A Little History, My Film Days
My first camera was a Minolta SRT-201. It was my graduation gift from my parents. Before that I used a trusty Kodak Instamatic to take probably thousands of pictures. Sadly, my treasured SRT-201 was stolen. It was 1977 and that point I had the option of getting anything I wanted. I was not tied to any particular manufacturer, so, I did what I always do: I researched all the products and tried to pick the best balance of price and performance. I was tempted by the Canon AE-1. It had speed priority automation and a deep catalog of Canon lenses. The Minolta XD-11 was new and offered some new features. In addition to speed priority it also had aperture priority automation. It was developed with Leica and had a reasonably large catalog of lenses. I bought the XD-11 for three reasons. The first is it had the option of both aperture and speed priority, the lenses were color matched (super important in the film era) and the lenses were cheaper. Since I realized my investment was going to be more in lenses than in camera bodies that third reason carried a lot of weight.
Autofocus shows up
Leica invented autofocus between 1960 and 1973. Remember Minolta worked with Leica and in 1985 Minolta released the first SLR with integrated autofocus, the Maxxum 7000. It took me a while, but I bought my first autofocus camera in 1992. Since Minolta changed their mount when they released autofocus I had the option of changing systems. I was going to have to buy new lenses anyway. So, I looked at Canon and Nikon, but came back to Minolta. Again the decision was based on the cost of lenses and one lens in particular. Since Minolta put the drive motor for focusing in the camera body they were able to produce cheaper lenses. They also produced the only autofocus mirror lens – a 500 f8.0 lens that I use to this day. That lead me to get the Minolta 9xi.
Digital Cameras and Format Wars
In 1988 Nikon released the first digital SLR camera, but it wasn’t until the resolution reached 6 megapixels with the Canon EOS 300D that I became interested. That was in 2003. This time the lens mount for Minolta cameras didn’t change. And Minolta introduced in-body image stabilization. It again allowed them to make cheaper lenses that lacked image stabilization. It was not quite as good as in-lens stabilization, but I had been hand holding for years, so I figured any image stabilization was better than nothing. Still, I waited. I didn’t think the early cameras provided image quality that was good enough. In addition, now that companies weren’t tied to 35mm film for image sizes they could develop other sizes such as APS-C and Four Thirds. In fact, none of the early digital cameras were full frame (35mm sensor size). Smaller sensors are easier to make and they gave manufacturers the opportunity to make lenses specific to the format. Olympus and Kodak collaborated on the creation of a format and sensor that were designed to be digital. Four thirds is the ratio used in older television broadcasts and was widely used in films, so it made sense as a format. The system was designed to be digital including the lenses which can be updated through firmware. So, film was full frame, but now digital sensors were APS-C and Four Thirds. The smaller formats made the lenses effectively longer. For APS-C the multiplier is 1.5 and for four thirds it is 2. That means a 100mm lens on an APS-C body is effectively the same as 150mm on a full-frame body and the same lens is effectively 200mm on a Four Thirds body. Or for the same field of coverage it was possible to use a smaller lens.
My First Digital Camera
Things were progressing fairly quickly in digital cameras, but even more so in the manufacturer space. Minolta sold their business to Sony. Uh-oh. I was afraid they would not continue the innovation and support that Minolta had. I was also afraid they would only create consumer grade cameras and not the professional grade that Minolta made. There has been a recurring theme with the Minolta lenses – they were always cheaper. Sony is not known for being cheaper, but it is known for making great electronics, so, I got the Sony Alpha 100. It was compatible with all my existing Minolta autofocus lenses and Sony brought out a new line of lenses optimized for APS-C. That was 2007. Over the previous 30 years I had purchased only 2 film cameras, the XD-11 in 1977 and the 9xi in 1992, that will change with the digital era.
Sticking with Sony
In 2010 Sony came out with a very innovative camera, the SLT-A55. I loved the specs – 16MP sensor, in-body image stabilization and a semi-transparent mirror. With the semi-transparent mirror they could achieve 10 frames per second shooting rate with continuous auto focus. That was truly amazing. It had an electronic viewfinder, so now you could see how the actual picture would come out including exposure, it could shoot movies with continuous autofocus and it was small and light. Really, it was presaging mirrorless cameras. I got one. In three years the resolution had increased by 50%, the frames per second went from 3 to 10 and the size went down too.
Micro Four Thirds
Micro Four Thirds (MFT) was introduced in 2008. It was the first mirrorless system. At first I didn’t pay much attention, but as more and more cameras came out and I could see the advantage of the smaller lenses and bodies. I began to think I should switch or at least add a MFT camera. What I saw as advantages were –
- They could use all the existing Four Thirds lenses which gave them a large catalog of lenses right out of the gate.
- The camera bodies were very small so easier and lighter to carry.
- The Micro Four Thirds lenses were also small making it possible to travel with more than one lens easily.
This was appealing to me for 2 types of photography that I enjoy – travel and street. I just couldn’t bring myself to make the plunge: I didn’t want to have to get all new lenses…
Mirrorless expands
Sony and Samsung introduced mirrorless cameras in 2010. I was hoping Sony would use the A mount that supported all my existing lenses, but they didn’t. I was mad, but it was really for the best. They developed, like Olympus before them, a mount that is updateable, open, and fully digitally integrated. They did the one thing that kept me in their camp and that was to release adapters that allowed the A mount lenses to work with the new mount. In 2011 I got the NEX-7. I still have it, and I still love it. I use it mainly for street and travel photography because it is so small and light.
