SLRs and their digital companions have been around for quite a while now. The first commerical SLR with a pentaprism, the standard amongst DSLRs today debuted in 1935. They have continued to evolve through the years, from the metal bodies of the classic Nikon FMs, Canon AE1s, Olympus OMDs etc towards the more modern bodies, such as the Nikon F65s and the Canon 1Ns. They were so great because they allowed the photographer to see what the lens/film was going to resolve when they pressed the button.The Digital SLR, or the DSLR for short, created another stir where digital photography began to become a viable photographic tool. Some revolutionary DSLRs include the Kodak DSC100, a 1.3MP DSLR that cost 30,000 dollars, Nikon D1, which disputed Kodak’s rule on the DSLR market with the tempting prospect of being able to use existing Nikon lenses on the body, the Canon EOS 300D, a sub-$1000 that brought DSLR into the reach of amateur photographers, the EOS 1Ds, one of the first full frame DSLRs available on the market, the Nikon D90 which marked the first camera with 720P, followed by the EOS 5D MKII with 1080p video. Even more recently still is the Nikon D800/D800E, with whooping 36 Megapixel sensors, which marks new grounds for photographers, and is considered on-par with film quality.

So why is this article titled the fate of DSLRs? They seem to be doing pretty well. When you go around the world can find tourists with their DSLRs. When you watch the Olympics, you can see professionals gunning away with their professional DSLRs and telephoto lenses. Surely the DSLR is not going to die anytime soon.

The answer to that is the subject of today’s discussion. Since the first SLRs took off, technology has slowly started to catch up. The first technology is the compact digital camera. One of the biggest disadvantages of DSLRs is their bulk. I recently embarked on a school trip to Mt Kosciusko, and even only with a Canon EOS 450D, two relatively light lenses and a flash, I could feel the weight of it on my back. You may call me a wimp or a weakling, but let me assure you, carrying a full sized DSLRs and a couple of lenses will cause fatigue. Many people do not want the weight, hence they use the compact camera. Although the compact camera used to be miles behind in image quality, now a compact camera can deliver pretty decent results.

What is the fate of the DSLR?

The Compact System Camera or the Mirrorless Camera is also a challenger to the DSLR. Olympus, Panasonic, Samsung, Fujifilm, Ricoh, just to name a few, only release Compact System cameras now. These cameras lack a mirror and are therefore a lot smaller and lighter than DSLRs. Originally the case against the CSC is the lack of lenses for the systems. But now, some serious lenses have been released for the CSC. In the primes department, Olympus has released the 12mm, the 17mm and the 45mm, which are all serious pieces of glass. Panasonic has a 12-35 and a 35-100 F2.8 zoom, equivalent to the 24-70 and a 70-200 in full frame terms. The Compact System Camera promises the image quality of a DSLR without its weight. I often find myself recommending a CSC to somebody looking for a camera to take with them when they are travelling if they ask for something light but with good image quality. Once the CSC hits full frame, which it has in some instances, it may lead to a decline in DSLRs.

DSLRs retain the advantage of autofocus speed and burst shooting over CSCs, but even then, CSCs are improving. The Sony NEX-7 can 10FPS when in a speed priority move, and other CSCs can hit that mark as well.

I am sure that the DSLR will be around for a lot longer, but perhaps one day, this beast will become part of photographic history. As technology progresses, newer and lighter technologies will rise and take its place. What do you think is the fate of the DSLR?