Previous news story    Next news story

Back to the future: ten one-of-a-kind cameras from the 21st century

By dpreview staff on Sep 3, 2013 at 09:30 GMT

At the turn of the 21st century, consumer digital cameras really took off. Technology was evolving at an incredible pace, and camera makers came up with features that we now take for granted, most notably live view on DSLRs. There were plenty of unique ideas going around, as well. Some were genuinely useful, while others may leave you scratching your head. In this article, we take a look at ten cameras that have stood out over the last thirteen years.

Comments

Total comments: 252
123
MPA1
By MPA1 (6 months ago)

Meanwhile, Canikon produce the same old same old with a few more MP.
We must look elsewhere for innovation these days.

1 upvote
pict
By pict (7 months ago)

I loved my Sony 707. Ever since they came out with the R1 I've been waiting for a slightly longer, stabilized version of the R1 - something the manufacturers should dhave been able to do years ago - but NOOOO... The manufacturers still have their heads up their asses so I am still using my 707, and liking it. Meanwhile, the best the manufactureres seem to be able to do to update the 2 marvelous cameras is for Nikon to release their P7800 (which is roughly equivalent to the 707 - marginally better in a number of ways but not as good in others) and call it "new." Duhh!

0 upvotes
rsongusa
By rsongusa (7 months ago)

Ah, the R1. That was a fun camera to use but the shutter lag was the killer. My brother had the F707 which he loved. He took it to Europe and took some amazing pictures with it.

0 upvotes
Deardorff
By Deardorff (7 months ago)

Come on guys. Where is the Canham 20x24 Polaroid camera? All this pixelography - lets get to the real thing.

0 upvotes
randevan
By randevan (7 months ago)

I still use my Olympus E-20 and E-330. The 330 is useful as an unmodified Infrared capture camera. The live-view is still useful.

0 upvotes
Sordid
By Sordid (7 months ago)

What happened to Eye Controlled Focusing by the way?
IMO an extremely useful thing!

0 upvotes
Jeff Keller
By Jeff Keller (7 months ago)

Wasn't that on Canon EOS film cameras?

0 upvotes
Sordid
By Sordid (7 months ago)

It was indeed.
An amazing feature I'd love to see in modern cameras as well.

0 upvotes
KentG
By KentG (7 months ago)

Pentax actually did the original R&D on eye-controlled focus but never decided to keep going on it to put it in any of their cameras. Canon picked up the ball and ran with it. One of its issues was on the EOS-3 if you had the AF set to 45 point it would often switch points from the time you wanted the picture till the time you pressed the shutter. As a result many pros just left it in 11-point AF mode. One reason why most DSLRs still have between 9-15 AF points. Too many is often too much.

2 upvotes
Sordid
By Sordid (7 months ago)

The EOS 30 was released around 2000. Just try to imagine what anyone could pull off with today's technology!

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

Very interesting.

0 upvotes
Pikme
By Pikme (7 months ago)

Olympus E330 - you forgot the part where dpreview infamously called live view "a solution looking for a problem"!

2 upvotes
J Parker
By J Parker (7 months ago)

The Luminous Landscape reviewed the Sony F707 years ago and stated:

"...there's no getting around it: I LOVE THIS SONY. Some cameras you just take to. It's slowly become evident to me over the years that some camera designs are more than the sum of their parts, more than a collection of features. You can't discover this from a catalog or a spec sheet. They just work better; they're harmonious; they inspire more affection, more loyalty. They fit you."

An updated version of this camera with the RX100's sensor would be revolutionary

1 upvote
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (7 months ago)

good idea, it could be like a super zoom version of the Rx100

2 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (7 months ago)

Is there any way to recover and use features from those cameras? The holographic focusing gizmo, the Coolpix projector, the lens from the R1? They were amazing pieces of engineering, weren't they.

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
1 upvote
22codfish
By 22codfish (7 months ago)

If only manufacturers had provided provision for interchangeable sensor updates, a lot of these designs would be in use today.

Just think, buy a new sensor, or a new lens, not a whole new camera.

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

New sensors come with higher resolution and/or higher read-out speeds, requiring new processor/memory, which often require new power conversion circuitry. What is left are body and screen. Few would be happy today with 180kpixel screens, and bodies are cheap.

