fgrey: Being a novice camera user with the anticipation of purchasing the NEX 7, this article leaves me without any measurable way to choose a camera without feeling duped.It would seem from this expert that everything is crap and a con. Example. With a car I know that choosing horsepower over efficiency is a bit senseless, but is is a way to measure quality. The most expensive cars are usually made to the highest standards including being the fastest. What is the benchmark with camera choices?
You make the mistake of thinking that quality can be reduced to a simple number. That doesn't apply to cars and it doesn't apply to cameras.
blork: As someone who has followed camera and photography news for years, and is constantly slapping my forehead as I watch manufacturers perpetually mimicing each other and continually jamming more "features" into cameras instead of making them purer, I love this article.
All I want is something like the Fujifilm X100 (with both autofocus and traditional rangefinder focus) and with simplified controls -- meaning traditional basic controls -- and interchangeable lenses. And not a $7000 Leica. Is that so hard? Why can't someone come up with that?
I'd gladly pay $1500 for that if it delivered what it was supposed to deliver -- old fashioned simplicity in which the photographer needs to understand the camera instead of letting the machine make all the decisions. And X100-like IQ. No stupid quirks due to bad software and UI. Please? Anyone?
As I'm sure you know, they can indeed come up with that. Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, and Olympus already have the technologies to allow them to make that camera.
But they won't build it unless make money out of it. The majority of potential purchasers want point-and-shoot cameras which will give them a crisp and colourful with no learning curve. For this market, the controls which you want and I want are not a bonus let alone a priority; they are an impediment.
The market for such a camera is tiny, and at a price of $1500 it would be minute. So don't hold your breath.
Wonderful article, though not perhaps in the way that the author intended.
Camera makers hammer the market with gadgets largely indistinguishable from their own previous range of gadgets, or from the products of other camera makers. The few real shifts in the market, such as bigger-sensor compacts and the revival of the mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, are not enough to save some long-established businesses who find little or no profit in a market which is disappearing.
But why write one paragraph when you could churn out dozens to say the same thing without offering any new insight?