PetaPixel published an interesting article today entitled Camera Makers Are Increasingly Happy to Trade Image Quality for Other Benefits by Jaron Schneider. I found it fascinating, particularly in light of my Let’s talk Fujifilm AF article that I published a little over a week ago. When I typed that post, I hadn’t considered that there might be an actual cost to image quality in order to produce blazing fast cameras with extraordinarily exceptional autofocus.
In my article, I said, “Fujifilm’s autofocus is very good—fantastic, actually. However, Sony and Canon (and arguably Nikon) have a bit more fantastic autofocus system than Fujifilm (as you’d expect). I really don’t understand the complaints about Fujifilm’s autofocus. It is like complaining that a Corvette isn’t a Maserati, and calling the Corvette garbage because it isn’t more like a Maserati. If you want a Maserati, buy a Maserati! Otherwise, appreciate that you have a Corvette.”
PetaPixel’s article essential states that the big three camera makers—Canon, Nikon, and Sony (a.k.a. Canikony)—are chasing faster camera processing, improved autofocus, and increased video specs at the expense of pure image quality. It might be that they’re so focused (pun intended) on those things that improving image quality for still photographs just isn’t a priority, so it remains stagnate from one model to the next. Perhaps they simply feel that image quality has neared the ceiling for the current tech, so there’s no need to push things further. On the other hand, the tech they’re using in some cameras to achieve speed plus autofocus and video specs is actually detrimental to image quality, particularly for dynamic range and high-ISO noise.
I’ve never even been inside of a Maserati or Corvette, but perhaps the Corvette, while not as fast or agile as the Maserati, offers a more comfortable ride for significantly less money, while still delivering a thrill. No camera is perfect, and each has advantages and disadvantages—what I can say for certain is that I’d choose a “Corvette” camera over a “Maserati” any day of the week. And I’m glad that Fujifilm is not compromising still image quality in pursuit of speed and specs. Jaron wrote, “One company that is finding its products suddenly becoming more compelling because of this: Fujifilm.”
I hope that Fujifilm doesn’t cave in to the negativity by some who would prefer that they simply become a part of the Canikony brands (Canikonyfilm?). In my opinion, Fujifilm should continue to blaze their own trail, and not concern themselves too much with what the other brands are doing. They need to continue to produce compelling cameras—trendworthy and timeless products—and do more to communicate with potential customers why their unique approach is desirable and maybe even preferable.
I really don’t want Fujifilm to pursue a path that leads to reduced image quality. Those who appreciate image quality above technical specs and extreme performance will turn to—and have already been turning to—Fujifilm as the Canikony brands ignore them. Those who prefer speed and specs above all else have three brands to choose from—for certain those things sell cameras (or else they wouldn’t be doing it), but those who actually need it are a very small percentage of the total customers. Most of those who buy those cameras do so because of marketing or hype or FOMO; however, they don’t need a “Maserati” by any stretch, and would be quite happy with a “Corvette” instead.
What is your opinion? Should Fujifilm give up some image quality in order to make faster cameras like Canon, Nikon, and Sony have been doing? Or should Fujifilm work more towards improvements in image quality instead? Comment below with your opinions!