The current edition of Amateur Photographer (UK) has a section in the editorials where Simon Iddion, Product Manager for DX DSLR at Nikon UK mentions the impact of “CSC’s” on DSLR sales. In the article it states that Nikon in the UK sees the sales of CSC’s impacting on the compact camera market and not DSLRs. he goes on to say that people who want a DSLR aren't interested in a CSC (paraphrased).

Canon seems to have the same line, officially. Do the big two have their heads in the sand, on this, or is it a ploy to distract us while they build a "killer" CSC of their own?

Do you agree? What did you give up, if anything, to move into m4/3? How has that impacted, positively, or negatively your photography?

I have kept my 35mm DSLR kit because I “need” it for work. But if I didn’t derive my income from photography I would probably not have any DSLRs any more. I have certainly retired any compact cameras in the house and I’m slowly off-loading them on eBay.

Gordon

__________________
Central Coast Wedding Photographer

An Introduction To Colour Management for Photographers

Flash is completely mirrorless.

As a long time DSLR user, I can't imagine going back to a DSLR, after using m4/3 cameras and lenses. I have sold most of my Nikon lenses and bought 5 Panasonic lenses and two bodies. They are a joy to use. For me it is like asking, "do you want to go back to using film?" The DSLR is from another era.

I debated getting a DSLR, but opted for the GF1 due mostly to the fact that I have 5 and 3 year old boys and the thought of chasing them around with a bulky DSLR just didn't appeal to me. Plus, I like the "rangefinder" form-factor (size anyway).

Hi, Gordon,

my case is quite clearly an example against the theories of Nikon and Canon.
A bit more than 2 years ago, I wanted to come back to photography, after having been absent for nearly 20 years. Before, I had owned (and still own, partly) 4x5inch systems, 6x6 systems (stolen from me, unfortunately, in the mid-80ties) and NIKON analog slr.

My original dilemma was : back to Nikon ? Or something else ?
I had quite a few Nikkor lenses, so I was disappointed that the digital generation of Nikon cameras weren't that compatible with their own lenses. But still, a D700 would have done the job.

Then, as by miracle, my attention was drown to the newly available Panasonic G1. I bought it with the 14-45 and 45-200, and, a Nikkor F to micro4/3 adapter.

I'm still a very happy G1 user, and shooting daily with a collection of Panasonic, Nikkor, Leica, Contax/Zeiss, Exa/Exakta, Kodak, Rodenstock, Schneider-Kreuznach, Hexanon, Meade and some c-mount glass, and even using (albeit sparcely) an adapter to 4x5.

So, in my case, the purchase of the G1 was clearly a loss of sales for Nikon, and it might well stay so as long as micro4/3 keeps going. I feel absolutely no need to upgrade to a FF digital slr.

Have a nice day,
Rafael

Without having firm numbers it can be difficult to come to conclusions. My impression though would in some ways support the Nikon claim - for the current situation.

I say this because it seems to me that a lot of MFT users (and Nex users) also own DSLRs, and often recent models - supported by lenses, flash units etc. The smaller cameras have been something of a novelty for the past few years and there remain some intense (and in my view often irrelevant) debates about image quality. We often read of people having a MFT camera for 'everyday' or 'casual' stuff, keeping the DSLR for 'serious' work.

In this scenario MFT etc would indeed be eating into compact camera sales.

The real question is: what happens next?

if Panasonic and Olympus continue their MFT push, and the press continue an increasingly positive attitude, then I sense that the future might well be different. Nikon and Canon have powerful brands and a deeply entrenched infrastructure. On the other hand, things change more rapidly than in the past. I read of more and more people letting their DSLRs go simply because they are not using them.

What I am really interested in is the strategies of Panasonic and Olympus. At times they seem hesitant.

While the mirrorless is a great setup, with the m4/3 and nx and nex lines. They can not fill all the types of photography that the dslr still do better. And if those types of photography are what you are into, the mirrorless will not be able to replace the dslr.

Every photographer is different. And if you are not into action shooting and more into general photography. The mirrorless has allot of merits over a dslr. But if you are chasing kids around at home or when they are at play. The entry dslr still offers a much better platform for someone looking to move up to a more advance camera then the mirrorless.

So at the end, it really comes down to the needs of the photographer. And canon and nikon still see the huge growth in entry dslr's as most point and shooter are moving up toward that route especially parents trying to capture their kids growing up.

I shoot everything that is why I run 2 systems, m4/3 for travel with general in mind, and a dslr for the low light and action stuff I like to shoot like plane spotting and dance. The 2 systems complements each other.

Absolutely - if there are things that you shoot where a given system can't handle it, then of course you will buy something else.

I think though that we have seen a significant leap with the GH2, where focusing seems to match most entry level DSLRs. I would also say that I do not regard entry level DSLRs as more advanced in any way from the latest MFT camera and lens offerings.

I suspect that the portion of the Nikon and Canon business most at risk is the lower end DSLR. If you can gain the same performance in a smaller package, why would you not consider the option?

I agree - it will start in the "lower end" - but that is the entry level end - that is where people come into the game, get bitten by the bug, and once they see what m4/3 can do, the image quality, and the Leica-like quality of the lenses etc, my bet is that they will stay. When they upgrade their G2 it will be to a GH2 or GH3 etc. Nikon will lose out, because it will be losing the most critical market of all - the entry level market. The behemoth cameras of the DSLR age will not be the cameras of the next generation.

I'm pretty much in the same position as you, though in my case having stopped shooting weddings, I'm beginning to question quite what my "need" is. There is still that little nagging voice that says "Don't ditch the DSLR", though I would dearly love to.

Its partly because in many situations the speed, build, reliability and the look of the DSLR makes a difference. If however I was shooting exclusively for stock and picture libraries which is my main source of income then I would dispense with them.

On the Nikon Canon issue, the current figures I've seen of total global camera sales show Sony in second place in front of Nikon and Samsung in a close 4th. place. Certainly its not the same in different countries but I'm wondering if Nikon and Canon are peoples automatic first considerations for non-DSLR's any more. I suspect that for CSC's people may be looking at other options first. Would people see a Nikon or Canon CSC less as an alternative to m4/3 and NEX or just another Coolpix or Powershot. Certainly they are way behind in terms of a significant system. Panasonic and Olympus have lots of models and lenses and by the time Nikon and Canon get anything into the shops Sony and Samsung will have expanded ranges as well. If they are to make a successful entry then I believe they will have to come in with something quite comprehensive and impressive straight away. Whether they are in a position to even contemplate something like that at the moment with a global recession and a national disaster to cope with is possibly very doubtful.

__________________
http://soundimageplus.blogspot.com/

i used to own and collected alot of canon gear, from eos 1v to the newer 5d mkI and 1d mkIIN, to semi pro bodies 20d 30d, down sized to 450d and alot of canon Ls / sigma EX lenses, i used it to fund my photography needs (since i was still a student the time i got really interested in photography), i did some weddings and pre nup shoots, debuts, events and even model /runway shoot.

now im shooting purely for my street/photojourn passion and family use, i ditched everything and went micro 4/3, leica and some films. its more than enough for me

i do sometimes miss the heft and the "pro look" in me when i shoot with a 1d mkIIN with a 200mm 2.8L, but the m4/3 has given more than i can overcome. especially using manual lenses in a digital body (the m4/3 and the m8) has always been a dream of mine

old school style shooting, less the hassle of developing films and waiting for my "not so good" images to be corrected next time i take a similar shot.

__________________
flickr Tumblr


www.adudelcastillo.com