Do We NEED So Many Mirrorless Camera Models?

[@SDWales]

I find the whole new gear scene so overwhelming, I have sold my existing gear and moved deliberately 'backwards'. Very deliberately and very happily so. I've grabbed a brace of older Pentax DSLR's, small, light APS-C, feature rich and well built - from 10 and 15 years ago. *Massive* used lens choice. Cost of 'new' system can only be described as peanuts. The resolution is better than I need even for the larger images sizes, and here's the thing, I am really *enjoying* my photography and taking better i mages than I did with my more recent gear. Works for me!

[@scrptwic]

I have only photograph with Pentax DSLR cameras a *istDL, K100D both I bought new and still use because of the CCD sensor a Pentax K50 from 2014 a Pentax K3-11 form 2020, and a Pentax K3MARK111 from 2022 . I trade off the older cameras using each one one week a month . The K3-11 I use for general photography and as my main backup camera the K3Mark111 is my wildlife camera as the autofocus is fantastic for moving subjects like birds in flight

[@zenography7923]

If it helps you shoot better images, it's working!

[@SDWales]

@@scrptwic Well well, Snap! - my three are also a *istD, a K100D and a K-5, and I rotate them in the same manner for the same reasons. I also love the CCD sensor on the earlier two. Lovely for flora close work. The *istD, when set to 400/800 ISO, and then the raw converted to B&W looks more like HP5/Tri-X than I could have ever thought. One of those I got 'untested' from a Charity Shop and then sold the accompanying kit lens for more than I'd paid for the combo. - A perfectly working body. Love it. A K3-II may be my final goal, when I find a good deal - Cheers

[@ethermod307]

Coming from the music world, I see a change coming in the foto world as well. In the music world, similar to the phone cameras, the advancement of the Digital Audio Workstations in computers has reached a point of saturation, and many musicians are turning to older ways of making music: analogue synthesizers, tape recorders, modular synths etc. I believe there is the same saturation in the phone cameras and that many people will slowly look for alternatives. There is already a lot of concern about the wrong use of mobile phones (social media etc.) which will turn some people away from them. I barely use my mobile phone nowadays. It such a joy to have replaced it with something that I allows me to be creative and social.

[@thegroove2000]

No Analog Saturation is digital Daws as well.

[@Focal_Paradox]

It's the oldest story in the book. If you can't sell product to new customers, sell 'upgrades' to the old customers. The industry is cannibalising itself.

[@bondgabebond4907]

Sad but true. Watch videos of Japanese used camera stores and you will see hundreds, if not thousands, of Leica cameras sitting on the shelf. Why are they not being used? I think it is incredibly funny. But this very thing happened in the past, but at a much slower rate. Good cameras had a good 8-10 year run. Now we are lucky it the model isn't replaced in 4 or less years.

[@lightbox617]

at 76, I just switched from Canon DSLRs to Micro 4/3 as a travel camera. I an able to spend a month, sometimes two months a year in Europe. I have been taking two Canon 80D bodies with extra battery packs weigh in , with lenses, at about 8lbs each. It adds up After MONTHS of research, I decided on a used, high quality, used Lumix G9. 3 lenses, one body with battery pack. Lenses; 7 to 14, 12 to 60 and 100 to 300. Yes; it is still as much a computer as it is a camera. The lenses are (on the used market) reasonably priced and serviceable if not perfect.For photographing architecture and architectural ornamentation in Budapest The kit is pretty damned good. Total cost of all used good, extra batteries and using existing SD cards was less that $1,200

[@sakeboersma]

My opinion… Olympus is underrated. In my student period (eighties and nineties) it was always Nikon, Canon, Leica that dominated. But Olympus, affordable, was so magnificent! And their OM lenses!! Brilliant!! And yes… I’m an Olympus enthousiast! One of my teachers (Paul de Nooijer) was a Nikon enthousiast, but he was swapped away with the Olympus OM 1 I bought! And now, these ‘modern’ times, I’m fond of my digital Olympus OM. With adapter for my 'old' OM lenses.

[@timothykieper]

See Nigel's comment about "simple" menus ?

[@nicokremers7150]

Hi Sake (Fries neem ik aan 😉). I also use Olympus Zuiko OM lenses. But not on an Olympus camera, tried it but did not like the crop. You should try these lenses on a full-frame and you will love them even more. (I recently switched from Sony A7 to Leica SL type 601)

[@atomaalatonal]

their old oly prime lenses are still effin expensive, if even on the market for sale. thats how good they are

[@MaybeTiberius]

yes it is underrated and i would say, a em1 ii is probably the highest value camera on used market. HOWEVER. the crop. to really play mft to its strength, you need to be in the market for long tele shots, macro, wildlife, birding and stuff like that. if you are.. go for it. but if you are mainly using standard zoom ranges of lets 20-100mm the 2x crop is working against you. especially with wintage lenses. good UW lenses are way more expensive. you can easily buy a cheap 28mm 2.8 on FF and go. with mft you would need a 14mm lens for that. for vintage lenses and fully using them, a cheap FF body is still the way to go.

[@celstark]

My 18 yo son just got a Sony A7 mk II for an early Xmas. He got into it from a friend his age who shoots film. It’s not dead in that generation. True, a used sale, but still keeping the hobby going.

[@kevinsylvester770]

I've spent far too much time dreaming about the 'perfect' camera or 'perfect' lens , came to the conclusion that I should just enjoy what is out there and stop dreaming !📸📷🎥

[@zenography7923]

The perfect strategy!

[@robstammers7149]

Revisit: Fascinating discussion Nigel. The point you make about over stuffing of functions into the camera body is totally relavant to todays mirrorless cameras. My Canon 200D has one really important function, Internet connectivity direct to my phone, what a great idea. I love Canon colours, but my ideal sensor would be the Foveon, as found in Sigma cameras. The menu format is pretty good in Canon cameras. And yes mirrorless cameras are just becoming too complex. Regards Rob.

