2017 Roundup: Fixed Prime Lens Cameras

Physics is physics. Larger sensors and lenses will always outperform smaller ones.

@JackM "Physics is physics. Larger sensors and lenses will always outperform smaller ones."

Well that is indeed the theory but check out virtually any new m43 or aps/c camera at low iso and spot the noise. It's a futile exercise because from a practical point of view in the real world, you can't see any.

Sure a 42mp m43 sensor would be noisier and then some than a FF sensor of the same resolution but how many people are truly in need of such high resolution?

Theories are fine but often they don't stack up or have an impact in the real world. I am not saying I agree smartphones are the future for the serious hobbyist or pro but for many they are already good enough to negate the need for compact camera.

You are correct about good light, but as soon as the ISO moves north of 1600 APSC, and FF by extension, outperforms m4/3 noticeably.

Incorrectly. DPR has stated that the difference in ISO is closer to 1/3 of a stop.

If you were a sensor engineer you would know that Fuji rates their ISO according to one of the accepted standards and is not cheating anything. Just look at your posts, first you say 1600 is actually lower than 800 which would give a difference more than one stop, then you pull a quote from DPR that the difference is closer to 2/3 stops. Can't be both ways.

You guys are being funny again

Fuji claimed that they use the SOS standard instead of REI. REI allows the manufacturers to set their own ISO standard while SOS does NOT. And if Fuji is really complying to the SOS, their ISO should actually be lower that other manufacturers which is clearly not the reality.

Also, as an irregular sampling pattern, X-trans is actually an AA filter itself (not IR filter, IR doesn't affect sharpness), which is clearly stated in Fuji's own academic publications :-). You can easily see that Fuji's own bayer camera actually does a better job on sharpness than their x-trans camera, especially in green area. Of course Fuji will never put that fact into their advertisement.

Overall, there was a time when people had no clue about overstated ISO, pre-cooked RAW or different ISO standard, so they wrongly believe that Fuji has some special tricks about noise. As I said, nothing fancy, just the most dishonest company in the industry with tons of fanboys

I remember when I first bought my XM1 after seeing the comparison tool in dpreview. I was blown away by the high iso performance. Amazing, clean pictures even at iso6400. After couple of months of usage, and comparing it to other cameras reality hit hard. Fuji's baked raw files, soft mushy details, less light sensitivity at same settings compared to even MFT was a slap on my face. So, i think yes, it is cheating! especially if they use it to their marketing advantage. Xtrans magic, great high iso performance as good as FF bla bla are all a result of this and part of a Fuji dream. @Jim, if you actually owned Ricoh and X70, you would know their ISO performance is identical as long as you shoot RAW. So, this is why people say Fuji cheats..to make you think that they are better...

Its really hard to keep track of which manufacturer is bribing DPR the most. According to comments in the A9 articles it is Sony, but apparently it is Fuji now.

This argument betrays an unwillingness to understand what a buyer of such a camera might find very attractive. Some examples:

1. Small and portable.
2. Not having to concern themselves with lens changing or lens lugging.
3. Fast, quiet, intuitive operation while remaining relatively discrete.
4. Excellent image quality.
5. In the case of the Fuji - a silent leaf-shutter with excellent fill-flash and great B&W.
6. Leica - blisteringly fast, intuitive operation and superb lens.
7. Sony - a 42MP excellent sensor, plus leaf shutter and the best 35/2 FF lens that money can buy.
8. All of them are far more likely to be carried than almost all system cameras and their clutter and parephenalia, which is often too tempting to leave behind.

Images are the most important thing - Cartier Bresson captured thousands of memorable images using a small, portable camera, typically using one lens. For some, a 35/2 is all they ever need - they are focused and adept and can produce excellent work.

(Part two of my response)

Finally, I don't understand why you are concerned with what you consider "gimmicks", and about the possible obsolesce of certain formats because "people are wasting money on these overpriced point and shoot models." In a free-market economy, people buy what they wish, for whatever reason they wish, often regardless of price or even quality.

You may regard these fixed-lens cameras as merely overly-expensive, sub-standard point-and-shoot cameras, but I feel that view is elitist. Many photographers find these cameras, pocketable or not (another of your highly questionable standards), to be either a useful single photographic solution, a welcome addition to their existing gear, or often, both.

I wonder how durable is the pop up viewfinder. For that reason I gave up my Sony hx90v

Some of these cost less than an equivalend quality lens alone. So I'd say there is some reason for considering buying them.

Really it has a different field of view and a different max aperture. Try this...

www.google.com

No mention of most other non fixed lens cameras either. Funny that.

All the same, I reckon a round-up of small ILCs with (small?) primes that would do a similar job would make interesting reading. I guess that would require a fair amount of research on the part of DPR and probably meet with 'why didn't you try...' comments, but it could be rather useful.

