At the time when tiny cameras were fashionable

I like to occasionally revisit the comparisons I made a few years ago.


Lumix GF3 (2011) / Nikon 1 J1 ( 2011)

At the time when tiny cameras were fashionable

Here is a first comparison from June 2017 with an update in 2022


Do you think we will ever see a real comeback of these mini cameras?

--

Maoby said:

I like to occasionally revisit the comparisons I made a few years ago.


Lumix GF3 (2011) / Nikon 1 J1 ( 2011)

At the time when tiny cameras were fashionable

Here is a first comparison from June 2017 with an update in 2022

https://www.flickr.com/photos/maoby/albums/72157688958703426/

Do you think we will ever see a real comeback of these mini cameras?

Click to expand...

I had both the GF1 and the GF2 (I had two and used the heck out of them) and skipped the GF3 since it was (IMO) pretty ugly. Olympus came along the following year and introduced the E-M5, and it was sorta game over. I did get the GM1 as my EDC, but the lack of IBIS meant that once smartphone got "good enough" I stopped carrying it.

--
Sam Bennett
Instagram: @swiftbennett

Maoby said:

I like to occasionally revisit the comparisons I made a few years ago.


Lumix GF3 (2011) / Nikon 1 J1 ( 2011)

At the time when tiny cameras were fashionable

Here is a first comparison from June 2017 with an update in 2022

https://www.flickr.com/photos/maoby/albums/72157688958703426/

Do you think we will ever see a real comeback of these mini cameras?

Click to expand...

No, and for two main reasons:

• A presumably significant portion of the market were people who now use their smartphone instead of a camera, and
• Engineering nightmare. Packing so much circuitry, cooling, and hardware into such a small area is expensive, and may be cost prohibitive for a low priced camera with a questionably sized market.

Bassam Guy said:

Bassam Guy said:

Do you think we will ever see a real comeback of these mini cameras?

Click to expand...

No, and for two main reasons:

• A presumably significant portion of the market were people who now use their smartphone instead of a camera, and
• Engineering nightmare. Packing so much circuitry, cooling, and hardware into such a small area is expensive, and may be cost prohibitive for a low priced camera with a questionably sized market.

Click to expand...

It's possible that cooling might be one of the big reasons here. Among my little fleet of M43, I have a Lumix GX850 (aka GX800 or GF9). It has 4K video, as apparently all imaging devices are required to have today, but it's next to worthless. It'll only run for a few minutes at 4K before overheating. (I concede that the 4K video opens up some 4K photo features that are kind of nifty.)

If I feel compelled to record video in 4K, I have other perfectly competent bodies that can do so -- but they're all considerably larger.

If you consider that the market for tiny cameras is now partly migrated to smartphones, and the rest would likely not be content with a photo-only device, I don't see how this market can survive.

Sony makes some small camera with their RX100 and ZV1 offerings, OM has the small pocketable TG7 as well as Ricoh, but all are fixed lens cameras, What is often under the table is that when folks profess to want a small "mini" cam they also want small "mini prices".

No reason for a manufacturer to go to the cost of miniaturization just to get a low margin product, IMO.

Bassam Guy said:

Maoby said:

I like to occasionally revisit the comparisons I made a few years ago.


Lumix GF3 (2011) / Nikon 1 J1 ( 2011)

At the time when tiny cameras were fashionable

Here is a first comparison from June 2017 with an update in 2022

https://www.flickr.com/photos/maoby/albums/72157688958703426/

Do you think we will ever see a real comeback of these mini cameras?

Click to expand...

No, and for two main reasons:

• A presumably significant portion of the market were people who now use their smartphone instead of a camera, and
• Engineering nightmare. Packing so much circuitry, cooling, and hardware into such a small area is expensive, and may be cost prohibitive for a low priced camera with a questionably sized market.

Click to expand...

Thereby is the mouthful. If all small cameras were built for the questionable market for low priced cameras then it is hardly surprising that the market is questionable (Catch-22).

The continuing high prices for 10+ year old quality small cameras such as the GM5 shows that many will pay a higher price for quality. The current price of the Ricoh GRIV and shortage of supply shows that there is a reasonably good market for small highly capable camera bodies.

A small capable Fuji camera is also quite expensive and Fuji have toruble keeping up with demand.

Yet even today the first word expressed about a compact sized camera is "pocketable?" and the second "pancake" as the only size of lens suiable for use with it.