[@tuttale]

I'm singing from the same sheet as you with a full frame sensor as a must for utilising old lenses. I chose the Canon RP when it came out as the first sub £800 digital full frame. With an adapter, I can use my EF lenses.

[@flertx]

Zen, the Best foto man! ❤

[@zenography7923]

Thanks!

[@zcounts]

love the channel!

[@zenography7923]

Thanks!

[@alanjones8579]

Hi There, thanks for the video...I use a few different cameras however the digital camera that I use the most is a Leica M4/3 D-Lux 8 before that a D-Lux 7 which I used for 6 years and before that a D-Lux Type 109 again I used it for 6 years. But my dream camera would be a Leica Q3 with a 24-75 f1.7 - f2.8 the same as the D-Lux cameras also the close focus facility. I just love the portability of smaller cameras and the button layout on the new Leica is about as minimalistic as it can be...thanks again for an interesting video and a topic that might just run for decades to come.

[@kennethbehrens8874]

Another sensor type option to consider would be the Foveon sensor.

[@zenography7923]

I've been reading about this recently, I think they have problems with noise at higher ISO settings? A very interesting sensor though.

[@ryanbeer5262]

I'd for sure buy yhat camera. Closest thing on the market is the Nikon Zf but many of the Z lenses are almost comically big, but these days i mostly shoot vintage glass anyway so its not a huge issue.

[@fistfulloflenses]

Another very enjoyable episode, very much agree about the point and shoot market, which has know been replaced by mobile phones,one additional feature I believe a modern camera would need to appeal to a wider ( younger) audience,is easy connectivity to social media, not something that I would need but certainly something that would be appreciated by younger people.

[@patternsinsand]

Not sure what you were using to record this video but my perfect mirrorless camera would definitely hold on to my face when talking to camera! Other than that, I continue to really enjoy your thoughts. I do shoot raw and I love tiny cameras so still clinging to that Micro Four Thirds dream but definitely, using vintage lenses on my full frame Nikon is one of my favourite things to do.

[@jpetermaughan]

I absolutely agree. I want good jpegs, straight out of the camera. I'm glad you have the courage to say so. I'm hoping Nikon's Z50II will do it for me, with its picture profiles (or picture recipes).

[@zenography7923]

I hear very nice things about those Nikon cameras, hope it works out!

[@lelandfitz1762]

I am also someone who prefers SOOC photos. I think modern cameras should make post production less needed instead of make it needed even more. Regarding getting a Kodak look in digital I think we already have been there. In the 2000s Kodak made CDD-sensors for many manufacutrers, I think Leica's praised M9 even had one. But naming film simulations after Kodak would just be costly I think. Camera companies should themselves make better color options SOOC.

[@Scatup]

I like the sound of your perfect camera. Not so bothered about video but time-laps would be nice.

[@nickm8134]

Very interesting video - completely agree far too many models, too much choice. Listening to you describe your 'ideal' camera - you could have been describing a Leica SL2-S. It certainly ticks a lot of your boxes. Expensive, but there are definitely second-hand bargains to be had. I bought one about six months ago, and I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that it is better value for money than many cheaper cameras. Leica's tend to hold their value, though time will tell how the SL cameras stand up in that regard. Like you I shoot almost exclusively on vintage glass, a mix of lower-end Leica (typically less than £150 per lens), Pentax, Zeiss etc. The Leica cameras have a thin sensor stack (compared to, for example the Sony's), so they tend to work better with vintage, especially wide-angle lenses that were not specifically designed for digital cameras. L-mount adapters are readily available for a wide range of vintage lens mounts. The controls and menu are exactly as you describe - physical controls, simple and user-assignable. Menus are as simple as they could be - almost a work of art compared to the usual mass of stuff you never need. The SL2-S is a relatively low pixel count, which gives it good high-ISO performance. It is also a very reasonable video camera. If only Leica's were a little bit cheaper, they would kill the market, but I guess it's all market driven in the end.

[@GerhardBothaWFF]

For “normal “ photography like portraits and landscape I think it is fair to say that you won’t take any better images with the latest camera and something from 15 years ago (in digital). But for challenging light conditions, or things like bird-in-flight where AF performance is critical, no dice. There you are leagues ahead with one of the latest models.

[@zenography7923]

Absolutely, there are situations in which the latest tech will beat the older for sure, and autofocus is definitely one of them!

[@EdwardIglesias]

Excellent video! It made me think which does happen from time to time. My own needs for an ideal camera are very similar. I'm still using a Sony A7II which serves me very well. On the subject of camera companies bringing out different models I think it is important to remember that digital photography is no more than 20ish years old. Looking at the early days of film, say from when Leica standardized 35mm film, there was a lot of experimentation with film size, flash types, lenses and so on. Imagine going from daguerreotypes to film or from field cameras to TLRs. I think that is kind of where we are now.

[@dropsosense1506]

The camera market has certainly changed over the decades. I bought an Olympus OM-4 film camera not long after they started being manufactured. They were manufactured for so many years that prices gradually increased for new ones to a point where used ones were selling for more than the regular price I paid for mine when it was new. At the time once I factored in inflation I calculated that I still would have made money if I had sold it about 5 years after I purchased it. Not many chattels appreciate in value like that one did. I missed the opportunity for realizing on the small profit but I am glad for that because I still enjoy using it.

