The End of the Photo Compact: A View from the Age of “Computational Photography”

In continuation of the note about Sony r1 I decided to write a broader review. About the favorite class of photographic equipment, intended specifically for “advanced” “consumers” – amateur photographers. Especially since there is a feeling that it is time.

Why is it time? Because the development of this technology has practically stopped. As well as cameras with non-removable optics in general. At the same time, the size of the market for cameras with removable optics has decreased. If 10 years ago, being at an event, you could see a crowd of people with measures, then in the last few years, most visitors prefer to shoot with a smartphone.

Let's see when the last cameras with non-removable optics were introduced:

Sony RX100 VII -2019

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10M4- 2017

Canon g 1/3/5/7/9 [mark 2-3] -17-19 year

Panasonic DC-LX100 II – 2018, LX-15-2016

Panasonic FZ2000 – 2016

Ricoh GR III, IIIx – 19 years

It can be assumed that the era of compacts is almost over. Which is not only a reason to complain, but also a reason to get out of the situation of permanent search for new, functional and giving a better picture cameras. You accept as a fact – the video will be worse than on the latest iPhone (or vivo x100 ultra). Approximately as this and the fan of shooting on film with its numerous limitations accept – starting with the fact that color film is already made with a rigidly “sewn” white balance / But people shoot. With prosumers (advanced compacts) – similarly. You can choose a camera for yourself from interaction with which you will get pleasure. Moreover, in terms of ergonomics of fitting it is often at the level of advanced SLRs. And in quality, especially early models – too. In the era when a camera was sold for under 2 thousand dollars (in current prices) they did not save on materials. You take it in your hand – you have a thing. At the same time, the prices for retro cameras are quite nice – from a couple of thousand rubles. People sell unnecessary and lying on the shelves. And for you it is a new toy

From film to “semi-digital”, and from there to computational photography

It is obvious and banal to write that cameras have been replaced by smartphones.

There were objective reasons for this:

1. the product is more mass produced, and therefore, all other things being equal, cheaper to produce. And the further you go, the more pronounced this is.

2. The quality of cameras on smartphones has increased significantly. And due to technology. And due to the size of the matrix – on flagships it is already 1”. And the lenses are already fast – up to 1/1.4/ Moreover, these matrices give odds not only to the lion's share of compacts, but also to ancient old crop SLR cameras, which were used by professionals (weddings, for example).

3. Digital revolution. Formally, “Digital” cameras have almost completely replaced film quite a long time ago. But these cameras were conditionally digital for a long time. Film was replaced by a semiconductor matrix. But otherwise the design of the cameras has not changed so radically – a mirror (if a SLR), autofocus sensors, a mechanical shutter. For medium format cameras, even digital backs were created – you can shoot on film, or digital. The camera's task is to focus, take a signal from the matrix, run it through the ADC and save it in raw. or more or less digestible jpeg. And then manual “development” and processing on a PC. With modern smartphones – differently. You can take a dozen frames in a split second and compare the signal from different frames to reduce noise. Or HDR. Or constantly shoot in RAM and at the press of a button dump the memory to disk, and not start focusing (shutter lag is a long-standing problem of compacts) Or run the input signal through the matrix, run it through filters and neural networks. If earlier the quality of the picture depended on the lens and matrix, now, often on the processor and sometimes a special chip, as well as algorithms .. The picture in full resolution in raw, however, may come out so-so, but the jpg is “delicious”. If it’s really sad, the camera will finish drawing the picture. The extreme case is the scandal with drawing the moon by Samsung flagships. The light dump that reached the matrix and was read is no longer a picture, but the input data for obtaining it.
Or take the settings – compacts offered, at one time the green zone mode – portrait, sports .. the further, the more modes there were – I observed up to 20 (including “pets”). There are not that many parameters in a traditional photo – shutter speed, aperture, exposure metering method, and focusing. But the transition to digital made it possible not to choose, relying on the camera's image recognition. And additionally get adequate processing inside the device. Let's say, smoothing out defects may be relevant on a girl's skin, a brutal bearded man with such “glamorous” processing will look strange, the “glowing skin” effect on a landscape will spoil the whole picture, but color correction may be relevant there, and, conditionally, high brightness of autumn foliage can make a frame better, then the same effect applied to a person's face will spoil it. So far, the processing of smartphones is often clumsy, and often excessively so. But obviously, development is going in this direction.

