Thom's camera market predictions, article.
One of the things one might think about right now is that if one is considering a serious investment in a DSLR system including several lenses, think twice before choosing Pentax or Olympus. They both make really good products, but they may be forced out of the market, and you'll have no upgrade path in the future.
If you only want a camera and kit lens, this is not really a problem, so go wild.
I actually think it's a grave pity, because I really like both Olympus and Pentax. Until the millennium, I had never owned a Canon or Nikon camera, but I had owned a Pentax ME Super, twice, and an Olympus OM2. Both makes make wonderful products with personality and innovation. But it seems the research money to compete in the electronics market, which is what the camera market has become part of, are simply too big to allow any but the very biggest companies to compete easily. If those two brands leave the DSLR market, we may see much less variety. For example, without them we would have no in-body image stabilization. Let's hope it goes differently.
Of course currently the great white hope is the big-sensor compact market, including the Micro Four Thirds platform. The event of speedy on-sensor autofocus and new high-rez screens and electronic viewfinders may give us compact cameras with professional capabilities. And this may make DSLR cameras much less relevant to many photographers. Especially serious enthusiasts, because for them a small-sensor camera might not be good enough, but they still care about bulk and weight. And who knows what amazing cameras we may see in this area in the future.
Update: actually, thinking about it, I think the Micro Four Thirds idea may be flawed. When I want a serious and flexible camera, my Nikon D90 is compact enough. And when I want a much smaller camera, I really don't care if it has exchangeable lenses. If I want something really portable, I'm not likely to bulk it up with extra lenses. So I think a fixed-lens (zoom or not) big-sensor compact is a better idea.
Wellick said:
A minor correction: in-body stabilization is available in Sony cameras (Minolta heritage) as well as in Pentax & Olympus.
Yes, good point. Although I doubt that Sony would have included it if they hadn't enherited it from Konica-Minolta, a company which has already buckled under.
17 comments:
A minor correction: in-body stabilization is available in Sony cameras (Minolta heritage) as well as in Pentax & Olympus.
I'm not sure about Olympus. I, too, love their cameras and particularly their phenomenal lenses. But they are indeed limited by their sensor. I think their continuing in business partly depends on how much market share or profitability they want or need. I hope their micro four thirds is well designed and successful. I fully intend to buy it when it first comes out.
It's hard to imagine a world where there are only two dSLR brands.
Yes, that would be a poor show.
I too hope they get the M4/3 camera really right, and that others join in the fray.
Thanks Wellick.
But a micro 4/3 compact type camera would be a bigger sensor, much bigger. They could default with a standard zoom lens and perhaps do away with the interchangeable aspect for that particular (imaginary) camera.
Yes, that's just what I mean. It wouldn't then be a M4/3 camera, but a big-sensor compact.
BTW, I think the 4/3 sensor is about the right size. Bigger than that and you probably can't make a pocketable camera.
If the Sigma DP-1 worked properly, that would be a good example.
(Except it seems like its APS-C sized sensor has forced too much compromise, like the F:4.0 lens.)
Very interesting article (even or because it is brief and precise). I agree completely with its content.
An argument for Pentax is the ability to use legacy lenses. The pancakes are beautiful as well. I waffle between Canon and Pentax but am more creative with the latter. Maybe it's the happy accidents you get trying to focus manually - regards to Bob Ross.
You can use adaptors on the old lenses and do fine. Maybe you'll miss autofocus on most, but I really don't see the point of sticking with Canon or Nikon just because (sniff) the products you buy from them won't be upgradeable forever. I was looking at a Konika Maxxum 5D a bit earlier tonight, and thinking, why the heck not? If it works, I can adapt to it, obsolete or not. The future of photographers isn't with cameras, it's with PHOTOGRAPHERS.
Rich, what happy accidents would those be?
Well, I'm a happy Olympus user (E-510 twin lens kit). For the time being it'll do me fine.
It would be a great shame if the DSLR market was reduced to just three or four (or two...) brands. I know Nikon and Canon do make some great gear, but it's not the same without the other makers trying hard to come up with interesting new developments and technologies (which they pretty much have to to compete with the big two). Of course the thing is, a camera's just a tool to permanently record an image, you the photographer actually take the picture. And there in lies the difference...
He said walking off enigmatically into the distance.
I wouldn't really call that a flaw. A camera with interchangeable lenses is identical to a fixed lens camera, if you have (or bring) only one lens.
I'm not so sure. I suspect it might be a bit more expensive. Maybe nothing significant.
But I'm more sure that it would be more bulky. With a fixed lens you can make it withdraw into the camera body when not in use.
Samsung is committed to Pentax K-mount, and even has a hybrid system coming out next year (likely a pentaprism-less, compact body). Samsung is far more committed to Pentax than, say, Panasonic is to Olympus.
Hoya, parent of Pentax/Tokina, has gone on record that they are expanding their dSLR lens line-up because it's so profitable. Tokina has quite a following on various cameras, and you can be sure that their optics -- which are paired with the K-mount specifics (SMC, weather seal, SR in the body) for K-mount -- will continue with Samsung rebranding as they do exist today as well.
So, lets say Pentax exits the dSLR market entirely. Even if the name "Pentax" is not on the unit, you will still have Samsung and Tokina expanding their share of the K-mount world. So there would still be a upgrade path for Pentax owners.
Nothing to see here, just some ignorance. ;)
As someone who is considering entering the world of DSLRs, I like to think of the size consideration in three distinct brackets.
Small enough for a jacket pocket, small enough for inclution in a standard size backpack or courier bag and finally requiring its own bag.
Sideways look at this is do use mobile computing platform angle. Smartphone, Netbook and finally laptop.
If you look at cameras there is a real blur between the compacts up to the prosumer/super zoom size category. But at some point compacts get to big for a jacket pocket and carrying an entry level DSLR and one Kit lens is no extra effort. No matter how small M4/3 is it is still to big for a jacket pocket and so it doesn't really matter practically if you carry the Panasonic G1 or a Sony a300 other than one cost £500 and the other £300 (both have LV and IS for fair comparison).
Cameras like the Sigma DP1 and Panasonic LX3 make the jump interchangable lens cameras can never do and that is get in (spacious) jacket pocket. That is the jump you seem to be getting at.
Ideally I would love to own something for each category, but if technology ever reached a point where I could buy one camera it it would fill all three I would be pretty happy.
Me too!
A M4/3 camera would have a smaller sensor than the DP-1, so it surely could achieve the same size, even with exchangeable lens.
Lookit the Olympus prototype.
There are many good comments on this here:
http://www.seriouscompacts.com/2008/11/future-of-compacts.html
Post a Comment