The results are in: the most important camera of the 2010s readers' poll

The functionality of a smartphone, to some degree is screen size (while still pocketable). The top phones have bigger, better screens than most cameras.

Nokia may have been first with a phone camera and Xerox was first with a computer mouse, but apple figured out how to make them usable and practical for the consumer.

"introduced selfies, took social media mainstream.." hmm to me these are negatives:)..a step backwards from photography.

@Karl Huber

For the nostalgic only.

@Karl Huber - "Staying with DSLRs is not necessarily a bad thing"

But it would have been bad if DSLRs were the only thing. Think about it: no face/eye AF, no real-time exposure preview, no live histogram in the viewfinder, AF points only in the central region of the viewfinder, no silent electronic shutter, etc. I could never go back to the constant clack of a mirror slapping up and down every time I press the shutter button, or go not having face/eye AF. or not having real-time exposure preview or a real-time histogram to assist with fine-tuning exposure, etc. Yes, I do understand that there are some people who don't want any of these capabilities, but thank goodness we now have mirrorless cameras that do have these capabilities for those who can appreciate them and use them to our advantage.

I'm also quite happy to shed all the unnecessary bulk and weight of chunky DSLRs too. I've always preferred the size of film-era SLRs over fat DSLRs. Mirrorless bodies are a lot closer to that.

@Karl Huber

Yup. For the nostalgic only.

@Karl Huber - That's nostalgia speaking. Remember, film photographers said the *exact* same thing about digital cameras:
"None of the digital gear I've used to date enthuses me as much as a clunky, reliable film SLR does. Using a film SLR, I feel like a photographer. Using a DSLR, I feel like a gadget geek."

Well, where are all those film photographers today?

Nostalgia is a powerful thing. It's not a bad thing. But it is what it is. I went through the same thing when going from film SLRs to digital SLRs, then from DSLRs to mirrorless. It takes a while for your brain to adapt. To each his own. But thankfully, DSLRs are no longer the only game in town. I've left DSLRs and can't imagine going back.

That was not the point of this. It was not revolutionary like the A7 and A7R were. If it was about best then surely one of the latest models would have won this

Again A7 and A7R were not revolutionary.
They came several years after the first mirrorless cameras, and actually were examples of how not to make mirrorless cameras (being that they lacked IBIS, good build quality and ergonomics, had poor menus and controls, etc).

Again: It‘s not about being revolutionary (or best or most beautiful or this or that) but being (the most) important.
E-M5 for example was important, but A7 maybe more, because E-M5 had no impact on the dominant camera companies (their way of technical development and so on), but the A7 had (by starting something, that changed/started to change the paradigm of Canon and Nikon).

"They came several years after the first mirrorless cameras, "

That's not the point. There were plenty of cars before the model T also. But the model T changed the world. When a product comes along and checks the right boxes, at the right time, and sets the direction for the future from all manufacturers, that is significant.

There would be no A7Rii without A7R first. A7/R created a huge amount of interest articles debates which lead Sony to put all resources into the system and in the end changed even Canon and Nikon and Industry as a whole by 2019

They were the most important cameras of the decade::A7/R

Whether something was the most "important" (not the best nor the most sold) camera of the decade is an OPINION. This poll that you are responding to PROVES you are wrong. A7/R was the most important camera of the decade. People voted and poll ended. Now you pop up with your "I hate Sony and so D800 was the most important camera of the decade". That's your opinion. What part of that you don't understand? The poll has already ended and you already lost. A7/R is the most important camera. Yes, that's an opinion of the majority, and you are responding to an article about opinion. If the majority says A7/R was the most important camera, that means you already lost. The poll has ended already.

tkbasic, joined Dec 20 2019.

jay-A
Joined on Oct 9, 2018
He's been bashing all cameras not made by Sony and personally attacking posters ever since.

Funny that you consider the disclosure of your join date as an attack :-) Maybe that's because you've got to hide your multiple previous IDs: Rex C, Oskar P, Mister Spaceman (you were at your craziest with this one) and the others.

As a general rule, if a recently joined starts head on with rants and trolling, it's because he's not a recently joined. Especially when he has 50+ comments against a single brand.

I don't see anything to discuss, and even less to discuss with trolls. Besides, I'm happy with the results as they are: best gear of the year, most significant product of the decade, #1 worldwide FF seller. I leave the ranting to the butthurts.

