Affordable Cameras Are Redundant?

Basic camera is all well and good but I don’t get why someone should buy Canon R100 when R50 already exists and the price difference is next to nothing. R50 isn’t crippled like R100. Even my own M50 is better than that R100.

I enjoy older, cheaper cameras. The truth is that a camera that took great images 10 years ago still takes great images. There aren’t any new cameras that aren’t good. New cameras tend to be incremental improvements over their older bodies. The good news is this constant renewal cycle gives us choice. At many price points we can select the features we want and need at a price that is comfortable to the wallet. Whereas the new bodies have state of the art features and performance the quality of the image isn’t that much better. At some point we have to realize that good enough is good enough.

If some of the commentators had problems with your Canon that is their problem. Here is a thought. The more people that have problems with older and inexpensive gear the less competition I have sourcing them.

Mask On Nurse Marty(Ret)

I bought year ago a second hand Canon EOS 1000D DSLR body for 45€. It's still a very good camera and in good condition. And it's a 15 years old model. E-PL8 was sold out from stores about 5 years ago and I paid 350€ for it (with kit lens). I'm not currently in need of a better camera than it is. Of course I have bought many lenses too. But nothing very expensive.

I bought this year a new smart phone which has camera but I don't use it much. (Less than one photo per month.) I carry a dedicated camera with me almost all the time.

I am 27 old and dont like to take pictures with phones. I shot film, or lumix g9, or on compact leica d lux)

Sometimes there are comments who are just commenting to spite. Don’t take it to heart.
My first camera was the m50 Mark ii. The pictures that this “cheap” camera took were beautiful and was my stepping stone into photography. I loved the manual involvement of the lens and the nicer color science. I have moved to fujifilm and it’s been fun. It’s still the “entry” one xt30ii.

Phone pictures like good while their tiny. Larger, they become pixelated. I don’t like the saturated colors they make and the quality isn’t great.

I love your work and these discussion that you host. Don’t get bogged down by the negativity.

Fully agree with you. For my 50's my wife gift me a very economic 1300D, after 25 years of point and shot my first refelx camera, this was fantastic for me. I think that the photo world needs all kind of camera, starting for cheapest for beginner, for gift and for people haven't large budget.

Yes, I think there is a place for inexpensive interchangeable lens cameras. Some people are curious and want to improve their photograph. This type of camera is a good way to begin exploring the fascinating world of photography.

I agree that a dedicated camera offer a more enjoyable experience than smartphone’s. But the R100 is a joke. Canon intentionally failed to cater to the target young users this camera is for by eliminating the touch screen. Unacceptable. Maybe if the price was $100 or less, it’d become more appealing.

Having affordable entry-level cameras that are instead extremely crippled by the need to not tread on the toes of more expensive model lines will only turn people off the experience, I think. Sure, you still get the more natural depth of field and less artificial sharpening - but Chinese brands are already giving you some of that. Flagships from Oppo, Vivo, Huawei and Honor have more natural detail and less absurd output sharpening than Apple or Samsung, and when you get to newer flagships like the Xiaomi 13 Ultra, that gives you more flexibility in photo and video production than many of these "vlogger" specials manufacturers are putting out.

Forget vlogging cameras that look like pro cameras. Give us phone-sized point-and-shoots that leverage computational photography, bigger sensors and better glass to give us unquestionably superior experiences. I've been impressed by the Fuji X100 series and the Ricoh GRs, because they give you programmable modes that allow you to custom program "looks" into your jpegs in ways that cellphone cameras don't. I think this might be a way to sway mobile phone shooters graduating from simple snaps to instagram filters to Lightroom/Snapseed editing to... actual cameras?

Young people just shoot themselves most of the time, or a group of young people, or a landscape..... until they have toddlers, then they notice that is imposible to take nearly decent shots in indoors to them without a micro 4/3, apsc or a full frame :) just for that, cameras will survive

As you mentioned here, many young folks have grown up now with the preeminent communication device of a generation, a smartphone. These were the buyers of those cheap cameras years ago because to many of them and the rest of us, photography is about communication and not art. The way I see photography as an art form working for them (and us) is to build cameras that are true interface devices to their smartphones. Put camera functionality, great sensor and robust communication (Wi-Fi and Bluetooth) in the ‘interface’, then put post processing in the smartphone. Heck, maybe even use the smartphone screen as as the EVF with a clip on mount to the camera interface (NFC?) That’ll reduce the cost of the camera body, fixed or ILC, affordable to the content creator. Just saying.

Maybe some people don't think of it as photography more of I wanted a picture of ..... or I wanted a picture of ..... and me.
Should that person move from maybe ..... to I want to explore photography then maybe they move to a dedicated camera.
Personally I like looking through the electronic view finder to take photos, usually of something I'm interested in or for a purpose.

