Previous news story    Next news story

Reader's concept prompts question: what would your ideal camera be?

By dpreview staff on Oct 19, 2012 at 23:22 GMT

What does your dream camera look like? One of our more enterprising readers has sketched-out what his would look like - creating an interesting contemporary rangefinder concept. Bristling with Nikon F4-inspired manual controls, each dial and switch also has a 'neutral' position to allow the on-screen interface settings to take precedence. Easycass acknowledges the concept may not be entirely possible - an 'ultra-fast' 24-105mm lens would dictate a fairly small sensor, and autofocus rangefinders have never exactly been commonplace - but it raises questions the question: 'What would your perfect camera be?'

With mirrorless and large-sensor compacts still going through a growth spurt, what would you like to see? What controls would you demand and what balance of size, price, sensor size and lens specs would you like to see. Let us know in the comments, below and try to be plausible (a realistic price is usually more than you want to pay for it).

If the comments section doesn't give you the space to express your ideas, consider doing what Easycass has done - create your own article.


Total comments: 710
By Crooty (Oct 22, 2012)

As a compact camera user, I would like a mix of my Canon SX40 with nice features from my old G9 that I miss.

-min 12Mp
-20-800mm zoom lens with IS (you really get used to those long zooms… argh)
-F1.8 or 2.0 to 11 (to take longer shots by daylight)
-manual position (P, Tv and Av too)
-2 custom positions
-custom self-timer
-wheel for ISO (80-3200) + "Auto ISO Shift" button (or at least available on shortcut button)
-HD video
-faster everything (SX40 is really slow)
-larger sensor
-superfine JPEG
-1cm macro
-nice enough continuous drive
-nice enough screen
-not too heavy

-why not 10m-waterproof casing eh?

What I don't need:
-articulated screen
-exposure compensation wheel
-all those scene modes

1 upvote
By Rachotilko (Oct 22, 2012)

Hi, maybe I am missing something ... why do we need FF ? I mean, current sub-FF cameras have IQ, dynamic range (after some PP), resolution etc. greatly surpassing anything a film could have dreamed of. The only exception is DOF. But that could bee remedied by larger apperture lenses, could it not ?
Let's be realistic here: it is very expensive to manufacture a FF sensor. This comments section could have been an outstanding opportunity for letting manufacturers know, what we want, *within a realm of realistic expectations*. Instead it is plagued by all the unrealistic "sub-$800 FF" demands. Because it *is* expensive to manufacture a digital FF sensor.

By joejack951 (Oct 22, 2012)

You can only make a lens so fast before it becomes unreasonably expensive and/or bulky. There's simply no match for fast full frame lenses for small sensors. Try finding a true equivalent to a 24/1.4, 35/1.4, 50/1.2, or 85/1.4 (to name but a few) for smaller sensors. You'll see how well full frame has hit the sweet spot for lenses because if you move up to medium format, you'll find the same lack of equivalent lenses likely because they'd all be too big given the size of sensor they're trying to cover.

The Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 is a great example of a failed attempt at making an equivalent to fast normal for m4/3s. That's a $1200 manual focus equivalent to a $100-200 50mm f/1.8 full frame AF prime. You can buy a used 5Dc for that kind of money. About the same money would also get you a Canon 50mm f/1.2 for which you'd need a 25mm f/0.6 for m4/3 to match it. I'm afraid of what that might cost if it could even be built.

By Superka (Oct 22, 2012)

Digital Fuji TX-1 (Hasselblad Xpan) - that what I need. Just the same design. It can be with no LCD-screen at all (I don't mind). There are no digital panoramic cameras, they all 3:2 (some 3:4).

By naththo (Oct 22, 2012)

My idea would be: Canon EF 4D mirrorless system with full frame sensor with wider dynamic range, full colours bit, low noise with optional noise cancellation for space/astronomy photography (Especially red noise) through settings, built in HDR, natural colours mode, full optical viewfinder, IPS OLED tilt/swift screen, all weather sealed body like Pentax does but keep it light weight as possible, noise option, RAW, DNG and JPG option, real time AF movie mode included, more range option of AF detection like phase, tracking, contrast edge etc, AF microadjustment still important, wider AE bracket to -5+5, more durable shutter curtain, double quad core processor good for sports shooting, special lens still required for real time AF movie mode like these few already released by Canon, built in sensor image stabiliser is a high demand too! so no need to buy lens with OIS so better value for $$$. Dual battery system, SD card only. Those photography would love this.

