[bobmaxja]

The SmartPhone will rule the market, nothing different than : 110, Polaroid, instamatic, cube flash, etc. AS I mention many times over few years...
WE have to remember we are a forum of DSLR users, we are not the market but a very small part of the markets.

[automorphism]

The market is already getting more specialized. Basic jack-of-all trades cameras like the D3200 or Canon Intro rebel series are gone the way of the dodo. The same goes with average lenses. Even basic 50mm f1/.8 like the Nikon Z version is at a much higher level than their 50mm f/1.8G for example. Camera makers are concentrating on areas that differentiate the ILC from the phone, and that is image quality. Like Sigma with the Art series.

Just like lenses each have a certain look, computational photography on phones has a certain look, and camera manufacturers want to make sure that they stay far away from that computational look as possible.

I don't think it's really a bad thing as long as they can make a sustainable business out of it. I mean, companies make sustainable business selling scientific lab-grade microscopes to a FAR more niche audience than camera companies. Same goes with Fazioli pianos -- as long as businesses are smart about it, they can stay alive and cater to a very discerning audience. That may mean higher prices, but it also means longer lasting, higher quality gear that will produce images that will always outclass the phone.

[Rondec]

Unfortunately, the price of cameras will probably go up as time goes by. I don't really expect them to "specialize," but many people are satisfied with their cell phone photos -- the images are fine, particularly for web posting and that's the main purpose of them. Fewer people will be buying cameras and those who do purchase ILCs will not do so as frequently -- there just aren't killer features that make you have to change your camera every couple of years any more.

From Pentax's standpoint, I think the big things are (1) Release a camera when you have real improvements -- that is, not because you are on a schedule and you have added an extra frame per second in burst mode and two additional scene modes. (2) Turn a profit on each camera you sell. This just makes sense, but I am convinced that some brands think they can gain market share through deep discounts -- this might help in the short term, but is dangerous long term if your purchasers get used to it. (3) Be true to yourself. Pentax has made high quality cameras with good ergonomics, excellent optical viewfinders. They haven't focused on video. They bring solid improvements with each new release, but each one is clearly a Pentax. I think it makes sense for them to continue on this path with their cameras and lenses.

My expectation is that Pentax will be a small but solid player for years to come.

[btnapa]

Does The Future Of Non-Smartphone Photography Lie In "Specialization"?

Yes and no. It would be a niche market. But I think players like Sony want to own the whole thing. Canon and Nikon were forced to do mirrorless just to stay relevant. Sony offers enough bodies to cover every angle possible, although at a very high cost. Fuji is trying to do the same with one or two bodies. Pentax has got the DSLR angle covered, I would focus on making the GR the best of category at any cost. Unless someone combines the best of phones with the best of cameras and creates a hybrid beast, I don't see much that has not been covered already. Pentax created the Theta. If they can do that, then they are capable of thinking outside the box. Let's see what else you got Pentax!

Talk about sign of our times. I tried to give my K5IIs to my 10-year-old niece who has a taken a liking to photography. She refused my offer. Mind you my brother (her father) already owns a M43 Panasonic with two lenses. I asked here why she was not using her dad's camera, she told me it was too clunky! She has also taken a liking to cooking. So the other day, she baked a bunch of ginger bread cookies. She documented the process with still and time-lapse pictures and a video too. All done with her iPhone. She then assembled the whole thing in some software I have never heard of and sent it to me in a full multi-media presentation with music! Tell me camera manufacturers are not screwed. Do you think she is going to buy the next Pentax or Sony or Fuji or any camera?

[vector]

She documented the process with still and time-lapse pictures and a video too. All done with her iPhone. She then assembled the whole thing in some software I have never heard of and sent it to me in a full multi-media presentation with music!

