p.13 #1 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
mach250 wrote:
I don't have any experience with the 780, how is it a blend of mirrorless and DSLR?
It's not yet available for purchase, so very few people have experience with it. But it has some features inherited and further developed from Nikon's Z6. Obviously it's not mirrorless, but in live view mode it behaves in a broadly similar way.
p.13 #2 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
M_XG1_82 wrote:
The only really important difference between smartphones and ILCs is the "specialty lenses" that can be attached to a MILCs/DSLRs. Such as: telephoto, TS/E, macro. Anybody dumping thousands of dollars into those lenses ain't gonna use a $500 ILC. Probably. Most likely a mid $2k+ camera.
This hasn't been my experience. A lot of people don't consider such lenses specialty lenses rather they are the lens they use almost all the time, for example, you're not going to find a wildlife photographer who shoots wildlife with a smartphone and is happy with the outcome. And these people generally start with inexpensive cameras and lenses and if they get hooked, they move up, to D7x00 and 200-500 Nikkor etc. Still no $2k+ camera body. The cost is typically much lower as second hand market offers good deals on gear that is a few years old, so budget shooters can get into long lens and macro photography on the cheap. These photographers need not be wealthy or anywhere near that.
Pretty soon all the new/young camera buyers will be people that grew up with camera phones and they would never consider buying a D3xxx camera to take pics of lil Timmy's soccer game. In a few years we'll see phones with small lens mounts that can attach small 200-400mm equivalent zooms that are 2-4" long and are only $200. Buh-Buy to all "cheap" cameras.
This will never happen, at least not to such a degree where any useable image would result of a decisive moment, e.g., soccer game where the photographers' son is kicking the ball over his head to score a goal and the shot is timed for the right moment. These things will never be possible on a small device, it's dictated by limitations in physics. You need a lot of magnification and to get a clear image; you need a lot of light captured at the right moment. And you bet these dads and moms will want shots of their pride and joy at moments of their successes. Now, it may be a question of whether a kit telezoom will give adequate result or if a more expensive lens is needed, but smartphones will not be a part of the equation for this type of photography.
The main issue is the physical aperture of the lens is just too small in any compact tele kit.
The smartphone is popular because it is flat and thin and can fit in just about any pocket without bulging out. As soon as you attach a telephoto lens to it, none of it makes any sense. Holding it is awkward, and you really need a viewfinder to hold a long lens steady. What is needed is an ILC camera and lens. Now, a valid question is at what level does the ILC start making sense? Personally I think the threshold for a good ILC experience is with the D7200 type camera.
Jan 22, 2020 at 08:09 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.13 #3 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
ilkka_nissila wrote:
It's not yet available for purchase, so very few people have experience with it. But it has some features inherited and further developed from Nikon's Z6. Obviously it's not mirrorless, but in live view mode it behaves in a broadly similar way.
Except it of course has no EVF, which makes some uses of the camera (most handheld shots) fairly clumsy to use with those features similar to the Z6. For example, face or eye AF holding the camera away from one's body using the back LCD is not at all like using those features with an EVF.
p.13 #4 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
ilkka_nissila wrote:
While the assembly of a mirrorless camera is simpler than that of a DSLR, some of the parts are really expensive to make, including the sensor where the read time is now a priority because AF is based on the sensor, and this is costly to develop. The A7R IV costs about 4200€ in my country, the D850 can be had for 2500€.
Don't forget that the upcoming D780 is said to use the same sensor as the Z6. So sensor cost in mirrorless and DSLR in the latest iterations of NIkon's mirrorless and DSLR is equivalent. But you can buy the mirrorless version for much less than the DSLR version. This is the current state of the Nikon World.
The a9II and the a9 use the same high speed sensor, and most of the exact same electronic parts including rear screen and EVF. So the cost of making these parts are equivalent. You can buy the a9 in a retail store, for about $2700 (I recently did) which I think is a little less than the Euro 2500 you quote as the price of the D850. This is the current state of the Sony World
The Canon EOS 5D Mark IV currently sells for just over $2000 , and the Canon R sells for $1799. Both share the same sensor. However, the mirrorless sells for less than the DSLR.
Neither the Nikon World, the Sony World, nor the Canon World support your arguments, in fact the quite the opposite.
p.13 #8 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
Steve Spencer wrote:
Except it of course has no EVF, which makes some uses of the camera (most handheld shots) fairly clumsy to use with those features similar to the Z6. For example, face or eye AF holding the camera away from one's body using the back LCD is not at all like using those features with an EVF.
