 |
| Flowers by the wayside. Canon SX60. While out for a walk, I made this photo of flowers growing at about waist height by setting Macro Mode on the SX60, moving the camera close to the subject and firing hand held using autofocus, viewing on the fully articulated monitor. The process took about a minute, with me grabbing shots inbetween gusts of wind. If I had been using full frame camera this photo would have required a tripod, macro lens, 15 minutes of setup time and lots of luck because the lens would have to be stopped down leading to slow shutter speeds and mostly blurred pictures because of the wind. |
ILC: Interchangeable Lens Camera
DSLR: Digital Single Lens Reflex Camera
MILC: Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera
FZLC: Fixed Zoom Lens Camera
In November 2013 I posted a 4 part series entitled ‘The Future of Cameras’. This was part fact, part analysis, part conjecture.
Since then dramatic changes have continued to shake the camera industry. Overall sales have further declined, the fall now affecting DSLRs as well as compacts.
Despite falling sales, camera makers have continued to pump increasing numbers of models onto the market. I checked the Canon Australia website today. Canon lists 15 current models of ILC, 13 of which are DSLRs and 2 are MILCs. Ten have a 27mm diagonal (APS-C) sensor, five a 43mm diagonal (full frame) sensor.
In retail outlets even more camera models are available as unsold stocks of the previous two or three generations of models are still on the shelves.
On the same website 84 lens models are listed.
It might be time for camera makers to consolidate their product lineups. But consolidate to what ?
 |
| White Faced Heron. Canon SX60. a few minutes after making the flower photo above I spotted this heron on the intertidal rocks about 30 meters away. I changed from Macro to Normal focus setting, zoomed out the lens and got the shot. I had no need to change lenses, no need for a tripod or even a monopod. The photo will not win any awards but is of sufficient quality for printing up to about A3 size. The FZLC is very versatile. |
There has for several years been a debate on camera forums about whether MILC s will supplant DSLRs as the preferred camera type for enthusiast photographers. But this debate may be rendered of limited relevance by advances in small sensor technology and aspheric elements which allow lenses to be made much more compact than was the case with spherical elements.
It seems to me there are basically two groups of camera users.
1. Professionals and some dedicated semi professionals and
2. The rest, consisting of a motley congregation of enthusiasts, expert amateurs, want-to-be experts, snapshooters and anybody else who elects to make pictures with a camera instead of the more usual smartphone. This group is, or has been until very recently, the backbone of the camera industry, buying by far the greatest number of cameras.
Until the last year or so there has been a largely correct view among camera sellers and buyers that if you wanted good quality pictures you should get an ILC and some decent lenses.
 |
| Canon SX60 on the left, Panasonic FZ1000 on the right |
But the Sony CMOS BSI 15.9mm diagonal (‘one inch’, 13.2 x 8.8mm) sensor first seen in the RX100Mk2 changed all that.
This sensor has since appeared in the Sony RX100(3), Sony RX10, Canon G7X and Panasonic FZ1000.
These cameras have excellent image quality allowing very big enlargements. The RX10 and particularly the FZ1000 can replace an entry to mid range ILC and a bag full of lenses.
So here is my vision of the future of cameras: My crystal ball is a bit fuzzy as there are so many unpredictables in the mix, but here goes anyway:
1. Professionals and dedicated amateurs who want nothing but the best will keep on doing what they are doing now which is using full frame ILCs. These are mostly DSLRs at present but the move to MILCs started by the Sony A7 will likely gain momentum. Or not, depending Canon and Nikon’s capacity for obduracy.
2.’The Rest’ will likely find their needs well met by a FZLC and/or an advanced compact. Some members of this group may well continue to buy ILCs perhaps believing they will get better pictures or better something by so doing. But my experience of using the FZ1000 over the last 9 months is that ILCs have become irrelevant to me. And I am very fussy about picture quality.
3. What about all the entry/upper entry/midrange ILCs with 27mm (APS-C Canon), 28mm (APS-C Sony, Nikon etc) and 21.5mm (Micro 4/3) sensors ? Well, I think they are drifting towards obsolescence.
