2011: The year of the Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera

Jan 18, 2011
Preview image

[caption id="attachment_2766" align="alignright" width="150" caption="credit: techcentral.my"][/caption]

In 2009 and 2010, new MILCs (mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras) such as the Olympus PEN, Sony NEX, and Panasonic Lumix G/GF/GH made a big splash in the photography world.  During 2010, MILCs made for almost 25% of interchangeable lens camera sales in Japan. So what does that mean? Years ago, DSLR cameras used to cost thousands of dollars and would literally be obsolete after a year.  They had tiny LCD screens that gave horrible/inaccurate representations of exposures and they also took forever to write to memory cards.  Battery life was a joke and by today's standards, even older professional models should be considered  boat anchors at best.  Many manufacturers tried to act on this flaw of DSLRs and make "affordable" (under $1,000) high-end point and shoot cameras that were referred to as "bridge" cameras. What happened to the market for these high-end "bridge" point and shoots? The introduction of the entry-level DSLR took away the need for a $550+ point and shoot. So with the popularity of MILCs increasing, is a similar situation going to occur again? Although Canon and Nikon reign supreme in the camera world, companies like Panasonic, Sony, and Olympus have clearly made an impact on DSLR sales.  What's the impact? Keep reading for some of my thoughts on this issue that is developing every day.

The Story of the Canon SX1 IS and the EOS Rebel XS

Imagine a high-end point and shoot camera with a CMOS sensor, 20x zoom, 1080p HD video, 4fps continuous shooting, and the ability to shoot RAW.  It sounds like the serious enthusiast's dream camera!  If you gave me just the specs on this camera, I would guess that it's a current model still in production.  The surprising part is that the SX1 IS was released by Canon in 2008, way ahead of its time.  It sold decently with a street price of around $550.  However, it was clearly a sign of the times when the SX1 IS fell out of favor because even though it sported new groundbreaking features, the price tag was too old fashioned.  As good as a cameras as the SX1 IS was (and still is; if you own one, just use it and forget about my snobby article), it was clearly the last hurrah of "ultra-high-end" point and shoot cameras.

Meet the Canon Rebel XS (1000D), the DSLR that took the market by storm when it was released a few months before the SX1 IS.  It retailed for around $650 at first, but was quickly under $600 and has since settled in around $500-550.  There were previous Rebel models, such as the original Digital Rebel, Rebel XT, and Rebel XTI, but the Rebel XS was the first to sell at such a low price.  It is still a current model and sells out whenever we get them in stock.  That speaks volumes about the quality of this little guy.  In fact, I would say that the Rebel XS is the Honda Civic of DSLRs: both cheap and reliable.  It's a 10 megapixel workhorse that takes very good pictures.  Whenever a customer comes in looking to buy their first DSLR, the Rebel XS is the camera I recommend.

The luxury features (such as 1080p HD Movie recording) of the SX1 IS weren't missed by those looking for DSLR picture quality at a low price.  It's hard to fight sensor size and the significantly larger sensor in the Rebel XS just produces better results.  Those looking for more zoom usually buy the XS with a 55-250mm EF-S lens for a reduced price in a kit or upgrade to either the 75-300mm USM or the even better 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 IS lens.  While the 20x zoom on the SX1 IS does give more "reach", most people don't need it and truth be told, "uber-zoom" point and shoots are very hard to shoot hand-held when zoomed out to their longest focal length.  DSLR sales have taken off since and almost every manufacturer has a bare-bones/entry-level DSLR that sells extremely well.  So will the age of the basic DSLR fade as fast as it appeared?  Probably not.  The concept of an entry-level DSLR is still relatively new and has at least five years left. However, it is clear that MILCs will impact the market in some way, just like how the entry-level DSLR sang the funeral song for bulky/expensive point and shoots.

Mirrorless ILCs

[caption id="attachment_2773" align="alignright" width="300" caption="credit: pentaxdslrs.blogspot.com"][/caption]

So what is this MILC I am talking about?  I suggest you check out some of my previous reviews if you want some solid basic information on MILCs.  I reviewed the Olympus E-PL1, Sony NEX-5, and Panasonic GH-2. (Links to reviews) Each one has a distinct style and different target customer, but reading those reviews should give you a pretty good idea of what a MILC is and how they work.  I have also included a little diagram in this post to show the difference between how light passes through an SLR and a MILC.  I don't want to get too technical, so here is my list of simple PROS/CONS of MILCs compared to DSLRs.  Some of the points aren't specific to all MILCs, but when that is the case, I will note it.