1 upvote
Bernard Hill
By Bernard Hill (7 months ago)

What about Olympus E100RS? Only 1.2Mpx but it captured photos *before* you pressed the shutter. Once it was half-pressed the camera started taking photos, and kept the last five in a circular buffer. Make a full press and the buffer was kept and of course the current view was recorded. And the next photos until you release.
I can't understand why no-one else has used this concept (or do you know different...?) but it's great for action shots waiting for a particular event such as a bubble bursting.
I eventually sold mine because my thing is landscape shooting and it didn't do a lot for that <g>

0 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (7 months ago)

Don't the Nikon 1 cameras have a similar feature? I'm pretty sure that they do.

0 upvotes
ragmanjin
By ragmanjin (7 months ago)

Canon and Nikon both do the same in their low-end point and shoots now, actually, under different names. At the end of the day you get a little video of all the photos you've taken with five-ish-second slow-mo clips leading up to them. Seems kinda gimmicky to me.

0 upvotes
herebefore
By herebefore (7 months ago)

The Sony F-707, and its follow-up both had this feature.
It worked quite well when shooting action.

None of the Sony models did a "video" with the feature, the captures were all full sized stills.

The cameras did video, but it was totally seperate.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
chris_j_l
By chris_j_l (7 months ago)

Just about any Fujifilm camera does this - it's a fairly standard drive mode with a few variations. The X20 has a circular buffer of 8 photos and you can choose how many shots before and after the press you want plus how fast (3, 6, 9 or 12 fps).
I have only used it for fun, not in anger though I wish I did have a life so active that did need it :).

0 upvotes
esmanhotto
By esmanhotto (7 months ago)

still use my R1, very good.

2 upvotes
Caseguy
By Caseguy (7 months ago)

I second that - I use my R1 professionally.

The only problem is that I lost the battery and Sony no longer supplies replacements in my country. I've purchased no-name replacements to continue using the camera but their life is inferior and the remaining time indicator is predictably unreliable.

How is it possible to charge $1,000 for a camera and then sentence it to certain death by no longer supplying it's dedicated battery??

0 upvotes
ChristianG
By ChristianG (7 months ago)

"others - especially live view - are now standard on every camera".

Really? I thought that Sigma was still the hold out? My SD14 certainly doesn't have it and I thought the "Merrills" didn't either but I might well be wrong there, it's a development that might have snuck through my defenses.

0 upvotes
SHood
By SHood (7 months ago)

The Sony QM camera lens can soon be added to this list.

0 upvotes
photoramone
By photoramone (7 months ago)

I bought a K-01 and though it seemed a bit BIG and did not have an optical viewfinder, I loved everthing else about it... Built in-the-camera shake reduction, and HDR, et al. Amazing photos with the pancake 40mm lense, and I was hooked. So all of the pentax lenses fit, and I was having fun again, taking pictures..So then I bought a "K-5" and decided to let my canon system go. I'm not going to worry too much about whether-or-not RICOH takes PENTAX down a uncharted path, I'm gonna go along regardless. Cuz I still like their GLASS... RJM

3 upvotes
KW Phua
By KW Phua (7 months ago)

There were some good concepts and some toys that want to try luck and test the market and eventually fail. I had seen some fanboys supported the toys but not able to produce good picture with the expensive toys. This type of company wasted too much of money, even if they hit the lottery still not able to cover the cost that been wasted. Hope they wakeup and design camera for photographer not fanboys.

0 upvotes
guyfawkes
By guyfawkes (7 months ago)

I'm pleased that my Sony R1 made the cut. It was indeed revolutionary when released and despite its lowly 10 meg sensor, compared to today's all singing all dancing cameras, and its relatively poor high ISO standards for today's tastes, its Carl Zeiss lens makes up for everything. And with this camera, you do have to wonder why we need so many megapixels for most uses.

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (7 months ago)

Lowly 10mp sensor? 10mp was relatively high-end for an APS sensor in 2005.

1 upvote
guyfawkes
By guyfawkes (7 months ago)

Andy, indeed it was, but I was really comparing it (and by inference, its performance) to today's higher mega pixel cameras and against which the R1 can still hold its own.

