How will future system camera look like?

[redbaron]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

i was in europe recently, the amount of tourists taking photos with their iphones instead af an actual camera is alarming. i mean, good luck to them if they feel that's all the need. but it's, sad. electronic fads are invading into our passion and degrading what photography used to stand for.

 

What's sad about tourists taking photos on a device that is easy to carry, records the location and can make phone calls?

 

Phone cameras are also perfect for recording more serious events where carrying a camera may get you killed. Tehran comes to mind.

 

What, exactly, should photography stand for?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[NZDavid]

An interesting discussion so far, but I think there is a big difference between what photographers would like to see developed, and what trends are likely to actually occur.

 

The OP asked specifically about system cameras. That doesn't necessarily imply pro cameras, although pros are likely to be the majority wanting one. We also need to ask, what is a system camera?

 

A camera that can record different angles of view, from wideangle to telephoto, perhaps macro? Then is a camera with a built-in superzoom lens a system camera, an all-in-one system camera?

 

As amazingly versatile as these cameras are, they are unlikely to satisfy everyone's requirements -- more wideangle, faster lenses, higher quality, ad so forth. So I think it is safe to say that future system cameras will incorporate interchangeable lenses.

 

In the pro market, change is glacial. Indeed, in many ways (basic shape and design), the last big change occurred when the majority of pros shifed from rangefinders to SLRs in the '60s. Even with the advent of digital and a computer interface, these cameras have remained remarkably similar in size, shape, and handling: all are big and heavy.

 

The two big areas where change is likely to occur are with viewfinders and formats. As yet there is no standard digital format, and there is not reason why it should be 24 x 36mm. Smaller sensors may be more versatile, so long as quality can be maintained. Which, as mentioned, makes large-sensor camera like the S2 a very limited market. Sensor size also affects lens size, and most pros will welcome smaller and lighter lenses. (As I posted elsewhere, it seems absurd why we could continue to use 35-equivalent focal lengths when angle of view would be more meaningful, but logic and simplicity don't always play a role; we'll probably have more complex and impenetrable jargon and acronyms.)

 

Which brings us to EVIL or DEVIL cameras, already hailed as the most significant development in camera technology in recent years. It is quite possible that the majority of system cameras will turn EVIL sooner rather than later; or existing DSLRS may find themselves sharing the shelves with an EVIL brother (Sony's latest offerings, for example). Pro videographers are used to E-finders, after all; why not still photographers? Cost and convenience are the main drivers, but there also has to be a quality level that is acceptable to a majority of photographers. Many photographers may still prefer optical finders; they just may not get a choice. Optical finders are now few and far between in the compact market.

 

Those cellphone camera-toting tourists who caused so much angst surely are worth watching, too. Maybe the future is not only a phone that happens to also be a mini computer with a built-in camera, but a high-performance camera that also happens to come with internet and email capability and a phone. Connecting more efficiently with other devices for uploading and sharing pictures is another interesting trend to watch.

[luigi bertolotti]

i was in europe recently, the amount of tourists taking photos with their iphones instead af an actual camera is alarming. i mean, good luck to them if they feel that's all the need. but it's, sad. electronic fads are invading into our passion and degrading what photography used to stand for.

 

Well... let's no complaint so much of cell-phone photogs... : to be honest, is it really SO different from 25 years ago or so ? I remember, at that times, in many tourist locations, crowd of people with their 110 cameras (I have a vivid remembrance in 1980 or 81, of a group of Japanese who photographed the MEALS in a Restaurant in Florence... ): probably the total number of shots was lower than now, but this happens also for "real" amateurs switching from film to digital, but was 110 true photography ? Or, before, the silly 126/Instamatic format ? I remember terrible 10x15 cm prints made from 110 catridges... I have never tried to print pics taken from my cellphone.. but I suspect the quality could even be better...

[Posto 6]

What if a small digicam sized unit could provide the same current quality as an S2?

 

Not if, but when!

 

Also, WIMAX connection will probably be seen as a must in a few years.

[giordano]

Indeed, in many ways (basic shape and design), the last big change occurred when the majority of pros shifed from rangefinders to SLRs in the '60s.

 

I don't think it's that simple. If you mean shifting from 35mm rangefinders to 35mm SLRs, there was never a time when the majority of pros used 35mm rangefinders. And if you mean shifting from using rangefinders of any kind for most pro work to using SLRs of any kind, (a) I'm still not sure there was ever a time that most professional photography was done with cameras with rangefinders and ( non-35mm rangefinders and SLRs came in several very different shapes and sizes.

