Introduction
 |
This is the second and concluding part of our look back at the cameras we found most significant during the nearly 25 years of DPReview.com’s history. Slightly perplexingly, it comes a day after we had originally announced we’d be closing, which perhaps illustrates that it’s easier to make sense of the past than to predict what the future will hold.
With that in mind, please join us as we look back at the years 2008 onwards, to see how we got to where we are today. We ended Part One with the first recognizable live-view-capable DSLR, so it’s probably no surprise that we start part two with the dawn of the mirrorless age.
Again, this article won’t get too side-tracked by cameras designed primarily for working professionals, as the focus is meant to be on cameras that updated the shooting experience for the majority of buyers. That choice is the only reason we’re skipping over 2007’s Nikon D3 (and its little brother, the D300), a spectacular camera whose greatly improved AF revitalized Nikon’s name in professional circles, and are continuing our rundown a year later.
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 (2008)
 |
No one had needed the term mirrorless to describe an interchangeable lens camera prior to Micro Four Thirds, so we’re not going to clumsily re-write history to retcon-in rangefinders. The Panasonic Lumix G1 is the clear antecedent of the majority of modern ILCs, and hence we consider it to be the first mirrorless camera. What’s interesting is that it wasn’t in any sense radical: instead it felt like a more compact and pretty convincing imitation of a Canon Rebel DSLR. It had a very conventional shape, a single command dial and a decent-sized EVF (albeit using the field sequential technology that refreshes each primary color one after another). Oddly, looking back, it didn’t shoot video; that would arrive with the GH1 a few months later. Its compact 14-45mm kit zoom (manufactured by a well-respected lens maker, we believe) focused very quickly in single AF mode, though continuous autofocus was less impressive. Despite trying not to make too much of a splash, the G1 set off ripples still being felt today.
Read our original Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 review
Click here to see what Chris and Jordan made of it, ten years later
Canon EOS 5D Mark II (2008)
 |
The Canon EOS 5D Mark II wasn’t the first DSLR to shoot video, but it was the first full-framer to do so, and the first to capture 1080p footage. Critically it was also a camera for which there was a significant lens ecosystem and an abundance of second-hand optics. This combination helped it become a hugely popular choice for would-be filmmakers, and, in a spectacular promotional coup, it was famously used to shoot the entire final episode of season six of the hit TV show House. From a stills perspective, it was also a pretty significant upgrade to the original EOS 5D, and many Mark IIs will have been used solely for that purpose. But, even though Canon would divert most of their subsequent video efforts into the Cinema EOS line, the EOS 5D Mark II stands out as the camera that helped kickstart the video/stills hybrid revolution.
Read our Canon EOS 5D Mark II review
Sigma DP1 (2008)
 |
The Sigma DP1 wasn’t the first fixed-lens camera to include an APS-C sensor (that was the Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-R1) – though it’s not clear to me whether Sigma considered its 1.7x sensors to be APS-C – but the Sigma DP1 was the first (properly) large sensor compact camera that was actually compact. Around 18 months passed between its announcement and its arrival, which prompted some doubts and anxiety in the meantime. But it should be obvious why people cared: it’s exactly the sort of camera photographers had been crying out for, for years, and it’s interesting that it took one of the smaller, more adventurous companies to actually try it. The DP1 had a 28mm equivalent F4 lens in front of one of the company’s Foveon X3 sensors (now up to 4.6 full-color MP). It was slow, its interface was significantly less polished than those of the mainstream brands and it ate batteries the moment you thought about pressing one of the buttons. But it was exciting, it was made purely for the love of photography and, in many regards, it was the future.
Fujifilm FinePix X100 (2010)
 |
The X100 series is still going strong, thirteen years later, though now shorn of the company’s compact camera ‘FinePix’ branding.
So the Fujifilm FinePix X100 wasn’t the first large sensor, prime lens camera, but it’s the one that struck a chord with photographers the world over. Whether you see the appeal as its Leica-like styling, its innovative electro/optical viewfinder or just finally having the option of a camera that delivered ‘DSLR-level’ image quality in an easy-to-carry body, it proved to be the camera that a lot of people had always wanted. The first version was deeply flawed (as detailed, at length, in our original review), but over a series of firmware updates and iterative models, the X100 series has been the acme of continuous improvement. At one point every editor in the DPReview office owned at least one of the models, and its continued popularity means it remains difficult to get hold of the most recent variant.
