Mirrorless Camera News and Commentary

News and commentary about the mirrorless camera world (latest on top). Hover or tap on News/Views in the menu bar above to see the full list of recent articles as well as folders containing all older ones dating back to 2011.

The War Over Nothing

It’s been interesting to watch the Internet Intensity Engine fire up with the Blackmagic Design 4K Pocket Cinema Camera (4KPCC). Starting the day the 4KPCC was announced, threads all over the Internet began exploding with “Panasonic’s done” messages.

Apparently the 4KPCC is going to cause everyone to stop buying Panasonic GH5 cameras because this new 4K camera is half the price.

Nonsense.

Realistically, these two cameras are different in so many ways that it’s difficult to enumerate them all. Moreover, Blackmagic Design is a bit more focused on film-like looks, while Panasonic is a bit more focused on video-like looks. That alone is enough to distinguish the two.

Then there’s the smaller swivel LCD on the GH5 versus the big fixed LCD on the 4KPCC, the autofocus abilities (or inabilities), the IS differences, and more, more, more.

To me, I’m likely to try using a 4KPCC on a fixed support as a B camera. I’m more likely to move around with the GH5, and more likely to use it as a prime camera. It’ll be interesting to see if I can cut between them and grade them well enough that they look the same. If so, I’d be very happy owning both.

The really funny aspect to this is that Panasonic already created a firestorm with the GH5s: which one do you buy, GH5 or GH5s? Again, there are differences, and they’re important.

These nonsensical X is better than Y posts just gets us back to the “do you really know what you’re doing and what you need” thought. Almost none of those posts declaring a “winner” seem to have much analysis to them on the need side. It’s all emotional fandom.

Look, I’m happy I have another video camera choice that uses my m4/3 lenses without a crop. I can see a couple of 4KPCCs as secondary cameras in my studio, but probably not as main cameras (basic autofocus need, for one). Ditto in the field.

But I’m also not going to form any real opinion on this until I’ve had the opportunity to test them. I had real trouble grading the original PCC footage into my timelines with my main cameras. And low light performance wasn’t particularly good, either.

So I’m just sitting back and enjoying the fan-flamed filmmaker fora follies as pure entertainment. I suggest you do, too.

The Mirrorless Prisoners' Dilemma

Game play has all kinds of interesting applications to real life. It's one reason why I love to play games, especially those that involve strategy over just straight out skill: it makes me think about and test strategies.

One reader reminded me (thank you) after my Attachment Rate article that Canon and Nikon are in a strange form of prisoners' dilemma. The original version of that game is simple: if you and your cohort rat each other out to the cops you both serve 2 years in prison; if you both remain silent, you both serve 1 year in prison; if one of you turns in the other but the other remains silent, the silent one gets 3 years in prison and the other remains free.

You only truly win if you rat out your associate and they stay quiet. (There are plenty of other variations of this game, and as you'll see, our mirrorless version is more complicated.)

So how's that apply to Canon and Nikon and their likely full frame mirrorless entries? Both companies have to make the same choice (new mount or existing mount), and the outcome will be decided based upon what they pick. For example:

  • Canon and Nikon both pick existing mount: Nothing really changes if the cameras are relatively equal (my assumption throughout this is that a Canon C7 is basically equivalent to a Nikon D7 is basically equivalent to a Sony A7III). Relative ILC market shares stay the same as the DSLR duopoly slide over to mirrorless. Some might say Nikon "loses" in this scenario, as they wouldn't make inroads against Canon, which is clearly something they'd like to do. But it's not really a loss. It's the status quo maintained between those two if they both move in the same fairly short time period. If there's a loser in that scenario, it would be Sony, because a user choosing Sony from scratch basically requires buying all new lens sets, while the huge base of Canikon DSLR owners shifting to mirrorless won't have to. Resultprediction: Canon, Nikon, and Sony in that order of ILC market share.
  • Canon and Nikon both pick new mount: Nothing probably changes in the Canon/Nikon market share relationship, but this empowers Sony, who is already there with a large line of lenses that Canikon couldn't duplicate day one. Result prediction: Sony, Canon, then Nikon.
  • Canon picks existing mount, Nikon picks new mount: This is a nightmare scenario for Nikon. Canon users can pick and choose between mirrorless and DSLR and use their lenses on both. Nikon users that want to try mirrorless have to start a new lens collection or use awkward adapters. And again, Sony is already there with a full set of lenses, so it's Nikon that's a clear loser in this scenario. Result prediction: Canon, Sony, then Nikon.
  • Canon picks new mount, Nikon picks existing mount: This is a problem for Canon, as it means that they have to count on adapters to appease their current user base. Result prediction: Nikon, Sony and Canon, with those latter two probably duking it out for second.

