 |
| I made this picture today by scanning a 44 year old monochrome negative. Will any of our modern digital images stand the test of time this well ? Will any of our new hi-tech wunderkameras tell the story any better ? |
Most manufacturers have been busy this year rolling out products touted as new and improved.
But my impression is that the whole camera market is to a substantial extent jogging on the spot with much huffing and puffing but for the most part only modest progress.
The turn of the Century saw widespread acceptance of digital imaging. This was a disruptive innovation requiring players in the industry to adapt or exit.
But the concept of the camera changed little apart from replacing film with a silicon based sensor and circuitry.
The paradigm shift came in the form of the smart phone, which completely changed everything about creating, storing, editing and sharing images.
Camera sales have now been in decline for several years suggesting buyer disenchantment across the spectrum.
Cameras generally are lagging far behind smartphones for connectivity and for ‘all in one’ capability; that is the ability to capture, store, edit and share images with one single device.
When my grandchildren ask ‘what camera should I buy’ I say ‘get a smart phone’.
But those very same grandchildren say they want lots of zoom so maybe there is a future for cameras after all and specifically ones with a fixed long zoom lens.
Battles for dominance
It seems to me there are two main contests right now.
Considering Interchangeable Lens Cameras (ILC)the battle is between the ‘old guard’ consisting of the Digital Single Lens Camera (DSLR) and the ‘challengers’ consisting of Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Cameras (MILC).
DSLRs have the advantage of incumbency, but there is no direction in which the DSLR can evolve. Sure the sensors can improve but that technology can be used for any camera.
Meanwhile there are specific areas of weakness in MILC technology which are impeding development of the genre.
As I see it the main ones are
* The mechanical focal plane shutter. These things cause vibration producing image impairment. The ‘final solution’ is a global shutter. Some video cameras have a global shutter but one has not yet been fitted to a consumer MILC designed for stills as well as video.
There are workarounds including Electronic First Curtain Shutter (EFCS) and Electronic Shutter (E-Shutter), but both of these technologies have problems and limitations, making them a stop-gap technology.
* Electronic View Finder (EVF) refresh rates. EVFs have improved considerably over the last few years but none can yet match the refresh rate of an Optical View Finder (OVF). In addition even the latest EVFs have difficulty displaying correct color in all conditions.
* Continuous autofocus (AFC) on moving subjects with multiple exposures per second. This is sometimes called ‘follow focus’. MILCs are catching up to DSLRs but still have some way to go.
I think that delay in moving forward with a solution to these three technological problems is the main reason that progress in ILCs is in the doldrums at the moment.
DSLRs are going nowhere because they have nowhere to go.
MILCs have not yet supplanted DSLRs as the dominant ILC because they have unresolved issues which require technological solutions.
The second main contest within the camera world is that of Interchangeable Lens Camera (ILC) versus Fixed Zoom Lens Camera (FZLC).
I believe this contest is likely to be much more relevant for the great majority of people who decide to use a camera for making photos.
The reasons are simple and are all about the user experience: versatility, convenience, never having to change lenses, cost (never having to buy extra lenses), a ‘one-device’ solution to all photographic requirements.
But FZLCs have their own issues (some shared with MILCs) and await resolution of these before they can convince ILC users to switch camp in large numbers.
As I see it the main ones are:
* Follow focus capabilityNote: FZLCs use leaf shutters. I have not read any reports or claims of shutter shock blur with this shutter type.
* Zoom lens technology. This has improved dramatically in recent years particularly with the availability of aspheric lens elements in consumer cameras, but there is plenty of room for further development.
* Small sensor capability. This has also improved in recent years but more needs to be done.
Again we see evolution of a camera type restrained by the pace of technological development.
Just as ILCs are in the doldrums awaiting technological developments, so are FZLCs.
I believe that when the issues above have been resolved to the satisfaction of most camera users then ILCs will become the preferred camera type for a small group at the upper end of the market, with most opting for a FZLC.
So on my analysis the whole industry is marking time awaiting technological developments.
Hence the dearth of really convincing new cameras this year.
Of course, this being the Camera Ergonomics blog I must say that all cameras of all types are still afflicted by ongoing ergonomic deficiencies. But the solution to this is conceptual not technological.
Camera makers need to read this blog and take my excellent and carefully researched advice.
Let us quickly run through the current offerings by brand. I have used DP Review (dpreview.com) as data source.
Canon released 17 new still photo cameras this year, the most of any manufacturer. Yet I find not a single candidate for camera of the year (COTY) among them. The DSLRs are just reiterating established themes. They are not bad cameras but none of them pushes the envelope. Some have lots of pixels which exacerbates the vibration problem with flipping mirror and mechanical focal plane shutter.
The Powershots and MILCs are a mediocre, half baked bunch. Only one of them (the G5X) has a built in EVF but it has to have a little rest after each RAW capture. Is this the 21st Century ?
Fujifilm released 6 new cameras but I see nothing notable or really new here. The X-T10 looks like a recycled X-T1 with fewer features and a lower price. Same old sensor though, and I do mean old. Sensors four size levels smaller are now offering 20mpx yet the X-Cams are stuck at 16mpx.