Who says you need to hold the camera away from your body? When I shoot using the LCD, I mostly hold it WLF style, like I did with my old Rolleiflex. That way the camera is very steady and the LCD mostly protected from direct sunlight.
Jan 23, 2020 at 09:23 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.13 #9 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
Jorgen Udvang wrote:
Who says you need to hold the camera away from your body? When I shoot using the LCD, I mostly hold it WLF style, like I did with my old Rolleiflex. That way the camera is very steady and the LCD mostly protected from direct sunlight.
Yeah, you can do it that way, but it still limits composition especially for portraits in which you often will want to be shooting from a perspective above or at least at the same height as the person you are shooting. So waist level with adults means you need a ladder or some sort of stool to be shooting on, which is definitely limiting. I also find the LCD to be too small and pretty poor for waist level shooting. Yeah, in a pinch I could use it, but for me I want to be able to bring the camera to eye level if I want and that doesn't work without an EVF, and if I have my choice I want an EVF that let's me shoot at eye level and at my chest looking down like the tillable EVF on my Fuji GFX50S. These things may not matter to you, but they definitely do to me. A high level camera in which I have to use the LCD for anything other than on a tripod is a non-starter for me.
p.13 #10 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
The live view mode, not the handling of the camera in live view mode, is similar. We know that the ovf provides a direct view of the outside world while the evf view comes from the sensor as does the LCD. The advancement of the D780 takes live view to a new level. For DSLRs.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Except it of course has no EVF, which makes some uses of the camera (most handheld shots) fairly clumsy to use with those features similar to the Z6. For example, face or eye AF holding the camera away from one's body using the back LCD is not at all like using those features with an EVF.
Jan 23, 2020 at 01:26 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.13 #11 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
Brev00 wrote:
The live view mode, not the handling of the camera in live view mode, is similar. We know that the ovf provides a direct view of the outside world while the evf view comes from the sensor as does the LCD. The advancement of the D780 takes live view to a new level. For DSLRs.
Part of what I think doesn't resonate with my experience in that quote is nobody that I know of that uses a mirrorless would even use the term *live view shooting*, and that is for good reason. I know for me, and I think for most people who use a mirrorless, I only use the LCD for special use cases (on a tripod, when the camera is at an unusual angle, etc.) and I use the EVF for 98% of my handheld shooting. In live view shooting on a DSLR that ability to use the EVF would be sorely missed, and to say it behaves in similar ways to a mirrorless when that pretty major feature of using an EVF is missing just doesn't mesh with my experience and I doubt the experience of the majority of mirrorless users who would not be using the LCD for the majority of their handheld shots.
There is a reason that very few mirrorless cameras and zero (that I know of) high level mirrorless cameras come without an EVF--people don't want to shoot such a camera with only the LCD. Live view mode with just the LCD is going to have exactly those same challenges as a mirrorless camera without an EVF. Sure it can compensate because it also has an OVF--that some will actually prefer. And that is a good reason to get a DSLR, but when you say that you should also realize that you are saying an eye level finder is a good thing and recognizing that an eye level finder is a good thing means that you can't really say that live view shooting is the same in a DSLR and mirrorless because live view shooting in a DSLR is missing that good thing (i.e., an eye level finder).
p.13 #12 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
Brev00 wrote:
The advancement of the D780 takes live view to a new level. For DSLRs.
Did you mean DSLRs or Nikon DSLRs? I don't know the answer but I wonder if Nikon D780 live view is a whole new level as compared to Canon or other systems that might have better live view.
p.13 #13 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
Steve Spencer wrote:
Part of what I think doesn't resonate with my experience in that quote is nobody that I know of that uses a mirrorless would even use the term *live view shooting*, and that is for good reason. I know for me, and I think for most people who use a mirrorless, I only use the LCD for special use cases (on a tripod, when the camera is at an unusual angle, etc.) and I use the EVF for 98% of my handheld shooting. In live view shooting on a DSLR that ability to use the EVF would be sorely missed, and to say it behaves in similar ways to a mirrorless when that pretty major feature of using an EVF is missing just doesn't mesh with my experience and I doubt the experience of the majority of mirrorless users who would not be using the LCD for the majority of their handheld shots.
