A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

More on the Mirrorless Battles



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 12th 18, 10:35 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles

https://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/who-wins-the-mirrorless.html

--
Regards,
Savageduck

  #2  
Old September 13th 18, 12:36 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
newshound
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 458
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles

On 13/09/2018 00:38, RichA wrote:
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 17:35:53 UTC-4, Savageduck wrote:
https://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/who-wins-the-mirrorless.html

--
Regards,
Savageduck


I only disagree in one regard; camera makers seem to be playing "me-too" offering what the others are, and not much more. There is no sense any of them are trying to dominate the other, which is what competition should result in. The Nikon and Canon offerings are very similar, with only a couple major differences. Unfortunately, the brick megapixel wall that is keeping these cameras below 50mp is one of the major stumbling blocks. There should be at this point 100mp FF cameras, 50mp APS and 40mp m4/3rds.


Megapixels are a convenient metric but is their endless pursuit really
helpful?

I was impressed when Canon dropped the MPix between (iirc) the G11 and G12
  #3  
Old September 14th 18, 10:33 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 97
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles

Linear approximations are fine, but exponentials are more realistic.

Does anyone have the specific numbers for the two graphics ?

Be happy to work the numbers and give the annual growths and declines.
  #4  
Old September 15th 18, 03:14 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 97
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles

For any who might be curious, I ran an exponential analysis, and for :

DSLR, it's an annual decrease of 11.87 % and will be
4,330,000 in 2023

Mirrorless, it's an annual increase of 3.027 % and will be
4,351,300 in 2023

Looks to be about equal by 2023.

Use any of this at your own risk.
  #5  
Old September 15th 18, 03:24 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles

In article ,
wrote:

For any who might be curious, I ran an exponential analysis, and for :

DSLR, it's an annual decrease of 11.87 % and will be
4,330,000 in 2023

Mirrorless, it's an annual increase of 3.027 % and will be
4,351,300 in 2023


decrease and increase of what?

if you mean users, both are round off errors to smartphone cameras.

Looks to be about equal by 2023.

Use any of this at your own risk.


better yet, ignore it.
  #6  
Old September 15th 18, 03:52 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 97
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles


decrease and increase of what?

Just read the first post starting this thread, dumbass.

better yet, ignore it.


Refuge of someone who's lost an argument.
  #7  
Old September 15th 18, 07:18 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles

In article ,
wrote:


decrease and increase of what?

Just read the first post starting this thread, dumbass.


quote it in your post for context.

better yet, ignore it.


Refuge of someone who's lost an argument.


nope.
  #8  
Old September 15th 18, 10:17 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 97
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles


quote it in your post for context.

OK, with all due respect, here it is since it's apparently needed.

The initial post related to the DSLR / Mirrorless issue,
and referenced the following site :

https://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews...irrorless.html

Here there was an article, which presented among other things, an
informative graphic related to DSLR and Mirrorless usage, in some
scale from 4 to 16 million, over a 5 year period. In addition to
yearly data points, linear expressions were presented.

I expressed, that an exponential fit to the points was prefferable to
a linear fit, and presented the exponential fits, which I computed
from the graphic.
  #9  
Old September 15th 18, 10:34 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles

In article ,
wrote:


quote it in your post for context.

OK, with all due respect, here it is since it's apparently needed.

The initial post related to the DSLR / Mirrorless issue,
and referenced the following site :

https://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews...irrorless.html

Here there was an article, which presented among other things, an
informative graphic related to DSLR and Mirrorless usage, in some
scale from 4 to 16 million, over a 5 year period. In addition to
yearly data points, linear expressions were presented.

I expressed, that an exponential fit to the points was prefferable to
a linear fit, and presented the exponential fits, which I computed
from the graphic.


fit it however you want. it's still a roundoff error compared to
smartphones.

be sure to display the image at its full resolution, not scaled to the
browser window:
https://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2017/03/cameraproductionchart.jpg

full article:
https://petapixel.com/2017/03/03/lat...t-reveals-deat
h-compact-camera/
³In a nutshell, photography is more popular than it has ever been *
take a look at the rise of Instagram or Snapchat, for example,²
Skafisk tells PetaPixel. ³But literally 98.4% of the consumer cameras
sold in 2016 were built into smartphones * only 0.8% were compacts,
0.5% DSLRs, and 0.2% mirrorless.²

slrs and mirrorless *combined* are *under* 1% of cameras sold.
  #10  
Old September 15th 18, 11:14 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 97
Default More on the Mirrorless Battles

I presented EXACTLY what I did.

It's hardly my fault if someone doesn't understand exponentials.

These are forms that represents many things, where something follows
change according to some rate, either negiaive ( i.e. - radioactive
decay, leaking vessel, etc. ) or posative ( i.e. - interest earning
account, etc. ).

The DSLR / Mirrorless issue has both, and follows exponentials quite
closely. I simply presented the relatinships as annual percentage
rates. Round off isn't an issue here.

In a nutshell, photography is more popular than it has ever been
take a look at the rise of Instagram or Snapchat, for example,
Skafisk tells PetaPixel. But literally 98.4% of the consumer cameras
sold in 2016 were built into smartphones * only 0.8% were compacts,
0.5% DSLRs, and 0.2% mirrorless.

Come back in a few years, and there won't be
a mirror to be seen anywhere.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hasselblad mirrorless MF Alfred Molon[_4_] Digital Photography 34 July 1st 16 09:51 PM
New Nikon Mirrorless - DL Eric Stevens Digital Photography 7 April 13th 16 05:31 PM
Canon mirrorless let-down (maybe) Me Digital Photography 23 July 28th 12 10:52 PM
Mirrorless, filmless. Irwell Digital Photography 9 September 16th 10 02:55 AM
Nikon to go mirrorless Neil Harrington[_5_] Digital Photography 1 July 22nd 10 05:21 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.