The three camera concept 17 January 2019

It seems to me that camera makers are trying to manage an existential crisis.

Most people who want to make photos do so with a smartphone. These are becoming sophisticated photographic devices with ever increasing capability.

I see now that one phone maker has shown a prototype with a 10x optical zoom lens, contained within the housing of the device.  Presumably a 20x zoom and maybe more will follow.

The response to this by most camera makers has been a rush to produce high end, high specification mirrorless interchangeable cameras, most using the 43mm diagonal (so-called full frame) sensor size.

These camera bodies are complemented by a selection of  big, expensive lenses of superb quality.

Let’s look at this in terms of three parameters of usability: convenience, versatility and quality.

* Convenience: The smartphone has had the upper hand on convenience for several years. This applies to taking photos and especially to sharing them with other people.  I see no way that any kind of camera can match the smartphone for convenience.

* Versatility:  Until very recently, like yesterday, cameras could claim greater versatility, largely as a function of being able to use long zoom range lenses. It appears that advantage is about to disappear.

* Quality: This now is the only remaining parameter where cameras might have a decently sustainable chance of remaining superior to smartphones.

The camera makers have figured this out of course, hence the rush to produce increasingly high quality products aimed at professional and enthusiast amateur users with considerable disposable funds to spend on their interest.

In the past the cost of research and development for the high end camera systems was substantially subsidised by volume sales of much lower cost items both fixed lens and interchangeable lens.

It appears this business model is no longer viable due to the dramatic decline in sales of budget cameras.

Which means Canon, Nikon, Sony and soon Panasonic will be competing for what was once a very small section of the camera market.

Can they all survive and prosper ?

We shall see. I guess it depends on the number of individuals prepared to spend quite a lot of money on their photography.

Where does this leave the various so-called crop sensor interchangeable lens camera systems, particularly those using 27-28mm (APS-C) and 21.6mm (M43) sensors ?

Most likely the camera makers will wait and see on this one. If crop sensor sales are good, they stay in the game. If the buyers abandon crop sensor systems, the makers have their full frame systems in place.   They are having an each way bet which seems reasonable.

What about fixed lens cameras?

There is a group of people, myself among them, who absolutely hate the whole clumsy, kludgy business of changing lenses.  We prefer to use cameras with fixed lenses.

The interchangeable lens concept was a clever way to obtain different focal lengths  in the middle of the 20^th Century but is now for most users and purposes obsolete due to the availability of high resolution zoom lenses.

Unfortunately for me and like minded photographers it appears that the “full frame” MILC project is burning up most, maybe all of the various makers’ R&D budgets, leaving nothing significant for fixed lens models.

In an interview with DP Review staff,  Mr Yosuke Yamane, President of Panasonic Imaging Networks Business was quoted as saying …..our strategy..… is “everything without compromise, image quality, build quality, operability, performance. It takes all our effort.” 

In the last two years the flow of new fixed lens models has slowed to a trickle. Even then most of the “new” models are just minor updates of previous versions.

The Canon  SX70 uses the same body and lens as the unloved SX60. The SX730 and 740 are minor updates. The G1X.3 is an actual new model, unfortunately with several flaws which impair its appeal to enthusiast photographers.

With “all our effort” at Panasonic going towards the full frame models there has been minimal action in the fixed lens space. The LX100.2 is a minor update and the ZS200 basically a ZS100 with a longer zoom of unimpressive quality.

Fujifilm delivered the X100F which appears to have gotten the X100 line more or less right at last after 7 years and 4 iterations.

The XF10 appears to be a flop with reportedly poor autofocus.  Which is a pity, it looks really nice.

Sony pressed on with updates to the RX100 line with the Mk5A and Mk6;  both technically excellent but just as uninteresting to enthusiast photographers as previous RX100 iterations.

The HX99 is an update of the previous model bringing little really new to the mix.

Although the RX10Mk4 is “just” an update to the RX10Mk3 it brings everything together in a very convincing fashion and easily wins my vote as best fixed lens camera of the last two years. On reflection make that the best fixed lens camera ever. It delivers outstanding performance in a wide variety of conditions.

Unfortunately Panasonic, the only maker likely to have the capacity to challenge the RX10.4 is MIA from bridge camera activity, preoccupied with its full frame project.

A kit based entirely on fixed lens cameras.

My needs and I suspect the needs of the great majority of photographers including many professionals and the most demanding enthusiast amateurs could be met by three models.

1. C-Cam

2. D-Cam

3. Z-Cam

The C-Cam is my renaming of the compact camera which is actually compact, meaning small in size. Some people like to carry these things in a pocket.

My latest favourite C-Cam is the Ricoh GR2. I will post a user review of this shortly.

There are still plenty of C-Cams on the market but the flow of new models has slowed considerably.

