Introduction
 |
Recently we put together a list of the twenty-five cameras we thought were most significant over the nearly twenty-five years DPReview has been running so far. They weren’t necessarily the best cameras or even the most advanced cameras of their day, but the ones that represented significant steps forward for the industry. Or, in the case of the Olympus XZ-1, were simply cameras that we really enjoyed and thought exemplified a particular style or era.
The comments we received on the article suggested many cameras that in fact had come close to making it onto our list. So we thought it’d be interesting to take a look at those long-list cameras that we agree deserve an honorable mention.
Canon PowerShot G1 (2000)
 |
The most common reason for a camera not to make our final cut was that it’s difficult to pick between models within a successful series. The PowerShot G1 is a great example of this. As commenter Podz points out it was the first enthusiast compact that could capture Raw. It was built around a 34-102mm equiv. F2.0-2.5 zoom lens, which Phil noted it shared with a number of rivals, and a Type 1/1.8 (~7.1 x 5.3mm) CCD sensor, a size that would become one of the defining features of enthusiast compacts for the next decade plus. The main thing that kept the G1 off our list was the competing claim of the later PowerShot G7 (2006), that set the template for a popular series of camera that was one of the few to offer something for enthusiasts during an otherwise fallow period. Although we sometimes found that the longer, slower lenses on the later models didn’t always offer an image quality boost commensurate with their increased size and price, they deserve credit for keeping the faith during a time when few makers were thinking about photographer’s compacts.
Read our Canon PowerShot G1 review
Olympus E-1 (2003)
 |
The Olympus E-1 was the first digital SLR to be designed from a blank sheet of paper. Olympus and Kodak settled on the Type 4/3 sensor (17.8 x 13.4mm) because it would give suitably good image quality and allow lenses comparable in size to existing 135 format lenses, as long as they were designed so that the light arrived at the sensor with very low angles of incidence (hitting the sensor straight-on so as to reach the light-sensitive region of the pixel). Four Thirds was intended as an open standard to which other manufacturers could subscribe, and both Panasonic and Leica also sold Four Thirds DSLRs, while Sigma and Samyang also made lenses for the system. The E-1, with its 5MP CCD, was the first in a series of rugged, weather-sealed flagship models, and the system went on to include models such as the E-330 (which made our ‘most significant’ list) and the diminutive E-400 models. But perhaps Four Thirds’ greatest legacy isn’t so much that it was the first all-digital camera system, but that it formed the starting point for Micro Four Thirds: the first mirrorless camera system.
Fujifilm F30/F31fd (2006)
 |
The Fujifilm F30 and F31fd were a pair of compacts built around Fujifilm’s Super CCD technology, specifically the sixth-generation ‘high resolution’ version that promised octagonal pixels for better use of the sensor surface. Critically, though, this sensor was also larger than most of its rivals used. This necessitated the use of a 36-108mm equiv. range that Simon Joinson characterised as ‘boring’ in his review of the F31fd. We gave credit to its low pixel count for its high ISO performance, against the grain of the market that was then pursuing higher-megapixel models (in reality, the use of a Type 1/1.7 (7.6 x 5.7mm) sensor had a lot to do with it too). These models brought a reasonable degree of direct control, including both aperture and shutter priority modes, but also an easy way to apply exposure compensation. Overall we gave them mixed reviews but looking back they were more enthusiast-friendly than their outward styling gave away.
Read our review of the Fujifilm FinePix F31fd
Pentax K10D (2006)
 |
It was interesting to see how many commenters advocated for Nikon’s enthusiast DSLRs, whether in the form of the D700, D750 or the likes of the D7200. While very nice cameras, it’s hard to pick one with something specific that we’d not seen before or elsewhere. Pentax’s DSLRs suffer from a similar fate. Konica Mintola beat them to the use of IBIS, and while using it to offer a switchable anti-aliasing filter simulation mode is ingenious, pixel counts soon got high enough that moiré isn’t a major problem in most photos. Nevertheless, when it comes to handing out honorable mentions, we have to include Pentax’s range of enthusiast DSLRs, from the K10D right through to today’s K-3 Mark III, for one attribute above all others: ergonomics. Whatever concerns about AF or JPEG color we’ve had over the years, everyone who’s reviewed one of the high-end Pentax cameras has come away loving the way they feel in the hand. It’s a combination of size and density: Pentax models tend to be a little smaller than their Canon or Nikon peers, but built from weather-sealed magnesium alloy in a way that makes them feel confidence-inspiringly solid. And beyond this sense of solidity, the dials are placed exactly where your fingers fall, making them feel like they were designed by, as well as for, photographers.