There is a reason that very few mirrorless cameras and zero (that I know of) high level mirrorless cameras come without an EVF--people don't want to shoot such a camera with only the LCD. Live view mode with just the LCD is going to have exactly those same challenges as a mirrorless camera without an EVF. Sure it can compensate because it also has an OVF--that some will actually prefer. And that is a good reason to get a DSLR, but when you say that you should also realize that you are saying an eye level finder is a good thing and recognizing that an eye level finder is a good thing means that you can't really say that live view shooting is the same in a DSLR and mirrorless because live view shooting in a DSLR is missing that good thing (i.e., an eye level finder). ...Show more →
The only time I ever use the rear LCD is flipped down when taking photos from a tripod. Trying to use it instead of a viewfinder by holding it away from the body makes for a very frustrating shooting experience with substandard image results caused by excessive camera shaking and poorer compositions. There is also the issue of the rear LCD becomes very hard to use in sunny conditions.
p.13 #14 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
My experience is different from that described. I often see people with mirrorless cameras use the back LCD, and some of them actually complain about the poor AF of DSLRs in LV mode as an argument against DSLRs, suggesting that they think using the back LCD to shoot is really important. I often see portrait shooters shoot with the LCD tilted and with the camera at waist level to mimic the experience of shooting a waist-level viewfinder (TLR or Hasselblad V style shooting) - this is good because you avoid straining your body by having to stand at an awkward height when photographing a sitting person's face or a standing person's whole body. Hasselblad even made a new digital camera for this type of shooting. For tripod based shooting (macro or landscape) I see very little use of viewfinder of any kind, by DSLR or mirrorless camera users. Of the four mirrorless cameras that I've bought for work, only one of them has a viewfinder and I hate that EVF to be honest. I will only use it for a moment and when necessary.
Eye-level shooting leads to too homogeneous output. Why should the optimal camera position be dictated by how tall the person is? Varying the shooting height leads to greater visual variety in portraits and documentary shots, without straining one's back, knees and neck. I even strained by neck quite badly when using the viewfinder to compose a macro shot where the camera was positioned on ice and I was forcing myself to look through the viewfinder. Now I would just tilt the LCD and avoid a six-month-long neck problem where I could not fully turn my head. A lot of portrait photographers walk in a funny way because they are used to kneeling down to a low position and handling a heavy camera from that height, as well as carrying tons of lighting gear around to location and back.
Ironically the D850 has a larger back LCD and higher-resolution screen than many mirrorless cameras, and some features that they lack, e.g. dual-image split view LV shooting. I find it very convenient and useful for the more difficult tilt shots (when shooting a vertical composition near-to-far landscape with tilt/shift lens).
p.13 #15 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
1bwana1 wrote:
Don't forget that the upcoming D780 is said to use the same sensor as the Z6. So sensor cost in mirrorless and DSLR in the latest iterations of NIkon's mirrorless and DSLR is equivalent. But you can buy the mirrorless version for much less than the DSLR version.
This is because the Z6 failed to sell in the expected quantity at its intended price and Nikon were forced to lower price to make it competitive. They even mention this price reduction as a reason why they are making a net loss in this financial year. So they had to reduce the price to such a point that their business is now making a loss i.e. are losing money.
Of course the D780 is a new camera and as such they have not yet been forced to reduce its price. Time will tell how quickly this will happen. The price is not high because it's a DSLR but because it's a new camera and they are trying to make a profit.
p.13 #16 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
RobCD wrote:
Did you mean DSLRs or Nikon DSLRs? I don't know the answer but I wonder if Nikon D780 live view is a whole new level as compared to Canon or other systems that might have better live view.
That is unlikely but dpreview staff's early comments on the D780 LV AF are quite complementary, so we can expect it to be quite good.
p.13 #17 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
chez wrote:
The only time I ever use the rear LCD is flipped down when taking photos from a tripod. Trying to use it instead of a viewfinder by holding it away from the body makes for a very frustrating shooting experience with substandard image results caused by excessive camera shaking and poorer compositions. There is also the issue of the rear LCD becomes very hard to use in sunny conditions.
Holding the camera at waist level and using the back LCD allows for a reasonably steady shooting experience. VR can also help stabilize the camera. The forearms can rest on the sides of one's stomach, so that good stability is achieved. This is especially useful if you are a taller than average person. For a shorter person, shooting with arms extended above one's head may come in handy, although stability is not as good as eye level or waist level. Still, having these options to shoot from different heights creates visual variety.
When shooting on tripod, a tilting LCD can be very useful. Many subjects are photographed from a low angle, for example, if you want to shoot close-ups of small mammals or plants. Equally, somtimes one can want to shoot over a fence and in that case having a tall tripod and sturdy center column can allow one to get the shot by avoiding the obstructions in the foreground, and without compromising stability too much. In this case the LCD is tilted down to see the scene and compose.
