[Mistral75]

That's true. Bokeh making is what ILC users may be after by using a full frame camera and lenses, even some vintage lenses that render in a special way. That say, smartphone makers have worked hard to have smartphones able to produce bokeh via dual lens and image processing. So now some of photographers who wanted a dedicated camera to make bokeh are now taking their phones to do it, which leaves the only reason for using an ILC is the capability to print big occasionally. (...)

Smartphones and their software don't 'make' bokeh, they make blur. As of today, the result is far from the rendering of a vintage lens (or any 35mm lens for that matter).

[biz-engineer]

When those limitations aren't acceptable, though - or if, as you suggest, the photographer might wish to print big - then theres still no substitute for a dedicated camera with larger sensor, proper controls and interchangeable lenses. Printing big is just one of many reasons...

That's also how the argument for high pixel count on ILC cameras doesn't work. Imagine that for a number of years you never print images, you share them via flickr or other online media. One day, someone spot one the photographs and want to make an enlargement to display on a wall, a single photo, the low resolution file will be limiting, the file from the smarphone will be unusable for a poster.

[Kunzite]

Smartphones and their software don't 'make' bokeh, they make blur. As of today, the result is far from the rendering of a vintage lens (or any 35mm lens for that matter).

If you show the youngsters a smartphone image telling them, "this is how bokeh looks like", they won't know any better and will believe you.
Problem solved.

[Mistral75]

If you show the youngsters a smartphone image telling them, "this is how bokeh looks like", they won't know any better and will believe you.
Problem solved.

Yet I thought Ceaușescu was dead...

[swanlefitte]

With the phone, surveillance, and science(mostly medical and space) uses driving research. Meta lenses are rapidly advancing.
They already have a form of wafer thin zoom. They now magnetically bend the light so there is no need for big, or curved, or multiple elements. Refraction and aberrations do not apply.
I check up about every 6 months and the advance in overcoming the obstacles is amazing.
Here's an overview more from the camera side.Metalenses are Growing Up

[reh321]

Smartphones and their software don't 'make' bokeh, they make blur. As of today, the result is far from the rendering of a vintage lens (or any 35mm lens for that matter).

The average 'amateur' doesn't worry about these things the way that many here do. The phone companies do seem to be producing what their customers want.

[reh321]

If you show the youngsters a smartphone image telling them, "this is how bokeh looks like", they won't know any better and will believe you.
Problem solved.

I remember photographing a {preschool} classroom; I used ISO 800 film so my flash wouldn't be a distraction. At some point, some precocious youngster told me my flash wasn't working. Putting aside the moment that I did not have a flash mounted on my "Super Program", we can see how fast youngster learn about the world around them. I gave each daughter a P&S when she turned 8; today each of them is "on her own" and carries a smart phone, and its camera is all she would think of using.

[Kunzite]

Yet I thought Ceaușescu was dead...

His communism was more like "the working class needs no bokeh!"

[yorik]

Actually, the K-01 contained an entirely new, smaller, lighter IBIS system. For all the supposed K-01 objections, a K-30 was a K-01 with a VF, mirror and PDAF senso added. It really isn’t the other way round. Some Pentax DSLR’s are MILC’s with optical capabilities added.

The sensor (and ibis) are great. I was referring to the `form-over-function' design of the outer shell. I also feel compelled to add that until Pentax improves the contrast-detect AF (hardware and algorithms) in their cameras, their DSLRs will not be very useful MILCs.

(Perhaps some of this will be addressed in the K-new )

[ecostigny]

Or they print relatively small. I recently printed a 70-page, 14" x 11" (35 x 27 cm) book of photos from a family trip to Germany and Austria. It was a mix of photos from my K-3ii, K-30, and smartphones. I have some great full-page photos of landscapes and other things that I'm sure benefited from the DSLR. But there have to be 100 smaller images in the book taken with phones and nobody noticed. I've gotten numerous comments that the book is brilliant, but nobody had the slightest idea that 25% of the photos were from phones.

The only comment I got about what camera I used were from my brother-in-law, whose phone got essentially nothing from the day we watched a falconry show at a castle. The 55-300 and K-3ii clearly and obviously showed its advantages that day. But aside from that day I don't think he was bothered about the "limitations" of his phone.

---------- Post added 01-04-20 at 06:35 AM ----------



Sports. Phones have a long way to go to duplicate the results of an ILC when the subject is far away and moving fast, often in challenging light.

Wildlife too. I was on a river cruise last year and got some shots of bald eagles that would have been impossible without my K-5 and 55-300mm zoom. For wide angle shots and people photos, smartphones are more than adequate for most people.

[MMVIII]

I think Canon and Nikon where benefitting a lot from the fact that a lot of (wealthy amateur) photographers bought DSLRs, also FF, because these where what the "professionals" where using. This market might have been taken by Sony, and smartphones - which just shows that many have "overbought" for their needs. Not saying that there might not be some real professionals also using ML, some might even really see a benefit in some offers, like eye AF etc. but the vast amount could have been happy for a long time with DSLRs just the same way - and some things like eye AF might come to these too, I expect at least one more generation of high end DSLRs from the big players. But these users will feel the pressure when development efforts will be shifted more and more to ML and support for their tools will be lowered. The last thing the manufacturers would want would be satisfied customers who would have already bought everything they needed and would use it for many years...

[ecostigny]

I think Canon and Nikon where benefitting a lot from the fact that a lot of (wealthy amateur) photographers bought DSLRs, also FF, because these where what the "professionals" where using. This market might have been taken by Sony, and smartphones - which just shows that many have "overbought" for their needs. Not saying that there might not be some real professionals also using ML, some might even really see a benefit in some offers, like eye AF etc. but the vast amount could have been happy for a long time with DSLRs just the same way - and some things like eye AF might come to these too, I expect at least one more generation of high end DSLRs from the big players. But these users will feel the pressure when development efforts will be shifted more and more to ML and support for their tools will be lowered. The last thing the manufacturers would want would be satisfied customers who would have already bought everything they needed and would use it for many years...

That is why the manufacturers have marketing departments: to convince you that the gear that will serve you well for many years is suddenly inadequate.

[xmeda]

For digital Pentax K100D, K10D, Kx, K5 and K50 were the main bestsellers. K1 is just a tiny drop when compared to them

[reh321]

For digital Pentax K100D, K10D, Kx, K5 and K50 were the main bestsellers. K1 is just a tiny drop when compared to them

but the K-1 marks the point where Pentax finally return to its 35mm roots, and the camera finally 'suitable' for that wealth of film K-mount lenses out there.

[xmeda]

Film lenses work on APS-C too

I know the difference in focal length. But combined DSLR + mirrorless FF market is around 10% of interchangeable lens cameras. FF DSLR having about 4%. Dominated by Canon and Nikon. Interchangeable mirrorless dominated by Sony.

Producing some K1 in 2008 would make much more impact. Sony had nice sensor in A900/A850 for it by that time and In that era many lenses were still available from Sigma, Tamron and Zeiss to start with...