Of course, this is an advanced and complicated Prisoners' Dilemma: Canon and Nikon could both choose to opt for both courses: they could make both an existing mount and a new mount mirrorless system! I'm not even sure how to score that scenario, as the number of combinations and permutations rise considerably, and it's unlikely that they'd do so with equal cameras.

But one thing is pretty clear from the above: Nikon has to choose to use the existing F-mount for full frame or they strongly risk losing the number two ILC market share. Canon has slightly more flexibility, both due to their larger established base, but also because their EF lenses have demonstrably worked well on adapters; the same isn't true of F-mount Nikkors because of all the small variations that are in the legacy base coupled with things like where the connectors are.

Of course, the notion of creating a new mount still has its desires: it means you can take everything you learned that you did wrong in the past and fix it once and for all with the proper dimensions and attributes in the new mount. Ah, the Sirens call of tech: start from scratch and all will be well in the end. Many a shipwreck has occurred listening to that call. Of course, other shipwrecks have occurred by not listening to it (Kodak being a prime example).

Teams of folk at both Canon and Nikon are certainly aware of the above. They've already spent long days analyzing how the choices may or may not pay off for them. If for some reason they've decided to pick a suboptimal choice in the basic prisoners' dilemma problem they face, that also means that there are teams already dedicated to trying to spackle over that problem with marketing and technology messaging.

So hang on to your horses, mirrorless world. We're about to see the big rodeo players trying to ride the bull.

Attachment Rate

dpreview's recent interview with Fujifilm executives literally started with a comment that should be paid attention to: "Even more impressive is the lens attachment rate, as we’ve sold so many lenses as well."

What is a lens attachment rate, and why is it important?

Basically, attachment rate is the number of lenses sold versus bodies. If you sold only one lens per body, then the attachment rate would be 1. Moreover, there'd be no reason why that camera should be an interchangeable lens camera ;~).

Historically, the overall attachment rate has been around 1.65 lenses per body sold, with a low of 1.5 and a high of 1.68 over the past 12 years. Here's the pertinent CIPA chart:

bythom cipa attachment

But this number is extremely deceptive. One of the things I discovered in surveying tens of thousands of enthusiast digital camera users is that they upgrade bodies regularly. So consider someone who started with a Nikon D70, then upgraded to a D90, a D7100, and recently to a D7500 (that's an every-other generation upgrade). If they followed the attachment rate, they'd now have 6.4 lenses for their camera on average. What my surveys showed is that this isn't quite right. The on-going updater actually has an average of 8-10 lenses, which would imply an attachment rate of something closer to 2.

At the other end of the extreme, the more casual shooters who just think they need an ILC and then buy a superzoom to use with it don't tend to buy another lens. The superzoom stays stuck on the camera, and they upgrade far less often. I don't have as good information about this group as the regular upgraders, obviously since my sites tend to appeal to someone who is more enthusiast and trying to keep up with their equipment, not the casual consumer. But the attachment rate I measured for this group is something between 1.1 and 1.2.

Now consider the person that buys into a new mount, which happens a lot with mirrorless. Yes, there's the "adapter route" that many think they're going to take, but I don't see many actually following that usage for long. Instead, what I measure is higher attachment rates. So Fujifilm shouldn't be surprised that they've seen high attachment rates for their new medium format mirrorless camera. The only person that's going to buy that is a serious enthusiast or a pro, and they not only have a higher attachment rate to start with, but they're starting from scratch when they buy a body.

Now why does all this make a difference in mirrorless?

Olympus and Panasonic made a mount switch in 2009 (to m4/3). They filled out a full lineup of lenses (and keep doing so), but I'll bet that they see higher initial attachment rates among switchers (people moving to their mount) than they now do among updaters (people upgrading bodies every couple of generations). Sony made sort of a double switch (E in 2010, FE in 2013). With E they took a mostly consumer approach, mimicking what Canikon did (wrong) with EF-S and DX, and I'll bet that they saw a very low attachment rate, which is probably one reason why we haven't seen a lot of E-only lenses lately. With FE, I'm pretty sure that Sony has a very high attachment rate, because the A7/A9 crowd is a more sophisticated enthusiast/pro and needs new lenses.

