How many generations of updates to you skip now?

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by D7k1, Sep 16, 2016.

  1. D7k1

    D7k1 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    693
    Nov 18, 2013
    PS cameras - almost extinct. But for us "hobbyist" what does the future markets look like for the manufacturers. When I owned Nikons I read Tom Hogen and I think in one of his latest posts he hits on a key issue. Cameras are now so good the re-purchase cycle of most folks is going to be extended - additionally there are lots of very good cameras on the used market.

    What impact this will have on the various manufacturers will be interesting to see over the next few new product cycles. I believe the shake out is just starting and it will be interesting to see who survives. With the trend of dual IS making Panasonic and Olympus more dissimilar and the choice of what body harder, I wonder if there in the end there only will be one 43 body manufacture or will each have a niche (stills vs video) in the market place.

    For those who care Tom's latest thoughts do not look good for Nikon.
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2016
  2. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    I started with a GX1, but upgraded to a GX7. Which is nominally 1 generation, but getting dual control dials and an EVF really put it in a different category of body. I wasn't doing it for the image quality, but for the ergonomic and usability improvements.

    I can't see myself getting a GX8, so I will be skipping at least this generation. If there is a new sensor that offers a reasonable performance bump (1 stop better DR would be great, even if low-light performance isn't much different) to go with all the extra goodies like DFD, 5-axis IBIS, 4K Photos, and weather-sealing, I can see myself upgrading. But until then, I remain firmly on the fence.

    If handheld Hi-Res and PDAF focussing are really good on the E-M1 II, I could also be persuaded, as I would now have a weather-sealed kit with super quality when combined with my HG 11-22. That lens is really manual-focus only on my CDAF GX7, though, so despite the excellent images that come out of it, the short-travel fly-by-wire ring is pretty annoying to use.
     
  3. tonyturley

    tonyturley Mu-43 Veteran

    374
    Nov 19, 2014
    I guess I'm sort of the odd man out . . . I ran on the upgrade hamster wheel for a few years, then decided to punt. Sold all of my APS-C stuff, and purchased a mint E-M5 with very few shutter actuations, plus a 17mm f/1.8. It was the camera that originally got me into MFT. My other camera is a Fuji X30 with its 2/3" sensor, and it's a camera I like quite a lot. For me, bigger was not better and the grass was not greener. YMMV.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. HarryS

    HarryS Mu-43 Top Veteran

    921
    Jun 23, 2012
    Midwest, USA
    EPL1(2010) -> refurb EPM1 (2012) -> EM5 (2012) and I was done buying bodies in 2012, although I picked up a refurb EPL5 in 2014 and a closeout sale GM1 in 2015. The EPM1 was a not much of an upgrade over the EPL1, and I should have gone straight to the EM5.

    The EM5, EPL5, and GM1 meet all my needs, so I have no wish to upgrade until they break, and even then I've had the two Olympus bodies repaired in 2015.

    I might buy another lens this year. Maybe a 12-35 xoom. The 12-40 is relatively bulky for my tastes.
     
  5. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    I've gone through quite a few bodies/cameras over the past few years trying to find what I liked. I think I've settled on a rangefinder with EVF, if the GX85 hadn't been released I probably would have gone back to the GX7. I think with the current and resent crop of cameras there has to be something, some new feature, that gives you a reason to upgrade. For my professional gear I'm using a D800 and D750. The D800 was released 4.5 years ago and had I purchased two at the time I probably wouldn't have picked up the D750. About the only things that would even make me think about changing either now is if one died or maybe if they release an FX body (D750 sized) with the 20mp sensor and the new AF system from the D5. Otherwise....

    Examples that come to mind:
    If I really wanted 4K and OIS.
    If I was a birder or nature guy and wanted the 100-400 and a body that supported dual OIS.
    If the E-M1 mkII is a leap in CAF. (and I didn't have the Nikons to handle it)

    Otherwise....
     
  6. dalto

    dalto Mu-43 Regular

    186
    Jul 6, 2016
    Texas
    I upgrade pretty much every generation for my ILC cameras. On my pocketable 1" camera I only upgrade if there is a big improvement.

    As for your comment on only being one m43 manufacturer over time I am not sure about that but I do believe that we have way to many players for the size of the overall ILC market.

    Panasonic
    Olympus
    Canon
    Nikon
    Fuji
    Pentax
    Sigma
    Sony
    Leica

    Assuming I didn't miss anybody all those companies have their own line of lenses and specific lens mounts(except for m43), many of them have multiple lens mounts. It also doesn't include the budding MF market.

    I can't believe there is room for much more than 5 players in this market in the long term.

    Don't take this the wrong way, I am a huge fan of having choices but I don't think it is sustainable.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. kingduct

    kingduct Mu-43 Veteran

    305
    Oct 12, 2013
    I had an E-PL1 and then upgraded to a G5, so I skipped two generations. This year, I'm going to upgrade to either the GX85 or the new G camera being announced (or conceivably the E-M10ii). So again, I'll have skipped two generations. It takes a combination of IQ and other improvements to get me to switch.

    Once I get my new camera, I don't anticipate changing for quite some time, unless something really revolutionary comes along. The only real question is whether at the point when I want to upgrade again, will I choose to just use a cell phone or not. Depends on whether the revolutionary advances are with cell phones or with bigger cameras. But that's years away and I'll enjoy m4/3 until then.

    Unlike many of you, I think there will continue to be a space for several camera companies -- after all, there were just as many SLR and rangefinder manufacturers in the 1980s. However, I do think it will become more of a niche.
     
  8. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 3, 2014
    I upgrade every generation. I am also really hard on my gear and after 2-3 years I need a new body anyways. But there is always something in the next generation that I want and now that I switched to ยต4/3 even a small increase in CAF ability is worth the upgrade.
     
