With mirrorless slowly becoming the new standar, will DSLR mount lenses lose value?

Generational changes, such as vinyl to CD, tape to DVD and film to digital, tend to occur very quickly. Individuals may continue to use old technology while it works for them, and some may never change for a variety of reasons. While this may blur the transition, the real indicator is new sales. The largest record store in Chicago closed one Saturday night in the mid-90's, and reopened Monday with vinyl records completely gone*, replaced with CDs. I didn't take much notice at the time (and never really looked), but the wave hit camera sales in or near the year 2003.

 

The same will happen with DSLR to MILC in the not to distant future. Professional photographers have a lot of loyalty to brands and models they find reliable and do the jobs to which they are tasked. That brand loyalty may benefit Nikon (and eventually Canon), but at the expense of DSLR sales.The pro-level market is approximately $3.2 Billion annually, and in the course of 4 short years high-end FX Sony sales have risen from virtually nothing to $1 Billion.

 

The technical advantages over DSLRs is undisputed, especially for focusing, tracking, exposure control and speed. With MILC's, focusing and exposure are embedded in the sensor, not separate arrays in the bottom of the mirror box. No alignment, aka "fine tuning," is required. Coverage is approaching 100%, compared to about 25% in DSLR's. If 20 fps isn't enough, MILC's can do 4K (or higher) video, 10 MP/frame at 60+ fps, all with a real-time, heads-up, live-view display.

 

* One of the quirks of the music and book business is that unsold items can be returned to the distributer, at the expense of the artist or author. Returns are subtracted from royalties.

I do prefer Nikon in general, but I think for Pros and those of us with lots of gear in a particular system, the loyalty is more economic than emotional. It just costs too much to go out and build a new working system from scratch. As to mirrorless, I suppose they will eventually dominate, or something as yet unimagined will, but to me, there is no substitute for a viewfinder, and I can't imagine a broader selection of lenses than is available for Nikon, or Canon for that matter.

I am the "old Ludite" who came into mirrorless only early this year. I purchased a Fuji X-E1 with the two kit lenses & have no regrets. The transistion from viewfinder (both RF & SLR) has been non existent. . .my eyeball see's the image. . .& if I am lazy, I use the back screen. At present I have adapters for 3 Minolta lenses from an XG-1 system and even for my FSU Jupiter-8 lens. As many above have stated, if it fits your "style". . . use it. Like cars, a lens is -40% out the door.. . . never mind "aging". Bill

just chasing technology. waste of money.

Photography gear changes quickly these days. I think the DSLR system is going to start/continue winding down (my opinion). You-tube is a game changer concerning the popularity of camera's with great video features.

Seems to me that when a digital viewfinder is high enough in resolution that you don't notice that it is digital, the transition will go fast.

 

There are plenty of non-interchangeable lens cameras with a digital (eye level) viewfinder, but not quite enough resolution.

With auto-focus, maybe you don't notice, but not enough for manual focus.