So what happened to inexorable rush towards full frame digital compacts?

Keith

Keith

The best camera is one that still works!
Local time
7:19 PM
Joined
May 5, 2006
Messages
19,242
Yes we have the Sony offerings but what about the rest .. Canon, Nikon, Fuji etc?

Maybe the compact mirrorless market has suffered sufficiently at the hands of the smart phone to make them a little wary!
 
I don't know. Maybe it is because they are not really all that compact? Or rather, that they try to be compact but end up being awkward. I finally bit on a Sony, even the ergonomically improved Mk.II and I find it difficult to handle at best. My XP is miles ahead in usability -simply a much better all-around camera, if not FF. Should that day come, I will sell everything else.
 
With digital camera sales in a free-fall with no bottom in site, why invest the money in something that few will buy?

Jim B.
 
back alley said:
for a guy like me, aps-c works just fine...
Click to expand...


There's no one like you mate ... they broke the mold! :)

I tend to agree with the comment about the declining digital camera market ... that and aps-c is keeping the faith for most people.
 
If they weren't so blasted expensive, and putting in so much crap that
you don't need (menu's) there could be a cheaper FF that everyman and
woman would get.

Range
 
Keith said:
I tend to agree with the comment about the declining digital camera market ... that and aps-c is keeping the faith for most people.
Click to expand...


JMO but I think these days APS-C has taken the place of the 35mm format for most people and that a lot of the people that use FF today are those who would have used medium format in the past.
 
Digital compacts have been replaced by tablet computers and smart phones.

My prediction, DSLR cameras are having a tough time now and will get tougher in the future. They will become products for a limited market.

Some stats:

http://www.statista.com/stats/162378/digital camera

Page on global stats:

http://www.statista.com/statistics/264337/cipa-companies-shipments-of-digital-cameras-since-1999/

Smartphone sales:

http://www.statista.com/statistics/...s-since-1st-quarter-2009-by-operating-system/

Mark Twain said, "There are three kinds of lies. Lies, damn lies and statistics!"
 
Op. I don't know.

All I wish is that Fuji or some other maker come up with a M43 with shutter speed dial and simple controls and a Leica knockoff that is affordable.
 
With Fuji doing what they're doing with APS-C, rivaling the quality of full frame, who needs it?
 
In some way's that true, when I go to Times Square in New York you should
see a the laptops and cellphones being pulled out taking pictures, I think you'll
have a market for DSLR and better cameras for the people like us who wants
something better.

Range
 
kbg32 said:
With Fuji doing what they're doing with APS-C, rivaling the quality of full frame, who needs it?
Click to expand...

I have a Fuji and it's pretty amazing, but I just picked up a full
frame used and cheap and it's nice when you pop on a 28mm
and it's a 28mm.

Range
 
Range-rover said:
I have a Fuji and it's pretty amazing, but I just picked up a full
frame used and cheap and it's nice when you pop on a 28mm
and it's a 28mm.

Range
Click to expand...

This is true.

I have two systems in digital. An FX Nikon system and a Sony APS-C system. There are advantages and disadvantages to both. I like the photographic results with the D750 full frame despite it's size and I really like the a6000 size despite it's minor photographic limitations.

They both fit different roles very well that I don't think a FF mirrorless would necessarily fit without getting spendy in the lens area.
 
Well problem number 1 with full-frame compacts (excepting Leica) is that the cameras are compact but the lenses are not. Problem number 2 is that no one (excepting Leica) makes a full, professional-grade compact (or any) camera system that can actually compete with Canon/Nikon - Leica (sort of) competes in a different make segment. The market is shrinking violently so everyone (companies and consumers) are reluctant to invest in anything new.

I shoot Fuji X for rangefinder-style fun and travel - they are compact, well-made and they deliver amazing results. I shoot Nikon APS-C for family sports and action - legacy lenses work great and are cheap. I shoot full-frame Nikon professionally because I know I can rent or buy a T/S lens for architecture or a 400/2.8 for wildlife. Anything I need is widely available used, new, or rental. And the workflow is straightforward (except Fuji but I'm learning).

And I shoot a lot of film because I like it and enjoy it - I can afford all the wonderful equipment that lusted for in my youth.

I know I shouldn't project my needs on everyone else but - why on earth do I need a FF compact? I understand wanting one - but other than a wedding photographer with a really bad back - who really needs one?
 
Fuji have done the hard work to build a system from scratch, with a range of lenses. I bet they sell quite a few lenses. Why start over?

Canon and Nikon are wary of entering a crowded market, and competing with their own slr systems. Why muddy the water?

Sony has a limited lens range, and farms half the lenses out to Zeiss. While others make most money selling lenses, Sony makes money selling bodies and sensors. This is why they are flooding the market and driving the price down on full frame.
With overall declining sales, full frame only makes sense for Sony.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom