Free Opinions. No Refunds.
fuji x10
X10 Goodness - My Review
07/11/2011 Filed in: Photography
The X10 has landed, and I’ve got some thoughts.
Before I get started, I have to give kudos to Henrys for actually holding my preorder spot. I haven’t had much luck with retailer waiting lists in the past, but those guys at my local Henrys really came through.
I don’t do pixel peeping reviews. You can go to DPReview and other sites for that kind of stuff.
TLDR: I really like this camera.
The one thing that drew me to this camera is its design. Not just the outward appearance, but that form and function are very nicely balanced. This camera is not small, nor is it light. It is noticeably larger than my LX3, but not unwieldy. It is heavy– in a good way. In hand, it feels great. The build quality is absolutely stellar, and it is a beauty. In comparison to the G12 and P7100, which look like they were pooped out by a kitchen sink, the X10 has classic good looks. Some pundits like to call it a retro look, but I think that does the camera a disservice. It is simple and timeless.
This camera handles beautifully. The manual zoom is firm and buttery at the same time. And while I haven’t gotten used to it, the “zoom to power on” operation is nicely executed. The back panel doesn’t seem to have any more buttons than my LX3 does, but the execution is better. Most of the operations that I change while shooting can be changed without navigating through a menu. EV, ISO, white balance and AF point selection are all available with a single touch of a button or twist of a knob.
Short of a touch screen, the AF point selection is probably the nicest implementation I’ve used. It beats the LX3 and my DSLRs easily. The AF is surprisingly fast. It’s not DSLR or EP3 fast, but fast enough.
The OVF, while nicer than any of its competitors, has limitations. It pales in comparison to the hybrid VF on its bigger brother, the X100. I see the OVF’s value in situations where you need to compose without rudely distracting others. A dark room, for example. Unfortunately, an eye detect sensor is not available on this camera, so you will have to manually turn off the LCD if you’re trying to be discreet.
The LCD isn’t the highest resolution around, but it’s plenty sharp, and the menuing system is quite snappy.
The camera also has an orientation sensor, which makes life easier when you import your images to your PC. Note that the Olympus EPL3 and EPM1 don’t have that.
The Auto ISO on this camera is to die for. You can pick Auto ISO with a peak up to 3200. It makes life a lot less fiddly in less than ideal lighting situations.
The X10’s flash isn't that powerful, and I see that as a good thing. You can use the flash without your images looking like you used flash (i.e., strong shadows, blown out faces). I've heard that Fuji point-and-shoot cameras have excellent fill flash performance, but I don't have enough Fuji experience to comment on that.
On the whole, the X10 handles very well.
Let’s not kid ourselves. This is a small sensor camera. You’re not going to get DSLR level bokeh, much less Micro 4/3rds level bokeh. You will get better bokeh than most compact cameras, including the Canon G series, Nikon P7x00 series and the Panasonic LX series.
The image quality easily bests my LX3, and isn’t that much worse than my Sony A300, an APS-C DSLR. Keeping in mind that my A300 came out in 2008, that’s quite a statement in terms of how much sensor technology has improved in the past few years. My A500, however, easily trounces the X10 in IQ, which is expected.
RAW is a problem for Mac users right now, since Apple hasn’t updated its import filters for Aperture or iPhoto, and the bundled SilkyPix importer won’t run on Lion. In any case, the JPEGs that come out of this camera are not bad at all. With the default settings, the images do seem to have a canvas-like texture in them. Once I dialed the sharpness and noise reduction settings down to the minimum, the grain pattern became much more natural looking and appealing.
At ISO 1600 and higher, images get pretty noisy at full resolution. They still easily beat my A300, however. Wow. Despite the noisiness at high ISOs, the images look more than satisfactory at Facebook resolutions.
Where things get interesting is in the half-resolution modes. There is a Pro Low Light mode that shoots at 6MP, that takes four shots in succession to create very nice images. The unretouched (but resized) image below was taken in this low light mode without flash. Without context, the image looks like nothing special. I can tell you the light in the room is utter crap, and the LX3 and my A300 would take absolutely horrible photos in comparison. The AWB also does a decent job considering that the ceiling light, which uses compact fluorescent bulbs, usually requires that my images be colour corrected in post.
