(09-13-2019, 06:42 AM)stoppingdown Wrote: DSLR... what? :o)
Seriously, I don't think that they are going to die soon, see answers above. But...
Quote:And digital didn't kill film.
Hmm... probably we have to define "kill". Interpreted in the strict way, true, digital didn't kill film. But looking at the fact that entire film companies dead, or completely repurposed, and that many film products disappeared, digital might have really killed film if we adopt a loose interpretation of the word.
I don't know when the first mirrorboxes were introduced. They were a pragmatic help, because range finders could not focus properly tele-lenses, same with macro. Before the photgrapher had a matte-screen to check framing and focus. Pretty much the same concept as today's mirrorless.
I want to say, mirrors were never more than second best and it's no reason to stick to a concept which is overcome by a much better and directer concept. Disadvantage is basically the dependance of electrical energy.
So, in terms of energy saving while waiting for a certain situation (bird coming home), DSLR still have some fragile and tiny advantages. They just ruin them by making loud shutter sounds to scare the bird away.
Keeping the sensor constantly under tension causes heat problems, solution will be a clever standby concept with super short wake up delay.
DLSR will exist as long as there are bodies left to shoot with, but the development of them is dead.