Posted by: Mike
One way you can look at camera reviewers is that they've made careers of complaining about cameras.
I've done my share of that over the years, so I think in all fairness I should report that the opposite is currently the case. I really do love the cameras we have available to us today. They're just utterly delightful, beautiful, captivating gadgets. Specifically mirrorless cameras, which hit the sweet spot for me. The cameramakers are maturing with digital, working out the problems and beginning to evolve into the possibilities. I'm "gobsmacked," as our friends in the UK might say.
The current cameramakers I appreciate the most are Sony and Fuji first of all, Panasonic and Olympus next. I have a lot of "legacy" sympathy for Nikon, and I keep trying to like Leica because its film cameras were so cool back in the Leitz era. (Leica aficionados greatly downplay the departure of the founding Leitz family ownership, but I think it was epochal.) But it's really not a natural fit for my budget. The main four mirrorless makers are where my most ardent admiration is aimed.
The cameras we have today are like catnip to me. (And it's only with difficulty that I restrain my natural tendency toward exaggerated metaphor: I'd like to name some stronger addictive substance.) I like them so much I'd be happy to surround myself with a number of them, shooting with each in turn, just to enjoy their beauty and elegance.
Of course, we were talking about diversions the other day. Being a gearhead is, admittedly, a distraction from photographing. Cameras don't matter all that much, at least after you already own the ones you need to do your work.
And I'd never judge a photographer based on the camera they use. It's the work that counts as far as I'm concerned. Consider this: longtime TOP reader and commenter "The Lazy Aussie" (Andrew H.C. McDonald of Perth) is currently one of 47 finalists for Australia's prestigious $25,000 Bowness Prize for this photograph of a fountain in a storm, one of his personal favorites:
...Taken on film with a pinhole camera! And, he tells me, he guessed the exposure and counted it off. The picture simultaneously suggests an alien landing craft and and some sort of reptilian or amphibian eyes gazing balefully from the woods, in addition to what it actually is.
But back to cameras
Still, I have an inordinate love of the cameras we have now. I do covet them, and more than one. I would just love to have the new "right sized" Panasonic GX8; I've owned three of its predecessors. I know I'd get along with that one. I have a Fuji X-T1—my current camera—but that doesn't stop me from coveting either the graphite silver model or the X-T10. Or the X-E2, if I'm really honest. I was privileged to own an Olympus OM-D E-M1 for a while, and only with reluctance chose the X-T1 in preference to it; and although the Panasonic GX7 came in third in that shootout for me, I could have lived happily ever after with that one too, no question in my mind. If I had one now and was happy with it, I'd never consider trading it in.
Photo by Eric Rose, taken with my former Panasonic GX7
Of course the Big Dog of International Camera Lust right now, and certainly not just for me, is the Sony A7R II. Thoughts of pairing that camera with the surprisingly reasonably-priced Zeiss ZA 35mm ƒ/1.4 (compare to any Leica equivalent) make me go wobbly. That one's out of my league, but talk about one awesome camera. Sony's A7 range is da bomb, if you'll pardon the now-unexplosive '80s expression.
(Of course, the A7R II, like the GX8, is in the Vaporware Honeymoon Period right now—that interregnum between announcement and shipping when dreams of new toys are as yet unsullied by Internet sour grapes. Let the camera come out, and the forums will soon tell you everything you should think is wrong with it.)
Golden age?
And that's not all. Subtract all the cameras I've mentioned above, and I'd still have a decent choice of great options I could live with, just from those four cameramakers. That's how deep the field is right now.
I hope in the future we don't look back and remember the mid-teens as a camera golden age. The market is constricting—not because cameras are getting worse or less popular, but possibly because gearheads like me are surfeited with choices and already have too many fine cameras and a lot of people, not just me, just can't justify another purchase even though we'd love to. The shrinking market is sure to constrict R&D and the pace of competition. I've already predicted that smartphone cameras will be better by 2025 than any single-chip camera we have now...development won't stop. But the choices we have among today's cameras sure look an awful lot like this is an era we'll remember. With fondness, and I hope not with regret.
For now, take your pick from 2015's pastry cart and enjoy, enjoy!
