The begining of the end of DSLR's, Trey Ratcliff.

[foghorn67]

http://www.stuckincustoms.com/2012/01/04/dslrs-are-a-dying-breed-3rd-gen-cameras-are-the-future/

Trey is done with DSLR's. Okay, he's not done. But he stopped investing in them. Going 3rd gen or EVIL.

Interesting points.

I would like to go the same route, but can't do so at the moment.
-I'm in love with Canon's C1, C2 settings, total lifesaver. (Maybe some EVIL's have this feature, don't know). Assigning buttons readily available for different functions, AF points and modes, really appeal to me.
-Lack of lenses bother me. None of the "systems" seem complete. (Maybe Micro Four Thirds with regular Four Thirds adapters? Does that exist?)
-All the camera manufacturer's are all over the map. Micro Four Thirds, vs APS-C, vs the myriad of even tinnier sensors.

Trey's shooting style would benefit from this. But I love the Canon system for flash's, remotes, syncs, etc.

I would go Sony NEX, but the selection is what, two lenses.

I might grab a Panasonic GF3 or an Olympus PEN that is similar so I am more likely to have a capable camera with me. I do leave the 40D, 7D, etc. at home more often than not because of their size, and the stigma of being "that guy" with the camera.
It seems the EVIL cameras don't get the suspicious looks.

 

[Railgun]

Heh...that first photo example is grainy as hell and has rediculous chromatic aberrations. Thanks, but I'll stick with my "ancient" gear.

If you enjoy photography, forget the stigma of being any guy...just go out and shoot.

 

[yhelothar]

Heh...that first photo example is grainy as hell and has rediculous chromatic aberrations. Thanks, but I'll stick with my "ancient" gear.

If you enjoy photography, forget the stigma of being any guy...just go out and shoot.

Are we looking at the same photo?

 

[Railgun]

Granted it may be a artifact of his horrible attempt at HDR, but yep...

Bah....I can't attach photos. Gimme a few and I'll get what I see posted.

 

[Cattykit]

Heh...that first photo example is grainy as hell and has rediculous chromatic aberrations. Thanks, but I'll stick with my "ancient" gear.

If you enjoy photography, forget the stigma of being any guy...just go out and shoot.

Check your monitor.

 

[Railgun]

Really?

 

[vbuggy]

I agree in principle with the article, although I didn't really see a need to declare it in such a manner (he seems to also have missed SLT's as an actually new concept, but nvm). I guess you have to do that when you have an ego.

Also, while SLR's as a traditional concept may have their days numbered I don't see large-bodied machines disappearing - I just see more scope for different form factors to propagate in order to promote steadier hand-held shooting or for better accessory compatibility, since e.g. the current compact systems like the NEX and Micro 4/3rds can actually be harder to hold steady, even while using the VF - or perhaps in the future we'll see full blur reduction so it doesn't really matter how you hold them anymore, but I see that being some way down the line.

Also the NEX has a fairly rounded lens selection now. If, by 'no lenses' you mean 'no off-brand third-party lenses', well yes that's a valid point. I see this improving further over time.

 

[jonny13]

I agree with Railgun. The picture looks fine in the tiny size in his article. If you click on it and get it full screen, it looks like a camera phone picture. Again, probably great for web based pictures or maybe 4x6 prints, but that would look brutal any larger.

http://stuckincustoms.smugmug.com/P...68747_nxsXfB#!i=1414248121&k=TNdPcBC&lb=1&s=O

Check your monitor.

 

[randomrogue]

That's terrible post processing. It's garbage. They caption it as HDR though and it's the only example on the page that's not from a DSLR.

 

[foghorn67]

You guys have to keep in mind, Ratcliff pretty much invented this "look".
It's not my cup of tea, but I wouldn't call it garbage.
Sometimes, I think jealousy rears it's ugly head.

 

[Sephire]

Trey is going to get some calls from Nikon.

 

[ElFenix]

"SLR"

the "D" is unnecessary, as no one thinks anyone means film anymore.

SLRs won't go away just like rangefinders aren't completely dead. but as viewfinders improve the other benefits of not having a big mirror slapping around will quickly outweigh the advantage of seeing the real scene in real time. lower weight, more reliable, no mirror shake, fps not limited by the mirror mechanism, lower manufacturing cost, etc.

probably fairly soon we'll have cameras where the only moving part is shifting the lenses for focus, and even that may not be necessary.

