Are cameras evolving into cell phones?

spystyle · 05-28-2010, 04:54 AM

The new micro 4/3 has no mirror or viewfinder and tiny lenses, it has me wondering - at which point in camera evolution will someone walk up to a photographer and ask - "Hey can I make a quick call with that?"

At which point could $1000 "SLR's" be mistaken for a Kodak EasyShare? Side by side the shooters stand with arms stretched out, composing on the LCD, which one is a Dad holding Mom's $100 EasyShare and which one is the guy with the $1000 "mirror-less SLR" ? They look the same

I'd rather see the opposite trend, where viewfinders get bigger and bigger, even bigger than the old film cameras - where you look in the viewfinder and see through the lens so clearly, you can make very thoughtful compositions... and it's never mistaken for a cell phone or EasyShare

What do you think ?

spystyle · 05-28-2010, 09:56 AM

Well no replies, I guess cameras are not evolving into cell phones

Adam · 05-28-2010, 01:52 PM

But cell phones are evolving into compact P&S cameras! Not the other way around, yet, but I bet that eventually you'll be able to make calls from your Pentax DSLR

justinr · 05-28-2010, 02:05 PM

It's not the making of calls but the receiving of them that would fry my head! Do you really want a ringtone going off when you are busy with the camera?

Nope, phones and proper cameras should be kept as separate tools performing quite separate tasks and may the fleas of a thousand camels infest the armpits of the first person to combine the two.

Parallax · 05-28-2010, 02:15 PM

Originally posted by Adam

But cell phones are evolving into compact P&S cameras! Not the other way around, yet, but I bet that eventually you'll be able to make calls from your Pentax DSLR :tongue:

There may be a benefit to that. Journalists, sports photographers, etc could instantly email high quality pictures without having to download to a computer first.

justinr · 05-28-2010, 02:21 PM

Originally posted by Parallax

There may be a benefit to that. Journalists, sports photographers, etc could instantly email high quality pictures without having to download to a computer first.

True, but it doesn't have to be built into the camera itself. It could fit like an external flash or battery pack.

TheTenaciousOne · 05-29-2010, 04:49 AM

Camera phones are getting better and better but they wont ever be able to get a high quality lens in there. Its physical restraints. While one day the sensor in a cell phone may be as good as those in p&s from today, im sure the sensor in a dslr is going to be even better still.
Phone cameras are getting fair good these days though and i use mine alot to copy documents for later reference

**eccs19** · 05-29-2010, 04:55 AM

Originally posted by TheTenaciousOne

Phone cameras are getting fair good these days though and i use mine alot to copy documents for later reference

Sounds like your James Bond. Using for phone for spy stuff.

Steve Beswick · 05-29-2010, 11:55 AM

Originally posted by justinr

Nope, phones and proper cameras should be kept as separate tools performing quite separate tasks and may the fleas of a thousand camels infest the armpits of the first person to combine the two.

Well, if P&S counts, that would be Samsung:
Samsung releases AMOLED 12M Camera/Phone: Digital Photography Review

justinr · 05-29-2010, 12:41 PM

Originally posted by Steve Beswick

Well, if P&S counts, that would be Samsung:
Samsung releases AMOLED 12M Camera/Phone: Digital Photography Review

Mmmmm..... That's probably worth 500 camels.

Mike Cash · 05-29-2010, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by spystyle

The new micro 4/3 has no mirror or viewfinder and tiny lenses, it has me wondering - at which point in camera evolution will someone walk up to a photographer and ask - "Hey can I make a quick call with that?"

At which point could $1000 "SLR's" be mistaken for a Kodak EasyShare? Side by side the shooters stand with arms stretched out, composing on the LCD, which one is a Dad holding Mom's $100 EasyShare and which one is the guy with the $1000 "mirror-less SLR" ? They look the same

I'd rather see the opposite trend, where viewfinders get bigger and bigger, even bigger than the old film cameras - where you look in the viewfinder and see through the lens so clearly, you can make very thoughtful compositions... and it's never mistaken for a cell phone or EasyShare

What do you think ?

