John (Lurker) Lind wrote:
> Joining this late...
And a happy new year to your too!
> - I've been using a higher end mirrorless for just over a year now - a Sony
> NEX-7 which reminds me in many ways of the convenient size and weight of my
> 1954 Zeiss Ikon Contax RF. The major reason for not getting a DSLR is the
> bulk and mass of the better ones (i.e. above the consumer grade stuff). The
> reason for the Sony is the physical size of its sensor for a camera in its
> class - also have an RX-100 which is stunning and IMHO is the digital
> equivalent of the Rollei 35S.
I've only glanced at the RX100, but the NEX-7 is such an excellent
camera. It's unfortunate that the A7/R didn't keep the same viewfinder
setup. I really like that camera and have found that it configures up
right for me. Same with the A7/R, but the NEX-7 seems to do it in a
way where it fits in the left hand correctly.
> Sacrilege that I have no Oly digital, but prized the smaller size and weight
> of the single digit OM system bodies and pro grade lenses compared to both
> the Nikon and Canon pro bodies - and many of their lenses - which is why I
> went with the NEX-7.
That's OK. I have just one Olympus Digital lens which sits on the
DMC-L1. Otherwise, it's all film gear.
> I don't believe mirrorless is doomed; it will find its place after some
> things settle down a little in the marketplace but it won't be a huge market
> share. Joe Consumer in the under 30 demographic wants a smart phone that can
> do everything so all other electronic gadgetry can be ditched in the nearest
> dust bin; he doesn't want to carry multiple devices. As long as it's good
> enough to produce something that looks OK on Facebook and has the
> connectivity to post it within seconds of making the photo, he's satisfied.
> It's all about the very immediate present, and everything is temporaneous
> with a half-life of an hour or so. Joe Consumer drives the mainstream market.
> Most of us here are at best a significant but comparatively small niche
> market.
Where I disagree on this is that I believe mirrorless is the future.
But not because of size advantage. The size thing is just a marketing
gimmick for now that Olympus has pushed the most. But just as the OM-1
did not significantly change the size of SLRs for the entire industry
(just look at the whales that Nikon and Canon continued/continues to
sell). Mirrorless is the future because it means less mechanical bits
and even the total elimination of mechanical bits. Once sensors get to
the point where we have full electronic "shutters" you can say goodbye
to the mechanical shutter and all that entails. I believe that the
form-factor of the DSLR, as we know it, will pretty much be maintained
because the form-factor has reached design maturity and needs very
little tweaking. Just look at what Panasonic did with the GH3--they
had to supersize it because m43 was too small. Just as SONY did with
the SLT cameras, Nikon and Canon will eventually follow suit and the
OVF will go away. The one variant on this is the hybrid DSLR
viewfinder, which I tried convincing Olympus to produce years ago.
> Sent from my iPad
LOL. Just after you got done talking about Joe Consumer. :)
AG (not sent from my iPad or Note3) Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|