"I don't see anything to discuss"
So you are only here to bash and attack users again?

Also, you realize this was a non-scientific poll only for fun, right? Or do you really think Sony makes any camera that takes better pictures than the GFX or better video than the S1H?

sony fans on comments/forums= Borg

all the same

Tkbasic, I am not going to waste my time since you are obviously just here to troll. The majority has spoken so complain all you want.
Regards

I had hoped Luis Gabriel Photography might engage in a civil discussion.
But instead he, like almost all Sony fans, instead only wants to call people names.
It is sad.
If you want to discuss facts, then do so. No need for your name calling.

Tkbasic is heating up towards his next ban. Funny how most recent DPR 'best of ' or 'best seller' articles have generated the same trolling behaviour.

tkbasi has done the same anti-Sony trolling for the past 10 years. Like I said in the earlier thread if there was an award for the most jealous person of the decade he would have won it. That's why he keeps changing his IDs as he is ashamed himself ;) -

I remember him from his style. This dude even once said Nikon 1 series is killing emount (haha) and that Sony will move to 1" ILC cameras.

I bet he will be here in 2029 if he is alive.

I don't think you understood the idea behind the poll. It is not saying that A7 / A7R were best cameras of the decade. It is saying that they were the most significant cameras because they changed the market dynamics and started a big sift towards mirrorless cameras. The recent releases of Canon R and Nikon Z FF mirrorless cameras is a proof of the impact that Sony A7-series has had at the market.

I think you misunderstand what you think I misunderstand. :) The same reasons you listed the Sony as being the most significant are the same reasons that an iPhone 4 and an Oly EM5 are more significant (also really Panny GH1, but that is 2009). What Sony did is come in late, but make mirrorless great.

Anyway the obvious leader here should be iPhone 4. Nothing else is even close. It changed everything.

Guess you didn't understand what the poll was about. Its ok...maybe next one in ten years. ;)

I'd say the a6000 if anything, was probably more substantial this past decade than the a7, but that's just my opinion. It was such a good camera, it's still for sale today, 6-7 years later and sort of set the benchmark for entry level APS-C ML cameras. Now some might argue the APS-C Canon M series does that now and that's a debate for another time I guess, but I'd say the a6000 is one of the long standing cameras that set a precedent for the rest of the market.

It's a hard discussion because the A6000 is almost indistinguishable from it's predecessor, the NEX-6. In some ways it's an upgrade, in others it's actually a downgrade. Did the NEX-6 stay current for as long or sell as many bodies? No. It's hard to look at the A6000 though and see anything other than a pricepoint, not a inspiring new watermark.

„The A7 was more of a step backwards. Bad menus, bad ergonomics, etc. The D600 was a better camera is every way from IQ to speed.“

One more time: It was NOT about the best, but the most important camera.

It wasn't important. You can say you don't get the A7Rm2 without the A7R and fine, that's techincally true, but you also don't get the A7R without the A99 or the NEX-7 so why draw the line with the A7/R?

If we ONLY got the A7Rm2 and sony stopped releasing cameras, we'd look at it like the Samsung NX-1. If they stopped with the A7/A7R, we'd look at them both like we do the pentax K-01

Sony has a history of taking ideas from others and incorporating them into superior products. More important, they present them in a way to create a whole new marketplace.

To wit, Sony purchased the license for video recorders from Motorola. Motorola failed to use this technology in a way to attract consumers, then wilted under threat of lawsuits by the media industry.

Sony's key was the idea you could record TV programs for later viewing, and skip over commercials. The media industry sued, Sony fought, and by 1982 had won (fair use). Now over 30% of movie industry income is from DVD or streaming, and delayed viewing (with commercial skipping) is a standard feature of cable boxes.

Where Sony fell down was restrictive licensing to competitors. Matsushita invented their own format, VHS, and won the format battle handily. Sony's embrace of third-party vendors was a turn-around, and probably the key factor in success of the A7.

Ed Ingold.

You are demonstrably wrong about almost everything you said.
A couple examples,

"Sony introduced full frame sensors, which used all the old lenses correctly."

Sony A mount lens never completely worked on E mount cameras. Either an adapter with limited AF was necessary or many limitations were required. For example 2.5FPS was the max. Of course all previous E mount lenses had restrictions too, for example the 10 MP limit on the A7.

"(M43) which most people consider re-badged handicam quality."