Read our Fujifilm FinePix X100 review
Nikon 1 J1/V1 (2011)
 |
There are parallels between Nikon’s 1 system and the original Four Thirds system: both were attempts to start afresh with new technologies (the DSLR and mirrorless camera, respectively), and question all the old assumptions about what sizes and formats a system should use. The 1 System, which used sensors that were huge in comparison to compact cameras but still small in comparison with DSLRs, was something of a disaster. Nikon introduced two rather point-and-shoot-oriented models, paired with some very slow aperture lenses; this offered the casual photographer some of the bulk of a DSLR but with few of the image quality benefits. And yet the Nikon 1s make it onto this list for their inclusion of several technologies that have become commonplace in the years since, showing how much Nikon got right. They used retractable kit zooms, to make them easy to carry around (pioneered by Olympus on its original 14-42mm for Micro Four Thirds); they were the first to use dual conversion gain sensors, albeit examples from the technology’s originator, Aptina, that didn’t exhibit the performance benefits we’ve since become accustomed to. But perhaps the biggest innovation was the inclusion of on-sensor phase detection, powering a hybrid phase/contrast approach that still dominates the industry. Fujifilm may have got there first with its compacts, but the Nikon 1s were the first mirrorless cameras with on-sensor PDAF.
Read our review of the Nikon J1 and V1
Olympus XZ-1 (2011)
 |
The Olympus XZ-1 is a slightly self-indulgent choice, but for me it represents the pinnacle of a late flourish in enthusiast compact camera design. For much of the digital era, Canon had almost single-handedly kept the enthusiast compact alive with its G series PowerShot models. These combined larger-than-typical sensors with large, metal bodies that featured control dials and tunnel-type optical viewfinders. But their long, usually rather slow lenses meant their image quality wasn’t always proportional to their increased bulk. The XZ-1 was one of a generation of smaller cameras, alongside Panasonic’s LX series, that did something different. They had shorter, brighter lenses that meant they could consistently deliver IQ far removed from other compact cameras. The XZ-1 and XZ-2 stood out for excellent hands-on controls despite their relatively restricted dimensions, and for the excellent 28-112mm equiv. F1.8-2.5 lens (later to appear in the Pentax MX-1). The larger-sensor RX100 arguably swept the class away, but the XZs were more fun for photographers.
Sony Cyber-Shot RX100 (2012)
 |
The RX100 completely redefined what a pocketable camera could do. It used a sensor nearly three times the size of those typically included in even the nicer, enthusiast-targeted compacts. The original model’s 28-100mm equiv. lens may have dropped to a rather underwhelming F4.9 at the long end, but this wasn’t far off the effect of the lens in the XZ-1. Nearer the wide end, though, the RX100 delivered image quality unprecedented in a pocket camera. Later versions gained shorter, brighter (24-70mm equiv. F1.8-2.8) or longer, slower (24-200mm equiv. F2.8-4.5) zooms, and added features such as pop-up viewfinders and Stacked CMOS sensors, but they stayed true to the little black bar of soap aesthetic of the original. They arguably worked better as point-and-shoots than as take-control cameras for enthusiasts, but you can’t dispute the boost they brought to pocketable image quality.
Check our our Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-RX100 review
Sony a7 (2013)
 |
It was always likely that someone would put a ‘full-frame’ sensor in a mirrorless body, even though there’s not the same impetus to mimic a film format if a system has no film heritage or legacy lenses. Having crashed and burned in its attempt on the DSLR market, and having already put a 36x24mm sensor in the NEX-VG900 camcorder (2012), it’s probably no surprise that the first mover would be Sony. The Sony a7 looked radically different when placed next to the likes of Nikon’s D610 or Canon’s EOS 6D, and it also hit the market at an appreciably lower price. The ergonomics were angular, the menus pretty horrendous and the operation surprisingly laggy (we have no regrets for not giving it a Gold award, despite acknowledging it as a milestone), but it set the tone for much that was to come. By the time the industry’s two biggest players responded, Sony was onto the Mark III, by which stage IBIS had been added and the majority of our original concerns had been addressed. Sony had also shared the specs of its E-mount, meaning a vast selection of lenses was available too. The original a7 may not be our favorite camera, but it’s the one that began the assault on the Canon/Nikon duopoly that had seemed indomitable for most of the digital era, and started Sony on the road to being an industry leader.
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 (2014)
 |
It’s difficult to know which GH model to include in this article as they have regularly been the models that have raised the level of video features and capabilities in the cameras we cover. Over the years new GHs have forced me to learn about Log, LUTs and 10-bit capture, about progressive and interlaced video and about just what anamorphic and open-gate shooting entail, as well as making me draw diagrams to explain multi-aspect sensors. The GH3 was probably the body that set the template for the GH series but we’re going to pick the GH4 because it was the first 4K camera we had to review (not the easiest thing to do in 2014, long before I had a 4K TV). I remember my mind (and eardrums) nearly being blown by the level of detail I captured with the GH3’s 1080 footage, and suddenly we had a sub-$1700 machine that could capture four times the detail. And it wasn’t just about specs: the GH bodies have been designed and refined to make them easy to work with. There’s a reason Jordan still regularly uses cameras from the series.
