Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-09-2018, 03:19 PM - 1 Like   #691
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,130
QuoteOriginally posted by pentasonic49 Quote
I think what is killing off all cameras now is why waste money on a camera when my smart phone does the lot.
Actually, it doesn't "do the lot". At the moment, the top three issues I can think of are

(1) I used rangefinder cameras, with 45mm lenses, 1969-79 ..... and I got so frustrated! I was very happy when I got my first Pentax SLR in 1979 - and then quickly added a 70-210 lens to my bag. I see one phone advertising that it contains "5 cameras", but as long as the lenses are built in, a phone will always lack the versatility of an ILC.

(2) I have yet to have a phone camera which handles motion well. They take a really long time to focus, and by then the scene may be different. Also, they are subject to 'rolling shutter' issues.

(3) User interface is subpar. No viewfinder, and few {if any} physical controls; even the best person will take longer to navigate soft-buttons than s/he could do with real buttons, dials, etc. It is hard to hold one in a stable posture.

11-09-2018, 04:17 PM - 3 Likes   #692
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,179
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
Actually, it doesn't "do the lot". At the moment, the top three issues I can think of are
There are tricks that help phones appear to have better camera then they actually are:
- cameras on smartphones use wide angle lenses, combined with a fast aperture, allows for slow shutter speeds, helping a lot to pull decent images out of the tiny sensors
- viewing displays are small, have utra-high resolution and are boosted for contrast and saturation, making images pop more even with poor native image quality
- images are over-processed, very aggressive noise reduction and boosted contrast, making images look good at small size, however when printed A3 or displayed on a monitor, processing artifacts become very visible

Many users are happy with their phones as long as they look at images on phone displays, don't zoom in, take photos in good light and don't take pictures of moving subjects.
Whenever those conditions aren't met, smartphones are still very poor substitutes to ILCs.

Last edited by biz-engineer; 11-09-2018 at 04:27 PM.
11-11-2018, 12:46 PM   #693
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: weston-super-mare
Posts: 395
I think you have missed the point I made about smartphones, of course we know there's a world of difference, but Joe Public already has something that takes all the pictures he wants, why waste money on a camera. I'm a volunteer at a museum, a great many of the visitors use phones, or even hold up ipads and the like, even laptops. Most of those with an slr only seem to have the kit lens, the ones with proper kit are few and far between.
11-11-2018, 12:53 PM   #694
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,130
QuoteOriginally posted by pentasonic49 Quote
I think you have missed the point I made about smartphones, of course we know there's a world of difference, but Joe Public already has something that takes all the pictures he wants, why waste money on a camera. I'm a volunteer at a museum, a great many of the visitors use phones, or even hold up ipads and the like, even laptops. Most of those with an slr only seem to have the kit lens, the ones with proper kit are few and far between.
So, how is that different from 1979, when i purchased my first Pentax SLR?
Back then. most museum visitors would have had a Kodak Instamatic, if anything.

11-11-2018, 02:27 PM - 1 Like   #695
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Alex645's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,526
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
So, how is that different from 1979, when i purchased my first Pentax SLR?
Back then. most museum visitors would have had a Kodak Instamatic, if anything.
It is different because now in the first world, almost everyone has a smart phone which can shoot in mediocre light. The point and shoot's of yesteryear with 400 ISO and not large apertures were forbidden to use flash in a museum, and anyone that cared would go to the gift shop to buy officially licensed slides or a museum produced publication regarding the exhibition.

Snapping nowadays can be shared instantly and the cost per snap is less with more that you shoot. Slide film and processing was never cheap, and print film also problematic.

With that said, those with a dedicated camera has a different mind set. Personally, in terms of photography, I think it has truly become the democratic art for the masses that was started with George Eastman in 1888 and continues today. What has changed is we the people can choose between a smart phone, Holga/Lomography, to a wealth of digital options.

Good news for the trees, magazines are diminishing. Bad news for Amateur Photographer magazine (UK) will probably publish their last issue before Pentax stops making cameras.
11-11-2018, 02:49 PM - 2 Likes   #696
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 12,275
QuoteOriginally posted by Alex645 Quote
It is different because now in the first world, almost everyone has a smart phone which can shoot in mediocre light. The point and shoot's of yesteryear with 400 ISO and not large apertures were forbidden to use flash in a museum, and anyone that cared would go to the gift shop to buy officially licensed slides or a museum produced publications regarding the exhibition.