1 upvote
rfsIII
By rfsIII (7 months ago)

The sensors weren't the problem. It was the software. Thanks to the advances in image quality offered by Lightroom 4 and Photoshop 6, I can now make awesome 16x20 prints from my 10 mp Nikon D200 even when I shoot at ISO 1600. It's ironic that image processing technology has only now caught up to the sensors of 8 years ago.

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (7 months ago)

I still have my Olympus C-8080 (should have been in this list of odd cameras), that your reviewers liked, so I bought one. Excellent optics, weird zoom (electric, with four fixed focal settings, no zoom), SLR-like design, articulated display (lousy in daylight), for its time, OK EVF, and excellent with a flash on top. Still use it for macro and flash shots. 8MP sensor, OK even today!

Total misery if you liked shooting backlighted objects, as both the display and EVF turned into purple rivers (the photos came out OK).

Then RAW was unusual, and it sure had that - speed demon, too, as it took about 30 seconds from RAW shot to RAW shot!

1 upvote
guyfawkes
By guyfawkes (7 months ago)

Tord,

I, too, loved my Oly 8080 back in 2004, so much so that the other week I got another via ebay for old time's sake. The only real down-side to it was the lethargic processing time for RAW images.

I recall when the first batch of 8meg cameras were released the 8080 had the best lens. Olympus even claiming it was built to Zuiko standards. I can well believe it.

0 upvotes
Sordid
By Sordid (7 months ago)

So it made a whopping 2fpm! Gorgeous! ^^

0 upvotes
guyfawkes
By guyfawkes (7 months ago)

Not sure about Tord's timings, unless this is for bracket exposures in RAW, but an individual RAW locks the camera for 12 to 13 seconds before it frees up for the next one. Still, only 5 shots a minute, though. Pretty poor. In comparison an R1 will flush a RAW file in just over 2 seconds.

It was this slow flushing time in RAW that eventually led me to sell the camera and get an R1.

Also Tord's reference to four fixed focal settings and no zoom refers to the magnfication factors in replaying images and which are fixed at 2x, 3x, 4x and 5x, not the lens, which is a true zoom.

0 upvotes
Fredrik Glckner
By Fredrik Glckner (7 months ago)

Another camera which has stood out the most recent years, is the Fujifilm X100, with a hybrid EVF/OVF.

Also, of course, the Ricoh GXR.

0 upvotes
madmaxmedia
By madmaxmedia (7 months ago)

They will be in the 2023 list of weird cameras...

0 upvotes
Acrill
By Acrill (7 months ago)

I like the Epson R-D1.

It is probably the only digital camera ever to feature a film advance lever!

0 upvotes
aris14
By aris14 (7 months ago)

I think that in those days digicams had their designs emerged out from a blank sheet of paper and a pencil. The 707 shows the way. The design was swallowed from marketeers. Cams still adopt a design as some film is still at their backs waiting to roll from one side to another, a rather ridiculous approach based only in our habits. I think a great opportunity was lost in terms of design and functionality mainly because of the stereotype for what a true good camera should look like...
BTW E-10 was a great cam and a lot of people in those days earned a lot of money shooting catalogs and such for web purposes...

0 upvotes
davids8560
By davids8560 (7 months ago)

Here are some additional candidates for this group:

Canon TX-1
Sony F88
Sony M1
Casio EX-V7
Kyocera SL300

0 upvotes
Haim Hadar
By Haim Hadar (7 months ago)

How come the Lytro didn't find its way to this list?
Nice idea and very enjoyable read anyway. Thanks.

0 upvotes
Jakob Dam Knudsen
By Jakob Dam Knudsen (7 months ago)

You're right - I'd completely forgotten about Lytro! Even though it didn't become a large commercial success, it still is extremely innovative!

0 upvotes
Jakob Dam Knudsen
By Jakob Dam Knudsen (7 months ago)

I think it's funny that Sony has several cameras represented, but none of them are SLT-series, which in principle has been the greatest new thing in system cameras for many years (even though it wasn't their invention in principle, as it is a revival of certain film camera tech).

