[toni-a]

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/features/dead-pool-canon-m-micro-four-thirds-hasselblad-xcd-pentax-k-dead-by-2025
Just came through this article 
It seems all he is after are clicks and views... 
 I don't see MFT doomed, since more Than ten years I read it's the end of Pentax, Pentax is dying next year...
In this article they are assuming a brand or mount will survive for what it is, while everything depends on what the company does and if they innovate and do good marketing. 
My humble opinion is all is possible, even Canon and Sony might do fatal errors, there are no possibilities of predictions. 
While APS-C was declining in Canikon land it rose nicely in Fuji land, who would have said Samsung will leave? 
SO my humble opinion is that all depends on how companies will manage things, nothing is guaranteed

[obican]

Everyone had said Samsung would leave. Only Samsung said they wouldn't. Same for Sony A-Mount, it was so obvious that they'd leave, despite their it ever happened.

[Klaus]

The other day I read another article which I found more interesting than the usual doomsday ones.
The author ranted on the fact that while full format cameras got smaller, the lenses actually got bigger and also heavier - leading to the unfortunate situation that the setups are terribly unbalanced and overall nothing has really been improved.

I actually mentioned this quite often in the reviews.

IMHO the only mirrorless system that is offering good ergonomics - that's when including the lenses - is MFT. And it's the only system that delivers upon the promise of being truly smaller than anything DSLR while not being too small thus avoiding to get unmanageable (like Nikon 1 and Pentax Q).
Fuji lenses are actually too close to DSLR variants in size/weight. Sony E had some potential but they lost it along the way. The same goes for EOS M.

Of course ... these are just my 2c

[obican]

Sony FE lenses are just plain stupid at this point. They could've made all their GM glass in the A-Mount, which already has all the advantages of mirrorless cameras except for the size and weight and let people who want a large camera for large lenses and long battery life be happy with a large form factor. On top of that, refine the mount adapter, continue with the original Sony/Zeiss mentality which is small, medium speed, expensive but excellent lenses for the mirrorless cameras. That was so easy. Now nobody is happy except for the people who'd be happy with literally anything.

Sony E is pretty much at the same point Canon EF-S has been for the past 18 years. You want mediocre zooms? You got them. you want expensive and mediocre zooms? You got them. You want sensible primes and top quality zooms? You go full frame. But again, people who only buy a camera based on specs along with a single bundled lens are happy. Same goes for EOS M, 95% of people who buy them are not interested in cameras to begin with, they are happy to own a Canon.

[toni-a]

Sony E is pretty much at the same point Canon EF-S has been for the past 18 years. You want mediocre zooms? You got them. you want expensive and mediocre zooms? You got them. You want sensible primes and top quality zooms? You go full frame. But again, people who only buy a camera based on specs along with a single bundled lens are happy. Same goes for EOS M, 95% of people who buy them are not interested in cameras to begin with, they are happy to own a Canon.

Agreed most EOS-M and lower end Canon APS-C buy nothing but the camera plus kit zoom, however in Canon APS-C golden days it was also used by many pros because full frame prices were prohibitive that's why in Canon and Nikon APS-C you will find a lot of decent lenses, even for Nikon for some time even their i flagship was APS-C like D2X
so you have some very decent Canikon APS-C lenses: Nikon 17-55f2.8, Nikon 16-85 , Nikon 18-105 and Nikon 12-24 are examples.
In Canon land you have 15-85 17-55f2.8IS 18-135thatb are very good performers without forgetting some very good third party offerings
Meanwhile for APS-C Sony offered good lenses in APS-C A mount, in E mount nothing really interesting aside 10-18 and to a lesser degree 18-135 the others are better suited for video, Sony 16-50 has noting good in it except size and quite handy range. So you can't compare a neglected sysyem like Sony E to Canon Efs or Nikon DX

[thxbb12]

@Klaus, the wording "ergonomics" is not exactly right; I think a better wording would be "total package size" (TPS).
I don't fully agree that only MFT qualifies here.
If you pick certain use-cases/lens combos, other systems are as well suited, if not better.

For instance, the following setups can be very interesting in term of TPS:

Fuji
- Body: X-T30
- Lenses: 16 f2.8 (or 14), 23 f2, 35 f2, 50 f2
Also the 15-45 zoom is very small (although plastic-fantastic and electric zoom - which I hate).

Sony FE
- Body: A7 III
- Lenses: Samyang 18 f2.8, 24 f2.8, 35 f2.8, 45 f1.8, 75 f1.8
Also, the Tamron 17-28 f2.8 and 70-180 f2.8 are quite compact

[toni-a]

Frankly for walks in the parks, hiking and travel I agree with you, lightweight and tiny combo is important however for  events and weddings I'd prefer a sturdy high performance kit, I have a wedding next month, and I will be using 7D2 plus 17-55f2.8 or 24-105f4IS plus Canon speedlite, the combo is big and  heavy yes but no compromises on performance, my secondary camera will be RP plus Tokina 16-28f2.8 and primes35mmf2.0IS  50f1.4 85mm f1.8 and 100mm macro for shallow DOF portraits and shooting the ambiance.
Ghas will be assisting me, he will be using Canon 6D Mkii as camera body plus speedlites, we will be sharing lenses.
total weight of the gear used, if you add tripods and monopod, is easily more than 10 kilos and it is the least of the concerns.

PS. My three year old  daughter, will be the ring bearer  so I don't know if I will take any shot of the bride 

[Klaus]

@Klaus, the wording "ergonomics" is not exactly right; I think a better wording would be "total package size" (TPS).
I don't fully agree that only MFT qualifies here.
If you pick certain use-cases/lens combos, other systems are as well suited, if not better.

For instance, the following setups can be very interesting in term of TPS:

Fuji
- Body: X-T30
- Lenses: 16 f2.8 (or 14), 23 f2, 35 f2, 50 f2
Also the 15-45 zoom is very small (although plastic-fantastic and electric zoom - which I hate).

Sony FE
- Body: A7 III
- Lenses: Samyang 18 f2.8, 24 f2.8, 35 f2.8, 45 f1.8, 75 f1.8
Also, the Tamron 17-28 f2.8 and 70-180 f2.8 are quite compact

Actually I do think that ergonomics is the right word.

A tiny FF mirrorless with 24-70mm f/2.8 simply doesn't handle well because it's so unbalanced. 
This changes a bit when adding a vertical grip - but then the TPS is getting even worse than that of a naked DSLR.

Of course, there are setups where this isn't an issue as you mentioned. Most FF mirrorless cameras are targeting prosumers - and this group tends to invest in such high-speed zoom lenses.

[toni-a]

Folks keep in mind that small size and lightweight  isn't always an advantage, I paid extra $$$ for an extension grip for my EOS RP that added nothing but extra size and weight but made it much better to handle, smaller and lighter isn't always good for ergonomics

[thxbb12]

I've never really understood the critiques about lenses not balancing well on a body.
The way I see it is very simple: if a lens is way bigger than the body, then fine: just hold the lens when taking a picture.
To me, this is a non-existent issue: you carry the body with the right hand and use the left hand to support the lens.
If I have a big body, I'd do exactly the same. The size of the body is irrelevant.