Current lineup
Today I have switched entirely to the E mount. I have an A7R, A6400 and the aforementioned NEX-7. They still use my treasured 500mm F8 mirror lens with the LA-EA4 adapter. My purchasing pace has slowed as technology has leveled off. The only real difference between the 2011 NEX-7 and the 2019 A6400 is that the autofocus on the A6400 is much more accurate and much faster. Otherwise the sensors are pretty much the same. I do intend to get the A7RIV soon for landscape and wildlife work since it offers a big step up from the A7R. I would go from 36 megapixels to 60 megapixels, from 4 frames per second to 10 frames per second and contrast autofocus to phase detect autofocus. The A7R is really only useful for landscapes; the A7RIV is good for everything I do.
Lessons
So, now to the point of the story: what should you look for when you are buying a system. There are 3 things to consider –
- What types of subjects you want to shoot?
- What kinds of lenses you might want?
- What budget you have to work with?
If you are primarily a travel, family or street photographer, then body and lens size will matter. If you are into landscapes then the sensor size will be important. If you shoot sports or wildlife then autofocus and frames per second will be important.
Throughout this story I have emphasized that lenses are really the most long-lasting part of the system. You will have lenses for many, many years while your camera bodies may come and go. That has become even more true today as digital cameras have accelerated the changes to the bodies. The bodies are still expensive and there are differences, but really you can get the same image quality from multiple manufacturers.
Setting a budget is important not just for the body, but the lenses and on-going investment. Look at the accessory costs along with the body and lenses and do some fantasy shopping on B&H, Adorama or Crutchfield. That will give you an idea of your system cost.
The point of all this is to get you thinking. Sure, there are differences between the manufacturers, but ultimately you will want to pick based on the overall system not just the body. Right now, there is no reason to get a DSLR. Every manufacturer now makes mirrorless systems and Fujifilm, Leica, Olympus, Panasonic and Sony are just building mirrorless systems. Canon and Nikon have recently entered the ring and are putting a lot of effort into the new bodies and lenses. The capabilities of mirrorless cameras are much greater than DSLRs now, so there are no advantages left to the older systems.
Make Your Pick
To determine what system to get you need to know how you will be using it. That will really drive at least your initial purchase decision. Think about the primary use for the camera. All cameras today can be used for most shooting situations, but you will want your system to fit your primary use.
If you are into travel and street photography, then you want something small. Micro Four Thirds will give you the smallest packages. Olympus and Panasonic make cameras in this format across the price spectrum. APS-C cameras are also small. The APS-C sensor is a little larger so it can work better in low light. Sony and Fujifilm have great APS-C cameras that are also small and easily portable. The biggest advantage for Sony is that it also has full frame cameras that can use the same lenses, so you can expand your system later with a full frame body for landscape or portraiture. You will generally want a zoom lens for travel and a fixed prime for street. Look at the various bodies and the matching lenses to price up a system.
For landscape and portraiture, you can use APS-C and Micro Four Thirds cameras, but you will be able to get better depth and nicer out of focus areas with a full frame camera. Canon, Leica, Nikon, Panasonic and Sony make full frame mirrorless cameras. Panasonic and Leica share a mount for these cameras, but it is different and incompatible with Micro Four Thirds. Canon and Nikon have adapters that let you use all their existing autofocus lenses, but they won’t have the same ability as native mount lenses. Sony has the biggest catalog of full frame lenses. Since I like landscape, travel and street I have bodies for each, but they can use the same lenses which is an advantage of the Sony system.
For wildlife and sports you will want high frames per second, good telephoto lenses and fast autofocus. Sony has what is arguably the most advanced camera on the market today: the Alpha 1. It can shoot 30 frames per second, has 50 megapixels and super-fast autofocus. Its target is sports and wildlife. However, it is also over $6500. So, if you budget allows it would be hard to beat. Most of us will have a smaller budget. There is an advantage to smaller sensors for sports and wildlife: it is the lens effective length increase. You can use smaller and lighter (cheaper) lenses and get just as close. Olympus, Fujifilm and Sony have cameras with smaller sensors with at least 10 frames per second frame rates and fast, effective autofocus. Canon, Nikon and Sony have full frame cameras with at least 10 frames per second and excellent autofocus systems.
I picked the Sony system out of inertia – I had been using the Minolta system. If I were to pick now without any baggage of a previous system I would still pick Sony. The ability to use both APS-C and full frame bodies with the same lenses is unique and is something that is important to me since I do shoot in multiple genres. Your decision might be different for a different reason, but Sony didn’t let me down as I had initially feared when they took over the Minolta camera business. They have created a comprehensive, professional system.
Final Words
I want to leave you with what I hope is a changed perspective. Don’t buy a camera based on the body but buy base on the system. Your biggest investment will wind up being in glass and accessories. Look for what you want or need today and can grow with. Keep in mind your budget and you won’t be disappointed. I have been taking pictures for over 40 years. Digital cameras make a lot of the process easier. Ultimately getting better pictures is not due to equipment, but rather technique. Take courses, review pointers and most of all take pictures. I will have future articles on software and camera technology, but I recommend looking for other blogs to help you take better pictures.