By ZAnton (Oct 22, 2012)

Body - G15 or Nikon P7700
24-150 f/1.8-2.0 lens, (can be a bit bigger than current G15/P7700)
sensor - 1/1,7" to 1"
8-12 MP,
DR of current Nikon DSLRs or close to that,
DXOMark max.ISO 400.
articulated screen,
no build in OVF or EVF
additional EVF either cheap or in package,
wheels for aperture (around the lens), for ISO (on top), for exposition (on top), relatively big wheel on the back side.
4*AA batteries.
cheap and small flash with tiltable light and AF-assist light.

By RoccoGalatioto (Oct 22, 2012)

Please no F4 it was bulky and cumbersome. Give me the F3 in digital. No added controls just a LCD screen on back. No AF, just the minimum to control digital recording. Not too much to ask really.

By JordanAT (Oct 22, 2012)

Perhaps, but the advantage of the F4 (I had the s version) was that the controls laid out very and the grip was far more comfortable than the F3/F2 bodies. I'll admit I have "large" hands, and the extra weight was not an issue for me - not the case for everyone. It was tough day when I realized I'd rarely shoot my F4s; and a very happy one when I found i could afford a used D3.

G Davidson
By G Davidson (Oct 22, 2012)

Okay, leaving aside compacts, here's what I'd like for image quality. Full-frame sensor, mirrorless. PDAF on sensor, so will AF with all Nikon lenses and mount any other company's, along with excellent 'VRIII' in-body stablisation. Built-in EVF, 60fps video, with focus-peaking for MF usage.

A range of optional grips to make it larger for the big lenses, along with a selection of pancakes and foldable zooms for usual usage, that will be smaller than most full-frame lenses so far. As a system, it can be quite small, but scales up for specific usages, which makes it somewhat modular, a bit like the OM-5 design.

By dbo (Oct 22, 2012)

My perfect Camera would be a RX1-alike FF Compact with a 20-100/f2.
EVF, built in Filters, progammable bracketing option.

1 upvote
By chrisdq82 (Oct 22, 2012)

I am a videographer, so my answer is from that kind of angle. I currently own a Nikon d5100, and for still photography it may not be perfect, but until i can afford an upgrade it suits my needs.

No my ideal camera would lean more towards video. I like the Sony NEX-EA50uh and the Black Magic Cinema Camera. In a perfect world like to see the form factor and size and weight of the NEX-EA50 and the sensor of the Black Magic. But i want it to remain in the same price range these camera already are in. So basically its a Black Magic that has a better body, lol. Cause i'm sorry, its body design is stupid to me. Its screen is a freaking mirror, you can barely see your shot without a evf. And the ability to change out batteries would be nice.

To top it off, nikon F mount. Lol

By joe6pack (Oct 22, 2012)

IMO, the best camera is one with open source software that lets you control from reprogramming buttons/controls to generate any picture from RAW.

By Bigbokeh (Oct 22, 2012)

Why won't they make a DSLR with a large 30mp sensor and NO TOYS - Just give me a full manual camera - all I need to adjust is WB, F, S, ISO and THAT IS ALL. Cost should be 1000.00 and then let me work.

1 upvote
By shaocaholica (Oct 22, 2012)

The 'rest' of the stuff you don't want isn't going to be save you much money given most of the hardware is already there for what you DO want.

You think saving a few buttons and programming logic is going to cut the price in half?

1 upvote
mark power
By mark power (Oct 22, 2012)

I've owned 9 digital cameras and maybe three times that number of film cameras and the RX-100 is pretty close to perfect for the shooting I do. 20x24 prints look like they were made with a view camera. It would be perfect if it has an articulated viewfinder and a fast Zeiss lens that started at 24mm. Of course it would have to remain the same size which is part of its near-perfection. The Rx-1 is tempting but its lens isn't wide enough for me and it's too big. Is full-frame really that much better than a 1 inch sensor? I've seen prints made with the top Canon DSLR and if there is a difference it's not perceptible to the eye although testing machinery can tell the difference I'm sure...