The same image, when shot in the X10’s full resolution modes, is noticeably noisier.
ISO 6400 dials the resolution to 6 megapixels as well, and is actually quite usable, as shown in the image below.
There’s also a 6MP Pro Focus Mode, that lets you create photos of stationary subjects that have creamier bokeh than with standard resolution images. It appears to work fairly well.
Depending on the blur setting, takes an additional one or two shots after your original shot has locked focus. I’m assuming that the additional shots shift the focus distance a few inches away from the original, and then it stacks the images, blurring the out-of-focus areas with some sort of algorithm. The result is much more realistic than the fake bokeh modes of other cameras, like the Pentax Q.
The black and white mode is satisfactory, but pales in comparison to the LX3’s dynamic black and white mode, which is absolutely fantastic. I have only shot in Provia mode, which is the standard colour mode. I’m pretty content with it and haven’t found any need to switch to Velvia.
The 1080p video is clean and sharp. It’s noticeably better looking than my iPhone 4’s 720p video, which is noticeably better than my LX3’s 720p video.
This is a great camera. I would go so far as to say that it is good enough to be an alternative to a Micro 4/3rds or Nikon CX camera. It takes great stills and video, and is a perfect bridge between a camera phone and a DSLR. At 12 MP, I think the resolution is still a little too high for the sensor, especially considering how good the images look at 6MP. I would have preferred to see this camera as an 8MP camera, but market forces dictate that Fuji pack more pixels onto the sensor. I get it, but it’s still a shame.
While the X10 easily outclasses its small sensor competitors, a few key features would have made it unbeatable:
In spite of my laundry list above, I do think that the X10 is easily the best small sensor compact camera around.
Before I get started, I have to give kudos to Henrys for actually holding my preorder spot. I haven’t had much luck with retailer waiting lists in the past, but those guys at my local Henrys really came through.
I don’t do pixel peeping reviews. You can go to DPReview and other sites for that kind of stuff.
TLDR: I really like this camera.
Design
The one thing that drew me to this camera is its design. Not just the outward appearance, but that form and function are very nicely balanced. This camera is not small, nor is it light. It is noticeably larger than my LX3, but not unwieldy. It is heavy– in a good way. In hand, it feels great. The build quality is absolutely stellar, and it is a beauty. In comparison to the G12 and P7100, which look like they were pooped out by a kitchen sink, the X10 has classic good looks. Some pundits like to call it a retro look, but I think that does the camera a disservice. It is simple and timeless.
Handling
This camera handles beautifully. The manual zoom is firm and buttery at the same time. And while I haven’t gotten used to it, the “zoom to power on” operation is nicely executed. The back panel doesn’t seem to have any more buttons than my LX3 does, but the execution is better. Most of the operations that I change while shooting can be changed without navigating through a menu. EV, ISO, white balance and AF point selection are all available with a single touch of a button or twist of a knob.
Short of a touch screen, the AF point selection is probably the nicest implementation I’ve used. It beats the LX3 and my DSLRs easily. The AF is surprisingly fast. It’s not DSLR or EP3 fast, but fast enough.
The OVF, while nicer than any of its competitors, has limitations. It pales in comparison to the hybrid VF on its bigger brother, the X100. I see the OVF’s value in situations where you need to compose without rudely distracting others. A dark room, for example. Unfortunately, an eye detect sensor is not available on this camera, so you will have to manually turn off the LCD if you’re trying to be discreet.
The LCD isn’t the highest resolution around, but it’s plenty sharp, and the menuing system is quite snappy.
The camera also has an orientation sensor, which makes life easier when you import your images to your PC. Note that the Olympus EPL3 and EPM1 don’t have that.
The Auto ISO on this camera is to die for. You can pick Auto ISO with a peak up to 3200. It makes life a lot less fiddly in less than ideal lighting situations.
The X10’s flash isn't that powerful, and I see that as a good thing. You can use the flash without your images looking like you used flash (i.e., strong shadows, blown out faces). I've heard that Fuji point-and-shoot cameras have excellent fill flash performance, but I don't have enough Fuji experience to comment on that.
On the whole, the X10 handles very well.