I am a very amateur photographer. It is not my profession. It is tough to justify a professional level camera when taking pictures is a hobby. It is great that affordable cameras are still being manufactured for people like me. In the end, the more people who are interested in photography the better it is for everyone. Often businesses make the majority of their profits from entry level products. This subsidizes the companies ability to manufacture higher end items. It's a pyramid folks.

You are absolutely right. The new generation they don’t have any knowledge about photography. Don’t feel sorry you have a great knowledge.

I will pick up one of my MFT or APS-C cameras any day before I use my 14 Pro for photography. The only times I use the phone is when I don’t have a camera with me, or I just need/want to send/share something right away. The iPhone is great for what it is, but the RAW-files cannot be compared to photos taken with larger sensors and better lenses.

I am getting on in age too so I tend to agree with you on this. On the other hand we are no longer the target of photography companies, I think. So who knows what the new generation thinks about this ?

I love my phone as a camera but it definitely struggles if you want any sort of reach beyond the wide angle. The flexibility I get with my cheaper mft camera lets me get a lot of shots I couldn’t get with the phone, and I’m glad my camera was cheap because it allowed me to spend more on lenses, which I find much more interesting than the camera itself.

Being as old as you are, Matti. Picking a Nikon D300 for about $150 USD, plus a good used lens or two, is a better option than spending $600 USD on the Canon EOS R100 with the kit lens. Every time a person that is getting into photography asks me for suggestions, they look like it's insulting for them to buy used. I try to explain that it's no different from a used automobile, but...

The cost argument is somewhat weird. How much does the iPhone 14 Pro cost?! Smartphones have gotten to a price point where they're more expensive than professional grade cameras.

I also like the Canon R100. In the UK it's still quite expensive, especially compared to the entry level DSLRs Canon sold a year or two ago. If the price comes down and Canon release some more APSC lenses I may get one when I have saved up enough money. I am hopeful the R100 sells well and encourages other manufacturers to release affordable basic cameras for beginners and photographers on a tight budget.

Lots of good points Matti. I think there is still a place for entry level cameras - more choices are always good for consumers. Phone cameras are awesome because it made photography more accessible and more mainstream as an activity, but entry level cameras are great when a proportion of those people want to take their hobby further. I do wish 2nd hand market places like MPB and KEH are available here in Australia, because then there are more options for getting affordable cameras and de-stigmatizing getting used gear.

I bought a used Lumix G5 with a shutter count of just under 1000 for $350.00 CND, it is small, light and because of this I use it a lot more than I thought I would when I made the purchase.

Well said Matti. After all one can learn to use them and learn their limitations. That Camera you were reviewing had some limitations in its use that were in my old cameras in the past and it was possible to take amazing photographs as well as terrible photographs and some lucky photographs. As I learned more I had more success. I think one can learn about how to use a camera in small bits of learning. E.g. learn what ISO means and experiment with using that setting and the next day try exposure compensation and learn about that. Then write down what you learned and how you set it on the camera.

ISO means and
experiment with using that setting

Whatever good the modern phones may be , I don t like composing photos with a phone. I do like viewfinders which isolate you to take photo in good conditions so Yes these little cameras are useful. I looked at this small canon but I finally choose the Panasonic g100. It s a camera which is for me underrated. It was marketed to vlog but due to its important cropping it s not so easy to use like this or with the expensive 9mm Leica Panasonic which is quite a non sense for me due to its price. I use it with the very small 12-32mm and it s perfectly adapted to it. I use it for videos and pictures during a recent travel through the French Alps(the high Alpin road in biking) and I particularly appreciated the tripod that you can use as an holder grip with two buttons (one for pictures, the other for videos). The screen is very good and can be moved in all directions, the functionalities are very rich , the viewfinder is quite good (you need to have your eye perfectly is the center) and the output quality is very usable. With the older you can make videos of bikers from you car very easily (far more easily than with a phone and with no danger of letting it fall down). So I really appreciate it and I got it for 400 euros on second hand market almost in perfect shape.

When I post my photos on facebook I always get compliments, it's not difficult, friends use their smartphones they are not interested in photography they just want pics, so it's badly framed, badly composed, they have no idea where the light comes from etc... but they are happy with that. No one is jealous of my camera or asks me for information, they just want pics and the smartphone suits them very well for that and on my side I always have women ready to put in front of my lens, they know they will look their best in my photos. Some I need 20' to prepare for an auto-portrait they need 2s for a selfie! ( can you image a auto-portrait of van Gogh by Christie call a selfie? :-) ) 100% of people are interested in pics but 95% are not interested in photography and that suit me very well. More risk to be crushed at football field than in a museum.