By samsamsamsam (Oct 22, 2012)

Full Frame has better saturated colors and shadows

Zvonimir Tosic
By Zvonimir Tosic (Oct 22, 2012)

Is the "open mount" idea possible in the age of digital? Say, an "Open Office" equivalent of a camera. Can that be Leica's M mount but with AF. Leica's patent on M has expired. Or something similar, perhaps even smaller ...
Or, do we get stuck to manufactures' proprietary technology instead, and wait for them to make our 'dream camera', which may never come anyway?
On the other hand, is it possible to source low quantities of sensors just for the sake of making one's own digital camera, experimenting, or at least developing some concepts which may be funded if proven worthwhile?
Is anyone doing things like that in the age of digital at all — creating custom made digital cameras?

1 upvote
G Davidson
By G Davidson (Oct 22, 2012)

That would be nice, but especially with AF systems hard to realise. The closest (though not really open) is M4/3.

By mervethenerve (Oct 22, 2012)

mine... a fullframe sensor. 16mp. 100%/1x viewfinder. a 2 or 3" lcd. thats it. offcourse a cf card, usb interface, color/bw, wb. No fancy features, no video. just the basic capturing features. thats it.

By Alizarine (Oct 22, 2012)

Ideal camera?

My eyes, only with manual aperture control and can zoom in and out. And of course capture stills with it (since it's streaming video technically, right?).

By EKB (Oct 22, 2012)

My own modest desire is for customizable front grips on dSLRs, similar in concept to the custom grips available for pistols. Want a small grip for your small hands? A big grip for big hands? A soft & spongy grip? A hard grip with a deep texture? A fancy show-off grip made of ebony, or ivory, or mother-of-pearl? Remove the standard grip and replace it with a new one that matches what you want, either OEM or from a third party.

By rsf3127 (Oct 22, 2012)

NEX-6 + a REALLY sharp and fast pancake.

Don't need anything beyond that.

End of wish list.

By plasnu (Oct 22, 2012)

Analog Film and Digital hybrid

1. full frame digital back / 135 film cartridge interchangeable body.
2. Lightweight (mirrorless / rangefinder)

The medium format digital back is no more only for professionals!

1 upvote
By AmaturFotografer (Oct 22, 2012)

Modular and programmable. You can call it personal camera or PCam or whatever. I want Sony sensor, Intel processor, Samsung display, Apple interface and Canon/Nikon glass.

Ok I know universal interface is impossible, just make it programmable. Sony Apps is actually a very good start by a company that is famous for its propriety formats.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
G Davidson
By G Davidson (Oct 22, 2012)

Assuming it's compact, I'd want a 1-inch or larger sensor, with about a 24-120mm (equivalent) lens. Ultra-high resolution in the sensor would make cropping longer lengths a breeze. I'd also want that lens to be reasonably bright on the end, perhaps having some kind of foldable feature to make this possible, as it might need to extend further for this.

I'd definitely want an EVF/high resolution LCD that at least tilts, or preferably folds out. I'd want a workable hybrid focusing system, with on-sensor PDAF and CDAF as well, for speed and reliability. It would need a few buttons and dials, not as many as pictured, but two dials for aperture/exposure settings would be good. A capitative touchscreen would help a lot to make deeper settings accessible.

It's hard to perfect right now, as we are still dependant on larger sensors for image quality. With all the progress being made here, I think we will be able make do with much smaller ones in the future, with bokeh produced digitally.

By farcanal (Oct 22, 2012)

I just want an 18-200 2.8 Is, fully sealed, pretty please with all the toppings :)

By TrapperJohn (Oct 22, 2012)

I'll take my current EM5, with one or two changes...

PDAF on sensor, so it can have good C-AF, and so it can AF the larger Oly ZD lenses quickly.

That would give me small and compact when I want it, or larger and extremely capable when I want it, without having to own two separate systems with two distinct sets of lenses.

1 upvote
By gftphoto (Oct 21, 2012)

For best compact, Sony RX100 would come close if had a really great electronic viewfinder. For best mirrorless, SONY NEX-7 would be hard to beat if they would fix some handling issues. I'm not a SONY guy historically, but they are doing some really neat stuff these days. Fuji X-E1 also looks intriguing.

