Top selling cameras of 2024 (in Japan)

[pdk42]

No L Mount in top ten, nor m43. Panasonic won’t be happy.

Fuji seem to be doing something right though - three models in the top five (goodness knows why, I’ve never found any Fuji camera appealing).

The best-selling cameras and lenses of 2024 (at Map Camera in Japan)

Discover the best-selling cameras and lenses of 2024 at Japan's Map Camera, featuring top models from Fujifilm, Sony, Nikon, and Canon.

www.redsharknews.com

 

[xaviergut]

No L Mount in top ten, nor m43. Panasonic won’t be happy.

Fuji seem to be doing something right though - three models in the top five (goodness knows why, I’ve never found any Fuji camera appealing).

The best-selling cameras and lenses of 2024 (at Map Camera in Japan)

Discover the best-selling cameras and lenses of 2024 at Japan's Map Camera, featuring top models from Fujifilm, Sony, Nikon, and Canon.

www.redsharknews.com

Very intetesting, Paul. I would like to know the total in the whole world, not only from a japanese Shop. But I don't know, maybe this information can be extrapolated to Japan or to the Asian market.


Yesterday I watched this video about nature photography with the Lumix S5 ii and it is a totally underrated camera for photography in general. Furthermore, this photographer only uses 2 lenses, the 20-60mm and the 70-300mm (along with the 85mm f1.8 for portraits):

 

[pdk42]

Very intetesting, Paul. I would like to know the total in the whole world, not only from a japanese Shop. But I don't know, maybe this information can be extrapolated to Japan or to the Asian market.


Yesterday I watched this video about nature photography with the Lumix S5 ii and it is a totally underrated camera for photography in general. Furthermore, this photographer only uses 2 lenses, the 20-60mm and the 70-300mm (along with the 85mm f1.8 for portraits):

Nice images. Awful music !!

 

[The Rigger]

[shrug]
Enh... L-mount is the best selling camera in my house; that's all I care about. Japan can do what they want.

 

[robin0112358]

Fuji seem to be doing something right though - three models in the top five (goodness knows why, I’ve never found any Fuji camera appealing).

I find some VERY appealing, but I don't have 10K for a used body and two lenses. (Medium format, obviously.)

 

[pdk42]

I find some VERY appealing, but I don't have 10K for a used body and two lenses. (Medium format, obviously.)

Ah yes, I'd forgotten about their MF stuff. That could interest me - at least it's not X Trans.

 

[Pete_W]

Ah yes, I'd forgotten about their MF stuff. That could interest me - at least it's not X Trans.

I am curious to know what the issue is with x-trans sensors, Paul.

I've never owned a Fujifilm camera but "reviewers" like Chris and Jordan have always rated them highly. Given my recent comments about C & J, maybe that's a clue!!

 

[Markuswelder]

I am curious to know what the issue is with x-trans sensors, Paul.

Adobe never used to play well with the Fuji files. Google Fujifilm works. Silkypix did, but most people hate Silkypix for some reason. Well, it's mostly because it's (Silkypix) a bit different to use than Lightroom/Photoshop, & lots of people hate different.
Apparently later versions of Adobe software work better, bit the stigma seems to hang around.

 

[pdk42]

I am curious to know what the issue is with x-trans sensors, Paul.

I tried an XE2 back in the day. 16Mp XTrans. I found the following when processing raw files with Lightroom:

- Mushy greens, especially evident with fine foliage (e.g. distant trees)
- A tendency to show “worms” if sharpened even a little too much
- Baked-in NR at even moderate ISO levels

People said that the only decent raw processor back then was Irridient, but I wasn’t going to change my workflow since I didn’t find the XE2 overly appealing in other ways - AF was so-so, the build of the body was poor, and I didn’t like the handling. But, the 30mm f1.4 lens I used with it was superb.

It seems to me that XTrans brings downsides for no upsides. The original objective of it was to reduce moiré without the need for a OLPF. But increasing pixel counts on Bayer sensors have pretty much fixed that problem without the need for an OPLF. All other manufacturers now use regular Bayer sensors without OLPF and there is no real world issue with moiré. Even Fuji tacitly admit it’s a pointless exercise since their low end and high end models don’t use it.

If you use SOOC JPEGs then it won’t bother you, but for raw, you need to choose the right PP package to get the best out of the sensor and I really don’t want to go that route.

 

[Pete_W]

Adobe never used to play well with the Fuji files. Google Fujifilm works. Silkypix did, but most people hate Silkypix for some reason. Well, it's mostly because it's (Silkypix) a bit different to use than Lightroom/Photoshop, & lots of people hate different.
Apparently later versions of Adobe software work better, bit the stigma seems to hang around.

Thanks. I use DxO PhotoLab and from what I've read, it also wasn't considered to be very good with x-trans raw files until more recently.

