The upside about all of this is that the cameras that are now seen as obsolete are still pretty damn good and can be bought for a decent price. The EM1.3 is crazy good for 600USD.
I found one for less than $600. Santa has possession of it now, but it will be under the tree on Christmas. Why spend the big bucks for a newer OM model for a few features that you don't need most of the time.
E-M1 III in what condition? Because anytime I look for one that has under 10k shutter count and in good shape is $800+ unless at a lower price in an active auction. The E-M1 III is a beast of a camera.
@@corykphotography Shutter count was 25, 051 and that wasn't an issue for me when the shutter is rated for 400,000 activations. The camera was like new, just a few small blemishes. It came with two Oly batteries and charger, and 2 aftermarket batteries with charger and a cheapie L bracket.
I am absolutely convinced that these camera manufacturers made a colossal mistake when they decided to put in extra features that photographers never needed and therefore complicated the camera. Over 95% of photographers are actually not capable of ansorbing so much complexity, never mind applying it efficiently. This is where Apple was superintelligent. They incorporated all that and much more into their mobile phones with their powerful processors, and made a simple idiot proof device that appealed to the generation who think that using a flight combat simulator is the same as flying an F4 Phantom in battle. Simplicity is the answer.
Hi Jimmy, I have seen almost all your videos and listened to your talks for many hours. Totally honestly, this is far the best I have seen from you. Respect 👍👍💯💯
Another thoughtful and pertinent commentary. Thanks, Jimmy. I think one photography skill that has really suffered is shot discipline. People no longer have to think about rolls of 24 or 36 shots, how much they cost, and how much processing shots costs. The philosophy of 'shoot a hundred and pick one' makes for lazy craft.
Jimmy, you are spot on. Many photographers today call cameras unusable simple because the autofocus is not the fastest on the market or the tracking and frame rates are not super fast or low light performance doesn't match the grain structure of Kodachrome 25. Sometimes my sarcasm comes out and I wonder out loud how any images were captured back when focus was manual, the fastest motor drives were 5 frames per second and the highest color film was ISO 400 or a very grainy Konica 1000. Yet, there are many iconic images from that era in all categories, wildlife, sports, concerts. How? By today's standards those cameras are unusable to many modern photographers. Photographers needed to anticipate plays in sports. They needed to observe wildlife and anticipate behavior patterns and they didn't have the luxury or shooting 3,000 images during a wedding just to create an album with 24-48 photos. They had to find ways or resolving lighting issues with strobes of other lights. You had to have knowledge and be very selective before pressing that shutter button. I think manufacturers need the digital equivalent of a Pentax K1000, basic, fully manual exposure and no bells and whistles (okay, maybe keep the autofocus so you can repurpose the lenses when you upgrade). BTW: I have an EP1, an EM1 MKIII and an OM1 MKII.
The fact is... hybrid is not the way to go for most professional work. It's best to invest in a great photo camera and then get a great video camera on the side. You can simply rent a Canon c80 or a Red if you need better video. Hybrid is good in of both worlds but will never deliver the best results. There is a reason Medium format is still the best for a lot of photography. Phase one wont be adding video for a reason.
I think where part of this argument and disconnect comes from is the viewpoint of the photographers in questions. Those photographers that want the highest frame rates, fast autofocus, tracking etc are thinking in a professional sense. They are photographing for work or care more about the output than the process. That means whatever medium can give them the best result is the best and everything else is inferior or in-optimal. If I'm shooting sports or wildlife I probably still have to anticipate plays/movements but if there is someone else there that is shooting at 30fps compared to my 5 fps DSLR then they have a 6 times more likely chance of getting the perfect shot. At the end of the day the person buying the wedding photos does not care whether the photographer took 3k photos or just 50 for the 24-48 album they just want their photos and the best that can be delivered. In other words the process does not matter to the client so it also does not matter to the photographer.
@@AstairVentof you make a great point but many of these comments come from non professionals and are made in a very hyperbolic way (unusable versus usable but not optimal).
I had gotten rid of all my camera equipment and was just using my iphone, its always the camera with you. I was looking at upgrading to iphone 16 pro max, then I put on the brakes. I decided I wanted to get back to my roots. looked around and found used olympus em10 mkIII. Glad I did, I enjoy it again
Have no fear. I'm also a woodworker. It goes in cycles. In the 80's and 90's it was just older guys who dabbled in woodworking. Now it's a very diverse / artsy group. I suspect photography will have a phase where a good number of people ditch their cellphones and desire a real camera. They will even make prints!!!!!
Love this 100%. Instead of buying a new camera, I have gone and bought an older Pentax k10d, and loving the simplicity of it all. Nothing complicated; just the exposure triangle and "being there". Also got an old E300 to limit myself further. Really enjoying it!
The K10d was a wonderful camera, which reignited my interest in photography. With a good lens, it's still workable except if you shoot distant subjects and need to crop.
A superb discussion connecting all the implications of the problems facing photography and photographers and camera makers today. There are 3 key points to make here by choice which do you choose: Digital full size cameras Film cameras Mobile phone cameras. The issue here is social connectivity, which the mobile phone beats the other two by a country mile. Is photography a creative art form, or a generational, instant gratification connective social (non art) platform? My Canon 200d has WiFi connectivity, but is limited to an available wifi connection, I cannot connect it directly to my phone, I rarely use this function, But I don't need to instantly share or transmit my photos to someone else. This is the quandary big camera makers face. Regards Rob.
Some fantastic points here and I agree the second hand market is full of amazing professional and prosumers cameras that still pack a punch for most people.
A few nights ago my 90D’s battery ran out of energy while doing street photography. I switched to my old and beginner’s Rebel T7 to keep shooting. I was actually amazed at the quality of the pictures. You’re right that knowing or learning what makes a picture a picture is the most important skill. You can take good pictures with any camera as long as you understand how to use them and their limitations. Great video and message!
Hi, I'm not new to your channel but first time commenting. What an awesome video and so spot on! ! Yes, the industry has forgotten its roots. This is in my opinion, what has in part fueled the film resurgence. I think the younger generation picked up on the direction that digital was heading and knew it was moving away from the art of photography. Cheers!
Great to find someone of like mind, so.. liked and subscribed. I run photography workshops in France and I've found that the latest mirrorless cameras that guests bring are actually hindering their ability to learn and advance their photography. These 'state of the art' cameras have way too many unnecessary features and the most incredibly convoluted and confusing menu systems. In a video about composition that I uploaded in September, I said that the fundamentals of photography haven't changed one jot since photography became an art form almost 170 years ago, and I stand by that. The image simply needs to be properly exposed, correctly focused, and beautifully composed. Those are the fundamentals that I want to my photography students to learn and concentrate on rather than waste time trying to figure out a myriad electronic gimmicks. A phrase I now use regularly when talking to my students is, "Ignore that. Ansel Adams didn't need it, Don McCullin didn't need it - and neither do you."
Thanks for the honest opinion. I am probably, like most, a hobby photographrer. My OMD EM-1 mk 1 and mk 2 still do what I want and they both look great and still bring me alot of joy in my weekend photo outings. I print for myself and family only so 20 MP is plenty. The system and lenses is small, light weight and fantastic for travel. If I ever get into videography it would be a DJI pocket, GoPro or maybe even a pockable camcorder.
Well said! I have the OM 1, and an EM 1 Mark 2, and numerous lenses with a field of view from 18-1200 (2400 with teleconverters). The OM 1 has great stabilization and I’m perfectly happy with its subject detection. I don’t plan to buy the OM 2. It’s not enough of an upgrade. I will take a look at the next upgrade, but I’m not sure I need more technology than I already have.
You are so right about the pursuit of technology and how it drives the market and gets consumers to buy gear that isn't really needed or has minimal improvement over their current gear. As an amateur, I've kept my costs lower by buying used which means you can save at least half of the original price. My second camera body, an Olympus M10 Mark II is pretty old by today's standards, but it's images are great and very comparable to the ones produced by my M1 Mark II.
I absolutely agree - I have long thought that, in many ways, modern digital cameras have become too complex. They have systems to speed up the process of taking a photograph by giving tracking and auto-everything, but it can often take more time and effort to decide what combination of features to use to take the photos. For some time now I have yearned for a camera that is, essentially, based upon the Olympus OM1 - small and compact is part of it, but the fantastic way that shutter speed, focus and aperture are all controlled with one hand - the one that is supporting the camera body - using controls that are concentric to the lens. This was a superb design decision, and it would be lovely if that could be replicated now. Things like tracking would be nice to have on a control. Iso could be done in much the same way that the OM1 did it - lift and turn a dial to select ISO, and turn without lifting to select compensation. That camera was a master-class in design for usability, and it would be wonderful if we could get something essentially similar. TBH, I would forgo many of the facilities available nowadays - including tracking - for a camera the same size and shape as an om1, full frame, similar size lenses. I'd even forgo autofocus...
Hi Jimmy, Great insights here! You are making a very good case for a digital camera with 3 dials: one for shutter speed, one for ISO and one for exposure compensation-and maybe a lever for manual focus / auto-focus. I think Leica got there first with the M8 (but left off the focus lever with manual focus only). If Leica re-launches a bare-bones 18 to 24MPx rangefinder camera with three dials and a CCD sensor (M9 style) - or Olympus with a minimalist 3-dial 16MPx OM-5ii - they will get the camera industry back on track. Retro is the future!
You're so right Jimmy! I love my EM5mk2. I also have a OM1 which I absolutely love the better iso performance & especially the viewfinder as my eyes are getting older. The camera only records what the " photographer " puts into the frame no matter what brand.
You started very well touching the sore areas asking how a new generation of "true" photographers - interested in aestgetic questions - could be fostered but then you slided into a gear and social media frenzy that let me assume you had been well breeded by the industry, by our frenzy system. The once enigmatic and unfortunately so prophetic statement of Marshall McLuhan "the media is the message" now becomes a terribly realistic meaning where the reality (whatever that may be) is replaced by multimedia spectacles and their endless reflections in the multimedia multiverse.
just make a small camera with two dials weather sealed with Ibis how hard can it be. They always make them with bits missed off and add stuff we don't need!!!! so frustrating. I think the biggest problem is that they don't listen to the consumers, manufacturers just make stuff they think we might like !. Your right Jimmy
Exactly. I don't mean any offense by saying this, but I don't care about all the AI based subject detect stuff. I don't want it and I don't use it. I would imagine that adds to the cost of the camera. I would love to see a camera company forget that stuff and make a camera out of high quality material, weather sealed (like you said) and a viewfinder. I actually feel like we are seeing lesser quality items for the same (or in most cases more expensive) price. Makes me sad. I picked up an old dslr recently since they were so cheap and it had everything I needed to take photos. I forgot how much I really enjoy using and ovf as well.
@@just_A_Hack You might not need subject detection but some of us do. Different needs = different tech for different people. Having animal detect and high frame rates is helpful when I'm doing wildlife photography. If you don't need that stuff just stick with the cheap old dslr's like you said and be happy you don't have to pay the premiums that we do.
@@just_A_HackI read/heard somewhere that it costs less for companies to integrate their existing technology across the board, than to make cameras where that tech is taken out/not included.
