[jogiba]

Not to disrespect camera phones, but I struggle to take decent photos with mine, whereas I don't with my SLR. Ergonomics are lousy on it, it is light enough that camera shake is a real problem. Smart phones are small computers that happen to have a camera in them. Perhaps they are better than nothing, but I would go into depression if that was the only photographic device I had to use.

Do you really think most consumer have been using SLR/DSLR cameras to take their photos the last fifty years ? I bet the best cameras most people ever had in their life is in their smartphone.


https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=Nokia%20808&sort=interestingness-desc
https://www.flickr.com/search?sort=interestingness-desc&text=Nokia%201020

[Andi Lo]

Do you really think most consumer have been using SLR/DSLR cameras to take their photos the last fifty years ? I bet the best cameras most people ever had in their life is in their smartphone.


https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=Nokia%20808&sort=interestingness-desc
https://www.flickr.com/search?sort=interestingness-desc&text=Nokia%201020

Those are amazing Jogiba, thanks for sharing the link

[mecrox]

It's quite important to make a distinction between folks for whom photography is an enthusiasm or even a job, to which they are prepared to devote a lot of time, learning and money, and those for whom it's a simpler matter of recording memorable moments, fun and so forth in an easy, unstressful but reliable way. Even then, for those in this camp, modern electronics mean the results can be superb. Of course the two camps merge at their edges and many flit of us between the two but at heart they are distinct, I think. I know lots of folks who greatly enjoy snapping with their cameraphone but they would not be interested in a DSLR. Maybe a bridge camera or compact if it was simple and well designed, and there was a good reason for it - a new member of the family, a special holiday and so forth. But changeable lenses, all those f-stops and settings, DOF and file formats, not to mention the sheer expense - just not for them. Why should it be? Even if they've gone out and bought a camera at some stage, chances are they've no plans at all to replace or extend it. They may not even use it all that much.

I'd argue that we've been though a period at the start of digital when the camera companies were able to extend themselves enormously because no one else was claiming the territory. Now the big beasts have started to move in on the territory of "a camera for every man", outfits like Apple, Google and Samsung. Those aren't outfits the camera companies can beat and, arguably, the camera companies are in this fix because they moved too far beyond their traditional territory. Being essentially hardware-based, they never understood that software - with all that it implies, in the network - would prove the key weapon in deciding who produces the camera for every man. So we are now seeing a period of retrenchment while the camera companies work out what to do next. Some may drop out; others may become stronger. That's all.

[ElJamoquio]

Because no matter what most people stills need a phone, moreso than they do a camera. Also a smartphone can help you do other things that are picture taking. Can your SLR play angry birds or search for the closest Chinese takeout?

A phone with a good camera is still "expensive", that much is true.

I didn't say anything about other uses. I agree that smartphones are more versatile, but I'm glad my camera can't tell me where to get MSG.

[Kunzite]

I never said it's the best camera for all situations, I'm saying its a good and relevant photographic tool.

No doubt that what you're saying is true, that at its current state it is no match to a "proper camera", but who defines what a proper camera is? Doesnt that depends on the situation? You certainly won't mount your Pentax SLR to the top of your head when you snowboard? Will you shoot your friend's daughter backyard birthday party with a 1Dsiii?

Smartphone camera is appropriate and might be the best choice for some people in some circumstances (just like all cameras and systems in existence). Everything has its place, including the smartphones

Its only merit is that you have it with you, (more or less) always.

A proper camera is a tool designed with a special photographic purpose in mind. It's usually hand held (so its shape should follow this purpose), sometimes tripod mounted (so it might need a tripod mount); it usually needs a viewing (composing/framing/focusing) method that also works outdoors; it usually needs a shutter release system that won't generate too much hand shake.

There are special cameras for mounting on a helmet, the GoPro series for example. Those were made for such purposes - rugged, with special mount systems, UI reduced to a minimum. Mentioning a heavy DSLR is nothing else than a strawman, as I never claimed there is only one type of camera.

[ElJamoquio]

I have an iphone 5. But I must confess that I don't use zooms often due to pursuit of image quality and I haven't use a point and shoot camera for many years because I was frustrated with them as well.

Hmmm... I almost never use my phone as a camera. I have to be pretty desperate. Even when I was carrying my camera, sometimes I'd carry a P&S, too. Taking a picture with a camera is a major PITA.

---------- Post added 07-08-14 at 09:23 AM ----------

I can pull out a P&S and take a decent quality pic in about a second. I can pull out my phone and take a decent quality pic in about ten seconds.

[philbaum]

Not to disrespect camera phones, but I struggle to take decent photos with mine, whereas I don't with my SLR. Ergonomics are lousy on it, it is light enough that camera shake is a real problem. Smart phones are small computers that happen to have a camera in them. Perhaps they are better than nothing, but I would go into depression if that was the only photographic device I had to use.

Totally agree. I can't even guess how this will impact the availability of serious ILC cameras, e.g.

a. Will there be fewer camera mfrs in the future

b. When we're out of the present bubble crash, will ilc cameras get a lot more expensive because of fewer buyers, or remain about the same price level as today

c. Will smart phones increase the number of photography enthusiasts in the future or will their numbers decline. Or like bowling - will the sport decline? (depressing thought)

d. Will the "real" photographer of tomorrow be about as welcome in establishments as today's smoker, i.e. a photographer with a real camera will be required to stay at least 20 feet away from any doorway and is not permitted to carry them inside, (another depressing thought)

e. Will "photography enthusiast" become a clinical term for someone needing treatment with anti-depressants -

Seriously, i'd hate to be to CEO of any camera mfr firm - where do they go from here?????