- Mushy greens, especially evident with fine foliage (e.g. distant trees)
- A tendency to show “worms” if sharpened even a little too much
- Baked-in NR at even moderate ISO levels

People said that the only decent raw processor back then was Irridient, but I wasn’t going to change my workflow since I didn’t find the XE2 overly appealing in other ways - AF was so-so, the build of the body was poor, and I didn’t like the handling. But, the 30mm f1.4 lens I used with it was superb.

It seems to me that XTrans brings downsides for no upsides. The original objective of it was to reduce moiré without the need for a OLPF. But increasing pixel counts on Bayer sensors have pretty much fixed that problem without the need for an OPLF. All other manufacturers now use regular Bayer sensors without OLPF and there is no real world issue with moiré. Even Fuji tacitly admit it’s a pointless exercise since their low end and high end models don’t use it.

If you use SOOC JPEGs then it won’t bother you, but for raw, you need to choose the right PP package to get the best out of the sensor and I really don’t want to go that route.

Thanks for the info.

When I was looking to move away from m4/3, I considered a range of cameras and narrowed it down to two - the Lumix S5 and the Fuji XT4. I was attracted to the Fuji controls and design but didn't know much about x-trans or the lenses available. I spent some time in the DPR Fuji forum but found quite a bit of conflicting information about the sensor. I saw complaints about foliage and worms, yet others claimed it was not an issue. Same with some of the lenses - I was interested in a few of the standard zooms but found some quite polarised views about quality and sharpness. I eventually went into a camera store to hold and try both cameras and the S5 was so much better ergonomically. Being a Lumix m4/3 user I decided it would be an easy upgrade as the menus and layout were very similar to what I was using.

 

[pdk42]

Thanks for the info.

When I was looking to move away from m4/3, I considered a range of cameras and narrowed it down to two - the Lumix S5 and the Fuji XT4. I was attracted to the Fuji controls and design but didn't know much about x-trans or the lenses available. I spent some time in the DPR Fuji forum but found quite a bit of conflicting information about the sensor. I saw complaints about foliage and worms, yet others claimed it was not an issue. Same with some of the lenses - I was interested in a few of the standard zooms but found some quite polarised views about quality and sharpness. I eventually went into a camera store to hold and try both cameras and the S5 was so much better ergonomically. Being a Lumix m4/3 user I decided it would be an easy upgrade as the menus and layout were very similar to what I was using.

Yes, the old-style aperture ring and shutter speed dial is definitely retro, but the PASM approach is actually way more useable.

 

[AlanC]

I spent some time in the DPR Fuji forum but found quite a bit of conflicting information about the sensor. I saw complaints about foliage and worms, yet others claimed it was not an issue.

I've owned three Fujis: X-Pro1, X-Pro2 and X-T2, with the X-Pro2 being one of my all-time favorite cameras. I'd have likely stuck with them if not for the stupid design of the X-Pro3: they removed a load of buttons so you had to use the touchscreen, then they hid the touchscreen (that daft hidden, fold down design with the ribbon cable that tends to fail) and justified it with a load of waffle about "pure photography".

As Marcus said, the foliage worms are very dependent on the software you use to process the images. Iridient Developer or X-Transformer don't have the problem and can pull a remarkable amount of detail from the files. Other software was a bit of a mix with early support in Adobe products being particularly bad, and DXO not supporting XTrans cameras at all. It's not so much of a problem now.

As to the retro controls, I like them. One glance at the camera and you can see how it's set up, plus Fuji's system of putting an 'A' (auto) position on the aperture, shutter speed and ISO makes a heck of a lot more sense than Nikon's dials plus PSAM on the Zf and Zfc. Plus I did use the X-Pro's hybrid viewfinder a lot of the time, although that's something else they watered down on the X-Pro3 where it lost the dual magnification ability and so was useless for wide angle lenses.

Having aperture rings is one of the (many) reasons why I like the Sigma i-series primes so much...

 

[Pete_W]

As to the retro controls, I like them. One glance at the camera and you can see how it's set up, plus Fuji's system of putting an 'A' (auto) position on the aperture, shutter speed and ISO makes a heck of a lot more sense than Nikon's dials plus PSAM on the Zf and Zfc.

Thanks Alan.

I was quite tempted by the retro controls on the XT4 as they reminded me of my first SLR, a manual Praktica camera, where I could easily see the settings.

 

[pdk42]

One of the biggest benefits of mirrorless cameras for me is the ability to see everything related to exposure permanently displayed in the viewfinder - aperture, shutter speed, ISO, over/under indicators/histogram. I can then adjust everything needed using the top dials without removing the camera from my eye. Having to lower the camera and look at physical dials seems a backward step to me.

 

[AlanC]

Having to lower the camera and look at physical dials seems a backward step to me.

I can't say that I ever remember having to do that other than for changing ISO on the X-Pro2 where you have to pull up and turn the ring round the shutter speed dial. I could, and did, change the ISO / shutter speed / aperture / exposure compensation on the X-T2 with the viewfinder to my eye, and the displays are much the same as for any other mirrorless camera. It did take two hands to change the ISO with the dial on the left, though.

I'm happy using either system, and both have their advantages and disadvantages, but given the choice I'd go for a camera with the retro controls.