This one may get a lot of you riled up, but it was a long time coming. There are times when camera manufacturers know what they are doing, and then there are other times when the newer devices simply lack any innovation. This could mean using older tech, a challenging interface, or just a mere lack of understanding of what photographers really want. You will see some familiar cameras and some that were outright disastrous. But hey, please don’t run after us with a pitchfork. We are merely doing our job of keeping you abreast of the tech you can easily avoid (even if some people swear by it).
Nikon 1 AW1
In 2015, Nikon was trying to get into mirrorless with the Nikon 1 V series. After seven cameras, they launched another ruggedized mirrorless, the Nikon 1 AW1, that can shoot underwater up to 49ft and can even withstand a 6.6ft fall. Despite its 14.2MP CX-Format CMOS sensor, a hybrid AF system, and multiple buttons, the camera was not as water-sealed as promised. Furthermore, it wrangles highlights, and the ISO gets noisy after 1600. It was a camera that did not make sense for a lot of photographers.
Sigma dp2/SD Quattro
Sigma has always dabbled with cameras, thanks to its Feveon sensors. However, the results have not always been pleasing. An example? The dp2 Quattro. The device houses a 29MP APS-C sensor, looks and works like a phone, offers contrast detection autofocus, and merely weighs 395 grams. However, none of that mattered when it proved its performance was slow. Its challenges include poor battery life, bad high ISO performance, slow autofocus, poor ergonomics, and slow write speed. Overall, it is not the most flexible camera to work with.
Similarly, the SD Quattro only had nine AF points, no weather sealing, and slow write speed, and its Sigma Photo Pro for RAW is the slowest software you will work with. There were some improvements over the previous model, such as high ISO performance and battery life, but this camera still sticks out like a sore thumb.
Fujifilm X-E2s
The Fujifilm X-E2s is an example of bad planning. The camera launched several years after its successor but barely had upgrades that would make it an option for users. It featured a 16MP sensor, good color rendition, and autofocus, but if you had used Fujifilm X Pro 2 first, you would not like this model. As our Editor-in-chief, Chris Gampat stated in the review: “But what I expect from a second generation product is second generation technology, not a recycle of parts from your previous cameras.”
Canon 6D Mk II
A Canon Rebel-like device, the Canon 6D Mk II features a 26MP full-frame sensor, 6.5 continuous shooting abilities, 45 autofocus points around the center, and dual-pixel autofocus. While it may not seem like a bad idea to purchase, it indeed is. The camera lacks 4K video, lower ISOs don’t perform as well, and the autofocus is sluggish with Sigma lenses. The color rendition is good, but overall, a Canon 6D user won’t feel the need to upgrade it. As our reviewer, Editor-in-Chief Chris Gampat, said: “I believe the Canon 6D Mk II to be a great camera for a college student. Why? Because you’ll need to learn how to work with something that more or less has quirks.” So, there you have it.
Ricoh GR III
Like most cameras launched today, the Ricoh GR III was more of an upgrade than a new camera altogether by the company. Despite being generation three, it had slow autofocus, no weather sealing, deep menus, a lack of a fast prime lens, and firmware issues reported by other users. The menus are also confusing, and the lack of flash has been an issue, as well as a lack of a tilting screen, and it is limited to work for one genre: street photography. You can skip this and pick another point-and-shoot.
Canon IVY CLIQ
An entry-level instant camera, there is very little working for the Canon IVY CLIQ. It’s photo paper has disappointing photo quality; the printer does not cover the entire image, the optical viewfinder is not the best, and it is a tiny mirror for selfies. Despite being the best in photo paper, Canon gives this camera a really bad quality paper. The images look like they were shot on a flip phone. That’s also because it houses only a 5MP sensor. At a time when Fujifilm was ruling with its Instant cameras, Canon gave us a subpar performer.
Sony a6600
Despite the a6600 being like a mini a9, there is a lot not working in its favor. The camera does not have fast face detection, a lack of touch screen menu, focus peaking is bad, details are lost above ISO 3200, no joystick, and no third exposure control dial, amongst other things. It gets improvements like battery, autofocus, and image stabilization, but beyond that, it is not a camera many semi-professionals would even look at. Since it was launched in 2019, Sony has provided a half-hearted update to this APS-C lineup.
