....the camera of the future isn’t from the past...

[kbg32]

Whether you agree with this or not, it is an interesting article. And, it is most probably true. We here at RFF are a niche. A small club. Doesn't matter how many people you all know who carry this or that. Or how many people you know young and old who still shoot film. We will not drive the market of the future. Only the here and now. The camera my 4 1/2 year old son will hold when he is my age, will have almost nothing to do with the past.

http://petapixel.com/2013/11/06/camera-future-isnt-past/#more-125409

 

[tunalegs]

It seems like the author would have also probably opined that disk film was the future and 35mm was on its way out if he'd written this 20 years ago.

They also seem to be confusing "retro camera design" with retro camera styling, and there is a big difference between those things.

There will never be a mass movement back to point-and-shoots from the camera phone because convenience trumps quality, and by the way, cameraphones have startling good quality.

Just like there was never a mass movement back to large format plate cameras after the roll film box camera was introduced. Yet somehow there are still a lot of people out there working with 4x5 cameras.

The box camera gave way to the instamatic, which gave way to the point and shoot, which gave way to the digital point and shoot, which is giving way to the improved phone cameras. Mr. Murabayashi acknowledges this in the article, to a point. But goes on to say that:

The future isn’t the Nikon Df, the Olympus OM-D EM-1 or the Fuji X100s. The future isn’t the Sony QX-100, which awkwardly attaches to my phone. The future for photographers willing to carry around a dedicated camera adopts paradigms from the phone.
WiFi, GPS and a touch screen are built-in, and its open source software allows me to launch Instagram (or whatever app is the soup du jour) and have the camera automatically pair with my phone so I don’t have to do everything twice. The future uses technology and design to free us from analog constraints. The future is optimistic, and the utopian future makes us want to catch glimpses of the next future — not peer backwards and yearn for the past.

The problem with this thinking is the idea that photographers don't want a camera, they really want a phone-camera, computer-camera, etc. The problem with this thinking is the idea that things like having knobs on a camera is old fashioned and backwards - rather than convenient and handy. The camera of the future may be different than the camera of today, but I don't think it should be considered retro simply for having knobs on it, or a piece of leatherette instead of pebble textured rubber.

 

[kbg32]

I doubt it Tuna. Style and design go hand in hand.

 

[uhoh7]

Easier to make a case for the rangefinder than it is for the prism, today.

What's holding that design together is the infrastructure---all the bodies and lenses and AF mechanics built around long flange prism cameras.

Sony just gutshot that design and the DF shows why it will subside in the end, even for pros: bloat. But will be a very long and very slow demise with lots of moaning.

However, as some, like me, rejoice at new alternatives, what looms in the distance ready to eat us all: a phone sized medium format--a real one--with new lens and sensor tech that will make the A7r look like a monster.

Oh well, let's have some fun while we can, 🙂

 

[_lou_]

I couldn't care less than for cameras of the future. Let's use cameras of the present, retro or not. Last week I shot one of my best pictures this year with an old cheapo Pentax MX, only because I had the right timing, the right lighting, and the camera did do matter (the lens maybe). New technology wouldn't have been any help here, so why care about the camera of tomorrow ?

 

[Rodchenko]

My camera of the future is likely to still be a camera of the past.

 

[Samouraï]

However, as some, like me, rejoice at new alternatives, what looms in the distance ready to eat us all: a phone sized medium format--a real one--with new lens and sensor tech that will make the A7r look like a monster.

Oh well, let's have some fun while we can, 🙂

Doesn't our understanding of physics preclude that from ever occurring? I suppose bodies can be as small as the sensor and ergonomics will allow, but what about lenses?

 

[Rodchenko]

Exhibit A: Olympus XA. No one would have believed the optics for that were possible.

 

[kbg32]

I read an article a couple of weeks ago about advancing sensor technology that utilize organic sensors. I wish I could find it. It was right out of science fiction and years away from perfection. There are people working on it as we write.

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

We here at RFF are a niche. A small club. Doesn't matter how many people you all know who carry this or that. Or how many people you know young and old who still shoot film. We will not drive the market of the future. Only the here and now. The camera my 4 1/2 year old son will hold when he is my age, will have almost nothing to do with the past.

I rather think that you are right. I have a copy of "Popular Photography", published in the mid 'sixties. A half serious article describes the camera of the year 2000. The interesting point is how many of the predictions have come true. Even more interesting is that the way in which the predictions came to pass are far different from the author's imaginings.

To paraphrase Fred Hoyle: the future is not only stranger than you imagine, it's stranger than you can imagine.

 

[uhoh7]

Doesn't our understanding of physics preclude that from ever occurring? I suppose bodies can be as small as the sensor and ergonomics will allow, but what about lenses?

