I’ve written before about how APS-C cameras and other small sensors are more or less moot these days. The exceptions to that rule have to do with them being in compact cameras — that’s something we can get behind. But interchangeable lens small-sensor cameras aren’t pushing any boundaries and are all pretty much the same things. So with a second-hand used camera market having such low prices these days, what’s the point of going for smaller-frame cameras?
To recap on what we’ve said before we can agree that Canon, Sony, and Nikon all make APS-C cameras that don’t really push boundaries at all. The exception might be the Canon EOS R7 with its pre-shot burst mode — but even that’s a stretch as so many full-frame cameras have that these days. And even despite this feature being important for sports and birding, it doesn’t mean that a photographer can’t get the shot still. Brand new, a Canon EOS R7 might cost around $1,500. However, a used Panasonic S5 II will cost around $1,300 if you specifically search for the used option on listings. Then you need to look at lenses — and the L-mount alliance has a lot of great options that are affordable and high-end both.
This is the “problem” for camera manufacturers — their APS-C cameras aren’t all that much of a better option than the lower-end of full-frame cameras.
With all this in mind, we’re in a buyer’s market more than anything else. The used camera market is just so saturated with camera models that anyone can get a full-frame camera very cheaply.
Want a great example? The Sony a7r III is highly used by photographers and costs only around $1,500. In fact, in 2022 most of the Sony World Photo awards were shot using that camera despite newer variants being available. That’s still a better option than some of the APS-C and Micro Four Thirds cameras out there. Photographers like Henriette Sabroe Ebbesen, Niki Phillips, and Ashley Zhang are making moving photos with older full-frame cameras.
So what about wildlife photography? Well, the original Canon EOS R6 has animal detection, does a great job with it, and can be had very affordably. “Canon has pulled an ace out of its sleeve when it comes to animal eye AF. I have been blown away with just how accurate and precise it has been,” we said in our review. “The eye AF starts almost instantaneously if you are close enough to an animal, and it does not matter if the animal is stationary or in motion.”
But let’s be honest here — conservation and wildlife photography are pretty small segments of the market of people who take photography very seriously. Mind you, the statement I’m saying is “photography” and not content creation. Making content for an attention economy is fine — but how many of you are really making prints, selling them, and being contracted for services?
All these cameras are also pretty small, lightweight, weather resistant, and capable. I haven’t even gotten the Nikon cameras yet — but I’ve already named three full-frame cameras that are better buys than newer APS-C cameras.
When other outlets like to defend small-sensor cameras, they’re probably just bought by a manufacturer or trying to win their favor in the face of our absolute truth-speaking.
And all of this leads up to a bigger issue — for APS-C cameras to survive, the manufacturers with their billions of dollars need to do a better job and be more innovative for photographers. Brands have asked for years what they can do for photographers. So here are some novel ideas for photographers:
- Built-in wireless flash transmission via Wifi, Bluetooth, or GPS, let alone radios: You could potentially eliminate the need for hot shoes and therefore make cameras even more weather resistant
- Multiple exposure mode with RAW capabilities: combine with the exposure preview functions this will make double exposures even easier and you can always edit the RAWs later. Right now, only Canon fully realizes this feature.
- Low light autofocus on people of color with melanin in their skin: Currently, Nikon and Leica are the only ones to do this weel.
- Touchless shutter: a feature where you can shoot an image just by using the eye-sensor on the viewfinder.
- Focus peaking that’s actually accurate: brands have more or been lacking on this for years. Canon does it well.
- In-camera filters: how about the addition of Pro-mist filters, haze filters, or even ghost filters that can be added to the RAW file in-camera?
- Better skin rendering of people of color: Google did this. Why can’t camera manufacturers do it?
- Improved battery life for all the processing things that are happening: right now, camera battery life in general doesn’t feel like it’s in a good spot.
- Higher-detailed LCD screens: photographers don’t want to edit more and more. So why not also calibrate the screens to what phones and monitors look like?
- Better menu interfaces: people are staring at screens more and more. And their eyes are getting worse. Isn’t it time to make the menu systems better?
These are just a few ideas — and they’re far better than the idea of doing something like getting rid of onion bokeh.