Boutique cameras. What is the use?

[Panama Hat & Camera]

There is a new category of digital cameras: the boutique cameras.
Some features of boutique cameras:
- small size;
- large sensor (*);
- fixed lens;
- no zoom (with one exception);
- no viewfinder (with some exceptions);
- contrast detection autofocus;
- cost more than an entry level DSLR.

(*) These larger sensors usually give much better image quality especially at high ISO which is useful in low light situation.

Antonio.

[Colin Southern]

Used by those who want better quality than a P&S, but who don't want the bulk of a DSLR.

[dje]

Antonio I dare say they give good image quality but a fixed lens with no zoom would be too restrictive for me I think.

Dave

[Colin Southern]

Some have zooms (eg Canon Powershot G1X).

I have to wonder if the appeal of some is their "retro" look.

Will be interesting to see how they compete against the likes of the Canon EOS-M range.

[Shadowman]

If there is a market out there you try to fill it. I doubt the manufacturer of these cameras expect to get customers from the DSLR market, if they do well added to bonus to them.

[dje]

Here is the strangest gear review (X100) I have ever read. But very clever.

[Shadowman]

Here is the strangest gear review (X100) I have ever read. But very clever.

Interesting link, thanks for posting.

[Harpo]

There is a new category of digital cameras: the boutique cameras.

Are you referring to the 4/3's or mirror less cameras that are all the rage lately?
As I understand, they do allow interchangeable lenses to vary zoom lengths. If you are talking about something else, then I guess Im out of the loop!

I do know for a fact that many photographers who are seriously into backpacking (not a 4 hour stroll in the park, but more like hiking the Appalachian trail) or Motorcycle travel, really like these smaller cameras and find them a good compromise to their big DSLRs when it comes to cutting weight.
Here are a couple links to those who find them very useful:
Backcountry Post & Oasis of My Soul

While I love motorcycle travel, depending on the trip, I still prefer to drag my big DSLR around. But if things with those smaller cameras continue to get better, I just might get one for those times I just want to ride light in case I run into a scene which I hit myself for not bringing my camera along!

With the P&S cameras getting better and coming close to DSLR image quality, that might be the better route than their mirror less brethren if you want a smaller camera for travel anyways. Then yes, I would agree it starts becoming more of a Boutique camera.

[inkista]

Try these two Fredmiranda threads. Then you might see.

Sony RX-1

X100/X100S

Some folks are the type who like to street shoot with a Leica M and a 'cron 35 (or Zeiss 35/2) more or less permanently attached. For those folks? These cameras are just the ticket and a helluva lot cheaper than an M9 with a 'cron 35 [hell, they're generally cheaper than just the Summicron 35]. It's also why pancake fast primes in the 35mm-40mm range are typically found in all the MILC mount systems, too.

But you will also note that Sony's already announced they're going to make an interchangeable lens version of the RX-1, and Fuji also offers the X-Pro1 and the X-E1 for those who want a similar camera without the limitations of a fixed lens.

[Panama Hat & Camera]

Used by those who want better quality than a P&S, but who don't want the bulk of a DSLR.

Collin,
I think that the mirroless cameras are the best option for who want better quality than a P&S, but who don't want the bulk of a DSLR.

Some have zooms (eg Canon Powershot G1X).

I have to wonder if the appeal of some is their "retro" look.

Will be interesting to see how they compete against the likes of the Canon EOS-M range.

Despite the "snapsort.com" site classification, I think that the Canon GX-1 is not a boutique camera. The Canon GX-1 is a very good compact camera and is the best and the more expensive Canon G series camera.

Perhaps the appeal of some is their "retro" and classical look ("trés charmant"). Some of them seem like film cameras Leica M.

The Canon EOS-M is a type of mirrorless camera with a larger sensor (APS-C).
Cheers,
Antonio.

[Colin Southern]

Collin,
I think that the mirroless cameras are the best option for who want better quality than a P&S, but who don't want the bulk of a DSLR.

Antoonio,

Probably - I think I'd prefer one. They're possibly a bit bulkier though.

[inkista]

...The Canon EOS-M is a type of mirrorless camera with a larger sensor (APS-C)....

Yes, but until Canon actually makes more lenses for it, and you decide you don't want an 18-55 kit lens, the 22/2 (35/2 equiv.) pancake makes it an awful lot like an X100, only without that hecka cool viewfinder...

[Colin Southern]

Yes, but until Canon actually makes more lenses for it, and you decide you don't want an 18-55 kit lens, the 22/2 (35/2 equiv.) pancake makes it an awful lot like an X100, only without that hecka cool viewfinder...