Sounds like a perfect travel kit…OP3, OM5 and a lens or 2! If hard conditions perhaps a Tg7. I often use an Osmo 4 and a Sony Rx100 Vii. Almost perfect for long journeys in mountains, but camera not weatherproof.
I totally agree with you ! I have a Canon R6 for sport and wildlife photography since I need fast and reliable autofocus for it, but I bought a 2nd hand 6D for slow photography like lanscape or architecture since it gives me what I need for it : great colours and enough pixels !
The challenge for camera companies is that the build quality and functionality available these days means that obsolescence is actually a diminishing concern. Hence they have to increase the costs because that one-time purchase now lasts for so long that upgrades really aren't that necessary nearly as regularly as they used to be.
I think there is room for both. Very supportive of simple cameras that teach the use of time, light and form. But I also just bought an OM1 because it offers the convenience of inbuilt nd’s / reduced tripod carry and other problem solving…so I can focus on seeing an image worth capturing. I don’t think there is anything wrong with tech that gets things/obstacles out of the way
as the Buggles song goes: Video Killed the Radio Star, the same analogy applies to P&S, when Nokia introduced a 0.3 megapixel camera on their phone in 2003 who would've guessed it would sound the deathnell of a whole industry and its offshoots ie holidays snaps printed off at Boots..... Today people have 50k snaps on their phone and have never printed off a single one!!
Very interesting analysis. I have been analysing the camera technology market and companies in this sector for a number of years and there are parallels with other tech sectors, such as mobile phones. The hardware technology has evolved almost to a point where consumers dont really need more ( 4k, 8 k, video, 120fps, 60MP sensors, AF tracking, AI assistance) these are all small differentiators to many photographers rather than essentail features. Cameras have become hybrid still and video devices - whether we need it or not. Sales have declined from a peak of c121M units pa in 2010 to c 8M units in 2023, so manufacturers focus on higher margin, feature rich devices. Keen amateur photographers are currently interested in uniquely designed, quality stills cameras such X100VI, Leica Q3 and I expect we may see a time lag before manufacturers respond. As you pointed out current cameras still lack wider connectivity, an operating system, internal storage and cluncky and irregular firware updates. This doesnt happen with laptops or mobile phones. Perhaps manufacturers need a rethink ..........
Camera manufacturers don't dare to do anything these days or have become totally unimaginative. I have a few ideas. 1. Replaceable/interchangeable monitor, foldable/swivelling, or optionally with cable >5 inches or a WiFi module. 2. Interchangeable viewfinders have existed before (prism viewfinder, shaft viewfinder), optionally with cable or WiFi. 3. And why not just have an interface that covers both options, prism hump down, monitor or WiFi module on. 4. Built-in wireless flash control (preferably compatible with Godox or something like that). Hot shoe makes room for point 3. 5. More cross-brand standards such as L-Mount or MFT, hasn't hurt any of the companies involved so far. 6. GPS, every cell phone can do that these days. 7. As far as I'm concerned, the inch indication on the focus scale can disappear (sorry to all the poor Americans). Okay, I'm just rambling again. Sorry, I'm an electronics engineer. I would have to think about it again for more. The filmmakers should come up with something themselves.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. You are right about the manufacturers losing the site of the customers demands. Obviousely the young are still interested in photography and shoot film. Only Pentax came with a new film camera. The truth is that when the trends change it takes some years to produce new camera due to production lines. When the small kameras like Fuji x100 models became popular, only Panasonic and now Fuji responded to what we wanted but only partially looking at the specs. Extra megapixels is not a must but EVF and good and light lenses are for exemple.
You are pointing a problem that is not for the manufacturers. They need to sell cameras as that is their revenue stream. If they dont sell they go broke. Your points may also applies 50 years ago into the 1970's when autoexposure and in the 80's when autofocus came. Professional photographer said that you need to measure the light properly and manual focus the lens. That is the correct skill of photography at that time.
@ Set the AI autofocus correctly using the sensitivity and speed setting, instead of knowing how to turn the focus ring on the lens for manual focus. The problem is that those critizing about lost skill, needs to understand that with new technology requires new knowledge and skills.
@@angeloplayforone I see, setting the sensitivity on a camera in your mind equates to having skills. A seven year old child could do that man. That is not skill, that is playing video games at the lowest level. You are so full of your own ideas that you have failed to see how dumb photography has become. Lets put it this way, give me a pinhole camera and I promise you that with a probability of over 95% I will produce an image, properly exposed, properly executed. Give me an all singing all dancing imaging computer called a ' digital camera ' and I will do the same. I have no problem with tech, I work in electronics. But, what would you do? Be looking for ever on the pinhole camera for the leg of the chicken focus mode???? It is one thing being ignorant, one can always learn , but it is a monumental fuck up if one was ignorant and also proud of it too.
Enjoyed the vid, very relatable. These days I will only buy another camera if I need it (or get an involuntary fit of the GAS) and it will no doubt be second hand heavily discounted. My best time with digital cams is using adapted manual lenses and just feeling at peace slowly taking some great shots, getting in the zone. I'm just a hobbyist.
I understand what you are saying. There are those that love gear and those that love photography. Those that love gear help the camera companies keep going so that photographers like us can have better gear. If a man has a camera he is more likely to discover photography if he already has a camera. Maybe not so bad after all.
Before about 2012, none of my cameras since 1954 had stabilisation, but I learnt to handhold to 1/25 second, and, for night shots I would use a reel of 400ASA film and prop myself and the camera against a doorway, wall or table, and still get about 3 decent shots out of 4. We did get away with very few features. In 2012 I got an DSLR, with some IBIS -- pretty classy! -- just a bit of a burden to carry when I went on holidays. Still I had had a film SLR, which wasn't light and well balanced either. But the DSLR suffered a "cider related incident" a couple of days into an overseas holiday and I bought a 1" mirrorless ICL camera for the rest of my trip, which I loved, even with only the 10-30 (28-80 equiv) lens. I added a screw on 2x converter until I was able to get an 80-300 equiv telephoto, and got quite usable 160mm equiv shots using that. It was not a camera with lots of controls, though you could find a few extras hidden in the menus. The biggest problem with that camera was unreliable lenses and no third party options. It doesn't even work well with adaptors. Had it been reliable, I would probably still be using it. It fitted a jacket pocket with the standard zoom attached, and the telephoto zoom went into the other pocket. It worked quite acceptably under normal street lighting, so, if I went shopping at night, I would take it and get a different kind of street photography: the quiet of a suburb after most shops close. I am currently using an MFT camera which is a trifle larger and heavier than is ideal, though more comfortable with an attached lens than the DSLR. When I have taken my photos, I download them to my laptop, which has a SIM, so I can connect to the Internet in most parts of Australia. I wonder if a travel-sized camera with a SIM option might be a way ahead. Carry a mini BT keyboard in your shirt pocket if necessary!
Wanted a good point and shoot pocket camera for my daughter (canon g7x mk3 or similar) but no stock and no idea when these cameras will be available. Prices are mad! Just bought her an older oly e-pl8 instead. Given up waiting for companies to get their sh*t together 😡
@@kiwipics yep, totally agree. My daughter was after a Fuji originally for the film simulations…must be a bit of a trend amongst the youngsters now that they’ve done the retro film camera thing. Spotted the used oly epl8 with a lens in immaculate condition in white that she liked the look of so we’ll see how that goes instead for less than half the cost of a new Fuji xm5 (which isn’t available for some time yet).
@dingoeatswolf3663 .. The Olympus EP and EPL have custom profile settings in all of their exposure modes. The colour and monochrome settings can be changed via the menu, and those can also be used as a 3 shot burst .. ie: 1@natural 1@vivid 1@b&w ... one shot at each with one press of the shutter button, and you can shoot like that even in RAW plus JPEG. The best option for easy colour profile changes are the Pen F (high prices s/hand) and the EP7, as they have a switch on the front for quick changes in JPEG only mode.
Finally updated to a G7. It's way more camera than I need, but still works with my 'old' full sized 4/3 lenses. Still use my Galaxy S23 and my Mini 2 for most shots. They just don't equal a dedicated camera for special purposes. Dedicated controls and the built-in features in the G7 make up for the difference in convenience.
Hey Jimmy great video, been watching your stuff for a long time now and always appreciate your content, I always carry a camera with me and what I'm finding a lot these days is the younger or people in general are amazed that I even bother to carry one with some funny comments and looks etc, it's not only the Camera industry but the whole world has gone crazy, anyway your right about the latest and greatest, I still love my older gear and think all of that low megapixel stuff renders some stunning photos, it's the glass that counts, hey upmost respect to you Man!!
I guess the question is...does one concentrate on creating an image or fascination with gadgetry. For the photographer, the camera is a tool, we select the best one for the task at hand. From the camera manufacturer outlook, I'm not sure what's left for for innovation. Unless your printing your photographs, any flagship cellphone has most folks covered, as you already mentioned. Flagship cameras from all the major manufacturers already do more than most of us ever use. I think anything over 50mpx is overhead.. so I have no idea what's next... As I learned many years ago, upgrading gear didn't make me a better photographer, just made life easier with some of the additional controls and innovations. As always, thanks for the great video and your candid thoughts on the Industry. Cheers!
Photography is still about the artistry, compositions, framing and choices. That does not mean that the new tech is bad, harmful or unnecessary. The new tools are for those who need them or it can improve their quality of life, helping them take photos they could not take before. I think what people are going through is the same as what happened when digital surpassed film or the introduction or automatic modes and autofocus - a mix of gatekeeping and fear that the skills they learned were no longer required to take a basic photo. When I want to go slow with photography i just pull out my DSLR or shoot film, that always still available to you and much cheaper too. I see modern cameras as my "work" camera and old ones as my "fun" camera. Still, people need to learn that if they don't need a feature they should not buy it. The camera industry thrives on GAS which is a bad and a good thing. It means continual improvements for those who those features are relevant to and it also allows manufactures to have a consistent income stream. If people only need the most basic camera (MF, sealing, glass) the used market is saturated with those and many are well made and won't need to be replaced for a while. If the manufacturer can't sell what they normally do they may have to step out of the camera market which has already been stifled by smartphones or completely switch to only catering towards expensive high-end/collector products that won't be available to most people. All in all I think people unproductively complain too much about this and instead should focus on getting manufacturers to add the features we want rather than random ones they seem to think we need. I would love to manufactures add safety features so we won't worry about our gear being stolen etc. but none of the major ones have done anything.
I've been trying to get my kids interested in photography but no they are happy with their iPhones! You are right that photography as we know it could die
Fascinating, I had a conversation with a professional photographer who mainly specialises in portraits and event photography who relies on the smart features of their kit. Anything outside their comfort zone was avoided.
Hi, great viewpoint, Im still using a Canon 70D and my I phone. I grew up with film cameras from the early 60's The trouble is that most iphone users take photos that exist in their thousands without any thought on composition or lighting.
If you’re shooting weddings, portraits, landscapes or anything that doesn’t move fast I completely agree with you. A twelve year old DSLR will do the job. When you get to sports, wildlife, and aviation you need speed. Fast focusing, fast tracking, fast exposure rate,are necessary to complete in that photo market. No one wants to tell a photo editor, “ I missed the shot because my camera is to slow.” This doesn’t mean you don’t have to understand the exposure triangle. Many people, myself included shoot wildlife today in manual exposure mode.
