With Today's Uncertain Photo Industry Can You "Future-Proof" Your Gear Purchases?

Enjoying lunch! (click to enlarge)
Olympus E-M1 Mark III; 300mm f/4 PRO lens + MC-14 1.4X tele-converter (840mm FOV); 1/1600th sec. @ f/5.6; ISO 4000; handheld

This post is an extension of a recent conversation I had with my photographer friend Peter Frailey (PeterFraileyPhoto.com).  We were casually speculating about what gear would we would now buy if all of our gear was stolen, lost or just gone.  It is an interesting proposition which, for me at least, requires some conscious thought.  What would you buy if you lost all of your gear and decided to start over?

The topic started me thinking that if I were to have the opportunity to buy all new gear would I, a) replace it by generally buying what I now have, b) buy what is most desirable to me today (wish list camera), or c) would I buy with "future-proofing" my gear purchase in mind?  By "future-proofing" I mean buy gear that has a state of the art sensor, EVF, image processor, focus ability and other features that I find useful for use now but also buy with the idea that the gear would come from a company that would still be in existence many years from now in case repair or replacement is necessary.  I think I would have to seriously consider all three options.  

First, I'll make the assumption that I will be photographing for, at least, the next ten to fifteen years if not longer.  I plan to photograph as long as I have the mental and physical wherewithal to do so.  Another assumption is that I believe that current cameras and lenses have achieved a certain "sufficiency" in that if I did not buy another camera for that time period, I could be happy with features, image quality, etc. that now exist.  Finally, I'll also make the assumption that I will be practicing the same types of photography as I now do.

The first scenario is easy for me.  If I had no regard for "future-proofing" my gear and bought what I like to use, I would buy either Olympus or Fujifilm.  I don't need the latest, greatest and state-of-the-art in the industry.  I probably have derived more personal satisfaction from using both of these systems (and probably Fujifilm more than Olympus due to Fujifilm's haptics and controls) than any other.  I wouldn't hesitate to re-buy either system.  In both systems the image quality is better than sufficient, the lens quality and selection is more than adequate and the haptics and features are excellent and more than I need now and probably in the future.

If either of those systems were my choice, I would not buy as much as I now own.  I still own too much gear.  I would most likely purchase a smaller kit with a wide angle zoom, a normal zoom and a telephoto zoom.  I would also buy a fast moderately wide prime (35mm field of view) for indoor or low light use.  Finally, for my bird and wildlife photography, I would buy some sort of really long zoom or long prime.  For Fujifilm it would be their 100-400mm lens.  If Olympus, it would be the 300mm f/4. prime.  Top off that list with a polarizing filter and a couple of neutral density filters and that would do it for me.  I've come to realize I much prefer zoom lenses to primes so I wouldn't buy the primes I've owned (or still own) again.  I very seldom use them. 

As far as buying a camera that would be on a "wish list," the only one that may currently reside on a list would be the Fujfilm GFX 100.  Since I was a long time film medium format camera user (more than 25 years), I understand the benefits of having a larger sensor.  However, a medium format digital camera, while perfect for my landscape photography, would not well serve the other types of photography I now practice.  I don't believe I would go that route in purchasing gear.

If I went the route of "future-proofing" my gear purchases, I think there is a need to consider manufacturer viability over at least a decade or more as well as sensor size, versatility in the way of features now available and lens selection.  Ancillary to this is future computer requirements required to run current and future AI based software and plug-ins.  We also can't ignore storage requirements for storing all of those image files.  In other words, the entire photographic ecosystem.

Also, in this scenario, I can't say I would never buy another camera or lens, after all I like both the creativity and technology of photography, but at this point in my photographic life I'm pretty satisfied with what I now use and don't think I'd have a reason to invest in a lot more or different types of gear.  So, the ultimate goal would be to buy now and use it for the long run if possible.

When speculating about the viability of various camera manufacturing companies, I'm not optimistic that all will survive in the form in which they exist today.  When thinking about buying all new gear, I would probably just jump right to full frame mirrorless.  That is where the industry is clearing pushing buyers.  That is the trend.  That is where the majority of research and development money is going.  That is where the biggest profit margins exist.