Image Quality
Let’s not kid ourselves. This is a small sensor camera. You’re not going to get DSLR level bokeh, much less Micro 4/3rds level bokeh. You will get better bokeh than most compact cameras, including the Canon G series, Nikon P7x00 series and the Panasonic LX series.
The image quality easily bests my LX3, and isn’t that much worse than my Sony A300, an APS-C DSLR. Keeping in mind that my A300 came out in 2008, that’s quite a statement in terms of how much sensor technology has improved in the past few years. My A500, however, easily trounces the X10 in IQ, which is expected.
RAW is a problem for Mac users right now, since Apple hasn’t updated its import filters for Aperture or iPhoto, and the bundled SilkyPix importer won’t run on Lion. In any case, the JPEGs that come out of this camera are not bad at all. With the default settings, the images do seem to have a canvas-like texture in them. Once I dialed the sharpness and noise reduction settings down to the minimum, the grain pattern became much more natural looking and appealing.
At ISO 1600 and higher, images get pretty noisy at full resolution. They still easily beat my A300, however. Wow. Despite the noisiness at high ISOs, the images look more than satisfactory at Facebook resolutions.
Where things get interesting is in the half-resolution modes. There is a Pro Low Light mode that shoots at 6MP, that takes four shots in succession to create very nice images. The unretouched (but resized) image below was taken in this low light mode without flash. Without context, the image looks like nothing special. I can tell you the light in the room is utter crap, and the LX3 and my A300 would take absolutely horrible photos in comparison. The AWB also does a decent job considering that the ceiling light, which uses compact fluorescent bulbs, usually requires that my images be colour corrected in post.
The same image, when shot in the X10’s full resolution modes, is noticeably noisier.
ISO 6400 dials the resolution to 6 megapixels as well, and is actually quite usable, as shown in the image below.
There’s also a 6MP Pro Focus Mode, that lets you create photos of stationary subjects that have creamier bokeh than with standard resolution images. It appears to work fairly well.
Depending on the blur setting, takes an additional one or two shots after your original shot has locked focus. I’m assuming that the additional shots shift the focus distance a few inches away from the original, and then it stacks the images, blurring the out-of-focus areas with some sort of algorithm. The result is much more realistic than the fake bokeh modes of other cameras, like the Pentax Q.
The black and white mode is satisfactory, but pales in comparison to the LX3’s dynamic black and white mode, which is absolutely fantastic. I have only shot in Provia mode, which is the standard colour mode. I’m pretty content with it and haven’t found any need to switch to Velvia.
The 1080p video is clean and sharp. It’s noticeably better looking than my iPhone 4’s 720p video, which is noticeably better than my LX3’s 720p video.
Not So Hot
- The lens cap, which is like the X100, is basically useless. I suggest buying an adapter ring (when it becomes available) and using a generic lens cap or a UV filter instead.
- The tripod mount is not centred under the lens. Not a big deal for me, but for some, it might be a deal-breaker.
- The RAW button. WTF is the point of it?
- Battery life isn’t stellar. On the bright side, no-name NP-50 compatible batteries are cheap and plentiful. Stock up.
- Don’t use flaky no-name SDHC cards with this camera. Expect unusual behaviour if you do.
- Half shutter “stops” the video recording. That’s counter-intuitive to me.
- Mechanical remote trigger is taking the classic design a little too far
Final Thoughts
This is a great camera. I would go so far as to say that it is good enough to be an alternative to a Micro 4/3rds or Nikon CX camera. It takes great stills and video, and is a perfect bridge between a camera phone and a DSLR. At 12 MP, I think the resolution is still a little too high for the sensor, especially considering how good the images look at 6MP. I would have preferred to see this camera as an 8MP camera, but market forces dictate that Fuji pack more pixels onto the sensor. I get it, but it’s still a shame.
While the X10 easily outclasses its small sensor competitors, a few key features would have made it unbeatable:
- Eye detect sensor to turn off the LCD when using the OVF
- Hybrid VF like the X100, or some type of overlay that shows the focus points, shutter speed and aperture
- A lower megapixel count with more sensitive pixels
- Better battery life
- The ability to use filters without paying for an overpriced adapter ring
- A flip up LCD
In spite of my laundry list above, I do think that the X10 is easily the best small sensor compact camera around.
