Since it goes up to the year 2000, I would have included the Olympus C-2100 UZ. This camera was way ahead of its time. It had everything, including a 10X optical zoom with stabilization. Electronic viewfinder.
For me this is true too. I really want to use my Panasonic G3 more, but my Samsung WB850 keeps giving me such good shots in so many conditions... it's so small, has great zoom, good in low light, and I get pictures I would never get without it.
Boxbrownie: A sensible and considered article, but will it be appreciated amongst all the gear junkies?
No, but then you've answered your own question by using the term 'junkies'. If that's what they are, for them it is more about 'having' gear than 'using' their gear.
toomanycanons: All the reasons listed don't apply to me. My DSLR kit isn't heavy and I don't even notice its weight when I do carry it; it doesn't matter to me how "good" compacts are now; I always have a short to medium zoom attached to my DSLRs and I usually shoot toward the wide end; street photography is boring and intrusive to me--doesn't matter if people see I'm carrying my DSLR, I'm not shooting them; and, last but not least, any "extra gear" is left at home till I know I'm going to need it then I'm glad I have it.
Everyone has their own preferences, and I can see you are in your comfort zone with your DSLR. But I think you have brushed off the 'intrusiveness' factor a little glibly. There are many occasions where a smaller camera will get you a better shot by being less noticeable/intimidating.
Durandalfr: LOL, people spit on the nokia 808 for having a small bump on the back and not being as flat as GS3, how people cannot put such a big phone into their pocket and blahblahblah. Now you have an hybrid phone/camera with an ugly degigne and miraculously, maybe because it's samsung's, pocket can now contain that king of design. People are brainless.
Anepo - I guess you mean that photographers are aiming for perfection in expressing their own vision. Yeah, maybe that comes with other characteristics that aren't so noble. Anyhow, I'm glad they exist!
danroso: The sound of optical zoom during video is horrible! Hear it on gsmarena.com 208 g??? Sony WX300, 20x zoom is just 166 g. I would go with the Nokia 808 sensor or bigger for good image on low light and decent digital zoom on good light.
Does anyone actually zoom while shooting? Most scenes determine the zoom to start with, and it stays there. And, since most output will be 'documentary', it won't really matter even if it is used.
donaldxr: Just remember one thing: It's a phone. The camera is just an extra feature.
Wait until we start getting unbelievable video that you can actually see because it becomes the model for the majority of phones, and then decide what it is... just like cells have changed the world, this will kick that change to the next level.
W5JCK: A terribly small sensor, a lackluster lens, a cruddy OS, and no camera buttons other than the shutter. Not good, if you ask me. I can only imagine how uncomfortable and awkward it will be to hold and use it as a phone with that big tumor (errr, lens) stuck on the back. Even with the lens retracted it is going to stick out very far.
I rate it:
-- Ergonomically: an F for phone and camera-- Phone: a C -- Camera: a D since cheap compacts can out perform it
It is what it is. A reasonable camera needs a lens. There's no predicting the course of technology, but it's hard to imagine a good camera without a protruding lens. And 10X is what I always miss on my Galaxy Note - it seems completely inadequate without zoom. But that is my taste, and I know others do fine with much less zoom. As this market matures, there will no doubt be choices to suit everyone. I'm glad it's beginning.
Flying Snail: That's real cool. But can you heat your dinner with it too?
Yeah, as far as it goes, it might be ok... but geeeze, couldn't they make it double as a backpack? And what if it starts raining, and I need a tent? What the hell use will it be then?
Combatmedic870: Pretty cool! I like how it starts at 24mm!
I mean....What no full frame?! No F0.95 lens? Only 10x zoom? Why is it so heavy?
I appreciate a lot of the comments here because I learn from them, and see ways things could work better. I'm sure the mfgs get ideas as well.
I just don't understand why there are sooooo many here who are so snobbish. Why do they care what other people like, just because it isn't what they like? Why do they put people down and call them brainless? I don't get it. Do they think it makes them look smart? Skillful? Like good photographers? Most snobbish people I have met are so opinionated that when I look at what they do I have a sense I'm being bullied into liking it - and therefore I like it less.
DPReview007: OK, so this one was clearly designed by marketing people, not photographers. It was designed to sell, not to take great photos. Two astounding choices:- they crammed 16 Megapixels on a 28mm2 sensor... Ahhhmmm- they crammed a 10x zoom into it...
It'll basically give you the same image quality as a crappy little "super zoom" compact...
Let's hope Nokia, Sony and Google Nexus (i.e. Nikon) will make more intelligent choices when they show their hands later this summer / year.