So what about Canon and Nikon?

As far as I'm concerned, Canon has made the same mistake with EF-M as Sony did with E. Target low and you get low results.

Full frame, on the other hand, is going to be interesting. If Canon really does use the EF mount for their full frame as my sources say will happen, that changes the dynamic entirely. Canon already has an installed base of over 100m EF lenses. Canon won't get an attachment rate bump if they use the same mount.

The same is true for Nikon, as well. Their crop sensor mirrorless prototyping has been all around a new mount (mimicking EF-M). But their full frame prototyping has been both new mount (Sony choice) and old mount (Canon apparent choice).

This has to be an agonizing decision for Canikon. All those legacy lenses in closets and in use are their strength, and one reason why they dominate DSLR sales (and overall ILC, as well). Keep the mount and they enable their entire user base to pick mirrorless or DSLR without much or any of a lens penalty. But their attachment rates will be low. The number of lenses they're selling now will be about the number of lenses they're selling later, so you won't see either of them proclaiming, as did Fujifilm, to be surprised by lens sales.

On the other hand, a new full frame mirrorless mount from Canikon would mean a higher attachment rate and more new lens sales. But it would also mean that they would be five years behind Sony in terms of lens choice and supply, which means they'd still be enabling people to switch.

So which will it be? We'll know before the end of the year, I'm pretty sure. If it had been up to me to make the decision, I would have voted to stick with the current mount and just deal with the snout that the empty mirror box would leave behind, and deal with the attachment rate problem a different way (e.g. marketing).

As you might have noticed, the mirrorless cameras are getting bigger. Another quote from that Fujifilm interview at dpreview: "One purpose of us doing the X-H1 is that some customers actually requested a bigger grip and better handling, especially together with bigger lenses like the 100-400mm." Yep. When you put two pound lenses out front, you're going to need a grab handle, not a little soap bar design camera body.

That bodes well for keeping the lens mount in the Canikon full frame mirrorless world. No way do I want to put my 400mm f/2.8 on an adapter on a small body.

150 Lenses!

I was doing some clean-up and additions to the Other Lens Makers section of the Lens Database on this site. Would you believe we're now up to 150 lenses for mirrorless cameras that aren't made by the camera makers? And that's not counting all the mount variations; many of these lenses are available in multiple mounts.

In looking over the details, I found the following to be true: there really are only four sources of lenses:

  • SE Asia — quite a few of the options are coming from cloners in SE Asia, particularly Taiwan and China (including Hong Kong as the output point).
  • Korea — the Samyang plant spawns a lot of sub-label variations, but Samyang itself has quite a few lenses.
  • Japan — no surprise there, as we've long had optical giants in Japan.
  • Germany — while many of the German designers subcontract the manufacturing (mostly through Japan), Zeiss alone is responsible for quite a few X-mount and FE-mount lenses.

Give it a whirl: take a walk through the third-party maker lens pages on this site: Lens Database/Other Lens Makers. You might be surprised at what you find. Given that we're less than 10 years into the mirrorless era, there's a ton of activity happening that you might not see by walking into your local dealer.


The Post CP+ Wrap-up

I'm doing things differently this year. Rather than write about products that were announced at or just before the CP+ individually, I'm going to work mount by mount (Canon EOS M, Fujifilm X, m4/3, Sony E/FE, etc.).That's the way most users think about their systems, and it's the best way to learn about which systems are progressing quickly and which are not.

What products go into this report? Any product launched between the start of the year and the end of CP+, basically. Why? Because this is traditionally one of the most active periods during which the Japanese camera companies update products (the other being late summer/early fall, with another blip in spring).

For DSLRs, check out the related article on dslrbodies.com

Canon
Here's a quote from Nikkei kicking off the CP+ coverage that should get people's attention: "Canon will shift more of its focus to mirrorless cameras, a change in strategy spurred by sharp growth in the market." In the Japanese market, for instance, Nikkei quoted mirrorless growing by 29.2% last year with DSLRs falling by 10.1%.

Worldwide, the trailing year numbers show mirrorless' growing strength, too: 4m mirrorless units shipped versus 7.5m DSLRs. Given that Canon and Nikon together own more than 95% of the DSLR market, this shift by Canon is definitely worth paying attention to.

The just announced EOS M50* is Canon's hope to take leadership in the Japan market, it seems. It's aggressively priced, small enough to be attractive in that market, and appears to be very carefully cost-controlled by Canon, too. I'll bet there's room for significant discounting if Canon needs to use that to get the dominant market share they seek.