Panasonic makes the compact, addictive and affordable G100D and yet buying hozizons are limited by complaints about lack of IBIS. I should also note that it is not really pocketable nor only suitable for very small lenses.

--
Tom Caldwell

Maoby said:

I like to occasionally revisit the comparisons I made a few years ago.


Lumix GF3 (2011) / Nikon 1 J1 ( 2011)

At the time when tiny cameras were fashionable

Here is a first comparison from June 2017 with an update in 2022

https://www.flickr.com/photos/maoby/albums/72157688958703426/

Do you think we will ever see a real comeback of these mini cameras?

Click to expand...

With the insistence of supporting 4K video, which requires COOLING, small bodies like those are a thing LONG past.

If they could manage with just Full-HD 1080p video, it wouldn't be a problem.

jeffharris said:

Maoby said:

I like to occasionally revisit the comparisons I made a few years ago.


Lumix GF3 (2011) / Nikon 1 J1 ( 2011)

At the time when tiny cameras were fashionable

Here is a first comparison from June 2017 with an update in 2022

https://www.flickr.com/photos/maoby/albums/72157688958703426/

Do you think we will ever see a real comeback of these mini cameras?

Click to expand...

With the insistence of supporting 4K video, which requires COOLING, small bodies like those are a thing LONG past.

If they could manage with just Full-HD 1080p video, it wouldn't be a problem.

Click to expand...

I have lived completely without video since digital was born - I don't use it, I don't need it, and I, and many others, would be happy with a very small high quality, expensive camera that has no video capability whatsoever. Being quite simple and not having the firmware goodies that we could easily leave for larger camera bodies in the same mount system.

All cameras made for M4/3 don't have to have similar capabilities - small(er), simpler, but smart and efficient and the video can be left out as "for the birds" or so as might be spoken. .... but oh, the groans ... no IBIS, no Video, fixed LCD ..... and ..... how much? We want the whole candelabra , cheap and pocketable.

Noteworthy Ricoh can't keep up with demand for the expensive new GRIV - a camera now back to the size of the GM1 but is a fixed lens prime. It has video but is hardly a feature of this alternative view of what small cameras should be. The GRD/GR models have always treated any video capability as an afterthought.

--
Tom Caldwell

Former Nikon 1 J3 and J5 shooter here. I've also owned and shot compacts like Panasonic LX7, Fuji F20, and Canon 110 HS.

The experience shooting tiny EVF-free single dial cameras is ... exactly like shooting a phone.

Only the dedicated camera is bigger, doesn't fit in your pocket, doesn't shoot as good video, don't shoot better photos, have a smaller and dimmer screen that's worse for shooting in direct sunlight than today's phones, and unlike most good phones today, the non-rugged compact cameras are not weather/dust sealed and their fussy miniature lenses are (in my experience) failure prone and a single drop will easily destroy your kit — there are no crash cases like there are for phones.

In short, these devices are inferior in nearly every way I can think of to today's phones — and have been for nearly a decade now.

There was a brief window when small-sensor cameras offered a bit better image quality and reach than phones. A few smaller sensor cameras like the Sony RX100VI and Lumix equivalent still offer a bit of differentiation with dual dials, a compact EVF, and longer focal range for a less phone-like experience.

There's zero reason I can think of why cameras such as those you're highlighting could ever make a comeback other than some TikTok influencer-hyped fad driving it for a short while before it burns out again.

Tom Caldwell said:

jeffharris said:

Maoby said:

I like to occasionally revisit the comparisons I made a few years ago.


Lumix GF3 (2011) / Nikon 1 J1 ( 2011)

At the time when tiny cameras were fashionable

Here is a first comparison from June 2017 with an update in 2022

https://www.flickr.com/photos/maoby/albums/72157688958703426/

Do you think we will ever see a real comeback of these mini cameras?

Click to expand...

With the insistence of supporting 4K video, which requires COOLING, small bodies like those are a thing LONG past.

If they could manage with just Full-HD 1080p video, it wouldn't be a problem.

Click to expand...

I have lived completely without video since digital was born - I don't use it, I don't need it, and I, and many others, would be happy with a very small high quality, expensive camera that has no video capability whatsoever. Being quite simple and not having the firmware goodies that we could easily leave for larger camera bodies in the same mount system.

Click to expand...

YEP, Exactly.

I have my iPhone 16 Pro for video. I shoot short clips of things like train rides, a drawbridge going up… Earth shattering stuff.