[@mikaelwerner1]

I agree on what you say there. When shooting on my mirrorless Sony I keep all in manual and do the adjustments of ISO, shutter speed and aperture until I get the result I want looking at the screen on the camera and it just does not feel like photography at all. I grew up with film photography, got my first camera an Agfamatic 100 at christmas 1970 and later moved on to Nikon FA and F2 and when the digital revolution came that almost killed it for me. For me photography is not about producing images. For me photography should be more like sport, very difficult but not impossible, that's what makes it interesting. To choose the right film stock, shoot manual, meter light, develop, scan, convert and carefully adjust in post. At least that is what I think. Thanks for all the good work you put into this channel!

[@zenography7923]

I grew up with film too, but I almost never shoot in manual. I much prefer aperture priority with vintage lenses and modern too come to that, but it's always nice to go back to a manual film camera. Thanks for checking in!

[@Magnetron692]

Hello Nigel, many thanks! I appreciate your videos! I like the Nikon Z system very much. I can use my wonderful Canon EF lenses with the Fringer adapter. The Z7 has a tremendous dynamic range and image stabilization. Best wishes, Ralf

[@zenography7923]

Hi Ralf, I keep hearing good things about the Z cameras, I must try one soon! Thanks for checking in mein freund!

[@TheNitebinder]

Interesting topic you have chosen here. Although I'm sure others have said this before, but the main reason for camera companies producing models at high rate is to stay one step ahead of the other. Gone are the days that Nikon, Canon and Leica would develop a new and improve one every five or six years. But build one model every year. If that model doesn't work, we'll have customers download new firmware and hope it works. The days when camera companies stood behind their products are long gone.

[@bvista58]

yes...and it makes it worse if you swap between different digital brands with different menues. I reckon the Nikon ZF comes closest to your ideal camera....or maybe wait for edition II and fingers crossed they have listened to your video :)

[@zenography7923]

Fingers crossed!

[@bvista58]

@@zenography7923 and it should be built to last and even be repairable in 50 years time, so we can hand it down to the next generations.... :)

[@bvista58]

@@zenography7923 ..yes, and I would have to add... to make the camera last and repairable into the future like a Leica....

[@Choetaesun]

I totally agree with your opinion and philosophy. I never completely understood the sophisticated menu. the sold it and buy a new model again. My Digital begin with Contax N-digital. Then move to Nikon, then Canon, then Sony then again Nikon. What did I do until now?!!! 1,000% support your suggestion! Thank you!

[@zenography7923]

Thanks for watching!

[@joseperalta6235]

During the film era, the SLR camera features where maximum shutter speed, step size, maximum flash-sync speed, light meter, and easy to load and rewind. If you needed better low light performance or more detail, you would upgrade the film and/or lenses. If you wanted video, you would need a separate machine. Now, all these features (or digital equivalent) are integrated in one machine, so upgrating requires a new camera. So during the film times upgrading your SLR for stills wasn't needed if you were happy with the shutter performance, everything esle could be upgraded independly.

[@robmay3570]

I agree with much you say, I personal would like a stills only camera as I think incorporating video means compromise in the still capability of the camera, I have Nikon D200 and Canon D5 classic a new smaller lighter version of these would be great full frame a round 25Mg pixel. In fact a full frame version of the Fuji film XT-1 and no video. If you want video get yourself a Blackmagic camera fantastic results. No compromise. I have many cameras and use the XT-1 and XT-10 X-E1 the most then Sony A7. great channel ythave inspired many of my camera purchases

[@zenography7923]

Thanks, glad you're enjoying it!

[@classic.cameras]

If you are a camera nerd like I am sure everyone who subscribes to this channel is. I am sure some ask every launch day by every camera reviewer on youtube "Why do we need another 85mm or 50mm or 35mm" or camera upgrades that devalue what we already have for barely an improvement. I get the business reason why companies do this but come on, it feels like 17 85mm lenses were released this year alone and they are all perfect. Good vid mate. Cheers.

[@classic.cameras]

P.S. Best 85mm I have bought in the last year was a Helios 40-2c. What an amazing lens from Russia.

[@zenography7923]

The Helios is a fantastic lens, for sure!

[@zenography7923]

Thanks, glad you enjoyed it!

[@dunstun365]

we had another bad storm last wkend

[@nathkanthi]

When you get good pictures with what you have and have asa,aperture shutter and exp comp is all that you need .camera manufacturers to be in market keep updating.is it required for you is for you to decide

[@bobjohnson9597]

Ill say as my sight is going in my dominant eye I am so happy with my new Nikon Z50 mark 2 and the auto focus sticks like Velcro especially on a bird's eye. Im finally fully conent with this camera. If its as rugged as my old Olympus cameras then it will probably outlast me, lols.

[@raveemahadevan]

agree...

[@Star-Trekking]

I agree!! Great vìdeo!

[@messylaura]

its not the camera you want but i been using the canon M50 for last 5 years, the small and light weight was what sold it for me, sure my main stuff is 400-600mm wildlife with ef lens but for the vintage and walkabout stuff small kit is such a godsend on the vintage side of things one thing the crop sensor does well is i have an M42 to ef-m tilt and shift adapter besides the regular one, turns any of my vintage lenses into a tilt and shift lens, been very useful a few times now. menu wise, probably a few extra toys i wouldn't mind but its simple and easy to use. among your list of must haves are some higher end things like the global shutter, along with some older style items so rather than a mass produced camera it might be a bespoke one. good point on the point and shoot crowd. its often been said people are not using proper cameras as much as they did before but like you say, most of those buying proper cameras still are, its the point and shoot crowd that has changed much more, and its also the new way images are shown and stored, you don't need a full on camera to post to the net like you i only ever shoot jpeg, i learnt on jpeg and love the images i get from my little M50, be it big wildlife lenses or vintage it handles them all

[@van-gabondramblinrose6398]

I have to agree with you. I have several Fuji camera's and readily admit to being an old Fuji nerd, but I bought an M50 several years ago and I absolutely love it. I do find it a little bit clinical compared to my Fuji's, but I've taken some amazing shots with it and with the 3rd party lenses that offer much better low light performance you can't go wrong. For an 'entry' level camera, it really does punch well above its weight.