Mike
(Thanks to Lazy Aussie and Eric Rose)
Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
Gordon Lewis: "I notice all the cameras you mentioned are mirrorless. Was that just a coincidence, or do you no longer have any love for the quotidian DSLR?"
Mike replies:No hate for DSLRs at all...see Greg Bolarsky's comment below. Sounds good to me. The smaller, vaguely retro mirrorless cameras are the ones that tend to give me the warm fuzzies I'm talking about here, though.
AHC McDonald (The Lazy Aussie): "Thanks for posting my picture Mike. What I was trying to get across is that this is what for me is the reason for shooting film. I would never have got this with a screen to view or digital. I took a test with the phone for framing and it was dull. It was a gloomy day, but nowhere near this dark. The exposure is waaaay off. But correct exposure would have been...not this.
"Another example is a photographer I really like, Mark Olwick. Although he doesn't really get into what camera he uses here, he frequently uses toy film cameras. This amazing elephants shot would almost be impossible with high-end gear. You maybe could emulate it, but every part of your gear would be screaming at you to go in the opposite direction."
Eric Rose: "I loved the GX1 I picked up from Frank Petronio. IQ was amazing. When Mike's GX7 came up, I just had to upgrade. The only thing missing is a mic jack.
"It's funny—years ago I felt that the Nikon F2 was the be-all, end-all camera for me. It did everything I wanted or needed a camera to do. That lasted for about 10 years; then I felt the need for a 'better' camera. Picked up an F5 plus a couple of N90s bodies for underwater work (in a housing naturally). To make a long story short, I have the latest and greatest but am still making the same types of photographs. Are they technically better? Probably. Can I make the image easier? Certainly. However the needs of my customers and even myself have only changed because technology has changed. I feel we have been in a 'golden age' since the '60s. There are now and have been tremendous cameras for many decades. What has changed is that you can now get stellar images out of very reasonably priced cameras. If you are interested, here's the back story of the roadside memorial image Mike featured above."
Paulo Bizarro: "I think all ages in photography are golden. I remember 20 years ago lusting for a Canon EOS 1, but I only had money for a Rebel kit. Later on, wonderful SLR cameras were available, Canon EOS 5 (the cheaper surrogate for the 1), Canon EOS 3, Nikon F100, you name it. In all ages, we were always at the peak of technology, and with plenty of choices available."
Jeff: "I'm glad some of the commenters see the real issues with the 'golden age.' Nobody loves yesterday's cameras. Cameras, cell phones, and other portable electronic multimedia devices are constantly adding functionality that the industry convinces us we need and we all play along. The reviewers sing the praises and the consumers get excited, over and over, year after year. Very few keep the one they have now regardless of whether they were or ever could be happy with it. It's a cultural problem. Since we don't see the perils of our over-production and our over-consumption and can't directly tie our behavior with the degradation of our environment we fool ourselves into thinking of it as a golden age. You can't even find a viewfinder on a 35mm digital camera that compares to a 35mm film camera made by Pentax or Olympus some 40+ years ago. The latter still works and makes good pictures and the former is headed straight to the landfill."
Peter Croft: "I'm doing my best to keep Olympus, Panasonic et al. in business. My motto is, The More Cameras You Own, The Better Your Pictures Will Be. It's not working so far, but I haven't bought every camera yet. ;-) Pentax K-5; Olympus E-M1, E-PL2, E-PL3; Sony RX10; Panasonic FZ1000; Fuji S100-fs; Sigma DP1M; Konica Minolta A2. Plus film—Olympus OM2SP; Pentax MZ1; Contax G1; Contax G2.
"Yes, I know it's a bit silly, but I love fine, precision equipment of any kind and I think cameras are the pinnacle of electro-mechanical design and manufacture. In the case of the E-PL2 and E-PL3, the camera and a lens combo were offered for substantially less than the price of the lens alone. Buy the lens, get a free camera. Couldn't pass it up.
"Although the E-M1 is a fabulous machine, I keep coming back to the Pentax K-5. It fits my hand and most importantly, I don't have to consult the manual to use it. I find the buttons and dials easy to use and the menus simple and quick. Not so the E-M1. Not at all."
Bill Wheeler: "Just today I arrived home to find a package at the front door—a used, refurbished Olympus OM-1 camera. What a beauty!"