[normhead]

No jealousy whatsoever.... I have always thought how funny the iphone crowd are when a new app of feature is on their phone, and are blind to the fact that is most cases android phones have had the feature for years

Are you trying to get some iPhone users to tell you why they think you're funny? Hopefully nobody bites.

---

Last edited by MarkJerling; 07-11-2018 at 07:15 PM. Reason: Rude comment removed.

[twilhelm]

Reading this thread I had to rethink what I thought. I’ve been an iPhone user since the 3G, I’ve tried the android phones, and I don’t have anything against them, but the user experience wasn’t up to my Apple. I always associated the type of company Apple is with what Pentax is and was. You pick them up and they are refined as though a little bit extra goes into them, they just work and do it well.

My phone camera actually sees a lot of use at work. It’s easy to grab it from my pocket and get a shot of evidence as compared to going to my trunk and digging out my DSLR. And the pictures, while not as good, are good enough for court hearings. That being said, it’ll never replace my DSLR. (Although, if my agency doesn’t replace my Nikon D40X, I’ll start using my K5)

[reh321]

My phone camera actually sees a lot of use at work. It’s easy to grab it from my pocket and get a shot of evidence as compared to going to my trunk and digging out my DSLR. And the pictures, while not as good, are good enough for court hearings. That being said, it’ll never replace my DSLR. (Although, if my agency doesn’t replace my Nikon D40X, I’ll start using my K5)

Before I retired, sometimes I would use my cellphone to photograph the white board at meeting end - fastest way to take permanent notes and they were plenty good .

[Digitalis]

When digital came along in the commercial photography industry - there were some who thought of it as nothing more than a consumerist fad. Digital turned out to be a seismic shift that shook the industry to the core when digital was found to be able to match - and even exceed film*. There are still film diehards out there in the industry, but their work is increasingly becoming an ever shrinking niche.

if my agency doesn’t replace my Nikon D40X, I’ll start using my K5

Buy a K-1 and file it under "work expenses"


* I was one of the early adopters of digital capture in Australia, and like Michael Reichmann(RIP) I did a lot of tests of Film Vs Digital and copped a lot of flak for my support of digital....in the end I was right about digital: I look to my detractors from that time, and where are they now? most of them have thrown in the towel and are working in other areas.

---

Last edited by Digitalis; 07-12-2018 at 06:56 AM.

[leekil]

Apple doesn't care about quality. They care about the count.

That's not accurate. Usually the "best smartphone camera" flips between Apple and Samsung (and sometimes Google), with there being a new leader whoever one of them bring out a new top phone. If you look to other Android manufacturers, there are some that are more budget-priced and often have budget-quality cameras to go with that. Apple doesn't have any products like that, unless it's an older device that is still in production that has been superseded by a technology improvement; their cameras are always pretty high quality.

Also, the smartphone simply did not kill the Big Camera. Maybe it simply shrunk it. But it will probably never replace a proper camera.

The danger is if the big camera manufacturers can't survive on only selling big cameras, if the rest of the camera market is almost completely smartphones.

[Rondec]

Smartphone cameras will never truly replace a dedicated interchangeable lens camera. Smartphones are good for snap shots and yes, the image quality has improved a lot over the years. Probably we are close to the max as far as sensor efficiency for such tiny sensors, but there will continue to be software improvements. The biggest things to me are things like ergonomics (phones aren't comfortable to use long term as a camera), battery life (this is your phone too and taking a lot of photos will drop your battery life pretty quickly), and overall image quality (working with RAW images from an iphone 6, they just aren't great at anything much above base iso).

This is a healthier place for cameras. There was a big bubble that burst at the beginning of the digital era. Lots of people bought cameras who weren't really interested in photography. Now the people who purchase ILCs are either interested in photography or at least understand the things that their cell phone cameras can't do that they want them to do (action photography, wildlife, ultra wide angle photography, etc). On the other hand, compact cameras are really decimated at this point.

It bears mentioning that not all of the decline is due to smartphones at all. It is that ILCs have improved a lot and people just don't upgrade them as often. I own a K-1 and a K-1 II. If Pentax comes out with a new full frame camera next year, barring one of them giving up the ghost, I don't know that I am going to be in the market for another camera. People are still using ILCs, they are just making due with older ones and not updating them as often. This is fine for them, but the camera brands needed them to buy a new camera every couple of years to keep the cycle going.