[@Ron-j5m]

I’ve noticed that the cost of new cameras and lenses are becoming prohibitively expensive, especially for younger people wanting to try out photography

[@martinhancock9235]

Pentax is the only manufacturer that's still affordable and using the same K lens mount as theie film era cameras. It's also easy to adapt older M42 lenses as well

[@trekkeruss]

No one should feel compelled to buy new; the old didn’t suddenly stop anyone from taking good photos.

[@nicedward7544]

They've always been expensive. My first couple of good digital cameras i worked my ass off for costed me over $3000 each with one mediocre lens. They can now be had on the used market for $200 and all of the pros had no problems with their capabilities 10 years ago.... You don't need the newest camera gear. I've been shooting for 30 years and haven't been gullible enough to purchase a camera new off the shelf since 2012

[@ahoyhere8113]

This is simply not true. I’ve been buying digital cameras since the early 00s and today things are much cheaper when you account for inflation, and the quality of features (IBIS, video, phase detect autofocus, etc) make the cameras vastly more technical to produce. The used market has absolutely crazy good deals.

[@Ron-j5m]

@ I said new cameras, not used market only shows how much they loose in value. Many people much prefer to buy new

[@dab7963]

Promise not to laugh. I gave a Nikon d300 to a friend of mine so he can learn photography and he wanted to take it to the city recently. He wanted me to set it up in automatic mode so I set it to manual and then switched it to P mode for program mode and set the aperture priority and set ISO to Auto sensitivity. I struggled for quite a while to figure out how to open up the door I couldn't remember that there's a little switch that makes it open. Then I couldn't understand when I looked through the viewfinder why the rear screen was not displaying an image. I struggle with this for about 30 minutes and then laughed and remembered that the d300 is a 12 megapixel camera with an actual lens and mirror configuration so the only way to get the rear display to show is to go to live view which back in the day was very primitive. I finally gave up. I have a Nikon Z9 and a Nikon Z6. I basically gave him the Nikon Z6 set it up and said use this instead. The technology as you have said has come a very long way from the old days.

[@zenography7923]

I've had a number of moments like that myself!

[@martingreenberg870]

These days there aren’t bad cameras. The new iterations have improved features but the improvements are at the point of deminishing marginal returns. At what point is enough enough? As another commenter suggested, I am buying older bodies. I love my LUMIX GX85/9. I just purchased a Fuji XE2. Oldies but still winners. Cameras that produced lovely images 10 years ago still make lovely images. Small & light wins the day for me. I hate the folding screens. I do street photography and don’t want to make my small body larger. I don’t do video but I do love IBIS. Still appreciate SOOC images. Mask On Nurse Marty (Ret)

[@zenography7923]

There are some great bargains in older bodies right now, we're spoilt for choice!

[@christinebeckett7060]

Ilford is still a very big seller of film, and its sales have got to the point that it's now branched into experimenting with colour film. Plus there's European brands such as Fomapan.

[@zenography7923]

Absolutely, and hp5 is probably my favourite b/w stock. I didn't know they were planning a colour film but I can't wait to try it!

[@christinebeckett7060]

@@zenography7923 It's been out a while. Harman Phoenix 200. Not bad, but still experimental. 😃

[@MichaelRusso]

Those are good requirements. However, camera companies could do much more. How about different formats, like the square. How about removal prism top on mirror-less, harking back to the Nikon F or Pentax LX, Canon F-1 ....

[@betenoirproductions6062]

Prisms require a mirror; you'd have to put something like a small OLED display facing up in place of the SLR focusing screen. Sounds pretty cool to me. 👍

[@sclogse1]

I imagine this full frame sensor camera won't be able to have much in the way of IBIS. Unless the camera size is pretty bigly. Can it have interchangeable name plates depending on the neighborhood you're in?

[@zenography7923]

:)

[@Jack_Warner]

If people didn't keep thinking they have to upgrade, everytime a new camera comes out, the companies would get the message. I'm still on my Nikon D810, that I bought in 2018. No plans to upgrade, it does everything I need.

[@christinebeckett7060]

What you say is true. In the days of film, I'd expect a camera to work for me for decades. Nikon's professional F was in production from 1959 to 1973. The F2 was in production from 1971 to 1980. The F3, from 1980 to 2001. But then along came digital. The D1 lasted from 1999 to around 2004. The D2 that replaced it was released in 2004. The D3 came in 2007. The D4 in 2012, the D5 in 2016. So in average the top professional digital cameras are now updated every three to four years. Consumer cameras are updated even sooner. I'm not sure who this appeals to, but there are folk out there who just HAVE to have the latest tech regardless of the cost, or of the use they put it to. If such folk did not exist, the camera companies would not bother with such a high release rate. I will upgrade one of my digital cameras every six or seven years. Doing it sooner than that would be throwing money away for minor, incremental, changes. Most of my digital cameras date from 2012 to 2018. Only one, a Fuji X-T50, is new. I expect to get at least a decade's use from them. And there's a world of difference between the performance of my 2012 X-Pro1, and the X-T50.

[@zenography7923]

That sounds like a wise buying policy!

[@npdady]

12:00 don't we all wish for a full frame fuji. 😢 Now it's either crop or medium format.

[@Hi-lb8cq]

I love my Canon 2f ep

[@imagenatura]

I'm holding out for a Sigma FP Foveon sensor camera with L-Mount. Interestingly, you didn't mention a proper mechanical shutter. I think that would be important for me as the S9 doesn't have one (neither does the FP/L). I also find it hilarious that your Sony can't seem to focus on you, something a good-old fashioned manual focus lens would do perfectly. All you need is to set up a monitor in front of the camera, get critical focus on the same plane as a table and make sure your eyes are roughly on that plane. I do this every day for my video stuff.