As others have said, i guess that’s the marketing machine; numbers are much easier to push…..more this or more that. Feel, ergonomics etc., that is a much harder concept to market. I had an RP, upgraded to the R8……yes, the latter is a way more capable camera from a dynamic range and AF point if view. Did it improve my my photography? No, not at all. I think if you’re a pro and workflow and getting the job done is important, maybe so. For me, i used the RP on safari and took photos of cheetahs running at 70mph; no issues! I just need to dial out of the upgrade path! The dopamine hit we all feel with new gear is very real and hard to fight!
Good of you to say so Mr Red35. More and more photographers worth their salt have started to think like you. The answer for me at least, has always been to go back to the basics. I have shot film for over 50 years and in all formats from 110 to 5X7 and still do. It is here that the button pushers are separated from people who have an indepth understanding of the science and craft of photography. Any idiot could point a modern digital imaging device towards any subject and record impressive images, simply because all the microcomputers insode that device are doing all the work. One has to ask from time to time, what exactly was my role in all that, besides paying a huge chunk of money for the latest tech????
AI has a lot to do with this and I agree with you. I have been in photography since 1979 and to be honest nowdays it is not satisfying shooting digital especially with the latest cameras. I bought my first digital camera in 2010 that being Nikon D700 and still shoot with it and I still go back to my Nikon FE and Olympus OM3ti to shoot BW. My son's best friend bought the Nikon ZF and he let me shoot with it for a few days and yes the images SOOC are really gorgeous but there was no effort whatsoever to do so. I am glad I still have my film cameras. I just wish the manufacturers listen and maybe bring out more simple no frills film cameras. Cheers
Watching film photographers blitz mirrorless users wasnt much of a surprise , mirrorless always has me thinking begginers school of youtube ! Spend a year NOT editing ! You learn a lot
Hi Jimmy, I very much enjoyed you "rant" and appreciate your thoughts. I will give you some of mine. Future photographers: I agree that in general we should be worried about the abilities of future photographers. On the other hand though, in recent times I have helped several young people to get full manual analogue cameras (Well frankly I gave them). Some just wanted the analogue look, but most of them wanted to learn the basic of photography to improve the way they take photos. So, there is some hope. Latest gadgets: I absolutely agree that for most photography you do not need the latest and greatest. I use "very" old digital cameras (2004) and really old film cameras (1930's) to take very nice photos. But if you want excellent photos of races and rallies then extremely high frame rates and focusing mechanisms come in very handy. If you want to do macro photography focus stacking is really nice. If you want to do night photography features like Live Time, Live Composite and Starry Sky AF are just brilliant. For landscape photography high-res mode is fantastic. Not everyone does portrait photography. Market: In a conversation with an owner of a local photography shop he said that he believes all Japanese manufacturers have decided together to focus only on the upper market. Remember that that was one of the first things OM System said about their new market strategy. I bought the OM-1 at this shop last year and that camera is rock bottom at his market. People buying real camera gear are spending more and more money. This man sells €6.000 to €10.000 lenses almost by the bucket (in a tiny little shop!). You need to sell 10 to 20 point and shoot cameras for that at a lower profit margin. If you look at what keeps selling in economically difficult times it are Ferrari's, Rolexes and yachts. So, it probably is a wise decision to focus on that upper market. Fuji X-M5: That one irritates me a bit. I remember OM System brought their first camera, the Pen E-P7, and everybody was like: Yeah, quite nice, but not special, it is lacking an EVF and it is too expensive. Now Fuji comes with essentially the same form factor, a bigger sensor but probably less features and a higher price and suddenly everyone (not just you) is boasting about it. So, it would be very nice if in your review you would compare it to a three year old E-P7 from OM System to see how big of a step the X-M5 really is (or how far ahead OM System was).
I don't think manufacturers don't understand the market. They just try to either blackmail you into spending more money or try to sell you the idea that you need to use their latest project. Now about om-5. It's a really nice camera. The only thing I can see is missing is lightweight prime compact weather sealed lenses to combine it with it.
Very true. But a fact is also, that it takes time to find the camera which is a tool for what you want to do. Personally I have Canon and Nikon and I really like the D5200. But my first Olympus, the M10 Iii, was something very different. Perfect handling. Everything is exactly where I would expect it. Upgraded to the EM1 II, added an EPL 9 in blue and now the OM1 II. With this technology I am very happy and would not need more upgrades like Full Frame or whatever.
And the irony is OM system cameras are packed with features (computational photography) and all the old school photographers have flocked to that system. Maybe they just got fed up using their skills.
To me you are still a very young man because 70 is coming up quickly for me. Where I have to disagree is with your statement that cameras have become expensive. My very first SLR was a Yashica TL Electro-X with a 50mm lens. Cost was 156 USD, a sum that took a lot of scrimping and saving. Multiply that by the inflation factor and that was 1200 2024 dollars. Three years later I purchased a brand new Nikon F2 body with a basic prism viewfinder for 425.00 USD. The lens I bought for this new camera was a used 50mm f2 Nikkor-H that cost 40.00 USD. Factor in the inflation factor for 1974 and that was a 3515.40 2024 USD purchase. Had I funds to get the F2 with the Photomic meter prism that was an additional 94.95 USD which with a 7.56 inflation factor means 171.82 2024 dollars. So, todays Z8 with all it's host of added features beyond a simple light meter is actually less expensive than a bare bones F2 with the photomic meter. When you start factoring in Inflation prices for camera gear today it is actually a bit less expensive that it was 20, 30, or even 50 years ago.
I'm shocked that you didn't mention Pentax at all. Their cameras are made by photographers for photographers. Everything a photographer could need in a modern camera is packed into even the entry level cameras. Automatic tracking of stars for Astro photography? It's there. Amazing color science? Yup. High ISO capability with clean images? Absolutely! Unique features within IBIS (such as composition adjustment that shifts the image sensor by X degrees to get the perfect composition, great for studio and landscape work. Rugged, weather sealed bodies and lenses across the whole range. You guessed it, they have that too from entry level with kit lenses to prosumer bodies and pro lenses. And nobody does optical finders as good as Pentax does. You can even save a shot you just took as a jpeg and save a raw copy of it in camera. And the list goes on. You should take a look at them, they deliver exactly what you talked about in this video.
Jimmy, you are nail it when you said the market on existing users rather than the new. In fact the industry need to seriously spend more to understand the Gen Z. Their understanding is paramount. Otherwise we may loose great companies that manufacture great photography products. i will not be surprised if Apple, Samsung or any giant consumers mobile phones makers decide to push deeper into photography functions, in that situation, it is definitely be very interesting. In my opinion, imaging giants must begin their journey either to evolves themselves into the mobile and modular (MM), or joint partnership to continue growth. A great example now is Insta360. They very wise. They are not exactly very good in imaging, but they very good in software, AI and mobile technology. (Even DJI can’t get close, in my personal view.) OMG this the original message, only later when watch more into your video than I realise you mention DJI. Hahahaha. Yes, DJI to me is an expert in gimbal industrial on land or in air period. They further developing Lidar. OMG their drones using that navigate through challenging urban or rural conditions. Jimmy, I hope my humble little views can help. 😊 love your content. Thank you very much.
My first camera was an Yashica FRII back when I was a teenager in the 1980's. That ought be basics (that came only had aperture priority - not even manual) of composition. Next, I moved to a Contax 167MT and that gave me a whole new set of tools that allowed my knowledge to grow even more! All with manual focus, let alone IBIS, EVF's or "wild" ISO! Modern cameras have many, many more tools, but, like you said... imperfection is chastised in the photography community as opposed to being celebrated (as it was done in the past). Today's pixel peepers would annihilate even Annie Leibovitz if she was shooting digital today with the same style and imperfections of the 80's.
My 16 year old 5DII still takes exceptional photographs, but I am going to pick up an OM-1 next year because of the computational features it offers. I'll keep my 5DII. On a side note most of the video cameras used to make docs at Sundance 2024 are around 10 years old. So older tech is still useful.
I have been shooting since 1994 when I purchased an Asahi Pentax K1000 at the PX in San Diego...from film to DSLR, I have used a number of bodies...but I just don't see myself making the jump to Mirrorless...those bodies aren't MADE for Photographer but for Videographers...not to mention that the price points for the bodies and lenses are nonsensical! Now companies are making bodies that have features locked behind a PAYWALL!!! I'll stick to DSLR bodies that are now even lower in prices as well as their lenses! Great video!
The thing that has killed prosumer cameras is the weight and having to carry it all in a rucksack. The big advantage was the Canon Ixus which was small light weight fitted in your pocket and took excellent photos. I am still using a really old Ixus which I got second hand in a charity shop and its still brilliant.
I bought a Canon Elph 360HS last week to have something I could carry around in my pocket. The Elph 360HS was out of stock for weeks. I got an email from them saying it was back in stock, so I ordered immediately. B&H was out of stock again the next day. So much for there being no demand for small point-and-shoot cameras.
Great Stuff! Add tech as needed but, keep it out of the photogs way. Instant gratification addiction is a big part of the problem. Thanks for this post Jimmy. We're on the same page My friend.
It would be nice if camera manufacturers continued to work on developing larger sensor cameras in smaller body’s. I do not really care for hybrid cameras, if I want a video camera I’ll buy one. I have a couple flagship cameras…I only use the most basic functions and I mainly shoot songbird in flight.
You are so right about the new cameras but this is a camera combo that will really blow your mind in picture quality and is from 2012. Sigma Merrill DP1 to 3, just try them out ;)
Cheers Jimmy , this is Sean in Atlanta! I totally agree with you, my friend! The camera market has gone absolutely bonkers! I am a photographer and I take zero, zero videos. Mybiggest dislike with modern cameras are those idiot flip out screens that I only use as a handle! I get it if you take videos, I do! But I do not and so I absolutely cannot stand the thought of a camera with that type of screen. The second thing that’s out of control are the prices ! If I wanted to spend $4000 to $6000 on a new camera body , I would get a used Leica. And I honestly don’t appreciate having to manually focus every single image I take! And lastly, it’s the mega pixels! Stop, already! We have more than enough! So I am in total agreement with you and I’m sure there will be folks who disagree with me. Fine. I want a camera with a tilt screen, or a fixed screen because that’s how a camera ends up being if it has my hated screen. Sorry! I feel better getting this off “my chest”, whatever that means! Sean
I can understand not having a use for a feature... but there's nothing 'idiot' about flip-screens. I don't shoot video, but i use a flip-screen regularly because it allows me to get my camera into positions for images that are otherwise impossible to achieve. The only alternative for many of the shots would be a remote monitor, but that's an additional piece of gear to manage and would slow my process down. My point is that it all depends on the what and the how of what one shoots, and if a feature facilitates that for a photographer then it's a good thing, and if it doesn't then it may be a nuisance - but the feature is not inherently or universally 'idiotic'. Thankfully, there are enough options out there to please everyone and their preferences.