In my opinion that isn't any different from the past with someone with a polaroid snapping a few picks, pasting them to a scrapbook page and sharing it. Not to discount the effort there, it is artsy and crafty and all that, but photography... it barely scratches the surface and certainly doesn't require a nice ILC camera. That is a trap I have fallen into, assuming that because someone likes snapshots and some crafty stuff that photography is for them. It often isn't and shouldn't be. Serious photography is complicated, time consuming, challenging, frustrating, and expensive. You have to be willing to deal with all that in order to derive the satisfaction and accomplishment that comes from developing the skills that come with it. But like most skills the majority of people will be unaware, unappreciative, unwilling to pay, and simply not care. I have accepted that my family and friends will appreciate when I can be there to take a nicer than average group shot, but beyond that they are happy to look at my work for a few fleeting seconds, give a compliment, move on and never think of it again. The time when they really care is when a big family event comes up, like weddings, births, significant birthdays, and they realize they want something better and find out what it costs to hire someone. Suddenly I'm their favourite friend/relative.

The point is that I still don't think things have changed that much and phones aren't going to kill off photography. It has always been an expensive and complicated hobby, and maybe it will get more expensive. I'm going to keep doing it because I love photographs. I think there are a lot of people who will keep doing photography and lot of new people who will continue to start into photography. But, the vast majority will remain as uninterested and dismissive as they always have been, and polaroids and cell phone shots are all they need to be happy.

[Erich_H]

In my opinion that isn't any different from the past with someone with a polaroid snapping a few picks, pasting them to a scrapbook page and sharing it. Not to discount the effort there, it is artsy and crafty and all that, but photography... it barely scratches the surface and certainly doesn't require a nice ILC camera. That is a trap I have fallen into, assuming that because someone likes snapshots and some crafty stuff that photography is for them. It often isn't and shouldn't be. Serious photography is complicated, time consuming, challenging, frustrating, and expensive. You have to be willing to deal with all that in order to derive the satisfaction and accomplishment that comes from developing the skills that come with it. But like most skills the majority of people will be unaware, unappreciative, unwilling to pay, and simply not care. I have accepted that my family and friends will appreciate when I can be there to take a nicer than average group shot, but beyond that they are happy to look at my work for a few fleeting seconds, give a compliment, move on and never think of it again. The time when they really care is when a big family event comes up, like weddings, births, significant birthdays, and they realize they want something better and find out what it costs to hire someone. Suddenly I'm their favourite friend/relative.

The point is that I still don't think things have changed that much and phones aren't going to kill off photography. It has always been an expensive and complicated hobby, and maybe it will get more expensive. I'm going to keep doing it because I love photographs. I think there are a lot of people who will keep doing photography and lot of new people who will continue to start into photography. But, the vast majority will remain as uninterested and dismissive as they always have been, and polaroids and cell phone shots are all they need to be happy.

I'm completely in agreement with you!

I don't know how many times I've been told:

"Oh! You should be selling your beautiful pictures!"

or something like that, both from family, friends, and passing acquaintances.

But as soon as I ask them if they want to actually buy a nice framed and signed picture, approximately 99.95% of them very quickly lost their interest.

They still very much like for me to give them a desktop wallpaper, though. For free, naturally.

And, of course, the family already got the framed ones, for free...

[Rondec]

I'm completely in agreement with you!

I don't know how many times I've been told:

"Oh! You should be selling your beautiful pictures!"

or something like that, both from family, friends, and passing acquaintances.

But as soon as I ask them if they want to actually buy a nice framed and signed picture, approximately 99.95% of them very quickly lost their interest.

They still very much like for me to give them a desktop wallpaper, though. For free, naturally.

And, of course, the family already got the framed ones, for free...

I think that landscape photography is a hard place to make a living in. I remember several years ago stepping into a gallery in Colorado with some beautiful framed photos and the photographer sitting forlornly by himself there. The photos were really nice, but I am just not sure that people are interested in them in that way. Once you have your home decorated, why would you buy another photograph to hang on the wall?