Hands On
14/10/2011 Filed in: Photography
I ventured out to the Henrys Photographic Show today, and managed to see or play with several recently released cameras that I’ve mentioned previously.
The X10 is the “little brother” to the X100. Coming in November, this $600 camera is what I’ve been looking for in a compact for a long time. The build quality is a notch or two above that of the Canon G12 or Nikon P7x00 series. It’s a little better built than my LX3, but it also feels way better in hand, mainly because the small body of the LX3 can be awkward at times.
The menu system is responsive, and more intuitive than any camera I’ve owned. I love that you can choose the Auto ISO upper limit as a menu item. The screen itself is quite nice, comparable to the one on my A500 DSLR. Having said that, the one thing I’ll miss from my DSLRs on the X10 is the eye detection, which turns off the LCD when you use the OVF.
Speaking of the OVF, it’s nice and bright. While it only covers 85% of the frame, it’s more than adequate for a compact camera.
The manual zoom is… dreamy. The rotating motion feels slow and deliberate, and it’s buttery smooth. It has a nicer rotating feel than any of my DSLR zooms, that’s for sure.
As for the autofocus, well, it seems to be average. About the same speed as my LX3. It is a bit of a bummer that the remote shutter trigger is mechanical. It would have been nice to have an RF or IR type of triggering system.
I can’t wait to get one.
The EP3 is a pretty known quantity these days. For me, I just wanted to see if the AF speed was as good as the hype made it out to be. The short answer is “yes”. The Olympus booth was not as well lit as some as the others, and the AF was particularly fast with the kit zoom. The rep popped on the 12mm prime, and the AF was a hair faster. It is at least as fast as my A500, and faster than all the compacts and ILCs I messed with. They had the EPL and EPM models there too, but I didn’t play with them. While I like the EP3 as a camera, I can’t get over the fact that I hate the overall design.
The Sony NEX7 is going to be very popular with serious photographers. It feels great in the hand. It’s heavy in a good way. The EVF is quite good as well, although I haven’t seen enough of them to really make any comparative statements. The focus seemed a hair slower than the EP3, but it was zippy overall. It’s a great camera, but it’s not my cup of tea, even though I’m a Sony Alpha shooter.
The NX200s on display had wires coming out of the handgrip, so it was a bit hard to get a feel for it, but it felt like a less expensive version of the NEX7. Not a cheap version, just less expensive. The LCD on the NX200 is stunningly sharp. The menu system is also really nice. I would even go so far as saying that it might even be nicer than the one on the NX10. The design of the camera is a bit better than average, although there are some design choices that will having you asking “WTF?” It boggles my mind why they printed the logo on the handgrip, where it’s most likely to wear out. The design of the on/off shutter release is also a little odd to me.
I love the lens ecosystem that Samsung has built up, and if I was going to go with a mirrorless ILC system, it would be between this one and the vapourware Panasonic GF Pro camera that may or may not ever make it to production.
As far as I could tell, the Pentax Q was behind glass, and you had to find a rep to let you mess around with it. From what I saw, however, it is small. The lenses are tiny. It looks like a really fun system, and I really love the industrial design, even though the specs may not live up to the high pricing.
Like the Q, the Nikon 1s were behind glass and required a rep. From what I did see, however, the fit and finish were underwhelming. They kinda looked cheap relative to their pricing. The handling is definitely not my cup of tea, and it will be interesting to see what kind of photographers will invest in this system.
FujiFilm X10
The X10 is the “little brother” to the X100. Coming in November, this $600 camera is what I’ve been looking for in a compact for a long time. The build quality is a notch or two above that of the Canon G12 or Nikon P7x00 series. It’s a little better built than my LX3, but it also feels way better in hand, mainly because the small body of the LX3 can be awkward at times.
The menu system is responsive, and more intuitive than any camera I’ve owned. I love that you can choose the Auto ISO upper limit as a menu item. The screen itself is quite nice, comparable to the one on my A500 DSLR. Having said that, the one thing I’ll miss from my DSLRs on the X10 is the eye detection, which turns off the LCD when you use the OVF.