I really only have one word to sum up my views on this subject "Agreed". I'm getting sick of all these so-called technological advances that I don't want, don't need and add very little if anything to my photography. I just returned from a five day trip to Marbella, principally for my step-daughter's wedding but also for the opportunity to do some nice walk-around, as Robin Wong calls it "shutter therapy" street photography around the old town and I just took my E-M1 mk1, 25mm f/1.8 and a black mist diffusion filter as an all-round choice and had an absolute blast!. :)
Very true!... speaking from 55 years photography experience. And now there is generative AI which makes it possible for future generations to 'make' photos without even needing a camera. Fortunately anyone who loves photography can still have fun making their own unique and (especially) memorable images with a real camera.
In my country, wedding photographers need to deliver images with a reasonably good focus, since otherwise their clients might ask for a refund. I don't think the photographers can change their clients to accept out-of-focus photos. Portrait photographers are expected to deliver something different from what you can out of an iPhone: background-blur. The photographers could try teaching the clients, but it could have a negative impact on their business. Many people expect 4k videos with good focus from RUclips creators. So, I think the manufacturers are not so crazy but just trying to sell their products. Smartphones were overpowered already a decade ago. This might be how the industry goes. I wouldn't even talk about cars. Product/service providers try to bait their customers a bit, and it is up to the customers to know what they really need.
@@Red35Photography I feel like the pocket 3 and action cameras dominate the market these days. Those re the modern point and shoot but with video now since video has become the main median
@@Marcus_Visbal I wouldn't disagree but strange that camera makers have all the tools and resources to make their point and shoot mover video friendly, but instead, they just didn't bother and let others eat the market. DJI is almost winning the market themselves, even GoPro is struggling to compete. DJI has built such an eco-system with their mics and drones that it's hard to beat if you are a content creator or into video making.
I agree. But it does liven up the 2nd hand market when new "photographers" sell their kits because they find that the cameras don't quite improve their game from snap-shooters to photographers
I had a Canon 90D and a Canon SL3. I recently sold the 90D and am shooting only with the SL3. Why? The SL3 does everything I need easily and quickly. I often found myself missing shots because I had to change settings on the 90D. Is the 90D more capable? Of course but not in anything I want to do. The SL3 is lighter, smaller and makes it easier for me to use when I am walking around taking photographs.
In the film days, a point and shoot 35mm camera could deliver the same quality as a professional SLR. And they did e.g. The Konica Hexar and Contax T3, the latter in particular having a spectacular lens. Now that sensor size is so important, achieving the same in digital seems unlikely, and those used to phone camera images are equally unlikely to care.
Dont get me started; I just renewed my cameras; probably for the last time. I cant see anybody making me a camera I would want to buy in the future. AND I blame luvvie US RUclips reviewers. What I now do with a new camera is spend half a day turning off the "new features" that I dont want and will never use Pictures I take today are no better than I was taking on my brownie in 1957; I still have a couple of those in my online gallery. The last advance in cameras was IBIS. There has been nothing of much value to me since then. I take photos!!! Not video and most people dont take video either; they take snaps. Every camera on the market now seems to have no tilt screen because vlogers cant see themselves!!! They solved this problem with Sony A6600 & Z50. It fell on deaf ears. All cameras since have articulating screens. It would be nice if only video slanted cameras had that yet, the new Z50ii has no tilt screen and I bet the Z5ii will have it despite it being poor for video. Sorry Nikon I will keep my Z5. I would rather have a fixed screen than articulated as its at least robust. I will be able to buy these cameras I now have used, for the rest of my life. Sorry manufacturers; your new cameras suck. I will stick with my current cameras for rest of my old life. Frankly they have brought their decline on their own hands. If they found out what real people want instead of listening to reviewers; most of whom are totally rubbish, then photographers would be much happier buying new product - have fun ;-)
Hey good to see you Vici!! ahah no doubt, everything we buy these days have video features. It's a norm. I don't dislike them, because I make videos, but then again, I am a photographer by heart and really would love to see a 'photographers' camera. Some get close but let's see :)
@@Red35Photography Well I cant see me changing my present lineup which is predominantly Sony (A7ii, A7cii replacing my A6500, A6000 but I have Nikon for my legacy Nikon lens collection which is substantial. I just bought the A7cii to replace my APS camera but, the articulated screen sucks so I wont buy another. I treat it as fixed like my Leica TL2. Its useless for street where a tilt is far more convenient. Whatever, I wont stop taking photos and I canm get great stuff 20yrs old online which at age 73 should see me out. I just need good quality images for my online art installations ;-)
I totally with you on this issue. I simply cannotn understand why Panasonic has gone FF for videographers. A DJI or even a smartphone is all that 95% of bloggers need to create their content and easily post it online. Those manufacturers that has gone all in into FF and video are chasing the wrong market. Also, I still use older cameras, the newest being introduced in 2018. They are good enough for me and even at 24MP, I lack nothing for heavy crops or large enlargements. Photographers should first learn the exposure triangle, composition techiniques, lighting and mastering the genre they are interested in first. The camera gear is secondary. I no longer watch product videos and have not watched any video of the latest cameras from any manufacturers. They just bore me to death and I simply do not need the latest and greatest gadgets.
It is our job to Make Cameras Great Again. Cell phone photos by the majority of people are junk, selfies, group shots and pretty much trash for Facebook. We need to get our children interested in using a camera. A cell phone is like a TV you watch. A camera becomes very personal as you and camera become one. We need to instill that mindset in our new generation of children. I have shot hundreds of thousands of photos in the good ole film days. Loved every minute of it. Digital, when you wrap your head around it, works great. We just skip to the head of the line by not having to deal with film. We do have a connection with the world as our newer cameras connect to our cellphone and we have the next best thing. I suspect cameras will evolve to be as convenient as cell phones.
I think when I used my dad's Canon viewfinder that he bought in the late 50's in Occupied Japan you had to be a lot more careful about taking a photo. On a roll of 35 shots you might get 2 that were keepers. Then came the process of loading the film in a canaster and developing it. Then the printing process. Even with studying of af the "Zone System", there was no guarantee you'd get anything. I think because a person with no photography experience and a digital camera can take thousands of pictures and there is no "waste" so to say. You just delete. You can use your Ai setting and oh well ...
I agree with everything you said in this vid. I have a Nikon Z8 and Z50, both of which I love and have taken wonderful pictures on. But I find that nine times out of ten when I leave the house I'll just grab my old D7100 with Tamron 17-50 2.8 and maybe Nikon 50mm or My Nikon D650 with 85mm and maybe 50 or 35mm. Why? Because the photo quality is still fantastic, they hang nicely in my big hands and one battery easily lasts all day and often several days. Also, I'm not as worried about them and have a huge range of lens combinations I can use.
Although Pentax almost got destroyed by Hoya, they still make traditional SLRs mainly for still photography. However, they are expensive. It's strange that to own a modern camera not just from the Pentax brand that's made mainly for still photography that it is more expensive than one made for video and still photography. That doesn't make sense to me at all. I remember the days when you could get a brand-new Pentax SLR which could perform just as well as any professional cameras
Well … yes and no. Running around in nature, photographing trees is certainly a different game than shooting sports. I love my R3 for that and I love eye autofocus for events. But I use Fujifilm for everything privat … than it’s not about performance.
100% But digital cameras are just computers with a lens slapped on the front and the only way to make consumers keep buying is by offering incremental hardware and software changes. As you say, photographers have been tricked into thinking newer gear means better pictures. What I’d like to see are some still photo-centric offerings. But what we’ll probably get are more colour choices.
But this problem is not just to do with cameras/photography… it’s the same for most hobbies etc, people think if they spend a shed load of money on golf clubs it will make them a better golfer, spend a shed load on a more advanced car it will make them a better driver. There is a fundamental thing that is common to all these things we do. As you mentioned it’s understanding and perfecting the basics so one understands how ‘to do’ regardless of what the hobby is or the equipment used.
Companies make what people buy. 🤷♀️ I just wish more people would choose cameras over phones that produce overly artificial photos. But that’s the reality. One exception: I think there’s a real gap in the market for compact rangefinder-style cameras with APS-C or mFT sensors and small lenses. These could sell quite well.
My thoughts... If any company doesn't sell new cameras which are better in some way than the last camera, they will simply go out of business... I think smart phones have peaked in terms of photography. Camera tech has evolved slowly and I think will be a long time before it peaks. If anyone is genuinely interested in photography, the newest and greatest cameras will still allow them to go back to basics if desired. The point and shoot will return.
0:55 exactly! Why does the X-M5 have to be a hybrid photo/video, the T50 does that, the S20 does that. The X-M1 was photo first the 5 has a flippy screen instant turn off. On connecting to the internet yes they should have been working on this a long time ago.
It ain’t rocket science. People just want something that works does not feel like it was designed to fall apart next week. For me, currently that’s a used Nikon Z5 for £640 UK with 6 month warranty.
of course there are things to advance. make a sensor smaller than MFT with tiny pixels that are able to get the clarity and low light/high ISO performance of 10x full frame. put 20ev stops IBIS and put it in a camera the size of say the OM5 or EM10. and then make lenses smaller. with the AI revolution, make small tiny lenses that max out at F4 but have the ability to choose literally any F stop and allow computations to create a photo with that F stop. a lot of ppl will push back saying "this isn't photography anymore" but honestly if you look at what already goes on under the hood of modern cameras and especially smartphones which are replacing the cameras, its already heading in that direction. i predict next gen cameras not about capture a moment, rather it is capture a memory or create art/aesthetic images.
The upside about all of this is that the cameras that are now seen as obsolete are still pretty damn good and can be bought for a decent price. The EM1.3 is crazy good for 600USD.
I found one for less than $600. Santa has possession of it now, but it will be under the tree on Christmas. Why spend the big bucks for a newer OM model for a few features that you don't need most of the time.
E-M1 III in what condition? Because anytime I look for one that has under 10k shutter count and in good shape is $800+ unless at a lower price in an active auction. The E-M1 III is a beast of a camera.
@@corykphotography Shutter count was 25, 051 and that wasn't an issue for me when the shutter is rated for 400,000 activations. The camera was like new, just a few small blemishes. It came with two Oly batteries and charger, and 2 aftermarket batteries with charger and a cheapie L bracket.
For me, seeing cameras like the D3 and D4 go for prices around the 400 to 850 dollar mark really blows my mind
I am absolutely convinced that these camera manufacturers made a colossal mistake when they decided to put in extra features that photographers never needed and therefore complicated the camera. Over 95% of photographers are actually not capable of ansorbing so much complexity, never mind applying it efficiently. This is where Apple was superintelligent. They incorporated all that and much more into their mobile phones with their powerful processors, and made a simple idiot proof device that appealed to the generation who think that using a flight combat simulator is the same as flying an F4 Phantom in battle. Simplicity is the answer.
Hi Jimmy, I have seen almost all your videos and listened to your talks for many hours. Totally honestly, this is far the best I have seen from you. Respect 👍👍💯💯
Wow, thanks! Glad to hear my friend.
Preach on, Brother Jimmy! Best video I've seen in ages. I dumb down every digital cam I have to make it as simple as I can.