Leicareleased 4 cameras, two of which, the Q and SL were actually new. The SL manages the previously-considered-impossible by being a MILC larger than many DSLRs, with similarly huge lenses and terrible ergonomics thrown in for bad measure.
Reviewers raved about the Q presumably because it is a camera some wealthy people might buy to use.
The Typ262 gives new meaning to the ‘retro’ idea with manual focus and no live view. Will anyone buy and use this thing ? Why ? What century are we in anyway?
Nikon is second to Canon with 15 new cameras this year. Two of them look interesting.
The P900 with its 83x superzoom lens reaching out to (35mm equivalent) 2000mm caused quite a stir with so much buyer response that the factory in Indonesia was unable to meet demand. I bought one and reviewed it for this blog. I found it to be a sheep in wolf’s clothing. The lens is difficult to use beyond about FLE1200mm. Getting and keeping a moving subject in the frame is very difficult.
Even with good VR achieving sharpness is difficult with camera shake and atmospheric distortion making their presence very obvious. The old Expeed C2 processor used is slow and precludes RAW capture. Lastly the ergonomics while not dreadful is just acceptable which is actually unacceptable on such a large camera which at no extra cost could have had a perfect ergonomic realisation.
The 1 Series J5 is notable for several advanced technological features. It is a MILC with no mechanical shutter (it uses an E-Shutter) and therefore no shutter shock. It can follow focus at 20 frames per second with, according to the DPReview testers, no EVF blackout.
It therefore appears, on the specifications and brief reports anyway, to have solved all three of the problems currently holding back MILC development.
Unfortunately all that techno wizardry is concealed inside an entry level consumer model with no EVF and no way to fit one.
Nikon continues to look confused about its intentions regarding the 1 Series camera system, housing what appears to be the fastest CAF performance in the entire camera industry inside a snapshooters compact.
Olympus listed 7 new models but most of them are essentially a recycling exercise with Mark 2 and –S variants of previous models. The Air A01 is new, but not a new idea, which might amuse some people for a while until the silly ergonomics of the thing spoil the fun.
Panasonic listed 9 new models but again most of them recycle existing sensors and other technology. Panasonic announced just this week that it will resume sensor development which had been on hold since 2011 following a series of disastrous financial results. Maybe this means the 20 Mpx sensor in the GX8 is the Sony IMX269. Unfortunately this is not a BSI type.
It seems to me the whole Micro Four Thirds system is marking time at the moment awaiting new developments in technology of sensors, EVFs, shutters and processing speed.
Panasonic says it wants to introduce 8K video which means 8000 pixels horizontal resolution. In 16:9 format that would give about 33 Mpx and in 4:3 format about 48Mpx. On a Micro Four Thirds sensor ????
So, no COTY candidate from Olympus or Panasonic this year.
Pentax/Ricoheach released 2 models, of little interest to COTY.
Samsungvery significantly released only one new model in 2015, the NX500, which I believe recycles the inner workings of the NX1. There are many rumors about Samsung’s intentions for its camera division. The fact that they presented only one (not very) new product does suggest an exit strategy in the making.
Sigmaas camera maker continues its eccentric ways with the addition of the dp0 to existing models in the very strange quattro range.
SonyReleased 8 new models during the year.
The A7R(2) will probably be nominated as COTY by many review sites and blogs. It has the most bells and whistles of any new camera this year, including first ever BSI full frame sensor with on chip CDAF and PDAF, IBIS and numerous other advances in technology. But there have been many complaints from reviewers and users about ergonomics, battery life and the range and quality of FE lenses.
Did I buy one ? No. Would I buy one? No.
For whom does this camera make sense ?
It seems to me that professional photographers and most dedicated enthusiast amateurs will stay with tried and tested DSLRs mainly from Nikon but some from Canon. These people want reliability, an established lens selection with the pro staples such as 24-70mm f2.8 and 70-200 mm f2.8 plus long fast lenses. They want good battery life. They want an integrated, coherent system. They want reassurance that their expensive new kit will not be rendered obsolete next week.
Most amateur photographers will get more than adequate picture quality and much more bang for their buck from M43 which does have an extensive selection of lenses.
Maybe the Sony A7 series cameras really do represent the dawn of a new age of full frame MILCs and I wish Sony the best of success with that.
But they have some way to go and there are ongoing concerns about Sony’s predilection for failing to fully support (E-Mount, 28mm sensor) or apparently abandoning (A-Mount) entire camera systems.
Summary
I see no clear COTY for 2015.
I think the entire camera industry is in prolonged crisis with buyers turning away in increasing numbers.
Will new technologies rescue the camera industry ?
I think so, yes, but at a much reduced level of sales to a discerning cohort of buyers who will not accept the many mediocre products and/or incomplete systems currently on offer.
Camera makers would also do their customers and therefore themselves a great good by paying far more attention to ergonomic factors in design than is currently the case.