Olympus OMD EM5 Mark III
The Olympus OMD EM5 Mark III is another camera that is a perfect example of using old tech in new-generation models. It featured the same sensor, image processor, and autofocus seen on the EM1 Mark II, which was launched in 2016. For a model released in 2019, the EM5 Mark III featured a plastic-like construction, a small hand grip, and poor battery life. However, the camera was underwhelming, not because it couldn’t shoot well, but because it could have done much more than that.
Sony RX100 VII
Despite having the world’s fastest AF during its launch in 2019, the Sony RX100 VII has many disadvantages. The touchscreen is limiting, there is no USB charging, the in-camera retouching options are weird, and there is a lack of weathering. It was priced around $1,200 at the time of its release. The camera’s lack of control and poor performance proved that Sony is no longer interested in point-and-shoot cameras.
Sigma FP
Yet another problematic camera from Sigma, the Sigma FP was designed for both photo and video, but it leaned towards the latter the most. For photographers, the challenge was the lack of more direct controls, a not-so-great continuous face autofocus, and a lack of image stabilization. The ergonomics also do not work well, despite it being small. As Chris Gampat stated, “This camera just seems to be a rehash of the same 24MP sensor that everyone is recycling from Sony and putting into cameras.”
Nikon ZFc
There is nothing innovative about the Nikon ZFc other than its range-finder style body. The camera boasts a 20.9MP APS-C sensor and provides good images with reliable autofocus. However, other than that, the camera has a very sensitive EVF, a cheap-ish-looking LCD, a lack of IS, slow autofocus at times, no joystick, and a lack of thumb rest. Overall, the Zf was the camera we wanted the Zfc to be.
Ricoh WG-80
The only thing that makes the camera somewhat serious is Ricoh’s name. It has a 1fps burst rate, images are soft, indoor image quality is poor, no image stabilization, and no RAW shooting and manual mode. The camera can dive more than 45 feet underwater, but it is of no use when the image quality is poor. Instead, if people want a rugged camera, it is better to pick up the Olympus TG-6, which is slightly more expensive.
Fujifilm XS20
Our editor, Chris Gampat, called the XS20 the most boring camera in the company. Why? Because there is barely any innovation. The Fujifilm camera features a 26MP X Trans APS-C 4th generation sensor, but it is not exactly new. There is also a lack of weather sealing, slower autofocus than competitors, no AI scene detection, and only a new vlog mode. Furthermore, while there is screen recognition for animals, Fujifilm makes it challenging to access it. Fujifilm has done better; we aren’t sure why this camera deserved the least innovations.
Fujifilm X100VI
The Fujifilm X100V was one of the best cameras in the company, but the X100VI did not come close to it. Sure, it has a 40MP sensor, some weather resistance for its small APS-C design, and a slight upgrade in autofocus and scene detection. Other than that, the camera is not for serious photography. There is no improvement in screen or EVF, partial weather resistance, battery drains quickly, lack of a better lens, and autofocus could have been faster. Despite the five-year gap between V and VI, Fujifilm barely did anything different. The only reason the camera is selling so well is because it is designed for content creators.
Canon EOS R5 II
We aren’t the only ones who thought Canon EOS R5 II was a really poor camera; people on the internet said it, too. Most updates here could have been launched as a firmware update to the older model. This R5II really does not help photographers but is designed to woo video content creators. Its battery drains quickly, there is a lack of in-camera multiple exposure preview, it has a more annoying ergonomic interface, and the autofocus is the same as the R3. The camera simply frustrated us all.
Canon EOS R1
Another Canon camera that could have been an update. The only thing working in its favor is dual image processors – the DIGIC Accelerator and DIGIC X, pleasing colors and good battery life. Other than that, the EOS R1’s sensor is nowhere close to Sony’s, autofocus struggles with people of color, and large files to work with despite the 24MP sensor. If anyone were to pick up this camera, then it has to be wildlife and bird photographers, and not sports photographers.
