At the dawn of digital photography, professional cameras maintained the look and bulk of the 35mm film cameras that photographers had been using for a generation.

But, because digital sensors were expensive to make, these cameras were equipped with a sensor that was approximately a third smaller than the 24×36 mm dimension of the 35mm film that was widely used at the time. These smaller sensors were not a terrible handicap, but they did require photographers to recalculate their lens coverage. While this proved to be an onus for wide-angle lens users, the change was a boon for telephoto lovers.

As a result, all lenses became more “telephoto” to compensate. Pro photographers  who wanted their “full frame” back anxiously awaited the day when advanced technology would provide them with the Holy Grail of cameras.

Eventually Canon came to the rescue with an affordable full-frame option, the 5D. Nikon followed with the D700. Though these were not the first full-frame cameras, they were the first that came in a reasonable size at a relatively affordable cost. Consequently, most photographers working on assignment for Traveler magazine use variants of these two full-frame cameras (with fast zoom lenses), a set up that prepares them for almost any photographic problem they may encounter in the field.

The problem with that setup is the weight and expense of the gear. Without getting into a discussion about physics, larger is better when it comes to sensors on digital cameras. Most pocket point-and-shoots have sensors that are much smaller–about the size of your pinkie fingernail. Though small-sensor cameras are convenient and less expensive, those things come at the cost of lower image quality (especially in low light), which can be a deal breaker for discerning photographers.

Parallel to the development of the full-frame camera, Olympus and Panasonic  partnered up, operating on the idea that medium-size sensors might bridge the gap, providing the excellent image quality pro photographers were looking for, developed a sensor and lens package that was marketed with the moniker 4/3. They hoped that designing lenses and cameras tailored for these smaller sensors would yield significant advantages over putting smaller sensors into older model 35mm cameras. The goal was to create smaller cameras while maintaining great image quality.

At first it didn’t seem like they had succeeded. Though the good 4/3, medium-chip, cameras were better than their point-and-shoot counterparts, they weren’t appreciably smaller than models with comparably reduced chips. They also lagged behind their big brothers when it came to light sensitivity.

Panasonic and Olympus kept working toward their goal, further refining their cameras into what is now called micro 4/3. The sensor is the same size, but they got rid of the reflex-viewing mirror box that allowed photographer see through the camera (replacing it, at least initially, by an LCD screen on the back).

Now here was a development that really changed the equation.

Going “mirrorless” allows the manufacturers to make the cameras much smaller. And, as second-generation models arrive on the scene, the sensors perform very well at higher ISO settings.

But habit being habit, most serious photographers still liked to hold their cameras up to their eye. Though the first auxiliary electronic viewfinders added were irritating to use (and prevented these cameras from really taking off), they’re now so much improved that the resulting package is just what many of us are looking for: Small, lightweight cameras with second-to-none image quality.

Now that Fujifilm and Sony have joined Olympus and Panasonic with similar options that have now matured into full featured, small cameras that don’t have to apologize for their performance, I would like to declare 2014 as the year of the mirrorless camera.

Check out my picks for the best bets to suit any kind of photographer–from pros, to travelers who simply want great digital reminders of their epic trip to Patagonia.

Dan Westergren is director of photography for National Geographic Traveler magazine. Follow him on Twitter @dwestergren and on Instagram @danwestergren.

Do you have something you want to ask Dan about travel photography? He’ll be answering reader questions periodically on the blog, so be sure to leave a comment!

Comments

  1. Daniel J. Cox
    Bozeman, Mt
    June 15, 7:32 am

    Aron, I should have mentioned that the benefits to a non Full Frame mirrorless system is the much smaller lenses that can be achieved with a smaller sensor camera (DX or Micro Four Thirds) than the Full Frame cameras. One of the main reasons I shoot the Lumix system is due to Panasonic’s Micro Four Thirds sensor which is a tad smaller than DX. However, I honestly feel Panasoinc has hit a sweet spot in the size of the sensor, which allows them to engineer much smaller lenses than even the DX sized mirrorless cameras. A full Full Frame mirrorless is going to have the same sized lenses as our traditional Nikons. That’s a deal breaker for me. Hope this helps.