Olen harrastanut valokuvausta yli 40 vuotta ja nyt viime vuosina olen huomannut että kamera ei ole yleensä koskaan silloin mukana kun pitäisi, ja niinpä myin pois kaikki pro luokan kamerani ja nipun objektiiveja ja päätin siirtyä ainoastaan kamerapuhelimen käyttöön. Tutkin pitkään kuvien laatueroja kännykän ja järjestelmäkameran välillä rinnakkain Photoshopissa ennen ratkaisuni tekoa ja minun silmäni ei mitään ratkaisevia eroja kuvissa löytynyt joten ratkaisu vaihdokseen oli helppo. Kamerapuhelimen etuna on pitkien 30 sekunnin valotuaikojen ottaminen käsivaralta, et tarvitse mitään ND suodattimia, kamerajalustaa ym lisävarustetta. Ainut negatiivinen puoli on että syvyysterävyyttä et voi aukoin säätää, mutta senkin voi tehdä sitten Photoshopissa. Minulla on ennakkotilauksessa Sonyn Xperia 1 V kamerapuhelin iPhonen tilalle, ja jossa on Sonysta tuttu softajärjestelmä, optinen 85-125mm zoom. Nyt Katukuvauksissa kukaan ei tule minulta kyselee, "otitko minusta kuvan", mutta kameralla kuvatessa minulta monestikin sitä kyseltiin. Nyt minulla on kamera joka on aina mukana ja siinä on myös puhelin. Jos et ole mikään lintukuvaaja niin suosittelen kokeilemaan.

I think high-ebd compact cameras (Ricoh GR, Canon Gx, Sony RX) will remain as they are still compact but offer more easy to use settings and larger image sensor with less automated processing. It also depends in your genre.

As I travel about taking photos I meet many people with an entry-level Canon DSLR and their kit lens. Obviously these cameras fulfil a need so I guess this mirrorless equivalent will too. Even if a buyer finds the R100 limiting, they will be able to learn all the basics of digital photography such as how to master the different exposure modes, how to focus in the right place, whether high ISO is really a disaster, etc. They will be able to learn whether RAW files are advantageous to them and how to edit them. They will be able to learn composition.
All this stuff is useful, so they don't have to learn that without that knowledge they can take lousy pictures on the latest expensive camera, and that they weren't that interested in photography after all.

I would prefer to buy a used Olympus than this Canon. Just FWIW.

I saw your video with the Canon R100, personally I do not like that camera and I will not recommend it to any, I would recommend a camera with better specs, new or used. Young people just keep their phones or hit a trend like analog film cameras, to really catch up digital photography for new people who are interest in photography, it needs to be with cameras and Lenses that have better specs than the R100. I do myself understand all the fuzz with phones and their bad quality cameras and Lenses, the cameras and Lenses in phones are very cheap (to make) and the phones are MUCH too expensive. The corona and other crisis made a jump in camera prices, but I think the prices will level out again so we still can get medium and high level cameras and Lenses.

A good option is a dedicated camera with a good app to transfer photos to the phone.

If you seriously want to take photos, I am sure the R100 is a great tool in your hand. I am sure it has a decent AF system, you can set ISO, f-stop and shutter speed manually or half-automatically, you can mount lenses according to your budget. Imagine what nice portraits of people around you can take with that really cheap 50/1.8, for example, including great available light pictures, because you have a great sensor. So people, stop complaining and go out shooting. Pricey cameras don't make good pictures. An R100 with a kit lens and a fast prime is all you need for a wide range of photography.

Upgraded to an OM1 and 2 zooms for my retirement present, and traded in my other M43 stuff partly because i wanted weather sealing, not long after i picked up an olld Olympus E3 with a decent lens for £150 in great condition, i love it, the OM1 however much as i like it i dont love it, my regret is selling my pen F to fund it

i want affordable advanced point and shoot cameras. like the G7X or G9X. would love to see some updates on these. pocketable but with full manual controls, good optics and a larger sensor than your average smartphone. personally, i would never voluntarily take anything that doesn’t fit into my pocket. tried it, and the cameras spent most of their time in the car or hotel room.

Please continue to provide us with good videos. Don't mind the haters, they are not worth your while.

Hello sir. You are a self made master in photograph. Your knowledge is very useful to one and all.

I think phones make way more sense for beginners as they fit the niche of point and shoot. It is very hard for people that have never owned a camera, to realize the advantage of interchangeable lenses, on both optical quality and reach. And budget cameras, not being better than older flagships, are not really helping clear those doubts. The gap between beginning and professional gear is riddled with way too many issues. So while you may look at this budget cameras and understand what you have to do to get the most out of it, for their intended market there is just a lost of grievances that phones already resolved (stabilization, high megapixel count, weather proofing, 3 focal lengths included). I think what camera manufacturers could do is make a 1k usd camera that really blows the phones away feature to feature.