I don't shoot much in bright sunlight as it is not photogenic lighting in my opinion. I tend to shoot at 1-2 hours before sunset to sunset or slightly after it, and sometimes in the morning also 1 hour before sunrise to 1 hour after sunrise. During middle of the day I go to work or have a shower and eat, and get ready to shoot again late in the evening. In the winter I do shoot also during the day on weekends because there are only a few hours of sunlight, but here the sun is not too high even during those hours. In the summer I avoid photography from 10am to 6pm and in the winter I avoid 10.30am to 2pm, unless I am in the forest which blocks the too high sun from hitting the subject from a high angle (in nature photography). In photographing in the city, because the buildings can block the sun from hitting the subjects in the wrong angles, opportunities arise also during the day, although I would still avoid mid-day on sunny days. I rarely shoot in such conditions where I would not see the back LCD clearly. But I do use the optical viewfinder for most of my hand-held photography. I would use the LCD more if the LV AF had been implemented better.
p.13 #18 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
Steve Spencer wrote:
Yeah, you can do it that way, but it still limits composition especially for portraits in which you often will want to be shooting from a perspective above or at least at the same height as the person you are shooting. So waist level with adults means you need a ladder or some sort of stool to be shooting on, which is definitely limiting. I also find the LCD to be too small and pretty poor for waist level shooting. Yeah, in a pinch I could use it, but for me I want to be able to bring the camera to eye level if I want and that doesn't work without an EVF, and if I have my choice I want an EVF that let's me shoot at eye level and at my chest looking down like the tillable EVF on my Fuji GFX50S. These things may not matter to you, but they definitely do to me. A high level camera in which I have to use the LCD for anything other than on a tripod is a non-starter for me....Show more →
Now we are getting to fine details and personal styles. When it comes to portraits, I hardly ever want a high angle, since it often encourages an unnatural, strained pose. I do however often shoot from a low angle, since it gives a natural and sometimes dramatic effect. When photographing children, which I often do, the answer gives itself. When all that is said, through 40 years of portrait photography, I've done pretty well using the optical viewfinder. It's actually one of the reasons why I would prefer the D780 over the Z6, a more "natural" contact with the subject.
But again, this is highly personal. Maybe the D780 is not the camera for you.
p.13 #19 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
When photographing full-body portraits, if the camera is eye level (or above, as I am a taller than average person, my eye level is higher than the typical subject's eye level) then the surroundings will exhibit keystoning (in an environmental full body portrait) and this definitely doesn't work for me; the shot should be constructed in such a way that the keystoning is eliminated. Additionally the head and upper body will be exaggerated if shooting from a close distance, and this might work for an effect shot but a general style whole body shot, I want to lower the camera so that the body does not appear significantly distorted and vertical lines are vertical. Otherwise the feet become tiny and the head big. I want to nevertheless preserve a close communication with the subject and not shoot with a long lens from a distance. So, I want to put the camera at waist level to get this perspective. I just got a geared center column to help me work with this type of a shot with the tripod helping keep the camera at the right height and not tilted up or down. I will need to sit down on a chair if I want to avoid an awkward position during such shoots. A more comfortable way of doing this for me would be to be in a standing position and lower the camera at waist level. Now, the bigger the LCD the better, of course. Now, because the LCD shows a delayed image I would look past the camera towards the subject bypassing the camera to ensure that I can see the moment. I will look at the composition on the LCD and time by looking directly at the subject. Of course, I will need to instruct the subject to look through the camera and not at me.
I can use an iPad as a larger display in the studio environment, e.g. using the Manfrotto digital director. I can attach this to the tripod and there we go a larger view of the subject. However, for now the problem with shooting in this way would be that I need to focus manually when using the current cameras that I have. OSPDAF would definitely make this easier and more spontaneous, with Eye AF and all the modern thrills. What is good about using the external screen is that I can use the camera in a vertical orientation and still tilt the screen in the way I want so I can shoot from a standing position, if that's more comfortable.
p.13 #20 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long?
I'm going to add something to the mix on why DSLRs still have a significant advantage over mirrorless in some scenarios, namely when shooting low light flash/strobe photography. Think event, party or night club photography in extremely low lit venues. I just shot a party the other night in a dingy lit restaurant and I don't think I'd shoot it with a mirrorless camera. Using the image sensor for both viewing and capturing the photo is a major disadvantage in this type of environment. With a DSLR, you can compose and then shoot without having to deal with a choppy EVF/LCD screen when shooting in low light. Plus infrared lights (on flashes) don't work with mirrorless cameras. Also I don't think you can solve this issue with technology, which comes down to fundamental physics. Having a separate optical viewfinder still has advantages when not integrated to the image sensor.