[luigi bertolotti]

I don't think it's that simple. If you mean shifting from 35mm rangefinders to 35mm SLRs, there was never a time when the majority of pros used 35mm rangefinders. And if you mean shifting from using rangefinders of any kind for most pro work to using SLRs of any kind, (a) I'm still not sure there was ever a time that most professional photography was done with cameras with rangefinders and ( non-35mm rangefinders and SLRs came in several very different shapes and sizes.

 

Well speaking of SYSTEM cameras as the original post said, I should be rather sure that pros , during about 50 years (to say, after WW end to 2000 about) used these kind of system cameras :

- The traditional studio cameras like Linhof / Sinar

- The "Press cameras" like Graflex/Plaubel/Linhof/Mamiya etc... (hardly to define properly as "system cameras", indeed: same for the TLR Rolleiflexes, also a important workhorse for pros)

- The MF SLR like Hasselblad Pentax 67 etc...

- The 35mm RF (Leica/Contax) and THEN the 35mm SLR.

 

And I agree that the last one was a very significant shift, which imho caused a deep change also in the consumer market and in the industry itself.

[andybarton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Or, before, the silly 126/Instamatic format ?

 

Don't knock the Instamatic 126 format.

 

Many people cut their photographic teeth at the age of about 6 with an Instamatic and have had the bug ever since. Cameras such as those were instrumental in getting children interested in photography during the 60s, many of whom are still learning the craft today, over 40 years on.

 

For example, I have photographs taken with my Instamatic of my now long dead Grandparents and a school trip to Portugal and Maderia. I could never have taken them if my Grandfather hadn't bought me that little Kodak and the cartridges to go in it.

 

Not everyone was given an M2 to play with at the age of seven

[giordano]

Cameras such as those were instrumental in getting children interested in photography during the 60s

 

But was there any excuse for the 126 SLRs from Zeiss, Rollei and Kodak?

 

I missed 126 myself. My first camera was one of these (12 on 620):

[janki]

Is this a historical camera? No, Yes, but I'm not sure.

 

Equipped with a digital image sensor, perhaps it is actually very futuristic.

 

How about installing a solar cell where the "pop up" flash is located.

It would remove all my skepticism by bringing a power hungry digital camera on a journey into the wilderness.

 

Why ponder any more? Today's camera manufacturers can certainly get a lot of inspiration from this aesthetic masterpiece, when they are designing tomorrow's camera.

[Nicoleica]

Don't knock the Instamatic 126 format.

 

Many people cut their photographic teeth at the age of about 6 with an Instamatic and have had the bug ever since.

 

I too started off with an Instamatic. An Instamatic 50. With a rapid wind lever, two apertures and a flash shoe. (I had the flashgun too.) I learned a great deal from using that camera.

[dcoombs]

i was in europe recently, the amount of tourists taking photos with their iphones instead af an actual camera is alarming. i mean, good luck to them if they feel that's all the need. but it's, sad. electronic fads are invading into our passion and degrading what photography used to stand for.

 

These are the modern equivalent of the old "wish you were here" picture postcard. To be emailed or put up on facebook. They will satisfy that niche, but I don't see them as a threat to photography as we aspire to it.

 

Doug

[Wiggi]

I think in the Full Frame segment, the future will be a SLR camera with pentaprisma and mirror.

 

In the APS-C format system cameras with changeable lenses like the Sony NEX are becoming a big deal. Some with built-in EVIL, some you can put an EVIL on. The figures of the APS-C SLRs will stagnate,

 

In the compact sector there will be the classical compact cams like today, but they will become cheaper. Other cams could have details of APS-C cams, f.e. EVIL. Maybe one manufacturer will offer interchangeable lenses, why not. On the other side compact cams will be offered with additional functions: GPS, mp3-player, TV, cell-phone etc.

 

To make the long story short: The camera market will grow for the manufacturers with the right products.

[RockyIII]

Many people cut their photographic teeth at the age of about 6 with an Instamatic and have had the bug ever since. Cameras such as those were instrumental in getting children interested in photography during the 60s, many of whom are still learning the craft today, over 40 years on.

 

My first camera was a Kodak Brownie box camera, hand-me-down from my father, but my first brand new camera was a Kodak Instamatic 104.

 

Rocky