Tuesday June 12, 2012
– Stewart Wolpin
What do you call
digital cameras that aren't point-and-shoot, but aren't D-SLRs – yet feature
interchangeable lenses?
Some folks call these
digicam tweeners Compact System Cameras (CSC). Some group them under the more
specific yet simpler rubric of "mirrorless." Other want something a
bit more jargon-y so combine these two sobriquets into Mirrorless System Camera (MSC). Highlighting their lack of fixed
lenses informs the sobriquets Compact Interchangeable Lens Camera (CILC) and Digital
Interchangeable Lens Camera (DILC).
Perhaps the most clever
but quizzical acronym offered is Electronic
Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens (EVIL).
Based on initial
market impact, however, whatever-you-call-them seem the opposite of malevolent.
But what is a
mirrorless interchangeable lens camera – MILC? Hey, another category name
nominee! Since no one acronym has been officially adopted by the industry, I'll
use mine.
MILCs consist mainly
of two types: Micro Four Thirds (mainly
Panasonic, Olympus and Pentax) and APS-C (mainly Fuji and Samsung). Nikon's 1
MILCs use a proprietary CX-format sensor.
But next month, Sony
will start selling what it calls a "premium compact," the DSC-RX100,
a fixed lens camera but with a larger-than-point-and-shoot/smaller sensor and
lots of manual controls.
With a 1-inch CMOS sensor
the same size as each of the two MILC Nikon
1 models, the RX100 isn't exactly a point-and-shoot digicam. But at
$650, it isn't what we typically think of as a point-and-shoot digicam, either.
Yet, it is a mirrorless camera but with a fixed lens, which makes it a
point-and-shoot camera.
I think.
One gets the feeling
MILCs will come in a lot more blurry flavors going forward.
Got MILC?
According to most
digicam industry know-it-alls, D-SLRs represent around 15 percent of the total
market. The now catch-all interchangeable lens camera (ILC) category – which
encompasses both D-SLRs and MILCs – is expected to rise 2-3 percent this year
on the strength of growing MILC sales.
Nearly every major
camera maker now has a MILC with the exception of the camera industry's 800-pound
paparazzi, Canon, which
is rumored to be readying one for the fall.
Geographically, the
U.S. has been a bit slow on the MILC uptake. But a recent survey conducted by gadget
research site Sortable found 22 percent of
U.S. consumers are searching for information on MILCs, compared to 36
percent for all other camera types.
But MILCs
are being soaked up in Japan like, well, milk. The Japan
Economic Newswire reported retail sales of MILCs nearly doubled in
March compared to March 2011.
More optimistic
forecasts have MILCs surpassing D-SLR unit sales in around four years.
Camera of necessity
MILC development was
practically forced on camera makers by makers of smartphones (which must make
Samsung schizophrenic). More and more, consumers are eschewing entry-level
digital cameras for the 5 or 8 MP imagers in their smartphones.
But smartphones
aren't replacing all photo-taking. It's clear that consumers employ smartphones
for in-the-moment candids and videos. But when events are planned – vacations,
celebrations, et al – we tend to pull out a real camera to make sure we get the
best shots.
MILC marketing is
based on the premise that consumers want a camera demonstrably more
sophisticated than their smartphone to satisfy their event-based photography
needs. Even a mid-level point-and-shoot – now smaller than most new
smartphones, which all have much larger screens and far more powerful
processors than similarly-priced digital cameras – just won't do.
But consumers also
are daunted by the complexity of D-SLRs, which also are deemed to bulky to
schlep around while site-seeing.
Hence, the appeal of
MILCs, nearly as small as a point-and-shoot but offering
definitely-not-a-smartphone differentiating interchangeable lenses.
MILCs also make
camera makers happy – more expensive cameras make more profitable cameras.
Considering overall falling camera sales as a result of the economy, last
year's Thailand flooding and other industry bad news (Kodak's bankruptcy,
Olympus' accounting issues, everyone's 2011 earnings disappointments and
executive changes, etc.), MILCs may seem like a godsend.
But lingering
questions persist about optimistic MILC sales forecasts and the new category's long-term
success and affect on the camera business.
For instance, how
sustainable is a $600-plus camera business given the inexorable improvement in
smartphone imagers? And will MILC sales cannibalize the low-end D-SLR business?
Forgive the pun, but
we'll wait and see how the MILC business develops.