SLR is not a synonym for "high-end camera" and a high-end high-dollar camera not of SLR construction is not an SLR. The English language has been butchered and bastardized quite enough over the last couple of decades without our further exacerbating the problem.

See: Rule 13

spystyle · 05-29-2010, 04:40 PM

13. Use the right word, not its second cousin.

I agree, they shouldn't be able to call it a "mirrorless SLR" if it doesn't actually "reflex" LOL

No mirror means it can't be a "reflex" camera because it isn't reflecting.

No rangefinder, no twin lens, not even a viewfinder ...

I guess technically it is a "point and shoot" with interchangeable lenses

reeftool · 05-29-2010, 06:05 PM

I think the OP's main gripe is that an expensive, high quality camera should somehow look like one. The problem is, we live in a monkey see, monkey do world. That's why Hyundai builds cars that look like Jaguar's.

**WJW** · 05-29-2010, 06:45 PM

Originally posted by reeftool

I think the OP's main gripe is that an expensive, high quality camera should somehow look like one. The problem is, we live in a monkey see, monkey do world. That's why Hyundai builds cars that look like Jaguar's.

Or else they still have some British Leyland or Ford people working there.

Spazmatazz · 05-30-2010, 03:50 AM

Cameras aren't evolving into cell phones. Human beings are evolving into cell phones and cameras. Soon, they're going to be able to implant chips in our brains, so you can make a phone call just by thinking it. You'll also be able to take pictures of things by blinking in their general direction, and then eject a 400dpi colour-calibrated print from your arsehole.

05-28-2010, 04:54 AM	#1
spystyle Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Maine, USA Posts: 424	Are cameras evolving into cell phones? The new micro 4/3 has no mirror or viewfinder and tiny lenses, it has me wondering - at which point in camera evolution will someone walk up to a photographer and ask - "Hey can I make a quick call with that?" At which point could $1000 "SLR's" be mistaken for a Kodak EasyShare? Side by side the shooters stand with arms stretched out, composing on the LCD, which one is a Dad holding Mom's $100 EasyShare and which one is the guy with the $1000 "mirror-less SLR" ? They look the same I'd rather see the opposite trend, where viewfinders get bigger and bigger, even bigger than the old film cameras - where you look in the viewfinder and see through the lens so clearly, you can make very thoughtful compositions... and it's never mistaken for a cell phone or EasyShare What do you think ?

05-29-2010, 04:40 PM	#12
spystyle Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Maine, USA Posts: 424 Original Poster	13. Use the right word, not its second cousin. I agree, they shouldn't be able to call it a "mirrorless SLR" if it doesn't actually "reflex" LOL No mirror means it can't be a "reflex" camera because it isn't reflecting. No rangefinder, no twin lens, not even a viewfinder ... I guess technically it is a "point and shoot" with interchangeable lenses Last edited by spystyle; 05-29-2010 at 04:51 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Driving & Cell Phones	BillM	General Talk	38	01-25-2010 06:28 PM
Cell phone batteries	Ratmagiclady	General Talk	35	12-05-2009 04:32 PM
cell phones- this is for poeple in the US	redpigeons	General Talk	34	09-15-2009 08:45 AM
How good is your cell phone cam?	K-9	Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories	14	08-14-2009 05:33 PM
street shots with the DEE VEE STYLE.. its evolving!	distorted_vision	Post Your Photos!	39	05-02-2008 05:21 PM

05-28-2010, 09:56 AM	#2
spystyle Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Maine, USA Posts: 424 Original Poster	Well no replies, I guess cameras are not evolving into cell phones

05-28-2010, 01:52 PM	#3
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,595	But cell phones are evolving into compact P&S cameras! Not the other way around, yet, but I bet that eventually you'll be able to make calls from your Pentax DSLR

05-28-2010, 02:05 PM	#4
justinr Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Tipperary Photos: Gallery Posts: 394	It's not the making of calls but the receiving of them that would fry my head! Do you really want a ringtone going off when you are busy with the camera? Nope, phones and proper cameras should be kept as separate tools performing quite separate tasks and may the fleas of a thousand camels infest the armpits of the first person to combine the two.