[ThorSanchez]

It bears mentioning that not all of the decline is due to smartphones at all. It is that ILCs have improved a lot and people just don't upgrade them as often. I own a K-1 and a K-1 II. If Pentax comes out with a new full frame camera next year, barring one of them giving up the ghost, I don't know that I am going to be in the market for another camera. People are still using ILCs, they are just making due with older ones and not updating them as often. This is fine for them, but the camera brands needed them to buy a new camera every couple of years to keep the cycle going.

Similar to PCs. 20 years ago, maybe even 10, people would upgrade their PC on a pretty regular basis because you'd go from a 500MHz Pentium to a 1GHz Pentium II to the 1.5GHz whatever, and more memory and bigger hard drives became available. The computer I'm typing on I built... four? five? years ago. I don't even remember, I'd have to go back and find the receipts. It's perfectly fine. I think about maybe a hard drive is going to die and maybe it's about time to replace it, but... well... I have backups and it works so why shell out $500 or $1000 to upgrade?

If a K-3iii comes out I might be tempted, but it would depend on the features. I'm not just spending $1200 because it's newer.

---------- Post added 07-12-18 at 07:40 AM ----------

iOS devices have 77,785 daily users according to today's Flickr stats.

Every cameraphone (Android and non Android) listed for Samsung, Motorola, LG, Google, and HTC have 17,407 daily users...You might be able to find a few hundred more users if look outside of the top 15 companies listed...

That's curious. I have a hard time taking that at face value since iPhones are something like 20% of all smartphones sold. There has to be some connection between Apple and Flickr. Is the Flickr app pre-installed on Apple phones?


I think you'd have a pretty good case if the data was Apple makes 20% of the phones but 40% of the online smartphone photos. But your data is more like 80%+. To me that indicates bad data.

[Digitalis]

Apple doesn't care about quality. They care about the count.

Don't you mean quantity?


There is a good quote from Josef Stalin:

"Quantity has a quality all of its own" - this way of thought works in many ways: people seek out to gather more Cameras, Lenses, Cars, Audio gear, Movie collections... and in some cases: Women*

Apple flooding the market the way they have is a good survival strategy - especially with all the proprietary connectors, chargers and accessories - the chances of being overtaken by a competitor is pretty remote.


* or whichever gender non-hetronoarmative individuals find the most appealing.

[normhead]

That's curious. I have a hard time taking that at face value since iPhones are something like 20% of all smartphones sold. There has to be some connection between Apple and Flickr. Is the Flickr app pre-installed on Apple phones?

When the data doesn't support you case, question the data.

The stock reply.
"Until you come up with better data, that's what I'm sticking with."

Your questioning of the data doesn't in any way negate the data. Only your credibility. Are you data driven, or opinion driven?

Get back to us when you come up with something.

[ThorSanchez]

When the data doesn't support you case, question the data.

The stock reply.
"Until you come up with better data, that's what I'm sticking with."

Your questioning of the data doesn't in any way negate the data. Only your credibility. Are you data driven, or opinion driven?

Get back to us when you come up with something.

How do you explain the fact that 80% of cell phones are non-iPhones but Flickr has 80% of photos from cell phones coming from iPhones? All that tells me is that Apple users upload dramatically more photos to Flickr than Android and other cell phone users. It tells me nothing about the quality of the photos or the photographers using iPhones.

I'm data driven. And all the data tells me in this case is that Apple users use Flickr a lot more than other cell phone users. Why? We have no idea.

[normhead]

How do you explain the fact that 80% of cell phones are non-iPhones but Flickr has 80% of photos from cell phones coming from iPhones? All that tells me is that Apple users upload dramatically more photos to Flickr than Android and other cell phone users. It tells me nothing about the quality of the photos or the photographers using iPhones.

I'm data driven. And all the data tells me in this case is that Apple users use Flickr a lot more than other cell phone users. Why? We have no idea.

See that's exactly the issue. You're just making stuff up.

And all the data tells me in this case is that Apple users use Flickr a lot more than other cell phone users. Why? We have no idea.