0 upvotes
mosc
By mosc (7 months ago)

Everyone knows SLT is a passing thing between two eras. It is a compromise between two technologies: dedicated PDAF senors on SLR's being useless when the viewfinder is off and CDAF-only from the main sensor. On-sensor PDAF will kill the SLT because you will no longer have any reason to send any light to a second sensor for focusing. SLT lets you get most of the advantages of the looming on-chip PDAF era today while still utilizing a separate focusing sensor. But it's time will soon come.

1 upvote
Boky
By Boky (7 months ago)

And Canon? What happened to Canon?

Oh well, I suppose they came up with, and then perfected, the process of milking their customers to the n-th. degree by selling vastly overpriced gear that is either intentionally crippled in firmware, or completely incapable of achieving a consistent and reliable focus.

0 upvotes
Jakob Dam Knudsen
By Jakob Dam Knudsen (7 months ago)

Well, they DID pioneer entry level access to digital SLRs.

And their compacts have been top choise for many years, and mostly deservedly so. Especially their old A-series, the entire S-series (with only a few exceptions) and G-series.

2 upvotes
guyfawkes
By guyfawkes (7 months ago)

And if I recall correctly, the Canon G2 was European digital camera of the year in 2002.

0 upvotes
mosc
By mosc (7 months ago)

Until a few years ago, Canon's user interface was miles ahead of the competition. Now, most of just borrowed liberally and they aren't that different.

0 upvotes
plevyadophy
By plevyadophy (7 months ago)

@mosc

Well, in my opinion, the user interface on their top tier 1D series cams wasn't miles ahead of the competition; rather, it was miles behind, a rather appalling eyesore. Nikon's was way better.

And I say all that as Canon 1D series owner.

0 upvotes
Dougbm_2
By Dougbm_2 (7 months ago)

Rubbish. My 5D and 50D are perfectly capable and good value.

1 upvote
CollBaxter
By CollBaxter (7 months ago)

Great article. Thank you.

1 upvote
zycamaniac
By zycamaniac (7 months ago)

Not to be picky, but 2000 is the last year of 20th century...

4 upvotes
CollBaxter
By CollBaxter (7 months ago)

I really don't believe this post.

1 upvote
KentG
By KentG (7 months ago)

Its true though. There was no year 0 so a decade goes from year 1 to year 10 (1 BC was followed by 1 AD). That means a century (100 years) ends at x000 not x999.

1 upvote
Max Fun
By Max Fun (7 months ago)

I would have also included the Ricoh GXR system to the list. Unique concept when it comes to customizable compacts.

0 upvotes
markie_jan61
By markie_jan61 (7 months ago)

Thank you for this interesting article.
--

1 upvote
Trollshavethebestcandy
By Trollshavethebestcandy (7 months ago)

This camera was one of a kind for me. Loved it. Kyocera swivel cam

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SL300R/ZSL3A.JPG

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (7 months ago)

Nikon beat them to that design by 5 years with the CoolPix 900 :)

0 upvotes
Gary Martin
By Gary Martin (7 months ago)

I had a great experience with the Sony 707, other than the stupid Memory Stick format. I did a lot of good work with it. These days, I'm also having great success with the Pentax K-01. I guess I'm attracted to odd designs!

0 upvotes
SamTrekker
By SamTrekker (7 months ago)

Nikon Coolpix Projector cameras weren't the only ones made since. It lives on in the newly released Sony HDR-GWP88, a videocam/camera hybrid.

0 upvotes
Robert Wyman
By Robert Wyman (7 months ago)

I had the Sony F707 and often used the little-known accessory wide angle lens attachment (screw mount to front of fixed lens) for architectural and interior images. It was an outstanding camera and I certainly received "my money's worth." Expensive Sony Memory Sticks were my only complaint at the time.

Robert Wyman
www.forensicphoto.com
Fort Lauderdale, Florida USA

2 upvotes
Woodlink
By Woodlink (7 months ago)

I wonder how many images still exist that were made from these cameras?