Thankfully, 2013 will be the year of the real camera phone finally.
I posted above about my 'crappy little super zoom' WB850. It's ok to have your own preferences, but people get a lot of satisfaction out of cameras that meet their needs well, even if they don't meet your particular needs. It's a little offensive to disparage others' valued possessions.
Making a camera that is 'designed to sell' isn't necessarily something to be scoffed at. Sure, selling some cheap, poor quality stuff is a waste of resources and based on cynical motives, but in this case it is providing a lot of people with exactly what they want. Nothing wrong with that.
Michael Ma: What a wasted opportunity. Everyone knows by now P&S cameras take about the same level quality of pictures of smartphones. With super zooms only being a good idea in theory but under-utilized, and having about the same pixel density of a smartphone, you aren't really getting too much in terms of photos you're going to want to keep over having the standard S4. I think the S4 lens is a single element F2.0 24mm equiv. The lens on this beast, even slower. Too bad they didn't do anything bold like put a MFT sensor with a pancake zoom lens. That may have been exciting.
Yeah, this looks really good. I have the WB850 - such a good little camera, long lens, good in low light, small size, wifi - the picture quality is just fine for internet use and also where finer detail and cropping is needed. It covers everything but 'art' photography. In fact, I always have a sense, 'If I could only merge this with my Galaxy Note...' And this hybrid seems like just the answer.
CameraCarl: Once again, lots of new cameras but only two with viewfinders. My wife (who is not as serious a photographer as me) won't even consider using a camera that does not have a viewfinder. And after struggling with the Panasonic LX3 and Canon S100 in daylight and bright sun, I will never buy another camera that doesn't have one. I can't figure why the manufacturers do not realize this. Why do they think photos ought to be taken at arm's length?
The Panasonic G3 has a beautiful, bright EVF. I read the technology of it, (don't remember the details, but figured it must have been left here from the future along with the Terminator chip :),It is ideal for me - I wouldn't change a thing. So if they put the same thing in a compact superzoom, I'd be first in line.
Check what happens if you shoot for a day with a camera with both viewfinder and LCD screen.
What happens with me is, I almost always use the viewfinder - without really thinking about it. I only notice in retrospect. So for me it's not a complicated intellectual exercise to figure out what's best - it's my body telling me what works best. And this is after shooting for several years with only the LCD.
StopMoKid: This is indeed an odd looking concept but what strikes me far more odd is the choice of APS-c. With Hasselblad being a defining name in medium format and the recent unveiling of VG-900, proving that sony is willing to pair a full frame sensor with the e-mount, I would never have guessed they would have dropped down to below full-frame with this model.
I can only assume it involves the market and price targets they plan for this system, but if it cost near as much as the 6D and D600, I fail to see many people choosing this instead of buying a normal nex camera. (Then again, the Leica X2 exists at $2000, with a fixed lens to boot) Ah, and let's not forget sony wants to sell a fixed lens, full frame camera for the price of their A99.
This is an interesting year for sony, I'll give them that.
But, I agree that it is an outrageous price. Still, Asians are all abuot prestige and name recognition, and conspicuous consumption.
Maybe the quality of sensor vs the size of the camera has overtaken Hasselblad's need for the bigger sensor? A smaller camera has real advantages.
Jim144: That's horrible.
But, you have to admire them if they have customers who will actually buy it. Any business is about extracting money from its customers, so if they're successful, hats off to them! (And pity for their buyers.)
'Any business is about extracting money from its customers' - That's if your restrict your time frame to the past 20 years. It hasn't always been the case for 'any business' - only now.
Business has almost successfully defined the human condition as being exclusively self-interested - a term that only really defines the corporation. But I can report, thankfully, that it is really only semi-effective propaganda. People are still people; corporations are not.
I see why there are so many comments about marketing ploys - all manufacturers probably track these sites to know which feature they should save for the next model: how difficult is a mic input? And everyone wants it.
Having said that, on the plus side, 1080p with high bit rate is a real improvement, the high def screen will be good. There seems to be added video focus capability by touch screen, but I would much prefer it by focus ring.
Also the programmable rocker arm, movie button on top and the eye sensor that activates AF.
And possibly the bigger 4-way button on the back. If it is easier to work than the G3 4-way, that would be nice.
I just bought my G3 a few months ago, and I'm very pleased with it. I would definitely like to have most of those new features, but they don't justify an upgrade for me. Nice, but I doubt I'd be taking better pictures, or even noticeably better video.
Well, ok. If you want to give me your G5 body for my G3 plus $200, I'll do it.
We see what he sees... great being a kid.