[@zenography7923]

I know, after all my talk of miraculous autofocus too! I think the mistake I made was having the backlight too bright, something that can knock out autofocus, apparently! Maybe I'll ditch the tech and go back to manual!

[@imagenatura]

@@zenography7923 I actually think the backlight isn't it- it your glasses. Yes, I think you should just remove the AF viable and go for manual focus in this setup. It's only useful when you're in an unknown environment and it's very impracticable to manual focus. Eliminating variables is the name of the game for getting good shots.

[@richardgrant418]

Who ever said “need” Welcome to how big business works It’s called competing for the market

[@Emdope1]

So basically, what you're saying is: "I need a Fuji with a Full Frame sensor!". All your needs would be fulfilled with any Fuji camera's options. But if you think about it... FF sensor would mean that Fuji would have to build a new series of lenses. I like Fuji cause the cameras are small and so are lenses. If they would made it for FF everything would get much bigger.. 🤔 So you see, I agree and disagree at the same time! ;) Anyway, great channel you "Old hippie" 😉✌👍 Cheers!😃

[@zenography7923]

I too love the Fujifilm cameras, but they can't shoot vintage lenses like a ff camera can! Not quite anyway.

[@Emdope1]

​@@zenography7923I know what you mean.. But except the different focal length on APS-C because of the crop factor, shouldn't it be better in terms of sharpness quality? The middle point of the lens should work on entire size of the sensor, or maybe I'm thinking wrong about it...? 🤔 I only used M42 mount lenses on my Fuji X-E4 and it seemed like a very good combination👍😉

[@timothykieper]

All good points and my thoughts exactly! Just wondering what happened to the famous Sony autofocus ? (sorry)

[@zenography7923]

I know, I shouldn't have crowed quite so much about it! I think I had the backlight up too high, which can throw it off.

[@catherinegrimes2308]

I shoot Fujifilm, not for the traditional styling but for a small lightweight camera system. The ergonomics of the traditional styling do not work for me and I find the positioning of the shutter release button to be awkward. This is apparent with my X-E3, but I find the X-S20 to be about right especially as I do wildlife photography. The custom settings of the X-S20 are really useful. I think that the nearest camera that meets your expectations is the X-H2s because of the stacked sensor and X-Trans sensor, even though it is not full frame or has retro dials.

[@zenography7923]

I haven't tried an xh2 yet, I'm sure I will one day though!

[@marvo1111]

I'm currently thinking about an analog Leica as the perfect mirrorless camera. My Sony 7IV, Fuji and Lumix are enough for me as a digital camera at the moment.

[@zenography7923]

That sounds like a good choice!

[@jacopoabbruscato9271]

When it comes to still pictures, we are deep into diminishing returns territory. We young people are buying cameras all right, just not the new ones. I do photography for a living and I use a 15 years old camera, I hardly feel any need to update since most improvements that have come in the last few years have been geared towards video. Also newer features usually come at the expense of ergonomics.

[@kbstabs5982]

Really like your videos. I agree with your list, except for the flippy screen, for an "ideal" camera. You say you like your Sony A7C but are you implying that it is not ideal? What about the X100V or VI, or the Leica D-Lux 8? Do these also fall short?

[@zenography7923]

Like all machines, all cameras have compromises of one kind or another, including my a7c and yes, even my x-t3! I reviewed an x100 camera but didn't get on with it too well, I didn't like the restrictions on exposure in aperture priority mode, a sort of 'mother knows best' approach. As for the Leica D lux 8, well, I'd love to try one and find out!

[@kbstabs5982]

@@zenography7923 Thanks for replying! May I ask what 35mm lenses for the A7C you would recommend looking for?

[@kaczynski2333]

It will slow down or stop when the demand signal goes away .

[@scrptwic]

Love my Pentax cameras i even photograph wildlife with a Pentax camera i have no problem photographing birds at the local wetlands with my Pentax K3 Mark111 with the 55-300 PLM or the Pentax 150 - 450 lenses

[@ronreid5702]

I also use Pentax, have for years. I recently looked at going mirrorless and could not do it. The EVFs were all crap, they made my vision swim, felt like I’d had a beer or three. So I purchased a K1ii and love it. Use it for nature stuff, photographing my sons football matches, and some walk around stuff. Can’t go past the old prism and OVF!

[@npdady]

Interestingly enough, I've read that the majority fujifilm's revenue comes from the instax line of products, instead of their mirrorless and lenses.

[@zenography7923]

I can imagine, film is a money spinner!

[@mikafoxx2717]

Got a used R6. I'll be homest, its crazy excessive, even as a person that does some wildlife where 12 fps and crazy autofocus isn't unappreciated. My 6D did most of what I needed in a camera, to be honest. Maybe I should've gotten a used 6D ii or 5D3 or something instead when the 6D died. I still have an old 5D and even that does a fair bit besides low light. Your comment about too many cameras and too few customers is true. 2008-2012 was the biggest peak in cameras so the tail end of that is probably the best value and most common. So 6D, 5D3, D800, and such. Sony seems to depreciate faster so maybe an A7r2 or a73.. the older ones were a bit clunky but they work especially for non pro use if you don't need crazy battery life or autofocus before they went to phase detect

[@zenography7923]

The older Sonys are very nice cameras. My mk1 a7 has 76,000 clicks and is still going strong, and contrary to what much of the internet says, I've found autofocus speed to be pretty good! It can sometimes struggle in low light but that aside, a very good camera in my experience.

[@georgianrooms]

I have a Canon 6d Mark 1 and a Tessar 2.8 50mm (a good example). That does me most of the time although I have many more cameras and lenses.....

