Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-03-2013, 04:27 AM   #61
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
QuoteOriginally posted by Tony Belding Quote
I don't buy this story that everyone is spinning about how camera phones will devastate the entire photographic industry.
It's having a huge effect on the traditional optical companies who've owned the industry for 70 years.

Canon, Nikon, Sony (Konica Minolta), Olympus, and Pentax are now losing significant revenues, market share, and mindshare to Samsung, HTC, Apple, Nokia, and maybe others.

Wile more competition is good, less revenues overall to the system camera makers will certainly slow down opportunities.

08-03-2013, 11:51 AM   #62
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
It's having a huge effect on the traditional optical companies who've owned the industry for 70 years.

Canon, Nikon, Sony (Konica Minolta), Olympus, and Pentax are now losing significant revenues, market share, and mindshare to Samsung, HTC, Apple, Nokia, and maybe others.

Wile more competition is good, less revenues overall to the system camera makers will certainly slow down opportunities.
Photography, as a technology and cultural activity, was very disruptive to painters. But painters and even those that draw will pencils, survived and so will still photographers.

But there will be a lot of change, and primarily by young people who are growing up with different life experiences and values than previous generations. They will spend their money in a lot of different ways than their predecessors and that will impact photography equipment.

I walked into a very busy Verizon store the other day and was amazed by the activity. I was probably the only one there buying a jetpack wifi connection for my laptop, tablets and smart phones were everywhere. There are no dedicated camera shops in my area, but there are dedicated smart phone shops in several locations.

A lot of assets are being poured into new camera models every 18 months or so - why is that necessary? The traditional optical companies are going to have to adjust to a new reality with lower revenue. Those that can adapt will survive, those that can't will go bankrupt.

DSLRs and SLRs have been refined over decades. Compact mirrorless systems are just now being refined and considering the rapid advances being made, I think they will take over the majority of ILC sales in less than 5 years. Just a simple example, my K5 will show plus or minus 5 stops of exposure, my Nex 6 will only show plus or minus 2 stops. That makes a difference in composing a scene for strobe work. I think its just a matter of a short time before manufacturers hit the sweet configuration spot with mirrorless cameras.

In the meantime, i keep a bag of Nex equipment and another bag of K5 equipment in the house. Both systems have their applications where they shine.
08-03-2013, 03:11 PM   #63
Banned




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,541
Some things, like enthusiasts advocating for FF, and others advocating for mirrorless, are connected.

If there was no GFC, which overlapped to a great extent with the smartphone upheaval (a natural result of everyone's belt tightening — "use one device instead of two, use phone instead of a new camera, instead of a computer, because times are tough, bad for economy, you can't risk", etc), people would witness much more innovation and progress in the camera market, especially in the FF arena and OVF enhancements (like Fuji did). Or, people choosing smartphone over a real quality camera is very much a result of an imposed necessity, and not so much of an educated, voluntary choice.

Camera making industry has barely scratched what's possible there in the FF arena, and somehow, in retrospect, those slogans "who needs an FF anyway?, who needs a big DSLR?" started just around that time, when the traditional type camera industry had to accept the recession times, play on smaller systems and "think small" in general. That slogan "who needs a DSLR" needed a "rational explanation", thus as image quality couldn't be blamed, all of a sudden DSLR's "OVF and pentaprism and funny shape was the culprit!"

Then the prognosis, loud, followed by villagers with forks and rakes coming out for a witch hunt, accompanied with drums and cymbals, "OVF, your days are doomed; we've seen an omen in the sky, EVF will run catch you and run circles around you in no time!".

We have that Saint John's hermit's apocalyptic complex ever since, see "great sins in our previous existence", which will be followed by "ever enduring and never ending doom which can be avoided if we are humble and cameras pocketable".

That mindset has become an end in itself — a substitute for photography, and it's hard to break it. Enthusiasts naturally want more innovations, truly better imaging devices, but is coming scarcely, and moving slowly. I think we as a society in general are stagnating ever since, and have accepted certain bizarre worldviews since then and operating within them that we are not quite conscious of.

The "mirrorless bug"is the ingredient idea of it — an idea of salvation mentioned above telling us that all of a sudden all picture making must be mirrorless, because otherwise "cameras can't be small enough, can't be put in shirt's pocket, it's ways cheaper to make them as such", etc. "Cheap, small enough, humble in size..." are the attributes that have become nouns. As ourselves, cameras also must find their way to salvation, which in the apocalyptic worldview "is just one and only way". Of course.

Let this global recession go for a longer while, and we will twist our worldview by 180 degrees, become true gophers of nature, and everything that electronics giants (who prosper greatly in such recession times) do, will be "the king" and "a way to go" because "it's really cheap and will save us from sinful splurge". As a society, we will kill our culture, kill real choice, lose a touch with reality.