Another thoughtful and pertinent commentary. Thanks, Jimmy. I think one photography skill that has really suffered is shot discipline. People no longer have to think about rolls of 24 or 36 shots, how much they cost, and how much processing shots costs. The philosophy of 'shoot a hundred and pick one' makes for lazy craft.
Jimmy, you are spot on. Many photographers today call cameras unusable simple because the autofocus is not the fastest on the market or the tracking and frame rates are not super fast or low light performance doesn't match the grain structure of Kodachrome 25. Sometimes my sarcasm comes out and I wonder out loud how any images were captured back when focus was manual, the fastest motor drives were 5 frames per second and the highest color film was ISO 400 or a very grainy Konica 1000. Yet, there are many iconic images from that era in all categories, wildlife, sports, concerts. How? By today's standards those cameras are unusable to many modern photographers. Photographers needed to anticipate plays in sports. They needed to observe wildlife and anticipate behavior patterns and they didn't have the luxury or shooting 3,000 images during a wedding just to create an album with 24-48 photos. They had to find ways or resolving lighting issues with strobes of other lights. You had to have knowledge and be very selective before pressing that shutter button.
I think manufacturers need the digital equivalent of a Pentax K1000, basic, fully manual exposure and no bells and whistles (okay, maybe keep the autofocus so you can repurpose the lenses when you upgrade). BTW: I have an EP1, an EM1 MKIII and an OM1 MKII.
The fact is... hybrid is not the way to go for most professional work. It's best to invest in a great photo camera and then get a great video camera on the side. You can simply rent a Canon c80 or a Red if you need better video. Hybrid is good in of both worlds but will never deliver the best results. There is a reason Medium format is still the best for a lot of photography. Phase one wont be adding video for a reason.
I think where part of this argument and disconnect comes from is the viewpoint of the photographers in questions. Those photographers that want the highest frame rates, fast autofocus, tracking etc are thinking in a professional sense. They are photographing for work or care more about the output than the process. That means whatever medium can give them the best result is the best and everything else is inferior or in-optimal. If I'm shooting sports or wildlife I probably still have to anticipate plays/movements but if there is someone else there that is shooting at 30fps compared to my 5 fps DSLR then they have a 6 times more likely chance of getting the perfect shot. At the end of the day the person buying the wedding photos does not care whether the photographer took 3k photos or just 50 for the 24-48 album they just want their photos and the best that can be delivered. In other words the process does not matter to the client so it also does not matter to the photographer.
@@AstairVentof you make a great point but many of these comments come from non professionals and are made in a very hyperbolic way (unusable versus usable but not optimal).
I had gotten rid of all my camera equipment and was just using my iphone, its always the camera with you. I was looking at upgrading to iphone 16 pro max, then I put on the brakes. I decided I wanted to get back to my roots. looked around and found used olympus em10 mkIII. Glad I did, I enjoy it again
Have no fear. I'm also a woodworker. It goes in cycles. In the 80's and 90's it was just older guys who dabbled in woodworking. Now it's a very diverse / artsy group. I suspect photography will have a phase where a good number of people ditch their cellphones and desire a real camera. They will even make prints!!!!!
Love this 100%. Instead of buying a new camera, I have gone and bought an older Pentax k10d, and loving the simplicity of it all. Nothing complicated; just the exposure triangle and "being there". Also got an old E300 to limit myself further. Really enjoying it!
The K10d was a wonderful camera, which reignited my interest in photography. With a good lens, it's still workable except if you shoot distant subjects and need to crop.
I bought a k10d , k20d and an Olympus E5 love all three .
I will never buy new again. New cameras are out of my league because of price and the fact that my existing cameras are full of features I don’t need.
@gp60m122 a lot of marketing... Some very niche features I do not need. But I guess if nobody buys gear, manufacturers go bust.
A superb discussion connecting all the implications of the problems facing photography and photographers and camera makers today. There are 3 key points to make here by choice which do you choose:
Digital full size cameras
Film cameras
Mobile phone cameras.
The issue here is social connectivity, which the mobile phone beats the other two by a country mile.
Is photography a creative art form, or a generational, instant gratification connective social (non art) platform?
My Canon 200d has WiFi connectivity, but is limited to an available wifi connection, I cannot connect it directly to my phone, I rarely use this function, But I don't need to instantly share or transmit my photos to someone else. This is the quandary big camera makers face.
Regards Rob.
Some fantastic points here and I agree the second hand market is full of amazing professional and prosumers cameras that still pack a punch for most people.
A few nights ago my 90D’s battery ran out of energy while doing street photography. I switched to my old and beginner’s Rebel T7 to keep shooting. I was actually amazed at the quality of the pictures. You’re right that knowing or learning what makes a picture a picture is the most important skill. You can take good pictures with any camera as long as you understand how to use them and their limitations. Great video and message!
Hi, I'm not new to your channel but first time commenting. What an awesome video and so spot on! ! Yes, the industry has forgotten its roots. This is in my opinion, what has in part fueled the film resurgence. I think the younger generation picked up on the direction that digital was heading and knew it was moving away from the art of photography. Cheers!
Great to find someone of like mind, so.. liked and subscribed.
I run photography workshops in France and I've found that the latest mirrorless cameras that guests bring are actually hindering their ability to learn and advance their photography. These 'state of the art' cameras have way too many unnecessary features and the most incredibly convoluted and confusing menu systems. In a video about composition that I uploaded in September, I said that the fundamentals of photography haven't changed one jot since photography became an art form almost 170 years ago, and I stand by that. The image simply needs to be properly exposed, correctly focused, and beautifully composed. Those are the fundamentals that I want to my photography students to learn and concentrate on rather than waste time trying to figure out a myriad electronic gimmicks. A phrase I now use regularly when talking to my students is, "Ignore that. Ansel Adams didn't need it, Don McCullin didn't need it - and neither do you."
That is why I love Leica
Thanks for the honest opinion. I am probably, like most, a hobby photographrer. My OMD EM-1 mk 1 and mk 2 still do what I want and they both look great and still bring me alot of joy in my weekend photo outings. I print for myself and family only so 20 MP is plenty. The system and lenses is small, light weight and fantastic for travel. If I ever get into videography it would be a DJI pocket, GoPro or maybe even a pockable camcorder.
Well said!
I have the OM 1, and an EM 1 Mark 2, and numerous lenses with a field of view from 18-1200 (2400 with teleconverters). The OM 1 has great stabilization and I’m perfectly happy with its subject detection. I don’t plan to buy the OM 2. It’s not enough of an upgrade. I will take a look at the next upgrade, but I’m not sure I need more technology than I already have.
You are so right about the pursuit of technology and how it drives the market and gets consumers to buy gear that isn't really needed or has minimal improvement over their current gear. As an amateur, I've kept my costs lower by buying used which means you can save at least half of the original price. My second camera body, an Olympus M10 Mark II is pretty old by today's standards, but it's images are great and very comparable to the ones produced by my M1 Mark II.
I absolutely agree - I have long thought that, in many ways, modern digital cameras have become too complex. They have systems to speed up the process of taking a photograph by giving tracking and auto-everything, but it can often take more time and effort to decide what combination of features to use to take the photos. For some time now I have yearned for a camera that is, essentially, based upon the Olympus OM1 - small and compact is part of it, but the fantastic way that shutter speed, focus and aperture are all controlled with one hand - the one that is supporting the camera body - using controls that are concentric to the lens. This was a superb design decision, and it would be lovely if that could be replicated now. Things like tracking would be nice to have on a control. Iso could be done in much the same way that the OM1 did it - lift and turn a dial to select ISO, and turn without lifting to select compensation. That camera was a master-class in design for usability, and it would be wonderful if we could get something essentially similar. TBH, I would forgo many of the facilities available nowadays - including tracking - for a camera the same size and shape as an om1, full frame, similar size lenses. I'd even forgo autofocus...
that was an incredible reflection! thank you for sharing your thoughts about the industry!
Hi Jimmy,
Great insights here!
You are making a very good case for a digital camera with 3 dials: one for shutter speed, one for ISO and one for exposure compensation-and maybe a lever for manual focus / auto-focus. I think Leica got there first with the M8 (but left off the focus lever with manual focus only). If Leica re-launches a bare-bones 18 to 24MPx rangefinder camera with three dials and a CCD sensor (M9 style) - or Olympus with a minimalist 3-dial 16MPx OM-5ii - they will get the camera industry back on track. Retro is the future!
You're so right Jimmy! I love my EM5mk2. I also have a OM1 which I absolutely love the better iso performance & especially the viewfinder as my eyes are getting older. The camera only records what the " photographer " puts into the frame no matter what brand.
You started very well touching the sore areas asking how a new generation of "true" photographers - interested in aestgetic questions - could be fostered but then you slided into a gear and social media frenzy that let me assume you had been well breeded by the industry, by our frenzy system. The once enigmatic and unfortunately so prophetic statement of Marshall McLuhan "the media is the message" now becomes a terribly realistic meaning where the reality (whatever that may be) is replaced by multimedia spectacles and their endless reflections in the multimedia multiverse.
just make a small camera with two dials weather sealed with Ibis how hard can it be. They always make them with bits missed off and add stuff we don't need!!!! so frustrating. I think the biggest problem is that they don't listen to the consumers, manufacturers just make stuff they think we might like !. Your right Jimmy
+ a decent EVF with PDAF AF - for me. :)
Exactly. I don't mean any offense by saying this, but I don't care about all the AI based subject detect stuff. I don't want it and I don't use it. I would imagine that adds to the cost of the camera. I would love to see a camera company forget that stuff and make a camera out of high quality material, weather sealed (like you said) and a viewfinder. I actually feel like we are seeing lesser quality items for the same (or in most cases more expensive) price. Makes me sad. I picked up an old dslr recently since they were so cheap and it had everything I needed to take photos. I forgot how much I really enjoy using and ovf as well.
@@just_A_Hack You might not need subject detection but some of us do. Different needs = different tech for different people. Having animal detect and high frame rates is helpful when I'm doing wildlife photography. If you don't need that stuff just stick with the cheap old dslr's like you said and be happy you don't have to pay the premiums that we do.
@@AstairVentof Don't get me wrong, I can see where it is helpful in some regards. I am glad it works for you and for those who use it.
@@just_A_HackI read/heard somewhere that it costs less for companies to integrate their existing technology across the board, than to make cameras where that tech is taken out/not included.
Sounds like a perfect travel kit…OP3, OM5 and a lens or 2! If hard conditions perhaps a Tg7. I often use an Osmo 4 and a Sony Rx100 Vii. Almost perfect for long journeys in mountains, but camera not weatherproof.
I totally agree with you ! I have a Canon R6 for sport and wildlife photography since I need fast and reliable autofocus for it, but I bought a 2nd hand 6D for slow photography like lanscape or architecture since it gives me what I need for it : great colours and enough pixels !
The challenge for camera companies is that the build quality and functionality available these days means that obsolescence is actually a diminishing concern. Hence they have to increase the costs because that one-time purchase now lasts for so long that upgrades really aren't that necessary nearly as regularly as they used to be.