By samsamsamsam (Oct 21, 2012)

1. Sensor from Nikon 800E
2. A weight under 500g.
3. The Display should also work, as a Waist-level finder, like Rolleiflex.
4. Maybe with two models, one with a really good Pentaprism viewinder and Display, and one only with Display.
5. A mount for nearly every lens, like Sony NEX.
6. It could be a upgraded Sony NEX.

Also for fun a "Silicon Film" for my good old Minolta XE1.
Search, Silicon Film.

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
1 upvote
By unlearny (Oct 21, 2012)

imagine a sigma DP2M with 24fps 1080p raw output 1080X3... I'm just not feeling very imaginative today. Let's start with that.

By Greynerd (Oct 21, 2012)

The camera shown does look a bit of a dog's dinner. There must be a law of diminishing returns where there are so many controls that there will be a problem remembering what they do and where they are and what needs the menus, plus what they do in different modes and how you have left them and having to constantly turn the camera to access them. This is when a menu becomes a better option especially as a reset is a lot easier than returning switches to a default condition. Thanks for showing this camera as it has cured me of the idea that menu driven cameras are necessarily a bad thing.

1 upvote
By wetsleet (Oct 21, 2012)

If you claim there are too many controls to remember, how would putting the same controls in a menu make that number of controls any easier to remember? I find a tactile, physical layout much easier to remember that a faceless menu system, the more so if the physical control location relates to the function. like aperture control round the throat of the lens.

By IGuay (Oct 21, 2012)

How about a ruggedized and weatherproofed camera like the RX100 however in a package just a bit larger( (no bigger then my FM) and maybe just a few ounces heavier - a full frame with a 24 - 135 1.8 thatstill fits into my coat pocket and will accept filters. A 3 " high def screen... buttons large enough for winter handling, and a menu that is so simple my grandkids can find what I want like on their iPad....You said ideal .And it doesn't need recharging till I get back home and my pictures WiFi or 4g to my cloud based storage automatically any where in the world Oh yeah, and I want to point it one way have have the focus points be where where my retina is focused

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
Tom Hoots
By Tom Hoots (Oct 21, 2012)

I have my dream camera: The Sony RX100. I've been carrying a camera in my pocket since Canon's S100 -- the original one from back in 2000. And all I've really wanted was a pocket camera with a larger sensor that would produce significantly better image quality than the usual pocket cameras, which the RX100 delivers.

More recently, over the past few years, I've become a fan of Sony's fast shooting capabilities, and all of the features it has developed around that speed, employing multiple image processing. So, including those features in a pocket camera with a larger sensor, Sony has absolutely met my needs.

By lacro (Oct 22, 2012)

If I could only also get the results and experience from the X10!

By dct_dct (Oct 21, 2012)

All good points. Who want's to dive into the GPS menu system of a car just to honk?
Of course, the proposed controls could be designed with tactile differencies from one to the other, but the basic idea to have daily used function at your fingertips is what we are discussing and asking already many years.
Kudos for the grit to bring such a first idea to the public. Just a remark to the viewfinder: If your design is referencing the rangefinder aera, please exchange the viewfinder with the flash window, to have it on the far left seen from behind. As your idea isn't a mirror based DSLR, the viewfinder does not have to be in line with the lens.

Gary Summers
By Gary Summers (Oct 21, 2012)

Panasonic has already shown with the L1 that even on a reflex the eyepiece doesn't have to be in line with the lens.

By dct_dct (7 months ago)

You got it! Right!
And Minolta with the Vectis SLR decades ago ;)

By goloby (Oct 21, 2012)

All I ever wanted was a full frame digital sensor in my FE2

john 47
By john 47 (Oct 21, 2012)

Funny how things come round full circle eventually. Nikon and Canon had some great rangefinder style cameras from the 60's not forgetting Leica of course. The SLR then dominated for many reasons and now were moving back to those days with all the new digital technology at our disposal. It is all now down to a balance between tech and design. Take the Leica approach, keep it simple make it last 100 years (film cameras that is) Take the Nikon SP in black, eye candy or what! take the design of form following function, subtle details see the screws, nice rectangular dimensions even got the control dial. Translate this to a modern digi with the same original ideas and Nikon would have a winner. Full frame pref. to take interchangeable lenses.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
By sklantedzrt (Oct 21, 2012)

I know that I'm the minority, but here goes:

