The End of dedicated digital cameras

[mani]

Enjoy your dedicated digital cameras while you can still buy them. 😉

http://petapixel.com/2015/04/09/thi...a-sales-looks-like-with-smartphones-included/

 

[Archlich]

People use their phones to take pictures, yes, but not vice versa. Since few people buy their cameras intentionally to take phone calls or surf Twitter - Samsung was kindly enough to prove it with the Galaxy NX - I'm not worrying that much.

 

[Sparrow]

Add a phone capability into the Leica M8 and suddenly it becomes a great camera.

... it would do wonders for the M5 though

 

[btgc]

If smartphones (or other devices) provide all you need to take good enough pictures then who cares if it is dedicated or combined camera?

To make things clear, SP have to go long route to replace all types of dedicated cameras we can buy today. They may get more rare or more expensive as volume shrinks, same as for film) but - disappear, plain and truly?

 

[John Bragg]

I keep a camera for a long time. Some for decades ! Phones on the other hand are upgraded, maybe every 2 years. My cameras will likely outlast me, long after my phones have been recycled or gone to landfill. For me, the two are separate but I know I am not typical in this. Cameras for me have a lasting intrinsic value and are positively not a disposable item !!

 

[f16sunshine]

The appetite for this sort of FUD seems voracious 😱

 

[Roger Hicks]

The appetite for this sort of FUD seems voracious 😱

Dear Andy,

Your post finally prompted me to look up FUD, which I see is "Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt". Well, yes, I see your point but on looking at the Petapixel piece linked, a more useful reading might be "F***ing Useless Drivel". It's an astonishingly one-dimensional piece.

Cheers,

R.

 

[leicapixie]

I fully agree with Roger !
I keep my cameras, digital or real, a long time!
I will not have a "camera" that needs a monthly rental..
Is upgraded every two years or sooner,
Has a "Touch Screen" that I CANNOT make work!
That way will result in a lousy end product as Digital sound has become.
Totally flattened out.
Some of my stuff from the 50's, Rollei, Leica..
Anyway I hate having a cell/mobile or bother with internet every few seconds.
Smart-phones and Smart-cars don't look that way to me..

 

[Kate-the-Great]

Take a peep at DSLR sales though- little correlation to smartphone sales; if anything mirrorless has hurt them a bit but they seem to have barely declined. I'm not sure how serious PetaPixel or OP were being about the demise of standalone cameras, but I think it's pretty overblown.

The Kodak Brownies sold millions, but didn't get rid of view cameras.

The Argus C3 sold millions, but didn't get rid of Leica or Zeiss.

"Point and Shoot" film & digital cameras surely outsold SLRs by orders of magnitude, yet we still have our F4 and Hasselblads and EOS-1.

Smartphones are killing compact camera sales because you don't need a fancy camera to take photos of your kids, or your dog, or your casual vacation.

You do need a fancy camera for art, or sports, or commercial photography. Different tools for different photographers etc.

 

[mani]

Take a peep at DSLR sales though- little correlation to smartphone sales; if anything mirrorless has hurt them a bit but they seem to have barely declined.

Can't say I really care about this subject much, and pretty predictable responses from most people to what was meant as a bit of a throwaway topic, but I'm intrigued where the figures for the robust state of the camera market in the States comes from?

Here's another graph broken down by world region that shows the market for digital cameras in the Americas shrinking at least as fast (if not more so) as the rest of the world:

http://www.statista.com/statistics/264338/shipments-of-digital-cameras-by-world-region-since-1999/

(PS: I see now that the linked graph may be subject to a premium account paywall filter).

 

[daveleo]

. . . . . . Well, yes, I see your point but on looking at the Petapixel piece linked, a more useful reading might be "F***ing Useless Drivel". . . . .
Cheers,

R.

Thank you, Roger, for starting my day off with a laugh.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Can't say I really care about this subject much, and pretty predictable responses from most people to what was meant as a bit of a throwaway topic, but I'm intrigued where the figures for the robust state of the camera market in the States comes from?

Here's another graph broken down by world region that shows the market for digital cameras in the Americas shrinking at least as fast (if not more so) as the rest of the world:

http://www.statista.com/statistics/264338/shipments-of-digital-cameras-by-world-region-since-1999/

(PS: I see now that the linked graph may be subject to a premium account paywall filter).

Don't get me wrong. I'm very grateful to you for having posted the link. Normally I don't bother to read links, but this sounded like an interesting topic. Which it is, even though the piece you linked to is a superb illustration of feeble or at best blinkered and uninformed thinking, as Kate-the-Great points out.