[@erichstocker8358]

I think for me the Leica M!1 is my "perfect" mirrorless camera. It has no video; it doesn't have tons of AI that decides what the foto should look like. In many ways an Urleica with a digital sensor.

[@Βόρειο_Σέλας]

I am on the same page, I need something that uses KISS principle. I am a veteran in photography since 1979 and the closest to my Nikon FE is the Zf but from what I saw, it has menus just like other cameras. I am still using my D700 and thinking now to add the Zf but I am still hesitating.

[@zenography7923]

I think menus are here to stay, despite my request! I'd say if you want a Nikon Zf and can afford it, go for it!

[@Βόρειο_Σέλας]

@@zenography7923 Yeah, am pretty close to doing so.

[@nonjaninja4904]

I just want a Leica-esque digital rangefinder I can actually afford. The Fuji GFX50R is the only mirrorless type thing I've been interested in.

[@nicedward7544]

Original a7c can be had for relatively cheap used. Might be worth a try. AF will be much better than the Fuji and easier to adapt glass to. Any vintage lens will cover the sensor whereas the gfx will be hit or mostly miss adapting 35mm lenses to.

[@robertbosson5223]

sounds lke you need a Leica M11!

[@zenography7923]

Now that would be nice!

[@mikrokosmfotos]

I have too many cameras! Not yet to the point where I don't get to use each of them for whatever it is that they excel at, but I certainly do not need any more. I do most of my shooting these days on Fuji X bodies, various lenses. Interestingly (at least to me), the Fuji I've owned for longest is the X-T5 which I got not long after it was released a couple of years ago. 40MP is overkill in most situations. Despite all the moaning online about focus issues it works perfectly for what I use it for, and even the much maligned AFC tracking focus (which I only use for dogs) is perfect. The Two Fuji bodies that I use much more often, and that I bought more recently when they were already 6-7 years old, are the X-Pro2 and X-H1. 24MP is more than enough for most things I do - events, portraits, landscape, street. I do like having mechanical dials and aperture ring because I'm old enough to remember when that's all there was. Everything I most need to see about the camera settings are obvious at a quick glance, even if the camera is not switched on. The X-Pro2 is probably my favourite - the handling and feel just work for me, and unless I need IBIS for some reason it's the one I pick up. But when it comes to studio or landscape and a tripod, I am a complete masochist and turn to the eccentric Sigma SD Quattro (from c.2015/16) and its somewhat magical sensor - all the joys of medium format film photography ... without the inconvenience of film. The sensor is nominally 29MP in resolution, but because of the way a Foveon sensor reads and codes light, the results look more like something around 50MP, and with the right lens have a distinctly medium format look. Colour and microcontrast are stunning. The Sigma Art lenses in 18-35mm zoom and 85mm portrait formats are beautiful in their rendering on this sensor, even if they each weigh as much as a house brick - my tripod is up to the weight-bearing task. None of the new releases are offering anything I feel compelled to buy into, and I certainly don't need any more megapixels, thanks.

[@zenography7923]

I've heard good things about the foveon sensor, I'll try one if I can!

[@mikrokosmfotos]

@zenography7923 Not for the faint of heart. They are idiosyncratic and a bit cantankerous, and you must work slowly and carefully with them. It's a lot like working with very low ISO medium format film, but the rewards for effort are certainly there.

[@erhantomekce5252]

Still having or keeping a high class equipment is like collecting goods a person likes. Since phone cameras are doing fine very good results. I still keep my Sony 7 m2 r and nex 7, besides many film cameras and lenses. These digitals also took place by those film cameras. I still don't want to buy a better taking picture mobile phone, just for not giving up to use my sony gear.

[@van-gabondramblinrose6398]

What's this?! Sony autofocus behaving like a Fuji? Now I feel so much better about my Fuji obsession, knowing the great and flawless Sony autofocus isn't quite all it's cracked up to be. Thankyou for making an old man very happy.

[@zenography7923]

I know, and after all my talk of magical a/f! I think I had the backlight turned up too high, which apparently can throw it off.

[@van-gabondramblinrose6398]

@@zenography7923 😂 Now you just deflated me again. 😉😆

[@edowino]

In my part of the world point & shoot was the only viable option because the SLRs were far too pricey for the ordinary person.

[@EricSzweblik-zj4mx]

Would you show us a selection of you best pictures

[@zenography7923]

I'll try to sort some out, it's a case of a few needles in a massive haystack though!

[@mauchkimberly]

I've watched to 3 minutes and decided that, yes, the many mirrorless bodies DO matter. They fill the needs of whatever you might want in your particular photo taker. But, in the end, the ones that solve the most problems are the ones that will be available. Therefore, if you like one of these odd ones, grab it while you can.

[@vgee3926]

They should make pocket digicams..those things went from selling for $20 for a used model to selling for $100's

[@lelandfitz1762]

I think the good image of a camera brand in the old days came from built quality. The rangefinder and the shutter had to work reliably for example, all was pure mechanical. Thus no need for new models every year. I wasn't alive but if I knew buying a camera lasts me decades, I would have more easily put up a huge amount of money for a really good camera. In digital times, and at least since Sony entered the market, we have smartphone-like product cycles. Whereas manufacturers sell tiny improvements as the big new thing. And users are expected to buy new models every few years. Of course no one has to. But a film camera simply doesn't age like a digital camera whose rear screen or viewfinder looks dated after 5 years compared to every other digital gadet we have. The market of digital point and shoots really sadly seems to be gone. There were such cool models in the 2000s. Today the only ones surviing are premium models that mostly haven't been updated in years and cost very very much.

[@franklee9213]

I want a barnack digicam.

[@zenography7923]

Me too!

[@erichstocker8358]

When I shoot my film camera, the image I see is not directly out of camera. The negative is equivalent to raw data. In the darkroom (or scanning process) I turn it into the "jpeg equivalent" image. No film other than the polaroid type (Instant) files delivered the final product out of camera. I doubt that people show their negatives to their friends. They show the worked print created from the "raw negative". Just look at work of the great film photographers and one can see how often the negative is different than the print.