Canon's Digic III or IV processor (superior, from a photogrammist's standpoint) with a 9- to 16 MP sensor, with a (35mm eq.) 25mm to 600mm zoom, inside a VERY ruggedized body, capable of withstanding a 5m drop and OPERABLE at -10 degrees Farenheight (-23C), priced under $300.
Okay, that'll never happen, but we alpinists who are both documenting our current climb and (literally) scoping out the visible cliff face a few miles away, trying to assess avalanche and rockfall dangers as well as potential routes would find such a camera infinitely usefull...
Actually, an internal heating system inside an aerogell-insulated double-walled shell, along with the use of readily-available-all-over-the-world AA batteries, plus leave-it-alone-all-day timelapse capability would be part of the deal.

Yep, it's impossible, but you're asking for a "dream", so that's it.

P.S. Make sure that the lantayd mount is bombproof and big enough for 3mm kevlar cord.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 13 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Fazal Majid
By Fazal Majid (Oct 21, 2012)

Hideous and all those knobs means settings will constantly get accidentally knocked out of whack. This train wreck shows by counter-example how camera designers do a much better job than they are credited for.

William DeBlase
By William DeBlase (Oct 21, 2012)

A modular camera. buy a body, add replacable features you want as techonology improves you just add that feature instead of replaceing the whole camera. You can start with basic features then as you improve in your learning and skills you can add others.

By Jimxrt (Oct 21, 2012)

I think Nikon should do a semi-compact camers that is a mirrorless system that is designed to use current AF-D and G Series slr lenses with the controls and menus that are simple straight-forward and easily understood and navagate through. Most cameras have controls difficult to manipulate, and menus that are difficult understant, are a nightmare to navagate and to use.

I think a mirrorless camera with easily understood control and intelligent but simple to understood menus and easily navagete through, a large APC-S sensor, about 12 to 16 MP, that uses the current F mount lenses like the G series and DX type lenses. It would be compact, easy to use, good resolution, has interchangeble lenses all ready availabel versital quiet. I think a great consept.

Jim B

1 upvote
By wetsleet (Oct 21, 2012)

If it uses SLR lenses then one thing it won't be is compact. Even though the camera itself might be mirrorless, the lens design assumes it isn't, so the flange to sensor distance must allow for a mirror, even though the mirror isn't there. So the camera still has a mirror box, just without a mirror inside.

Unless of course this compact mirrorless camera uses an adaptor to take SLR lenses, and otherwise uses its own range of lenses with a much shorter flange to sensor distance. I think they already make one of those...

G Davidson
By G Davidson (Oct 22, 2012)

Jim, I'm hoping for the same system. It's true that lenses will be bigger than for other formats, but I don't think we should underestimate the pancake/foldable zooms that could be made for it for when size is an issue. I am biased, as I have a lot of Nikon lenses I'd use with an adapter at first, hopefully with the Nikon 1's sensor-based PDAF.

Seeing as Sony, Fuji, Canon, Samsung and Pentax are all offering APS-C mirrorless systems, there must be a market as it offers a great compromise to maintain decent control over DOF, IMHO an essential function for any serious camera, which smaller sensors really struggle with.

I suppose Nikon is waiting until Mirrorless takes off in a bigger way. They could still have the CX system for people who want something more compact and with adapters use their (especially) long lenses on it. A mirrorless D7000 is waiting in the future, no doubt.

By hiplnsdrftr (Oct 21, 2012)

I am a firm believer that many cameras available today are purposely "crippled" in an effort to ensure near future upgrades.

So despite the features we desire... don't hold your breath.

By wetsleet (Oct 21, 2012)

I kind of find the opposite - they have so many fandangled features and knobs that it is sometimes difficult to know where to start taking a picture. My current camera probably has more features and options related to auto-focus alone than the entirety of the controls on my first film SLR.

By arammc (Oct 21, 2012)

I want cameras to be Programmable, they are computers after all. An external interface standard would be nice too (similar to midi for music control, but for cameras).

Apart from adding features that cameras leave out like timelapse shooting, being able to remotely control how the camera works would lead to all sorts of interesting possibilities. (take a slow shutter shot, then a freeze action shot right after, combine for interesting motion blur effects.).

I like all the controls on this.

