Originally posted by BigMackCam Smartphones have made digital photography accessible for almost everyone, since even the cheaper phones have half-decent cameras these days. And whilst many of us might consider them too limited both in features and image quality, they're "good enough" for lots of folks, and those people probably won't move on to SLR or mirrorless cameras. Then again, phones are even more prolific than compacts were, since even those who have zero interest in photography get a camera with their phone - and some of them will go on to develop an interest, either out of curiosity or so they can contribute to social media within their peer groups. More smartphones and more folks taking photos should, I think, bode quite well for the DSLR and mirrorless market in the medium term - because a minority of phone users will make photography their hobby (perhaps, even, their profession) and will want more than a phone camera can offer. Of course, longer term, we'll still get to a point of almost total saturation...
I wonder if smartphone sales will begin to tail off in the same way interchangeable lens cameras are? Or maybe this is already happening? Certainly, there are members of my family who used to upgrade to each new iPhone, but are now keeping them for longer and missing one or two generations of phone simply because of the cost - and the fact that their existing phones are "good enough"...
Yes, and even smartphone sales are beginning to decline, now. But it's not because people are abandoning smartphones. Instead, the need for upgrading has subsided.
Similarly, digital cameras have matured which is leading to a decline in sales. The DSLR market is more mature so it seems to be declining faster. The MILC market still has some upgrade-oriented cycles to go but once it matures, MILC sales will decline, too. But shrinking sales does not mean the end.
The bigger issue with smartphones versus ILCs is what you allude to. There's always been a spectrum of camera users from the casual, few-snapshots-per-day, convenience-oriented picture taker to the serious, 1000-images-per-week, control-oriented photographer. In the beginning, only a niche set of "photographers" owned "real cameras." The "picture takers" had instamatics, pocket 110s, polarioids, etc. There was a short historical period when picture takers bought real cameras when those cameras got enough automation to make them convenient (hint picture takers were the camera users who only used P-mode). But then the smartphone came along.
Today, the picture takers love the convenience of the smartphone -- there's no way any ILC can ever hope to win them back over. However, it's just as true that the photographers love the extensive controls, sophisticated features, and dedicated ergonomics of the ILC -- there's no way any smartphone is ever going to win them over, either. And even the compact camera category is still alive and in retail stores -- a friend just bought a very compact Canon from an electronics store chain. He's definitely more of a picture taker than a photographer but his interest in landscape, wildlife, and macro pictures means that a smartphone just can't hack it. (His Canon has a 25-625 equivalent zoom!)