Speaking of the OVF, it’s nice and bright. While it only covers 85% of the frame, it’s more than adequate for a compact camera.
The manual zoom is… dreamy. The rotating motion feels slow and deliberate, and it’s buttery smooth. It has a nicer rotating feel than any of my DSLR zooms, that’s for sure.
As for the autofocus, well, it seems to be average. About the same speed as my LX3. It is a bit of a bummer that the remote shutter trigger is mechanical. It would have been nice to have an RF or IR type of triggering system.
I can’t wait to get one.
Olympus EP3
The EP3 is a pretty known quantity these days. For me, I just wanted to see if the AF speed was as good as the hype made it out to be. The short answer is “yes”. The Olympus booth was not as well lit as some as the others, and the AF was particularly fast with the kit zoom. The rep popped on the 12mm prime, and the AF was a hair faster. It is at least as fast as my A500, and faster than all the compacts and ILCs I messed with. They had the EPL and EPM models there too, but I didn’t play with them. While I like the EP3 as a camera, I can’t get over the fact that I hate the overall design.
Sony NEX7
The Sony NEX7 is going to be very popular with serious photographers. It feels great in the hand. It’s heavy in a good way. The EVF is quite good as well, although I haven’t seen enough of them to really make any comparative statements. The focus seemed a hair slower than the EP3, but it was zippy overall. It’s a great camera, but it’s not my cup of tea, even though I’m a Sony Alpha shooter.
Samsung NX200
The NX200s on display had wires coming out of the handgrip, so it was a bit hard to get a feel for it, but it felt like a less expensive version of the NEX7. Not a cheap version, just less expensive. The LCD on the NX200 is stunningly sharp. The menu system is also really nice. I would even go so far as saying that it might even be nicer than the one on the NX10. The design of the camera is a bit better than average, although there are some design choices that will having you asking “WTF?” It boggles my mind why they printed the logo on the handgrip, where it’s most likely to wear out. The design of the on/off shutter release is also a little odd to me.
I love the lens ecosystem that Samsung has built up, and if I was going to go with a mirrorless ILC system, it would be between this one and the vapourware Panasonic GF Pro camera that may or may not ever make it to production.
Pentax Q
As far as I could tell, the Pentax Q was behind glass, and you had to find a rep to let you mess around with it. From what I saw, however, it is small. The lenses are tiny. It looks like a really fun system, and I really love the industrial design, even though the specs may not live up to the high pricing.
Nikon 1
Like the Q, the Nikon 1s were behind glass and required a rep. From what I did see, however, the fit and finish were underwhelming. They kinda looked cheap relative to their pricing. The handling is definitely not my cup of tea, and it will be interesting to see what kind of photographers will invest in this system.
The X100's Little Brother
29/08/2011 Filed in: Photography
So it indeed appears as though there will be a follow up to Fuji’s immensely popular niche camera, the X100.
Over the weekend, details of the X10 (possibly known as the X50 in some markets), quietly leaked onto the Internets. Looking to be a slightly smaller version of the X100, it will be priced at $599 have the following features:
To me, it’s a nice alternative to the LX5/G12/P7100/EX1/XZ1 type of camera. The zoom range appears to be between 28mm and 112mm (35mm equivalents), which is functional for most people. I do have to admit, the 24mm minimal focal length of the LX series is pretty awesome. Having said that, 24mm focal lengths on compact cameras usually come at the price of some image distortion.
Debates will rage in the popular photography forums. With a price comparable to the low end Micro 4/3rds cameras and an inferior sensor to boot, why bother?
Since my site is my pulpit, so to speak, I can say whatever I want without worrying about trolls, since I don’t provide comments. So, here’s my response.
There seems to be a lack of common sense among camera lovers. Digital photography isn’t the same as film. Film is paper thin, digital sensors are not. Film cameras came with no imaging sensors (that would be your film, by the way), digital cameras do. And for those lacking any context, a 35mm equiv sensor costs a hella lot more than a $5 roll of 35mm film. Camera manufacturers have to delicately balance the importance of size, features, sensor size, price and demand. Chances are good that they’re not going to get all of that right. The only sure thing about the release of new cameras is that there is going to be an inordinate amount of kvetching online by people who are too busy reading specifications to be taking actual photos, aka, the “measurbators”.
