What's new
  • Guest
    As per our long standing policy of not permitting medical advice on the forum - all threads concerning the Coronavirus will be locked.
    For more info on the coronavirus please see the link below:

Is the end of the DSLR here?

Canon's new mirrorless is very impressive... and shuts down all but the highest end DSLRs
and this is from a Nikon Fanboi

"Our Verdict
So far, so amazing. While we need to put the Canon EOS R5 through a full battery of lab tests and long-term usage, we’re overwhelmingly impressed by what we’ve seen so far. It’s going to be too much camera for most people, but if you want near-medium format muscle then its 45MP stills packs a powerful punch, while serious videographers will be awed by both its 8K and 4K capabilities. The game really is being changed."

Sensor: 45MP full-frame CMOS 36 x 24mm
Image processor: Digic X
AF points: 5,940 Dual Pixel CMOS AF II
ISO range: 100-51,200 (expandable to 50-102,400)
Stabilization: 5-axis, up to 8 stops
Max image size: 8,192 x 5,464px
Metering zones: 384
Video: 8K DCI or UHD at 30p, 24p / 4K DCI or UHD at 120p, 100p, 60p, 50p, 30p, 25p, 24p / 1080p (FullHD) at 60p, 50p, 30p, 25p, 24p
Viewfinder: 0.5-inch OLED EVF, 5,690k dots, 100% coverage, 0.76x magnification, 120fps refresh rate
Memory card: 1x CFexpress type B, 1x UHS-II SD/SDHC/SDXC
LCD: 3.15-inch fully articulating touchscreen, 2,100k dots.
Max burst: 12fps mechanical shutter, 20fps electronic shutter
Connectivity: Wi-Fi 5Ghz and 2.4GHz, Bluetooth 4.2, USB-C (USB 3.1 Gen 2), micro HDMI (type D), microphone, headphone, N3 remote, flash sync, gigabit ethernet (via WFT-R10 grip)
Size: 135.8 x 97.5 x 88mm
Weight: 650g body only (738g with card and battery)

Such are the lofty specs of the Canon EOS R5 that virtually every feature is a key feature. Obviously the headline attraction here is the remarkable video capability. The R5 can capture full-width (uncropped) raw 8K video using the entire readout of the 35mm sensor – and it does so internally at up to 29.97fps in 4:2:2 12-bit Canon Log or HDR PQ (both H.265) in both UHD and DCI.

Its 4K capture is every bit as ferocious, recording at up to 119.88fps (in the same 4:2:2 Canon Log or HDR PQ, in UHD or DCI) with external HDMI recording up at up to 59.94fps. However, the R5 is much more than just a video behemoth.

Since the 8K DCI video has a resolution of 8,192 x 4,320, the camera has a Frame Grab function that enables you to take high-resolution 35.4MP stills (as either JPEGs or HEIF files) from your footage – which is 5.1MP greater resolution than the Canon EOS R.

All of this is thanks to the brand new 45MP image sensor, which Canon claims makes the R5 “the highest resolution EOS camera ever” – supposedly resolving even greater detail than the 50.6MP Canon EOS 5DS / R. This is thanks to the new low-pass filter design, which was introduced in the flagship Canon EOS-1D X Mark III.

Traditional low-pass filters (employed to get rid of moiré) employ dual-layer, four-point subsampling and introduce a layer of softness to images. Canon’s new tech features quad-layer, 16-point subsampling and combines it with a Gaussian distribution technique to deliver sharpness rivalling the 5DS / R. Our lab results for the 1D X Mark III didn’t quite bear this out, so we’ll need to put the R5 through a full raft of tests.
Looks like a pretty amazing camera, wish I could afford it because I've always wanted a full-frame digital camera with resolution to match my old medium format film rig. I'm not really a fan of the convergence of still and video, either, but I suppose it's inevitable.
The end of the dslr is here ... the new lenses are medium format quality as well..that said unless you are doing magazine shots or are professional you’d be hard pressed to need the resolution of a regular slr .. hell some our favorite photos come from my wife’s Sony phone ( which to be fair is a better camera than phone )


Yeah, I switched from Nikon to Fuji a few years ago. Also not going back. That being said almost any reasonably recent dslr or mirrorless is more than capable in the right hands. We all shoot with what we’re comfortable with.
I skipped over the DSLRs. I had a Minolta SLR in the 90's but never really learned how to use it just left it in auto. Then I went to a couple different point and shoot super zooms. When I got my first real camera and got serious about it the Pansonic GX85 just had so many more feature and ones closer to what I was used to than a DSLR for even close to the same price. I may one day go full frame or APSc, but I think I still have a few good years in micro 4/3s. More than happy to trade the smaller sensor for the features and price. Exited to see what else there is in another 5-10 years though.
I have a Nikon d750 and it’s pretty awesome, sadly I don’t use it as much as I used to. These days I’m shooting mostly film again for family shots, and everything else is on my phone.