Well, traditional cameras have changed quite little. For comparison – film canon eos 5

Over the past 15 years, camera manufacturers have removed mirrors and made cameras more compact. But, alas, they have not created anything groundbreaking. The breakthrough happened in other places – primarily smartphones. But not only them. Drone manufacturer DJI removed its camera from the drone and gave the buyer a convenient handle with a stabilizer. And received millions of satisfied video bloggers – this is what they needed. And the customers' money went to it and not to Canon and Nikon

Is it time to write off all your photographic equipment and throw it away?

Not really

1. And in smartphones and cameras, so far, it is used traditional optics. The lens on the 2024 camera is not much different from the one on your grandfather's lens. And what does this mean? That you have to pay for the characteristics not only with the price, but also with the size. And manufacturers, to please the consumer, strive to make the smartphone thin. And optics require space. Especially if the sensor size is not so small. We stopped at the option with protruding cameras, but it will not be possible to increase the matrix size any further.

The solution may come at some point – developments in lenses with controlled optical characteristics are already underway.

The second problem is the lack of a zoom lens. In the era of our parents (and some grandparents), when they shot with a Zenit/FED, lenses with a fixed focal length dominated. By the 90s, manufacturers had learned to calculate and make zooms well. And a standard lens, like 28-75/2.8, became typical. For shooting in life (getting sober, reporting, children), this was enough. Well, and those who did not have enough – took superzooms, like 28-420. But because of the size of smartphones, we were returned to the era of fixed lenses. True, the equivalent focal length of the main camera was no longer 50 mm (which was considered “normal”, close to the perception of the eye, as for a film, and then a digital camera), but 24-28 mm. Which, according to the old “canon”, was an ultra-wide-angle lens. With which you can shoot a landscape. But not an individual portrait – the perspective is distorted too much, for portraits we used “portraits” with FR- 80-135. The reason is the change in focal lengths of physics. Wide-angle lens, it is easier to make thinner without additional tricks. For now we have found a temporary solution – a set of matrices with lenses

Ergonomics. The camera has a comfortable grip. The phone does not. Numerous physical elements of reduction – two rings on the lens, wheels, buttons, selectors. Which makes shooting more convenient, control of parameters prompt. And, personally, it gives me pleasure. To shoot in bright light, when the screen goes blind and glares – the viewfinder will help, to shoot from a non-standard angle – a rotating screen. Smartphones have nothing like this. Their ergonomics are terrible, since its main purpose is not photography, we have a flat bar with rounded edges, which is simply inconvenient for use as a camera.
Ergonomics are important to me. It's not just “it's nice to work with the device” and “it's quick and efficient to reconfigure”, but also efficiency – you shoot more often with the camera you like and get more good shots

Imperfection of algorithms. Many smartphones edit the picture too much. At the same time, the algorithms are not perfect. And the almost dark gray at night turns out to be bright blue, and the portrait algorithm made for glamorous divas turns the portrait of a bearded brutal man into such a diva – it looks comical. After some time, I think they will learn and will process different objects very differently, and let the owner choose what he wants. But, for now, many cameras have problems with this.

Some interesting “retro” cameras

I don't pretend to have a complete review. Here are the cameras that I had or that interested me.

Epson R-D1

digital rangefinder. And at the same time the first mirrorless camera. Lenses fit with Leica bayonet. Model of 2004. Still not cheap. Not a compact, but speaking of interesting old cameras, it is worth mentioning. It was produced for 10 years

Panasonic Lumix LC1

2005. 2/3 matrix. Non-removable lens, with Leica nameplate. They are asking quite a bit for it now. RThe picture quality is not impressive – but it is beautiful.

