2021 Camera Hunt

While my current photo setup exceeds my needs, over the past couple years I’ve grown acutely aware of the price of using it:

1. It is large and heavy, but also delicate.
2. It is rather hard to use.
3. It draws attention.

The first point is really key. The whole lot needs to go into a photo backpack and will use the volume. This means that my wife is left hiking with all our food and drinks. That’s not exactly great.

The second point is tricky. I can use this all right. But, if I want to hand it over to anyone, they won’t succeed with the AF. I either need to repeat the crash course on aiming with the small rectangle, or resign myself to setting up hyperfocal focus. Having a foolproof eye detection AF would easily quintuple the number of pictures I am in. But, also, maybe allow my wife to take better pictures?

The third point is silly. My gear is large enough to look like a pro setup. I’ve had people joking about appearing in National Geographic. I’ve had people wondering out loud which newspaper will they be in. I can live with that. But it might be nicer without.

The superb results you get with a non-fallible modern AF would be nice too.

Requirements

It appears I want a thing that’s as easy to transport, while having (in order of weight):

1. Good AF.
2. A nice wide angle lens.
3. Good image quality.

I’m flexible on price - if I want something more expensive, I’ll just be saving up for it longer. Unless it’s the A1 - that’s silly too long, even with my ample fun budget.

Options

Nikon Z

Z6

I’m pretty happy with my Nikon DSLR kit. That’s thanks to its perfect handling and being relatively light. They moved to mirrorless pretty recently. But are already known for the best handling. And started the lens lineup with exactly what I want.

Nikon offers three bodies with exact same ergonomics. The middle one seems to be the one for me. Everything around it looks good.

However, there’s a snag. Move to mirrorless got Nikon engineers faced with having inherently smaller and lighter technology. And what they decided to do with the suddenly reclaimed resources? Put it all into optical quality. Sure, that comes handy when printing photowalls… But what I care more about is that the overall system got marginally heavier.

A straight upgrade, sure. But that’s not solving the problem I’m having.

Sony

A7C

I got very excited when I first saw this. They took the tremendously good A7III and made it as small as possible. To top it off, the flippy screen can be turned inwards. Having no screen to scratch is about as robust as it gets. And now they followed with a bunch of excellent small lenses.

But nothing is ever perfect. The sacrifices made for miniatiurisation are in ergonomy. All Sonys, except the silly expensive A1, are laggy. Viewfinder, the main reason I didn’t buy A7III, got smaller. Grip got shallower and there’s fewer controls. And the whole thing got lighter only by about 150 grams.

Sony has legendary AF and in-body stabilisation. All in all I’d expect slightly better quality than from my DSLR. For video there’s no contest - the Sony is leaps and bounds ahead. The thing is also easy-enough for a five year old to use correctly.

A second loss, after ergonomy, would be in versatility of the zoom lens. 28-60 is annoyingly shorter on both ends and darker than my 24-120 f/4. The closest equivalent is a 24-105 f/4. Those 15mm are missing to get better quality at about the same weight as my 24-120. Tamron offers both a 28-200 and a bunch of f/2.8 lenses, which are lighter than DSLR equivalents, but still heavier than I want.

All in all, looks great. In most configurations about half the weight of what I carry. Great AF with eye-detection and no compromises. Open standard mount brings in a lot of lenses from 3rd parties.

A7R iv

If I accept additional weight and bulk of a better viewfinder assembly, I get… A better viewfinder. And a lot more.

A7R iv comes with the best viewfinder on the market. And the highest resolution sensor. It also has a larger grip and some more buttons. Otherwise it’s similar to A7C.

But, the high resolution brings an interesting opportunity. Just the centre has enough resolution, to use it as a fully functional APS-C camera. This opens up the market for much smaller and cheaper telephoto. Taking pictures of wildlife becomes much more reasonable.

But, I have no use for the 60 megapixels. 24 is more than a 6k TV. Anything larger is just slowing Lightroom down. The only use I see for this, is cropping down from a good wide lens, to replace an ok longer lens.

That, and the thing is rather expensive.

A9

A professional body for sports photographers. Previous generation, so can be bought used for reasonable prices. It does not have the updated ergonomics of the A7Riv. I.e. the grip is smaller and the EVF is only +50% of the baseline. Or, second best, after the A7Riv, equal to the other “good” ones. Otherwise, it’s the same camera as A9ii, which is outside how much I want to spend.

Firmware update gave it the same AF algorithms as the new bodies. The hardware of this camera is really fast. However, in a YouTube comparison, the AF difference is too small for me to see. 24 megapixels is just as much as I want. It has a very low viewfinder lag, which might be worth it on its own?

