BBurns
Loc: South Bay, California
This is painfully long but but worth the time. it does make many excellent points.
Nothing wrong with that IMO.
I tried to watch the other day but it is too long for the time I had available.
I watched about half of it. The commentator says Smartphones are not the villain. He says the technology has exceeded so rapidly, that many consumers don't feel they need this consistent new technology, and pay higher costs for them. They are keeping their old cameras and lenses.
A point of view I never thought of.
I agree with him. I may WANT a new camera, but I don't NEED a new camera. I'll work with what I have until it breaks and then get a new camera.
photoman022 wrote:
I agree with him. I may WANT a new camera, but I don't NEED a new camera. I'll work with what I have until it breaks and then get a new camera.
(My little bridge camera is 13 years old, my DSLR is 9 years old. And yes, I do WANT a new camera...)
Another gloom & doom story about photography. Smart phone photography is for the "selfie" crowd. I like to think a little when I'm taking a photographs.
Doyle Thomas wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vu1UagrnW4g
Yeah, I saw that the other day. Robin is in my YouTube feed.
Market saturation, paradigm shifts, and product maturity eventually slow down every product.
BBurns
Loc: South Bay, California
burkphoto wrote:
....Market saturation, paradigm shifts, and product maturity eventually slow down every product.
Exactly like computers. first a hobby in the 80's, then the technology race until they just became another household appliance.
BBurns wrote:
Exactly like computers. first a hobby in the 80's, then the technology race until they just became another household appliance.
Smartphone market is saturating now. The lure of a new iPhone every year has lost its luster.
Ched49 wrote:
Another gloom & doom story about photography. Smart phone photography is for the "selfie" crowd. I like to think a little when I'm taking a photographs.
That is fine. The problem is in some cases (not all) the cell phone will take as good a picture as your high performance camera. Maybe better. Cell phone cameras are very good at what they are designed to do. What they are designed to do is take portraits and family photos and vacation pics. They are convenient and everyone has one with them. So for the average person what incentive do they have to buy an expensive camera?
JD750 wrote:
That is fine. The problem is in some cases (not all) the cell phone will take as good a picture as your high performance camera. Maybe better. Cell phone cameras are very good at what they are designed to do. What they are designed to do is take portraits and family photos and vacation pics. They are convenient and everyone has one with them. So for the average person what incentive do they have to buy an expensive camera?
Oh, OK...thanks for setting me strait! Cell phones take better pictures than dedicated cameras in most cases....Whew!
JD750 wrote:
That is fine. The problem is in some cases (not all) the cell phone will take as good a picture as your high performance camera. Maybe better. Cell phone cameras are very good at what they are designed to do. What they are designed to do is take portraits and family photos and vacation pics. They are convenient and everyone has one with them. So for the average person what incentive do they have to buy an expensive camera?
Not everyone has one. I don't, and don't want one. I have a simple flip-phone for emergency calls and it's never "ON" unless I'm making a call (rarely).
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.