No one ever said that except a few rabid Sony fan boys. In fact many Photographers such as IlyaV switch from Sony FF to Micro Four Thirds.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52584698
Even Francis Ford Coppola was on record as saying he preferred video from a GH2 over a $10,000 Sony video camera.

brycesteiner

You are right! Everyone is still trying to copy the Olympus SSW sensor cleaning.
Overheating is another issue mirrorless cameras at the time were having, but Olympus never had that issue.

SirSeth

People see everything as black and white. They say M43 is bad in low light and therefore not usable for anything else. But honestly M43 may have the best "overall" cameras. There are a lot of things they do not do best, but they certainly can do them . Even low light. I've shot in near total darkness and the IBIS and a fast lens made it easier than expected. This site showed for video if you need a wider DoF (shooting multiple subjects, etc), then the GH5s beats all the FF competitors including the A7Sii.
Then of course there are features found on M43 that are not on any FF camera such as 60FPS.

Or you could be a very old person and want to support Sony because you still have a working Minolta X700 lying around.

Some old folks (c'est moi) dumped Nikon and embraced Sony for a variety of reasons.

The reasons include smaller footprint, better lenses, and higher image quality (vs a plethora of 12 MP DSLRs). In-body image stabilization and totally silent operation were a game-changer for wedding and event photography, not to mention for travel and landscapes.

How many companies can come from NOthing to THEthing in 5 years?

"Judging from the tourists places I've been in the past year or two, I almost never see anyone with a dedicated camera." There, fixed that for you.

I was at the San Diego Wildlife Park two years ago, and we took one of the tours into the pens with the rhinos and giraffes. My fiancee and I had three out of only four dedicated cameras on the tour - everyone else was using a smartphone.

I have friends that got back from an African safari three months ago. They still haven't taken the pictures off of the FZ1000 they brought with them (at my suggestion).

Here too is an older guy and happy A7x user since the first and original one. Never used a playstation.

At the time when the A7/R came out, I decided to buy again a proper camera. The one before I had bought about 30 years earlier. After reading lots of reviews without being able to make up my mind, I went to a store and handled the Nikon's of the time (D610 and D800) and the A7. My mind was made up immediately as the A7 was much more similar in weight, size and feel to my old Nikon film camera. For my purpose, I am much more likely to carry an A7-sized camera than a huge lump like FF DSLRs.

Given my job, I am attracted to newer technologies, which affected my decision too.

There can be no doubt that the smartphone camera is indeed the one that resulted in the most impact. It literally disrupted the entire industry and we are still dealing with its impact today. Smartphones have changed the way most take photos, the way most share photos, and indeed the entire culture of photography.

We literally have billions of smartphone cameras out there, vs a few million mirrorless models out there. The real poll is in sales, because that is where everyone votes with their money.

In a few decades, we will still be assessing the impact of the smartphone, while the Sony mirrorless models will be all but forgotten.

"that is possibly true for the masses"

Indeed the definition of the "importance" in the voting is very loose. However one might argue that a camera seen as "more important" by billions rather than by millions of people is the more important one :)

Probably the smartphone cameras are more important for Photography in general, because they caused a pretty solid revolution as how images are used in everyday life.

Yep, just a name change.

Infantile tantrum.

You're missing the point, the important part is not mirrorless, it's full frame interchangeable mirrorless camera, that is, a camera that is positioning itself as a direct competitor to Canon and Nikon professional DLSRs, something any other other company didn't even try to attempt until very recently with Panasonic because they thought that market was impregnable. The A7 was that camera, and the A7 line singlehandedly forced a paradigm shift in the professional camera market, and forced Canon and Nikon to rethink their strategy.

If you don't think the A7 had any influence, then think what would have happened if Sony had never released it. Guess what kind of cameras 95% of the pros would be using, and yes that would be Canon and Nikon DSLRs with no FF mirrorless on the horizon, because why would they risk cannibalizing their own market?

this was simply a fan boy competition

@pollup despite the Sony hype. I suspect that 95% of pros will indeed be using Canon and Nikon . Professional shooters generally use the gear as tools and if they already have an excellent tool they will be the least likely to jump ship for a "feature" fans rave about.

@TN Args you can redo the match at the pub but you can’t change the score.

@James Stirling
I think YOU are missing the point: It does not matter if 95% are using or will be using Canon or Nikon. The point is that the focus of future development finally has now switched to mirrorless. This exciting fact has indeed happened before the end of the decade and it is the major change in photography since the introduction of DSLRs. While many products have contributed, objectively no one can deny that the A7 system has played the crucial role to make such thing happen.