I think there is room for both. Very supportive of simple cameras that teach the use of time, light and form. But I also just bought an OM1 because it offers the convenience of inbuilt nd’s / reduced tripod carry and other problem solving…so I can focus on seeing an image worth capturing. I don’t think there is anything wrong with tech that gets things/obstacles out of the way
as the Buggles song goes: Video Killed the Radio Star, the same analogy applies to P&S, when Nokia introduced a 0.3 megapixel camera on their phone in 2003 who would've guessed it would sound the deathnell of a whole industry and its offshoots ie holidays snaps printed off at Boots..... Today people have 50k snaps on their phone and have never printed off a single one!!
Very interesting analysis. I have been analysing the camera technology market and companies in this sector for a number of years and there are parallels with other tech sectors, such as mobile phones. The hardware technology has evolved almost to a point where consumers dont really need more ( 4k, 8 k, video, 120fps, 60MP sensors, AF tracking, AI assistance) these are all small differentiators to many photographers rather than essentail features. Cameras have become hybrid still and video devices - whether we need it or not. Sales have declined from a peak of c121M units pa in 2010 to c 8M units in 2023, so manufacturers focus on higher margin, feature rich devices. Keen amateur photographers are currently interested in uniquely designed, quality stills cameras such X100VI, Leica Q3 and I expect we may see a time lag before manufacturers respond. As you pointed out current cameras still lack wider connectivity, an operating system, internal storage and cluncky and irregular firware updates. This doesnt happen with laptops or mobile phones. Perhaps manufacturers need a rethink ..........
A very honest and truthful commentary.
Camera manufacturers don't dare to do anything these days or have become totally unimaginative.
I have a few ideas.
1. Replaceable/interchangeable monitor, foldable/swivelling, or optionally with cable >5 inches or a WiFi module.
2. Interchangeable viewfinders have existed before (prism viewfinder, shaft viewfinder), optionally with cable or WiFi.
3. And why not just have an interface that covers both options, prism hump down, monitor or WiFi module on.
4. Built-in wireless flash control (preferably compatible with Godox or something like that). Hot shoe makes room for point 3.
5. More cross-brand standards such as L-Mount or MFT, hasn't hurt any of the companies involved so far.
6. GPS, every cell phone can do that these days.
7. As far as I'm concerned, the inch indication on the focus scale can disappear (sorry to all the poor Americans).
Okay, I'm just rambling again. Sorry, I'm an electronics engineer. I would have to think about it again for more.
The filmmakers should come up with something themselves.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. You are right about the manufacturers losing the site of the customers demands. Obviousely the young are still interested in photography and shoot film. Only Pentax came with a new film camera. The truth is that when the trends change it takes some years to produce new camera due to production lines. When the small kameras like Fuji x100 models became popular, only Panasonic and now Fuji responded to what we wanted but only partially looking at the specs. Extra megapixels is not a must but EVF and good and light lenses are for exemple.
You are pointing a problem that is not for the manufacturers. They need to sell cameras as that is their revenue stream. If they dont sell they go broke. Your points may also applies 50 years ago into the 1970's when autoexposure and in the 80's when autofocus came. Professional photographer said that you need to measure the light properly and manual focus the lens. That is the correct skill of photography at that time.
Can you please define the real skill of photography these days?
@ Set the AI autofocus correctly using the sensitivity and speed setting, instead of knowing how to turn the focus ring on the lens for manual focus. The problem is that those critizing about lost skill, needs to understand that with new technology requires new knowledge and skills.
@@angeloplayforone I see, setting the sensitivity on a camera in your mind equates to having skills. A seven year old child could do that man. That is not skill, that is playing video games at the lowest level. You are so full of your own ideas that you have failed to see how dumb photography has become. Lets put it this way, give me a pinhole camera and I promise you that with a probability of over 95% I will produce an image, properly exposed, properly executed. Give me an all singing all dancing imaging computer called a ' digital camera ' and I will do the same. I have no problem with tech, I work in electronics. But, what would you do? Be looking for ever on the pinhole camera for the leg of the chicken focus mode???? It is one thing being ignorant, one can always learn , but it is a monumental fuck up if one was ignorant and also proud of it too.
@@lensman5762Asking loaded Reddit questions is cringe.
@@angeloplayforonei can use my 50 year old camera and my sony a7 , can you do both too?
Enjoyed the vid, very relatable. These days I will only buy another camera if I need it (or get an involuntary fit of the GAS) and it will no doubt be second hand heavily discounted. My best time with digital cams is using adapted manual lenses and just feeling at peace slowly taking some great shots, getting in the zone. I'm just a hobbyist.
I understand what you are saying. There are those that love gear and those that love photography. Those that love gear help the camera companies keep going so that photographers like us can have better gear. If a man has a camera he is more likely to discover photography if he already has a camera. Maybe not so bad after all.
Before about 2012, none of my cameras since 1954 had stabilisation, but I learnt to handhold to 1/25 second, and, for night shots I would use a reel of 400ASA film and prop myself and the camera against a doorway, wall or table, and still get about 3 decent shots out of 4.
We did get away with very few features.
In 2012 I got an DSLR, with some IBIS -- pretty classy! -- just a bit of a burden to carry when I went on holidays. Still I had had a film SLR, which wasn't light and well balanced either.
But the DSLR suffered a "cider related incident" a couple of days into an overseas holiday and I bought a 1" mirrorless ICL camera for the rest of my trip, which I loved, even with only the 10-30 (28-80 equiv) lens. I added a screw on 2x converter until I was able to get an 80-300 equiv telephoto, and got quite usable 160mm equiv shots using that. It was not a camera with lots of controls, though you could find a few extras hidden in the menus.
The biggest problem with that camera was unreliable lenses and no third party options. It doesn't even work well with adaptors. Had it been reliable, I would probably still be using it. It fitted a jacket pocket with the standard zoom attached, and the telephoto zoom went into the other pocket. It worked quite acceptably under normal street lighting, so, if I went shopping at night, I would take it and get a different kind of street photography: the quiet of a suburb after most shops close.
I am currently using an MFT camera which is a trifle larger and heavier than is ideal, though more comfortable with an attached lens than the DSLR.
When I have taken my photos, I download them to my laptop, which has a SIM, so I can connect to the Internet in most parts of Australia. I wonder if a travel-sized camera with a SIM option might be a way ahead. Carry a mini BT keyboard in your shirt pocket if necessary!
Wanted a good point and shoot pocket camera for my daughter (canon g7x mk3 or similar) but no stock and no idea when these cameras will be available. Prices are mad! Just bought her an older oly e-pl8 instead. Given up waiting for companies to get their sh*t together 😡
I have my Cnn G5X-II always with me; it brings me good quality (raw).
@ would love one but none available either down under…discontinued I think…imports from Japan are commanding AUD$2000! Mad!
The easy answer is buy older tech secondhand... You don't need new or latest tech. Take the X100 VI for example, it's overpriced and not needed.
@@kiwipics yep, totally agree. My daughter was after a Fuji originally for the film simulations…must be a bit of a trend amongst the youngsters now that they’ve done the retro film camera thing. Spotted the used oly epl8 with a lens in immaculate condition in white that she liked the look of so we’ll see how that goes instead for less than half the cost of a new Fuji xm5 (which isn’t available for some time yet).
@dingoeatswolf3663 .. The Olympus EP and EPL have custom profile settings in all of their exposure modes. The colour and monochrome settings can be changed via the menu, and those can also be used as a 3 shot burst .. ie: 1@natural 1@vivid 1@b&w ... one shot at each with one press of the shutter button, and you can shoot like that even in RAW plus JPEG.
The best option for easy colour profile changes are the Pen F (high prices s/hand) and the EP7, as they have a switch on the front for quick changes in JPEG only mode.
Finally updated to a G7. It's way more camera than I need, but still works with my 'old' full sized 4/3 lenses.
Still use my Galaxy S23 and my Mini 2 for most shots.
They just don't equal a dedicated camera for special purposes. Dedicated controls and the built-in features in the G7 make up for the difference in convenience.
I agree with you 100% and I am hoping the manufacturers listen and make cameras that a photographer can relate to.
Hey Jimmy great video, been watching your stuff for a long time now and always appreciate your content, I always carry a camera with me and what I'm finding a lot these days is the younger or people in general are amazed that I even bother to carry one with some funny comments and looks etc, it's not only the Camera industry but the whole world has gone crazy, anyway your right about the latest and greatest, I still love my older gear and think all of that low megapixel stuff renders some stunning photos, it's the glass that counts, hey upmost respect to you Man!!
I guess the question is...does one concentrate on creating an image or fascination with gadgetry. For the photographer, the camera is a tool, we select the best one for the task at hand. From the camera manufacturer outlook, I'm not sure what's left for for innovation. Unless your printing your photographs, any flagship cellphone has most folks covered, as you already mentioned. Flagship cameras from all the major manufacturers already do more than most of us ever use. I think anything over 50mpx is overhead.. so I have no idea what's next... As I learned many years ago, upgrading gear didn't make me a better photographer, just made life easier with some of the additional controls and innovations. As always, thanks for the great video and your candid thoughts on the Industry. Cheers!
Photography is still about the artistry, compositions, framing and choices. That does not mean that the new tech is bad, harmful or unnecessary. The new tools are for those who need them or it can improve their quality of life, helping them take photos they could not take before. I think what people are going through is the same as what happened when digital surpassed film or the introduction or automatic modes and autofocus - a mix of gatekeeping and fear that the skills they learned were no longer required to take a basic photo. When I want to go slow with photography i just pull out my DSLR or shoot film, that always still available to you and much cheaper too. I see modern cameras as my "work" camera and old ones as my "fun" camera. Still, people need to learn that if they don't need a feature they should not buy it. The camera industry thrives on GAS which is a bad and a good thing. It means continual improvements for those who those features are relevant to and it also allows manufactures to have a consistent income stream. If people only need the most basic camera (MF, sealing, glass) the used market is saturated with those and many are well made and won't need to be replaced for a while. If the manufacturer can't sell what they normally do they may have to step out of the camera market which has already been stifled by smartphones or completely switch to only catering towards expensive high-end/collector products that won't be available to most people. All in all I think people unproductively complain too much about this and instead should focus on getting manufacturers to add the features we want rather than random ones they seem to think we need. I would love to manufactures add safety features so we won't worry about our gear being stolen etc. but none of the major ones have done anything.
Good post.
I've been trying to get my kids interested in photography but no they are happy with their iPhones! You are right that photography as we know it could die
Fascinating, I had a conversation with a professional photographer who mainly specialises in portraits and event photography who relies on the smart features of their kit. Anything outside their comfort zone was avoided.
Hi, great viewpoint, Im still using a Canon 70D and my I phone. I grew up with film cameras from the early 60's The trouble is that most iphone users take photos that exist in their thousands without any thought on composition or lighting.
If you’re shooting weddings, portraits, landscapes or anything that doesn’t move fast I completely agree with you. A twelve year old DSLR will do the job. When you get to sports, wildlife, and aviation you need speed. Fast focusing, fast tracking, fast exposure rate,are necessary to complete in that photo market. No one wants to tell a photo editor, “ I missed the shot because my camera is to slow.” This doesn’t mean you don’t have to understand the exposure triangle. Many people, myself included shoot wildlife today in manual exposure mode.
As others have said, i guess that’s the marketing machine; numbers are much easier to push…..more this or more that. Feel, ergonomics etc., that is a much harder concept to market.
