[SilverDog]

There is indeed a demand for simple P&S cameras AND simple SLR film cameras. I've been buying some cameras on Ebay and subsequently visiting my local photo shop for supplies, gear etc. I almost always see a gen-z human interested in "getting into shooting pictures with a film camera which I've never done". They sell used gear and I've witness several closed sales along with film, bags etc.

Another attraction with the zoomers are vintage 120 film cameras. Lots of that going on.

[Rondec]

I don't think this is a real trend. I don't think there is much image quality improvement using a point and shoot camera versus a smart phone camera.

The data I see showed that point and shoot camera sales peaked in 2008 with around 110 million units sold. In 2021 the number of units sold was around 3 million. I guess to me, the benefit that point and shoots have is the lens -- you typically get more zoom with them than you would with a cell phone camera. The negative is that phones are better at computational photography. So, a lot of phones will do night modes where they combine several images together to produce better high iso image or they'll do on the fly HDR or other tricks. You can do some of these in post, but the processor in a phone is so much faster than the one in a point and shoot camera that it isn't surprising that cell phones are better in this regard.

[niceshot]

Everybody uses the Phones ,and this has destroyed photography. Film is where it is at for me. I want to do direct positive prints of of photo paper like JOE VAN CLEAVE does, That is photography. I don't understand the need for point and snapshot . Just use your phone then, unless your talking film .

[reh321]

Everybody uses the Phones ,and this has destroyed photography. Film is where it is at for me. I want to do direct positive prints of of photo paper like JOE VAN CLEAVE does, That is photography. I don't understand the need for point and snapshot . Just use your phone then, unless you’re talking film .

They may have been thinking of P&S the way Kodak used to make them - F/13-F/16, so ‘always in focus’. Their example {“not quite in focus”} hinted at that. Smart phones control ISO, but a Pentax without controls would have to key shutter-speed off ISO setting; that could be done.

---

Last edited by reh321; 03-08-2023 at 08:10 AM.

[TaoMaas]

I don't think there is much image quality improvement using a point and shoot camera versus a smart phone camera.

It sounds strange, but I'm not sure better image quality is the goal of these younger folks. I think it's a turning away from extremely sharp pics in favor of a more analog look and feel. Some friends and I went to a camera show last week and there were young guys there carrying old Leicas, another guy was shooting with a Pentax 110, and yet another guy was shooting with an Olympus XA2.

[reh321]

It sounds strange, but I'm not sure better image quality is the goal of these younger folks. I think it's a turning away from extremely sharp pics in favor of a more analog look and feel. Some friends and I went to a camera show last week and there were young guys there carrying old Leicas, another guy was shooting with a Pentax 110, and yet another guy was shooting with an Olympus XA2.

Exactly, avoiding the ‘clinical’ look of perfection.

That is what I was trying to get at when I referred to Kodak cameras using F-stop of F/13-F/16, and getting everything sort of in focus.

That is the look of the photo I showed here recently, but took in the mid-1950’s.

[niceshot]

Get an old Range Finder

[Wheatfield]

Everybody uses the Phones ,and this has destroyed photography. Film is where it is at for me. I want to do direct positive prints of of photo paper like JOE VAN CLEAVE does, That is photography. I don't understand the need for point and snapshot . Just use your phone then, unless your talking film .

We said the same thing about Kodak Instamatic cameras using print film rather than Kodachrome.

[Rondec]

It sounds strange, but I'm not sure better image quality is the goal of these younger folks. I think it's a turning away from extremely sharp pics in favor of a more analog look and feel. Some friends and I went to a camera show last week and there were young guys there carrying old Leicas, another guy was shooting with a Pentax 110, and yet another guy was shooting with an Olympus XA2.

My main point was that compact sales are less than three percent of what they were fifteen years ago. Regardless of a slight uptick in sales, the overall trend is downward.

[reh321]

My main point was that compact sales are less than three percent of what they were fifteen years ago. Regardless of a slight uptick in sales, the overall trend is downward.

The whole thing doesn’t make sense. The article from Adorama does seem to talk directly about the Elph, even though I have two sitting around myself ……. I guess I should check on the market for them since anything I would get is worth more than the value they’ve been to me for the past seven years. In general, Pentax was clearly talking about film cameras, whose sales are probably down even more than the sales of compact cameras, and they were clearly talking about starting ‘with basic‘ cameras.

[gofour3]

We said the same thing about Kodak Instamatic cameras using print film rather than Kodachrome.

I only shot Kodachrome 64 on my Kodak Instamatic and it probably was not the best choice for that simple camera. Much better results when I got my Pentax KX, it was a demanding film not suited for cheap P&S cameras.

Phil.

[andrewd]

The best value point and shoot is one of the final Canon EOS cameras. I bought Rebel T2 (300x) for £35 in almost unused condition. I then added a 40mm pancake lens (4x cost of camera!) and then set it on programme mode and use as a point and shoot. An absolute bargain compared to what some of the trendy P&S cameras go for.

[reh321]

I only shot Kodachrome 64 on my Kodak Instamatic and it probably was not the best choice for that simple camera. Much better results when I got my Pentax KX, it was a demanding film not suited for cheap P&S cameras.

Phil.

The ‘cover photo’ of my “Railroads” album may be a result of using Kodachrome 64 in my Kodak Instamatic 100 {my memories of 1967 are vague}.



I would have adjusted levels when I scanned it. Pentax could get usable results if they include a simple lightmeter in their ‘film project’ result in any case.

[richard0170]

The best value point and shoot is one of the final Canon EOS cameras. I bought Rebel T2 (300x) for £35 in almost unused condition. I then added a 40mm pancake lens (4x cost of camera!) and then set it on programme mode and use as a point and shoot. An absolute bargain compared to what some of the trendy P&S cameras go for.

I did much the same thing, £50 for a EOS 600 and £90 for a used EF 40mm. What surprised me about the set up was how good the AF performance was for such an old camera.

---------- Post added 03-10-23 at 08:36 AM ----------

Gen Z already has P&S cameras, it's in those phones they always seem to have in their hands.

Whilst this is certainly true, and not just of Gen Z*, there is a pleasure to be had of using a simple P&S film camera for random shots, irrespective of IQ. Maybe this is the appeal some members of that generation are finding.
Are they called Gen Z because they are fast asleep most of the time?

[reh321]

I did much the same thing, £50 for a EOS 600 and £90 for a used EF 40mm. What surprised me about the set up was how good the AF performance was for such an old camera.

I don’t remember having problems focusing on {speeding} trains before I switched back to Pentax {a K-30} from a Canon {a Rebel}. I believe processoring/processors are ultimately the issue.

In any case, focusing tends to not be an issue for most truly ‘simple cameras’.