Well, first it's not compact... So different than I'm taking about. I think the shape and included light room is what put most people off. But yeah at least it is different.
Larry Cloetta
Veteran
To me, it’s decidedly compact.
Compact or not compact, that distinction lies in the realm of opinion, not fact. There is no dividing line except for personal ones. Many people sharing an opinion would not change that. If there were National Bureau of Standards measurements for “compact”, maybe then......no, not even then.
BillBingham2
Registered User
I'm still waiting for the NBS to provide some guidance for Fast, User Friendly, and Pretty.
My guess is it's work that was dropped due to sequestration and other budget cuts....
B2 (;->
ptpdprinter
Veteran
If I wanted to use a camera like an iPhone, I would just use an iPhone; however, I am sure there are some who might find its features useful.
charjohncarter
Veteran
Darn I just bought a 36 Mp FF. Now I have to worry my neighbor will get a 60 Mp.
benlees
Well-known
You're both right! The recent mirrorless offerings from Canon and Nikon can be seen as a missed opportunity. Those are some boring cameras. Looking historically we shouldn't have expected anything else. Market leaders but from a horsepower perspective; little in terms of innovation. "Fleet" sales are their bread and butter. Sony has scared them and their latest cameras reveal a catch up strategy. Whether this has given them a kick in the pants or exposed their decline, time will tell.
Smaller companies like Sigma and Fuji will make more interesting cameras because they have to. Fleet sales mean nothing to them so if they want to make money they have to offer an alternative.
BillBingham2
Registered User
VS... A medium format camera...not weight, but just length and height it is big...
bmattock
Veteran
I had a specific use case - I was an international traveling software consultant and it was a lot easier taking the cheap-and-cheerful Olympus from place to place than it was shooting film. I did take a film camera with me for the first couple years. But this was before 9/11 and it wasn't that hard to get rolls of film hand-inspected, to have camera equipment pass through security undamaged (and unstolen).
After 9/11, although I knew that film was superior, it just became more and more of a hassle and the digital option, though lower quality, was simply much more convenient. I could keep the camera on me, no rolls of film to be damaged by x-rays or 'lost' in my luggage, etc.
I still have the digital photos I took at 640x480 back then. Not the greatest quality, but suitable for the web and memories. They aren't ready for hanging in gallery or publishing in a book, but they've been less ephemeral than I thought they might be at first.
Huss
Veteran
Agreed! But the EVF in the Z7 is pretty darn good. I can nail focus wide open w/o having to resort to any of the aids such as magnification, peaking etc. And very quickly. Nikon spent a tonne of money getting it right - not just in resolution but in the optics behind it:
https://www.nikonusa.com/en/learn-a...nikon-z-system-electronic-viewfinder-evf.html
Larry Cloetta
Veteran
VS... A medium format camera...not weight, but just length and height it is big...
LOL. I know the size. That wasn't the point I obviously failed to make. But, any old how, it would still be a compact in my hands, for my use, and I could not perceive it otherwise, diagrams notwithstanding. Whatever.
The camera war is not over at any rate, getting back on topic.
"In war the result is never final." Carl von Clausewitz
BillBingham2
Registered User
Haven't touched one yet.....
I'd like to see that work trickle down into a XE-3 size and priced camera. Not being a professional that would get me to jump in and purchase a new camera. The quality of the viewfinder is as important to me as the fell of the camera/lens.
B2 (;->
BillBingham2
Registered User
VS... A medium format camera...not weight, but just length and height it is big...
You should add say a ZX-1 vs say a XE-3, Leica CL perhaps, or X70.....
I know, dragging us back off topic.
B2 (;->
raid
Dad Photographer
Oh boy! I paid $500+ to get my 10MB M8 fixed, and now there will be cameras with 60+ MB sensors. What hae I done??!!
BillBingham2
Registered User
FujiLove
Well-known
Amazing. If they carry on innovating like this, there may be cameras with more resolution than my thirty-year-old Mamiya 6!
raid
Dad Photographer
rhl-oregon
Cameras Guitars Wonders
Chiming as the tech-equivalent of the guy with the pince-nez and ear trumpet, I’m happy to hear about Zeiss upsizing the dainty RX1 (one of my most reliable tools, though cramped!) and bundling WiFi/LR-editing goodies for life on the road with iPhone as a production studio.
The compact cameras I reach for most are digital — Leica and Sigma Merrill and Sony and Ricoh. A couple operate ‘filmically’—the M-D 262 and the X100s—and that’s great, in a Have Your Cake and Eat It fashion. But I also like the quirkier handling of the Leica T and DP2Q and SDQ, in part because I don’t mind the little brain-rewiring exercises to make me work well with their capabilities, and in part because I like having lots of resolution for cropping or stretching the file like taffy. A bigger better sensor and f2-2.8 lens (fixed being a bonus, not a handicap) in a relatively small tool sounds great to me, and really, I’m already there—without having bought any of my standbys new. I bet I’ll get a great deal in a couple of years on the ZX1 from someone who tried it but is going in the other direction—the world of film....
——————————-
Context: Filmwise, though I *am* using my Fuji GF and GA, but how much longer in a world where I can get MF resolution from Foveon...?
I did just come to a decision, half regret half relief, to say sayonara arrivederci so long fare thee well to 35mm film, despite my squinty inner sentimental geezer. In truth I am not nor ever was nor will be a paragon of doing wet stuff in the dark, or the mongrelized solution of scanning. Best to let the sublime pros and lifelong devotees of 24x36 filmcraft do that.
The compact cameras I reach for most are digital — Leica and Sigma Merrill and Sony and Ricoh. A couple operate ‘filmically’—the M-D 262 and the X100s—and that’s great, in a Have Your Cake and Eat It fashion. But I also like the quirkier handling of the Leica T and DP2Q and SDQ, in part because I don’t mind the little brain-rewiring exercises to make me work well with their capabilities, and in part because I like having lots of resolution for cropping or stretching the file like taffy. A bigger better sensor and f2-2.8 lens (fixed being a bonus, not a handicap) in a relatively small tool sounds great to me, and really, I’m already there—without having bought any of my standbys new. I bet I’ll get a great deal in a couple of years on the ZX1 from someone who tried it but is going in the other direction—the world of film....
——————————-
Context: Filmwise, though I *am* using my Fuji GF and GA, but how much longer in a world where I can get MF resolution from Foveon...?
I did just come to a decision, half regret half relief, to say sayonara arrivederci so long fare thee well to 35mm film, despite my squinty inner sentimental geezer. In truth I am not nor ever was nor will be a paragon of doing wet stuff in the dark, or the mongrelized solution of scanning. Best to let the sublime pros and lifelong devotees of 24x36 filmcraft do that.
Just a different way of saying the same thing... It's not compact.