I had an RP, upgraded to the R8……yes, the latter is a way more capable camera from a dynamic range and AF point if view. Did it improve my my photography? No, not at all. I think if you’re a pro and workflow and getting the job done is important, maybe so. For me, i used the RP on safari and took photos of cheetahs running at 70mph; no issues!
I just need to dial out of the upgrade path! The dopamine hit we all feel with new gear is very real and hard to fight!
point and shoot cameras are instant on, ready to capture an image, phones are clumsy and never ready for a fast shoot
Going even farther in returning to the basics. Film photography. Tons of fun- sunny 16.
Good of you to say so Mr Red35. More and more photographers worth their salt have started to think like you. The answer for me at least, has always been to go back to the basics. I have shot film for over 50 years and in all formats from 110 to 5X7 and still do. It is here that the button pushers are separated from people who have an indepth understanding of the science and craft of photography. Any idiot could point a modern digital imaging device towards any subject and record impressive images, simply because all the microcomputers insode that device are doing all the work. One has to ask from time to time, what exactly was my role in all that, besides paying a huge chunk of money for the latest tech????
AI has a lot to do with this and I agree with you.
I have been in photography since 1979 and to be honest nowdays it is not satisfying shooting digital especially with the latest cameras.
I bought my first digital camera in 2010 that being Nikon D700 and still shoot with it and I still go back to my Nikon FE and Olympus OM3ti to shoot BW.
My son's best friend bought the Nikon ZF and he let me shoot with it for a few days and yes the images SOOC are really gorgeous but there was no effort whatsoever to do so.
I am glad I still have my film cameras.
I just wish the manufacturers listen and maybe bring out more simple no frills film cameras.
Cheers
Watching film photographers blitz mirrorless users wasnt much of a surprise , mirrorless always has me thinking begginers school of youtube ! Spend a year NOT editing ! You learn a lot
Hi Jimmy, I very much enjoyed you "rant" and appreciate your thoughts. I will give you some of mine.
Future photographers: I agree that in general we should be worried about the abilities of future photographers. On the other hand though, in recent times I have helped several young people to get full manual analogue cameras (Well frankly I gave them). Some just wanted the analogue look, but most of them wanted to learn the basic of photography to improve the way they take photos. So, there is some hope.
Latest gadgets: I absolutely agree that for most photography you do not need the latest and greatest. I use "very" old digital cameras (2004) and really old film cameras (1930's) to take very nice photos. But if you want excellent photos of races and rallies then extremely high frame rates and focusing mechanisms come in very handy. If you want to do macro photography focus stacking is really nice. If you want to do night photography features like Live Time, Live Composite and Starry Sky AF are just brilliant. For landscape photography high-res mode is fantastic. Not everyone does portrait photography.
Market: In a conversation with an owner of a local photography shop he said that he believes all Japanese manufacturers have decided together to focus only on the upper market. Remember that that was one of the first things OM System said about their new market strategy. I bought the OM-1 at this shop last year and that camera is rock bottom at his market. People buying real camera gear are spending more and more money. This man sells €6.000 to €10.000 lenses almost by the bucket (in a tiny little shop!). You need to sell 10 to 20 point and shoot cameras for that at a lower profit margin. If you look at what keeps selling in economically difficult times it are Ferrari's, Rolexes and yachts. So, it probably is a wise decision to focus on that upper market.
Fuji X-M5: That one irritates me a bit. I remember OM System brought their first camera, the Pen E-P7, and everybody was like: Yeah, quite nice, but not special, it is lacking an EVF and it is too expensive. Now Fuji comes with essentially the same form factor, a bigger sensor but probably less features and a higher price and suddenly everyone (not just you) is boasting about it. So, it would be very nice if in your review you would compare it to a three year old E-P7 from OM System to see how big of a step the X-M5 really is (or how far ahead OM System was).
I don't think manufacturers don't understand the market. They just try to either blackmail you into spending more money or try to sell you the idea that you need to use their latest project.
Now about om-5. It's a really nice camera. The only thing I can see is missing is lightweight prime compact weather sealed lenses to combine it with it.
Very true. But a fact is also, that it takes time to find the camera which is a tool for what you want to do. Personally I have Canon and Nikon and I really like the D5200. But my first Olympus, the M10 Iii, was something very different. Perfect handling. Everything is exactly where I would expect it. Upgraded to the EM1 II, added an EPL 9 in blue and now the OM1 II. With this technology I am very happy and would not need more upgrades like Full Frame or whatever.
I love my Pen F with 3 small Olympus primes for my travel & every day camera.
And the irony is OM system cameras are packed with features (computational photography) and all the old school photographers have flocked to that system.
Maybe they just got fed up using their skills.
To me you are still a very young man because 70 is coming up quickly for me. Where I have to disagree is with your statement that cameras have become expensive. My very first SLR was a Yashica TL Electro-X with a 50mm lens. Cost was 156 USD, a sum that took a lot of scrimping and saving. Multiply that by the inflation factor and that was 1200 2024 dollars. Three years later I purchased a brand new Nikon F2 body with a basic prism viewfinder for 425.00 USD. The lens I bought for this new camera was a used 50mm f2 Nikkor-H that cost 40.00 USD. Factor in the inflation factor for 1974 and that was a 3515.40 2024 USD purchase. Had I funds to get the F2 with the Photomic meter prism that was an additional 94.95 USD which with a 7.56 inflation factor means 171.82 2024 dollars. So, todays Z8 with all it's host of added features beyond a simple light meter is actually less expensive than a bare bones F2 with the photomic meter. When you start factoring in Inflation prices for camera gear today it is actually a bit less expensive that it was 20, 30, or even 50 years ago.
I'm shocked that you didn't mention Pentax at all. Their cameras are made by photographers for photographers. Everything a photographer could need in a modern camera is packed into even the entry level cameras. Automatic tracking of stars for Astro photography? It's there. Amazing color science? Yup. High ISO capability with clean images? Absolutely! Unique features within IBIS (such as composition adjustment that shifts the image sensor by X degrees to get the perfect composition, great for studio and landscape work. Rugged, weather sealed bodies and lenses across the whole range. You guessed it, they have that too from entry level with kit lenses to prosumer bodies and pro lenses. And nobody does optical finders as good as Pentax does. You can even save a shot you just took as a jpeg and save a raw copy of it in camera. And the list goes on. You should take a look at them, they deliver exactly what you talked about in this video.
Jimmy, you are nail it when you said the market on existing users rather than the new. In fact the industry need to seriously spend more to understand the Gen Z. Their understanding is paramount. Otherwise we may loose great companies that manufacture great photography products.
i will not be surprised if Apple, Samsung or any giant consumers mobile phones makers decide to push deeper into photography functions, in that situation, it is definitely be very interesting.
In my opinion, imaging giants must begin their journey either to evolves themselves into the mobile and modular (MM), or joint partnership to continue growth. A great example now is Insta360. They very wise. They are not exactly very good in imaging, but they very good in software, AI and mobile technology. (Even DJI can’t get close, in my personal view.) OMG this the original message, only later when watch more into your video than I realise you mention DJI. Hahahaha. Yes, DJI to me is an expert in gimbal industrial on land or in air period. They further developing Lidar. OMG their drones using that navigate through challenging urban or rural conditions.
Jimmy, I hope my humble little views can help. 😊 love your content. Thank you very much.
You are 100% right mate!
Just bought a "old" EOS 5D Mark IV in mint conditions with only 5000 clicks for 1200 dollar. Will be using that for years to come.
There are young ones who can't count money. Watching the screen constantly has taken away brains. It's not just a photography problem.
My first camera was an Yashica FRII back when I was a teenager in the 1980's. That ought be basics (that came only had aperture priority - not even manual) of composition. Next, I moved to a Contax 167MT and that gave me a whole new set of tools that allowed my knowledge to grow even more! All with manual focus, let alone IBIS, EVF's or "wild" ISO! Modern cameras have many, many more tools, but, like you said... imperfection is chastised in the photography community as opposed to being celebrated (as it was done in the past). Today's pixel peepers would annihilate even Annie Leibovitz if she was shooting digital today with the same style and imperfections of the 80's.
My 16 year old 5DII still takes exceptional photographs, but I am going to pick up an OM-1 next year because of the computational features it offers. I'll keep my 5DII. On a side note most of the video cameras used to make docs at Sundance 2024 are around 10 years old. So older tech is still useful.
I have been shooting since 1994 when I purchased an Asahi Pentax K1000 at the PX in San Diego...from film to DSLR, I have used a number of bodies...but I just don't see myself making the jump to Mirrorless...those bodies aren't MADE for Photographer but for Videographers...not to mention that the price points for the bodies and lenses are nonsensical! Now companies are making bodies that have features locked behind a PAYWALL!!! I'll stick to DSLR bodies that are now even lower in prices as well as their lenses! Great video!
The thing that has killed prosumer cameras is the weight and having to carry it all in a rucksack. The big advantage was the Canon Ixus which was small light weight fitted in your pocket and took excellent photos. I am still using a really old Ixus which I got second hand in a charity shop and its still brilliant.
I bought a Canon Elph 360HS last week to have something I could carry around in my pocket. The Elph 360HS was out of stock for weeks. I got an email from them saying it was back in stock, so I ordered immediately. B&H was out of stock again the next day. So much for there being no demand for small point-and-shoot cameras.
Great Stuff! Add tech as needed but, keep it out of the photogs way. Instant gratification addiction is a big part of the problem. Thanks for this post Jimmy. We're on the same page My friend.
It would be nice if camera manufacturers continued to work on developing larger sensor cameras in smaller body’s. I do not really care for hybrid cameras, if I want a video camera I’ll buy one. I have a couple flagship cameras…I only use the most basic functions and I mainly shoot songbird in flight.
You are so right about the new cameras but this is a camera combo that will really blow your mind in picture quality and is from 2012. Sigma Merrill DP1 to 3, just try them out ;)
Cheers Jimmy , this is Sean in Atlanta! I totally agree with you, my friend! The camera market has gone absolutely bonkers! I am a photographer and I take zero, zero videos. Mybiggest dislike with modern cameras are those idiot flip out screens that I only use as a handle! I get it if you take videos, I do! But I do not and so I absolutely cannot stand the thought of a camera with that type of screen.
The second thing that’s out of control are the prices ! If I wanted to spend $4000 to $6000 on a new camera body , I would get a used Leica. And I honestly don’t appreciate having to manually focus every single image I take!
And lastly, it’s the mega pixels! Stop, already! We have more than enough!
So I am in total agreement with you and I’m sure there will be folks who disagree with me. Fine. I want a camera with a tilt screen, or a fixed screen because that’s how a camera ends up being if it has my hated screen.
Sorry! I feel better getting this off “my chest”, whatever that means!
Sean
I can understand not having a use for a feature... but there's nothing 'idiot' about flip-screens. I don't shoot video, but i use a flip-screen regularly because it allows me to get my camera into positions for images that are otherwise impossible to achieve. The only alternative for many of the shots would be a remote monitor, but that's an additional piece of gear to manage and would slow my process down. My point is that it all depends on the what and the how of what one shoots, and if a feature facilitates that for a photographer then it's a good thing, and if it doesn't then it may be a nuisance - but the feature is not inherently or universally 'idiotic'. Thankfully, there are enough options out there to please everyone and their preferences.