In terms of "current" bodies, that means that the EOS M lineup is four cameras now (M5, M6, M50, M100). All targeted in the consumer DSLR price range.

What is missing, though, are lenses. Yeah, I know the argument: consumers only buy and need one super lens. I think that's a false argument, and has been for well over a decade. The way you shore up a systemis through the things that extend the base abilities of the camera, otherwise people don't need a system camera.

Canon didn't announce any new EOS M lenses in this period, which I think diminishes their push. Even one new lens would have been a message of the kind of strength that Canon really needs to show.

Thing is, I'm told by some in the distribution realm that there are three SKUs reserved for new EOS M lenses this year. That's a start, I suppose. But remember that Canon is going up against full lens lineups in crop sensor mirrorless now, something they haven't experienced before (being at the short end of the supply stick, that is). This allows competitors, particularly Fujifilm, to position Canon solely as a low-end and restricted consumer purchase.

Canon needs to add EOS M lenses, stat.

The third parties aren't exactly helping Canon. The only announcements I can find of EOS M lenses in this period are theLaowa 9mm f/2.8 and 25mm f/2.5 5x Macro manual focus lenses, and those are with the converter. While those will help fill in some gaps Canon isn't addressing, they're small gaps, and being manual focus isn't good.

Fujifilm
Probably the most active of the mirrorless camera companies is the ever-expanding Fujifilm. Expanding to what, I don't know. We'll come back to that in a minute.

In terms of cameras, Fujifilm launched three in our study period, which is more than any of the other mirrorless mount providers. Of course, one of those—the X-A20—is a regional-only option, so it's really only two new bodies for most of us.

The X-A5* is already in folk's hands (including mine) and represents Fujifilm's entry position in mirrorless. Curiously, Fujifilm's entry position is the least Fujifilm of the bunch. My sources say that this body is a Fujifilm set of modifications to an OEM design. And that shows.

Focus is the old disappointing and contrast-detect devil that befuddled early mirrorless. The sensor isn't an X-Trans, but a straight off the shelf Sony Bayer. The body is less Fujifilm retro than usual, and the unmarked exposure compensation dial and small plastic vertical control dial are not at all mainstream Fujifilm design standard that I can see.

But it's a competent camera capable of nice image quality at entry DSLR pricing.

At the other end, we have the X-H1. I'm still scratching my head about this one. As we've seen with other mirrorless entrants, camera sizing is growing, almost as fast as my waist line did in my 50's. But not by enough to really distinguish it from the X-T2, in my book.

There's a lot in Fujifilm's line now: X-A5, X-E3, X-T20, X-T2, X-H1, X-Pro2 (and don't forget medium format). But I can't quite make out how that lineup fits together. What am I supposed to buy and why? In particular, the X-E3 and X-T20 are one decision problem, while the X-T2 and X-H1 are now another. The X-Pro idea, which kicked off Fujifilm's retro/modern merge, seems like a bit of an orphan.

I understand filling out product lineups. But anyone that reads my work knows I'm also a strong believer in product line rationalization.Apple's pretty good—but not perfect—at this. The camera companies all tend to be fairly poor at it. They get into one of two patterns: (1) de-contenting to price differentiate (e.g. Canon/Nikon DSLR strategy); or (2) completely different bases that cause customer confusion. It's #2 that I believe Fujifilm is now caught up in.

Still, the X-H1 has the one feature that everyone asked for (IBIS) and reaches more easily into the video realm than the other X's. Thus, it won't be ignored by the Triple F crowd (FujiFilmFans).

Between the X-A5 and X-H1, Fujifilm can now walk into any distributor or dealership and claim to be a "full product line." That's probably the most important thing for them at the moment. But still, I really hope that they do a bit more rationalization of the models. Long term, I suspect that no camera company is going to be able to keep more than a few models in their lineup. So it's important to start putting the stakes in the ground now.

In terms of lenses, Fujifilm went low, with an entry 15-45mm f/3.5-5.6*powerzoom lens that's much more suited to the X-A5 than the X-H1, even though the power zooming part is designed for the video side of things (e.g. X-H1). Fujifilm also went high, introducing the two MKX cine lenses (18-55mm t/2.9 and 50-135mm t/2.9). The latter I understand, the first isn't wide enough.