Since I’m in the market for this type of camera, let me explain why I have ruled out Four Thirds. And, because I represent only one particular type of use case, your mileage will vary.
A camera like the X10/X50 is a secondary camera to me. My main rig is and always will be an SLR. I don’t have a big SLR, so size has never really been the defining issue. I always have my iPhone with me, so in a pinch, I can always take a photo when I need to. There are, however, plenty of times when I need image quality somewhere between my camera phone and my SLR. And that’s where a “bridge” camera fits in.
So why not an ILC? Here’s my problem with ILCs as a secondary camera. With the exception of the recently announced Panasonic X kit zoom, kit zooms on the current batch of ILCs are big enough that I’d rather carry my SLR. The second problem, is that a camera with a sensor as large as my DSLR (APS-C, by the way) seems somewhat moot. Sure, I could get a Sony NEX or a Samsung NX, but why bother? For the marginal space savings in my camera bag, I may as well carry my SLR.
What about a smaller sensor ILC, like Micro 4/3rds or the rumored Nikon? Or what about a tiny-sensor ILC like the Pentax Q? My problem with these two alternatives are the fact that the cameras have lens mounts. WTF are you talking about, Steven? All ILC’s have lens mounts!
The problem with a lens mount on a secondary camera system for me is that a lens mount equals temptation. Temptation for newer and more lenses equals money. While having more lenses isn’t a bad thing in itself, I’d rather be investing in lenses for my main rig, not my secondary rig. I do have to say, the Q does look like a damned fun camera, even though the image quality will likely fall short of its competitors.
If you read the ILC discussion forums, which I sometimes lurk for fun, you’ll see a lot of people making comments on how they leave their DSLR at home much more often. Well, I don’t want that to happen. I need an equipment arsenal that encourages me to use my SLR. My secondary camera actually needs to be a little inferior to my DSLR. For that to happen, it needs to be a 4/3rds sensor or smaller. And to keep me from buying non-A-mount lenses, it needs to have a fixed lens. To have enough versatility for my needs, that fixed lens needs to be a zoom somewhere between 28mm and 90mm (now you know why I didn’t just go for the X100). I highly doubt we’ll see any 4/3rds sensors in a fixed lens camera any time soon, as I believe it would have happened by now. With the exception of some fixed focal length niche cameras from Fuji, Leica, Ricoh or Sigma, I don’t really see any large sensor cameras with fixed lenses. I don’t really know of any with fixed zooms.
I have been wondering why we don’t see any cameras like the Panasonic LC-1 any more. That camera (also having a 2/3 sensor), while super expensive in 2003, epitomizes the kind of compact camera I’d like to shoot with. The X10/X50 is a modern update to the LC-1 form factor. While that 2/3 sensor won’t result in any bokeh-licious images, the images will be more than good enough for the ultimate destinations for my photos: flickr, facebook, iPhone, iPad and my HDTV.
People, it’s time to stop the kvetching and measurbating. Make some time to leave the house with your camera and shoot photos. In the end, that’s what it’s all about.
Update: Looks like the official announcement is coming this Thursday.
Over the weekend, details of the X10 (possibly known as the X50 in some markets), quietly leaked onto the Internets. Looking to be a slightly smaller version of the X100, it will be priced at $599 have the following features:
- Bright, high resolution, Fujinon F2.0-F2.8 manual 4x optical zoom lens
- Optical zoom viewfinder with revolutionary performance
- 12 Megapixels 2/3 inch EXR CMOS sensor
- EXR Processor
- Manual shooting modes
- RAW shooting & built in RAW conversion
- Highspeed continuous shooting up to 10fps
- Retro compact design with magnesium alloy
- Full HD 1080p movies with stereo sound
- Manual pop-up flash with dedicated hotshoe
- High contrast 2.8" 460k LCD monitor
- 1cm super macro mode
- Motion Panorama 360
- Auto Bracketing Functions
To me, it’s a nice alternative to the LX5/G12/P7100/EX1/XZ1 type of camera. The zoom range appears to be between 28mm and 112mm (35mm equivalents), which is functional for most people. I do have to admit, the 24mm minimal focal length of the LX series is pretty awesome. Having said that, 24mm focal lengths on compact cameras usually come at the price of some image distortion.
