
Why Isn’t Micro Four Thirds the Perfect Format?
Micro Four Thirds had a lot going for it when it launched as it promised low cost, smaller lenses, and good image quality. So why didn't it become the go-to format?
Mike Smith is the principal photographer at Focali Photographic. He has been an active photographer for over 30 years, having started out on a reliable Canon SureShot before progressing onto his faithful Pentax P30. He now shoots on a range of digital cameras and formats, although he produces the majority of his work on Nikon. He also shoots regularly on both 35mm and medium format film. Outside of his commercial work, Smith writes regularly on both technical and philosophical photographic topics and has a fascination for fine art and abstract architectural work.
Micro Four Thirds had a lot going for it when it launched as it promised low cost, smaller lenses, and good image quality. So why didn't it become the go-to format?
With Canon's strong foothold -- or should that be increasing stranglehold -- on the mirrorless market, you can easily argue it is becoming the Microsoft of the camera world.
The Viltrox AF 13mm f/1.4 STM lens slots neatly into an existing range of Viltrox primes for APS-C cameras, a focal length that is notably absent from Fujifilm directly. The 13mm, which is equivalent to 20mm on 35mm full-frame, is fairly wide and works well for landscapes or architecture, especially for the low price of $429.
We're sold software on the basis that what we can't get right in-camera, we can fix and improve after the event. Even with all the fancy algorithms that are available to us, the single best thing you go do to your image is a simple crop.
As a photographer, you might be out on the street or at a vantage point in the landscape. You raise the viewfinder to your eye, compose the framing that you envisioned, then click the shutter. You have a picture that was acquired using the technical elements at your creative disposal: focal length, shutter speed, and aperture. But where was the camera?
The announcement has landed and it's now official: Canon has released an APS-C RF-mount camera. In fact, it hasn't just released one - but two - in the form of the R7 and R10. It might seem strange, given that Sony and Nikon have had APS-C models for some time, but this is a big deal because Canon already has the EF-M mount and EOS M APS-C mirrorless range. This begs the question, is Canon about to scrap the EOS M line?
Nikon has revised its medium-term management plan and in an eye-opening revelation, all but announces the death of F-mount.
Nikon recently released its annual results which are a key metric in determining how well the manufacturer is doing both in terms of short-term finances as well as implementing its medium-term strategy. The quick takeaway is that it's making more money, but that camera market share is worryingly low. What does this mean for it going forward?
It's the time of year when many corporations announce performance over the last year and Fuji is no different, except all eyes are on recovery from COVID shutdowns and supply chain problems. So how did Fujifilm do? The short answer is very well and, for its Imaging division, film is king.
The year 2020 saw digital camera shipments nosedive to a new low of 8.9 million units, down from 121 million units in 2010. It was believed it couldn't get any worse and, indeed, shipments stabilized in 2021. So why do sales appear to be in free-fall again?
You're out in the field, having scouted out a new location to grab a landscape vista. You release the shutter button and then chimp the back of the camera to see what you've captured... the sky's blocked out, blinking back at you. You've got a dreaded case of the blinkies, but does it actually matter?
The smartphone is perhaps the single most important device in history, wresting the power of news and journalism back into the hands of the everyday person. Data communication is the key enabler, but the camera -- more than anything else -- slakes the thirst for instant visual gratification. So, why is shooting with a smartphone so deeply unsatisfying?
It's a strange twist of fate that the company that rivaled Kodak in film manufacturing but currently makes very little of its money from the camera business should now be the largest camera manufacturer in the world.
Nikon seems to have put the bad days of 2020 behind it and is accelerating into a new business positive future in which its Imaging Division plays a significant, but not central, role in its financial stability.
Digital cameras are great -- the technology they are built upon is remarkable, underpinned by remarkably sophisticated designs. Not only that, but the pictures they acquire are of such astonishing quality that they make anything that went before pale in comparison. So why then do digital cameras have such (relatively) short lifespans compared to film cameras?
The camera sector isn't exactly a thriving business at the moment, with year-on-year declining sales and a slew of manufacturers having exited the market.
The news of falling camera shipments is like the dripping of a faucet. It comes with a regular, steady, beat, and just when you think it has stopped... plink, there it goes again! So perhaps it's no surprise that CIPA -- the trade body for manufacturers -- has a downbeat forecast for 2022, but strangely seems to have missed the good news!
Is this photo worth $10 million? Prince Andrew thinks so, or at least reports indicate that his out-of-court settlement with Virginia Giuffre will cost somewhere north of $10 million. The figure makes this image perhaps the most costly single photo in the world.
Sony announced last week that it was the number one mirrorless brand holding the highest market share for eight years straight. Canon then followed this up by claiming that it was the number one digital camera company, also leading on mirrorless market share. In a game of smoke and mirrors--something Sherlock Holmes would be proud of--who is telling the truth?
Cameras are expensive, and Canon is no stranger to hiking its prices when it sees fit -- the EOS 1D X Mark III flagship DSLR costs a fairly sizeable $6,500. But has it always been this way?