About compactness*** in photo equipment

With the venue of different new camera models from the manufacturers, I am encouraged by a renew effort to design and produce more compact models (with interchangeable lenses) such as the Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III & EP-L9, the Panasonic Lumix GX-9 (Micro Four Third - MFT) and the Fujifilm X-A7 (APS-C), not to mention the Canon M200 (APS-C) or the recent Sony A models (APS-C). So, there is still hope for us who appreciate to work with smaller cameras and lenses in order to be less intrusive for our subjects and ... less tired at the end of the day!

We are now facing a much mature market that is excluding all the use-to-be very simple and small camera models rightly replaced with a lot efficiency by the "photo-multi-use-smartphone". The technical fundamentals of the photo camera seem to reach a kind of plateau and now the advancements are more in the fine sophistication of the things.

I don’t want to provoke a debate about the pertinence to have a specific viewfinder on a camera device and I concede that now many users are fully able to produce very good pictures with the help of the back-camera screen. So, there is no point there. But the good news is about the definition and the dynamic of the newest image sensors available which are the most important elements required for good to excellent picture quality.

Almost every modern digital compact (Interchangeable Lens System) camera models are including all the features to operate them from fully automated to a complete manual configuring set-up. Control dials and buttons as for the interface presentation may differ from one manufacturer to another but all basic functionalities are available plus many other additional special features that are offered by each specific system.

Stabilization optionality is now another almost obligatory basic feature asked by the potential users. More and more the newest models are incorporating the functionality inside the camera body providing the IBIS (In camera Body Image sensor Stabilization) variation. Many basic zoom or prime lenses are also giving an optical stabilization optionality, OIS (Optical Image Stabilization). Most of the newest camera model with IBIS will also work in conjunction with the OIS lenses. All these stabilization systems are trying to reduce the blurry effect generated by the photographer movements (shake).

In term of physical size of the compact ILS camera models, we have reached a certain standard. In fact, many people do prefer a little more larger camera body for ergonomic purposes mainly. Furthermore, they fully appreciate a larger back screen and a more usable viewfinder if available. Hand prehension and related space for fingers are other factors in favor to get a more traditional camera body dimension.

Compactness of the camera lenses is the other aspect to consider. The big lenses with very large maximum aperture praised by some professional photographers and more by certain advanced amateurs are not small optical units and combined with a compact camera body, these optics have a strong tendency to unbalance to say the least the whole set. Some manufacturers are doing a better job in offering an array of practical compact lenses (prime or zoom) that have a more flexible maximum aperture like F1.7, F1.8, F2, F2.4, F2.8.

If you are the kind of photographers who likes to strongly postprocessing your pictures or if you expect to print big enlargements, you may choose to get a larger image sensor size to maximize your final picture output quality. But for most of us, the MFT and APS-C sensor formats can fulfill the bill very nicely. Going in larger image sensor formats will cancel most of the compactness benefits and flexibility.

Compactness is still a big criterion for many photographers when it comes to select an equipment that will be use on a regular base. The photo equipment market is acknowledging this fact by proposing different camera and lens models that respond to that specific preoccupation. The future of compact photography is as always interesting and encouraging.

*** Compactness is a very subjective notion. On the extreme side, it will represent the smallest size possible to produce an operational camera device. But there are some physiological limits to be able to properly use a camera model with confort and confidence. Those limits are very personal. In my book, a camera viewfinder or a camera back viewing screen should be large enough to be able to judge roughly the accuracy of your photo composition and the sharpness of your subject. Control dials and buttons should be reachable and ajustable easily with a minimum of involuntary activation. But at the same time, the camera body-lens combination should be small and light enough to be brought all-day long in your hand or around your neck without fatigue. So it is still a question of compromise between handling and compact design.