It’s definitely not a catch-all, but the size of a photographer’s camera used to be indicative of his professionalism. That simply can’t be said anymore. The DSLR has had its come-uppance in the form of high-end, manual point-and-shoots and micro-four-thirds devices. Hybrid, category-defying cameras like the Fuijfilm X100 and barrier-breaking machines like the Sony NEX-7 mean that the old faithfuls of the market have more to compete with than their own kind.
And this new industry variety has photographers and analysts alike predicting the death of the DSLR. In the tech world, pundits are required to announce the death of some gadget or platform every so often. It usually coincides nicely with a splashy new product launch that heralds the next evolution of whatever technology is now dead. Sometimes these assessments are right on, and sometimes they are nothing more than bloated excitement paired with an overuse of hyperbole. In the case of the DSLR, it’s a little of both.
Transition time
Photographer Trey Ratcliff recently wrote that he doesn’t see himself buying anymore DSLR bodies or lens kits. “Look, I hate to say it! I’ve spent loads of money on DSLRs and lenses for my Nikon,” he says. “I’m not going to be using any of it in five years.”
Ratcliff explains that the next era of what he calls “third gen cameras” is the new wave of photography. And while professional photographers might take offense at his death call for DSLRs, he does something very important: define the digital imaging evolution we’re experiencing.
According to Ratcliff, the flood of mirrorless, EVIL, micro-four-thirds, and similar ILC systems on the market falls under this “third gen cameras” definition. In his opinion this means that DSLRs were the second generation. Now whether or not you agree with that last part, we do all need to acknowledge that something is happening with these so-called third generation cameras.
First of all, they are everywhere. Every big brand camera maker (with the exception of Canon—side note: Canon, when are you going to get in on this?) has a high-end, expensive, ICL third gen product in its arsenal. They have near universal appeal and of course, yield very impressive results. Point-and-shoot dependents love them, as do many advanced and professional photographers.
They’ve undeniably become a focus for camera manufacturers, and it does come at a cost for DSLRs. Both of these types of cameras are expensive, and both have expensive lenses – which can’t be used between body types because of that whole mirrorless thing. So at a certain point, the buyer has to make a decision. And right now, third gen cameras might appear to have the upper hand.
What exactly is sounding the death knell?
In reality, however, there are only a couple of third gen models that can currently challenge the results of a full-frame DSLR (full-frame being an important distinction). The Sony NEX-7, the Olympus E-P3, and the Fujifilm X-series come to mind. While the other Olympus PEN models and Nikon’s recent foray are great consumer level cameras, they aren’t going to replace a professional or advanced shooter’s camera of choice.
Many of these seem like early iterations of what we can expect to see in the future from these developers—and who knows? They might all create third gen cameras with mind-boggling sensor sizes, like Sony did, or with an astounding AF system, like Olympus. But at the moment, they are stealing buyers from an entirely different segment…
The real loser
…and that different segment losing dollars is the cheap point-and-shoot market. According to VP of Industry Analysis at the NPD Group Stephen Baker, this is what will actually start to feel the hurt this year. “Lower cost products just won’t come to market, and those that will be out there, will be priced more and more and profitability.”
Companies are realizing that these sub-$200 (some might even say $300) units are really the devices being squeezed out thanks to third gen cameras. But these new products aren’t the only ones to blame: smartphones are just as responsible for their death. A recent NPD study revealed that the smartphone camera is becoming the pocket point-and-shoot of choice.
And it’s hard to argue otherwise. Personally, we’d rather buyers invest in a worthwhile, quality camera like a micro-four-thirds or DSLR device for lasting images, and just use their smartphones for on-the-go moments. These entry-level models are so quickly outgrown and easily damaged that you might as well be throwing $100 away.
We’re not ready to declare the death of the DSLR. If anything, they may become more refined and higher-priced, aiming entirely for the professional market. But even once the next generation of what thus far have been called “hobbyist” cameras can adopt higher technology, we don’t think they’ll edge out the likes of the Canon 5D Mark II or the Nikon D700. Current owners who shelled out for these models are committed to them, and so are manufacturers. The industry may be forced to adapt and help photographers use more lenses interchangeably via more affordable adapters, giving these cameras added worth.
So while it might not have a retro look or fit easily in your bag, don’t forsake your DSLR just yet. There’s plenty of life left in it.
DSLR will not die.
Hi Molly, thanks. Well, Pentax is relatively small also as a camera manufacturer and the brand’s market share too… So I wasn’t sure if it falls under that or not. :)
The iPhone, Fuji and the rest are all great tools, but you can only get so much out of them. It’s true that most photographic output is destined for the web, but anything less than an APS sensor is never going to satisfy artists. Photography per se is not an art anymore, it’s a visual filing cabinet. Photography as an art will always be about the fundamentals of composition and light first and processing/editing second. This needs data, which needs big sensors (and note, not necessarily ever more megapixels).