When you look at camera body pricing and what is being introduced, full frame is becoming much less expensive, mirrorless is where most all of the research and development money is being spent and almost all new lenses from the big four (Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic) are full frame.  That is also where the large independent lens manufacturers (Sigma, Tamron, Tokina as well as the smaller Chinese and Korean brands) are also putting much of their resources.  This goes for accessories as well.

So, what about the major camera manufacturers and various sensor formats?

I think micro4/3 is certainly sufficient for what most of us really do with our photography.  I think many photographers "over buy" just in case they need more quality, etc. at some mythical point in time.  If an agreement is reached at the end of this month and the sale of Olympus' Imaging Division goes through, I think JIP will keep Olympus around and try to turn a profit.  I don't believe they will just sell off the assets, right away at least.  I hope they succeed.  But in what form?  Some articles I've been reading point toward them likely to move toward marketing to the business community in the way of surveillance and other types of industrial photographic needs. Maybe—also target professional and high end enthusiast photographers, but I wouldn't bet on it.  If Olympus can't sell enough product to make a profit, how can JIP?  They have to target additional or different markets.  However, if they do target pros and enthusiasts but don't develop and introduce some upgrades (new sensor, better EVF, better battery, etc.) in the next cameras, they are doomed to fail in the consumer market.  What Olympus sells now, although sufficient for me without a doubt, will not bode well with many who want newer and better.  And...we are all correct in wanting state-of-the-art features in any camera we buy.  But will JIP give their current customers that new technology?  Who knows?  I wouldn't put my money on it since they say they won't be doing any heavy duty research and development.  Most likely, for the long run, I wouldn't reinvest in Olympus.

Panasonic, with the release of the introductory level S5 full frame L-mount body, in my mind, is sending a signal that they plan on developing full frame for stills photography and video.  I think the S5 was developed to address the segment of the market that attracts those who don't want to or have a lot of money to spend but are intrigued by full frame which, prior to now was unaffordable, and to try to attract those buyers.  Although, in the past, Panasonic said they had full intention of supporting micro4/3, I don't have a lot of hope that Panasonic will continue to fully commit to that format with more than one G9 successor, if even that.  With Olympus divesting themselves from the consumer imaging business, things have changed in that market.  I think their focus will solidly be on video for the format if, indeed, they continue with micro4/3 at all.  Panasonic says their GH5 is still selling well and there are clear advantages in video for the micro4/3 market.  I would expect to see a GH6 but not much beyond that.  

Fujifilm is solid, in my opinion.  They have a cult following (rightly so) and sales seem to be steady or increasing even during the pandemic.  I've seen quite a few videos and articles about photographers switching to Fujifilm from other brands.  The APS-C sensor size is still a sweet spot for many—certainly more than sufficient for almost all.  It gives great image quality and the Fujifilm film simulations are very popular.  The current cameras are feature rich and satisfy my needs as is.  Fujifilm is certainly an option for the future, but they need to refresh some of their older lenses (slow focusing and with noisy focusing motors by today's standards) as well as release some additional new lenses (especially in the telephoto/telephoto zoom arena) to satisfy more photographers and videographers before some will jump into the brand.  I think they will survive and thrive.  Fujifilm is very much an option.

I think there is a better than 50/50 chance that Nikon will go the way of Olympus—selling themselves to another camera company or investment company.  I don't think that their name, technology and lenses will go away, but maybe under the umbrella of another company.  I think, at this time, I would hesitate to buy Nikon gear, not because of its quality, features, menus, color or anything about the cameras or lenses, but I just don't know in what form they will exist and there may be a possibility that the support needed for lens repair, etc. may not be there.  Also, Nikon seems to be somewhat out of touch with what people want.  They have made a series of missteps in development and marketing that has hurt the brand.  Their cheese has surely moved and, if they don't see the light soon, I don't think they can survive as they now exist.  I've never been without a Nikon camera since 1974 or so, but I think if I were buying gear all over again today, I wouldn't be willing to take the chance on Nikon.  But, having a Z7, which has incredible image quality, color and great haptics, I really hesitate to sell it.  If I didn't have one I wouldn't buy another but I am finding it really hard to sell what I already own.  I think it was shortchanged when first introduced by the "influencers."  But if you talk with the pros who own and use the Z cameras, they love them.