[jcdoss]

Sony A7 2nd hand prices have been dropping here as the gadget chasers go for the latest and greatest (A7s)
$1000-$920 are now common with easily $150 worth of freebies like additional batteries, charger and even metabones (pricey) adapters.
Prices of the other canikon FF have also been pushed down because of this.

I'm intent on hanging on until Photokina before getting an upgraded or second body, but where are you finding sub-$1k A7's?

[RonHendriks1966]

Totally agree. I can't even guess how this will impact the availability of serious ILC cameras, e.g.

a. Will there be fewer camera mfrs in the future

b. When we're out of the present bubble crash, will ilc cameras get a lot more expensive because of fewer buyers, or remain about the same price level as today

c. Will smart phones increase the number of photography enthusiasts in the future or will their numbers decline. Or like bowling - will the sport decline? (depressing thought)

d. Will the "real" photographer of tomorrow be about as welcome in establishments as today's smoker, i.e. a photographer with a real camera will be required to stay at least 20 feet away from any doorway and is not permitted to carry them inside, (another depressing thought)

e. Will "photography enthusiast" become a clinical term for someone needing treatment with anti-depressants -

Seriously, i'd hate to be to CEO of any camera mfr firm - where do they go from here?????

On a few off them:
a. Yes there will be less brands in the future. No idea who will survive or how many different platforms wil survive. My guess is that there will be less mount in 5 years then there are today.
b. I think they will be split in cheaper and more expensive and that the middle will be dead in the future. So either for hobby or for enthousiast/pro's.
c. I think the numbers will decline. Who needs pictures of anything else when you are used to take pictures of yourself.
d. You allready see that working in bars with laptops and phones is getting banned from places. So taking images as with Google iGlass will be not tolerated as it was before.
e. I guess the "photography-enthusiast" is the one surviving and that the professional photographer will be the one that needs pitty and help from outsiders.

[ElJamoquio]

I'm intent on hanging on until Photokina before getting an upgraded or second body, but where are you finding sub-$1k A7's?

I'm seeing them at $1200. I purchased an open-box A7R at $1500 from Amazon a few months ago, for what it's worth.

[Rondec]

Do you really think most consumer have been using SLR/DSLR cameras to take their photos the last fifty years ? I bet the best cameras most people ever had in their life is in their smartphone.


https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=Nokia%20808&sort=interestingness-desc
https://www.flickr.com/search?sort=interestingness-desc&text=Nokia%201020

Sorry, but when I look at those, I see exactly what I don't like about phone cameras and point shoot cameras -- overly saturated images that look almost cartoonish. There are only a couple of those that I like and those were taken in the sort of light where just about any camera would be successful.

[jogiba]

Sorry, but when I look at those, I see exactly what I don't like about phone cameras and point shoot cameras -- overly saturated images that look almost cartoonish. There are only a couple of those that I like and those were taken in the sort of light where just about any camera would be successful.

I see you still don't get it.

[ElJamoquio]

I would say he doesn't prefer it. Looking at those photos, there were some I liked and some I didn't. It's just personal preference.

The thing is, DSLR's are more flexible. They can make pics with those looks, they can make pics with other looks. Camera phones are sometimes good enough and sometimes not.

[Rondec]

I see you still don't get it.

I'm a lost cause.

I wouldn't expect you to understand, but there are gradations in tonality that you see as you increase sensor size and dynamic range. They are really apparent in full frame and medium format sensored images, but compared to camera phone images, APS-C cameras exhibit a lot larger dynamic range and the ability to bring out detail and color in the image without punching saturation and vibrance to 11.








I take a lot of images early in the morning or at sunset and the dynamic range required to capture a landscape image at those times of day is pretty high. I don't typically use HDR to process my images, but would rather work from a single image and deal with what is there.

[mecrox]

I'm a lost cause.

I wouldn't expect you to understand, but there are gradations in tonality that you see as you increase sensor size and dynamic range. They are really apparent in full frame and medium format sensored images, but compared to camera phone images, APS-C cameras exhibit a lot larger dynamic range and the ability to bring out detail and color in the image without punching saturation and vibrance to 11.





I take a lot of images early in the morning or at sunset and the dynamic range required to capture a landscape image at those times of day is pretty high. I don't typically use HDR to process my images, but would rather work from a single image and deal with what is there.

Lol, really lovely images that make the point. However, the question isn't whether a smartphone sensor is good enough to replace what you or I already have in a DSLR, given that we are sufficiently interested in photography to own a Pentax DSLR, multiple lenses and be on a specialist forum in the first place. The answer, I presume, is no both now and for the foreseeable future. It's whether a smartphone is or soon will be good enough to please the 95 per cent of folks who are not like us, or most of them. Much of the camera industry depends on large-volume sales. if they go, so does the industry in its present form.

FWIW, I am currently putting together a blurb.com book of our holiday photos. Many were taken on an iPhone, some on a Canon G11 and some on a Pentax DSLR. Yes, one can immediately see all the differences when the images are put up in Lightroom. But with a bit of touching up, which would not be necessary if they were not being printed, the iPhone ones are all perfectly OK for their intended use. They are hardly works of art like your images but they do the job of taking you there very well, imho.