The Laowa 9mm f/2.8 and 25mm f/2.5 5x Macro lenses also got added to the X mount choices. As I've noted before, Fujifilm has arguably the best APS-C lens lineup available, particularly when you start adding in some of the third-party lenses.

Leica

This is a Photokina year. I really would expect Leica to be most active around their home turf show, not the away game that CP+ provides. Thus, we really only got a few customized bodies, plus the 75mm f/2 and 90mm f/2 Summicron SL lenses.

We'll see much more from Leica later in the year, I expect.

Nikon CX
Hear the crickets? I do. Nearly everyone else does, too.

Nikon last made a mirrorless sound back in April 2015 (J5 introduction). Since then, all quiet on the Eastern front. In fact, the reclamation team has come in and started emptying the manufacturing plant while the accounting team figures out how many zeroes they need to add to the write-down number.

I've written many times about the mistakes Nikon made with the Nikon 1 line. No need to repeat myself. And the good news, if there is any, is that Nikon doesn't appear to be going to repeat themselves. Any new mirrorless product from Nikon will likely not be in the Nikon 1 lineup, it will be something new.

Of course, the original plan was for that "something new" to have appeared by now. First it was a late 2017 launch, then an early 2018 launch, but instead we just hear crickets.

What's that, the crickets are chirping faster? Are things warming up?

m4/3: Olympus and Panasonic
The m4/3 twins were active early this year, though not as active as you'd expect from a pair celebrating their 10th birthday.

On the Olympus side we got the mailed-in E-PL9. Olympus took what they had in the firmware pile and added it into the E-PLate. The E-Plate is selling for just US$550 these days, while the replacement will limp into the market trying to catch a few more fish at the higher "list price."

I had to read the press release quite a few times to figure out if there was anything worthwhile that changed in the new model. Bleach Bypass Art Filter anyone? Okay, sure, it has a built-in flash now, and the grip design is different. Yes, there's 4K video and Bluetooth and a sweep Panorama feature, too. But realistically, not much of significance changed. The big change for a still shooter would be the inclusion of the flash.

Olympus also made some firmware updates to the E-M1 models, the E-M5II, and the Pen-F. The most significant of those was to the E-M1 Mark II, which got a fair amount of tweaking on stability and performance. But overall, these weren't significant feature additional updates (unless you call a new art filter —yep, Bleach Bypass again—significant).

Panasonic, meanwhile, did a bit more on the body side.

First, we got the surprising GH5s. That's basically a GH5 with a different sensor, one tuned for video low-light performance. The sensor-based IS had to go, which has the video crowd all bummed, but you can't dispute the low-light performance, which is clearly state-of-the-art for a crop sensor camera.

Meanwhile, the GX9 is basically a sensor update to the previous model (20mp up from 16mp). The rear LCD gets a minor upgrade, and a few other subtle things turn up (faster fps, for instance). But again, not a huge iteration change. Which I guess is where we're at with m4/3: 10 years in and the major stuff has all been done, it's just iteration city for most of the line at this point.

The only real news on the lens front comes from Panasonic: the Panasonic Leica 50-200mm f/2.8-4, which looks to add another really nice telephoto option to the already well-filled m4/3 lens lineup. I will say this: Olympus and Panasonic seem to have figured out how to cooperate to fill out a complete and very interesting lens lineup. Instead of just duplicating each other, even when there's overlap (the 12-35mm f/2.8 versus the 12-40mm f/2.8 for instance) there's plenty to distinguish one from the other.

Sony FE/E
Sony has been slow and steady in mirrorless, at least on the full frame side of things. The A7 Mark III introductions seem to be all slotting into just about the expected time periods (two year iteration rate), with only the A7S now waiting for its turn.

The A7III*, the base model, was the only camera Sony announced in our early 2018 window, but it basically brings many of the A9 features down into the entry full frame model. Don't get too excited, the weather sealing isn't up to the other models, there are more plastic parts here, the EVF/LCD have lower resolutions, and the sensor isn't running at the same refresh rate and we've got a long viewfinder blackout time again. This is the base model, after all.

Still, Sony full frame now seems very predictable. A7SIII next, a new A9 variation—probably a high-resolution pro body—after that. Then the IV models start to roll again some time in 2019.

I like predictability. Not that I want to upgrade with every cycle. But rather, knowing that my current choice will be iterated and brought forward into the future, I know that at some point I'll have the option to upgrade what I'm using.

Where I wrote about Fujifilm's un-rationalized line, Sony's A7/9 lineup is very rationale. Easy to to market, easy to understand as a user. Bravo.