0 upvotes
MadMacStew
By MadMacStew (7 months ago)

I have thousands from my Sony DSC-R1, a fabulous camera for its time that I still own (but hardly use now), alongside my more conventional Canon 5D mkIII

0 upvotes
dale thorn
By dale thorn (7 months ago)

My first digicam was the $1000 Kodak DC260, which took an average of 50 seconds to write a one mp image to card. Next I traded my Leica M6 for the Minolta DImage 7 with a 200 mm zoom - a great breakthrough. Then the very good quality Casio EX1000 10 mp pocket camera (later cheapened by Casio), followed by a Nikon 8700 then 8800 bridge/zoom cameras, followed by a Panasonic FZ-50 and then the Panasonic G1. Going for better quality in a small size, got the LX3, then got the Leica X1. After the X1 got the LX7, Nikon Coolpix A, then Leica D-Lux6, then Leica X Vario, then Monochrom and Noctilux. The last camera cost more than all of the others combined, and it feels like it weighs as much as all the others combined.

0 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (7 months ago)

Isn't the LeicaD-Lux6 the same or almost the same as the LX7?

How are you finding the Leica X Vario? It attracted a lot of negative comments but I find the camera quite nice to use in my hands despite the "slow" zoom lens.

The Monochrom is in a league of its own. For those who appreciate B&W photography, this is it.

For those who are not prepared to pay the price, they definitely would have a lot to say. You must be having a jolly good time with it.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (7 months ago)

A reasonably good collection of strange digital cameras since it all started.

Of all the innovation over the years, I would say the Sony Hologram AF system and its night vision capabilities is perhaps the most useful. It is unfortunate Sony did not develop this feature further to include it into their recent cameras. I am using my Sony V1 with this capability until today. There is no auto focus hunting in the dark, even in total darkness. Isn't that wonderful?

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
plevyadophy
By plevyadophy (7 months ago)

Sony are an irritant. They always produce, every once in a while, a product that has the Wow! Factor. Unfortunately, they then usually either cut corners somewhere in the manufacturing process which leads to unreliability and the their worse failing is that of suffering from Attention Deficit Disorder; they just can't seem to follow anything through for any length of time (e.g. Hologram AF, Night Shot, the R1 project (just think how cool that would be with an updated sensor or fullframe 35mm sensor (which I guess they will now claim they have done with the RX1).

I started out my digital photography journey with Sony cams, first with the F505V; in fact I have owned all of the Sony cams (except F828) mentioned in the article. However, I have now given up on Sony for the reasons mentioned above.

2 upvotes
0elias0
By 0elias0 (7 months ago)

So true... As a company, Sony is like this mad scientist---brilliant, restlessly innovative and unable to stand still. But, unable to focus or develop its creations with any kind of logical process. We owe it a lot in terms of contribution to the industry, yet as a customer it drives you crazy. I work in the video industry, and while Sony garners much respect there, people laugh and roll their eyes about the dozens of products and formats and codecs it has pioneered and then carelessly abandoned.

2 upvotes
Paul Farace
By Paul Farace (7 months ago)

I wish someone (FUJI or Canon) would build a modern version of the OLY C211 Camedia... a non-Polaroid printer mated to an even better digital camera, maybe a bit smaller with prints a bit bigger? WOW that would be a fantastic machine! I enjoyed the original and was amazed by its capabilities. Time for version 2.0~!

0 upvotes
Steven Blackwood
By Steven Blackwood (7 months ago)

The Olympus c210o IS was sort of a unique camera. A Canon made IS system coupled with a 10x zoom. I got a lot of use out of it.

0 upvotes
timo
By timo (7 months ago)

The K-01 looks much better in the flesh than in photos. It's biggest flaw was the lack of an EVF option. Because of its focus peaking and k-mount compatibility I would still be tempted by a secondhand one at a good price.

2 upvotes
Charles C Lloyd
By Charles C Lloyd (7 months ago)

I took a lot of great photos with the Sony 707. (I took a lot of bad ones too). The swivel back really allowed for convenient viewing when holding the camera at "interesting" levels. I do miss that feature.

1 upvote
Archiver
By Archiver (7 months ago)

Fantastic stroll through the last 13 years. Thank you, DPR!