[@zenography7923]

Sure, film images need to be edited and adjusted, and the final result is dependent on aesthetic choices by the film processor. However, when shooting colour (which I don't develop myself), when I pick up the prints from the lab the experience for me is straight out of camera images, as I don't do any of the editing work myself.

[@erichstocker8358]

@@zenography7923 Of course then you are depending upon someone else deciding what the color, clarity and saturation are. Color printing was very involved. Indeed, I remember that Ansel Adams spent many hours to get the image of Moonlight over Hernandez and that was B&W. Image the days were it color. But that is a decision that everyone makes do they make to do the work to get the image as they want or do they accept the views of someone else to get the image they want. Both are valid. Photojournalists always let the labs do it for them and they sent jpegs when they switched to digital.

[@rangersmith4652]

Camera companies, like car companies or computer companies, need to have models at various price points because lots of customers -- especially new customers with milited understanding of the product -- shop price over every other factor. If I'm Canon, and I don't have a mirrorless priced at $999, then the thousand-dollar buyer will not buy a Canon. So Canon offers a model it can price at $999 that achieves the desired profit margin.

[@carlosandreviana9448]

Do you have anything against Nikon?? You didn't mention it once and the Zf is by far, the most suitable for street photography, because it is the first camera with subject detection on manual lenses, top dynamic range and IBS and can emulate recipes with picture profiles.

[@zenography7923]

Nothing against Nikon whatever, I shot a D80 and a D90 for many years. However, I have no experience of their mirrorless models - something I need to correct!

[@atomaalatonal]

well, i ditched my 5d now after getting a nikon d200 and goin for a d700 now as my ff dslr. hence i still have some canon lenses i got a used 7d almost mint and 5k shutters for 150bucks to mount the canon lenses on it while slowly transferring to nikon. absolutely no need for new mirrorless cameras. i shoot everything as long as its cheap second hand 20y latef :D

[@barrycohen311]

You can take one company like Fujifilm and analyze their product range. It's insane. Bloody mental! They must currently be selling 90 different models of cameras. It's mind boggling. I have an X100T, X-T2 and an X-T20. I bought all of them new when they were currently selling. I am not into bells and whistles and dumb features. I'm an old film shooter. The X-T2 and X100T I own are actually Made In Japan. Fuji's later models are not.

[@zenography7923]

I sold my x-t2 and got an x-t3 as it has better video capability, I still miss the 2 though!

[@_H_2023]

I only use manual mode with third party lenses so that means on my XH1 you are practically using none of the functions in a digital camera as the lens can't talk to the cameras settings. The parts that you do need are only the parts that a digital camera requires to make it function like a film camera eg white balance/film sim/shutter/ISO it has to do all this electronically. Basically you can shut down most of the camera if you are in full Manual mode however on odd occasions the camera will try to talk to the lens and usually you can see this in the viewfinder. The perfect camera would be no video, no electronic rubbish, all manual with a much lower price tag. The only camera that's got all this is the Leica M series but at a ridiculous price tag.

[@jeghedderhenrik]

my perfect camera need to have a LARGER evf with at better resolution than the present cameras on the market .. thats it, even my 10 year a7ii fullfill my needs. bigger evf thats all

[@nicokremers7150]

Yes, I agree. That is why I recently switched from Sony A7 mark i to a Leica Sl (type 601). However, the jpeg’s from the Leica are terrible so I had to switch to RAW as well. Have learned a lot these last months.🙂

[@VeitKrammel]

i think you search for a Nikon Zf + Fuji jpg Engine. :D

[@zenography7923]

I think you might be right!

[@dadautube]

nothing wrong with ML cameras as an extra / added option on top of other options ... but if it's going to be the ONLY OPTION, then ...

[@dadautube]

speaking of non-RAW in-camera-post-processed SOOC digital shots compared to SOOC film shots, well, sometimes i wonder why even the highly experienced old-school photogs having done film photography for ages simply forget all about the fact that after film is exposed in the camera, it also has to be processed first ... and especially in case of negative film, in order to view the final image, then it has to be test-striped after developing so that actual prints of any size can be made of every single frame, using either manual film enlargers and/or highly sophisticated semi-automatic computerized printing machines ... either way, film or digital, there is always a wait time after exposure, even in case of SOOC digital shots, especially if the latter is going to be printed in large sizes ... also, shooting in RAW first and then post-processing the results quickly and automatically is also possible via Photoshop or Lightroom etc software ...

[@zenography7923]

Film has to be processed, sure, but I was talking about the end result, eg picking up film images from the developer, without doing it oneself.

[@ramblinginmeath4950]

I stopped at the XT1... still going and I have no desire to ever upgrade.. too much snake oil stuff out thre ... yes mobile phone cameras have really shaken up the camera industry .. or and I still listen to Vinyl .. greetings from Ireland

[@MaybeTiberius]

i know this will never happen, because manufacturers would not be able to sell you lenses with that one but something i would really love to see would be a ff camera... DESIGNED as a vintage lens platform entirely. strip all of that modernlens featureset out. no ai, no autofocus, no facetracking or whatever. reduce the price of the camera in return because you took all those features out that you have no use for with vintage lenses anyways. basically build an old 35mm film camera on full manual mode only...but slap a mirroless sensor and a display too it. and design it in a way similar to lets say a fuji xt1 with dials, so everything iso/shutterspeed and whatnot are dials. i am not into film simulations because i m just simply not into jpgs and rather go always raw and do my own film like editings in LR but an affordable FF fuji inside an xt1 body without any AF capabilities... a modern refresh of old analog cameras...please give me that. modern cameras, while they work great for adapting lenses... really they are made for modern lenses 1st and 90% of its features is no use for vintage but yet you are paying for those features. in generally go back to MF and photography traditions more. i know: improvements and whatnot. great. but what does autofocus have to do with improvements if you think about it? autofocus isnt better than mf same as mf isnt better than autofocus. its just a different way of shooting. you can very well improve a camera in the areas that REALLY matter... like build quality, haptic, ergonomics, battery life, display and viewfinder, and so on and still embrace MF. why does everything ''improvement wise'' need to be coupled to the autofocus. its almost as if thats all there is with new cameras. looking back a camera 10 years ago and a camera from 2024, there is basically almost no realworld difference in how good of an image they can take and all that has changed is autofocus stuff.