I thought they were making an EOS EF lens adaptor for the EOS-M?

http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home...pter_EF_EOS_M/

[geoz]

Hi Antonio,

This is like asking what good is a haiku. These cameras maximize quality within convenience. There is a range where they at least meet the standard DSLRs.

I shoot with a Sony RX100 and joined this forum when I bought it a about nine months ago to improve my digital skills. (In the film days I had a good Minolta with a bag of lens and filters.) It is a fixed lens with a relatively average zoom with a large sensor. The benefit is that the raw file is about 20MB and sometimes I can crop away three quarters and get a good image.

I am jealous of some of the images I see on this site knowing that they are out of my reach. But I know that if I went to the standard DSLRs I would be in for several thousand dollars. I like the convenience of sticking it into my pocket and going on vacation with my girlfriend taking your standard snapshots but also being able to capture an interesting image on the fly. For example, these are good for a young husband who can convince his wife that she and the kids will look better because flash is not needed and he can post process (and BTW he will have the ability to challenge his own photography skills.)

For professionals and serious amateurs a standard DSLR is the way to go. However, for social photography where you want to limit the disruption for whatever reason, these small cameras are hard to beat. If I remember right Andy Warhol was one of the first to use small camera

Here a link to my project 52 site (The shot of the bike rack in Paris was taken at night with no flash, PP in LR4.)

Also from a hockey game where I was between 20 to 50 yards/meters from the action. Devils game

As for using point and shoots by an artist - hard to beat Andy Warhol

Cheers,
George

[inkista]

I thought they were making an EOS EF lens adaptor for the EOS-M?

http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home...pter_EF_EOS_M/

Sure, I suppose, if you want to put outsized lenses on your camera. ...But kinda defeats the purpose in having a smaller camera if you're still hauling around the big glass ...

[Colin Southern]

Sure, I suppose, if you want to put outsized lenses on your camera. ...But kinda defeats the purpose in having a smaller camera if you're still hauling around the big glass ...

Just means you can use bigger glass for the same weight -- could probably even hand hold a EF1200/5.6 with the weight saved

PS:

http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/01/n...nses-soon-cr2/

[Black Pearl]

A very good friend of mine got rid of his SLR kit in favour of a Leica X1. He wanted a simple, light weight, fantastic quality camera and decided that for his style of shooting he could make do with a fixed lens. A few years on and he still shoots with it every day.

Some of his work: A Photographic Road Trip with the Leica X1

His wife still owns a Nikon DSLR so he can access other lenses if he has to but its a rare occasion. I have very nearly done the same thing with a X100 a dozen times but kept getting the sweats so I'm probably going to go down the route of a XE1 with a couple of lenses later in the year.

[Shadowman]

Sure, I suppose, if you want to put outsized lenses on your camera. ...But kinda defeats the purpose in having a smaller camera if you're still hauling around the big glass ...

Even more of a concern if mounted on a tripod and there isn't a mounting collar on the lens. I purchased a 70-300mm 4/3rds (21 ounce) lens for my pen-epl1 and carrying it around is a chore, but so glad to have it when you need it. I tried using this combo as a walkaround lens about three times, much better having it in the camera bag.

[thequacksoflife]

A very good friend of mine got rid of his SLR kit in favour of a Leica X1. He wanted a simple, light weight, fantastic quality camera and decided that for his style of shooting he could make do with a fixed lens. A few years on and he still shoots with it every day.

Some of his work: A Photographic Road Trip with the Leica X1

His wife still owns a Nikon DSLR so he can access other lenses if he has to but its a rare occasion. I have very nearly done the same thing with a X100 a dozen times but kept getting the sweats so I'm probably going to go down the route of a XE1 with a couple of lenses later in the year.

the XE1 is the route I want. but the x100 is a super camera! I decided to dump the dSLR after some holidays last year not missed it at all. well I've noticed the lack of weight

[jcuknz]

Sure, I suppose, if you want to put outsized lenses on your camera. ...But kinda defeats the purpose in having a smaller camera if you're still hauling around the big glass ...

You do not have to put outsize lenses on but get lenses designed for the camera such as my Lumix 14-140 [ 28-280 AoV ] on my GH2 where I end up with a camera about the same size and weight as my earlier FZ50 which is similar to a small DSLR or SLR. The purpose of the small camera is to use small lenses with the AoV of the huge things. If you can work with a small sensor then the FZ200 with its constant f/2.8 x24 zoom seems a pretty good arrangement. Though unfortunately it starts from a wide angle and so though x24 misses out on reach when compared with my FZ50 which though x12 has 430mm AoV reach from 35mm.

Though the camera is just a box to hold the photos... it is the lens that does the real work ... and to Colin I would suggest that the weight helps to promote steadiness ... it always did with film so I doubt if it is different with digital. You just have to be young and fit ... which is not me these days