If Sigma can solve the speed of operation issues that plagued the DP1 in its new DP2 it may come close to meeting your needs. My LX3 has way too many bells and whistles ,but I find I can ignore most of them ,and just shoot RAW wth manual controls. The nice thing about most of the crap that adds complexity is that you don't have to use it.

p.s. it's good to have you back.

I find that 95% of my shooting is in Aperture-preferred mode with exposure compensation as necessary. As David Kee says, with software based features you can ignore them. The real problem is getting the other necessities such as ISO, compensation, white balance etc as direct access buttons. The DP2 looks to be close, but I'd prefer the Olympus carrot camera for the lens flexibility and speed with the Panny f1.7 pancake scheduled this year.

Wouter, I read your blog and almost commented there. I too want a simple camera with quick and easy to use controls. Last year I went from a G9 to a DP1. The DP1 just wasn't the camera I was hoping for and now shoot with an Olympus e420 with a pancake lens. It was the closest I could find, but it's still not simple and quick enough when shooting in full manual. Just as the last poster said, I often shoot in Aperture Priority because it gives me very good control.

That said, I'd buy the camera you are describing as long as it isn't bigger than the G10. I'd prefer smaller, but that is the max.

I too am hopeful for the new Olympus. I hope 2009 is good and the digital camera market matures and expands to include at least one camera similar to the one you describe!

it is the same disease that has consumed microsoft and many other big software vendors (adobe included). feature pack feature pack feature pack.

i truly dream of an all manual digital. the only things that i enjoy from digital cameras are the instant feedback and EXIF stamping. let me shoot raw, in a predictable, non-auto white balance mode; give me full manual exposure and focus controls in easy, tactile reach and i am forever a fan. however i just don't see that happening. the marketplace for that sort of camera is just not visible enough. i think it's there, and i think it's huge (think how much the k1000 sold in its day!) but the majors have a tough time thinking below a certain market share. it's going to take a smaller, third party player to capture a nice niche market. maybe teaming up with one of the bigees for the sensor.

Who says the Sigma DP1 is a popular camera? I doubt that it's sales numbers are even a fraction of the volume that a truly popular camera. I'll bet the DP1 has a fraction of the sales volume of the Panasonic LX-3 or Canon G10, which are both niche cameras that don't do near the volume of the really popular compact cameras.

While I too wish for a larger sensor compact with a high level of manual control - even a compact rangefinder - the DP1 is simply not an acceptable compromise of price, value and performance. The fact that it sells at all speaks more of the sorry state of serious compact cameras than it does for the DP1's few virtues.

If enough people wanted to buy a simple digital camera they would make one. The problem that the manufacturers have is that every photog who asks for a simple camera has a slightly different idea of what that camera is and the features it has or doesn't have. You don't want a simple camera; you want a custom camera. So instead they make all-in-one cameras, and count on your ability to turn off or ignore the features you don't need.

I agree largely with the sentiments posted here. A simpler, more efficient camera that gets out of your way would be great. I think we're getting closer. The DP1 is the blueprint---big, serious sensor and quality lens in a compact frame---now it just needs its operation to be made more fluid. The obstacles to getting there as I see them are:
1) The market is small. If it's done right there will be a market for it, but it will be a small one. Nut jobs like us and professionals just don't compose as big a segment as say, P/S consumers or DSLR enthusiasts. But since those markets have begun to mature over the last couple of years, the SC market has become the final frontier. No one owns it yet, so there's market share to be had. To boot, regardless of the state of the economy, the SC segment will fork over the cash if the formula is right. We seem to always find the dough.
2) P/S Digicams are pretty damn good. Despite what we all think, digital P/S cameras are amazing little machines. A total idiot can take good pictures with them. So the sell becomes harder and harder when the average consumer can't see the discernible quality difference between, say the LX3 and the SD900. Back in the day, you had to know a little something about exposure and ISO to shoot your family snaps. But those days are long gone and the average consumer doesn't want to go back. We may have to live with some of what we might call "useless" features like cleavage detection because consumers find them useful. And frankly, they work surprisingly well most of the time. These features might help broaden appeal, making them more attractive propositions to manufacturers. Let's just hope they are in the 2nd and 3rd tier of menus, or that you can set and forget these features as desired.
3) Legacy systems (DSLRs) These will openly compete with this new segment. That's why most of the cameras active in launching M4/3 are not the big players, but newer or smaller players with little to no stake in the entry level DSLR market. I don't think the marketers know what to do here either, as there is no good reason why, for example, the G1 should look the way it does. Olympus, always an innovator, unlike Panasonic, will hopefully explore the new possibilities that a mirrorless design can offer.
4) Burgeoning technology. The advancement curve in digicams is entering its adolescence. There are still lots of changes happening quickly. Think of how many gorgeous, functional, terrific film compacts came and went during periods of limited innovation. There should have been no reason for these cameras to be viable for a decade or two. Yet somehow, the consumer market wouldn't pay for the quality difference, and the pro/enthusiast market wasn't big enough to satisfy manufacturers who could make less capable cameras faster and sell more of them. Fast forward to 2009, where 2-year-old cameras are old news and it's tough for both manufacturers and consumers to hold on to a camera for too long. The M8 would probably be the best modern attempt at a long-term digital investment. A fine camera in many respects, but look how dated it's gotten and how far behind it is from a technology standpoint. It's a very tough industry for the non-giants. And it's just not fiscally compelling for a major camera company to make a long-term investment camera at this point. A minor player? Well that's another story.

The DP1 and K1000 are both great cameras, and successful for the small, smart companies that produce them. But they are blips on the radar screen in the face of the larger market. The M8 is the camera I would like in a slightly smaller body---a removable lens compact with optional automation and great primes that would use the current technology to take the best of RF and SLR technology and fuse it into a new form. Oh yeah, minus the $8K pricetag.

I personally do not worry about the state of serious compact digital cameras. I think great things are happening and the market is finally ready. And the innovators like Sigma, Olympus and Ricoh will have to have an impact on the remaining giants. Unfortunately, you can't separate a camera's profitability from its purpose. They're totally intertwined. You shouldn't wish for a camera that won't make any type of crossover to the consumer market. Because it won't last long. Or you'll pay an arm and a leg for it (see M8) and wait forever for updates an improvements out of step with the market.

I'm hoping the Oly pancakes are everything we hope they will be, and turn M4/3 into the next great hope for serious digital compacts.

Sounds like you're the market for a Leica M8 - at least until Sony come out with their CLE-Digital...

"". . . a usable clear bright viewfinder"

My theme song, although I would add it should be a big, clear, bright viewfinder that doesn't cost a fortune to add as an optional accessory. (And no, I wouldn't buy a car that offered a windshield as an extra-cost option either.) Diopter control would be appreciated, too.

In a list of other excellent features, I notice you didn't mention overall size. I look at the trend of compact camera designs and fear we're fast heading toward a time when they will be polycarbonate wedges the size of a matchbook — and just as aesthetically pleasing as a matchbook to hold and use. Which is to say not pleasing at all. Most of today's crop seem to be designed for the dainty fingers of teenage Japanese or Chinese girls. Nice girls and nice fingers, I'm sure, but I don't have fingers like that. Mine aren't big for a man's hand, BTW, just average.