By hiplnsdrftr (Oct 21, 2012)

The concept is really good. The point is that there are obviously other camera formats than what is currently available. I really believe many popular cameras sell well simply because there are so few alternatives or consumers simply don't know any better.

I would really like to see a mirrorless compact with similar features and build quality to a Canon 1Dx. Regardless of price.

By boinkphoto (Oct 21, 2012)

One that has high IQ more than high features. I think modern camera discussions get lost if FPS, MPs, AF points, etc. In the end it's what matters most is whether the image looks good to your eye, in the same way one might prefer Velvia over say EBX.

Yes, with PP you can do a lot to alter these things, but my experience has been that the default output of the camera has a big effect on how much you use the camera and/or enjoy it (and I say this as a RAW shooter).

By luxborealis (Oct 21, 2012)

About 10 years ago, I put out an internet plea for the following modelled on the style of a 4x5 view camera mostly for landscape photography. Being a 4x5 user, it's the sensor that is most important and virutually all other bells and whistlers superfluous:
• Sensor size of 7200 x 9600 for a 4:3 ratio, 20x26"x360ppi - or better yet a 9600x9600 square senor with various "crop" options: 7200x9600 H or V, fill square 4x5, 2x3 etc.)
• large, 3x4" LCD (or larger! with no viewfinder but decent battery life for Live View)
• no Mirror would be ideal (and one wouldn't be needed with this design)
• Nikon or Canon mount
• A-priority with Exposure Compensation and Maunal
• Matrix/Evaluative metering with optional spot metering with the ability to vary the location of the spot
• muli-spot metering with built-in user-customizable Zone calculations
Amazingly enough, aside from the multi-spot, we are almost there as the D800 comes close these specs in some ways.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
By ddtwenty (Oct 21, 2012)

I like to add another point.

As a compact enthusiast user, I just want to use a high grade super zoom like 400-500 mm. range. I can only find the super zoom on travel zoom compact like canon SX 260 with 25-500 zoom. And the quality of images are quite good.
Only if it come with larger sensor , that would be better.

Let's say ... if panasonic will do the LX8 with the specification I said below..
(24-90 zoom with large 4-5 inch touchable lcd and 1 inch sensor.)

They should add another choice for super zoom users....for instance...
Panasonic LX8T which has the same specifications like LX8 24-90 but come with telezoom lens 125-500 mm. With f stop like f 2.8- 4 . The sensor is also 1 inch.

I think this will be a great choice for enthusiasts who want to use super zoom lens but can afford to pay more than 300$. yes I can pay 500-600$ for a high grade super zoom one, and in the same time I can carry this high grade super zoom with me anywhere because it's just a compact size camera.

Thank you Panasonics if you do these cameras for real.
LX8-W 24-90 f.2.0-2.8 1 inch sensor
LX8-T 125-500 f.2.8-4 1 inch sensor
Both cameras equiped with 4 inch high resolution lcd android 4.1 O.S.

Bob Meyer
By Bob Meyer (Oct 21, 2012)

I think you underestimate just how big a 125-500mm equivalent, f 2.8/4 lens would be to cover a 1" sensor.

1 upvote
By grafli (Oct 21, 2012)

the 500mm have to have a 46mm front-element.
Thats not too big for my opinion.
The length does not to have the real focal lenght(185mm) eighter.

(1" Sensors have a 2,7x Crop Factor. so the 500mm has to be devided by 2,7 =185mm. The F-Nuber is wished to be 4. So the 125mm have to be devided by 4 =46,3mm.)

By JohnHoppy (Oct 21, 2012)

Full marks to Easycass for his design study. And interesting reactions, mostly positive: ignore those detractors who feel they're qualified to criticise, let them design their own! I know how difficult it is, I designed my 'dream camera' a while ago and guess what I called it? - "C1". Now how odd is that?!! So there is design talent out there, my only question is - how do we get the camera makers to listen? Instead of rolling out the same incremental updates time after time.

1 upvote
By wetsleet (Oct 21, 2012)

what I like about this design is that with a little bit of experience the user's fingers' muscle memory would be able to read (and operate) all the controls without the further need to actually look at the controls. It would also be very quick to change control parameters - almost no need for a settings screen or menu etc, just flip a couple of switches already at your fingertips.