That's hogwash, you don't know anything, you have no data to support your case, you're just flailing in the wind trying to excuse your personal bias. Things that could be equally true. Apple user take more pictures. - More apple users buy their phones to use as cameras. It could be Apple users post more pictures on all sites. The stuff you make up really doesn't ad any knowledge to the conversation.

It could be Apple's "ease of use" makes it easier to upload. It could be Apple's user base is more into photography, that's actually quite likely since Apple has traditionally been a preference for graphic types. There are a lot of reasons why Apple seems to be connected to the phone market. But I doubt there's flickr app that makes a difference. I use both an iPhone and Apple computers, and I know of no app such as you are discussing.

There are tons of flickr related Apple apps. But your previous post suggested they were all available on Andorid phones first, so how is that an advantage?

Strike 2. (three strikes and you're ignored).

[altopiet]

When the data doesn't support you case, question the data.

The stock reply.
"Until you come up with better data, that's what I'm sticking with."

Your questioning of the data doesn't in any way negate the data. Only your credibility. Are you data driven, or opinion driven?

Get back to us when you come up with something.

As far as I know, Samsung and IPhone sales are about the same (+-18% in 2017), but if you compare the OS, Android obviously has by far the bigger share of the market.

Might it be, that because a lot of Samsung and Android phones are sold in developing nations, who might make more use of social media like Facebook and Instagram, to share photos, and not Flicker, the majority of images shared on the www are actually Samsung/Android?

Actually what is relevant is that "smartphones" as a whole, for better or worse, changed the landscape of photography.

[ThorSanchez]

See that's exactly the issue. You're just making stuff up.


That's hogwash, you don't know anything, you have no data to support your case, you're just flailing in the wind trying to excuse your personal bias. Things that could be equally true. Apple user take more pictures. - More apple users buy their phones to use as cameras. It could be Apple users post more pictures on all sites. The stuff you make up really doesn't ad any knowledge to the conversation.

It could be Apple's "ease of use" makes it easier to upload. It could be Apple's user base is more into photography, that's actually quite likely since Apple has traditionally been a preference for graphic types. There are a lot of reasons why Apple seems to be connected to the phone market. But I doubt there's flickr app. I use both aniPhone and Apple computers, and I know of no app such as you are discussing.

There are tons of flickr related Apple apps. But your previous post suggested they were all available on Andorid phones first, so how is that an advantage?

Strike 2. (three strikes and you're ignored).

No worries, I'll step away from the thread. Wouldn't want to be ignored. Clearly Apple makes better cameras and photographers clearly prefer their superior product. Obviously that's true if they get the most Flickr uploads.

[normhead]

As far as I know, Samsung and IPhone sales are about the same (+-18% in 2017), but if you compare the OS, Android obviously has by far the bigger share of the market.

Might it be, that because a lot of Samsung and Android phones are sold in developing nations, who might make more use of social media like Facebook and Instagram, to share photos, and not Flicker, the majority of images shared on the www are actually Samsung/Android?

Actually what is relevant is that "smartphones" as a whole, for better or worse, changed the landscape of photography.

Exactly, there was never an excuse for this unprovoked attack on Apple. Smart people don't go there. It was a cheap shot at best. A hit and run artist hoping no one would take the time to expose him. What is as yet unstated is that the graph showing iPhone sales is probably representative of the growth of the smart phone industry taken as a whole. The article isn't about the iPhone per se, it's about what it represents. Which makes the attack on iPhones even more irrelevant. They just used the iPhone because they were convenient numbers. NO doubt a more serious study would have included all smart phones with cameras. but because it's the #1 phone of flickr, and flickr stats are freely available, it was great example stat, and completely appropriate for the article as posted, until some Android guy comes and wants to tell everyone how bad Apple is.

Some people just cruise the internet looking for a chance to hate.
For some "Apple" produces a pavlovian reflex, it turns on their hating.
They should just go back to slobbering like the Pavlovian dogs.

[mohb]

Exactly, there was never an excuse for this unprovoked attack on Apple. Smart people don't go there. It was a cheap shot at best. A hit and run artist hoping no one would take the time to expose him

But you are doing exactly the same as he is, nobody knows why anybody uses a specific phone.