  9. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    You may be right that there are too many companies to be sustainable, as numbers are declining over time, we may see it resemble something more akin to the 35mm film market as it stabilized in the modern pre-digital era (after various mergers and acquisitions). If I'm not wrong, at that point is was basically:

    Canon
    Nikon
    Konica-Minolta
    Pentax
    Olympus
    Fujifilm
    Yashica / Kyocera / Contax
    Leica

    So you see, it's not really that different. Again, that doesn't include the medium format players like Mamiya, Bronica, and Hasselblad that were undergoing a bit of a renaissance at the time. And even at this time, Panasonic would have been active making camcorders and professional broadcast cameras, so even they aren't really a new player in today's market, just one that has had its emphasis shifted.

    The number of film cameras sold at the time was really pretty small compared to the number of digital cameras today. I imagine development costs were not quite as high as today, but then again, with most companies buying their sensors from an outside supplier (i.e. Sony) even that aspect is fairly well amortized. It must have been extraordinarily expensive for all the manufacturers to develop their autofocus, matrix metering, electronic auto exposure, and motor-drive componentry from scratch at that point.

    So who knows. Everything might be a little bit less profitable, and so we may see some of the manufacturers decide it is not worth their while. But it might just be a return to a "new normal" which is the same as the old normal.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. Giiba

    Giiba Something to someone somewhere

    282
    Aug 19, 2016
    Burnaby, BC
    Any chance someone has a link to where Tom talks about the future of Nikon?
     
  11. TheMenWhoDrawSheeps

    TheMenWhoDrawSheeps Mu-43 Regular

    156
    Jun 15, 2016
    Sure there are much more players, but the market is getting bigger too! Thats not 30%ilc, vs 70%dslr anymore. It's actually the other way around, especially in the enthusiast World. I get even hobbist, and noobs which are asking straight ahead for an ilc, Instead of "i want serious professional camera, do you have eos 1000 on stock?".

    As for me, i'm more like a huge weirdo.
    I bought pentax k-x 7 years ago, and as true pentaxian(and nihilist) for a bigger part i turned it on M, and kept shooting next two years. Next upgrade was old prime lens, which got me even deeper into getting the Best results out of cheap equipment.

    I missed k-30, k-50, k5, k5ii, k5iis, k3, k3ii, k1.
    Reason why i missed them - i had the possibility to actually test the cameras.
    I simply failed to see all the "expotential growth and benefits of such an upgrade".
    24mp Sensor doesn't give you twice the Detail of 12mp Sensor. It has twice the Resolution, but only 30% more Detail with ideal!!! lens. In real life for enthusiast without $$$ factor it gets negligible. So does 1extra stop of light, so does one stop of dynamic range, so does one extra stop of bokeh, etc.
    Elsewise you wouldn't shoot mft.
    I bought E-M5ii, not because it was small upgrade in IQ(6 years apart from k-x) but simply because it is more comfy.

    I think many are actually upgrading the camera for upgrades sake. They need growth, and are willing to pay for minor changes - they will buy every 1-2 Generations, simply because they'll get 3-5% better images, or even 3-5% chance of striking better images.

    Now as manufacturers are slowly hitting the sealing, and the technical/ergonomic/quality aspects starting to blur, Sensor size and the features will become even a bigger issue.
    As for Features - we already are getting cameras, which are constantly updating and Features are simply updated in time to make the camera more appealing to buy.
    I doubt that em5ii isn't capable of making 32mp high res shot handheld, but i belive elsewise it would take quite some EM1 buyers away, so most probably there will be an update in a year or two.

    As for Sensor size - hasselblad made it, and Fuji is going MF too with a Sony Sensor(guess if it will be there too?)
    It's ingenious move from Fuji - they already have aps-c lineup with fully equivalent to ff lenses, which makes it almost indistinguishible from it in many ways. Now they will offer same consumer a huge update, beyond FF.
    I wish Olympus would recognize that - we already have f0.85 primes(no af yet), there is almost no way to grow further in terms of lenses, so MFT either have to make a miracle Sensor, and do not buy Sony ones, or it have to go with Sensor size much bigger than FF as an alternativ route.
     
  12. D7k1

    D7k1 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    693
    Nov 18, 2013
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  13. Giiba

    Giiba Something to someone somewhere

    282
    Aug 19, 2016
    Burnaby, BC
    Very interesting read. Not that I know anything about Nikon but I remember in the late 90's when I was buying my first AF slr I found Nikon's f-mount fracturing confusing and so wrote it off and never looked twice. I looked today and that situation has only gotten worse with more lens variants. It makes Canon's decision to make a clean break between FD and EOS seem the better choice; though they're now following in Nikon's footsteps. I respect that Olympus choose a digital format and stuck with it. (Though the move to mirrorless isn't different? or is it?)

    I consciously skipped from slide film to digital last year, though I did go 10+ years without a real camera.... I did that because the digital market was so tumultuous. Things have settled dramatically in the last 5 years. This I think is the source of much of the industry's troubles, they got drunk on the annual upgrade cycle. Now the addicts are suffering.

    It will take some dramatic improvements (or broken gear) for me to upgrade. Olympus has been smarter it seems and switched to a slower release cycle a while ago. At this point I think I'll wait for the e-m1 mkiii.

    Anyway, I've had too much free time it seems as I'm sure I am rambling now.

    TLDR: nothing important, I'm waiting for the e-m1 mkiii
     
  14. Djarum

    Djarum Super Moderator

    Dec 15, 2009
    Huntsville, AL, USA
    Jason
    I had the first Oly....ep1. Moved to the epl3 mainly for the larger grip. Then went to the epl5. No new bodies for me until the sensor performance improves dramatically and the epl line gets a larger grip.