Although the linked article isn't really an example, one of the things I find most fascinating about the internet is that it reveals how many stupid, ill-informed, unpleasant people there are in the world, especially when it comes to making comments about politics or indeed anything else they don't really understand and aren't clever enough to think about independently. Or at least, it reveals how many of those stupid, unpleasant people try to foist their bile or ignorance or both on others, and how few of them are aware of how little they actually know.

One of my long-held basic principles is that you should never trust anyone whose vocabulary does not include the phrase, "I could be wrong."

Cheers,

R.

 

[HHPhoto]

Can't say I really care about this subject much, and pretty predictable responses from most people to what was meant as a bit of a throwaway topic, but I'm intrigued where the figures for the robust state of the camera market in the States comes from?

Digital camera sales in the US are not robust, they are declining.
Here is the best data available (the original numbers from the camera manufacturers):

http://www.cipa.jp/stats/dc_e.html

There will be no "end of dedicated digital cameras".
That is completely overblown.
But fact is that the sales are strongly declining, and this trend will continue for many years before we see a bottom on a low level.
That is because the main reasons for the decline (market over-saturation, only tiny progress in technology with new models, budget limitations of the average consumer etc.) will be there for the next years.
And probably some of the manufacturers will have to quit the market because of lack of profitabiliy (currently only Canon, Nikon and Leica are really robustly profitable with their digital camera divisions).

So in the future we will have a much smaller market with less companies, but definitely not the "end of dedicated digital cameras".

Cheers, Jan

 

[Phil_F_NM]

Good thing I have a digital that is rated for a few hundred thousand exposures and shutter repairs aren't expensive.

Or:

Good thing I have a few film cameras.

Or:

Good thing I know how to make plate negatives and my own emulsion for use in a view camera.

Or:

The sky is falling.

Whichever case, I'm having fun shooting and will continue to do so for the forseeable future. I'm sure this petapixel article did exactly what it was meant to do and get many clicks on the site.

Phil Forrest

 

[raid]

I just checked it out; my M9 does not have a built-in phone in it. What a bummer. I spent al this money to get a phone that is a Leica, and now I know that it ain't true!

Maybe the M8?

 

[jcb4718]

It is an interesting graph. It seems to be describing two different things. Firstly, actual camera sales are holding up i.e. digital camera sales are about the same as the peak of analogue camera sales. If that proves to be a correct interpretation it means that camera manufacturers should not bank on a growing market: they can only grow individually by increasing market share. As has been said, this will likely lead to a shakeout of the weaker manufacturers. The smartphone camera sales are a different thing. The vast increase in phone-camera sales reflects the vast increase in phone sales i.e. they would likely happen anyway even if phones did not have cameras. That's not to say phone camera sales have not eaten into digital camera sales, in particular the simple P&S type. It will be interesting to see if overall digital camera sales stabilise at the current level.

 

[dave lackey]

Dear Andy,

Your post finally prompted me to look up FUD, which I see is "Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt". Well, yes, I see your point but on looking at the Petapixel piece linked, a more useful reading might be "F***ing Useless Drivel". It's an astonishingly one-dimensional piece.

Cheers,

R.

What he said!!! LOL!!!...😀

The sky is not falling, it is merely changing shades and color as the day progresses. What a wonderful time to be in photography!

 

[DominikDUK]

DSLR the victim of I-phone no, entry level and pure P&S cameras sales on the other hand yes. Will it completely kill the latter not likely. But I could be wrong 🙂

+1 for Roger's posts in this thread

 

[Paul Jenkin]

Well, in just over a week's time, Apple (purveyors of some of the sexiest "must have" technology ever made) will launch its new range of iWatches. They don't appeal greatly to me as I'm more than happy with my Oris. However, the marketing clout Apple has means the launch of this new Apple product is guaranteed to have an impact on sales of wrist watches - at some level.

Nothing specifically to do with phones v traditional cameras, per se, but some new products extend existing markets and others provide replacements. Some, like on-board mobile phone cameras, have limitations and others will provide an option for a watch to no longer be just a watch but a link to the internet, or even be a phone itself....

 

[jschrader]

leaving the telephones out, it seems that camera sales are still as high as in 2000. Twice as high as they were when I got my first SLR.

Why did they not add the telephone production for the years 1947 - 2000? People buy telephones to talk, and maybe also check bus timetables and stock exchange news..... They were using telephones for that much before the smartphone.

😀