Is there any solution to break the circle? Camera making companies who try to resists such nonsense and start to think normally again, and try to establish true quality principles, will benefit. But I understand it's really hard. They probably won't sell the most, and will be very careful, and in the eyes of others, they will risk a lot. But more than a few people — I believe — will support them too because they bring in necessary refreshment, due change, excitement, and show everyone what are we all missing.

Last edited by Uluru; 08-03-2013 at 03:45 PM.
08-03-2013, 05:16 PM   #64
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,441
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
Is there any solution to break the circle?
Will my 28 year old daughter, a schooled, accomplished photographer in a related professional visual imaging field, who is a senior executive now, buy a dSLR or even a MILC? She just came home and dug out her film Rebel to take back to New York, so maybe. But she shoots every single day and posts every single day to her blog and to Instagram and Flickr. Well composed, well lit, well thought out images. That she takes with an iPhone.

08-03-2013, 05:41 PM   #65
Banned




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,541
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Will my 28 year old daughter, a schooled, accomplished photographer in a related professional visual imaging field, who is a senior executive now, buy a dSLR or even a MILC? She just came home and dug out her film Rebel to take back to New York, so maybe. But she shoots every single day and posts every single day to her blog and to Instagram and Flickr. Well composed, well lit, well thought out images. That she takes with an iPhone.
When I visited Tate, I saw tens of thousands sketches done by JMW Turner in his lifetime, done with pencil, chrcoal, watercolour, etc. It's a body of work that rivals today's digital photography portfolio of many of us together. It is quite unbelievable and astounding, that someone has created so much work, every day, 200 years ago, just by hand.

But there were just a few hundred large canvases,. Thoughts well rounded, deep, mature, transdimensional.

Is everything out of that huge opus of JMW Turner art: from a single pencil doodle to a prime canvass? Well no — although museum guides would love us to believe that.

Similarly, people take shots every day with iPhones like Turner was filling in his sketchbooks with pencil, but all that is not photography. It's snapping, sketching, training, exercising. Preparing for the real act.

Last edited by Uluru; 08-03-2013 at 05:47 PM.
08-03-2013, 06:11 PM   #66
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,441
What snobs are we to declare what is or isn't
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
well rounded, deep, mature, transdimensional
- or a photograph - dependent upon the medium?

And more importantly for this discussion, does my daughter care?
08-03-2013, 06:14 PM   #67
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,864
In answer to the original question.....

no
08-03-2013, 08:28 PM   #68
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,796
QuoteOriginally posted by arnold Quote
ell don't forget the folders. This 1951 35mm Retina has a lovely Xenar lens, and slides into your pocket.
I stand corrected. Though considering my background in large format, camera formats smaller than 35mm aren't really my area of expertise.

08-04-2013, 10:42 AM   #69
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
If there was no GFC, which overlapped to a great extent with the smartphone upheaval (a natural result of everyone's belt tightening — "use one device instead of two, use phone instead of a new camera, instead of a computer, because times are tough, bad for economy, you can't risk", etc), people would witness much more innovation and progress in the camera market, especially in the FF arena and OVF enhancements (like Fuji did). Or, people choosing smartphone over a real quality camera is very much a result of an imposed necessity, and not so much of an educated, voluntary choice.


Then the prognosis, loud, followed by villagers with forks and rakes coming out for a witch hunt, accompanied with drums and cymbals, "OVF, your days are doomed; we've seen an omen in the sky, EVF will run catch you and run circles around you in no time!". ....


The "mirrorless bug"is the ingredient idea of it — an idea of salvation mentioned above telling us that all of a sudden all picture making must be mirrorless, because otherwise "cameras can't be small enough, can't be put in shirt's pocket, it's ways cheaper to make them as such", etc. "Cheap, small enough, humble in size..." are the attributes that have become nouns. As ourselves, cameras also must find their way to salvation, which in the apocalyptic worldview "is just one and only way". Of course.....
.
To discuss some of your thoughts:
A. people choosing smartphone over a real quality camera is very much a result of an imposed necessity
There is no debating that the global recession is restricting the ability of many people to purchase some expensive options. But i don't think any of us would dispute that one can buy some really fine gear pretty inexpensively. And this inexpensive gear is technically generations ahead of what masters like Henri Cartier-Bresson had to contend with.

But there is more driving camera choices than just economic restrictions. These "smart phones" are not inexpensive. I don't have a smart phone and choose instead to put my resources into camera equipment. I'm not up on what people are paying for smart phone connections, but it runs from $50 to $100 a month or more, isn't it??? So thats like $600 to $1200 a year. In two years, a person who avoids a smart phone could choose to spend that $2400 on a FF camera if thats what they wish to do. So to some extent, many people out there are choosing not to buy more expensive cameras, rather than being forced to forego these cameras.

B. villagers with forks and rakes coming out for a witch hunt
What a bizarre way to describe those of us who dare to say that there may be some benefits to a mirrorless camera. I own and frequently use a K5 with an OVF and a Nex 6 with a EVF. I enjoy using both of those cameras and each have a different set of benefits and disadvantages. To me, photography at its best is an exciting art form. It is not a religion and to ridicule people who believe there are advantages to mirrorless cameras is inappropriate.