Wedding and portrait photography is still doing quite well and has become pretty pricey. I know there are plenty of folks who just get Uncle Max to take their photos, but there are also lots who will drop several thousand on a photographer who can do the best job capturing their day in a way someone with an entry level Canon and fast 50 can't.

And for all the talk of video on the Forum, I don't know that there are a lot of folks willing to pay for video either -- and good quality video takes more time due to the editing process than still photography.

[Erich_H]

I think that landscape photography is a hard place to make a living in. I remember several years ago stepping into a gallery in Colorado with some beautiful framed photos and the photographer sitting forlornly by himself there. The photos were really nice, but I am just not sure that people are interested in them in that way. Once you have your home decorated, why would you buy another photograph to hang on the wall?

Wedding and portrait photography is still doing quite well and has become pretty pricey. I know there are plenty of folks who just get Uncle Max to take their photos, but there are also lots who will drop several thousand on a photographer who can do the best job capturing their day in a way someone with an entry level Canon and fast 50 can't.

And for all the talk of video on the Forum, I don't know that there are a lot of folks willing to pay for video either -- and good quality video takes more time due to the editing process than still photography.

I'm not really trying to make a living.
Just trying to see their hand.

Which mostly is of the hot-air kind.

Most people don't have anything but hot air inside.

Unfortunately.

[btnapa]

It has always been an expensive and complicated hobby, and maybe it will get more expensive.

You and I are not the future. We represent the past and the present, possibly a little bit of the future. A 10-year-old is the future of camera buying. I am a diehard Pentax DSLR owner who also bought into the Fuji system for video work. So I have done more than my share of buying to support the camera industry.

I was asked by our in-law to recommend a camera for his daughter who is going to college studying an art related major. I asked her what she wanted to do with the camera, trying to figure out if a Pentax will do for her. I asked her if she was going to do video. The reply was no video. I still am not convinced that one of these days she would want to do video and find it lacking in Pentax bodies. There are lots of choices out there but I do not want to be ostracized for giving wrong recommendation to people.

[kjfishman]

The smart phone camera has come a long way and young people are addicted to them. Real cameras will remain the domain of the serious photographer because in the end it is all about the glass. Smart phone lenses smaller than a dime will never compete with real cameras.

[Erich_H]

.... I was asked by our in-law to recommend a camera for his daughter who is going to college studying an art related major. I asked her what she wanted to do with the camera, trying to figure out if a Pentax will do for her. I asked her if she was going to do video. The reply was no video. I still am not convinced that one of these days she would want to do video and find it lacking in Pentax bodies. There are lots of choices out there but I do not want to be ostracized for giving wrong recommendation to people.

Why would you be ostracized for recommending something as per the requirement put to you?
It can't be your responsibility to foresee any and all future needs and wants of the person asking for your help.

[vector]

You and I are not the future. We represent the past and the present.

Maybe. I hopefully have another 40 years in me so that's not a bad outlook as a future customer. I don't know a lot of 20 something's with the budget for ILC camera's. I don't actually have a clue what market research says about ILC camera buyers demographics. I can only contribute my observations, but I think on the hobby side of things folks tend to get serious a little later when they have more disposable income. Point and shoots and compacts and now smartphone cameras have been and will stay popular with the younger crowd and I think budget always has and will continue to be a major factor in that. At some point there will also be part of that market that is interested in more. Whether Pentax stays appealing for hobbyists who want better than a smart phone image... I don't know. I am only talking hobby here too because while there are Pro's using Pentax I think the overwhelming majority of camera buyers across all brands are hobbyists and Pentax doesn't really cater to Pro's that much outside 645 which is a really small market.

I re-evaluate my photography preferences regularly and I'm still choosing to be here. We see new forum members join regularly and often hear their story on why they chose Pentax. I don't think Pentax needs to be too concerned about what kids like, or even teenagers or even 20 something's. Their market should be a discerning buyer who wants something good quality and has the budget to buy into a full system. Those are the kind of users that will keep a niche brand afloat. I would argue that they offer that kind of gear now and I stay with it because of what I can get for my money and the experience I have using Pentax gear.