Olympus Camedia E-20P

2001. A DSLR with pentopism, instead of a rising mirror. With an excellent lens, but a small matrix 2/3. A camera from the golden era of fittings. If DSLRs assumed, in that era, that the kit lens 18-55, it was a temporary cheap plug, to replace which the photographer would buy something decent and according to his needs, then due to the low optics on such cameras they tried to make it high-quality. You can buy it on Avito for 3 thousand. The only thing is that it is slow. And heavy. If you want passers-by to take you for a pro – a good option

From the same era, the answer from Kenon

Sapop PowerShot Pro1. 2004. Canon version. Same 2/3 metric

Olympus C-8080, 5x opt. zoom 28 – 140 mm equiv. F 2.4 – 3.5.2004. The characteristics, as you can see, are similar, even the matrices of different manufacturers were often the same

Sony Cyber-shot F828. An original design, when the mattress is built into the lens, and it is not the tap that rotates, but the entire back of the camera. In the early era of digital photography, there were no established standards

The next iteration of development is the Sony R1, but I won't repeat myself here. I still consider it the best old camera with non-removable optics.

Minola a1/a2. Still the same CCD matrix, 2/3. Optics equiv. 28-200 mm f/2.8-f/3.5-f/11.0. 2004 year see the round metal connector on the right? This is a studio light synchronizer. Cameras from this section, which shows. That it is not designed for housewives. They were filmed for them and for money. Of the features, I want to note the relatively compact size, the viewfinder that moves up and a decent speed of continuous shooting in RAW (which is rare in that era). Relatively compact. If you want an interesting experience and are ready to put up with the limitations of cameras from that era, you should take a closer look at the cameras from this section. Newer cameras were often oriented towards a less demanding segment. And the lens is good – it produces a flexible picture, with a “film” taste

For those who love something more authentic

And the cameras are newer (but on average lower class).

panasonic fz 50. Hyperzoom. 2005. Matrix 1/1.8 top control. Matrix, allowing to shoot only, but low ISO. Exceptionally sharp lens. And. symbolic price. Used it having a DSLR, on it shot more often.

fudjifim s100fs (2008), s200exr, s1 (the latest version of the camera series) The first models can be bought on Avito for 3-5 thousand. Which is reasonable. For s1, they ask for >10, which is inadequate. The cameras had better matrices than Panasonic, but the lens, in my opinion, was inferior. I myself shot for quite a long time on a hyperzoom, but came to the conclusion that I rarely need a focal length >135.

fudjifim- x10/20/30. Came out in 12-15 years. On the 10th model there was a known problem with white circles on light sources. Pocket camera with retro design. Matrix 2/3. The other cameras have a section, a little less 1/1.6-1.8

Samsung ex1, ex2 – are well made and have a nice AMOLED screen, but mediocre, ill-conceived ergonomics. Samsung's attempt to enter the photo equipment market – at the time of release they also had quite nice prices.

Canon g1-g15. Quite large cameras with good ergonomics and good lenses.

The line had an analogue Nikon P series. I owned a p7100, but its ergonomics, in my opinion, were significantly worse.

Keon also had an s series, about s110. Compact. The matrix is ​​also 1/1.8, but there are far fewer controls, a worse grip and a less interesting lens. But it fits in a shirt pocket

Olympus XZ-1 – form factor, similar to Canon's s series – small, thin… But extremely pleasant color rendering.

panasonic lx1-lx7 – zoom lenses, good ergonomics, retro style

The picture quality of cameras of the same years of production is +/- comparable. But you shouldn't expect high picture quality, especially in difficult conditions. And the speed often suffers – from pressing the shutter button to the picture, a noticeable time can pass. Back then, this was a problem, but only sometimes (reportage), and now even taking pictures of people posing is not always easy, because any girl with Instagram knows that her iPhone focuses in a split second.