When considering how to move up from compact small sensor cameras, the Sony R1 was on my list, as well as the Canon 30D and the entry level Sony Alpha. While I'm glad I moved to the much more flexible Canon system, the R1 still seems like it could have done many things.

I hankered after the Sony 707. too, but not as much as the R1. When taken as a whole, Sony are a surprisingly innovative camera company. From the round end Cybershots to the 707 and R1, and now to the RX100 and RX1. No one else makes cameras like Sony.

I met someone with a Casio TRYX early this year! She could easily take selfies with friends, then use a wifi card to send them to her phone instantly.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (7 months ago)

I'd have include Olympus's E-1 which was (I think) the first DSLR with ultrasonic sensor cleaning, a method that has pretty much become the standard and only decent method of auto-cleaning dust off a sensor.

0 upvotes
TN Args
By TN Args (7 months ago)

One of the most enjoyable articles on dpr, thanks for this.

2 upvotes
ntsan
By ntsan (7 months ago)

Casio TRYX and its latest model TR-15 is selling hot cakes in Far East Asia, often it can be fetched at same price as RX100 II... (well above its RRP)

Even on ebay it can be fetch well over $500, over twice the RRP of $250 when it was released, it's pretty rare for camera to go up in value in this digital age, I think the author haven't done enough research before written it off as failure.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting
1 upvote
ezradja
By ezradja (7 months ago)

Sony R1: 21,5 x 14,4mm 10MP sensor, 24-120mm 2,8-4,8
Canon G1X: 18,7 x 14mm 14MP sensor, 28-112mm 2,8-5,8
similar concept, very different size camera

0 upvotes
ET2
By ET2 (7 months ago)

R1 is 7 years older than G1X

4 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (7 months ago)

And offers different features than G1x does.
So... I wouldn't say that the concept is similar.

0 upvotes
RFC1925
By RFC1925 (7 months ago)

and has a bigger sensor.

0 upvotes
guyfawkes
By guyfawkes (7 months ago)

And a simply fabulous lens, even by today's standards.

1 upvote
deep7
By deep7 (7 months ago)

Don't knock the Olympus E300. It's the most comfortable DSLR I've ever used, a really sensible design. Sadly, the media is full of plebs who couldn't see beyond the fact the shape wasn't "conventional". The E330 was cramped and uncomfortable by comparison. I had both.

1 upvote
RichRMA
By RichRMA (7 months ago)

Speaking of plebs, the E330 had logic in its design, especially the raised and offset viewfinder eyepiece. I loved it.

0 upvotes
CollBaxter
By CollBaxter (7 months ago)

The E-300 was one of the Only DSLR where the internal flash did not foul on the camera mounted external flash and both could be used at the same

0 upvotes
herebefore
By herebefore (7 months ago)

I still have (and use) the E-300, along with a bunch of other cameras.
It is a solid (and heavy) brick of a camera without many "frills".
I didn't care much for its "follow-up" the E-500, which to me always felt like it was falling apart (rather loose, creaky plastic case).

They were the last of the line (in the US) to use CCD sensors.

0 upvotes
Clyde Thomas
By Clyde Thomas (7 months ago)

Did you really leave out the Minolta Dimage 5 and 7...?

Tiltable EVF and flash sync at any speed with any strobe.

You know... REAL FEATURES that togs have been requesting for years.

4 upvotes
utomo99
By utomo99 (7 months ago)

I suggest dpreview to make article: What is future cameras we dream on.

maybe manufacturer will try to make it

0 upvotes
alfredo_tomato
By alfredo_tomato (7 months ago)

The GX7 got one of my future camera dreams, a tiltable built in EVF.

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (7 months ago)

I had the 707 & 717, which we used for infrared. Alas, Sony set these cameras so the lens was always wide open when used in infrared "night shot" mode. Perhaps it made sense to lock the lens wide open for use at night but it was a drag during the day because you needed lots of neutral density and still had no depth of field.

Then I saw Sony's reasoning. eBay sellers had started claiming Nightshot was an "x-ray" feature that let you see through clothing. I never put this to the test and doubt it was true (eBay) but it may have discouraged Sony from making a daylight infrared camera. And then came Fuji's forensic infrared camera.

2 upvotes
Total comments: 252
123