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ series (2007?)
 |
One reason we included the Olympus C700 UZ in our most-significant list was because it hinted at the later creation of the pocketable superzoom – to be pioneered by Panasonic’s DMC-TZ ‘travel zoom’ series (inexplicably renamed ZS in the US market after 2009). Part of what made the TZ series possible was the development of enough processing power to allow real-time lens corrections. This technology allowed pocket cameras to offer zooms that widened out to 24 and 28mm equivalent, rather than having to start at 36 or 38mm equiv. or needing a specialist ‘wide’ model. However, because all this correction was conducted behind the scenes and these models didn’t offer Raw output, we can’t be entirely sure which camera took this approach first. Our guess would be the DMC-TZ2 (2007) or one of its contemporaries, but it wasn’t until the release of the Raw-shooing LX3, a generation later, when we could see what was happening. As Gordon Laing highlights, the travel zoom was one of the last types of compact to offer something not easily replaced by smartphones.
Read our original Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ3 review
Nikon D3/D300 (2007)
 |
We’ve written before about how the Nikon D3, with its combination of much improved autofocus and then-groundbreaking high-ISO performance, revived Nikon’s fortunes in the professional market. The D3 matched the 12MP of Nikon’s high-res D2Xs pro model while shooting 1fps faster than the 4.1MP D2Hs, and made the move to full-frame while doing so, giving Nikon shooters full utility of their film-era lenses. As we noted, it didn’t make our ‘most significant’ list only because we didn’t want to just look at the most expensive cameras on the market, flagships out of the reach of most people. Interestingly, though, the wider mass of Nikon users didn’t have to wait years for the 51-point AF system and AF tracking system from the D3 to trickle down: they were incorporated into the D300 that was launched at the same time. The D300 offered a more modest increase over the D200: a slight increase in pixel count and an uptick in burst rate. But the move from an 11-point AF system to 51 points (with greater coverage than the D3, thanks to its APS-C sensor), and a shift from CCD to CMOS meant that it still offered an improvement in low light performance over its forebear, even with a smaller sensor than the D3. Whereas the D3 would be supplemented with a high-res sibling and replaced on a roughly biennial basis, the D300 received only a minor update before the spectacular D500, nearly nine years later (another camera that nearly made the list).
Read our review of the Nikon D3 or our review of the Nikon D300
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 (2008)
 |
The LX3 nearly made our original list, but the better JPEG engine and click dial of the Olympus XZ-1 nudged us in that direction instead. Following two models that used ‘widescreen’ 16:9 sensors, the LX3 was the first Panasonic camera to have an oversized sensor and then use different crops that all gave the same diagonal angle of view. It meant you could shoot 3:2, 4:3 or 16:9 and maintain the 24mm equivalent field of view. This trick, combined with a prominent switch to encourage the use of different aspect ratios, was the LX3’s most striking feature, but it was an excellent photographer’s compact beyond this. The 24-60mm equiv. lens could be a little restrictive at the long end but its F2.0-2.8 maximum aperture, in combination with the relatively large sensor, meant the LX3 offered a size/image quality combination that was hard to beat. On a personal level it was the camera that made me really appreciate the impact that sensor size and a bright lenses could bring. The LX series continued to evolve and, as photographers’ compacts moved to larger sensors, spawned the lovely LX100 cameras that maintain the multi-aspect approach and bring more direct control, though losing some of the LX3’s pocketability.
Read our Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 review
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 (2009)
 |
This, along with the Nikon D700, was one of the few cameras I remember multiple members of the DPR team getting so excited about that they considered buying one. We’d all drooled over the Olympus E-P1, but then Panasonic arrived to show us the GF1. ‘You might want to wait a few weeks’ was Simon Joinson’s assessment of our Olympus fever as he emerged from the briefing. The GF1 was the smallest digital ILC ever launched, and remained usefully compact when combined with the 20mm F1.7 pancake prime. A clickable dial on the back meant you had aperture, shutter speed or exposure compensation immediately to hand, giving you direct control and very good image quality in a tiny package. Weirdly, Panasonic seemed to think it had made a point-and-shoot camera, and proceeded to make the GF line more and more touchscreen led, before recognizing what the original model’s appeal had been and effectively rebooting the idea as the GX1 two years later. As with the even smaller GM5, we still occasionally wish Panasonic would look back and think ‘could we make a small enthusiast camera again?’
