies without mirrors the thickness of FF/FX DSLRs or less, and über EVFs with multiple megapixels, high density, fast refresh and more, that make smartphone displays look dated.

Of course the registration distance will render existing MF lens useless but lightweight adapters would restore their functionality.
With adapters you can stick 135 format tilt-shift lens onto this baby and use the full image circle of such a lens for once.

[ving]

they are the future, we can either move forward or get left behind.... theres nothing else to it

[arthurking83]

OK.. curiosity got the better of me, so I dragged the kids for a day out today and I ended up at a place where I could see this future for myself.

Kids were screaming and kicking with complaints of 'boring', but with the appropriate bribery they managed to survive.
In the end we had to come up with a compromise, so I only managed about 10mins of playing with a Sony A77 today.

I have to say after reading the DPR review I was expecting a lot more from the Sony's EVF.

In a word, quite terrible. With the A77 as the current leader in EVF technology(as reported by DPR), they still have a very long way to go before they can replace, or even supplement a proper OVF in a good camera such as Dxxx's and xD's from the big guys.
I suppose if they were to replace an OVF in the likes of a D5000, or similar low end pentamirror vf type camera then I could see the benefit of their use.

Big problem was the massive contrast level.
The image through the OVF was akin to a 100% contrast and saturation boost on the average image. Completely unrealistic. Because I had limited time to fiddle around, the salesman also didn't know how to reconfigure the settings, I can only assume that there is no adjustment for contrast level for the EVF(there was nothing obvious or readily at hand to do so).
Considering the working of an LCD screen, there would be a need on occasion to be able to quickly and easily adjust the level of contrast in the EVF(or any electronic screen).
With an OVF, you eyes a basically doing the adjusting, so this was a major negative point.
But the contrast and saturation level set into this particular A77 was massively wrong anyhow. Not impressed at all by it.

The other issue was when panning. If you pan, things turn into an electronic blur(as opposed to a natural visual blur as you see with the naked eye).
It just looked artificial when compared to any OVF. I suspect that this aspect of an EVF is easily fixed with an LCD panel with high refresh rates.
I dunno what the refresh rate of A77s EVF LCD screen actually is, but I reckon it needs to be tripled to give a more stable image.
That aspect wasn't as annoying as the contrast/saturation issue, and whether there is in fact a quick and easy way to adjust for it.

FWIW, the lens on the A77 for my brief play was a 17-50/2.8 type of 'pro lens' focused very fast and accurately and I doubt that the lens wasn't to the EVF issue in any way(just in case).
Impressed with the lens tho. No card in the camera, but going by the images on the review screen, they looked very nice.

One element of the EVF was the apparent DOF. It looked quite well done. I wasn't expecting to see a shallow DOF for some reason, and I suppose there should be no reason not to expect there to be, but with the f/2.8 lens mounted there was a nice apparent separation as you would expect to see.
It looked better than you normally see with a standard camera matte screen(which all seem to be ground to what amounts to a DOF with a f/5.6 aperture value).

If it was a choice between this EVF("currently the best") or a 'D300 optical type vf', you'd take the D300 vf any day.. by a big margin.
(you can substitute the term 'D300 optical vf' with that on a K5 or 7D or whatever semi pro type camera).

If the comparison was made with a D5100 type small dinky darker(in low light) vf, then you'd probably think again in favour of the EVF.

I'm sure there's a way to adjust the contrast and saturation, and then most of the negatives would be less of an issue.

So OVFs are still safe for a while yet, unless someone comes up with an EVF that's three times as good as the A77's.

[Lance B]

I looked at a Sony A77 a few months back when a friend was looking at getting a camera. I agree with Arthur, in a word, Terrible!

My friend ended up getting a Nikon D5100, but now he has the photography bug, he says he will buy my D7000 when I sell it.

[kaiser]

Modern DSLRs suck immensely for manual focus too. No split prisms or micro prism focus screens and the exceedingly short rotation of most AF lens focus rings is bad news. Many lenses now have no focus scale or hard stops.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

An aftermarket screen helps, but does not completely negate this issue. I've been pretty damm happy with how my Nikon Ais lenses are holding up to the modern sensors - and theyre cheap and readily available.

[mpb]

Interesting observations from Arthur and Lance after a play with the Sony A77. I have had mine for six months and must say I find the EVF very good and the benefits of far out way the drawbacks.

Is it perfect? Of course not. Terrible, definitely not.

Manual focus is a breeze with focus peeking and highlighting of the areas in focus. I found it almost impossible to manually focus a DSLR.

The ability to see the results of changes to settings in the viewfinder as you make them is great. I can set the exposure base on what I see rather than looking at the meter. Changes to white balance, ISO, etc show up as you make them.

I was sceptical of EVF's prior to getting the A77 but now would not go back.