I think the discussion about moving across to MILC is not only impacted by the tech, but by one's circumstances. If I was younger and not already heavily invested in DSLR gear I would certainly be eyeing the emerging MILC market with interest and looking to get the R lenses and bodies to go with them as their performance reaches my requirements and expectations. But I am not young and personally I have about $35kNZ invested in Canon glass - most of it EF or EF-S and of course I have about another $28kNZ worth of bodies to match. So I am not rushing over to the new FF mirrorless right away. As Canon have said there is much development ahead for that platform, and in the meantime there will likely be some new and excellent DSLR bodies out this year, which I shall consider carefully on their merits.
I look at the celebrated images taken back over the years that have stood the test of time and, to me, what they share in common is subject, timing, and technqiue - certainly the tech makes some difference and it MUCH easier today to get amazing images than in times gone by. As to the outcome: I am not a pixel peeper. I take images that I like to look at from a reasonable distance and being retired I am not seeing the value of divesting myself of the gear I have got and know so well - with bodies, the return on investment is the use you make of them rather than the resale value. So if I don't sell my current gear en masse, what is the ROI in getting even more right now (remember I'm retired on a pension). The mirrorless market is in its adolescence, if not its infancy, so there is time for me to save up for the one or two great MILC bodies I might want in the future when things reach maturity - if I'm still around that is... 
@Tronhard wrote:I think the discussion about moving across to MILC is not only impacted by the tech, but by one's circumstances. If I was younger and not already heavily invested in DSLR gear I would certainly be eyeing the emerging MILC market with interest and looking to get the R lenses and bodies to go with them as their performance reaches my requirements and expectations. But I am not young and personally I have about $35kNZ invested in Canon glass - most of it EF or EF-S and of course I have about another $28kNZ worth of bodies to match. So I am not rushing over to the new FF mirrorless right away. As Canon have said there is much development ahead for that platform, and in the meantime there will likely be some new and excellent DSLR bodies out this year, which I shall consider carefully on their merits.
I look at the celebrated images taken back over the years that have stood the test of time and, to me, what they share in common is subject, timing, and technqiue - certainly the tech makes some difference and it MUCH easier today to get amazing images than in times gone by. As to the outcome: I am not a pixel peeper. I take images that I like to look at from a reasonable distance and being retired I am not seeing the value of divesting myself of the gear I have got and know so well - with bodies, the return on investment is the use you make of them rather than the resale value. So if I don't sell my current gear en masse, what is the ROI in getting even more right now (remember I'm retired on a pension). The mirrorless market is in its adolescence, if not its infancy, so there is time for me to save up for the one or two great MILC bodies I might want in the future when things reach maturity - if I'm still around that is...
I think your reasoning is very well stated and makes perfect sense. If I were invested that heavily in Canon gear and glass, there is no way I'm going to dive into an emerging market with its high prices, limitations and trade-offs. As you say, when the market and product matures and competition starts driving prices down a bit, that would be the time to evaluate a move into mirrorless. Also, selling all your existing gear at cut-rate prices to dive into an immature mirrorless market at this stage also makes no sense to me. I myself would only sell primes and other glass that I might not be using.
That said, for someone like me, who has hundreds, not many thousands, of dollars, invested in DSLR tech, the likeliehood of moving into mirrorless is more of a near-term possibility.
@ebiggs1 wrote:"...in the meantime there will likely be some new and excellent DSLR bodies out this year, which I shall consider carefully on their merits."
You know if I could have a F1n in a DSLR format, I would be happy. I don't need all the gadgets that come as the latest greatest. Just give me a meter and a shutter button. I'll do the rest. Oh, OK, throw in AF (yeah, we all get older eyes eventually!) but that's it.
That is why I bought two Nikon Df bodies - the Df (f for fusion) harkens back to the layout and feel of the Nikon F and A-1 bodies that I used back in the day. All my gear is Canon except these two bodies and two zooms to go with them. While keeping the full digital menus and capabilities available, Nikon have supplied the physical controls from back in the day. Added to that they put in the fabulous FF sensor from the Nikon D4, which gives it brilliant low light capabilities. The only criticism I have is that they put the card slot on the bottom beside the battery, which makes it a pain to change if one uses a battery grip (admittedly not supplied by Nikon).
Nikon initially got a lot of flak for this
"The Df is an amazing camera and was hammered by people who have no or minimal contact with it. This is a camera that CAN be used as a digital DSLR, or it can be the digital version of the film cameras I used to use back in the days when I first started as a photographer. You can choose which personality you use or apply a combination of those two interfaces.
Its intent is to re-create, as much as possible, the experience that photographers had when using a film camera. But it recognizes that digital photography has other elements that film did not have and it has tried to deal with those without losing the analogue interface. The experience of using film required a discipline of approach that one does not have to have today and what some regard as shortcomings, I see as a recreation of those conditions, and I'm fine with it.
The clues to the fusion philosophy are in the whole design ethic:
- The ability to use Non-AI lenses
- The use of analogue dials controlling the essentials
- The fabulous sensor, upgraded with a new processor to improve low-light/high ISO performance. It encourages you to use available light and fast prime lenses.
- The removal of video to concentrate on stills, making the camera more compact and lighter.