 

[Kaido]

Interesting article. I think we are in the beginning of another digital revolution (the mirrorless thing, etc.) - Nikon V1, Lytro, etc. Heck, I use my iPhone as a camera more than anything these days. But I don't think I'm quite ready to ditch my SLR yet...maybe in a few years when the technology has gotten better on the new cams (ex. full-frame!).

 

[slayernine]

I've taken some photos with an Sony NEX and they don't seem grainy. I'm thinking that there may have been some quality loss when compressing for web.

 

[Railgun]

Sometimes, I think jealousy rears it's ugly head.

This isn't jealousy. And this is from the original link, which is basically 2500x3400.

 

[foghorn67]

I've taken some photos with an Sony NEX and they don't seem grainy. I'm thinking that there may have been some quality loss when compressing for web.

Part of Trey's workflow is a tonal contrast bump, it makes pictures grainy.
I do the same once in a while. (without the saturation and other things).
It looks wonderful on print.

 

[Railgun]

Those shots had to have been done handheld. There's no way I'd bracket handheld and use it to showcase or argue against SLRs.

 

[Throckmorton]

"SLR"

the "D" is unnecessary, as no one thinks anyone means film anymore.

SLRs won't go away just like rangefinders aren't completely dead. but as viewfinders improve the other benefits of not having a big mirror slapping around will quickly outweigh the advantage of seeing the real scene in real time. lower weight, more reliable, no mirror shake, fps not limited by the mirror mechanism, lower manufacturing cost, etc.

probably fairly soon we'll have cameras where the only moving part is shifting the lenses for focus, and even that may not be necessary.

An SLR doesn't show you what the camera sees in real time, but an EVF does. Why do SLRs still exist??

 

[randomrogue]

An SLR doesn't show you what the camera sees in real time, but an EVF does. Why do SLRs still exist??

Probably because EVF's haven't been that good. I haven't had a chance to check out the A65 or A77 but apparently it's a giant step up.

 

[JohnnyRebel]

"SLR"

the "D" is unnecessary, as no one thinks anyone means film anymore.

Wrong.

JR

 

[Binky]

SLRs won't go away just like rangefinders aren't completely dead. but as viewfinders improve the other benefits of not having a big mirror slapping around will quickly outweigh the advantage of seeing the real scene in real time. lower weight, more reliable, no mirror shake, fps not limited by the mirror mechanism, lower manufacturing cost, etc.

probably fairly soon we'll have cameras where the only moving part is shifting the lenses for focus, and even that may not be necessary.

The first sentence seems to conflict with all of the other sentences. I think you're saying that a moving mirror will eventually be replaced, but not quite yet.

It seems inevitable that cameras with moving internal parts will be replaced by more modern technology. Moving parts always lose as technology removes the need for something to move. The article is sorta stating the obvious.

 

[CuriousMike]

I want my wife to carry a DSLR with her.

No way; she sticks to the Panasonic ZS3 which is very portable.

I'm all for Cameras v3.0 mashing DSLR-eque quality into ZS3 size (preferably at ZS3 price points. )

 

[ElFenix]

An SLR doesn't show you what the camera sees in real time, but an EVF does. Why do SLRs still exist??

well, they don't show you the moment of capture in real time (unless you're using a pellicle :hmm, that's for sure. EVF neither show you the moment of capture nor the action leading up to it in real time.

The first sentence seems to conflict with all of the other sentences. I think you're saying that a moving mirror will eventually be replaced, but not quite yet.

i'm not sure how it conflicts. rangefinders are a niche item, and i anticipate SLRs to be a niche item for along time after the consumer, tourist, and even most of the pro market moves on. just like rangefinders.

there are people out there still shooting spotmatics, after all.

 

[alkemyst]

Soon an iPhone will be capable of F1.0 shots at 100iso in pure darkness

 

[JohnnyRebel]

An SLR doesn't show you what the camera sees in real time, but an EVF does. Why do SLRs still exist??

Perhaps minus the speed of light.... I'm not really getting how light bouncing off mirrors isn't real time.

JR