The End of dedicated digital cameras

[mani]

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.

There was a lot of noise and fury in this post. I'm obviously too stupid to understand which element in the chain of causation is the ultimate target for all the hate? At first I thought it was me, but as I'm often admitting to being wrong, it must be someone else.

 

[jcb4718]

Well that's exactly it, Paul Jenkin and Ischrader. Digital camera sales shot up but it could well be that they will stabilise at something like the level analogue sales achieved. Surely there will always be people (people like us?) interested in buying actual cameras? I think the camera manufacturers should learn from Apple. One of their main development drivers is simplifying technology. Digital cameras are insanely complicated! Too many menus, too many options, too much information. I mean analogue pictures are comparable to digital pictures and analogue cameras are a lot simpler.

 

[Hsg]

There will always be a digital camera that offers EVF, manual exposure, manual focus and interchangeable lenses.

That's all I need.

 

[dct]

...Too many menus, too many options, too much information. I mean analogue pictures are comparable to digital pictures and analogue cameras are a lot simpler.

Well said!

And the industry should be able to achieved this simplification without the price range of a collector's model like the M60 (type 240).

 

[dmr]

Do any of the smart phones ever come close, in terms of quality of optics and sensor, let alone finished photo quality, to the dedicated film or digital cameras?

 

[daveleo]

The decline of digital camera sales has nothing to do with simplicity vs complexity. It's due to convenience. People these days ALWAYS have their picture-taking cell phones with them. Why buy and carry around a separate camera??

And . . . Digital is painfully painfully simple . . . set camera to P and shoot. Push another two buttons and it's on facebook or instagram or whatever, going around the world.

 

[zuiko85]

Perhaps DSLR and mirrorless ILC sales will stabilize at a greatly reduced level in a few years. These cameras are often associated with professionals earning a living by their photography and by hobbyist who are keen on having much more control over their photography than the standard phone camera gives them. In the film era there was a decline in SLR sales in the late 70's/early 80's as autofocus point and shoot cameras became better and very easy to use with motor advance and rewind and auto film loading. I think we are seeing the same in digital now. My wife has a smart phone (that I cannot figure out how to operate) and uses the still picture and video all the time. She has even downloaded a few of the pictures she wanted to keep. I have warned her that she should have physical prints made of those few she wants to keep.

 

[Huss]

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

Not for art.

 

[farlymac]

My cell phone can take pictures. I've taken exactly three in the year or so that I've owned it. One was to have a custom user screen photo, the second was a spur of the moment capture of a car that was like one I used to own many years ago, and the third was the sign on the side of a truck so I could remember the phone number. Even though it's just a simple flip phone, it still gets counted in all those other phones with cameras. So I'm kind of skewing the numbers, as I spend my extra money on film camera gear.

One can make numbers do anything they want with them. Just ask your Congressperson.

PF

 

[Huss]

Do any of the smart phones ever come close, in terms of quality of optics and sensor, let alone finished photo quality, to the dedicated film or digital cameras?

iPhone 6 et al are better than many p&s dedicated digital cameras like my Canon S95.
dpreview had a comparison test of phones vs p&s cameras a while back.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Another day another petapoop article about nothing.

 

[Hsg]

Technology growth is exponential while photography problems are the same as they were when photography begun - how to make interesting photos...

 

[David Hughes]

...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.

Hi,

Reveals? Don't you mean "Confirms" ?

Regards, David

 

[Roger Hicks]

There was a lot of noise and fury in this post. I'm obviously too stupid to understand which element in the chain of causation is the ultimate target for all the hate? At first I thought it was me, but as I'm often admitting to being wrong, it must be someone else.

The article itself. Sorry: I thought that was pretty clear. I'm grateful to you for bringing this to my attention (and everyone else's). I just thought that once I'd read it, it was drivel, and an example of a particular kind of ill-informed and ill-thought-out drivel at that. Not a very good example, but all part of the syndrome I was attacking. I'm not blaming you for the poor quality of the article, not for a moment, and I apologize profoundly if you have gained that impression. The thing is, we need to read drivel like this from time to time to realize what mighty edifices some journalists can build on such slender foundations. Ko.Fe summed it up perfectly: "Another day another petapoop article about nothing."

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Hi,

Reveals? Don't you mean "Confirms" ?

Regards, David

Dear David,

You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment. Besides, I was trying to be generous.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Hsg]

 

[willie_901]

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 🙂
...

Remember, the purpose of Peta-Pixel and similar sites is to make money. Money is made be very low levels of compensation for each referral to another site A large number of referrals to other sites generates more income. This economic system lead to absurd levels of headline inflation. And there is no peer review (editorial oversight) of content. This is not a combination that fosters journalistic integrity. But it does reward FUD headlines.

Anyway, You are not wrong.

A more complete analysis of camera sales data over the same period shows mobile phones destroyed the low-cost, casual-use P&S digital camera that decimated sales of low-cost, casual-use P&S film cameras. The sales of low-cost, casual-use cameras has always dwarfed the sales of more expensive cameras.

Meanwhile, since 1999 DSLR sales increased, leveled out and then declined. The impact of mobile phones on this segment is small. DSLR sales decreased because for many photographers DSLRs became "good enough". Many DSLR photographers are not motivated to upgrade. They do not need another stop or two of signal-to-noise ratio and analog dynamic range. At the same time the user experience became stagnant. And the mirrorless market eroded some DSLR market share.

The sales of mirrorless camera segment, intended to replace DSLRs, remains more or less constant.

Thom Hogan comments on the sales trends in a coherent, thoughtful way.

 

[f16sunshine]

Photographing and using photographs is only one aspect of my job.
For many of these tasks the iPhone is the perfect tool. The iPhone 6 in particular has been an efficiency machine.

As to the thread title.
I dislike the FUD mongering nature of the title.
(No offense to OP or his intentions).

A better title would be.....

"Camera phones lead a robust photography culture in today's society".

 

[NickTrop]

FUD indeed. The market that is and will continue to see sales decline is the compact point-n-shoot digitals. The smart phone camera for the casual shooter/FB/Twitter/Flickr/text/(or email)-pics-of-the-grandkids user, is more than adequate... The 100's of millions world-wide who are enthusiasts, semi-pro, pro photographers will continue to shoot their DSLRs, mirrorless, and advanced cameras. Nobody who's "into it" will be satisfied with a cell phone camera, though the smart phone's photographic capabilities might be a bigger consideration for these users when choosing a phone.

The low-end compact point-n-shoot is the odd camera out obviously -- not enough camera for "enthusiasts", rendered obsolete by the smart phone for the casual shooter. Those ubiquitous $99 digital shooters had to have razor thin margins, so I'm not s' sure the camera makers are all that sorry to see them go. No need for infographics overload to illustrate what is obvious.

Ironically, however, the small sensor "enthusiast compacts" are some of the most interesting and capable photographic critters out there imo. I've posted a couple times about my love affair with the Olympus XZ-1, truly one of my all-time faves, film or digital. A real mighty might, that one.

 

[Huss]

The only thing that matters is if photography is in decline. Not camera sales.