Sony has shown by their own actions that they unexpectedly and quickly develop and introduce really good cameras and lenses then just as quickly abandon them.  They have shown this with their a900, a850, a99, etc. lines of DSLRs and numerous other cameras in that system as well as their NEX and a6000 series of APS-C cameras.  They were full steam ahead with the full frame A-series DSLRs and lenses, then they just stopped.  They switched to mirrorless, with a new mount, leaving their customers high and dry.  They also developed a series of really good APS-C cameras but they essentially quit making new APS-C lenses, for the most part.  Again, leaving their users in the lurch.  Will they do that with the a7 series of mirrorless cameras sometime in the future?  If past performance is the best predictor of future performance, well, I wouldn't be too surprised if all of sudden they decided to go in a different direction again.  Also, I can't get past Sony having only lossy compressed files and not lossless compressed like everyone else.  What is with that?  Then there is the haptics and menus.  No, Sony would not be on my list although a lot of people love their Sonys and swear by them.

Canon seems the most viable today in longevity, research and development and support of their camera systems.  They are the market leaders and are the largest camera manufacturer.  I've used Canon cameras in the past and really liked them.  For many years, I used film Canon F1 and F1n cameras for my personal work.  Great cameras and lenses.  Canon is obviously putting all of their resources into mirrorless as, we all know, that is the way the market is currently trending.  They have recently introduced a couple of terrific mirrorless cameras with focusing, image quality and features as good as anyone's.  The R5 and R6 cameras, in my opinion, will be home runs for them.  Also, to accompany theses new mirrorless bodies, they are pumping out mirrorless equivalents of their EOS lens line rapidly, which is a good sign for the future.  I don't see Canon going away nor quitting developing new cameras and new features.  Canon is on my list.

Pentax—what can I say?  Ricoh has them hanging in there—but barely.  Pentax roams around in the outer edges of the gear conversation.  Pentax has always been a very highly respected camera brand, their lenses have always been excellent, but at the level they now produce cameras and lenses, they are largely irrelevant to the overall industry.  Like Fujifilm, they have sort of a cult following of loyalists and that is well deserved.  Additionally, there is no indication that they will produce mirrorless camera bodies or lenses so that potentially could reduce sales even farther in the future.  But I hope they survive.

Okay.  So, if I were going to "future-proof" my gear purchase so I could have a viable system over the next 10-15 years, what would I choose.  Most likely, I would choose to buy Canon gear.  I would buy full frame, mirrorless.  Probably the R5 with the 45mp sensor.  That mirrorless model with the higher resolution sensor would give me the most flexibility for the future.  Canon seems to have hit a home run with this camera (for stills photographers, at least) and with the lenses they are quickly developing and introducing for this mirrorless line, soon it will be filled out as is their DSLR lens line.  Canon is smart in their research, development and marketing.  They may have been considered by some to have recently lost their way, but I think now have the pulse of their customers.

The alternate (and certainly just as viable) potential purchase I would make would be Fujifilm gear.  Although less versatile due to the slightly smaller, but still more than sufficient sensor, and fewer specialty lenses, I believe Fujifilm will endure the continuing market downturn and, by sheer exuberance and cult following the brand enjoys, will not only survive but continue its growth and popularity.  Fujifilm seems to understand exactly what their customer base wants and provides firmware updates even when the camera model has been supplanted by a newer model.  In my experience, they provide such extensive updates that it is almost like getting a newer model camera.  That garners a lot of loyalty.  As I mentioned, I enjoy using Fujifilm cameras more than any other because of the haptics, menus and film simulations.

So, that is it.  Canon or Fujifilm.  Canon for all around flexibility and versatility but Fujifilm for the sheer pleasure to use.  Today, I couldn't choose.  Luckily, I don't have to choose as I have all my gear and, hopefully, nothing will happen to it.

What about you?  Considering buying for now versus the future, what do you think you would choose to buy?

Join me over at my website, www.dennismook.com.  Thanks for looking. Enjoy!  

Dennis A. Mook  

All content on this blog is © 2013-2020 Dennis A. Mook. All Rights Reserved. Feel free to point to this blog from your website with full attribution. Permission may be granted for commercial use. Please contact Mr. Mook to discuss permission to reproduce the blog posts and/or images.