Hi guys, I have been in the market for a new camera lately and have been seeing a lot of cameras (such as the RX10ii) with fixed lenses that feature 4k, slo-mo, and the picture profiles that most DSLR/Mirrorless cameras w/ interchangeable lenses have. What I'm wondering is, if the lens fixed onto the camera is a quality piece of glass, what would be the drawback when compared to interchangeable lenses? It seems like these cameras are cheaper and yet offer the same features.
pros/cons of fixed-lens cameras
- Thread starter WhiteOpus
- Start date
Fixed lens cameras tend to have smaller sensor sizes, which is the major difference. There's nothing inherently wrong with wanting (or having) a fixed lens, assuming that lens is of good enough quality - in the 'good ol days' of DVCAM, HDV et al we shot a lot with fixed lens cameras - albeit the cameras were in the $10k range at the time (which you can now pick up an FS7 for!).
Even television ENG cameras are designed so that the lenses themselves can be interchanged, but for a vast majority of work - they don't (or didn't).
Being able to change lenses is handy, helpful, and in general allows you to use specialised lenses that will overall give you better IQ (and much more interesting/versatile shots) - for example, you might use a vintage lens set on one project, and a sharp, modern, contrasty set on another. Or a couple of zooms on one fast-paced project, then a set of 12 primes on a slower-paced narrative.
That doesn't mean, however, that fixed/single lens cameras can't be workhorses, and indeed they traditionally have.
The other drawback is the smaller sensor - however, these days 'smaller sensor' tends to mean 1" rather than the 1/4, 1/3, 1/2, 2/3" sensors that used to be the norm. A 1" sensor is just smaller than a 4/3 sensor (and is pretty close to 16mm film). That's entirely useable and you can get nice images out of it, but some prefer the aesthetic that you get out of S35mm (or full frame), as evidenced by the abundance of '35mm converters' for fixed lens cameras back in the 'old' days.
Even television ENG cameras are designed so that the lenses themselves can be interchanged, but for a vast majority of work - they don't (or didn't).
Being able to change lenses is handy, helpful, and in general allows you to use specialised lenses that will overall give you better IQ (and much more interesting/versatile shots) - for example, you might use a vintage lens set on one project, and a sharp, modern, contrasty set on another. Or a couple of zooms on one fast-paced project, then a set of 12 primes on a slower-paced narrative.
That doesn't mean, however, that fixed/single lens cameras can't be workhorses, and indeed they traditionally have.
The other drawback is the smaller sensor - however, these days 'smaller sensor' tends to mean 1" rather than the 1/4, 1/3, 1/2, 2/3" sensors that used to be the norm. A 1" sensor is just smaller than a 4/3 sensor (and is pretty close to 16mm film). That's entirely useable and you can get nice images out of it, but some prefer the aesthetic that you get out of S35mm (or full frame), as evidenced by the abundance of '35mm converters' for fixed lens cameras back in the 'old' days.
The aesthetic of the sensor size is a big concern of mine. I'm of the opinion that S35 "looks" the most cinematic, but I can't put a finger on why that is. Another thing I don't fully understand is how sensor size relates to aliasing/moire. Would that be more related to the processor inside of the camera, the size of the sensor, or the actual sensor type? I'm trying to get away from the horrible aliasing and generally "digital" look I'm getting on the 6D I currently own.
Somewhat off-topic, but is it possible for a sensor or any of the internal hardware to get "old" or "burn out", resulting in a lower quality image?
Somewhat off-topic, but is it possible for a sensor or any of the internal hardware to get "old" or "burn out", resulting in a lower quality image?
Last edited:
My DP has a fixed lens camera and I have a t2i so I've seen both sides of the coin. But I don't really know what to tell you.
It's much simpler, you don't have to worry about buying a ND filter because his camera has one built in. Has a nice fixed aperture lens, you don't have to worry about research what lens to buy, etc.
Great for run and gun. Great for doc work.
But he is never going to get as wide as a 8mm lens.
If you want to be able to spend more money and have more control, then go for one with a removable lens.
It's much simpler, you don't have to worry about buying a ND filter because his camera has one built in. Has a nice fixed aperture lens, you don't have to worry about research what lens to buy, etc.
Great for run and gun. Great for doc work.
But he is never going to get as wide as a 8mm lens.
If you want to be able to spend more money and have more control, then go for one with a removable lens.
Maybe because that's the 'sensor' size that's been most popularly in use (for cinema) for a long, long time..?