Write a video script, shot and edit it?

Let's just say that I won't be bringing my crampons and ice axe along with me to Hell.

Tom Caldwell said:

All cameras made for M4/3 don't have to have similar capabilities - small(er), simpler, but smart and efficient and the video can be left out as "for the birds" or so as might be spoken. .... but oh, the groans ... no IBIS, no Video, fixed LCD ..... and ..... how much? We want the whole candelabra , cheap and pocketable.

Noteworthy Ricoh can't keep up with demand for the expensive new GRIV - a camera now back to the size of the GM1 but is a fixed lens prime. It has video but is hardly a feature of this alternative view of what small cameras should be. The GRD/GR models have always treated any video capability as an afterthought.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

We would hardly regard the Sony RX100 (type) camera in the same breath as a cheap compact without an evf - the RX100 and systems cameras such as the GM5 - were full cameras with evf and expensive at launch prices. Panasonic tried to make the GM series work but had to reduce the price considerably in the process. Not that the GM series had particularly good video or was packed to the rafters with advanced firmware or user conveniences such as tilting lcd. But it did have the full benefit of the quite excellent Panasonic Touch Screen interface on its lcd.

The GM5 was, and remains, a quite useable long lasting simple and full M4/3 systems camera - one of the few camera bodies that have steadily increased in value - until there are very few examples indeed left on the market.

Panasonic have tried since to winkle out a compromise camera body - that is still fairly small, is simple and addictive and provides good value at a market price where they can sell it and make good money. It is called the G100D and whilst hardly a firmware knockout offers an excellent evf and most things that we might need from a camera - except that amazing and useful IBIS. But there are enough M4/3 stabilised lenses about to make up for this if only the IBIS blinkers are lifted for a moment.

As I recall, it was more a case of affordable rather than fashionable. The alternatives were big black expensive bricks.

Tom Caldwell said:

We would hardly regard the Sony RX100 (type) camera in the same breath as a cheap compact without an evf - the RX100 and systems cameras such as the GM5 - were full cameras with evf and expensive at launch prices. Panasonic tried to make the GM series work but had to reduce the price considerably in the process. Not that the GM series had particularly good video or was packed to the rafters with advanced firmware or user conveniences such as tilting lcd. But it did have the full benefit of the quite excellent Panasonic Touch Screen interface on its lcd.

The GM5 was, and remains, a quite useable long lasting simple and full M4/3 systems camera - one of the few camera bodies that have steadily increased in value - until there are very few examples indeed left on the market.

Panasonic have tried since to winkle out a compromise camera body - that is still fairly small, is simple and addictive and provides good value at a market price where they can sell it and make good money. It is called the G100D and whilst hardly a firmware knockout offers an excellent evf and most things that we might need from a camera - except that amazing and useful IBIS. But there are enough M4/3 stabilised lenses about to make up for this if only the IBIS blinkers are lifted for a moment.

Click to expand...

Agreed. That's why I was commenting specifically about the EVF-free/single-dial camera user experience in my title.

The experience of shooting a G100D (which has two dials and an EVF) is a completely different experience than phone-style wielding an EVF-free GF9 or EP7 or Fuji XM5 or Ricoh GR or Lumix S9 or Sony ZEV10 etc. I prefer the experience of the G100D and I've been one of the rare folks on this forum to (generally) praise its capabilities — my principal gripe has been its too-delicate-for-my-oily-salty-trail-dust-and-sunscreen-slathered-meat-hooks rear control wheel.

The thing about the tiny, fragile EVF-free cameras that I think has doomed most of them to the rubbish bin of history is that if they're going to offer a phone like experience, they need to offer something significantly better in the way of IQ/video quality and/or focal range.

A fair number of cameras have stepped up to those challenges — and they're doing pretty well in the market, as far as I can tell.

But many have gone extinct as well, such those the OP Maoby has shown us. I don't see those ever coming back for reasons already stated.

--
"Gentlemen, it has been a privilege playing with you tonight." - Titanic musician before their final song

Michael Houston said:

Bassam Guy said:

Michael Houston said:

Do you think we will ever see a real comeback of these mini cameras?

Click to expand...

No, and for two main reasons:

• A presumably significant portion of the market were people who now use their smartphone instead of a camera, and
• Engineering nightmare. Packing so much circuitry, cooling, and hardware into such a small area is expensive, and may be cost prohibitive for a low priced camera with a questionably sized market.

