There are new leaders among the mirror less cameras – third generation of Panasonic Lumix system compacts. Novelties, and now there are two models – Lumix DMC-G3 and DMC-GF3, unites unusual for this manufacturer and exclusively correct, in our opinion approach: miniaturization, simplification, the advanced functional filling and low cost.
Good cameras Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 and Samsung NX11, but is it worth buying them for their price??
March 2011: the second wave passed between compacts and DSLRs
The appearance of the first mirrorless system cameras the experts and technique amateurs rejoiced as if children. The idea promised a completely new type of device and new unique features. Plus, the manufacturers – first Olympus and Panasonic, then Sony and Samsung – added fuel to the fire with unrestrained experimentation with form, function and price. After almost two years and a couple of generations of mirrorless cameras for some brands we can make sober estimations and conclusions. We have two such conclusions.
The first: not many participants of the market seemed to understand why exactly they should get rid of the mirror. Let’s get it straight: the mirror, or more precisely the optical TTL viewfinder, which is made possible by the mirror, is one of the two key advantages of SLR cameras. viewfinder gives you a yet unimaginable electronic interface and a different way of seeing a scene and the next picture. Eliminating a system which is beloved by millions of photographers, it should be clearly understood what it will replace. The price, in spite of the seemingly strong simplification of the system, is not yet such a plus. So it’s all right.
The main plus could be compactness because viewfinder shaft is one of the most voluminous elements of SLR construction. Unfortunately, not everything is smooth with compactness yet either. Technically cameras became both smaller and lighter, but in practice there is not much of a gain at all. Any of the new cameras can fit into a pocket only if a very compact lens, like miniature “pancake” is installed.
The secret of success of the most compact Sony NEX-5 which critics and advisors rarely pay attention to is not at all in the thickness, which is commonly measured in compacts. Exceptional foresight of the designers was shown in the creation of minimal possible profile, i. e. low height of the frame.
The logic is this: the depth of the camera, no matter how thin it is, inevitably “worsens” any installed lens, width – limited by the size of the display, battery, handle, and therefore lends itself little to reduce. If the height and depth are equal, there is the only parameter that defines the volume and hence the portability of the device.
High height – and here you have a cube, which by any measure would not fit into a normal bag, much less into a briefcase or pocket. Low profile – and you get a device which even with a “long” lens can fit at least one side into a briefcase. Amazingly simple!
The second conclusion follows directly from the first. Non-mirror cameras, especially “second wave” in the form of Sony and Samsung products and second generation of Olympus and Panasonic are, no doubt, great cameras. Not lacking in charisma, functional advantages and various interesting features. And yet as a class of cameras they are not yet understandable for all photographers. Regular compacts are often smaller and cheaper, and most SLRs are faster to work with.
The advantages of the now forgotten class of the rangefinder film, which the new cameras are to revive in a new incarnation, are not obvious today. So among the evident advantages we can mention only bigger sensor size and absence of camera vibrations, connected with the work of SLR unit, than compacts.
In other words, you will definitely have a lot of fun with one of the mirrorless cameras described in our review and you will be happy with its functionality and extensibility, and probably also with its very attractive design.
But before you run to the store, carefully weigh the pros and cons. Are you making a sensible choice and are there no alternatives better suited to your requirements?? And manufacturers have to look for the right format to immediately understand why we should skip the optical sight. Well, or to lower the price, because a good price helps to turn a blind eye to many shortcomings.
Having looked at Panasonic new models – Lumix DMC-G3 and DMC-GF3, something made me want to come into the store
June 2011: third generation – smaller, simpler, cheaper
There are new favorites among mirrorless cameras – the third generation of “system” Lumix compacts of Panasonic company. Novelties, and at present two models are presented already – Lumix DMC-G3 and DMC-GF3, are united by unusual for this manufacturer and exclusively correct, in our opinion approach: miniaturization, simplification, the advanced functional filling and low cost.
The unfamiliarity of the approach is that the first two generations of “system” cameras Lumix, though proven to be interesting and promising in many ways, all the time somehow fall short: the functions are cut, the design is not very good, the price is high. It was interesting to watch these experiments but I had no desire to buy one of the cameras for myself and recommend it to my friends. Developers and marketers of Panasonic took into consideration the past mistakes in the new range and it seems they won.
With the Lumix G3, the company has eschewed brutal instrument design and tried to create a pleasing, “soft”, one might say “amateur” look. Made the most of the features available, from Full HD recording to a flip-down touchscreen with native high-speed focus and powerful electronics.
Moreover, it is not a cyborg, pumped like steroids, with haphazard functionality, but an elegantly and intelligently thought-out system, aimed at the photographer and giving him a lot of convenient and practically useful tools for taking pictures. The company also took care of the price: according to forecasts, it will be quite adequate both to the camera’s abilities and to the market, taking into account the competitive environment existing in it.
The all-new GF3 the camera was announced at the time of this issue, but we hurried to tell you about it, too is about the same cocktail. A very small and light body, a fast processor with fast focusing, touchscreen, easy-to-use controls, plus all the available functionality an amateur photographer could need and not casually competing with the family’s older video hybrid, the GH2 .