The sensor size ultimately affects the field of view, and to that end, the depth of field is essentially affected, as you need to use different lenses to get a similar effective field of view.
It's more related to how the image is processed than sensor size in and of itself.
You can get dead pixels on a sensor, but I've never seen sensor 'burn-out' as you describe it. If it's something that can happen, I've never experienced it. I've used Alexas that have tens of thousands of hours of use from television, and my own Sony HVR A1 which is 10 years old and seen hundreds of hours of use has no sensor 'burn-out' (though I haven't used it in a while).
There are a couple of Panasonic fixed lens cameras with sensors larger than 1" - the DMC-LX100 and the AG-DVX200.
But the LX100 lacks a mic jack - and the DVX200 is overpriced for a camera that doesn't record to RAW and lacks a fixed aperture lens.
If you want the 4K and slow mo features of the $1298 fixed lens RX10 II and a large sensor with interchangeable power zoom lenses for about the same price, you might want to consider a $1299.95 4K Samsung NX-1 with its APS-C sized sensor, 1080/120p maximum frame rate and 16-50mm power zoom lens.
This camera can give you results like that look like this:
- Yvonne
- Syringe - NX1 LowLight Test (4K) (shot at up to ISO 4000 with no noise reduction - please watch at 2160p at your monitor's highest resolution)
- Samsung NX1 test scene. 2 person dialogue at night by a fire.
- (The Quiet Escape) - a Short Film. 2015
Here is some smooth 1080/120fps slow motion:
- Samsung NX1 120fps
- Samsung NX1 - Super Slow Motion
- Samsung NX1 120fps Slow Motion, Danyang Paragliding, Korea
- Guys in Broumov - slowmotion with Samsung NX1
It's a great still camera too, with higher resolution than the 20.2MP RX10 II and a 15fps continuous frame rate. Here's the still image quality you can get from this 28.2MP camera: Flickr Samsung NX1 Pool
The NX1 also has a new and more efficient type of video compression, h.265, which Power Director 13 Ultra editing software will read, but if you don't have PD13, you can use the free RockyMountains Movie Converter to transcode your footage to ProRes or h.264 in order to edit it (until the other software manufacturers catch up).
In my view, this large sensor, interchangeable lens camera is a much better value for your money than any of the fixed lens 1" sensor cameras in this price class.
But the LX100 lacks a mic jack - and the DVX200 is overpriced for a camera that doesn't record to RAW and lacks a fixed aperture lens.
If you want the 4K and slow mo features of the $1298 fixed lens RX10 II and a large sensor with interchangeable power zoom lenses for about the same price, you might want to consider a $1299.95 4K Samsung NX-1 with its APS-C sized sensor, 1080/120p maximum frame rate and 16-50mm power zoom lens.
This camera can give you results like that look like this:
- Yvonne
- Syringe - NX1 LowLight Test (4K) (shot at up to ISO 4000 with no noise reduction - please watch at 2160p at your monitor's highest resolution)
- Samsung NX1 test scene. 2 person dialogue at night by a fire.
- (The Quiet Escape) - a Short Film. 2015
Here is some smooth 1080/120fps slow motion:
- Samsung NX1 120fps
- Samsung NX1 - Super Slow Motion
- Samsung NX1 120fps Slow Motion, Danyang Paragliding, Korea
- Guys in Broumov - slowmotion with Samsung NX1
It's a great still camera too, with higher resolution than the 20.2MP RX10 II and a 15fps continuous frame rate. Here's the still image quality you can get from this 28.2MP camera: Flickr Samsung NX1 Pool
The NX1 also has a new and more efficient type of video compression, h.265, which Power Director 13 Ultra editing software will read, but if you don't have PD13, you can use the free RockyMountains Movie Converter to transcode your footage to ProRes or h.264 in order to edit it (until the other software manufacturers catch up).
In my view, this large sensor, interchangeable lens camera is a much better value for your money than any of the fixed lens 1" sensor cameras in this price class.
Last edited:
Yeah - there's always going to be a trade-off with a fixed lens camera. Whether it's non-constant aperture, slow lens, smaller sensor, lacking mic inputs etc.
There's never going to be a 'perfect' camera, especially when you're looking in the <$5k range. That being said, with any camera or camera system, there is always one trade off or another, so more than anything if you're looking to invest your hard earned dollars into a camera system, you should read and learn as much as you can, and try and get your hands on, and then take some footage through post to consider which tradeoffs you're happy with.
If your dollars aren't hard-earned, then hey blow your money on whatever