Calling all optics experts......report to this thread immediately!

How long to phone sized nocti speed medium format rigs, crazy sharp, with dreamy bokeh?

tap tap tap.......

that's my biological clock ticking....

 

[kbg32]

Just like there was never a mass movement back to large format plate cameras after the roll film box camera was introduced. Yet somehow there are still a lot of people out there working with 4x5 cameras. [/QUOTE]

Define "a lot" please? There are nowhere the number of large format shooters today as there were at the turn of the millennium, as there were 10 years previous to that.

4x5 sheet film holders cost me roughly $20 for a pack of 2 30 years ago. Those same holders cost over $100 now.

 

[kbg32]

I rather think that you are right. I have a copy of "Popular Photography", published in the mid 'sixties. A half serious article describes the camera of the year 2000. The interesting point is how many of the predictions have come true. Even more interesting is that the way in which the predictions came to pass are far different from the author's imaginings.

To paraphrase Fred Hoyle: the future is not only stranger than you imagine, it's stranger than you can imagine.

Love that quote by Mr. Hoyle.

 

[Rodchenko]

And he certainly mis-imagined the future.

 

[tunalegs]

Define "a lot" please? There are nowhere the number of large format shooters today as there were at the turn of the millennium, as there were 10 years previous to that.

4x5 sheet film holders cost me roughly $20 for a pack of 2 30 years ago. Those same holders cost over $100 now.

There are a lot more photographers using 4x5 sheet film cameras than there are photographers using roll film box cameras. When you consider how many box cameras were made relative to view cameras, press cameras, etc. "a lot" is more than justified.

People never went back to the view camera, but that doesn't mean that large format became irrelevant or outdated just because more convenient cameras existed. In fact, it was the box cameras which became outdated when instamatics were introduced - the view camera however was unphazed by the development of 126 film. Because photographers who were using view cameras were using them for different reasons than people who were using box cameras. A view camera may be old tech, but that's distinctly different from something which is designed to be retro.

The point being that the developments and trends of consumer grade snap shot cameras don't always effect meaningful change in the equipment of enthusiasts and professionals. Just because it's convenient and fun to take photos with an iphone doesn't necessarily mean that hobbyist photographers (or pros) are going to see a camera without wifi built in as old fashioned. Unless of course enthusiasts see instagram and facebook as vital outlets for their work, and feel the need to instantly transmit their shots to the internet (although obviously very handy for some professions - also obviously beside the point for others). I'm not saying it can't happen, but that there's different approach to photography between enthusiasts and casual snapshooters - one can't always use a trend developing for one crowd to predict a trend for the other.

 

[kbg32]

Absolutely agree. Of course there is a different approach to photography between enthusiasts and casual snapshooters. Pros never did drive the market though manufacturers are known to cater to them/us on occaision.

All I am saying, the number of people using large format is definitively less than it was even 10 years ago. I am sure there are quite a few people out there still using them. Five years ago I sold my mint Toyo field camera for 4x more than I paid for it. The buyer got a great deal considering what they were going for new. I had an extremely modest reserve on it and watched how the price climbed over the duration of the auction. I had it over 20 years!

As well, all I did was post an article for discussion, not that I necessarily agree with every word in it. The next generation or two of designers, and beyond, will probably be thinking outside of the box in what a camera will look like and do.

 

[mfogiel]

I abhorre smartphones, instagram, facebook, digital photography and all the social media. In my eyes, it is a de-personification of the human being. You do not count, only the crowd counts, the instant "cute" or "hip" thing, that you cheer, and then forget in a heartbeat.
Not everybody wants to become a McDonald burger.

 

[uhoh7]

I abhorre smartphones, instagram, facebook, digital photography and all the social media. In my eyes, it is a de-personification of the human being. You do not count, only the crowd counts, the instant "cute" or "hip" thing, that you cheer, and then forget in a heartbeat.
Not everybody wants to become a McDonald burger.

How did you access this site?

You hate RFF?

It's bascially facebook for RFF and classic photograhy lovers.

 

[konicaman]

For the snapshooters the article is no doubt true. P&S is a dead end, retro or not. For pros and entusiasts it is a different game. As an analogy I always carry a multitool (I am a part time IT consultant) - it can take a PC apart, but I still carry a toolbox with high quality screwdrivers, pliers etc. when on a job.

We probably can´t imagine what future cameras are gonna look like, but I believe there is a reason that the basic design of an SLR (Digital or Film) haven´t changed much for the last 50 years.

Just the observations of a 50-something year old white guy 😀

 

[L Collins]

Who cares? Some of us blissfully ignorant will be printing silver halide in the darkroom without any regard for the "future" of photography while the gaggle of barking seals that is the "public" will be shooting 80 mgpx files and uploading them to social media via the ether.