Read our Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 review
Samsung NX1 (2014)
 |
The Samsung NX1 represents one of the great ‘what if’s’ of digital photography. The Korean giant was one of the first manufacturers to launch a mirrorless system, having previously made little impact with the DSLRs it co-branded with Pentax. The original NX10 model was an impressively solid first attempt, but it was the NX1 that really caught the industry’s attention. Its 28MP APS-C sensor was the first of its size to adopt BSI design, bringing 15fps shooting, and its on-sensor phase detection underpinned an impressive-for-its-day AF tracking system. Its features got expanded and enhanced even while we were trying to review it, gaining a remarkably GH4-like range of 4K shooting options and becoming the first consumer camera to capture H.265 video. Sadly Samsung abandoned the camera market shortly afterwards and the NX1 was discontinued within a year of its launch.
Sony a6000 (2014)
 |
The Sony a6000 doesn’t stand out for what it was, more for what it did in the marketplace. Overall it wasn’t an especially ambitious camera, not when listed alongside the Samsung NX1. Sony essentially did away the magnesium alloy housing and removed high-res viewfinder of its mid-tier NEX-6, instead using what feels like a stamped steel body with an updated sensor. But the key innovation was arguably that it knocked $100 off the list price. The a6000 was bundled with the retractable 16-50mm (a lens that I don’t believe anyone has ever described much more positively than ‘generally transparent’), which made it look as convenient as it was affordable. This package was regularly available for $500 and they flew off the shelves. We don’t have access to sales data at DPReview, but our a6000 review received over seven million pageviews (the most-read that we have records for), which suggests it achieved a degree of popularity.
Read our Sony a6000 review (if you haven’t already)
Nikon D850 (2017)
 |
The D850 was launched around a year before Nikon introduced its mirrorless Z mount, but even then it was pretty apparent that it was likely to be the last time Nikon would build a DSLR to satisfy the studio and landscape market. But what a way to finish. The D850 is a magnificent camera in which every detail seems to have been polished to a high shine. The sensor is superb (and still underpins the current Z7 II), and there’s something about the D850 that seems to work it perfectly. More accurately, perhaps, it’s that every little detail feels like it works perfectly: the AF system is one of the most effective we’ve encountered on a DSLR (with an automated fine-tuning process to support that), and the interface seems to hit the balance point between robust customizability without the kind of overkill where you feel like you have to design the whole thing yourself. With up to 9fps shooting, despite its 47MP sensor, and 4K video if you needed it, the D850 raised the level of what you could expect a high-res DSLR to do. Saying that something can’t be improved upon is always a good way to make yourself look foolish when you’re writing about technology, but it was hard to keep the thought out of our heads when we were using the D850. Other DSLRs were yet to come (and may yet still be), but the D850 felt like a fitting swansong for a once-dominant technology.
Sony a9 (2017)
 |
The Sony a9 wasn’t the first camera to include a Stacked CMOS sensor, but it was the first large sensor camera and the first ILC to do so. The fast-readout chip with its built-in DRAM was the arguably the first time a mirrorless camera looked credible at the pro sports end of the market. It shot 20 frames per second and offered an AF tracking performance beyond anything we’d previously seen (and over a wider part of the scene than any DSLR). Its video specs were oddly limited, perhaps to stop it treading anywhere near the toes of the vastly more expensive CineAlta Venice, which was built around a comparable chip. It didn’t look like the prevailing notion of what a professional sports camera should look like, instead resembling an a7 so much that it prompted some concern about Sony’s prices spiraling. A slightly revised Mark II appears to have cemented the deal for Associated Press photographers to exclusively adopt Sony cameras, perhaps making it as significant in the professional sphere as the a7 was in the wider photographic market.
Summary
 |
It’s tempting to conclude this article with a camera such as the Nikon Z9 or Sony a1, which built on what the a9 offered by delivering a previously impossible combination of high speed and high resolution (something that used to require separate models). But we don’t want to focus on the ultra high end of the market, and we also won’t fully know the impact of these models for a few years.
Likewise, it may seem strange not to have highlighted any of the models that launched Canon’s, Nikon’s or Panasonic’s full-frame mirrorless systems, but again it feels too early to make that call.
Instead it’s perhaps of greater interest to look around and see where all these cameras have brought us to. Modern sensors deliver amazing reproductions of reality, and, in most regards, every modern camera does a great job (of course there are still differences in AF performance and video capabilities, but nothing that’s likely to get in the way of a keen photographer). At the same time, though, cameras have become rather homogenous. You can buy a camera that looks like a late 2000s DSLR or one that looks like a 1960s SLR or rangefinder, and that’s it: that’s what the camera makers have decided the market wants. Looking back at the weird, the wonderful and the inventive cameras that brought us here, it’s hard not to feel we lost something along the way.
But, as I’ve found myself pondering of late, who knows what tomorrow brings?
Thanks to Andy Westlake, Gordon Laing and Phil Askey for their input into these articles.
Author:
This article comes from DP Review and can be read on the original site.