[Wheatfield]

Unfortunately, the price of cameras will probably go up as time goes by. I don't really expect them to "specialize," but many people are satisfied with their cell phone photos -- the images are fine, particularly for web posting and that's the main purpose of them. Fewer people will be buying cameras and those who do purchase ILCs will not do so as frequently -- there just aren't killer features that make you have to change your camera every couple of years any more.

From Pentax's standpoint, I think the big things are (1) Release a camera when you have real improvements -- that is, not because you are on a schedule and you have added an extra frame per second in burst mode and two additional scene modes. (2) Turn a profit on each camera you sell. This just makes sense, but I am convinced that some brands think they can gain market share through deep discounts -- this might help in the short term, but is dangerous long term if your purchasers get used to it. (3) Be true to yourself. Pentax has made high quality cameras with good ergonomics, excellent optical viewfinders. They haven't focused on video. They bring solid improvements with each new release, but each one is clearly a Pentax. I think it makes sense for them to continue on this path with their cameras and lenses.

My expectation is that Pentax will be a small but solid player for years to come.

Regarding making profit on everything you sell. People forget that losing money on everything they sold (a surprisingly small exageration) was what put an end to Pentax as a company. When I was selling cameras, it was no big secret that the low end suff was a loss leader. I expect Pentax lost money on every K1000 and 50mm f2 lens they sold right from the start. And they sold something like 3 million if them.
Companies can no longer afford loss leaders, and the K3III hardly seems to be a product that would be a loss leader anyway.

---------- Post added Dec 26th, 2020 at 12:19 PM ----------

I think that landscape photography is a hard place to make a living in. I remember several years ago stepping into a gallery in Colorado with some beautiful framed photos and the photographer sitting forlornly by himself there. The photos were really nice, but I am just not sure that people are interested in them in that way. Once you have your home decorated, why would you buy another photograph to hang on the wall?

Wedding and portrait photography is still doing quite well and has become pretty pricey. I know there are plenty of folks who just get Uncle Max to take their photos, but there are also lots who will drop several thousand on a photographer who can do the best job capturing their day in a way someone with an entry level Canon and fast 50 can't.

And for all the talk of video on the Forum, I don't know that there are a lot of folks willing to pay for video either -- and good quality video takes more time due to the editing process than still photography.

I've overheard that conversation more than once at gallery shows, my own included.
People are quite certain they can replicate a photograph with their own camera, which makes landscape photography a pretty hard sell.
Why buy what you can get "for free" so to speak.

[btnapa]

Why would you be ostracized for recommending something as per the requirement put to you?

Erich_H, you know it is a thankless job! I am the "pro" after all and should be a mind reader and guarantor!! If you recommend something and they are happy you never hear from them. God forbid if you tell them to get something and they find out that it is not the latest and greatest, you never hear the end of it. I love my Pentax gear. They are built like a tank and they deliver every time. I own Fuji gear too but I cannot say they are as solid as my Pentax stuff.

I think K3III would be a solid platform for anyone wanting pro class gear. But you have to remember too that with a kit lens, we will be talking about around $2,300-2,400. Not exactly cheap or beginner price range.

[Wheatfield]

Erich_H, you know it is a thankless job! I am the "pro" after all and should be a mind reader and guarantor!! If you recommend something and they are happy you never hear from them. God forbid if you tell them to get something and they find out that it is not the latest and greatest, you never hear the end of it. I love my Pentax gear. They are built like a tank and they deliver every time. I own Fuji gear too but I cannot say they are as solid as my Pentax stuff.

I think K3III would be a solid platform for anyone wanting pro class gear. But you have to remember too that with a kit lens, we will be talking about around $2,300-2,400. Not exactly cheap or beginner price range.

I think a point can be made that if a person wants cheap or beginner price range, the camera manufacturers are starting to come round to the fact that this market is now being served by ever more sophisticated cell phones.