As one who works in photo retail I have seen a decline in sales of cameras over the past decade or so. Smartphones have crushed sales of compact cameras. However, there is still a small demand for reasonable priced cameras, both compact and interchangeable lens cameras, a demand that we sometimes have difficulty fulfilling thanks to a shortage of modern digital cameras (I believe the chip shortage may be partly to blame). Now, we are a small photo shop in a small town in the north of England and in a good month we'll sell less than a dozen new cameras as most of our business is mainly photo printing, frames and similar accessories. We do however sell quite a few pre-owned cameras, including film cameras as popularity in film has grown particularly from young adults who are learning that film gives you images the quality of which their smartphones can't achieve, at least not without a few filters., but again, shortage of film stock has led to a few disappointed customers.
Back to the point- I have seen a demand for "proper" cameras at a reasonable price point and the Canon you recently reviewed is a good start. We have sold a few Lumix G100's this year (we're a Panasonic dealer) which seems similar spec wise but is a little cheaper. I also believe that creators like you making video reviews of reasonably priced cameras can help to keep interest in such cameras from the occasional photographer as well the keen amateur.
Take care.

I don’t care how good a phone camera is, I don’t get any enjoyment out of using one, as I have to have a viewfinder. Shooting off of the back screen is ludicrous to me, a huge step backwards in my opinion.

Great video. Phones can take some good pictures but I will stick to dedicated cameras because the lens variety, flashes, ergonomics, battery life, low-light picture quality and zoom capabilities are worth it IMO.

If camera companies want to continue to attract new customers to their product line, they need to continue to offer a reasonably well appointed camera with decent kit lens at an attractive price point. I don’t know what that number is, but it’s certainly no more than $1000 USD in my view (about the cost of a new well appointed phone these days). If the price of getting into photography with a “real” camera is too dear, I suspect many will not make the leap.

Maybe I'm unusual here but I too am "an old guy", in fact older than I think you might be Matti. I've been taking photos for maybe 60 years on and off, purely as an amateur, and for everyday and street I love my iPhone for photography. I also use the GRIII/Xs like you and I have a Fuji X-T3 set up with primes and a zoom for landscapes and "serious" portraits of family. I have no problem with the ergonomics of the phone and I take quick street shots one handed if something suddenly happens in front of me. The 12 MP sensor is good enough for my use and I make small square photobooks of our travel trips through Lightroom. For more considered shots I might use the GRs but I'm taking travel and street photos for me and my wife only and my set up works for me!

Unfortunately, inexperienced users get better technical results from smartphones than from the camera.

I think if mfg updated a new line of pocket type cameras they would sell much better than a larger body/interchangeable lens camera. If fuji would update the x70 it would be a huge seller if it was done right and promoted properly.

My biggest complaint with phone cameras is that people invariably hold them vertically, and never use "landscape" orientation. There's a reason the terms "portrait" and "landscape" are used.

The problem of especially the Canon R100 is that they have not put in a touchscreen (important for people coming from smartphones to quickly set a focus point) and it does not have any form of movable screen (selfies). This is however exactly the target group for that product. For what it does, it is thus too expensive. Granted, it might be interesting to see the marker around Christmas for the R100. Should be much less than MSRP by ther time

I lost my favourite Lumix 20mm lens, so was looking for a replacement. I found a good one on a well known site in their used section. Also there was a used camera - a Lumix GF3, which was only £34! The two go together really well and will fit in a pocket, so really useful when I want to go out unencumbered by my bigger M4/3rds kit. The slightly out of date GF3 still takes really good pictures which are better than I get from my phone.

I bought a second hand G7x mark ii for two reasons, 1st - I didn't have much money to buy an good interchangeable lens camera
2nd - I wanted to have a small camera with good specs to carry everywhere.
A camera is a camera , the feel is different and the vibe is different .
A smartphone never gave me that feeling while clicking pictures.

Being a LUMIX gx880 and gx9 owner, I can definitely agree that there’s market for cheapish cameras! I think it helps you to go out and shoot, and it’s double the pleasure when you get a nice shot from this cameras

Well done Matti. You did a wonderful talk on this subject. It is true that people can take wonderful photographs if they spend a little time learning the basics of photography, therefore not needing IBIS, or image stabilised lenses, or cameras with large megapixel counts, or the sharpest lenses out there. After all those who learned the basics of photography in film camera days or early days of digital photography shot beautiful images that still look beautiful today. Of course, it will be necessary to have more expensive gear if you are a professional, but even older DSLR cameras and lenses can do a fantastic job, eg a Canon 5D or a Canon 5D mark II.