What I Want in a Digital Camera

Or, Why the Heck Haven't They Made This Yet?

Since I began my search to replace my aging Olympus C-2100 UZ (I still miss my Uzi sometimes), I've yet to find a digital camera that I'd say is close to my ideal. Even if price weren't an issue, every model offered up in the past 2 years is lacking something important to me.

So, here's my annotated "short" list of digital camera requirements:

1) Excellent picture quality. It seems obvious to me that this should be near the top of anyone's list who really cares about the camera he/she uses. But oddly enough, and contrary to the belief that technology improves with time, cameras being announced recently seem to offer us worse image quality than cameras being made a few years ago. There is much gnashing of teeth over the increasingly noisy 5-9 megapixel sensors being stuck in 'prosumer' and enthusiast non-DSLR cameras. The manufacturers seem to believe that we're willing to put up with incredibly noisy (even at ISO 100) images as long as they're really, really big. Sorry...that doesn't make any sense to me. I'd take a clean 3MP image over a noisy 8MP image any day of the week. If that means you have to make a 1" (versus 1/1.7" or smaller) 5MP sensor, so be it. Even my Canon SI 1S, which came out in 2003, turns out worse photos than my old C-2100, which came out in 2000 -- the Canon just doesn't offer the same vibrance, clarity and tack-sharp images the Olympus produced despite it being 3 years newer. DSLRs seem to be the clear winner in picture quality, but they have a different limitation...

2) Great movies. OK, I heard several of you photography purists audibly snort when you read that. Yes, I really like the fact that I can take high-quality (VGA, 30fps) MPEG-4 movies with my digital camera (the lack of this feature is why I replaced my C-2100). I'll be taking some stills of something (OK, basically just my daughter these days) and I'll think "gosh, it'd be nice to get this on video." Switch modes and bam, I'm recording live action. And it's rare (OK, never) that I want to film something for longer than a few minutes, so the HQ movie mode offered by many of the better digicams suits me much better than a miniDV camcorder. Unfortunately, none of the DSLRs available today offer movie mode. Why is that? Surely they could figure out a way to lock up the mirror and just start recording video data. I mean, other than the optics configuration, a DSLR is pretty much like any other digital camera.

3) Fast response. I want to be able to take pictures well within a second of turning the camera on and I expect the shutter response, including auto-focus, to be darn near instantaneous. Too many expensive cameras still hem and haw over focusing, especially in low light situations (why on Earth did they stop putting AF assist lamps in high-end cameras?!?), making me lose moment after moment that should have been captured. Yes, DSLRs are generally quite fast, but for other reasons I mention none fits my ideal profile.

4) Anti-shake / optical image stabilization in the lens. I have notoriously shaky hands -- so much so that my friends used to joke I'd be the first surgeon to cut out his own spleen by accident. So for me, image stabilization is a real boon. And yes, I request that this be handled by moving lens elements (a la Canon) and not by moving the CCD (as Konica Minolta does). The latter approach is much less effective at countering shake due to the physics of optics (which I won't go into here).

5) A fast fixed lens with high-quality optics. This isn't so much a requirement as a logical conclusion. I want image stabilization in the lens, but I don't really want to have to buy a bunch of really expensive OIS lenses. Plus, I don't prefer the idea of hauling around a bunch of lenses -- I used to own a 35mm SLR and having a camera bag the size of a hockey duffle always irritated me. Today's long-zoom prosumer digicams have great range -- 35-350mm (10X) is common and 35-420mm (12X) is becoming moreso. That's a lot of zoom, my friend, and except for maybe slapping on a wide-angle adapter once in a while, 35-420mm covers pretty much anything I can imagine doing on any kind of regular basis. So I'm happy to give up the ability to swap lenses if they'd give me a really good (fast with great optics) fixed lens.

6) Zoom and focus rings on the lens. Why is this concept so strange to camera makers? They seem to think we want to zoom in and out using a little thumb toggle instead of twisting a barrel ring. Well, it ain't so. Not only would zoom and focus rings make for much better (i.e., precise) control, they'd use up less battery and wouldn't add noise to movies the way that powered zooms do. Fuji's FinePix S9000 (shown) is a good example of what I'd like the barrel on my camera to look like.

7) Optical viewfinder -or- high-res EVF. I like the idea of getting back to an optical viewfinder, but unless the camera is a DSLR, this is really tough to do well. So, I'd be willing to keep an electronic viewfinder as long as it has enough resolution to let me focus manually with confidence. This is impossible to do in most digital cameras due to crappy EVFs and it's very frustrating.

8) Powered by NiMH 'AA' cells. I have a hard time justifying a camera using a proprietary rechargeable battery when four 2500mAh NiMH 'AA' cells give such great power. Sure, they take up a bit more room, but I'm not pretending this camera needs to be pocketable. Besides, isn't that what the handgrip is for -- a place to put the batteries??

9) Pop-up flash and hot shoe Yes, I want options. For snapshots and spontaneous fill flash, a pop-up flash is usually just fine. But, if I'm going to do something serious, a hot shoe for competent external flash is essential.

10) All the other little stuff. Full manual controls, including white balance and those other more obscure settings; good ergonomics; a good rear LCD (2" or larger please); an EVF mounted on the far left edge of the camera (if looking at the back), so I can avoid nose smudges all over the LCD; standard-size threaded filter mount on the lens (without requiring a special adapter or hood); a reasonable flash media format (Memory Stick and xD Picture Card do not qualify); live histogram; neckstrap and lenscap strap attachment points on the camera body; full bracketing; and some other things I probably can't think of at the moment.

You might notice I didn't specify image resolution (megapixels). That's because I don't really care that much. At least 3MP is reasonable and more than 6MP seems wasteful to me (media gets eaten up really fast with 8MP images). Big zoom can make up for lower MP a lot of the time, as can effective framing when you actually make the shot.

Yes, this ideal camera would probably be pretty costly, but you know what? It'd be worth it...to me, at least.

Update: I've started a list of cameras that almost meet these requirements at this GearBits post...go check it out.