Click here to read our Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 review
Pentax 645 D / Z (2010 / 2014)
 |
Pentax didn’t join the full-frame DSLR market until 2016’s rather likeable K-1, but it had introduced the medium format 645D some six years earlier. The 645D used a 44 x 33mm 40MP CCD sensor in a body that could accept the company’s 645 system lenses. The sensor is smaller than the 56 x 41.5mm of the 645 film format (meaning there’s a 1.2x crop factor, relative to the larger format) but still around 70% larger than full-frame. The 645D was a huge and heavy camera, but with one of the nicest viewfinders we ever got to use. The 645Z from 2014 was even better, using the 50MP CMOS sensor that would go on to underpin medium format models from Fujifilm and Hasselblad. But it was Pentax, with its existing series of film lenses, that brought digital medium format within reach of deep-pocketed enthusiasts. Sadly we were never able to borrow either camera for long enough to fully review them, but the 645Z still made a case for itself when its mirrorless rivals arrived.
Read our Pentax / Fujifilm / Hasselblad comparison
Ricoh GR (2013)
 |
Ricoh launched the first digital version of its much-loved GR series in 2005, having made film models since the mid ’90s. The first four digital versions maintained the 28mm equiv angle of view of the film models and used the Type 1/1.8 (~7.6×5.1mm) sensor format that was pretty standard for enthusiast compacts. It’s the fifth iteration we’re going to focus on, though. Called simply the Ricoh GR, it made a vast jump in sensor size, fitting an APS-C sensor into a body that was essentially the same size as the smaller-sensor GR Digital IV. It maintained the magnesium alloy build and excellent, customizable one-handed control system, but saw a huge boost in image quality. The maximum aperture may have dropped from F1.9 to F2.8 but a nearly ten-fold increase in sensor size meant the newer camera was over two stops ahead in equivalent terms. This meant much better image quality and more control over depth-of-field. This ability to capture up to four times more light came with a 33% increase in price. Since then, Ricoh has not just updated the sensor but also added image stabilization to the latest GR models.
Fujifilm GFX 100S (2021)
 |
Fujifilm was already three cameras and ten lenses into building what’s arguably the most complete APS-C system ever when Sony released the first full-frame mirrorless camera. Ever since that moment it’s become common to see people asking when Fujifilm is going to make a full-frame camera. The riposte to that question came in 2016 when Fujifilm made clear it was going to go one format bigger, with the medium format GFX 50S. Rather than having two systems that risked competing with one another (and that would compete head-to-head with the combined might of Canon, Sony, Nikon and Panasonic marketing machines), Fujifilm instead created a system that used a sensor nearly four times larger than APS-C (and 70% larger than full-frame), meaning they offered a smaller, less expensive format than full-frame or one that gave you a further step up in image quality. The original GFX 50S was quite a lumpy thing, certainly when compared with the rather elegant Hasselblad X1D launched at a similar time. But Fujifilm’s mass-market nous meant it was quicker to work with, better at focusing, offered much better battery life and cost less. Further refinements and the adoption of a 100MP sensor that comfortably out-performs full-frame have led to the GFX 100S: a versatile, relatively compact medium format camera that costs the same as a pro-grade full-framer. An absolute dream in the studio or beyond.
Read our review of the Fujifilm GFX 100S
Summary
 |
So there you have it: a little honor for some of the cameras that just fell short and the ranges that offered too many choices for us to pick from. This has been an interesting series to write, charting the development and demise of the compact camera, watching DSLRs go from APS-C to full-frame only to be swept away by the surge of mirrorless cameras.
As I’ve been selecting and tidying-up the images I’ve found myself remembering what many of them felt like in my hands, remembering the speed of their autofocus and the now dated clunkiness of their menus. Cameras that didn’t have DR correction (such as Active D-Lighting) to give more balanced JPEGs, models that pre-dated Auto ISO, those that couldn’t even shoot video. All cutting-edge in their day and revelatory when new to the photographers who used and loved them.
Of course even with this addendum, we can’t list every good camera that’s been released over the years, and the ones we thought were significant weren’t necessarily the best, anyway. But I hope you’ve found this look at our long-list interesting, even if your favorite still didn’t get a shout-out.
Author:
This article comes from DP Review and can be read on the original site.