Let me address some of the criticisms I have seen hurled at this:
- It's a STILL photographers' camera - that deserves no apology, there are many DSLRs out there that do video just fine.
- It doesn't have a built-in flash. Neither did the film cameras, but it has a perfectly serviceable flash hot shoe with all the capabilities of any Nikon camera built-in.
- The unit does not have enough focusing points. It has a lot more that film cameras did and it works fine.
- There is only one card slot. Film cameras could only hold one film at a time. In the days of film when I was shooting around NZ, Australia and Asia for landscape, wildlife and travel production I could carry only a limited amount of film and that had a finite life in the very hot conditions. When I took a photo I would not know if it came out for maybe a month before it was developed. The temptation was to take several bracketing shots, but then there was the limited film capacity to consider. It generated a discipline of being sparing and very careful with my settings and composition. I still do that today with digital and shoot a lot less than my contemporaries who only knew the digital environment.
- The controls have lock on them - yep and so did most of the film cameras, it's about learning to get used to them, once you do it's automatic.
This camera is all about taking time to enjoy the process of taking a photo, as well as the final outcome. In a similar situation my daughter's boyfriend asked about my record turntable and asked why I would still have one of those when an MP3 player was much more efficient. My response was that playing a record became an occasion in its own right and that was a big part of the enjoyment for me - in exactly the same way as taking a photo with the Df does.
I have now retired from my photographic career, I take photos for free and for me. I still have over $45k of Canon gear, which I have used since I went digital and I shall continue to use it. I chose Canon for its glass, but I always respected Nikon - I used them both when I shot film. I chose to switch brands for this body alone because of what it is specifically and I am happy that I have done so.
There are a lot of photographers out there who crave the latest technology on the belief that a better camera will make them a better photographer, or that the gear is somehow holding back their innate abilities. In 38 years of photography I have never felt constrained by the gear (I have used Nikon, Canon, Olympus and several other medium format brands). I have felt constrained by my skill in using what I have. For those who want the latest tech this is not for you, move on and be happy. For those of us who value the process this is a fine camera and worthy of respect."
I would LOVE Canon to do something like this for a retro, but high performance DSLR. I recognize that backward compatibility issues would be a challenge, but making an EF mount body with the same physical controls as the F or A-1 body would, I believe, find a sympathetic market amongst those who were, or are film users.
"That is why I bought two Nikon Df bodies - the Df ..."
It is a little beyound a shutter button and a meter!
@ebiggs1 wrote:"That is why I bought two Nikon Df bodies - the Df ..."
It is a little beyound a shutter button and a meter!
I agree that the detail is different but the principle is the same and this one exists!
In the very simple situation you suggest I suspect it would be possible to construct such a camera, cannibalizing the parts from other units. I would suggest giving it a try or putting the idea out there on sites where people look for custom 3D printing projects!
"I believe Nikon have had the edge on their sensor tech for a long time."
This is only a partial victory for Nikon which I agree with you to a point. Nikon does not make some or for a while most of their own sensors. They buy them.
I believe the D5 is a Nikon designed sensor but I am not sure Nikon actually manufacturers it. The sensor in the only Nikon I am interested in, the D850, is made by Sony. In the end if you can't make the best something and you want the best something, perhaps you should buy it and just admit you can't do it.
At this point I will never switch or leave Canon. I have been with Canon so long my camera is just like an extension of my hand. It just feels right, like a good friend. I will still criticize them when they screw up, IMHO 
, of course, which they really don't care. I'm sure.
@ebiggs1 wrote:"I believe Nikon have had the edge on their sensor tech for a long time."
This is only a partial victory for Nikon which I agree with you to a point. Nikon does not make some or for a while most of their own sensors. They buy them.
I believe the D5 is a Nikon designed sensor but I am not sure Nikon actually manufacturers it. The sensor in the only Nikon I am interested in, the D850, is made by Sony. In the end if you can't make the best something and you want the best something, perhaps you should buy it and just admit you can't do it.
At this point I will never switch or leave Canon. I have been with Canon so long my camera is just like an extension of my hand. It just feels right, like a good friend. I will still criticize them when they screw up, IMHO
--------------------------------------------------------------
I think you get my point. I preferred Canon's Glass, which from a longevity perspective I considered the more important characteristic, and I agree that with so much Canon gear, the interface is familiar to the point of being almost automatic for me. I find it very easy to move between Canon products.
My comment about going to Nikon was, I hoped clearly made, that the Nikon Df body fulfilled a very specific desire to take images in a way I had done with film and the Df was just right in that respect - as I said I would encourage Canon to make there of Df equivalent for the F or A1 body look-alike. The Nikon Df sensor is highly regarded (from what I have read) for its performance particularly in low light, something I have experienced myself. I don't need a 50MP sensor and 16 on the Df does just fine for me. I DO find the interface of the menu system something to get used to, and the fact that the lenses turn in the opposite direction has caught me more than once, but JUST for this body I let Nikon into my stable of gear.
At last count I had 26 Bodies, all but 3 of which are Canon, and 20 lenses, all but 2 of which are Canon, so as I said, I'm pretty committed to the brand - I think I can still rate myself as a Loyal Customer!
