Random thoughts: (recognising this is Nikon forum, I will mention the C word too!)
I do like Nikon's CX system at a technical level. It is the price/performance I have difficulty with, where I think it needs to be much lower positioned in that way. I don't think it is small enough to justify a premium. I recognise that beyond a point, the sensor size probably isn't making a significant difference in body cost so they can't really push it down.
I know everyone has been predicting the downfall of DSLRs for years, but we're still not there yet. What would be a good milestone to look to? The year when more mirrorless bodies are shipped than DSLRs? Anyone brave enough to guess when that will be? 3 years? 5 years? Something else?
Even when Canon/Nikon go full on mirrorless, I still don't think it'll be an overnight transition. Everyone already with a DSLR will ask themselves, what does the new system do that I can't do now? The transition would be interesting. Will people dual-system? Adapt the DSLR lenses to cover shortcomings in the mirrorless, at least for the early days (assuming each manufacturer will offer adapters offering a good level of backward compatibility). That in itself will probably mean SLR lenses will hold value long after any mirrorless offering is made, with the first drops being the areas directly covered by the new native mirrorless lenses.
It was before my time, but is there anything from the Canon FD to EF shift we can learn from? Of course Nikon sidestepped that problem by not changing mount, with the benefits and negatives that go along with it.
Oh, I see on CanonRumors someone has dug up a patent for 50mm f/3.5 macro for full frame mirrorless from Canon. Take it for what you will...
I do like Nikon's CX system at a technical level. It is the price/performance I have difficulty with, where I think it needs to be much lower positioned in that way. I don't think it is small enough to justify a premium. I recognise that beyond a point, the sensor size probably isn't making a significant difference in body cost so they can't really push it down.
I know everyone has been predicting the downfall of DSLRs for years, but we're still not there yet. What would be a good milestone to look to? The year when more mirrorless bodies are shipped than DSLRs? Anyone brave enough to guess when that will be? 3 years? 5 years? Something else?
Even when Canon/Nikon go full on mirrorless, I still don't think it'll be an overnight transition. Everyone already with a DSLR will ask themselves, what does the new system do that I can't do now? The transition would be interesting. Will people dual-system? Adapt the DSLR lenses to cover shortcomings in the mirrorless, at least for the early days (assuming each manufacturer will offer adapters offering a good level of backward compatibility). That in itself will probably mean SLR lenses will hold value long after any mirrorless offering is made, with the first drops being the areas directly covered by the new native mirrorless lenses.
It was before my time, but is there anything from the Canon FD to EF shift we can learn from? Of course Nikon sidestepped that problem by not changing mount, with the benefits and negatives that go along with it.
Oh, I see on CanonRumors someone has dug up a patent for 50mm f/3.5 macro for full frame mirrorless from Canon. Take it for what you will...
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.