All of those who hang around at photo forums as often as I do will certainly have caught the discussions centering on the future of the reflex camera concept. According to many mirrorless-enthusiasts, the old rattle mirror is said to have served its time. It’s too big, too loud and too expensive to remain relevant in the 21st century. On top of that, the optical viewfinder doesn’t allow an evaluation of exposure and white balance before releasing the shutter. “The future belongs to the mirrorless!”, is often read in threads like that. But is it true?
It is no secret that the photography industry is facing serious troubles these days. On the one hand, many photographers turn to smart phones instead of compact cameras, on the other hand, the remaining camera markets are shrinking, although not nearly as much. What does come as a surprise after reading many anti-DSLR threads is the fact that the mirrorless market shrinks much more quickly than that of the DSLRs. According to CIPA, not only Nikon is having a hard time selling its “non-reflex” outside of Japan. Who would have thought? 😉
Please don’t consider it malicious glee, I am no DSLR-fan, or else I wouldn’t call two DSLMs my own. 😉 But it upsets me that people fall into line with this hype without thinking. When was the last time in the history of photography that a concept has been replaced by another one? That doesn’t happen as often as you would think. I believe that both DSLR and mirrorless have their pros and cons and shouldn’t be replaced by one another. At least not as long as there is much to do to eradicate the serious disadvantage of mirrorless-cameras at focusing (especially AF-C), the “live-view” (what is more “live”, a mirror displaying the real-time world or an e-viewfinder/LCD with ½ second delay?) and battery life. All of that probably won’t come that quickly, drinking tea and taking photos is the order of the day. 😉