Mirrorless cameras were / are supposed to be almost revolutionary, the smart new way, the tool to save us from the tyranny of Nikon and Canon and their evil DSLR's. So as the camera manufacturing industry collapses before our eyes and descends into bankruptcy, is there any point to a camera type that is just as heavy, large and expensive as what it's supposed to be replacing? Or has it just all been a colossal waste of time and effort and in fact, the reason that the stand alone camera is dying an undignified death? And are they just a pointless product designed to convince a pile of camera nerds that they are on the cutting edge, when in reality they are cameras for wimps, who have neither the strength or skill to handle a proper camera? Well, if you have an answer to that send an email to those YouTube losers who have managed to miss the real revolution, i.e. Smartphones and have worked so hard to line their pockets and with their inept so called 'reviewing' which basically consists of rubbishing anything that camera manufacturers unwisely send to them and have brought the industry to it's knees.
Leaving the hyperbole behind, there is a serious question in there. Has photography benefited from mirrorless cameras? are they different enough? and is the connection between the rise of mirrorless and a lowering in camera sales coincidence or cause and effect?
So what do we gain from a mirrorless camera?
- A smaller 'footprint'. But then the Panasonic FF S series is huge and heavy. However, the Nikon Z7 I have is considerably lighter and smaller than my D850 and the image quality is just as good. So a bit of a draw here.
- Better video. Well yes, but for high end movie and television work Nikon and Canon DSLR's have been used for many years, so again there is an advantage for mirrorless cameras and with IBIS, solo handholding work is certainly a lot easier, but many 'pro' users still have to be convinced.
- You might imagine that mirrorless cameras would be cheaper, but that would not be the case. I have certainly argued for years that they should be cheaper than they are.
- EVF's and Live View screens help in low light. When it's dark the view through a DSLR viewfinder is dark as well.
- Quieter operation. I'm a great fan of silent electronic shutters. And in many uses that DSLR 'clunk' can be a real problem.
- The ability to use literally 1000's of lenses via adapters gives incredible choice.
- The most obvious loss is battery life. No EVF to run and for stills use much less live view. However once live view is switched on, that advantage ceases. But in most cases for you can take 1000's of images on one battery charge.
- With top of the range DSLR's these days AF is lightning fast and though many mirrorless cameras are now excellent in that regard, I believe DSLR's still have an edge.
- Because of the time that Nikon and Canon have been manufacturing DSLR's, they are fast to use, robust and reliable. And yes there are professional photographers who use mirrorless cameras, but you will struggle to see many using them. To be honest you will struggle to see any photographers at all because of CoronaVirus, but I am talking about before this and hopefully after it's over.
So in answer to question at the top of the page - 'Are mirrorless cameras one huge pointless disappointment?' the answer is no. But if the question is 'Are mirrorless cameras the answer to everything and the future of photography?' I would say No as well. And I think that it would be a serious mistake for Nikon and Canon to abandon the DSLR, because there are plenty of us out here that would be seriously unhappy if that became to the case.
On this final point we seem to be in a situation where camera companies feel the need to abandon what has made them money in the past. For example Panasonic seem to have deserted m4/3 in favour of their full frame L mount cameras. Apart from the truly dreadful 'vlogging' camera the G100 they seem to be ignoring their core m4/3 users. And Nikon and Canon are spending all their time on their mirrorless products, including the new Canon R5. This is a super specified attempt at a 'pro' mirrorless camera. Unfortunately there are already rumours of overheating. And it's very expensive as are the new R lenses.
Ultimately whether or not mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras are successful depend on how consumers react. These days all the camera manufacturers are chasing the enthusiast / professional market, since everybody else uses their smartphones. Including the Huawei P40 pro that I own which is of course actually a mirrorless camera with a choice of lenses. Now the enthusiast / professional market is very competitive and I would doubt that everybody chasing this will make a profit or even survive. Now whether it is a coincidence that the rise of the mirrorless camera has occurred at a time when the sales of 'proper' cameras are declining is anybody's guess and it's more likely to have been affected by the huge improvements in smartphone quality. But it has been a factor.
Summing up, I think that mirrorless cameras may prove to be somewhat irrelevant. It is going to take a while for professional photographers to trust them. Assuming that professional photographers still have a way to make a living of course. CoronaVirus has pretty much changed everything. Mirrorless cameras are not one huge pointless disappointment, but neither are they the saviours of the camera industry. For those of us that are looking for best gear we can afford, they are an option, and I've certainly used a lot of them. What the future brings is, at best, uncertain and predictions are merely speculation. But then that's how it's always been and probably always will be.
On this final point we seem to be in a situation where camera companies feel the need to abandon what has made them money in the past. For example Panasonic seem to have deserted m4/3 in favour of their full frame L mount cameras. Apart from the truly dreadful 'vlogging' camera the G100 they seem to be ignoring their core m4/3 users. And Nikon and Canon are spending all their time on their mirrorless products, including the new Canon R5. This is a super specified attempt at a 'pro' mirrorless camera. Unfortunately there are already rumours of overheating. And it's very expensive as are the new R lenses.
Ultimately whether or not mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras are successful depend on how consumers react. These days all the camera manufacturers are chasing the enthusiast / professional market, since everybody else uses their smartphones. Including the Huawei P40 pro that I own which is of course actually a mirrorless camera with a choice of lenses. Now the enthusiast / professional market is very competitive and I would doubt that everybody chasing this will make a profit or even survive. Now whether it is a coincidence that the rise of the mirrorless camera has occurred at a time when the sales of 'proper' cameras are declining is anybody's guess and it's more likely to have been affected by the huge improvements in smartphone quality. But it has been a factor.
Summing up, I think that mirrorless cameras may prove to be somewhat irrelevant. It is going to take a while for professional photographers to trust them. Assuming that professional photographers still have a way to make a living of course. CoronaVirus has pretty much changed everything. Mirrorless cameras are not one huge pointless disappointment, but neither are they the saviours of the camera industry. For those of us that are looking for best gear we can afford, they are an option, and I've certainly used a lot of them. What the future brings is, at best, uncertain and predictions are merely speculation. But then that's how it's always been and probably always will be.