Why? Take the 27/28mm sensor size. By the time you add a couple of pro grade f2-2.8 zooms, the resulting kit is almost as large as full frame with two f2.8 zooms and maybe even larger than full frame with f4 zooms. So I just don’t see why professionals or dedicated expert amateurs would bother with the smaller sensor size.
What about ‘the rest’ many of whom are currently using an APS-C DSLR or MILC ? As I opined above I believe their needs can already be met by one of the better FZLCs and in the next few years the improving capability of FZLCs will make their appeal even stronger.
There might I suppose be a niche for professionals and enthusiast amateurs who want quality but a substantially more compact kit than full frame can provide. Micro 4/3 could fill this. Maybe. But so could a top tier FZLC with a fast lens.
 |
| Advanced compact mockup. This is 2mm taller than a Sony RX100(3) but has much better ergonomics with a decent handle and built in EVF always available (no need to pop it up). Small size is compatible with reasonably decent ergonomics. |
4. I think there a place for a really capable advanced compact, also with fixed zoom lens.
Sony’s RX100 series has been a proof of concept for this type of camera, they just need to get the ergonomics right. My compact mockup shown in the photo illustrates how I think that could be done.
5. Now let’s talk FZLCs.
Some people refer to this type as a ‘Bridge Camera’ as if it were a bridge spanning a gap between something (maybe a compact) and something else (maybe a DSLR). But the modern FZLC is not a bridge from anything to anything else, it is a fully independent stand alone camera type which can in fact replace an ILC and a set of lenses.
This morning I was reading a post by a well known photographer who said that when asked what lenses one should take on a photographic expedition his response would be …”everything from 16mm to 500mm”. Precisely. And if you could have all that range or close to it in a camera with one fixed zoom lens that might be a very appealing proposition, provided the image quality was good enough.
Smaller, lighter, much less expensive, no need to buy and change lenses. Sounds like a good idea.
In the 20th Century the way to provide multiple focal lengths was interchangeable lenses.
In the 21st Century long zoom lenses provide the same capability without the need to buy, carry and change lenses.
There are FZLCs on the market right now with remarkable zoom ranges. For instance the Canon Powershot SX60 which I am reviewing at the moment has an astounding 65x zoom range from E21-1365mm.
The camera can make surprisingly good images in ideal conditions but in low light and/or at the long end of the zoom, neither the tiny 7.7mm diagonal sensor nor the lens are capable of delivering sufficient image quality to satisfy a discerning user. Several cameras with similar specification are in the same boat.
 |
| Aperture-Sensor size-Zoom range diagram. If one of the three becomes larger then one or both of the other two must become smaller to maintain overall size. |
A larger sensor is required, along with a lens of more modest zoom range.
It seems to me there could be a place for three FZLCs which might appeal to the discerning amateur photographer.
#1. Sensor about 20mm diameter (cropped 4/3); about 16Mpx; lens wide angle to medium tele, say Equivalent 22-150mm; wide aperture, say f1.5-2.0. This is a general purpose camera which would cover the needs of most users most of the time and might be the only camera many owners would ever need.
#2. Sensor about 11mm diameter (the so called 2/3inch size); about 10Mpx; lens medium to long tele, say Equivalent 100-800mm; aperture f2-2.8. This is a sport/action/wildlife/bird/nature camera with fast focussing and high frame rate.
#3. Sensor same as above, about 11mm diameter; about 10Mpx; lens wide to long, say about Equivalent 24-600mm; f2.5-2.8. This is the all purpose model for the user who wants just one camera which can do most photographic jobs.
As I envisage this three camera scenario, each of the three cameras would be about the same size, have the same system of controls and a very similar sized lens.
A camera built to the design of my Mockup #13 would be just about right I think.
There are no ‘levels’ of cameras in this scheme of products. Each has the best available sensor and operating system. Each is fully specified. Beginners have only to set ‘Auto’ Mode on the dial to start taking photos immediately. More experienced users can explore the full range of the camera’s capabilities.
