Three weeks ago, three new camera models were released at approximately the same time. Presumably the timing was co-incidental as they are from three different makers.
The cameras are
* Pana-Lumix L10, a studied exercise in retro rangefinder styling in a fixed zoom lens compact with modest specifications and performance.
* Sony A7R6, MILC, a hugely ambitious and mostly successful attempt by Sony engineers to combine the benefits of high resolution, high performance and high video capability in one, do-absolutely-everything package.
* Canon EOS R6V, a dedicated video model based on the EOS R6 MILC. A model which efficiently does what it claims to do, without trying to be all things to all people.
I asked Google to show me all YouTube videos published about each camera.
By 28 May 2026 the L10 had generated the most videos, at 131 followed by the R6V with 89 then the A7R6 with 56.
Not only did the L10 generate the greatest number of videos it also produced the most enthusiastic comments by the various presenters. It is a long time since I have seen such enthusiasm for a new camera model. It also generated a great deal of discussion about various aspects of the camera’s design.
The EOS R6V is a fairly predictable fill-out of Canon’s consumer video cam catalogue with no surprises but also no notable disappointments either. Most reviews are descriptive without any vaulting enthusiasm or crushing damnation.
The A7R6 is one of the most highly specified, high performing, highly capable model for both stills and video that has ever been produced.
But it attracted little more than going-through-the-motions reviews. Yes it’s fantastic, yes it does this, yes it does that, yes it has bigger numbers for almost every measurable parameter anybody can think of. But not many reviewers could work up much enthusiasm for the A7R6 and not many said they would rush out and buy one with their own money.
What is going on here ? The best camera by far, in terms of capability, specifications and performance generates the least enthusiastic response. Why ?
I think the reason might be that camera technology has come so far that even a basic entry level mirrorless interchangeable lens (MIL) model has more than enough resolution, dynamic range, performance and capability for pretty much any use case except professional sports and birds in flight.
Sony has been the camera and sensor technology leader for 20 years, forcing Canon and the rest to play catch-up, which they have done. But for the last few years I think that the increasing technological capability in cameras has made them complete overkill for most photographers and most subject types. Like driving a race car in the morning peak hour gridlock traffic.
We can read or watch endless reviews and videos comparing one model to the next with scores for pixel count, technical dynamic range, shots per second and on…and on…and on…..and none of it make a visible difference to the output photos in most cases.
For the Sony user it will be difficult to tell without looking at the EXIF data whether a photo came from an APSC a6700 or the full frame A7-5 or the A7R5 or A7R6. Pixel peepers might see it but most people will not and would not care even if they could.
Buyers get bored with high powered specifications and turned off by the asking price to acquire them. So they turn to some attribute(s) of cameras with which they can engage directly at a personal level.
And those attributes are styling and ergonomics.
We buy stuff. Often when confronted with several options each with the same or very similar capability we opt for the one the appearance of which appeals to us. This applies to garments, cars, houses, toys, breakfast cereals, ……. anything really.
No surprises there. But now we come to the interesting part.
What do buyers who value styling seek in a camera. What style is considered stylish and what is not ?
There have been several movies over the years in which the lead actor or actress is portrayed using a camera. Quite often that will be a Leica Messsucher (yes, it has three letters “s”) model like the M3 of 1954 shown in this post. In the first episode of the 2026 Prime TV series “Vanished”, the lead actors appear to be using a Fujifilm X-100 series model. It appears this style of camera is visually appealing in its own right. Given that most people alive today had not yet arrived on this earth when the M3 was released and only a tiny fraction of one percent of photographers actually use a Leica M series camera, why is this style so appealing ?
Having owned and used and regretted buying a Leica M6 back in the film camera era, I don’t have a positive regard for those cameras. Leica M cameras are really not user friendly. I was happy to return to Canon and cameras which work with me instead of against me.
But I guess most people who like the styling of Leica M models have probably never had to struggle with the recalcitrant demands which they impose on the user.
Anyway whatever the reason, it appears plenty of potential camera buyers like the look of Leica M series cameras. Early Canon and Nikon cameras also utilised this technology and styling. The Canon VI L of 1958 is shown here. Canon camera museum describes this model as “Highly sought after in the classic camera market as a historical high quality camera”. These old cameras were solidly built. The VI L with 50mm f1.2 lens (yes they made f1.2 lenses in 1958) weighed about 1.4 kg.