I really only have one word to sum up my views on this subject "Agreed". I'm getting sick of all these so-called technological advances that I don't want, don't need and add very little if anything to my photography. I just returned from a five day trip to Marbella, principally for my step-daughter's wedding but also for the opportunity to do some nice walk-around, as Robin Wong calls it "shutter therapy" street photography around the old town and I just took my E-M1 mk1, 25mm f/1.8 and a black mist diffusion filter as an all-round choice and had an absolute blast!. :)
Very true!... speaking from 55 years photography experience. And now there is generative AI which makes it possible for future generations to 'make' photos without even needing a camera. Fortunately anyone who loves photography can still have fun making their own unique and (especially) memorable images with a real camera.
You can't make photos without a camera. AI is computer generating an algorithm with no soul, no skill, and no fun.
In my country, wedding photographers need to deliver images with a reasonably good focus, since otherwise their clients might ask for a refund. I don't think the photographers can change their clients to accept out-of-focus photos. Portrait photographers are expected to deliver something different from what you can out of an iPhone: background-blur. The photographers could try teaching the clients, but it could have a negative impact on their business. Many people expect 4k videos with good focus from RUclips creators. So, I think the manufacturers are not so crazy but just trying to sell their products. Smartphones were overpowered already a decade ago. This might be how the industry goes. I wouldn't even talk about cars. Product/service providers try to bait their customers a bit, and it is up to the customers to know what they really need.
Just to clarify, Is this video not filmed on a pocket 3? A point and shoot video camera made by DJI?
Yes :) A point and shoot video cam (wit still capture but only 16:9)
@@Red35Photography I feel like the pocket 3 and action cameras dominate the market these days. Those re the modern point and shoot but with video now since video has become the main median
@@Marcus_Visbal I wouldn't disagree but strange that camera makers have all the tools and resources to make their point and shoot mover video friendly, but instead, they just didn't bother and let others eat the market. DJI is almost winning the market themselves, even GoPro is struggling to compete. DJI has built such an eco-system with their mics and drones that it's hard to beat if you are a content creator or into video making.
I agree. But it does liven up the 2nd hand market when new "photographers" sell their kits because they find that the cameras don't quite improve their game from snap-shooters to photographers
I had a Canon 90D and a Canon SL3. I recently sold the 90D and am shooting only with the SL3. Why? The SL3 does everything I need easily and quickly. I often found myself missing shots because I had to change settings on the 90D. Is the 90D more capable? Of course but not in anything I want to do. The SL3 is lighter, smaller and makes it easier for me to use when I am walking around taking photographs.
Of all the tech that is truly useful is image stabilisation.
In the film days, a point and shoot 35mm camera could deliver the same quality as a professional SLR. And they did e.g. The Konica Hexar and Contax T3, the latter in particular having a spectacular lens. Now that sensor size is so important, achieving the same in digital seems unlikely, and those used to phone camera images are equally unlikely to care.
Yes! Yes! 100% agreed! Upmost respect Man! Cheers from Brazil!
Dont get me started; I just renewed my cameras; probably for the last time. I cant see anybody making me a camera I would want to buy in the future. AND I blame luvvie US RUclips reviewers. What I now do with a new camera is spend half a day turning off the "new features" that I dont want and will never use Pictures I take today are no better than I was taking on my brownie in 1957; I still have a couple of those in my online gallery. The last advance in cameras was IBIS. There has been nothing of much value to me since then. I take photos!!! Not video and most people dont take video either; they take snaps. Every camera on the market now seems to have no tilt screen because vlogers cant see themselves!!! They solved this problem with Sony A6600 & Z50. It fell on deaf ears. All cameras since have articulating screens. It would be nice if only video slanted cameras had that yet, the new Z50ii has no tilt screen and I bet the Z5ii will have it despite it being poor for video. Sorry Nikon I will keep my Z5. I would rather have a fixed screen than articulated as its at least robust. I will be able to buy these cameras I now have used, for the rest of my life. Sorry manufacturers; your new cameras suck. I will stick with my current cameras for rest of my old life. Frankly they have brought their decline on their own hands. If they found out what real people want instead of listening to reviewers; most of whom are totally rubbish, then photographers would be much happier buying new product - have fun ;-)
Hey good to see you Vici!! ahah no doubt, everything we buy these days have video features. It's a norm. I don't dislike them, because I make videos, but then again, I am a photographer by heart and really would love to see a 'photographers' camera. Some get close but let's see :)
@@Red35Photography Well I cant see me changing my present lineup which is predominantly Sony (A7ii, A7cii replacing my A6500, A6000 but I have Nikon for my legacy Nikon lens collection which is substantial. I just bought the A7cii to replace my APS camera but, the articulated screen sucks so I wont buy another. I treat it as fixed like my Leica TL2. Its useless for street where a tilt is far more convenient. Whatever, I wont stop taking photos and I canm get great stuff 20yrs old online which at age 73 should see me out. I just need good quality images for my online art installations ;-)
PS. YOu are right about point and shoots - my Pixel 7 has completely replaced my Olympus Tuff 5 as my always carry camera.
I totally with you on this issue. I simply cannotn understand why Panasonic has gone FF for videographers. A DJI or even a smartphone is all that 95% of bloggers need to create their content and easily post it online. Those manufacturers that has gone all in into FF and video are chasing the wrong market. Also, I still use older cameras, the newest being introduced in 2018. They are good enough for me and even at 24MP, I lack nothing for heavy crops or large enlargements. Photographers should first learn the exposure triangle, composition techiniques, lighting and mastering the genre they are interested in first. The camera gear is secondary. I no longer watch product videos and have not watched any video of the latest cameras from any manufacturers. They just bore me to death and I simply do not need the latest and greatest gadgets.
It is our job to Make Cameras Great Again. Cell phone photos by the majority of people are junk, selfies, group shots and pretty much trash for Facebook. We need to get our children interested in using a camera. A cell phone is like a TV you watch. A camera becomes very personal as you and camera become one. We need to instill that mindset in our new generation of children. I have shot hundreds of thousands of photos in the good ole film days. Loved every minute of it. Digital, when you wrap your head around it, works great. We just skip to the head of the line by not having to deal with film.
We do have a connection with the world as our newer cameras connect to our cellphone and we have the next best thing. I suspect cameras will evolve to be as convenient as cell phones.
I think when I used my dad's Canon viewfinder that he bought in the late 50's in Occupied Japan you had to be a lot more careful about taking a photo. On a roll of 35 shots you might get 2 that were keepers. Then came the process of loading the film in a canaster and developing it. Then the printing process. Even with studying of af the "Zone System", there was no guarantee you'd get anything. I think because a person with no photography experience and a digital camera can take thousands of pictures and there is no "waste" so to say. You just delete. You can use your Ai setting and oh well ...
I agree with everything you said in this vid.
I have a Nikon Z8 and Z50, both of which I love and have taken wonderful pictures on.
But I find that nine times out of ten when I leave the house I'll just grab my old D7100 with Tamron 17-50 2.8 and maybe Nikon 50mm or My Nikon D650 with 85mm and maybe 50 or 35mm. Why? Because the photo quality is still fantastic, they hang nicely in my big hands and one battery easily lasts all day and often several days. Also, I'm not as worried about them and have a huge range of lens combinations I can use.
We have 10-12 years old lenses, but instead of becoming cheaper, they became more expensive. So, yes, the camera industry has gone crazy.
Although Pentax almost got destroyed by Hoya, they still make traditional SLRs mainly for still photography. However, they are expensive. It's strange that to own a modern camera not just from the Pentax brand that's made mainly for still photography that it is more expensive than one made for video and still photography. That doesn't make sense to me at all. I remember the days when you could get a brand-new Pentax SLR which could perform just as well as any professional cameras
Great vid! What’s that drone you’re using? Love it…👋🇦🇺
Thanks. It's the new Hover Air X1 Pro Max. It's pretty cool, like a flying camera man following me around.
Cameras should be more modular. Example: interchangeable sensors - colour, b&w, infrared, low light, high resolution. Uploadable custom menus. Voice command interface. Print paper simulations. Multiple image ratios (2:3, 4:3, 1:1, 6:7, etc.). Digital filters (old style b&w, polarizer, soft focus...).
Well … yes and no. Running around in nature, photographing trees is certainly a different game than shooting sports. I love my R3 for that and I love eye autofocus for events. But I use Fujifilm for everything privat … than it’s not about performance.
I use a lumix gx80 and still get some great shots, I must say I would like a newer version of this with good focus
Great advice!
!Used a Fuji X100 6 and an old Ricoh 500 g film rangefinder.The Fuji was better in every way - but the 500 as more fun 😎
100% But digital cameras are just computers with a lens slapped on the front and the only way to make consumers keep buying is by offering incremental hardware and software changes. As you say, photographers have been tricked into thinking newer gear means better pictures. What I’d like to see are some still photo-centric offerings. But what we’ll probably get are more colour choices.
But this problem is not just to do with cameras/photography… it’s the same for most hobbies etc, people think if they spend a shed load of money on golf clubs it will make them a better golfer, spend a shed load on a more advanced car it will make them a better driver. There is a fundamental thing that is common to all these things we do. As you mentioned it’s understanding and perfecting the basics so one understands how ‘to do’ regardless of what the hobby is or the equipment used.
Companies make what people buy. 🤷♀️
I just wish more people would choose cameras over phones that produce overly artificial photos. But that’s the reality.
One exception: I think there’s a real gap in the market for compact rangefinder-style cameras with APS-C or mFT sensors and small lenses. These could sell quite well.
My thoughts...
If any company doesn't sell new cameras which are better in some way than the last camera, they will simply go out of business...
I think smart phones have peaked in terms of photography.
Camera tech has evolved slowly and I think will be a long time before it peaks.
If anyone is genuinely interested in photography, the newest and greatest cameras will still allow them to go back to basics if desired.
The point and shoot will return.
0:55 exactly! Why does the X-M5 have to be a hybrid photo/video, the T50 does that, the S20 does that. The X-M1 was photo first the 5 has a flippy screen instant turn off. On connecting to the internet yes they should have been working on this a long time ago.
It ain’t rocket science. People just want something that works does not feel like it was designed to fall apart next week. For me, currently that’s a used Nikon Z5 for £640 UK with 6 month warranty.
of course there are things to advance. make a sensor smaller than MFT with tiny pixels that are able to get the clarity and low light/high ISO performance of 10x full frame. put 20ev stops IBIS and put it in a camera the size of say the OM5 or EM10. and then make lenses smaller.
with the AI revolution, make small tiny lenses that max out at F4 but have the ability to choose literally any F stop and allow computations to create a photo with that F stop.
a lot of ppl will push back saying "this isn't photography anymore" but honestly if you look at what already goes on under the hood of modern cameras and especially smartphones which are replacing the cameras, its already heading in that direction.
i predict next gen cameras not about capture a moment, rather it is capture a memory or create art/aesthetic images.
Good thought and I agree with you. Still, what will the camera industry do.