Since the advent of photography more than 200 years ago, there are still only a few basic styles of cameras. To be sure, digital has added a couple of new styles, but the overall basic operation of a camera hasn’t changed that much and still requires a human being to take the photo. Otherwise, what’s the point?
As you read the descriptions below, keep in mind that certain cameras work best in certain situations, despite what camera makers tell us.
A great deal of effort goes into a camera's design and functionality, but at times the final product misses the target.
The selection of these cameras, as well as the comments, is subjective, and certainly a few of these will rub people the wrong way.
These are some designs that didn't work visually or ergonomically, although many of them produce outstanding photos.
The seeds of digital photography were planted when electronics first appeared in cameras.
Digital sensors were an evolution in camera technology and not the revolution that many argue.
In the mid-1930s, the first hint of what was to be arrived when Zeiss Ikon fitted its 35mm Contflex twin-lens reflex camera with a selenium meter.
Kodak took it one step further with the Kodak Super Six 20 by adding automatic exposure. By the early 1960s, trap needle autoexposure was common.
When Frenchman Joseph Nicephore Niepce captured and processed the first photograph from his window in 1826, he had no way of knowing that he set into motion what would become a worldwide movement that continues to this day.
Up until that moment, the closest thing to a photograph was a drawing produced by an apparatus known as the camera obscura, which was a box with a lens on one end that projected an image onto a piece of paper on the other end, sometimes using a mirror to reflect the image upward. The owner could then trace what he or she saw.