It is not as waterproof as the A7Riv. It’s imperceptibly smaller but heavier.

A7 iv

There are rumours of an upcoming 24 megapixel body. There have been such rumours for a long time. This time they say it’s really around the corner.

If that happens before I make my decision, it will replace the option of A7R iv. Or, more closely, the A9. Unless I grow very fond of the idea of using an APS-C telephoto.

Fuji X

X100 v

Now, this is a very close competitor to A7C with a single lens. Similar optical properties. Sony has a tiny bit better image quality and comes with image stabilisation. Very similar weight and body size. But Fuji’s lens is incredibly thin, barely protrudes out of the body. The camera is a bit below half of the weight of my DSLR with a similar lens.

It doesn’t offer as magical autofocus as Sony. Actually, it’s [allegedly not good enough for shooting kids][https://youtu.be/4_16__mcHIE]. Otherwise, it promises a vastly superior experience. The EVF has 150% the resolution. But, more importantly, it can switch to an actual optical viewfinder. Now, that’s something that calls to me.

It also comes at half the price with A7C with the one similar lens. The downside: Fuji’s lens is permanently attached. There are two converters, but they don’t seem worth the trouble. So, 35mm equivalent (1.33x in iPhone parlance) is all we get.

I have a problem here. I guess the thought of buying an X100 will stay with me until I do so. On the other hand, it’s been there for years, can live with it. Then, I wonder how often will the camera suffice? I don’t even own a 35mm lens now. I really like the wide angle. But the 50mm allows for nicer portraits too. So, while I want it, I fear I’ll end up wanting to carry both this and a larger one.

X-E4

The smallest Fuji body. Also rangefinder style, which I like. But, it’s the exact same size as A7C. But it:

• Lacks stabilisation.
• Has inferior autofocus.
• A small and slow viewfinder. But, it’s still a tiny bit larger than A7C’s.

It’s kind of a cheap X100 with interchangeable lens. But it doesn’t have the great lens of X100.

X-S10

Now, Fuji does offer stabilisation. But only in the SLR-style cameras. They even made one that’s modern-styled: mid-priced X-S10.

The viewfinder is the same as X-E4, so a tiny upgrade from A7C. The stabilisation is really good. It also has the front control wheen the A7C lacks.

Now, the autofocus is definitely inferior to Sony. I can tell them apart in blind comparison in a YouTube video. It is not as good in finding where the face is. It is not as quick in acquiring focus. It loses it more easily when the face moves. It is still better than what I have. If equipped with one of the newest lenses. The old ones are very slow.

X-T4

Finally, the Fuji flagship. This offers a good viewfinder, bested only by A7R. A ton of control dials. Retro style, with a tiny grip. I never really used something similar - need to try.

Data

First, summed up for the light scenario: a smaller zoom with a wide and normal prime. There’s also the viewfinder size (technically magnification in 35mm equivalent) and resolution. Oh, and if I take the Fuji wide zoom instead of prime, that’s +180CHF and +150g, probably worth it. All prices from Galaxus. Except for the A9, which is average of what it seems to cost used. I imagine some of these can be had quite a bit cheaper by shopping around. The data:

Body	VF size	VF resolution	Σ Pice	Σ Weight	Σ Weight no zoom	Comments
F X100V	0.52	3.7	1220	478	478	Fixed lens.
Sony A7C	0.59	2.4	3169	994	827
F X-E4	0.62	2.4	2354	1129	689
Sony A7R	0.78	5.8	5976	1150	983	Over 2x resolution.
Sony A9	0.78	3.7	3770	1158	991	Fast pro body.
F X-S10	0.62	2.4	2120	1230	790
F X-T4	0.77	3.7	2771	1372	932
Nikon D750	0.7		0	2005	1295	Optical viewfinder.
Nikon Z6II	0.8	3.7	4640	2125	1625

There are also options to upgrade to a better normal and telephoto zoom, as well as a portrait prime:

Body	Better zoom	Price	Weight	Telephoto	Price	Weight	Portrait	Price	Weight
F X100V
Sony A7C	28-70mm F2.8	951	470	100-400mm F5-6.3	1275	1135	85mm F1.8	495	371
F X-E4	16-55 F2.8	921	655	70-300mm f/4-5.6	799	588	56mm F1.2	786	405
Sony A7R	28-70mm F2.8	951	470	70-350mm F4.5-6.3	783	678	85mm F1.8	495	371
Sony A9	28-70mm F2.8	951	470	100-400mm F5-6.3	1275	1135	85mm F1.8	495	371
F X-S10	16-55 F2.8	921	655	70-300mm f/4-5.6	799	588	56mm F1.2	786	405
F X-T4	16-55 F2.8	921	655	70-300mm f/4-5.6	799	588	56mm F1.2	786	405
Nikon D750	24-70mm F2.8	1019	905	100-400mm F/4,5-6,3	1250	1135	85mm F1.8	428	630
Nikon Z6II	24-70mm F2.8	2058	805				85mm F1.8	896	470

The full table is a bit too unwieldy to render in the page. You can see it in Google Sheets. And if you’re wondering: exported to markdown using the first hit on Google.