Thanks Ivan for pointing out the neglect of Pentax. It is common in north america to neglect Pentax.
But I am not agreeing with “Well, Pentax is relatively small also as a camera manufacturer and the brand’s market share too… ” They are in North America. But in other markets, especialy Asia they are a big player. And they have a loyal group of followers, not just because of lenses but because of features that Canon and Nikon and Sony don’t seem to care about. I will go so far as to say Nikon and Canon (sony and fuji) chased away many people to Pentax by making cameras that were not useful to outdoor enthusiasts and travelers (the kind where you don’t have a hotel or car). I doubt it is an accident that Pentax is neglected in media.
Great article, Molly!
Mine works fine :D
Nice article.. Its the truth too. You can see it on the streets.
I used my Pentax K-x for shooting concert videos and I didn’t experience overheating issues. Ok, one take was not more than about 10 minutes but I shot several in series.
Mine works fine :D
3rd generation? Since when mirrorless belong to 3rd generation? 3rd generation are cameras in smartphones, if anything.
Meanwhile on the market it seems like mirrorless are being killed from bottom by large sensor compacts, and from top by DSLRs, so… if anything is in the danger of death – it’s mirrorless.
TechFreak from digitaltrends.com said:
Alan, these DSLR’s shoot good video to an extent. Many of the Nikon’s and Sony’s overheat from shooting footage that is longer than say 10 minutes. Their CMOS sensors cannot handle it. I think Canon is the only manufacturer where their camera’s do not do that. We have a couple years before the DSLR industry fixes this and video recording goes more mainstream.
I wonder that Pentax is totally ignored in the article. Form factor of Pentax cameras was always the best, including their 3rd gen Q series mirrorless interchangeable lens camera…
Hi Ivan. I personally haven’t had any experience with new “third gen” ICL cameras from Pentax. But when I say there are options of this genre from “big brand camera makers,” Pentax falls under that description in my opinion.
Dead? Maybe to the soccer moms out there who would rather shoot photos with their iPhones but to any semi-serious photographer the DSLR is still king.
While every other pundit is saying the DSLR is dead, we say the opposite. The DSLR is still very much alive and kicking!
Great piece. I think point and shoot cameras are dead too. The iPhone and other smartphones do a good enough job to where there is not need to hull around a compact camera.
DSLR’s have their place, and they are affordable enough to where people can buy them if they want to get into serious photography.
Personally I think Micro four-third cameras are a waste of money. You can get a good DSLR for the same price, get better pictures and have more compatibility with peripherals etc.
I would love to own a MFT camera — having the option would be great. Would I trade in my DSLR? No. I want both, and if I had to choose, it’s still DSLR for me. I think there’s always going to be a certain demographic that feels this way and that’s why DSLRs aren’t done.
Even if these new camera guts replace the guts in your current camera, its not like Nikon and Cannon are suddenly going to start making an entire new line of lenses and camera bodies that your old lenses won’t fit on.
You are also overlooking an ENORMOUS aspect here that all of Canon’s new DSLR’s shoot amazing HD video. They are taking over so much of the video production world, not even just indie films and skate videos, but even shows like House use them.
Alan, these DSLR’s shoot good video to an extent. Many of the Nikon’s and Sony’s overheat from shooting footage that is longer than say 10 minutes. Their CMOS sensors cannot handle it. I think Canon is the only manufacturer where their camera’s do not do that. We have a couple years before the DSLR industry fixes this and video recording goes more mainstream.
I’d say it is already pretty mainstream.
My over all point though was just that I don’t really think “DSLR” cameras are ever going to die, they might use some different parts, but there will never be a point when everything is just replaced by your iphone or point and shoot.
..is this a trick question?
Great article Molly!
Thanks!
Jonah Wallace, interesting read for you.
While I don’t see this as the death of DSLRs right now, but I think Ratcliff makes a very good point. “Third Gen” cameras have only been around for a couple of years and they have already closed the gap on DSLRs, and it will be neat to see where the segment is in 5 years.
Absolutely. They’ve become an entirely new market and photographers of all skill levels are gravitating toward them. I think his defining what exactly this genre is is great.
Do you mean third gen as in Micro four-thirds?
Yeah, using Ratcliff’s lingo.
I would disagree with him. Micro four-thirds are still way to expensive and not compatible enough with 3rd party lens manufacturers etc. MAYBE in 3-4 years, but I think regular DSLR’s will continue to come down in price too.
Technology is getting smaller. It used to be that you had to have a Porsche or a Lamborghini to have a fast car off the lot. Well, my Subaru can beat most Porsche’s off the line, and it cost more than half of what it costs the other guy.
Point is, size, and money spent doesn’t always mean you have the best thing.Though I do long for the days of analog film… I still say you can’t get better quality than that. It’s all limited by the lens.
I meant, it costs less than half… not more! lol