Mirrorless ILC PROS

-The lack of a mirror box and pentaprism greatly reduces size. -Panasonic and Olympus share the 4/3rds sensor size and Micro 4/3rds lens mount, which means smaller cameras and smaller lenses that will take up less space and obviously weigh less. -This also means the Micro 4/3rds system is cross compatible.  You can use Panasonic lenses on Olympus PENs and Olympus lenses on Panasonic Lumix G/GF/GH cameras. -Because of the cross compatibility, the final product will also be less expensive in the long run. -The smaller form factor is also less intimidating for beginners and those used to point and shoots. -The smaller Micro 4/3rds system has a "2x crop factor" which allows for incredible telephoto focal length equivalents in smaller lenses. -The image quality blows away any point and shoot camera, even the more expensive ones. -HD Video has become a staple in Mirrorless ILCs, even the most basic ones.

Mirrorless ILC CONS

-Although smaller in size, Mirrorless ILCs are not pocket cameras. -Slower Contrast-Detect Autofocus; SLRs still have an edge here. -Battery life is much shorter than SLRs because the LCD is constantly being used for composing and reviewing images/movies. -Optical Viewfinders in DSLRs are still more pleasing to compose through compared to the EVFs (electronic viewfinders) of MILCs.

-Also some MILCs don't have built in EVFs, they are expensive add-ons -There aren't as many lens options for MILCs (yet). -Mid-level SLRs are built better than MILCs. -MILCs don't exactly have user friendly menu systems.

Final Word

As popular as they are now, cameras like the Canon G12 and Nikon P7000 are feeling the heat from their MILC competitors.  They won't vanish over night and ultimately, the photographer behind the camera is the most important factor.  However, based on the data from Japan MILCs have already started to impact the entry-level DSLR market.  We have to remember that MILCs are in their infancy, only being introduced in 2009 with the Panasonic G1.  In a few years, MILCs will cost less, take better pictures, and be much more consumer friendly.  I've had the pleasure to use and work with a wide variety of MILCs and I can confidently say that it is a good concept.   Still, no one has created the "DSLR Killer" quite yet, but they are getting closer with each attempt.  The entry-level DSLR took a few years to attract the attention of the consumer market, but it happened.  The same thing will happen with MILCs.  Although Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, and Samsung have gotten off to a nice headstart, Canon and Nikon are destined to join the game.  Somewhere in a secret Japanese facility, both companies are probably working on prototype MILCs.  I have no brand loyalty in the camera industry, but competition is a very healthy thing; it forces other companies to put out better products.  Stay tuned as I'll be testing out and reviewing the Panasonic GF-2, one of the latest MILCs to hit the market, next month.