A bit like all the major control in a car - you don't (mercifully) need to take your eyes off the road in order to operate any of the major or most of the minor controls.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
By Caramel23 (Oct 21, 2012)

Premium compact like Pana LX7 with OM-D EM-5 Quality and Performance like high speed AF & better sensor. also better build in flash and 5X zoom.

for M4/3, current OMD EM-5 is really enough, just hope there's more M4/3 lens.

By lylejk (Oct 21, 2012)

Just thought of this too. Why not a nuclear battery (they are pretty much bulletproof safe). Your powersource then would last beyond years; probably longer then the camera itself. :)

1 upvote
By Shurato (Oct 21, 2012)

Slightly OT, but still gotta say this: Frankly, when seeing this concept image above of a camera, I may have second thoughts in actually getting it; talk about total absence of aesthetics to put it diplomatically. However, knowing that this would be the one camera with all the features I would like to have, the perfect camera, I'm pretty sure I still would get it; since I'm well aware just a good design of a camera doesn't make the photographer shoot good pictures, it's the photographer's experience which makes the good pictures.
And if Nikon would indeed adopt this design and release this kind of perfect camera, I imagine it would even become a classic pretty fast, also or especially because of the "no-frills-aesthetics-but-feature-packed" attributes.
I wonder if this discussion post may even have been initiated by Nikon themselves, including this concept image... ;-)

Rol Lei Nut
By Rol Lei Nut (Oct 21, 2012)

A FF rangefnder with liveview and a *great* EVF, simple, direct controls and IBIS, which can mount my Rolleiflex and Leica R & M lenses.
Autofocus is not necessary, => *as long as the EVF is good enough* (ideally I'd like the viewfinder of my Leicaflex SL, but that would be impossibly expensive to make and would preclude being able to mount all kinds of lenses).

The new Leica M is a step in the right direction, but is too expensive, has no IBIS and the EVF isn't good enough for fast *and* accurate manual focus with non-rangefinder coupled lenses.

A compact FF dslr like an Olympus OM would be nice, but it must be able to
1) mount at least all lenses designed for slrs (sigh! Goodbye M lenses....)
2) have a truly good manual focus viewfinder, something *no* dslr has managed to do yet.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
Indulis Bernsteins
By Indulis Bernsteins (Oct 21, 2012)

What about the Fujifilm X-Pro1 or X-E1. Takes great photos. Has Leica M lens adapter (though Ken Rockwell thinks the $600 35mm Fuji lens gives the 50mm Leica lens a run for its money). Not FF but has decent EVF, and picture quality is astounding esp at high ISOs. Yes I have one on order!

By wetsleet (Oct 21, 2012)

rangefinder...autofocus not 'necessary'?
Am I missing something? Can a 'rangefinder' camera ever be an 'autofocus' camera? I thought 'rangefinder' was an inherently manual method of focussing.

Or has the term 'rangefinder' just become a shorthand for a camera that kinda looks like an 'old fashioned non-SLR' model?

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
By Sunshine_boy (Oct 22, 2012)

We've seen so many innovations, gimmicks and tricks in compact cameras and yet nobody has had a go on a tilting on board flash head. They try repositioning the whole flas unit away from the lens but is it so hard to allow adjusting the flash head (up or down) once the unit is up?

By GirlyP (Oct 21, 2012)

A digital OM-1 system, with full-frame sensor ofc. The same huge viewfinder, the same lightweight lenses and the same cool looks.

By AndyGM (Oct 21, 2012)

There is a camera already that is very close to perfect for me - The OM-D EM-5.

The only things I would change are:
- it needs better Continuous AF (this should be coming in the next OM-D camera)
- The burst mode could be used for things like in camera HDR
- Setting up bracketing should be less fiddly

But the main issue is it is twice the amount of money I had to spend on a camera (but then this exercise is about dream cameras, so money shouldn't matter either :) )

By timccr (Oct 21, 2012)

I'd like an Olympus PEN or Panny GX that is weather sealed with a fast, weather sealed, ultra wide prime (OK so that bit is really unlikely so a faster weather sealed version of the Panny 7-14mm) and the Oly 60mm macro. The stills can be printed as exhibition quality A2 prints, it records 4:2:2, 10-bit video at 50Mbps and someone makes a really nice underwater housing for it so that I can take the whole lot to 100 metres.

Total comments: 710