Noped away

Some quick ideas that, upon a quick glance, I decide to not stick with.

Just use the phone

The radical solution to the three problems above is to just not use a camera. Well, I want pictures, so not use a dedicated camera. After all, phones have been progressing leaps and bounds for a while.

However, they are progressing with a bunch of explicit design constraints and objectives. An important one is, they go with the assumption that pictures are viewed on a phone. You see where this is going, right? Just before writing this I double checked. A picture taken with an iPhone 12 Pro still doesn’t really look good on a 4k TV.

1" compacts

There are some really nice-looking compact cameras out there. Really exciting. Until I saw the sample galleries. My wife already has an iPhone. The computational magickery makes up for the difference in sensor sizes. And see the earlier section for why not.

Film

There’s something magical in using a camera about as old as my parents. Those things are small engineering marvels, in a way we can physically grasp. I mean, just look at this beauty. Also, have I mentioned small?

However, all the magic vanishes in the second part of the process. Once I have an exposed film, sadness ensues. My mother imprinted on me a strong preference for colour pictures. Colour enlargers are too beasty and scanners are an ocean of sadness, meaning I’ll never do end-to-end DIY. And sending films to a professional, to have JPEGs back in some weeks, does kill much of the fun.

On top of that, if a DSLR defeats non-photographers, a vintage camera is likely to leave a professional shooter stumped. They’re also rather fragile. All in all, not a practical thing for most cases.

Olympus

Olympus has been marketing directly at me - someone who wants to downsize. They also offered me a pretty deep discount for the E-M10 Pancake kit. Which makes it easy - I only have one camera to read about.

Looking at samples, it is a bit of a blast from the past. There’s no mistaking of denoising artifacts in the JPEGs. RAW is way better, but still a decisive step down from what I have. Seems borderline acceptable.

The viewfinder is about the same as A7C. AF is contrast-detection only. Images are taken at a more square-ish 4:3 aspect ratio.

The system lacks a compelling wide-angle option. A 7-14mm Pro zoom defeats the cheap and light appeal. A 9mm f/8 fisheye is not a serious lens. In other lengths it’s ok, as long as I don’t care about background blur.

If not for the wide lens, I’d consider this the largest step down to take. But I really like those too much.

Quick rejections

1. Panasonic - I don’t quite believe in depth from defocus for now.
2. Leica - I’m afraid “made in Germany” isn’t worth the extra money for me. I’d prefer an α1
3. Canon R - I’m not used to Canon and their focus seems to be on a different market segment than I am.
4. Sony α1 - just too much money for a hobby. Lovely otherwise.
5. Nikon Z50 - looks cool, but without stabilisation and suboptimal AF is not worth the price.
6. Canon M - better AF, but otherwise like the small Nikon.

Conclusions

Sony A7C is the best solution for the problems I’m having. It also offers the widest selection of lenses for solving any future problems. Hence, that’s the rational thing to buy.

2023 Update

I ended up buying both the A7C and X100V.

The Sony is roughly all I expected it to be. The ergonomics is just good enough to not distract. I only notice it if I wield the same day my Nikon, which is vanishingly rare. Not really the camera to buy if you work all day camera in hand. But perfect for throwing into a backpack without a worry. The only unexpected shortfall is in handing the camera to others. I keep forgetting to switch the AF mode to wide. Which means I’m still getting pictures with focus on the background.

I ended up buying the amazing small Sigma C zoom lenses. f/2.8 is enough for the wider angles. f/5-6.3 on 100-400mm is a bit sad, but less sad than carrying something brighter. The quality on all of them strongly exceeds what my viewing situations require. Note the Sigmas are marginally smaller and lighter than similar Tamrons, which offer maginally better quality in return. If I was buying now, I would probably buy the Sony 20-70mm f/4 instead.

The one thing that the Sony doesn’t do, is that it doesn’t make my gear geek go “wow”. That’s what the X100V does. It’s an amazing little toy. It sits in my pocket when I’m out doing something non-photographic. It offers a superior shooting experience and very nice results… As long as the object isn’t moving too fast and it’s in the right distance. Since I bought this, my collection of older-than-me rangefinders is collecting dust.

Looking back, I don’t regret choosing this pair at all :)