On 15 Nov 2007 09:03:18 -0800, Bill Tuthill wrote:

Arguments over relative merits of DSLR vs P&S digicams
occupy a plurality of current traffic volume on r.p.d.

In many ways it reminds me of the film vs digital debate
of the last many years.

DSLR partisans seem like the defenders of film, because
they don't have a lot of firm evidence that their workflow
is superior, except at high ISO or some arcane usage.

I know DSLRs are selling well, but do these flame wars
indicate the beginning of the end?

Pretty much.

Let us for a moment presume there is a sealed-lens/sensor design that doesn't
allow in any dust. Takes images in absolute silence. The lens range is a full
180-degree fish-eye to an extremely long zoom, all with either an aperture or
sensor ISO high enough to capture even the most difficult of hand-held
situations in any settings. The body is of a titanium shell for extreme
durability. Few moving parts allows operation in deep sub-zero environments. Let
us also presume that the electronic viewfinder (LCD and EVF) is high resolution
enough that its display, feedback, and articulation abilities far exceed
anything that has been implemented so far, optically or otherwise. Lets also
presume that these P&S camera designers also had the foresight to include the
options of shooting in the IR and UV portions of the spectrum too. This of
course is dependent on an EVF system because no optical viewfinder in the world
can accomplish this. Oh what the heck, while we're at it throw in high quality
video and CD quality stereo sound recording too so you don't even need your
camcorder as an accessory anymore. Why not.

Poof! There goes any need for the cumbersome lens interchangeability, size,
weight, noise, dust, high-cost, focal-plane shutter limitations, inaccurate and
dim OVF, and all the other drawbacks to using any DSLR.

Surprisingly I've already found all of these conditions met in only 2 P&S
cameras (minus the UV capability and a slightly higher resolution EVF) with only
2 inexpensive, small, and light-weight adapter lenses. I've already had
thousands of photos published with this combo. Not one person yet can tell that
they were done with P&S gear. A whole kit of 1 camera + 2 lenses fitting into
one large pocket. If these two P&S camera's features were combined nobody would
think twice about buying a DSLR. I certainly never do.

So yes, the advancements of the P&S camera are definitely the death-knell to the
DSLR. Why would anyone need lens interchangeability if all those ranges,
precision, and capability were built into one dust-free sealed lens? Nobody
thought that an 18x high-quality zoom lens was even conceivable just a short 5
years ago. It's just foolish to duplicate in many parts what can be accomplished
with just one. Speaking of all-in-1 options, CHDK is clear proof of that. You
can do all the same things, and even more than, what was one time only possible
by tethering your camera to a bulky and energy-hog computer. Now you don't even
need the expense, bulk, travel limitations, and power-requirements of a computer
if your camera can run CHDK.

Lens interchangeability and the high-ISO performance are the *only* two thing to
which the DSLR advocates are still tentatively holding onto. And at what cost?
Dust problems? Noise? Camera shake from the mirror and shutter? Slow mechanical
shutter limitations? Bulk? Weight? Do I need to list all the drawbacks?

Ultra-zoom lenses are already making one of those "benefits"(?) obsolete. They
are grasping at straws now trying to hold onto the high-ISO performance. When
it's already been clearly shown that if your long-zoom P&S lens has enough
aperture then even that is not the holy-grail to owning a DSLR.

Yes, the DSLR *IS* going bye-bye. It's not a matter of "if", it's a matter of
"when". And to my findings the sooner the better. They're a waste of time, cost,
weight, materials, research, and labor. Based on a design that is half a century
old with all the same limitations that were inherent in that format from way
back then. The only ones still clamoring to wanting a DSLR appear to be those
more bent on status, peer pressure, and acceptance by those around them than
actually wanting to increase their chances at getting a decent photo. You know,
the ones who are still emotionally insecure, the ones that have to run with the
mindless herd for fear of getting lost.

The DSLR will have about the same fondness in 15 years as we do when looking
back on the flash-cube Instamatic from the late 60's with all its inherent
faults, drawbacks, and limitations. The phrase "I can't believe we put up with
those DSLRs back then," will be commonly heard.