I must agree. I bought an almost new one a few months ago for a snip and it has become a real favourite. I too will never get rid of it and none of these in this review would encoure me to.

Me too. Tha Coolpix A has been very reliable and produced amazingly detailed images. Although sometimes I prefer to take the Fuji X10 for it's zoom.

I wanted one when then came out, but they were just too much dough. I ended up with a Lumix LX7 with the EVF. I still may pick up a Nikon Cp A when B&H get's a good one in.

Great sense of humor !!

Don't be puzzled! Just think of me as the old timer in "Blazing Saddles" who the town elders point to with pride for his superlative examples of authentic frontier jibberish!

I have placed my Leica Minilux on a sidewalk café table. There are risks to everything. If they steal it, you lose an object. If they shoot you, you might die. The biggest risk of dying, is driving in your car. Don't worry about your camera being stolen. Nice post though.

there is no place on earth where they would shoot you for a $400 Leica Minilux except maybe Portland

That the only camera here with OIS is the Leica Q!

@kodachromeguy,

My OP is conclusion. Is it not?

Yes Richard, the RX1R II's battery life is bad... I tried to use the camera for long exposure shots, it's then even more complicated. I bought an external USB power bank, but haven't tried it yet...

Saying the RX1Rii is the only option for "very serious or pro" photography for being FFis a ridiculous argument. It's been easily demonstrated Pros using cameras with smaller sensor to do Pro work - because - it's no coincidence it's the photographer who creates the photographs- not the camera.

That doesn't mean less than FF may work for your needs and or wants but that's a different point.

Well I should have specified what I meant by "serious" photography... My needs are to be able to print photos in large format, in order to sell them in a gallery... For these specific needs a "less than FF" sensor isn't just enough... I normally shoot with a Pentax 645z, but sometimes use my RX1R II that gives some very impressive results...

Serious photographers only use large format cameras.

@ldm - your needs are not the same as "serious photography". There's a wide range of "serious photography" done with many cameras of different sensor sizes. For you it doesn't work. And that's fine.

But like I said - there's gallery work done with smaller sensors. And seroous photography too. It really all depends on needs and wants.

I am exhibiting work that includes a picture taken with an original Pentax Q and Nikon 1 J4s. I had the San Francisco Symphony license one of my photos for full poster printed for the streets, cd cover , book cover of a music production taken with an old 4/3 system camera - which did worse sensor wise than current m43.

It's hard to make blanket statements. I am sure Fuji Apsc is quite fine for a lot of serious uses.

Serious photographers stay away from dpreview endless gear discussions

@raist3d yes, the needs are individual. Congrats for these achievements.

@worldcup1982 You did't stay away from this endless discussion, but I fully agree that time is best spend shooting :)

@IdM photography ...who said i am serious? :)

Medium format or nothing. The rest have small sensors. I'm really serious.

@Bombastic
DC2000 does 10fps with 20MP full resolution - too slow fps for you? And image quality is on par with Sony RX100.

http://deepshots.co.uk/blog/2017/02/quick-review-sealife-dc2000-underwater-camera/
Great value compared to leica

So why not shoot in burst mode?
No review I've seen has made any comments on slow shot to shot performance, main gripes have been the lens isn't wide enough for serious UW work.

It commonly known that zoom with your feet means moving your body closer to, or further away from, the subject.

I am Jesus :-)

I should think the populace would be used to zooming with their feet by now. It's all that most of them can do. It's a trade-off of the mobile phone age.

"...The only difference is that you can set it on the GR as a firm shutter press while in all modes,..." Which is why it's not the same thing.

If you are shooting at a fast shutter the camera shake won't get you.

Fuji really missed an opportunity to decide to invest in a camera different in every relevant category?

In a sense, I guess. They also missed an opportunity to make a full frame DSLR.

Umm that must be why the x100Fs are flying off the shelves....

The ultimate camera will be the soon to be released X40.

The Coolpix A takes fantastic photos. I too would love to see an update. 24mm f2 sounds perfect.

You guys are hilarious... You think Nikon doesn't see the potential of the premium compact market?

Its simply a financial decision, they can't afford to open a very extensive and expensive production line for the DL cameras.

@GabrielFFontes: Nikon states "the DL series will be canceled due to concerns regarding their profitability considering the increase in development costs, and the drop in the number of expected sales due to the slow-down of the market."

A new Nikon premium compact would mean more development costs, and wouldn't change "the slow-down of the market."

Tieu Ngao & PropaPH, let's hope it's in the works!

In the camera market there is always room for excellent products most buyers will never really understand or use. Just like ski and tennis shops. But these products must be truly excellent.

Cool pix A was a very bad selling at the time because too expensive.... reason why maybe they hesitate to invest again in such a camera....
But yes I agree, at 400 usd it was a terrific camera.

So, to correct the article, the use of SPP is NO LONGER mandatory.