Snapping nowadays can be shared instantly and the cost per snap is less with more that you shoot. Slide film and processing was never cheap, and print film also problematic.

With that said, those with a dedicated camera has a different mind set. Personally, in terms of photography, I think it has truly become the democratic art for the masses that was started with George Eastman in 1888 and continues today. What has changed is we the people can choose between a smart phone, Holga/Lomography, to a wealth of digital options.

Good news for the trees, magazines are diminishing. Bad news for Amateur Photographer magazine (UK) will probably publish their last issue before Pentax stops making cameras.
In my view you are right on a number of points. About 8 years ago a buddy went to Paris...France, not Texas. He had a DSLR and knew when to press the shutter...also a wide angle zoom. I assumed he was going to take his DSLR, etc...but he said no. He would pick up postcards or a tourist publication for photos of the Louvre...Eiffel Tower, Seine River...etc.

Now I look at the Cell phone photos and videos taken by my kids (ages...20 something, 30 something...my I am getting old ) and I have to say ..these photos are much better than any point and shoot I remember.

The cell phone camera has democratized photography . Back in the '50's to sometime in the 2000's I recall people rummaging through a high shelf in a clothes closet (because that's where they kept their cameras) for their point and shooters...or even SLR/DSLR cameras for birthdays, Xmas, Easter shots and that was about it, until holiday time. Now cameras are always with most people in the G8...in their daily lives and ready to be used when they seem something that they want to take a pix of...through the very workable medium of cell phones. I see pictures of hamburgers, etc...that they feel just has to be recorded...selfies in front of all manner of tourist attractions..the world is awash in personal photos.

As far as magazines go...every time I go to the newsstand there seems to be one less magazine. They either shut down completely, have gone from monthly... to quarterly and 'artsy' ...or become blogs online.

I'm starting to think that newsstands are on the endangered list and I wonder if I'll see them in 5 years.
11-11-2018, 03:19 PM - 1 Like   #697
Digitiser of Film
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 20,580
The smartphone camera thing really intrigues me....

There seems to be a desire amongst some people to say that smartphones have somehow replaced other digital cameras, and in certain use cases I guess they have. But even a humble (late model) point and shoot with a four or five times zoom potentially offers more versatility than most smartphones if for no other reason than the zoom lens.

I agree with @lesmore that cell phones have democratized photography. That's a great way of looking at it. But I'd probably fine tune that statement just a touch and say that they've democratized a relatively narrow band of photographic applications. They give everyone, young and old, regardless of budget, a means of taking photos at a single (or, for multi-lens models, limited range) focal length that are perfectly acceptable - good, even - when viewed at appropriate sizes, and certainly better than most of the film era consumer compacts could hope to achieve.

But, at the end of the day, I see smartphones as just another photographic tool. Rather than replacing other tools, they can sit within the photographer's arsenal and offer fantastic capabilities when the use case and intended audience for the images suits. For some people, all they'll ever need is a decent smartphone camera, and that's fine. Frankly, though, if those people can achieve everything they want with a smartphone, they never needed a high end compact in the first place, let alone a serious DSLR or MILC.

11-11-2018, 04:21 PM - 1 Like   #698
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,130
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
The smartphone camera thing really intrigues me....

There seems to be a desire amongst some people to say that smartphones have somehow replaced other digital cameras, and in certain use cases I guess they have. But even a humble (late model) point and shoot with a four or five times zoom potentially offers more versatility than most smartphones if for no other reason than the zoom lens.