05-28-2010, 02:15 PM	#5
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by Adam But cell phones are evolving into compact P&S cameras! Not the other way around, yet, but I bet that eventually you'll be able to make calls from your Pentax DSLR :tongue: There may be a benefit to that. Journalists, sports photographers, etc could instantly email high quality pictures without having to download to a computer first.

05-28-2010, 02:21 PM	#6
justinr Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Tipperary Photos: Gallery Posts: 394	Originally posted by Parallax There may be a benefit to that. Journalists, sports photographers, etc could instantly email high quality pictures without having to download to a computer first. True, but it doesn't have to be built into the camera itself. It could fit like an external flash or battery pack.

05-29-2010, 04:49 AM	#7
TheTenaciousOne Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Adelaide, SA, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 111	Camera phones are getting better and better but they wont ever be able to get a high quality lens in there. Its physical restraints. While one day the sensor in a cell phone may be as good as those in p&s from today, im sure the sensor in a dslr is going to be even better still. Phone cameras are getting fair good these days though and i use mine alot to copy documents for later reference

05-29-2010, 04:55 AM	#8
eccs19 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Lisle, Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,510	Originally posted by TheTenaciousOne Phone cameras are getting fair good these days though and i use mine alot to copy documents for later reference Sounds like your James Bond. Using for phone for spy stuff.

05-29-2010, 11:55 AM	#9
Steve Beswick Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Ontario, California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,736	Originally posted by justinr Nope, phones and proper cameras should be kept as separate tools performing quite separate tasks and may the fleas of a thousand camels infest the armpits of the first person to combine the two. Well, if P&S counts, that would be Samsung: Samsung releases AMOLED 12M Camera/Phone: Digital Photography Review

05-29-2010, 12:41 PM	#10
justinr Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Tipperary Photos: Gallery Posts: 394	Originally posted by Steve Beswick Well, if P&S counts, that would be Samsung: Samsung releases AMOLED 12M Camera/Phone: Digital Photography Review Mmmmm..... That's probably worth 500 camels.

05-29-2010, 04:04 PM	#11
Mike Cash Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Japan Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,950	Originally posted by spystyle The new micro 4/3 has no mirror or viewfinder and tiny lenses, it has me wondering - at which point in camera evolution will someone walk up to a photographer and ask - "Hey can I make a quick call with that?" At which point could $1000 "SLR's" be mistaken for a Kodak EasyShare? Side by side the shooters stand with arms stretched out, composing on the LCD, which one is a Dad holding Mom's $100 EasyShare and which one is the guy with the $1000 "mirror-less SLR" ? They look the same I'd rather see the opposite trend, where viewfinders get bigger and bigger, even bigger than the old film cameras - where you look in the viewfinder and see through the lens so clearly, you can make very thoughtful compositions... and it's never mistaken for a cell phone or EasyShare What do you think ? SLR is not a synonym for "high-end camera" and a high-end high-dollar camera not of SLR construction is not an SLR. The English language has been butchered and bastardized quite enough over the last couple of decades without our further exacerbating the problem. See: Rule 13

05-29-2010, 06:05 PM	#13
reeftool Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Upstate New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,554	I think the OP's main gripe is that an expensive, high quality camera should somehow look like one. The problem is, we live in a monkey see, monkey do world. That's why Hyundai builds cars that look like Jaguar's.

05-29-2010, 06:45 PM	#14
WJW Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Central Texas Posts: 383	Originally posted by reeftool I think the OP's main gripe is that an expensive, high quality camera should somehow look like one. The problem is, we live in a monkey see, monkey do world. That's why Hyundai builds cars that look like Jaguar's. Or else they still have some British Leyland or Ford people working there.

05-30-2010, 03:50 AM	#15
Spazmatazz Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 29	Cameras aren't evolving into cell phones. Human beings are evolving into cell phones and cameras. Soon, they're going to be able to implant chips in our brains, so you can make a phone call just by thinking it. You'll also be able to take pictures of things by blinking in their general direction, and then eject a 400dpi colour-calibrated print from your arsehole.