Click to expand...

It's possible that cooling might be one of the big reasons here. Among my little fleet of M43, I have a Lumix GX850 (aka GX800 or GF9). It has 4K video, as apparently all imaging devices are required to have today, but it's next to worthless. It'll only run for a few minutes at 4K before overheating. (I concede that the 4K video opens up some 4K photo features that are kind of nifty.)

If I feel compelled to record video in 4K, I have other perfectly competent bodies that can do so -- but they're all considerably larger.

If you consider that the market for tiny cameras is now partly migrated to smartphones, and the rest would likely not be content with a photo-only device, I don't see how this market can survive.

Click to expand...

I came back here because I just saw a video from micro four nerds:
titled "This is the World's smallest 4k interchangeable lens camera. it's micro four thirds. it's tiny. it's REALLY tiny.... I love it!" and that thing is TINY!

Tom Caldwell said:

Bassam Guy said:

Maoby said:

I like to occasionally revisit the comparisons I made a few years ago.


Lumix GF3 (2011) / Nikon 1 J1 ( 2011)

At the time when tiny cameras were fashionable

Here is a first comparison from June 2017 with an update in 2022

https://www.flickr.com/photos/maoby/albums/72157688958703426/

Do you think we will ever see a real comeback of these mini cameras?

Click to expand...

No, and for two main reasons:

• A presumably significant portion of the market were people who now use their smartphone instead of a camera, and
• Engineering nightmare. Packing so much circuitry, cooling, and hardware into such a small area is expensive, and may be cost prohibitive for a low priced camera with a questionably sized market.

Click to expand...

Thereby is the mouthful. If all small cameras were built for the questionable market for low priced cameras then it is hardly surprising that the market is questionable (Catch-22).

The continuing high prices for 10+ year old quality small cameras such as the GM5 shows that many will pay a higher price for quality. The current price of the Ricoh GRIV and shortage of supply shows that there is a reasonably good market for small highly capable camera bodies.

A small capable Fuji camera is also quite expensive and Fuji have toruble keeping up with demand.

Yet even today the first word expressed about a compact sized camera is "pocketable?" and the second "pancake" as the only size of lens suiable for use with it.

Panasonic makes the compact, addictive and affordable G100D and yet buying hozizons are limited by complaints about lack of IBIS. I should also note that it is not really pocketable nor only suitable for very small lenses.

Click to expand...

Tom, there's a new baby on the block. See my response to Michael just above ^^^

I believe that there are still many of us serious photographers who couldn't care less about video.

Maoby said:

I believe that there are still many of us serious photographers who couldn't care less about video.

Click to expand...

YES - I'm one of them.

Just give me a small, high quality stills-only camera and I'm a happy camper.

Me too. When people review cameras, they always concentrate on video specs. I get it. It's important for some, not me.

Bassam Guy said:

I came back here because I just saw a video from micro four nerds:

titled "This is the World's smallest 4k interchangeable lens camera. it's micro four thirds. it's tiny. it's REALLY tiny.... I love it!" and that thing is TINY!

Click to expand...

First time ever heard of Z Cam E1.

Tom reviewed Z Cam E1 2018.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60595500

16MP stills.

2015 launched Z Cam E1. 4 years before Sigma Fp 2019. Z Cam E1 was Sigma Fp before Sigma Fp ever was, except it's 4/3 sensor. Easily see Sigma Fp took lots of design cues from Z Cam E1.

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/7...rds-e1-camera-with-4k-video-and-open-platform

https://www.dpreview.com/products/sigma/slrs/sigma_fp





[ o ]

As my luck usually has it just day before yesterday missed an auction sold under £50 Z Cam E1.

--
Photography after all is interplay of light alongside perspective.

I remember the time when one big desire was to always have a camera with you, and in the film days lots of manufacturers produced small 35mm cameras, such as the Olympus XA series, or Minox lines.

That desire still continues to this day, but the demand has been filled with ultra success by phone manufacturers. So, in terms of cameras like those listed by the OP, I can't see them making a return, and there is a large quantity on the second hand market for a fraction of their new price. Making a profit from them now would be challenging, unfortunately.

I have an EP-M1and will, once I find a one a decent price, get the 17mm f2.8. This would be a handy, fits in the pocket, camera. Better than a phone, and used for stills only, on occasion. The user experience is probably behind that of an iPhone, but I prefer the quality and control a camera offers.