Of course, missing in action is the APS-C rationalization from Sony. Where FE is healthy, active, and understandable, the E side of things isn't. We have yet to see an A5xxx since 2014. The A6xxx line consists of the same camera with three difference performance engines. Do you want the EcoBoost or the Biturbo?

On the lens side of things, the Sony FE/E mount is where all the glass activity is at. It's like a giant Jupiter pulling all the lens makers into orbit around it. Look at this:

  • Sony — as if to add an exclamation point to my E comments: 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS. Okay, which camera is that really for?
  • Laowa —9mm f/2.8, 25mm f/2.5 5x Macro
  • Sigma — Nine Art Primes: 14mm, 20mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 70mm, 85mm, 105mm, 135mm
  • Tamron —28-75mm f/2.8
  • Tokina — Firin 20mm f/2 AF
  • Voigtlander — 21mm f/3.5, 110mm f/2.5 Macro
  • Zeiss — Loxia 25mm f2.4

That's a whopping 17 new lenses popping up in the FE/E mount during the first part of this year. All those lenses should give Sony users great confidence that they can find the lenses they need and desire. And I don't expect lens introductions for the mount to slow any time soon.

But here's something you probably wouldn't expect me to write about: a cable. Sony now has a control cable that allows an A7/A9 to control an RX0 simultaneously. Bravo. It doesn't seem like much, but when you create a "system" the system really needs to be more than just about a few body and lens choices. A true system extends well beyond the basic components that you use at the center.

I applaud Sony for trying to extend their product use well beyond just a camera/lens philosophy. I want to see more of this. Indeed, my first question about this new accessory was: can I control video shooting on the RX0 while shooting stills on the A7/A9 (or vice versa)? Great system extensions open up new possibilities for those of us working with this gear. That's what we want to see.

Meanwhile, it appears that PlayMemories is dead. We've gotten two cameras now without it, and Sony reps are talking about "not enough demand" and pros not using it. Uh, duh to both. Sony tried to sell features that were in other cameras for free to consumers, and the pros wouldn't use PlayMemories because the options weren't very sophisticated. On top of all that, the app system was not very well integrated, and it was never opened up to outside developers, who actually might have figured out things that might have proven "in demand" or useful.

Final Words
So, Canon and the m4/3 twins get a passing grade, Fujifilm is right at that B+/A- line, and Sony is at the head of the class. Nikon and Pentax: F for missed attendance.

Now for some bad news.

bythom cipa jan2018

Mirrorless shipments (blue circle, left chart) didn't start the year off hot as they did last year. Overall, the trailing year numbers are stuck right at the 4m unit mark, which is what mirrorless achieved last year.

More bad news? Look at the DSLR numbers (red circle). Worst start to a year yet, and that's after a 15%, 24%, 8%, 13%, and 10% series of previous yearly drops. Why's that bad news for mirrorless? Canon and Nikon are going to try to squeeze into the mirrorless game this year, big time.

On the one hand, it's good news for mirrorless customers. More competition is always good. But while I expect this Canikon push to up the volume of mirrorless units for 2018 somewhat to maybe the 4.5m unit range, that volume is going to be split among more competitors.

This is going to be a really tough year for everyone. We're going to see who really wants the mirrorless volume and who will just step back and let the giants fight among themselves.

My guess?

Primary Fighter: Fujifilm

Primary Flighter: Olympus

Sony will sit confidently in the full frame sector waiting for the inevitable Canikon rush.

Bottom line on March 4, 2018: If you want a full frame mirrorless camera, buy a Sony; and you can even buy all three generations of the oldest models if you want to play the price/performance game to the max. If you want a crop sensor camera with a full lens set, pick a Fujifilm or an m4/3 camera body. If you're happy with a small, highly-competent-but-truly-consumer-oriented product with minimal lens choice, the Canon M series is also worth looking at.

*Items marked with the asterisk are in the byThom studio being reviewed.




2018 Mirrorless Camera News/Views

Mirrorless camera news and views for 2018.The stories in these folders were front page news on sansmirror during the time periods indicated:

2017 Mirrorless Camera News/Views


2016 Mirrorless Camera News/Views


2015 Mirrorless Camera News/Views


2014 Mirrorless Camera News/Views



text and images 2018Thom Hogan
portions Copyright 1999-2017 Thom Hogan-- All Rights Reserved
Follow us on Twitter: @bythom, hashtags #bythom, #sansmirror