I agree with @lesmore that cell phones have democratized photography. That's a great way of looking at it.
I believe this is a continuation of Kodak's dream: "You press the button, and we'll do the rest". Not everyone had a box camera in the 1950's, or an Instamatic in the 1960's, or a 110 Camera in the 1970's, or a Disk Camera in the 1980's, or an APS Camera in the 1990's - but that was the direction George Eastman's vision was pushing the company. Smart Phones have pushed in another step, because more people are purchasing a Smart Phone for the phone and happen to get a camera as a bonus, but it is just another step. There are still a few people, even Americans, who will never carry a phone like that around with them.
11-11-2018, 04:31 PM - 1 Like   #699
Digitiser of Film
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 20,580
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
There are still a few people, even Americans, who will never carry a phone like that around with them.
Interestingly, despite being a photography enthusiast, I didn't choose to own a good quality smartphone (with decent camera) until a couple of years ago. It takes nice enough photos and videos, and it's a useful tool for very casual photography. I have some photographs I've taken with it that are undoubtedly keepers... But mostly these are records of where I've been or what I've seen, rather than the result of a creative photography session.

Although I'm pleasantly surprised by the quality of the JPEGs my phone takes when viewed at appropriate reproduction sizes, I never take just my phone with me if I'm going somewhere or doing something where I feel I might have photographic opportunities. At the very least, I'll take my Q7 and a lens or two. I might still use my phone's camera, but only as part of my kit.

That said, the smartphone definitely fulfils the requirement for that age-old adage, "the best camera is the one you have with you". And the quality of the resulting images is far better than it used to be...
11-12-2018, 12:47 AM   #700
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 561
I replaced my wide angle lenses for a smartphone. I really saw no big difference in doing so and my kit got helluva lot lighter.
11-12-2018, 02:13 AM - 3 Likes   #701
Pentaxian
Dartmoor Dave's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Dartmoor, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,857
With yesterday being Remembrance Day, I spent some time looking at family photos from the early 20th Century (as I'm sure many did). Leaving aside the matter of B&W vs Colour, I'd say that my great-grandparents were taking photos a hundred years ago that were technically at least as good as, and often better than, the ones that most of family are taking today with their smartphones.

And of course that's because every frame that my great-grandparents shot cost them money, and they weren't particularly well-off people, so taking a photo was an event and they made a real effort to do it well. The main reason why most of the smartphone photos that people take today are so bad isn't the fault of the phone technology itself, but because they take so many photos so casually that they just don't make any effort at it. Presumably people who invest in a "proper" digital camera are more likely to make a bit more effort, resulting in hopefully better photos.

One thing's for sure, I think that my great-grandfather's hundred-year-old folding camera loaded with a high quality modern film could still give any smartphone and many DSLRs a pretty good run for its money in the right hands.
11-12-2018, 03:33 AM - 1 Like   #702
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,606
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
The smartphone camera thing really intrigues me....

There seems to be a desire amongst some people to say that smartphones have somehow replaced other digital cameras, and in certain use cases I guess they have. But even a humble (late model) point and shoot with a four or five times zoom potentially offers more versatility than most smartphones if for no other reason than the zoom lens.

I agree with @lesmore that cell phones have democratized photography. That's a great way of looking at it. But I'd probably fine tune that statement just a touch and say that they've democratized a relatively narrow band of photographic applications. They give everyone, young and old, regardless of budget, a means of taking photos at a single (or, for multi-lens models, limited range) focal length that are perfectly acceptable - good, even - when viewed at appropriate sizes, and certainly better than most of the film era consumer compacts could hope to achieve.

But, at the end of the day, I see smartphones as just another photographic tool. Rather than replacing other tools, they can sit within the photographer's arsenal and offer fantastic capabilities when the use case and intended audience for the images suits. For some people, all they'll ever need is a decent smartphone camera, and that's fine. Frankly, though, if those people can achieve everything they want with a smartphone, they never needed a high end compact in the first place, let alone a serious DSLR or MILC.
I think there was a group of people who purchased SLRs a few years ago because they wanted to take digital photos of somewhat decent quality. They weren't really interested in photography and so once the camera in their phone or ipad got "good enough" they left their ILC at home and used their phone instead.

People who are more interested in photography are still frustrated with phones as photography instruments -- both from an image quality standpoint and from a form factor standpoint. I do think ILC sales have decreased some as a result of phone cameras, but they weren't people who were going to buy multiple models and lots of lenses anyway.
11-12-2018, 04:34 AM   #703
Pentaxian
MMVIII's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: EU
Posts: 1,121
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I think there was a group of people who purchased SLRs a few years ago because they wanted to take digital photos of somewhat decent quality. They weren't really interested in photography and so once the camera in their phone or ipad got "good enough" they left their ILC at home and used their phone instead.