Sony is the company that really made it popular and has lead the movement, especially with the FF line.

Armadillo
Higher up you wrote
”this is about the most relevant camera in the decade”

I remember an interview with a Sony manager right after they bought KM's camera business. He stated then (around 2006) that they intended on making cameras less mechanical and more electronic with the eventual goal of an all electronic scheme (mirrorless with a global shutter). They realized very early that they wouldn't unseat C&N from DSLRs and took the path toward MILC early. The SLTs were a sort of hybrid allowing some of the needed technologies to be developed while still having compatibility with the A-mount.

@Gmon750
the point here is that DSLRs have been more or less the same thing over and over, the next big change is mirorless and the pressure has been put on the market by the A7 system. Pretty obvious, where is the fanboysm here? Maybe in the Canikon users that cannot thank Sony to get their brands off their comfort zone giving to the market new tech sooner rather than later?

OH NVM!

New account with a SEEERIOUS grudge against Sony. LOOOOL!!!

Does it hurt-y hurts your feeling feels when you see someone with a Sony??

To be honest both of you guys sound butthurt to me.

Sigma, Tamron and Samyang all make lenses for the E-mount that have excellent performance - equivalent to native Sony lenses in many cases. Tamron can even update the lens firmware via the camera just like Sony lenses (not sure about the other two but the option is there if they want it). Yeah it sure sounds like Sony is holding back on the E-mount info.

Posting stuff all over again won’t make it true Mac Daddy. And frankly, who cares. There are dozens of third party manufacturers for E mount so the specs shouldn’t be that hard to find.

@Johans81 It is called protruding HEMORRHOIDS OK???

AND ITS NOT FUNNY!

Have not sat since 1976!!

From the link to Sony's license: "You may use the Basic Specifications for lenses and/or mount adopters to mount to Sony’s E-mount Interchangeable Lens Digital Camera only *2 , NOT for manufacturing, selling or otherwise disposing of other products."

Sony provides the E-mount specs so that 3rd party manufacturers can make lenses and adapters for Sony cameras. So it's open in so far as it provides the information so 3rd party manufactures can make fully compatible E-mount lenses - which I think most people mean when they call it "open" (i.e. no reverse engineering required). It's not fully open as it does not allow someone to use the E-mount in their own cameras.

Let's just say Sony provides the E-mount specs to 3rd parties that want to make lenses and adapters for Sony cameras. This results in greater compatibly than having to reverse engineer the lens mount. This is a good thing.

@fjbyrne: I believe everybody agrees with you here, except one recurring troll with multiple ID that should not be fed.

What has Sony innovated?
OSPDAF - NO
Eye AF in ILCs - NO
Ergonomics -NO
First Mirrorless FF camera - NO.
5 Axis IBIS - NO

For the record Sony makes sensors with the input and IP of many different companies including their own.

The question was the most important camera not the most important sensor

Ergonomics - Most definitely not. Sony's ergonomics are so bad I wonder if their product designers' hands are shaped differently than the rest of humanity's hands.

Nothing wrong with the ergonomics. 90,000 images with a Sony A7ii (and successors) since late 2014 and I can still move my fingers ;)

What is most relevant in this decade is the transition to mirrorless, that is hard to argue against. It is also hard to argue against the fact that if that is happening now instead of sometime in the future is because of the A7 system.
These are simple facts that clearly the majority of the survey voters see but some animately are here trying to mud bringing all sort of irrelevant reasoning on the table.

Does it really matter?
It changed the way people are taking photographs.
It obviously can do much more, so what if it isn’t a dedicated tool?

This would be analogous to claiming the tv hasn’t changed the world because it is a radio with moving pictures :)

Masses choice is irrelevant to photography until their influence will challenge what real photography is about.
That has not happened yet imo. In case it has helped in depreciating the value of an art, mocking it and trivializing it in the worst possible way. Everyone thinks is a photographer nowadays with a smartphone and Instagram filters.

Smartphones have indeed changed "what real photography is about." Smartphones have changed the entire culture of photography, and the uses of a photo.

Because of smartphones, more people are taking photos than ever before, many enjoying it who otherwise would not. There are more great photos than ever before, many taken with smartphones. Because of smartphones, photography is bigger and more important to the culture than ever before.