Debates will rage in the popular photography forums. With a price comparable to the low end Micro 4/3rds cameras and an inferior sensor to boot, why bother?
Since my site is my pulpit, so to speak, I can say whatever I want without worrying about trolls, since I don’t provide comments. So, here’s my response.
There seems to be a lack of common sense among camera lovers. Digital photography isn’t the same as film. Film is paper thin, digital sensors are not. Film cameras came with no imaging sensors (that would be your film, by the way), digital cameras do. And for those lacking any context, a 35mm equiv sensor costs a hella lot more than a $5 roll of 35mm film. Camera manufacturers have to delicately balance the importance of size, features, sensor size, price and demand. Chances are good that they’re not going to get all of that right. The only sure thing about the release of new cameras is that there is going to be an inordinate amount of kvetching online by people who are too busy reading specifications to be taking actual photos, aka, the “measurbators”.
Since I’m in the market for this type of camera, let me explain why I have ruled out Four Thirds. And, because I represent only one particular type of use case, your mileage will vary.
A camera like the X10/X50 is a secondary camera to me. My main rig is and always will be an SLR. I don’t have a big SLR, so size has never really been the defining issue. I always have my iPhone with me, so in a pinch, I can always take a photo when I need to. There are, however, plenty of times when I need image quality somewhere between my camera phone and my SLR. And that’s where a “bridge” camera fits in.
So why not an ILC? Here’s my problem with ILCs as a secondary camera. With the exception of the recently announced Panasonic X kit zoom, kit zooms on the current batch of ILCs are big enough that I’d rather carry my SLR. The second problem, is that a camera with a sensor as large as my DSLR (APS-C, by the way) seems somewhat moot. Sure, I could get a Sony NEX or a Samsung NX, but why bother? For the marginal space savings in my camera bag, I may as well carry my SLR.
What about a smaller sensor ILC, like Micro 4/3rds or the rumored Nikon? Or what about a tiny-sensor ILC like the Pentax Q? My problem with these two alternatives are the fact that the cameras have lens mounts. WTF are you talking about, Steven? All ILC’s have lens mounts!
The problem with a lens mount on a secondary camera system for me is that a lens mount equals temptation. Temptation for newer and more lenses equals money. While having more lenses isn’t a bad thing in itself, I’d rather be investing in lenses for my main rig, not my secondary rig. I do have to say, the Q does look like a damned fun camera, even though the image quality will likely fall short of its competitors.
If you read the ILC discussion forums, which I sometimes lurk for fun, you’ll see a lot of people making comments on how they leave their DSLR at home much more often. Well, I don’t want that to happen. I need an equipment arsenal that encourages me to use my SLR. My secondary camera actually needs to be a little inferior to my DSLR. For that to happen, it needs to be a 4/3rds sensor or smaller. And to keep me from buying non-A-mount lenses, it needs to have a fixed lens. To have enough versatility for my needs, that fixed lens needs to be a zoom somewhere between 28mm and 90mm (now you know why I didn’t just go for the X100). I highly doubt we’ll see any 4/3rds sensors in a fixed lens camera any time soon, as I believe it would have happened by now. With the exception of some fixed focal length niche cameras from Fuji, Leica, Ricoh or Sigma, I don’t really see any large sensor cameras with fixed lenses. I don’t really know of any with fixed zooms.
I have been wondering why we don’t see any cameras like the Panasonic LC-1 any more. That camera (also having a 2/3 sensor), while super expensive in 2003, epitomizes the kind of compact camera I’d like to shoot with. The X10/X50 is a modern update to the LC-1 form factor. While that 2/3 sensor won’t result in any bokeh-licious images, the images will be more than good enough for the ultimate destinations for my photos: flickr, facebook, iPhone, iPad and my HDTV.
People, it’s time to stop the kvetching and measurbating. Make some time to leave the house with your camera and shoot photos. In the end, that’s what it’s all about.
Update: Looks like the official announcement is coming this Thursday.