C. telling us that all of a sudden all picture making must be mirrorless, because otherwise "cameras can't be small enough

The title of the thread is Do you believe mirrorless will replace dslrs?

I'm not telling you to do anything. Buy a FF DSLR every day of the week if you like - I don't care. All any of us did was express an opinion of where the camera market is going as an intellectual discussion.

What is interesting to me intellectually, is how the manufacturers, even the traditional ones, are seemingly investing some serious money into focusing research. Nikon in their 1 system appears to have hit a home run with what many say is a very quick focusing system for CDAF. Canon with their dual purpose pixels in the new 70D provides a whole new approach on how to focus a camera. Sony and Nikon are both choosing a hybrid focusing system but at the sensor. They wouldn't be spending the money if they didn't expect to achieve some new advantage with these designs.

Last edited by philbaum; 08-04-2013 at 10:54 AM.
08-06-2013, 12:34 PM   #70
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,109
I think the camera phones of today and the P&S cameras of yesterday say that the vast majority of people are satisfied with "snap shots". They get posted on Facebook, text'ed around the world to relatives in other countries, and used in presentations at board room meetings with bad lighting. Do you really need 16+MP FF camera? Of course not. Give someone a 12 MP P&S and they are thrilled with the compressed JPGs coming out of it. We enthusiasts, amateurs, and professionals are a small crowd and we think we're loud because we're shouting in a small room. The "snap shot" takers are much louder in a much bigger room. That's not a bad thing. There will always be a market for APS, FF, micro 4/3, etc. Heck, there's even a very potent market for vacuum tube guitar amplifiers for those wanting "that sound" and people still buy wooden pencils because they "feel right" (me).
08-06-2013, 12:51 PM   #71
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hamilton, Texas
Photos: Albums
Posts: 647
QuoteOriginally posted by 6BQ5 Quote
Do you really need 16+MP FF camera? Of course not. Give someone a 12 MP P&S and they are thrilled with the compressed JPGs coming out of it.
Heck... I was thrilled with the 2.1 MP JPEGs coming out of my first Elph. They were way better than the photos from my old 110 format Kodak when I was growing up. Sometimes we forget just how good we've got it.

EDIT: I meant first Digital Elph. Sometimes I forget that there was an APS film version too!
08-06-2013, 05:29 PM   #72
Pentaxian
arnold's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,295
QuoteOriginally posted by 6BQ5 Quote
I think the camera phones of today and the P&S cameras of yesterday say that the vast majority of people are satisfied with "snap shots". They get posted on Facebook, text'ed around the world to relatives in other countries, and used in presentations at board room meetings with bad lighting. Do you really need 16+MP FF camera? Of course not. Give someone a 12 MP P&S and they are thrilled with the compressed JPGs coming out of it. We enthusiasts, amateurs, and professionals are a small crowd and we think we're loud because we're shouting in a small room. The "snap shot" takers are much louder in a much bigger room. That's not a bad thing. There will always be a market for APS, FF, micro 4/3, etc. Heck, there's even a very potent market for vacuum tube guitar amplifiers for those wanting "that sound" and people still buy wooden pencils because they "feel right" (me).
The majority are far more impressed with 'effect filters' than a picture with good composition and picture quality. It is a social media thing rather than a photography thing.
08-06-2013, 07:00 PM   #73
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hamilton, Texas
Photos: Albums
Posts: 647
QuoteOriginally posted by arnold Quote
The majority are far more impressed with 'effect filters' than a picture with good composition and picture quality. It is a social media thing rather than a photography thing.
I've got to admit I'm a sucker for effects filters.
08-06-2013, 07:11 PM   #74
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,109
QuoteOriginally posted by arnold Quote
The majority are far more impressed with 'effect filters' than a picture with good composition and picture quality. It is a social media thing rather than a photography thing.
That's my 15 year old cousin to some degree. She always "enhances" her shots she takes with her iPod. Some of the effects look nice but they take away a certain purity which I always regret. I think her favorite right now is the "vintage postcard" look.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
digital camera, mirrorless
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Do we think Pentax will ever implement an EVF? Mr_Canuck Photographic Industry and Professionals 32 02-06-2013 05:38 AM
What do you think the replacement for the K-01 will be like? Glen_S Pentax Mirrorless Cameras 74 01-16-2013 09:47 AM
Do you really think that HOYA will carry TWO mirrorless system? ogl Pentax Compact Cameras 55 06-29-2011 11:11 PM
Do you think Pentax will announce their EVIL APS-C size sensor camera soon? wll Photographic Technique 20 01-06-2011 06:14 AM
Do you think the K-7's video capablity will lead to a run on Russian lenses? konraDarnok Pentax DSLR Discussion 7 05-31-2009 08:51 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:33 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top