Another style which appears to be popular is the mid 20th Century single lens reflex 35mm film camera. You can see this in my 60 year old Asahi Pentax Spotmatic of 1964. Many 35mm film SLRs of the era looked very similar to this and in their day they were much more popular than rangefinder types. The styling is similar with horizontal brightwork above and below black leatherette cladding although the rangefinder windows are replaced by a reflex prism.
The original versions of these cameras did not look that way as a result of a styling exercise. They simply represented the most space efficient approach to the task of packaging all the various components into a functional device.
In the present day, when endless lists of expensive and largely superfluous specifications fail to ignite buyer interest then models which reprise the romance of early photography can sometimes do the job.
One of the first mainstream camera makers to tap into this buyer demographic is Fujifilm. In a courageous move they abandoned almost all their previous catalogue of compacts and bridge cameras and launched the original X100 model in 2011. This was followed by many more X- series compacts and MILCs. This strategy has paid off for Fujifilm which has seen its market share rise to 9% as the luckless Panasonic falls to 3.5%.
Fujifilm also sells truckloads of plastic INSTAX instant picture cameras which are boosting their sales figures.
The new L10 may be a sign that Pana-Lumix has finally gotten the retro-styling memo. I hope it is not too late to rescue their fortunes.
Nikon offers their full frame Zf and APSC Zfc models with retro styling.
OM System offer the OM3 as a retro styled version of their high spec flagship OM1-2 model.
There are many rumors that Canon will try its luck with a retro version of the EOS R8 sometime in 2026.
And of course Leica cameras have throughout their modern history made a virtue of their heritage inspired styling.
This leaves Sony as the major brand without an overtly retro styled model and without any current rumors suggesting there might be one in the future.
Moving right along, this is the Camera ergonomics blog so my main interest is cameras which appeal on the basis of their user experience which encompasses ergonomics.
Ergonomics and styling each have a very different way of engaging with potential camera buyers. Anybody can appreciate a device’s styling on sight.
But coming to understand and appreciate the benefits of good ergonomic design takes much longer and involves extended hands-on experience of several different types of camera configurations.
With reference to a hand held device such as a camera, ergonomics can be defined as The applied science of creating equipment which fits the human body’s natural capabilities and physical limitations, reducing strain on muscles and joints.
This is quite separate from any likes or preferences expressed by some user(s).
It involves detailed analysis of holding, viewing and operating the device. It considers many issues including the functional anatomy of fingers and hands, the number and complexity of actions required to control the device, haptics and much else.
I will expand on some of these issues in my next post which will be an analysis of the ergonomic logic of the Canon EOS R10 and comparison with some cameras in the same upper entry size/price/capability bracket.
Is it possible for designers to incorporate a stylish appearance and good ergonomics into the same product ?
I offered a partial answer to this question in my post of March 2024 about my CONRO concept retro styled camera. This is certainly a retro looking design. Whether it would be stylish enough for the fashion conscious buyer in 2026 I am not so sure.
I will provide more detail about styling versus ergonomics in the next post but for now will just demonstrate one issue which affects many style-oriented cameras.
This is the handle, or lack or vestigial nature thereof.
With reference to the attached pictures of my average sized adult hands holding the R10, I identify five advantages of the projecting type handle with overhang which we find on that camera and many others.
* First, the forward projection provides a platform on which designers can locate a shutter button, front control dial and at least one function button. These can be and in the case of the R10 are, located where the fingers want to find them without having to stretch.
* Second, the shape of the handle allows the hand to remain in the strong half closed relaxed position while holding and operating the camera.
* Third, the handle allows designers to locate control dials and buttons so that all primary and secondary focus and exposure functions can be controlled without having to change grip with either hand and without having to take the eye from the viewfinder.
* Fourth, the middle finger of the right hand tucks under the overhang. This allows the weight of the camera to be supported easily while the hand stays relaxed.
* Fifth, the camera is easily carried in the right hand while walking along with no need for a neck strap. When a subject appears the camera is already in hand and ready to capture the moment. I use a simple generic wrist strap for added security although it is rarely needed.
Most flat front or mini handle cameras can access aftermarket accessory grips of some kind. These can make holding the device more secure but without the front overhang they are not as effective as an ergonomic handle built in to the original shape. They leave the shutter button and other controls back on the body while the accessory grip pushes the third, fourth and fifth fingers forward.
To end this post I include a product photo of the Fujifilm X100-6, Canon EOS R10 and new Lumix L10 side by side. This raises, yet again, the question: what is a compact camera ? Is it just the fixed lens ? And if so what is the selling point of such a camera ?
No comments:
Post a Comment