I do enjoy using the dslr but the size is something that keeps me from carrying it all the time. Totally my fault though because I insist on keeping a battery grip on it. I would probably go mirrorless if buying something brand new now though.

I also am not a fan of the video/camera mashup. I never take videos so it’s a useless feature for me.


Moderator Emeritus
I'm interested in how many buyers will have a computer capable of dealing with 8k video files.

The other thing to bare in mind is, while a mirrorless camera is a bit smaller and lighter, the lenses for a full frame mirrorless will be just as big, and sometimes bigger than the SLR equivalent. In my experience this can negate most of the weight advantage, and cause problems with ergonomics.

I think the SLR's days are numbered, but there is still a place for them for the time being.
I'm interested in how many buyers will have a computer capable of dealing with 8k video files.

The other thing to bare in mind is, while a mirrorless camera is a bit smaller and lighter, the lenses for a full frame mirrorless will be just as big, and sometimes bigger than the SLR equivalent. In my experience this can negate most of the weight advantage, and cause problems with ergonomics.

I think the SLR's days are numbered, but there is still a place for them for the time being.
I don’t think its really the size as much as you have the built in IS, lack of a legacy shutter, better mechanisms of autofocus ( their deep learning algorithms ) and for resolution nuts, glass that can resolve 45 mpx. (Even for non resolution nuts, resolution is built in zoom ).

That said you can imagine a r5 plus a small fixed 35 lens perhaps not being a Leica but functionally pretty close with a format that is familiar.

I am not going to change but if I were going to start over I would - for the next generation - I think it does make sense. That said for retro film used - I think BW etc SLR’s will clearly be needed ? ( but you can see that flipping to toy cameras to be honest)

For normal humans used to normal human price tags I think the r6 is for us.
According to this article the camera will overheat in a variety of situations
interesting, it does feel video related though, in that article it’s throttling the high res video mode only, so it feels that standard burst still was not throttled?. That said I get your point, its not to clear to me when standard photography in continuous mode becomes a video, though they are different modes on my 5div.. clearly.

My only guess for that to be plausible is that the 8k video mode must be compressing it into the video format which might be causing the heat issues? In contrast continuous burst raw saving just saves giant files? I can not afford this camera but I am very curious now :)

The other thing it might be is the FPS seems to be different in all these modes, so it’s 30 FPS in 8K video 120 FPS in 4K video and I assume for photography 12 FPS with a mechanical shutter ( which I did not realize it had ) and 20 FPS with silent. Perhaps its not throttling the photography side because raw saving at those FPS is relatively non intensive? ( which would align with the article )

For those prices, I'll hold onto my Canon DSLR and the few good lenses that I have. My DSLR is about 12 years old and still takes great pics.
As a still photographer who has zero interest in video, the only feature that mirrorless gives me that's missing from a SLR system is short flange depth. That said, My a900 can infinity focus with adapted M42, DKL and Tamron Adaptall lenses, that's a bunch of cool vintage glass I have access to, though far less than mirrorless bodies make available.

When truly excellent EVFs start becoming *affordable* that will tilt the playing field as well, since sub 6MP EVFs are very disappointing IMO, not that you can't get great images from a camera that uses a lower res. EVF, it's just harder to see the subtleties of the scene through that limitation.

As far as the megapixel hot-war reigniting, I have to say that I'd rather see improved dynamic range, especially at higher ISO, prioritized over 40MP+ full frame res. (not that current gen sensors have bad DR!). Honestly, 24MP FF is more pixels than most photographers will ever need and even with storage density increasing and prices decreasing, a large body of work at 60MP in RAW (plus your backup) is going to suck some serious HD space!

As always, the state of the art should push the limits of technology, but that doesn't mean we all want it (or should). It certainly doesn't mean we should scrap our existing hardware, so long as we're getting results we like from it...

The thread title is spot on though, we've been seeing the slow death of the optical SLR format since Sony's reintroduction of pellicle mirrors and the proliferation of mirrorless as a size/video/price solution for budget through advanced amateur level interchangeable lens cameras.