People who are more interested in photography are still frustrated with phones as photography instruments -- both from an image quality standpoint and from a form factor standpoint. I do think ILC sales have decreased some as a result of phone cameras, but they weren't people who were going to buy multiple models and lots of lenses anyway.
I have to agree. If someone really claims that his phone replaced his DSLR/MILC he wouldn't have needed this kind of equipment from the beginning. Which does not change the result for camera manufacturers, they did not care if someone bought an appropriate camera for his needs or out of ill information or out of prestige, in the end the sum of sold units counted.

I do like my Huawei's liitle camera, with this (marketing) touch of Leica it at least manages to be not completely and utterly useless with it's controls. Still, the interface is a horror and beside snapshots with the help of automatisation and computational photgraphy support I would never consider it a proper photograpaher's instrument, like a GR can be.
11-12-2018, 04:49 AM   #704
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,179
QuoteOriginally posted by MMVIII Quote
I have to agree. If someone really claims that his phone replaced his DSLR/MILC he wouldn't have needed this kind of equipment from the beginning. Which does not change the result for camera manufacturers, they did not care if someone bought an appropriate camera for his needs or out of ill information or out of prestige, in the end the sum of sold units counted.I do like my Huawei's liitle camera, with this (marketing) touch of Leica it at least manages to be not completely and utterly useless with it's controls. Still, the interface is a horror and beside snapshots with the help of automatisation and computational photgraphy support I would never consider it a proper photograpaher's instrument, like a GR can be.
Agreed. Not only mobile phones have taken away the casual shooters, but there is also a slow down of sales due to camera companies making of DSLR that are still working great after 5 years. Cameras such as Pentax K1, D810, D850 are likely to have rather long life cycles. People still use D800E and don't feel the need to buy something new.
11-18-2018, 10:43 AM - 3 Likes   #705
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 105
QuoteOriginally posted by Dartmoor Dave Quote
With yesterday being Remembrance Day, I spent some time looking at family photos from the early 20th Century (as I'm sure many did). Leaving aside the matter of B&W vs Colour, I'd say that my great-grandparents were taking photos a hundred years ago that were technically at least as good as, and often better than, the ones that most of family are taking today with their smartphones.

And of course that's because every frame that my great-grandparents shot cost them money, and they weren't particularly well-off people, so taking a photo was an event and they made a real effort to do it well. The main reason why most of the smartphone photos that people take today are so bad isn't the fault of the phone technology itself, but because they take so many photos so casually that they just don't make any effort at it. Presumably people who invest in a "proper" digital camera are more likely to make a bit more effort, resulting in hopefully better photos.

One thing's for sure, I think that my great-grandfather's hundred-year-old folding camera loaded with a high quality modern film could still give any smartphone and many DSLRs a pretty good run for its money in the right hands.
Truth.
There have been more images taken in the last 10 years than in the preceding 100 years combined, but the average quality of images is far lower.
Closed Thread

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!
amateur, amateur photographers, article, camera, cameras, canon, clients, count, customers, email, flash, lenses, market, month, nikon, olympus, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, post, publication, read, ricoh, romania, system, thread, times, uk
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fuji Predicts Canon & Nikon Will Loose 50% of Their Current Market Share Winder Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 57 05-18-2018 02:02 PM
Pro Photographers with Amateur Gear vs. an Amateur with Pro Gear alamo5000 Photographic Technique 35 07-02-2017 04:33 PM
Wanted - Acquired: Pentax FA 50mm f1.4 UK UK UK UK UK!! DaveHolmes Sold Items 0 04-28-2011 11:56 AM
Pentax announces k-5 digital slr for advanced amateur photographers Adam Homepage & Official Pentax News 3 09-20-2010 05:55 PM
CNNmoney predicts that the end of the desktop PC is near MRRiley General Talk 18 07-26-2010 02:55 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:59 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