[reh321]

Why not? GoPro produces cheap electronic gadgets and sells them and some accessories for a good profit. They are marketleader and sell to the masses and probably get some good profit, as the production and development cost can't be that high. Ricoh sells optomechanical photographic tools with integrated electronics. Take the 645z, or K3II, or K1 and some lenses, much more complex with mirror and prism, IBIS, metering and AF, imaging processor. High cost, low volume, but can still be profitable, like surveying equipment, 3d Laserscanners, Tachymetres... there are companies who have their specialieation and can find their income in not mass market businesses.

GoPro may not be a very good example of a company doing well in the photography business
GoPro takes a nosedive - Oct. 29, 2015

[monochrome]

GoPro may not be a very good example of a company doing well in the photography business
GoPro takes a nosedive - Oct. 29, 2015

GoPro seems to suffer from a problem similar to Nikon. They overestimated sales, overbuilt capacity, over-produced and when sales (for Christmas, as management just revealed) slowed (because the fad has passed and the next generation of toy is drones) inventory rapidly built. Now they're slashing prices to clear stock, further impinging Gross Revenue.

It probably isn't a death spiral - they'll retrench and remarket (their target customer age will rise) but good luck owning the stock for a while.

Ricoh Imaging is fine. Corporate isn't closing the door. They're not going away, much as a few people on here seem to wish they would.

[Zygonyx]

The guy (that is me) probably does understand photography. The chip and processor in a DSLR are relatively small, and getting smaller (Moore's Law is still functioning). At some point getting a bigger sensor or packing in more megapixels isn't going to make a difference for most photographers. ...

Let me challenge the word "most", that is definitely not meaning "all photogs", hence not market-driving.

Just slap it in the phone, add a snap-in case that will accept the lenses you want, and you now have a smartphone with DSLR-like performance. It may not have the ergonomics or focusing speed of a DSLR, but it will be a heck of a lot lighter to take while hiking, skiing or on any kind of vacation.

We already know that unless lenses are very small hence limited in potential, such devices (Sony XQ) are only used by geeks, not really by photogs

The lower end of the camera market has indeed fallen off a cliff due to the smartphone. Remember Garmin? You use the smartphone for directions now too, right? ....

Have you figured out why people are still buying watches, after more than 20 years of pocketable phones ?
So GPS is not the sole nor the best example imho (and dedicated GPS devices still exist) to demonstrate any physical replacement smartphones are definitely not bound to do, as far as photog is concerned.

The next generations want ease of use. The smartphone gives it to them....

I don't think laziness and/or automation are compatible with good results, nor creative nor profesionnal results.

Just to conclude, some of these points, even when progress arise ; and some other we easily can think of (you mentionned rightly ergonomy, you could add power autonomy, smartphone size linked to sensor size, aso...) just don't support your point of vue.

Plus, when adressing market issues or trends, a common mistake is to confuse volumes and segmentation considerations ; to confuse mass-market with global-market.

[Kunzite]

The guy (that is me) probably does understand photography. The chip and processor in a DSLR are relatively small, and getting smaller (Moore's Law is still functioning). At some point getting a bigger sensor or packing in more megapixels isn't going to make a difference for most photographers. I think what the K-3 has now is good enough for non-professionals. There is no reason why a smartphone can't hold a 24mp APS-sized sensor in another 4 years, with a separate processor either in the phone or more likely in a snap-in case. A 24mp processor will be "old" in four years, so there is no need for sunk cost (R&D, manufacturing, etc.). Just slap it in the phone, add a snap-in case that will accept the lenses you want, and you now have a smartphone with DSLR-like performance. It may not have the ergonomics or focusing speed of a DSLR, but it will be a heck of a lot lighter to take while hiking, skiing or on any kind of vacation.

There's a very good reason why a smartphone can't hold an APS-sized sensor: physics. There simply isn't space for such a large sensor and a corresponding lens, and you don't want to increase its size too much because then using it for its other purposes (talking, browsing, gaming etc.) is going to be cumbersome.
But it's easy to ignore that when the plan is "just slap it in" (how hard can it be?)

Another good reason is that most people don't need APS-sized quality. You're thinking of a device made for people who would likely buy a dedicated camera, not for the post-lunch-images-on-Facebook crowd. Let's get real, the only kind of camera which can be replaced by a smartphone is a compact.