[@zenography7923]

I like the idea of a stripped out, vintage lens only camera, very interesting!

[@charleslawrence7327]

what perfume do you wear

[@zenography7923]

givenchy for digital but only chanel number 5 for film

[@peterm2353]

It's what companies do when overall sales fall - they try to provoke sails artificially by selling new models which are essentially nothing more than a "distinction which does not make a difference". It's the oldest marketing trick in the book.

[@melgross]

Camera companies are like any other. In order to keep sales going they have to introduce new models on some regular basis. It’s nothing nefarious. You don’t have to buy anything you don’t want to. It’s silly to complain about that. And they do get better. They aren’t sideways movements.

[@zenography7923]

Not nefarious at all, everyone needs to make a living. But it's resulted in a profusion of models with often tiny differences between them.

[@philhodgkinson1460]

There just is no such beast as a perfect camera.... After all what is a perfect car.....sent me backwards to film cameras but would like A FUJI X PRO - 2 not a new camera but still.... your Leica ii not a new camera.... love my old FED 2 also...looking out for nice 90mm elmar for it screw thread too.... Nice video but a shade long winded I feel Nigel......

[@tomislavmiletic_]

1) Around year 2010, the photographic industry produced over 120 MILLION units of cameras. Today, they barely make over 30 millions. Perhaps even less. Enough said. F****** smartphone cameras! 2) Years ago, some Fujifilm CEO said that medium format GFX cameras don't have X-trans sensors course there's no benefit of doing that at that sensor size, so APSc only. Is that the truth or they are hiding the fact that Sony declined their demand for X-trans MF sensor, I couldn't tell... 3) When we are at it, you should really, really try out Fuji's GFX camera, especially for use with vintage lenses. You can even use only cropped, Leica format on it to fit any 24x36mm lenses. ANY model will suffice... 4) If you use any Fujifilm camera, it's still wise to shoot Jpeg + RAW. Course that way you can still use Fuji's X Raw studio converter (course some shots still need some refinement or fixing), which will simulate conversion from Raw on your camera, but with connivance of using a personal computer. 5) Yes, yes, small and light camera! Course I got a torn knee, my ribs hurt (course of multiple breaks), just like my neck, not to mention my crocked spine. I was a war correspondent and reporter for too long, what can I tell you...

[@tedcrosby9361]

It’s called consumerism, and why I got off the digital conveyor belt, and stuck with my film photography.

[@photobobo]

Not just Kodak, Fujifilm still sells film.

[@kevinarmstrong3415]

Am told it’s made for them by Kodak.

[@tonykeltsflorida]

When I got a Canon M6 mark II, I knew I didn't need anything newer. Canon doesn't like me because I refuse to upgrade.

[@pilbara67]

I have 3 Nikon DSLR's and don't see the need to upgrade to a Mirrorless camera. It would be good if camera companies would just make cameras for photographers , who needs video and tech.

[@richardwalker4518]

I'd settle for an OM-3 with a digital FF sensor, made true to the original in other respects, i.e. fully mechanical shutter and operation, and a stonking viewfinder. And all metal construction, built like a tank etc. No need for a rear screen, give it the multi spot metering, yeh, an OM-3 with a digital sensor!

[@zenography7923]

Now that would be a very cool machine!

[@nicedward7544]

The tech hit a wall years ago in my opinion for the average and even pro photographer. Video maybe a bit more recently... maybe. I could still get by with a 15 year old camera no problem for paid stuff and nobody would be the wiser. The convenience of great af is nice but let's be real 99% of us aren't getting the cover of nat geo and if you know what you are doing the perks of new cameras are nothing more than convenience. I remember being totally fine shooting sports and wildlife with my full manual film cameras back when. I'm currently 2 generations behind in the Sony world and I'm completely content. I'm not gullible enough or have the GAS to buy new stuff. I haven't purchased a camera new since the 5dii in 2012 it whenever it came out.

[@cgriggsiv]

I agree with you It is extremely redundant to have that many cameras when it should be one maybe two every five to eight years or three models every 10 years you have your upper echelon your mid-tier and your low tier for the digital cameras and then every 10 years make another set less landfill less materials being used less of everything being used because these cameras last a long ass freaking time so long they are made correctly enough without much manufacturing bull crap Looking at you Intel for that bull crap with all that wasted sand for silicone So yes every 10 years there should be three tiers high mid and low that way there's no waste

[@clivelockwood3236]

No wonder young people are not buying DSLRs they are spoilt by camera phones point and shoot and gives them exellent pictures. They dont print any more so phone images are great foe them ans so easy to use,

[@richardgrant418]

Do you also wonder why there are so many models of televisions, telescopes and telephones?

[@zenography7923]

Something similar applies I guess.

[@duringthemeanwhilst]

a modern Sony? hunting for focus??? oh my goodness you'd better not tell a certain conspiratorial KZbinr!!

[@zenography7923]

:)

[@Gogogordy1]

The automobile biz is no different with mfrs all producing every possible variant type of every possible type of vehicle possible to void losing a potential sale. Too. Many. Choices.