-MZ

In 2009 and 2010, new Mirrorless ILCs (interchangable lens cameras) such as the Olympus PEN, Sony NEX, and Panasonic Lumix G/GF/GH have made a big splash in the photography world.  During 2010, MILCs made for almost 25% of interchangeable lens camera sales in Japan. So what does that mean? Years ago DSLR cameras used to cost thousands of dollars and would literally be obsolete after a year.  They had tiny LCD screens that gave a horrible/inaccurate representations of exposures and they also took forever to write to memory cards.  Battery life was a joke and by today's standards, even older professional models should be considered  boat anchors at best.  Many manufactuerers tried to act on this flaw of DSLRs and make an "affordable" (under $1,000) high-end point and shoot cameras that were refered to as "bridge" cameras. What happened to the market for these high-end "bridge" point and shoots? The introduction of the entry-level DSLR took away the need for a $550+ point and shoot. So with the popularity of MILCs increasing, is a similar situation going to occur again? Although Canon and Nikon reign supreme in the camera world, companies like Panasonic, Sony, and Olympus have clearly made an impact on DSLR sales.  What's the impact? Keep reading for some of my thoughts on this issue that is developing every day. The Story of the Canon SX1 IS and the EOS Rebel XS Imagine a high-end point and shoot camera with a CMOS sensor, 20x zoom, 1080p HD video, 4fps continuous shooting, and the ability to shoot RAW.  It sounds like the serious enthusiasts dream camera!  If you gave me just the specs on this camera, I would guess that it's a current model still in production.  The surprising part is that the SX1 IS was released by Canon in 2008, way ahead of it's time.  It sold decently with a street price of around $550.  However it was clearly a sign of the times when the SX1 IS fell out of favor because even though it sported new groundbreaking features, the price tag was too old fashioned.  As good as a cameras as the SX1 IS was (and still is, if you own one just use it and forget about my snobby article), it was clearly the last hurrah of "ultra-high-end" Point and Shoot cameras. Meet the Canon Rebel XS (1000D), the DSLR that took the market by storm when it was released a few months before the SX1 IS.  It retailed for around $650 at first, but was quickly under $600 and has since settled in around $500-550. There were previous Rebel models such as the original Digital Rebel, Rebel XT, and Rebel XTI, but the Rebel XS, but the xs was the first to sell at such a low price.  It is still a current model and sells out whenever we get them in stock.  That speaks volumes about the quality of this little guy.  In fact I would say that the Rebel XS is the Honda Civic of DSLRs, both cheap and reliable.  It's a 10 Megapixel workhorse that takes very good pictures.  Whenever a customer comes in looking to buy their first DSLR, the Rebel XS is the camera I recommend. The luxury features (such as 1080p HD Movie recording) of the SX1 IS weren't missed by those looking for DSLR picture quality at a low price.  It's hard to fight sensor size and the significantly larger sensor in the Rebel XS just produces better results.  Those looking for more zoom usually buy the xs with a 55-250mm EF-S lens for a reduced price in a kit or upgrade to either the 75-300mm USM or the even better 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 IS lens.  While the 20x zoom on the SX1 IS does give more "reach", most people don't need it and truth be told, "uber-zoom" point and shoots are very hard to shoot hand-held when zoomed out to their longest focal length.  DSLR sales have taken off since and almost every manufactuerer has a bare-bones/entry-level DSLR that sells extremely well.  So will the age of the basic DSLR fade as fast as it appeaered?  Probably not, the concept of an entry-level DSLR is still relatively new and has at least five years left. However it is clear MILCs will impact the market in some way, just how the entry-level DSLR sang the funeral song for bulky/expensive point and shoots. Mirrorless ILCs So what is this Mirrorless camera everyone I am talking about?  I suggest you check out some of my previous reviews if you want some solid basic information on Mirrorless ILCs. I have reviewed the Olympus E-PL1, Sony NEX-5, and Panasonic GH-2.Each one has a distinct style and different target customer, but reading those reviews should give you a pretty good idea of what a Mirrorless ILC is and how they work.  I have also included a little diagram in this post to show the difference between how light passes through an SLR and a Mirrorless ILC.  I don't want to get too technical, so here is my list of simple PROS/CONS of Mirrorless ILCs compared to DSLRs.  Some of the points aren't specific to all Mirorrless ILCs, but when that is the case I will note it. Mirrorless ILC PROS -The lack of a mirror box and pentaprism greatly reduces size -Panasonic and Olympus share the 4/3rds sensor size and micro 4/3rds lens mount, which means smaller cameras and smaller lenses that will take up less space and obviously weigh less. -This means the Micro 4/3rds system is cross compatible.  You can use Panasonic lenses on Olympus PENs and Olympus lenses on Panasonic Lumix G/GF/GH cameras. -This usually means the final product will also be less expensive in the long run -The smaller form factor is also less intimidating for beginners and those used to point and shoots -The smaller Micro 4/3rds system has a "2x crop factor" which allows for incredible telephoto focal length equivilents in smaller lenses. -Image quality blows away any point and shoot camera, even the more expensive ones -HD Video has become a staple in Mirrorless ILCs, even the most basic ones. Mirrorless ILC CONS -Although smaller in size, Mirrorless ILCs are not pocket cameras -Slower Contrast-Detect Autofocus, SLRs still have an edge here -Battery life is much shorter than SLRs because the LCD is constantly being used for composing and reviewing images/movies -Optical Viewfinders in DSLRs are still more pleasing to compose through compared to the EVFs (electronic viewfinders) of MILCs -There aren't as many lens options for MILCs (yet) -Mid-Level SLRs are built better than MILCs -MILCs don't exactly have user friendly menu systems Final Word As popular as they are now, cameras like the Canon G12 and Nikon P7000 are feeling the heat from their mirrorless competitors.  They won't vanish over night and ultimately the photographer behind the camera is the most important factor. However it won't be long before MILCs start to impact the high-end point and shoot AND entry-level DSLR markets.  We have to remember that MILCs are in their infancy, only being introduced in 2009 with the Panasonic G1.  In a few years MILCs will cost less, take better pictures, and be much more consumer friendly.  I've had the pleasure to use and work with a wide variety of Mirrorless ILCs and I can confidently say that it is a good concept, but no one has quite yet created the "DSLR (or G12/P7000) Killer" but they are getting closer with each attempt.  The entry-level DSLR took a few years to attract the attention of the consumer market, but it happened.  The same thing will happen with MILCs. Although Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, and Samsung have gotten off to a nice headstart, Canon and Nikon are destined to join the game.  Somewhere in a secret Japanese facility both companies are probably working on prototype MILCs.  I have no brand loyalty in the camera indsutry, but competition is a very healthy thing, it forces other companies to put out better products.  I have a feeling we're on the cusp of

Comments

Unique Service

Fairfield

123 US Hwy 46 (West)
Fairfield, NJ, USA 07004
(973) 377-2007

Philadelphia

28 South 2nd Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106
(215) 608-2222

© 2024 Unique Photo All Rights Reserved.

Fairfield

123 US Hwy 46 (West)
Fairfield, NJ, USA 07004
(973) 377-2007

Philadelphia

28 South 2nd Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106
(215) 608-2222

© 2024 Unique Photo All Rights Reserved.