[Rondec]

Smart phones are expensive enough right now with current tiny sensor, I can't imagine the cost if they tried to stick a four thirds or APS-C sensor in one of them. Beyond which, people use their phone camera for snap shots and they don't need a large sensor for those.

The biggest negative to smart phone cameras is the ergonomics. It is just really tough to use one for an extended period of time and get the steadiness you need. Sure, it can be done, but smart phones aren't replacing ILCs any time soon -- the market is slowing just because people are satisfied with the ILC they have currently and won't upgrade till it stops working.

[quant2325]

There's a very good reason why a smartphone can't hold an APS-sized sensor: physics. There simply isn't space for such a large sensor and a corresponding lens, and you don't want to increase its size too much because then using it for its other purposes (talking, browsing, gaming etc.) is going to be cumbersome.
But it's easy to ignore that when the plan is "just slap it in" (how hard can it be?)

Another good reason is that most people don't need APS-sized quality. You're thinking of a device made for people who would likely buy a dedicated camera, not for the post-lunch-images-on-Facebook crowd. Let's get real, the only kind of camera which can be replaced by a smartphone is a compact.

You obviously know little about technology! Note: The Lumix boasts a 1" 20-megapixel CMOS sensor and runs off the Android OS. I am simply talking about combining the two cameras you see below. The technology is already here.

[Rondec]

You obviously know little about technology! Note: The Lumix boasts a 1" 20-megapixel CMOS sensor and runs off the Android OS. I am simply talking about combining the two cameras you see below. The technology is already here.

Looks like an ergonomic nightmare to me...

[Zygonyx]

Don't worry, there will be strong ergonomics improvements by a few years
And this Lumix DMC costs even more than i-phone 6+

[Kunzite]

You obviously know little about technology! Note: The Lumix boasts a 1" 20-megapixel CMOS sensor and runs off the Android OS. I am simply talking about combining the two cameras you see below. The technology is already here.

Obviously, I have no clue how to use a ruler (or otherwise approximate 23.5x15.6mm). By the way, I think your first picture is representative for what you're suggesting.

[Zygonyx]

Btw to be serious 5 sec. again, the very ergonomic and powerful Ricoh GR APS-C can be found for about 40% of that Lumix, and the GR II 65% : any thought ?
Ah, right, those don't get phonecalls...

[johnmflores]

Btw to be serious 5 sec. again, the very ergonomic and powerful Ricoh GR APS-C can be found for about 40% of that Lumix, and the GR II 65% : any thought ?
Ah, right, those don't get phonecalls...

...or run Snapseed or other Android editing apps.
...or run Twitter, Facebook, Hootsuite, Instagram or other social apps.
...or run an email client for immediate sharing of photos with editor/publisher
...or run Wordpress, Medium, or other publishing app for immediate publication


Don't get me wrong, I'd love a GR, but if I was covering events or had a big following on social media, the Lumix CM1 would get the nod.

[Zygonyx]

You can also have your 150 bucks smartphone to reach the graal conveniently.... using wifi ; and so versatile you also can use it with your 645Z medium format qualitative shots.

Multifunction pocketability will always be compromising and expensive.

[cali92rs]

...or run Snapseed or other Android editing apps.
...or run Twitter, Facebook, Hootsuite, Instagram or other social apps.
...or run an email client for immediate sharing of photos with editor/publisher
...or run Wordpress, Medium, or other publishing app for immediate publication


Don't get me wrong, I'd love a GR, but if I was covering events or had a big following on social media, the Lumix CM1 would get the nod.

+1
What most folks that are on DSLR websites fail to realize is that for 90% of the population, if it takes a person more than 3-5 taps/swipes to get a picture or video onto a website, then they are not interested PERIOD. They dont care which camera has better DR, which one has more resolution, which one is noisier etc. They want their piece of media on their blog instantaneously.

[Zygonyx]

Again, different uses for different purposes.

I was just admiring this morning a fascinating black and white portrait taken with a chamber, on a 150*100 cm HQ print...

Your geekmick shots NEVER will render so authentic...

Social "instant-nevrose" might also to be somehow outdated in sometime...
Look at Tweeter...
Sense and reflection will eventually surpass instant febril feevers - that is my conviction.

[johnmflores]

Sense and reflection will eventually surpass instant febril feevers - that is my conviction.

...says the guy that made four posts in this thread within the last hour....