Compacts with a large matrix and a fixed lens

High quality picture, with compact dimensions. Twins triplets from different manufacturers:

Nikon Coolpix A, Ricoh GR series, Fujifilm X70

High-quality picture, but low versatility. The complete opposite of hyperzooms. The most interesting of them is Ricoh GR. It also has a IIIx version with a 40 mm focal length. Ricoh does not make very mass-market cameras, but they are ideal for an advanced street photographer. For example, you can set the focus to hyperfocal when turned on, for the required distance. Such cameras are worth taking only if you are sure that this is what you need. Many street photographers love

There were also fixes from Sigma with their three-layer matrix Foveron. For an amateur because of the specifics. And also compacts from Laika – but there is a good overpayment for the brand.

Larger options with fixed lenses

The Fujifilm x100 series is a trendsetter in retro photography, with a hybrid optical-digital viewfinder. The matrix is ​​a crop SLR form factor. But the dimensions are not so compact – it will not fit in a shirt pocket, and in a jacket pocket. You can wear it if you don't mind.

4. And Sony rx1 is a rare representative of the FF compact class (the only known competitor is from Laika). Great picture. But, not at all compact dimensions. You can't put it in your pocket. The price is about 60-70 thousand for a camera of 2013 and mediocre repairability (as service engineers say), and unhurried autofocus. The lens, 2/35 with a Zeiss nameplate, gives a beautiful picture. There was a second version of Sony rx1 mark 2 of 2016, but its price is still, even on Avito, from 150 thousand. And the model is already 8 years old. On the one hand, the best camera in terms of picture from this article.

Relatively fresh zooms.

1. Panasonux lx100, lx100 mark 2. Crop 2. Retro design, and the lens. But the lx200 is expensive, and the lx100 did not have the most advanced matrix, even at the time of release, in addition, the retractable lens “likes” to suck in dust that could settle on the matrix or optics. At the same time, cleaning the matrix, in a good way, requires complete disassembly of the camera. Of the inconveniences – the zoom drive and especially the autofocus are electronic. The style is visually retro, but by feel – not retro at all. In addition, reporting, when you want to quickly switch between a general plan and a portrait position is less convenient

2. Compacts with an inch sensor.
There is a series from Sony – Sony RX100

There is one camera from Panasonic Lx10/15

There are 4 rulers of Canon

Canon g 1x – 1.5 inch matrix. But with lower aperture optics and dimensions that are closer to mirrorless cameras

Canon g 5x compacts with viewfinder

Canon g 7x – compacts without a viewfinder, but with a swivel display and acceptable ergonomics
Canon g 9x – the smallest. But no viewfinder like 5x, no rotating like 5x or flipping like 7x screen. And even the lens is inferior in sharpness to 5 and 7x. Sharpness only in the center, and the periphery is sacrificed for compactness.

I myself have been shooting for several years on 7x, shooting tens of times more than on a DSLR. Now I have acquired a Sony RX100

3 Hyperzooms

Canon g 3x. A sort of g5x with a huge lens attached

Panasonic TZ is a good option if you want to combine compact size and an inch sensor. Camera for a lazy vacationer

Panasonic FZ1000/FZ2000. Quite large cameras, 1-inch matrix and wide lens. Continuation of the fz50 tradition

Cyber-shot DSC-RX10. The latest version of M4 – Expensive. But high quality. The most functional camera with an inch matrix. Which can even be used for amateur sports shooting.

Instead of a conclusion

There are many models. It will not be possible to reduce them to a single rating. It depends on what you like and what your priorities are.

If you select by:

photo quality -sony rx1

In the retro category, my leader is the Sony R1. It is also the leader in price/quality

If you want a universal hyperzoom cheap – fudjifilm s200

And if it is functional and expensive – Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10M4 is the most versatile camera of modern ones

In terms of price/quality on the secondary market, you need to monitor Avito. They can be very different. For the last few years, I've been shooting with my first Canon G7X as a pocket camera – an inch matrix, acceptable speed, and dimensions that allow you to carry it in your pocket. But for 5 years, it cost 12 thousand on Avito. And now they're asking 40 for it. You can take almost any retro camera to play with – these were good, high-end cameras. On Avito, you can now find Sony, Minolta, and 20 Olympus for 2-3 thousand. Sometimes – ideally. Beautiful and interesting toys. With high-aperture optics. And first-class controls. Although with a lower resolution and worse operating speed than the average smartphone.