In terms of their combination of qualities, both cameras claim to be the most promising, if not the best compact system cameras. Which of the two to choose – a larger and “more serious” or easier, but smaller – the only question you need to answer before going to the store.
The goal of other camera manufacturers is now to educate. Not in the sense that they should unanimously copy Panasonic novelties – we, on the contrary, are for diversity of types – but that specialists of many photo companies should adopt the ability to draw conclusions from the past actions and inactions, to search, invent and take a complex approach to the problem. However, these skills are universally useful for everyone.
Nikon V1 and Pentax Q: expensive, prestigious and long-lasting?
December 2011: Nikon and Pentax weren’t even going to beat DSLRs
The entry into the mirror-less camera market one of the two leaders in the SLR market has disappointed some photographers who were expecting to see a machine with a large matrix. It seemed that the unploughed field for creativity plus Nikon’s experience, professionalism of engineers, developers, and designers would inevitably give a damn about all competitors.
It turns out that the One platform wasn’t meant to compete with APS-C format cameras, but rather to create a new product line designed for amateurs who prefer an easy-to-use product, without trying to beat DSLRs. Pentax chose a similar way.
Even price competition didn’t work. Olympus, Panasonic, Samsung and Sony are gradually decreasing the price of the devices, while Nikon is not going to get into the middle price category. All this, however, allows you to hope for the best. New products usually try to sell at a high price, and demand makes its own adjustments.
Mistakes are inherent in everyone, and the early developers of mirrorless compact systems are no better in this respect than the latter. Even the first Sony NEX, which was nearly perfect for its time, had a lot of known flaws. Counting and correcting mistakes, not someone else’s, but one’s own is also the way to go.
Maybe the Nikon One concept won’t do well in the market, and then engineers and marketers will have to change their approach. Creating new formats has always been an increased risk. The history of film formats says it all. Out of the variety of 35 mm film formats only one has survived and even survived in digital photography as a professional full-size sensor.
Now it’s interesting to wait only for the Canon compact system. I want to believe that this company would not produce too conceptual and expensive camera at the initial stage. Lots of developers have gone through this stage and given up on such actions, so, really, why not look around?
Sony NX 7 and Fujifilm X-Pro1: Can the Whale Beat the Elephant??
March 2012: a new class of mirrorless cameras bridges the unconnected
In short reviews we mostly focus on advantages and disadvantages of certain camera models, rarely mentioning general features of one manufacturer’s products. Meanwhile, a fair judgement on “system” cameras would lose much credibility without considering the systems available for the cameras taken.
The comparison methodology here is somewhat reminiscent of the riddle of whether the kit beats the elephant. One of the new Panasonic with a good lens beats one of the new Sony. One of the new Sony’s with a good lens will beat anyone at all. But there is a nuance. Finding a good lens for Sony is a nontrivial task, and if you have specific requirements and don’t have an unlimited credit line it’s an impossible task.
By making great cameras, Sony is implementing an unclear strategy with regard to the optics for them. What about the aperture ratio “Poltinik” when it seems that the last non-professional realized that 50 mm on a cropped 1.5 is not the same at all as 50 mm on a film frame. Especially at three times the price.
The most attractive 24 mm for genre, reportage and street photography is implemented in the Carl Zeiss Sonnar T*, and believe me, you don’t want to know the price of this lens! Proposing to put big Sony Alpha optics with an adaptor which weighs almost as much as a camera itself on one of the most portable system cameras looks like a mockery.
The “micro four thirds” system of Panasonic and Olympus cameras offers a wide choice. There are already about three dozen heterogeneous lenses claimed for it, 90% of which were created by the titular developers of the platform.
The Samsung NX system is developing dynamically: apart from third-party products, it has 9 proprietary lenses, including three very promising “pancake lenses” 16, 20 and 30 mm, a 60 mm macro lens and an impressive specialized “portrait lens” 85 mm F1,4.
The observation that newcomers are more and more often satisfied with a “whale” zoom, do not aspire to expand their stock of optics, and therefore the above-mentioned calculations do not apply to them, is quite reasonable. However, newcomers also often follow “public opinion,” which is shaped by professionals and photography enthusiasts.
This very public is “trying out” a new unfamiliar class of mirrorless “system” cameras. And when the professionals get bored of arguing about the size and speed of the camera bodies, they’ll start discussing the optics. Some manufacturers would like to be prepared for that.
The practical advice to buyers is obvious. When hesitating between Samsung and Sony or between Sony and Panasonic think about whether you want to invest in expanding your stock of optics in the near future. In case of a positive answer it is useful to think beforehand about what kind of scenes you like to shoot, what optics you need for it and how much it will cost you from the different competitors. At least, perplexed faces of sellers and exorbitant price tag won’t be a surprise for you.
What innovative features and advancements can we expect in the next wave of digital cameras with interchangeable optics? Will they prioritize resolution, low-light capability, or something entirely new? And what impact will these advancements have on photography and the way we capture images?