At least the camera makers understand the concept of the C-Cam (even if they sometimes fail to implement it competently) which is to deliver big camera results from a small package.

I suspect that even as smartphones grow in capability there will remain a niche market for C-Cams. 

But they had better be really good. This means providing an engaging user experience for expert photographers and producing excellent high quality pictures.

My next category is the D-Cam.

This is the fixed zoom lens general purpose, high capability, high function camera for documentary and all wide/normal/long normal general photography requiring high performance and high image quality in a smaller package than any ILC with a comparable zoom/aperture/focal length range.

At the beginning of the digital era in the last few years of the 20^th Century and early in the 21^st Century cameras of this type were quite popular.

Sony’s early Cybershot 700 (1998) and 707 (2001) were full featured models with a full suite of controls. The R1 of 2005 caused something of a sensation with its avant garde design and APS-C sensor.

Canon’s early G models were chunky, fully featured cameras designed to appeal to enthusiast photographers.

Panasonic produced the LC1 in 2004 with a very sophisticated feature set and manual controls.

But after a few years camera makers turned their energies to interchangeable  lens models and  mid-range, all-in-one types fell out of favour.

So great has been the decline in this camera type that there are currently none of them in production so I made a wooden mockup of one to illustrate the concept. This is Mockup 16 you see illustrated in this post.

Why would anyone want to buy/use/make a D-Cam ?

Consider this:

By way of example I will consider currently available ILCs and lenses in the wide/normal/long normal/short tele from Sony in the entry/enthusiast/advanced sector of the market.

Camera bodies: (These all use the same lens mount)

A6000, A6300, A6400 (just announced) A6500

A7.1, A7.2, A7.3

Lenses covering the wide/normal/long normal range:

E: 30mm f3.5, 35mm f1.8, 16mm f2.8, 24mm f1.8, 20mm f2.8, 10-18mm f4, 50mm f1.8,

18-135mm, 16-70mm f4, 16-50mm f3.5-5.6.

FE: 24mm f1.4, 24-105mm f4, 85mm f1.8, 50mm f2.8, 50mm f1.4, 50mm f1.8, 55mm f1.8, 35mm f2.8, 24-70mm f2.8, 28mm f2, 90mm f2.8, 35mm f1.4, 16-35mm f4, 28-70mm f3.5-5.6, 24-70mm f4.

That is 7 camera bodies and 25 lenses.

I believe that Sony could right now with existing technology make ONE camera body with ONE fixed zoom lens which provides for practical photographic purposes all the capability of all the bodies and lenses listed above.

Of course it is not just Sony playing this game. They copied Canon and Nikon which have been slicing the market into tiny little segments for years.

So why do they not embrace the D-Cam approach ?

Call me cynical if you will but the main reason appears to be the makers’ desire to separate buyers from as much money as possible.

Vendors can start by selling the buyer an A6000 with the not-very-sharp-and-prone-to- falling-apart kit lens, then offering upgrades of bodies and lenses right up to the A7.3 and 24-70mm f2.8 or equivalent set of primes. Along the way the buyer has purchased maybe 10 pieces of kit when a single D-Cam in the first place would have done the job just fine.

The only “upgrade” which might be needed could be a move from “enthusiast” level D-Cam to “Expert/pro” level D-Cam.

Presumably the people who make and sell camera gear would say the multiple bodies/multiple lenses system which currently prevails is a way of offering consumers “choice”.

But what is the point of having a “choice” of three different 50mm lenses and a 55 and two different 35mm lenses when you really don’t need any of them ?

In my view this is needless choice which appears to be designed to benefit those who make and sell camera gear rather than those who buy and use it.

The Z-Cam is represented mainly by existing bridge cameras like the Lumix FZ1000 and Sony RX10.4.

When implemented well, cameras like this can make very powerful and versatile photographic tools.

Implemented badly they can be little better than junk and in my view not worth whatever they cost. In the junk category I include most models which use the so-called ½.5 inch (7.4mm diagonal) sensor. 

The exception is the Lumix FZ300 which does use the small sensor but is in many respects a decently good and versatile camera.

Sony and to some extent Panasonic appear to have a reasonable understanding of and commitment to the Z-Cam genre.

However in recent times the flow of new or updated products has virtually come to a halt.

For instance the Lumix FZ1000 was announced in June 2014, and has yet to see a convincing upgrade. I don’t count the FZ2500 as an upgrade to the FZ1000 as the 2500 is a primarily video centric device with a lens which is not sharp enough for high quality still photos.

I read this as a very bad sign for those of us who really like to use this type of camera.

Summary  Most camera makers are heavily invested in their full frame mirrorless project to the detriment of fixed lens models.

In this post I outline what fixed lens models I would like to see from the camera makers.

In particular I hope one of them has the courage to make a really convincing D-Cam.