  2. Daniel J. Cox
    Bozeman, Mt
    June 15, 7:27 am

    Aaron, I’m with you on loving my Nikkor glass. However, if most of your photography is when you travel, you may want to look to other options that are so much easier to carry which makes shooting more fun and productive. I still use my Nikon’s for almost all my wildlife work but I’ve been shooting a mirrorless Lumix system for all my travel. If you do choose to stick with the traditional DSLR Nikon DX, a wonderful lens is the 18-200mm zoom. It’s relatively small, very sharp and allows you to have a wide focal range attached at all times. If you want more info on the mirrorless gear you can visit our Blog at http://www.naturalexposures.com/corkboard/. We have a lot of info on the new mirrorless cameras along with the pros and cons of using them.

  3. Aaron Cress
    Salisbury NC
    May 28, 11:34 pm

    Dx or Fx mirrorless for Nikon any thoughts or opinions? I love my nikkor glass and the way the images are rendered out of the Nikon system. I’ve tried other systems and don’t really want to carry (or afford) two sets of equipment to have a better travel images. I guess we can all dream of ideal equipment, I would like to know what you would like to see or what innovation would help you as a travel photographer?

  4. Daniel J. Cox
    Bozeman, Montana
    April 30, 6:09 pm

    As Dan Westergren predicted 2014 is shaping up to be the breakout year for Micro Four Thirds, super high quality, relatively low cost, light weight cameras great for travel. I just shot my first test with the recently introduced Panasonic Lumix GH4. The results are impressive. You can see it here if you interested in what I think is the best option available in this category of cameras. http://www.naturalexposures.com/panasonic-lumix-gh4/

  5. Amelia Shellie
    April 21, 2:59 am

    Among digital camera ranges one of the most appreciable one is camera ranges offered by Canon . With some of the most awaited features Canon has launnched Canon IXUS 155 Point & Shoot Camera . It has been incorporated with tremedously advance features that is making it a high resolution HD camera .

    For more info visit:
    http://www.flipkart.com/canon-ixus-155-point-shoot-camera/p/itmdtqeqavxmgkve?affid=sandeepsem

  6. Daniel J. Cox
    San Jose, Costa Rica
    March 6, 9:00 pm

    For those interested I’ve just posted a very detailed review of my experience with the Micro Four Thirds Lumix GH3. I’ve been shooting the GH3 for over a year now and have captured over 100,000 images. For those interested you can see more at http://www.naturalexposures.com/one-year-testing-the-panasonic-lumix-gh3/

  7. Daniel J. Cox
    Tokyo Japan
    February 8, 12:31 am

    I just had a chance to see and hold the new Lumix GH4 Micro Four Thirds camera. It may be more camera than some need for general travel. Even so, it is very impressive. You can read more about my thoughts about this brand new flash sip Lumix on our Blog at http://www.naturalexposures.com/panasonic-announces-new-lumix-4k-gh4/

  8. William Titus
    Spring Hill, TN
    January 26, 4:57 pm

    For my ‘all round” vacation camera, I have settled on the Olympus EM-5 with the Olympus 40-150 mm lens and have been pleased over-all with the result. Could you comment on this outfit as to whether a comparable choice might be available in same price range with better result? Thanks, in advance.

    Thank you, by the way, for your informative article.

    W Titus

  9. Daniel J. Cox
    West Yellowstone, Montana
    January 8, 11:28 pm

    Dan, I agree with you completely on your prediction of 2014 being the break out year for smaller, lighter, professional quality cameras. While traveling with our photography groups I’m hearing more and more of an interest in trying to find a camera system that is smaller and lighter that produces professional results. I’ve been shooting the Panasonic Lumix line of Micro Four Thirds for nearly four years now and I absolutely love them. I just got back from Antarctica where I was a photo coach onboard Seabourn Quest. I had lots of questions from guests interested in the Lumix cameras I was shooting. I’ve written a detailed Blog Post on the Pros and Cons of the smaller system. If you’re interested you can see it at http://www.naturalexposures.com/seabourn-quest-update-mirrorless-camera-info-polar-bears-seabourn-quest-video-update/