Could these three FZLCs be made with existing technology right now ?
I suspect the answer to that is very likely ‘yes’. Look at the lens on the Panasonic LX100. With a larger body at Mockup #13 size I am sure they could readily double the zoom range and keep a wide aperture.
Some cameras notably from Fuji, have been using the 11mm sensor for several years, albeit in the idiosyncratic EXR formulation. . With further development and a more conventional architecture this size could deliver very decent image quality. 10 Mpx is plenty for good image quality, even with substantial enlargement.
So yes, I think camera makers could make the FZLCs which I suggest right now.
So, why do they not do so ? Of course I have no idea what goes on in the corridors of camera development at the various manufacturers.
But here is my guess for what it is worth: If they did make those cameras, did the job with full force, put all the top technology into each one, then I suspect buyers would wonder what might be the point of getting an ILC.
In that case the market for ILCs might collapse and the total number of cameras and lenses sold each year might fall to some small fraction of the present level.
And that would make life very difficult for several, maybe all the camera makers, some (most ?) of whom I suspect would decide to exit the imaging business.
But the survivors would end up making cameras which customers want to buy and use, and that would be very good thing.
What about the Panasonic FZ1000 ? This is currently the best multi purpose, do (almost) everything FZLC on the market and is my regular camera. Panasonic could stay with the current formula for sensor size and lens zoom range /aperture range and just update sensor capability and AF follow focus capability at intervals. Nothing wrong with that. But if the formula is to change in the direction of greater zoom range/aperture then the sensor size needs to be smaller.
What about the Panasonic LX100 ? I have one of these and it makes fine pictures. At least it did until it didn’t. It is in the workshop for a new main board having stopped working suddenly. But I digress. I see this size camera as a ‘betwixt-and-between’. It is not really compact like a Sony RX100 so it has to be carried in a bag just like a larger model. So why not make it larger with more zoom range and better ergonomics. The slightly larger bag required is no more bother to carry all day.
For any given overall camera size, there is a nexus between sensor size, lens zoom range and lens aperture range as depicted in the diagram. The designers can increase, say, the zoom range but doing so requires that the aperture range and/or sensor size be reduced. The key to good design is to get the balance right so that the camera is able to make good pictures in a wide variety of conditions.
Look at the Panasonic FZ1000 and Canon SX60 together. They are roughly the same size. The FZ1000 is a bit larger, particularly in the lens. They have the same proper camera layout with hump top, EVF, full handle, built in flash and fully articulated monitor.
The SX60 has an Equivalent 21-1365mm f3.4-6.5 lens (65x zoom) and 7.7mm sensor.
The FZ1000 has an Equivalent 25-400mm f2.8-4 lens (16x zoom) and 15.9mm sensor.
The FZ1000 makes really good pictures in most conditions, the Canon has a much more limited envelope of reasonably good imaging capability.
The FZ1000 has a good balance between lens zoom range, lens aperture and sensor size.
The SX 60 is unbalanced. The zoom range is extreme, presumably for marketing reasons, forcing the lens aperture range to be very small (large f numbers) and the sensor to be very small.
The pictures which emerge from it have excess digital noise from the small sensor with more pixels than it needs and softness from the over ambitious lens.
Summary Over the last few years the camera industry has been buffeted by many changes which challenge the survival of many makes, models and concepts of the good camera.
The future is notoriously difficult to predict but it seems highly unlikely that ‘business as (currently) usual’ is likely to continue. All the players are pushing out too many models which are almost the same as last year’s version and/or are half baked with desirable features such as a viewfinder and handle missing.
They keep churning out the same old stuff when the market is telling them to change and do it fast.
It seems to me that one possible way forward is that detailed in this post, namely a shift from ILCs to FZLCs for the majority of non professional camera buyers/users.
The market will decide, but I would like to see more high grade FZLCs available from which to choose.
I think manufacturers are quite capable of making these cameras with present technology but some appear reluctant to produce them.
We live in interesting times.